Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Compost inoculated with KKU microbes and chemical fertilizer increased sugarcane shoot biomass.

A claim from Effect of compost made from filter cake and distillery slop on sugarcane growth · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost inoculated with KKU microbes and chemical fertilizer increased sugarcane shoot biomass.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
Amending compost inoculated with KKU microbes with chemical fertilizere0
Outcome
shoot biomasse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“Amending compost inoculated with KKU microbes with chemical fertilizer significantly increased shoot biomass and had a positive effect on growth and development of sugarcane”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 856–1029

Title

Effect of compost made from filter cake and distillery slop on sugarcane growth

Tipnapa Wongkoon Asia-Pacific Journal of Science and Technology 2017

Other claims from this paper (1)

Record rev-c537e8992565e6a2a19aacd237b083344fb9d3181b527df0990cc5e41290715f · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

inoculation · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

60 papers: 54 positive, 6 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
    Inoculation with IAC-RBcr5 reduced biomass accumulation in sugarcane.

    Rhizobacteria improve sugarcane growth and photosynthesis under well‐watered conditions · 2018

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Soil animals and Pythium adversely affected sugarcane growth.

    Recentexperiments With soil Animals Attacking Roots of Sugarcane · 1930

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Without nitrogen fertilization, Azospirillum inoculation negatively affected sugarcane development up to 60 days after transplanting.

    Nitrogênio e Azospirillum brasilense no desenvolvimento inicial da cana-de-açúcar · 2020

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    G. diazotrophicus inoculation and N-fertilizer application did not significantly increase sugarcane emergence percentage.

    Effect of nitrogen and Gluconoacetobacter diazotrophicus on growth of sugarcane · 2017

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    Inoculation with WF 010 reduced sugarcane sett germination relative to un-inoculated controls.

    Identification and determination of the impact on sett germination of fungal isolates associated with sugarcane plants · 2020 · compared with un-inoculated control

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    The interaction of NPK and biofertilizer doses had an insignificant effect on root volume, root wet weight and root dry weight of sugarcane seedlings.

    The Effect Of NPK Fertilizer Doses And Biofertilizers On The Growth Of Sugar Cane Chips Bud (Saccharum Officinarum L.) Seedlings · 2025

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    NN145S inoculation increased sugarcane seedling biomass under the stated nitrogen fertilizer rate.

    Plant Growth-Promoting Nitrogen-Fixing Enterobacteria Are in Association with Sugarcane Plants Growing in Guangxi, China · 2012

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Both bacterial strains increased sugarcane plant height, shoot weight and root weight in greenhouse plants.

    Diazotrophic Bacteria Pantoea dispersa and Enterobacter asburiae Promote Sugarcane Growth by Inducing Nitrogen Uptake and Defense-Related Gene Expression · 2021

    Same direction

51 papers more in this group

See all 60 papers →

fertilization · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

147 papers: 129 positive, 18 negative or no effect

128 papers in the same direction as this claim · 14 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Within-row compost significantly reduced root surface area versus control.

    Gypsum and Compost Effects on Sugarcane Root Growth, Yield, and Plant Nutrients · 2002 · compared with the control

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Municipal waste composts had no effect or harmed sugarcane growth.

    Organic Material Soil Amendment Effects on Root Rot and Sugarcane Growth and Characterization of the Materials · 1999

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Planting fertilizer percentages did not increase tillering at Morrinhos-GO.

    Yield and biometry of fertilized sugar cane with organomineral fertilizer of sewage sludge and biostimulant · 2020

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Field fresh weight was comparable across nitrogen treatments.

    Impact of urea fertilization rates on nitrogen losses, productivity and profitability in East African sugarcane plantations · 2024

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    Green manuring reduced sugarcane biomass accumulation by 7 to 16%.

    Effect of intercropped prickly sesban (Sesbania cannabina) green-manure and nitrogen levels on growth and yield of sugarcane. · 2003

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Fertilizer combinations did not significantly affect germination, CCS or sugar recovery.

    Comparative efficiency of solid and liquid fertilizers in sugarcane · 2009

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Grower habitual fertilizer was the costliest and had inferior germination.

    Fertilizer Effects on Mechanization Wide Row Spacing Sugarcane · 2009

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Different manure applications had no significant effect on sugarcane growth height and stem diameter.

    Effects of Sugarcane Intercropping with Potato on the Sugarcane Yield and Quality · 2013

    Opposite direction

138 papers more in this group

See all 147 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.