Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The top 20 maize hybrids performed better for grain yield and other agronomic traits than commercial checks across drought and well-watered environments.

A claim from International Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science · 2014

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The top 20 maize hybrids performed better for grain yield and other agronomic traits than commercial checks across drought and well-watered environments.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Material
top 20 hybridse0
Treatment
drought stress and well-watered environmentse0
Outcome
grain yield and other agronomic traitse0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
commercial checkse0

Not reportedGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Combined analyses across drought stress and well-watered environments showed that the top 20 hybrids performed better for grain yield and other agronomic traits of maize compared to the commercial checks”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 862–1065

Title

International Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science

Olivia Odiyo International Research Journal of Agriculture and Soil Science 2014. doi:10.14303/irjas.2014.055

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-fb02308d5571ddba3030c20363b8d19b037b88bf2cd5bf96e4e0c5ff56a7bbc4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

drought · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

353 papers: 53 positive, 300 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this claim · 300 in the opposite direction

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

344 papers more in this group

See all 353 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.