Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Stover mulch increased grain weight per ear head versus three alternatives.

A claim from Impact of Moisture Conservation Practices and Zinc Fertilization on Growth Parameter, Yield Attributes and Yield of Pearlmillet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.)] under Limited Moisture Conditions · 2020

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Stover mulch increased grain weight per ear head versus three alternatives.

Taxon
PearlmilletCenchrus americanust0
Treatment
Stover mulche0
Outcome
grain weight per ear headse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
control, dust mulch and pusa hydrogele0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

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

Cenchrus americanus
Cenchrus americanus · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Stover mulch recorded significantly higher plant height, dry matter accumulation, grain weight per ear heads, total number of tillers and effective tillers as compared to control, dust mulch and pusa hydrogel but remained at par with pusa hydrogel + stover mulch.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 515–778
t0

“Pearlmillet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.)]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 116–153

Title

Impact of Moisture Conservation Practices and Zinc Fertilization on Growth Parameter, Yield Attributes and Yield of Pearlmillet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.)] under Limited Moisture Conditions

Saroj Kumari Yadav; B. L. Dudwal; Hansa Choudhary; et al. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2020. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2020.902.292

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-c7e4c99bddc9ae2e5bf752657b0f637f3e1bf8bc9bfbbc89e3cd125299b16542 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

mulching · yield · Cenchrus americanus (pearl millet)Results differ

19 papers: 17 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

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

10 papers more in this group

See all 19 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.