Intervention effectmodel-written summary

No tillage with straw mulching and plastic mulching increased root length of spring wheat and field pea by 35.9% to 92.6% compared with conventional tillage.

A claim from [Effects of tillage practices on root spatial distribution and yield of spring wheat and pea in the dry land farming areas of central Gansu, China]. · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No tillage with straw mulching and plastic mulching increased root length of spring wheat and field pea by 35.9% to 92.6% compared with conventional tillage.

Taxon
spring wheat and field peae1
Treatment
No tillage with straw mulching and plastic mulchinge0
Outcome
root lengthe1
Direction
increasede1
Value
35.9% to 92.6%e1
Comparator
conventional tillagee1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“No tillage with straw mulching and plastic mulching increased the root length and root surface area”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–895
e1

“Compared with conventional tillage in spring wheat and field pea, root length increased by 35.9% to 92.6%, and root surface area increased by 43.2% to 162.4%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 897–1068

Title

[Effects of tillage practices on root spatial distribution and yield of spring wheat and pea in the dry land farming areas of central Gansu, China].

Ming Jun Zhang; Ling Ling Li; Jun Hong Xie; et al. PubMed 2017. doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.201712.028

Other claims from this paper (17)

Record rev-e61201e94cdc6c6911445e502db9cc7aee14c612d207aacfb9e634cd180e32e4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 7 in the model’s answer

organic · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

71 papers: 60 positive, 11 negative or no effect

59 papers in the same direction as this claim · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

62 papers more in this group

See all 71 papers →

mulching · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

organic · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this claim · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
See all 8 papers →

3 of 6 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.