Intervention effectmodel-written summary

T7 shading plus silicate also gave the greatest significant shoot length increase.

A claim from Vegetative Growth and Quality of Washington Navel Orange as Affected by Shading Nets and Potassium Silicate Spraying · 2020

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

T7 shading plus silicate also gave the greatest significant shoot length increase.

Taxon
Washington navel orange treest0
Treatment
Shading net (75 %) + potassium silicatee0
Outcome
shoot lengthe0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“T7 (Shading net (75 %) + potassium silicate) caused the highest significant increase in shoot length.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 558–659
t0

“Washington navel orange trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 32–61

Title

Vegetative Growth and Quality of Washington Navel Orange as Affected by Shading Nets and Potassium Silicate Spraying

Aly, A.; Rehab Awad; H. El- Sayed; et al. Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences, H. Botany/Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences, H. Botany 2020. doi:10.21608/eajbsh.2020.119321

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-e4cd5820637114d323c8d56326da9d6cdcb580d48e53b53f18cc85df33685c64 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

silicate(4-) · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

shade · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
See all 5 papers →

trap barrier · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
See all 5 papers →

3 of 4 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.