Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Conventional ground motor sprayer had the worst lost spraying on the ground, about 44 %, on onion.

A claim from COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SOME DIFFERENT SPRAYING TECHNIQUES TO CONTROL ONION THRIPS (THRIPS TABACI LIND. [THYSANOPTERA: THRIPIDAE]). · 2020

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional ground motor sprayer had the worst lost spraying on the ground, about 44 %, on onion.

Taxon
onionAllium cepae1
Treatment
conventional ground motor sprayere5
Outcome
lost spraying in grounde5
Direction
worste5
Value
44%e5

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Thrips tabaci Lindeman (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) on onion crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 307–369
e5

“Conventional ground motor sprayer revealed the worst equipment in lost spraying in ground about 44% from spraying volume was lost on ground, but the best equipment saving lost spraying on ground was electrostatic Agrimondo 15.5% from spraying volume”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1540–1789

Title

COMPARATIVE STUDY ON SOME DIFFERENT SPRAYING TECHNIQUES TO CONTROL ONION THRIPS (THRIPS TABACI LIND. [THYSANOPTERA: THRIPIDAE]).

I. M. Ammar; A. E. Ammar Menoufia Journal of Plant Protection 2020. doi:10.21608/mjapam.2020.170546

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-e218b7e7d7e9b83758c6e0186112c33076cd5cdeae9ba0303bff8973bdf8d92a · schema claims-v0.9 · position 8 in the model’s answer

application · molecular: metabolites · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 10 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper 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

3 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.