Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Under calcium deficiency, peanut yield of HN032 was significantly reduced by 22.75%.

A claim from The physio-biochemical characterization reflected different calcium utilization efficiency between the sensitive and tolerant peanut accessions under calcium deficiency · 2023

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Under calcium deficiency, peanut yield of HN032 was significantly reduced by 22.75%.

Material
HN032e1
Treatment
calcium deficiencye1
Outcome
peanut yielde0
Direction
significantly reducede0
Value
22.75%e0

Not reportedGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“peanut yield was significantly reduced by 22.75%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1739–1787
e1

“under calcium deficiency conditions, the activities of antioxidant enzymes SOD, POD, and CAT, as well as the MDA content, were significantly increased in the leaves of HN032”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1564–1737

Title

The physio-biochemical characterization reflected different calcium utilization efficiency between the sensitive and tolerant peanut accessions under calcium deficiency

Kang Tang; Dengwang Liu; Na Liu; et al. Frontiers in Plant Science 2023. doi:10.3389/fpls.2023.1250064

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-a6e7560b97b2ac2e047f9af5620021b071e0b0def10abaf12aae3308e62672ae · schema claims-v0.9 · position 10 in the model’s answer

calcium atom · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ

74 papers: 68 positive, 6 negative or no effect

67 papers in the same direction as this claim · 6 in the opposite direction

This claim is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.

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

65 papers more in this group

See all 74 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.