Intervention effectmodel-written summary

75 percent of the recommended phosphorus with PGPR II gave high nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency.

A claim from Effect of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and PSB on root parameters, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency of irrigated maize under varying levels of phosphorus · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

75 percent of the recommended phosphorus with PGPR II gave high nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
75 per cent of recommended dose of phosphorus fertilizer along with PGPR IIe3
Interactor
PGPR IIe3symbiont
Outcome
nutrient uptake as well as nutrient use efficiencye3
Direction
highe3

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Effect of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and PSB on root parameters, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency of irrigated maize under varying levels of phosphorus”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–179
e3

“Application of 75 per cent of recommended dose of phosphorus fertilizer along with PGPR II recorded high nutrient uptake as well as nutrient use efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1258–1413

Title

Effect of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and PSB on root parameters, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency of irrigated maize under varying levels of phosphorus

Yasmin Gulnaz; Fathima Ps; Denesh Gr; et al. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2017

Other claims from this paper (3)

Record rev-ca863cd9accb05fc09e3510487bcdf3961d498b56aec44ab601712171baf5470 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Results differ

189 papers: 174 positive, 15 negative or no effect

173 papers in the same direction as this claim · 12 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

180 papers more in this group

See all 189 papers →

inoculation · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Results agree

20 papers: 20 positive, 0 negative or no effect

19 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

11 papers more in this group

See all 20 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.