Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Leaf water potential was the exception to effects of water stress.

A claim from PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF COWPEA UNDER WATER STRESS AND REWATERING IN NO-TILLAGE AND CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE SYSTEMS · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf water potential was the exception to effects of water stress.

Treatment
Water stresse0
Outcome
leaf water potentiale0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingDirectionValueQualifier

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Water stress affected all variables evaluated, with the exception of leaf water potential.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 471–561
t0

“COWPEA”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–33

Title

PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES OF COWPEA UNDER WATER STRESS AND REWATERING IN NO-TILLAGE AND CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE SYSTEMS

RÔMULO MAGNO OLIVEIRA DE FREITAS; JEFERSON LUIZ DALLABONA DOMBROSKI; FRANCISCO CLÁUDIO LOPES DE FREITAS; et al. Revista Caatinga 2017. doi:10.1590/1983-21252017v30n303rc

Other claims from this paper (7)

Record rev-a8a59a6972e1e6b16f219b699d7dd712fc9e6c09f93db685c08ca781052682c7 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

drought · physiology: water · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

27 papers: 8 positive, 19 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this claim · 8 in the opposite direction

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

18 papers more in this group

See all 27 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.