Abstract
Leaf extracts and mulch from 14 multipurpose trees were used to test their effects on maize germination, growth and yield. Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration. The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Lonchocarpus sireceus , Senna siamea and Leucaena leucocephala . Terminalia superba , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Pithecelobium dulce , Gliricidia sepium and Senna siamea significantly reduced maize root growth at the lowest extract concentration, while shoot length was most significantly reduced by Gliricidia sepium , Leucaena leucocephala , Alchornea coordifolia , Pithecelobium dulce , Terminalia superba , and Tetrapleura tetraptera at all concentrations. Growth of maize in pots and yield in the field were controlled by nitrogen supply and uptake. Fast‐decomposing leaf material rich in nitrogen promoted growth and yield of maize. Thus Leucaena leucocephala and Gliricidia sepium , both nitrogen‐fixing legumes with high nitrogen contents and fast‐decomposing leaf materials, significantly increased maize growth and yield. This suggests that the negative effects of leaf extracts observed in the laboratory are ecologically irrelevant in the field.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 14
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extracts of all tested tree species reduced maize germination increasingly with concentration.
- Treatment
- leaf extracts of all speciese0
- Outcome
- Maize germinatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- with increasing extract concentratione0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia sepium leaf extract caused one of the most drastic germination reductions.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium”
e1“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Tetrapleura tetraptera leaf extract caused one of the most drastic germination reductions.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium , Tetrapleura tetraptera”
e1“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Lonchocarpus sireceus leaf extract caused one of the most drastic germination reductions.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Lonchocarpus sireceus”
e1“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Senna siamea leaf extract caused one of the most drastic germination reductions.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Lonchocarpus sireceus , Senna siamea”
e1“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Leucaena leucocephala leaf extract caused one of the most drastic germination reductions.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most drastic reductions were caused by Gliricidia sepium , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Lonchocarpus sireceus , Senna siamea and Leucaena leucocephala”
e1“Maize germination was significantly reduced by leaf extracts of all species with increasing extract concentration”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At the lowest concentration, extracts of five named trees significantly reduced maize root growth.
- Treatment
- Terminalia superba , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Pithecelobium dulce , Gliricidia sepium and Senna siameae0
- Outcome
- maize root growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- at the lowest extract concentratione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Terminalia superba , Tetrapleura tetraptera , Pithecelobium dulce , Gliricidia sepium and Senna siamea significantly reduced maize root growth at the lowest extract concentration”
Claim · model-written summary
Extracts of six named trees significantly reduced maize shoot length at all concentrations.
- Treatment
- Gliricidia sepium , Leucaena leucocephala , Alchornea coordifolia , Pithecelobium dulce , Terminalia superba , and Tetrapleura tetrapterae0
- Outcome
- shoot lengthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- at all concentrationse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“shoot length was most significantly reduced by Gliricidia sepium , Leucaena leucocephala , Alchornea coordifolia , Pithecelobium dulce , Terminalia superba , and Tetrapleura tetraptera at all concentrations”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen supply and uptake controlled maize growth in pots.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Growth of maize in pots and yield in the field were controlled by nitrogen supply and uptake”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen supply and uptake controlled maize yield in the field.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Growth of maize in pots and yield in the field were controlled by nitrogen supply and uptake”
Claim · model-written summary
Fast-decomposing nitrogen-rich leaf material promoted maize growth and yield.
- Treatment
- Fast‐decomposing leaf material rich in nitrogene0
- Outcome
- growth and yield of maizee0
- Direction
- promotede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fast‐decomposing leaf material rich in nitrogen promoted growth and yield of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Leucaena leucocephala leaf material significantly increased maize growth and yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leucaena leucocephala and Gliricidia sepium , both nitrogen‐fixing legumes with high nitrogen contents and fast‐decomposing leaf materials, significantly increased maize growth and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Gliricidia sepium leaf material significantly increased maize growth and yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leucaena leucocephala and Gliricidia sepium , both nitrogen‐fixing legumes with high nitrogen contents and fast‐decomposing leaf materials, significantly increased maize growth and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors interpret laboratory extract inhibition as ecologically irrelevant in the field.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the negative effects of leaf extracts observed in the laboratory are ecologically irrelevant in the field”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
The same questions in other papers
Gliricidia sepium · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
Leucaena leucocephala · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Gliricidia sepium · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →Leucaena leucocephala · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →botanical · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
141 papers in the same direction as this paper · 198 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
336 papers more in this group
See all 340 papers →nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 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.