Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The I7 irrigation schedule gave the maximum leaf area index, 2.18.

A claim from Effect of irrigation scheduling on the growth and yield of wheat genotypes · 2015

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The I7 irrigation schedule gave the maximum leaf area index, 2.18.

Treatment
Irrigation schedules(I7) at crown root initiation + tillering + jointing + flowering + milky + dough stagese1
Outcome
leaf area indexe1
Direction
maximume1
Value
2.18e1
Setting
Dharwad (Karnataka)e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorQualifier

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“effect of irrigation schedules and genotypes on the growth and yield components of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) at the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad (Karnataka) in the year 2001–02”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 40–235
e1

“Irrigation schedules(I7) at crown root initiation + tillering + jointing + flowering + milky + dough stages recorded maximum effective tillers at harvest (94.66), total dry matter production (217.58 g m−1 row length), leaf area (49.31 dm2 m−1 row length), leaf area index (2.18), the mean ear length (6.89 cm), number of grains per ear (34.58), 1000 grain weight (39.83 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 306–678

Title

Effect of irrigation scheduling on the growth and yield of wheat genotypes

Afzal Ahmad; Ramesh Kumar Agricultural Science Digest - A Research Journal 2015. doi:10.5958/0976-0547.2015.00045.2

Other claims from this paper (17)

Record rev-e647aabf97432b450e4880a3bcab214b9262b8a95f8cdccb8e5ce358a9b0edf8 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

crown compound · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction

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

stage · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

37 papers: 24 positive, 13 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this claim · 13 in the opposite direction

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

28 papers more in this group

See all 37 papers →

irrigation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

242 papers: 177 positive, 65 negative or no effect

176 papers in the same direction as this claim · 61 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

233 papers more in this group

See all 242 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.