Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Apple fruit sugar content did not differ significantly among fertilizer application methods.

A claim from Apple Quality and Calcium Content as Affected by Fertilizer Treatment · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Apple fruit sugar content did not differ significantly among fertilizer application methods.

Treatment
application method of calcium fertilizerse0
Outcome
sugar contente0
Direction
did not differe0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–5
e0

“sugar content and acidity of apple fruit did not differ significantly, regardless of the application method of calcium fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 867–998

Title

Apple Quality and Calcium Content as Affected by Fertilizer Treatment

Senad Murtić; Rodoljub Oljača; Ivana Koleška; et al. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 2017. doi:10.15244/pjoes/69146

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-d2cb077c9044d7ec19316023e470b6f25eee3a103ae9b586e5934f04b5984731 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

calcium atom · quality: sugar starch · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

20 papers: 10 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this claim · 10 in the opposite direction

  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 →

fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 23 positive, 16 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this claim · 23 in the opposite direction

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

30 papers more in this group

See all 39 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.