Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Manual weeding produced 1,027.37 kg ha-1, below the leading herbicide strategy.

A claim from Agronomic evaluation of cowpea as a function of weed control with herbicides and different combinations · 2016

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Manual weeding produced 1,027.37 kg ha-1, below the leading herbicide strategy.

Treatment
manual weedinge0
Outcome
mean productivitye0
Direction
followed bye0
Value
1,027.37 kg ha-1e0
Comparator
glyphosate + flumioxazin at 15 DAAe0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The combination of glyphosate + flumioxazin at 15 DAA, gave the highest mean productivity, 1,105.32 kg ha-1, followed by manual weeding with 1,027.37 kg ha-1.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–1100
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–30

Title

Agronomic evaluation of cowpea as a function of weed control with herbicides and different combinations

Wando Wilson de Oliveira Souza; Alexandre Bosco de Oliveira; Alek Sandro Dutra; et al. Ciência Agronômica/Revista ciência agronômica 2016. doi:10.5935/1806-6690.20160081

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-e5afea12015928f5029fbbae728078b34054748c55fb056ba058d1d58f40f2e4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

herbicide · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

53 papers: 45 positive, 8 negative or no effect

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

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

44 papers more in this group

See all 53 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.