Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Rhizobium inoculation alone significantly enhanced chickpea growth.

A claim from The Combined Effects of Gibberellic Acid and Rhizobium on Growth, Yield and Nutritional Status in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) · 2021

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Rhizobium inoculation alone significantly enhanced chickpea growth.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume0
Treatment
seed inoculation with Rhizobiume0
Interactor
RhizobiumRhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
growthe0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizobium
Rhizobium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Ninjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“GA3 application and seed inoculation with Rhizobium, when applied singly, significantly enhanced chickpea growth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 682–795

Title

The Combined Effects of Gibberellic Acid and Rhizobium on Growth, Yield and Nutritional Status in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

Munazza Rafique; Muhammad Naveed; Adnan Mustafa; et al. Agronomy 2021. doi:10.3390/agronomy11010105

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-a0fb040998ddf4e9b48ef1d84ffc22d10fbbb75a7909196e9a64550aeed1488e · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

Rhizobium · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

46 papers: 45 positive, 1 negative or no effect

44 papers in the same direction as this claim · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

37 papers more in this group

See all 46 papers →

inoculation · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

152 papers: 135 positive, 17 negative or no effect

134 papers in the same direction as this claim · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. no effect
  7. no effect
  8. negative

143 papers more in this group

See all 152 papers →

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.