Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Treatment T8 (Azotobacter, Azospirillum and NPK at 50% each) gave higher strawberry yield (287.0 g/plant) than control (141.57 g/plant).

A claim from Efficacy of biological, organic and inorganic substrates of nutrients on yield attributing characters, sensory evaluation and economics of strawberry cv. Chandler under Lucknow conditions · 2016

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatment T8 (Azotobacter, Azospirillum and NPK at 50% each) gave higher strawberry yield (287.0 g/plant) than control (141.57 g/plant).

Taxon
strawberryFragaria ×ananassae0
Material
cv. Chandlere0
Treatment
Azotobacter (50%) + Azospirillum (50%) + NPK (50%)e2
Outcome
yielde2
Direction
highere2
Value
287.0 g/plante2
Qualifier
141.57 g/plante3
Comparator
controle3
Setting
field experimente0

Not reportedGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor role

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

Fragaria x ananassa
Fragaria ×ananassa · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field experiment was conducted for two years to study the performance of strawberry cv. Chandler as affected by the biological, organic and inorganic nutrient substrates under sub-tropical conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–201
e2

“Treatment T8 [Azotobacter (50%) + Azospirillum (50%) + NPK (50%)] was most effective for commercial cultivation with higher yield (287.0 g/plant)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 490–635
e3

“compared to control (141.57 g/plant)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–783

Title

Efficacy of biological, organic and inorganic substrates of nutrients on yield attributing characters, sensory evaluation and economics of strawberry cv. Chandler under Lucknow conditions

Rubee Lata; Deepa H. Dwivedi; R.B. Ram; et al. Indian Journal of Horticulture 2016. doi:10.5958/0974-0112.2016.00107.9

Other claims from this paper (3)

Record rev-ee202075d137ddbbcab5c36a193bd707ff8ada95faa2a7be2e7ad8e57d74560e · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

Azospirillum · yield · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)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 →

Azotobacter · yield · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results agree

31 papers: 31 positive, 0 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this claim

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

22 papers more in this group

See all 31 papers →

fertilization · yield · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results

229 papers: 193 positive, 36 negative or no effect

192 papers in the same direction as this claim · 34 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

220 papers more in this group

See all 229 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.