Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Foliar fertilizer spraying significantly reduced grape titratable acid content.

A claim from Application of Different Foliar Fertilizer on Three Varieties of Grapes · 2010

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fertilizer spraying significantly reduced grape titratable acid content.

Taxon
Grapest0
Treatment
spraying amino acid chelated calcium liquid fertilizer,humic acid liquid fertilizer and balanced nutrition at different growth stagese1
Outcome
titratable acid contente0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

t0

“Grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–71
e0

“significantly reduced the titratable acid content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 509–558
e1

“spraying amino acid chelated calcium liquid fertilizer,humic acid liquid fertilizer and balanced nutrition at different growth stages”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 238–371

Title

Application of Different Foliar Fertilizer on Three Varieties of Grapes

Luo QiangWei Xibei nongye xuebao 2010

Other claims from this paper (8)

Record rev-97bbd7c901bea841ab90c1710b0d458ae188cdb1d7e81d6deaa44fddb347472d · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

amino acid · molecular: metabolites · VitisResults agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

calcium atom · molecular: metabolites · VitisResults agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 10 papers →

stage · molecular: metabolites · VitisPositive and negative results

5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive
  4. positive
See all 5 papers →

3 of 6 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.