Intervention effectmodel-written summary

In 5 of 8 locations, dicamba applied at 30 and 60 days after planting caused greater peanut yield losses than at 90 days.

A claim from Peanut Yield Response to Dicamba · 2011

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In 5 of 8 locations, dicamba applied at 30 and 60 days after planting caused greater peanut yield losses than at 90 days.

Treatment
dicamba was applied at 30 and 60 DAPe1
Outcome
peanut yield lossese1
Direction
greatere1
Comparator
90 DAPe1
Setting
5 of 8 locationse1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleValueQualifier

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

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

Verbatim

t0

“Peanut Yield Response to Dicamba”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–32
e1

“In 5 of 8 locations, peanut yield losses were greater when dicamba was applied at 30 and 60 DAP when compared to 90 DAP”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 281–400

Title

Peanut Yield Response to Dicamba

E. P. Prostko; T. L. Grey; M. W. Marshall; et al. Peanut Science 2011. doi:10.3146/ps11-4.1

Other claims from this paper (2)

Record rev-bf7220d895edccf3c8c6e05b12fb7bc2d1334b8bbe04c5abeea479ec8f514e63 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

dicamba · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ

6 papers: 0 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. negative
See all 6 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.