Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Imidacloprid plus spinosad avoided 83.16% yield loss versus control.

A claim from Bio-efficacy of Different Insecticides Against Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood) in Green Gram · 2018

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Imidacloprid plus spinosad avoided 83.16% yield loss versus control.

Treatment
imidacloprid 30.5 SC @ 0.12% + spinosad 45 SC @ 0.0135%e0
Outcome
yield losse1
Direction
followed bye0
Value
83.16%e0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“followed by imidacloprid 30.5 SC @ 0.12% + spinosad 45 SC @ 0.0135%(83.16%) as compared to control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1069–1167
t0

“Green Gram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–96
e1

“yield loss”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 954–964

Title

Bio-efficacy of Different Insecticides Against Thrips (Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood) in Green Gram

Surbhi Kansagara; Kalpit D. Shah; Atul R. Rathod; et al. Current Agriculture Research Journal 2018. doi:10.12944/carj.6.3.15

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-bdc5387553cada691d8900c393e19997e0ee3c8681a5db33f4a54eea07f0f046 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

spinosad · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 10 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

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

2 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

imidacloprid · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

13 papers: 13 positive, 0 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

4 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.