Intervention effectmodel-written summary

biological and technological yields of sugar increased by 2.07 t/ha

A claim from Yield and quality of sugar beet after foliar feeding with nitrogen, magnesium, boron and copper · 1996

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

biological and technological yields of sugar increased by 2.07 t/ha

Treatment
soil-foliar feeding with N at the dose of 100 kg/ha (60 kg/ha to soil and 40 kg/ha to foliage) combined with foliar feeding with Mg (2.0 kg/ha) and B (0.6 kg/ha)e1
Outcome
biological and technological yields of sugare0
Direction
increasede0
Value
2.07 t/hae0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“biological and technological yields of sugar increased by 2.55 t/ha and 2.07 t/ha, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 573–668
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–31
e1

“soil-foliar feeding with N at the dose of 100 kg/ha (60 kg/ha to soil and 40 kg/ha to foliage) combined with foliar feeding with Mg (2.0 kg/ha) and B (0.6 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 297–458

Title

Yield and quality of sugar beet after foliar feeding with nitrogen, magnesium, boron and copper

D. Domska Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences 1996

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-e5afa67ccc8068dc024a8c06b2b177ea4687a86752a19ddcee091db1a2fb0672 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

magnesium atom · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

11 papers: 9 positive, 2 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction

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

2 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

infection · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 2 positive, 7 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this claim · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. positive
See all 9 papers →

micronutrient · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

2 papers more in this group

See all 11 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.