Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The specified nutrient and humic acid treatment produced higher chickpea seed yield of 1659 kg ha-1 than other treatments.

A claim from Response of Chickpea to application of Humic Acid along with Vermicompost on Uptake of Nutrients, Yield attributes and Yield · 2020

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The specified nutrient and humic acid treatment produced higher chickpea seed yield of 1659 kg ha-1 than other treatments.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume0
Treatment
application of recommended dose of N and P through VC and RP along with soil application of HA @ 5 kg ha-1 and foliar spray @ 0.25 per cente1
Outcome
seede0
Direction
Highere0
Value
1659e0
Comparator
other treatmentse1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Higher seed and stover yield of chickpea (1659 & 1743.7 kg ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 583–647
e1

“due to application of recommended dose of N and P through VC and RP along with soil application of HA @ 5 kg ha-1 and foliar spray @ 0.25 per cent compared to other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–961

Title

Response of Chickpea to application of Humic Acid along with Vermicompost on Uptake of Nutrients, Yield attributes and Yield

Shree latha; S. N. Bhat; S. R. Balanagoudar; et al. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2020. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2020.901.262

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-bae5b5a6f4d2e58a3f4e5bd91fcc03a9b813da86399ca93694e05027deef8e52 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

other · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ

28 papers: 27 positive, 1 negative or no effect

26 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

19 papers more in this group

See all 28 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ

102 papers: 93 positive, 9 negative or no effect

92 papers in the same direction as this claim · 9 in the opposite direction

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

93 papers more in this group

See all 102 papers →

phosphorus · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

168 papers: 161 positive, 7 negative or no effect

160 papers in the same direction as this claim · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

159 papers more in this group

See all 168 papers →

3 of 5 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.