Intervention effectmodel-written summary

total N/S content ratio was associated with most efficiently Cabbage-head development in cabbage.

A claim from Nutritional Relationship between Nitrogen and Sulfur in Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.) · 1981

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

total N/S content ratio was associated with most efficiently Cabbage-head development in cabbage.

Treatment
total N/S content ratioe0
Outcome
Cabbage-head developmente0
Direction
most efficientlye0
Value
between 10 and 20e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Brassica oleracea var. capitata
Brassica oleracea var. capitata · TaxonThamizhpparithi Maari · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cabbage-head development was most efficiently when the total N/S content ratio was between 10 and 20”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1034–1134
t0

“Nutritional Relationship between Nitrogen and Sulfur in Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–103

Title

Nutritional Relationship between Nitrogen and Sulfur in Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.)

Tetsuo HARA; Koji SUGIMOTO; Yoji SONODA Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science 1981. doi:10.2503/jjshs.50.60

Other claims from this paper (15)

Record rev-e2c7b95d081ecdd923e2faa6af62fc735bc662b837f1f3717916c4e2ac682e94 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 11 in the model’s answer

nitrogen · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

103 papers: 90 positive, 13 negative or no effect

89 papers in the same direction as this claim · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

94 papers more in this group

See all 103 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.