Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Excess irrigation and fertilizer intensified nitrogen accumulation in cotton roots, stems and leaves.

A claim from Enhancing cotton field productivity in arid northwest China through improved farm-level nitrogen balance and reduced nitrogen footprint · 2025

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Excess irrigation and fertilizer intensified nitrogen accumulation in cotton roots, stems and leaves.

Treatment
excessive irrigation and fertilizatione0
Outcome
N accumulation in the roots, stems, and leavese0
Direction
intensifiede0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“excessive irrigation and fertilization intensified N accumulation in the roots, stems, and leaves of cotton plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1231

Title

Enhancing cotton field productivity in arid northwest China through improved farm-level nitrogen balance and reduced nitrogen footprint

Chao Xiao; Xintong Xu; Yi Li; et al. Field Crops Research 2025. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109891

Other claims from this paper (12)

Record rev-fa208c2fecaa3fe764142db477680d6b2a9190ad2f2985f6a12569e69bda3b7c · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

irrigation · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

32 papers: 27 positive, 5 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this claim · 5 in the opposite direction

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

23 papers more in this group

See all 32 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

131 papers: 121 positive, 10 negative or no effect

120 papers in the same direction as this claim · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

122 papers more in this group

See all 131 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.