Abstract
One of the major problem in the cultivation of sugar beets is continuous cropping obstacle in China. In order to evaluate the effects of continuous cropping year on the photosynthetic performance, dry matter accumulation, and distribution of sugar beet, this study was conducted in the 2020–2021 crop season at the Agriculture and Forestry Sciences of Ulanqab, Inner Mongolia. A split plot system arrangement with three replications was set up to carry out the field testing. The main plots had five planting years, with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments for one, two, three, and four years (designated as C1, C2, C3, and C4, respectively). The subplot consisted of two fertilization treatments designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y). The findings demonstrated that the continuous cropping impeded sugar beet photosynthesis as well as the accumulation and dispersion of the dry matter in leaf, petiole, and root. The intercellular CO 2 concentration (Ci), transpiration rate (Tr), stomatal conductance (Gs), net photosynthetic rate (Pn), and SPAD value were dramatically dropped as the number of continuous cropping years increased under the crop. Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively. The dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, and the whole plant were also reduced by 11.86–49.61%, 9.58–44.77%, 17.26–53.76%, and 10.62–49.79%, respectively. With the increasing of continuous cropping year, the growth of sugar beet was significantly inhibited. Study revealed that continuous cropping had an impact on the distribution of dry matter accumulation of sugar beet; it considerably raised the dry matter ratio above ground, lowered the dry matter ratio below ground, and prevented dry matter from moving from aboveground towards root, whitch caused a decline in sugar beet root production and disturbed the root shoot ratio. Compared with CK, the root shoot ratio significantly decreased by 3.62–19.76%. Under continuous cropping stystem, the application of bio-organic fertilizer had an effect on promoting the photosynthesis of sugar beet, and regulating the distribution and transport of dry matter. The effects of bio-organic fertilizer were significantly under continuous cropping for 1–2 years. Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively. Dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, whole plant were significantly increased by 8.32–16.18%, 10.80–13.33%, 14.93–20.13%, 14.12–15.43%, and 10.65–15.32%, 6.58–15.63%, 15.37–20.94%, 12.68–16.85%, respectively. Nonetheless, the root shoot ratio increased by 4.58–8.56% and 4.52–7.35%. Above all, Under continuous cropping conditions, the application of 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizer could effectively promote the photosynthesis of sugar beet, and better regulate the distribution and transport of dry matter of sugar beet. These results can provide scientific basis for bio-organic fertilizer to alleviate the problem of sugar beet continuous cropping.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced sugar beet SPAD value by 10.09–48.21% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- SPAD valuee1
- Direction
- significantly reducede1
- Value
- 10.09–48.21%e1
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced sugar beet net photosynthetic rate (Pn) by 14.60–43.19% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- Pne1
- Direction
- significantly reducede1
- Value
- 14.60–43.19%e1
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced sugar beet intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) by 12.00–42.86% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- Cie1
- Direction
- significantly reducede1
- Value
- 12.00–42.86%e1
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced sugar beet transpiration rate (Tr) by 7.77–43.83% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- Tre1
- Direction
- significantly reducede1
- Value
- 7.77–43.83%e1
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced sugar beet stomatal conductance (Gs) by 9.61–37.68% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- Gse1
- Direction
- significantly reducede1
- Value
- 9.61–37.68%e1
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the SPAD value, Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of continuous cropping treatments were significantly reduced by an average of 10.09–48.21%, 14.60–43.19%, 12.00–42.86%, 7.77–43.83%, 9.61–37.68%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced leaf dry matter accumulation by 11.86–49.61% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- leafe1
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 11.86–49.61%e1
- Comparator
- control (CK)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“The dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, and the whole plant were also reduced by 11.86–49.61%, 9.58–44.77%, 17.26–53.76%, and 10.62–49.79%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced petiole dry matter accumulation by 9.58–44.77% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- petiolee1
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 9.58–44.77%e1
- Comparator
- control (CK)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“The dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, and the whole plant were also reduced by 11.86–49.61%, 9.58–44.77%, 17.26–53.76%, and 10.62–49.79%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced root dry matter accumulation by 17.26–53.76% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- roote1
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 17.26–53.76%e1
- Comparator
- control (CK)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“The dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, and the whole plant were also reduced by 11.86–49.61%, 9.58–44.77%, 17.26–53.76%, and 10.62–49.79%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping reduced whole-plant dry matter accumulation by 10.62–49.79% relative to the first-cropping control.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- whole plante1
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 10.62–49.79%e1
- Comparator
- control (CK)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“The dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, and the whole plant were also reduced by 11.86–49.61%, 9.58–44.77%, 17.26–53.76%, and 10.62–49.79%, respectively”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous cropping significantly decreased the root shoot ratio by 3.62–19.76% and raised the above-ground dry matter ratio at the expense of the root.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- continuous croppinge2
- Outcome
- root shoot ratioe1
- Direction
- significantly decreasede1
- Value
- 3.62–19.76%e1
- Qualifier
- it considerably raised the dry matter ratio above ground, lowered the dry matter ratio below grounde3
- Comparator
- CKe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with CK, the root shoot ratio significantly decreased by 3.62–19.76%”
e2“with the a first cropping of each growing season serving as the control (CK) and four continuous cropping treatments”
e3“it considerably raised the dry matter ratio above ground, lowered the dry matter ratio below ground, and prevented dry matter from moving from aboveground towards root”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased sugar beet Pn by 12.79–22.50% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Pne1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 12.79–22.50%e1
- Qualifier
- 13.69–18.91%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased sugar beet Ci by 14.76–16.47% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Cie1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 14.76–16.47%e1
- Qualifier
- 12.17–14.60%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased sugar beet Tr by 4.76–13.08% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Tre1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 4.76–13.08%e1
- Qualifier
- 5.71–15.14%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased sugar beet Gs by 8.51–12.70% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Gse1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 8.51–12.70%e1
- Qualifier
- 7.58–15.41%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased leaf dry matter accumulation by 8.32–16.18% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- leafe1
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Dry matter accumulation of leafe1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 8.32–16.18%e1
- Qualifier
- 10.65–15.32%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, whole plant were significantly increased by 8.32–16.18%, 10.80–13.33%, 14.93–20.13%, 14.12–15.43%, and 10.65–15.32%, 6.58–15.63%, 15.37–20.94%, 12.68–16.85%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
e3“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased petiole dry matter accumulation by 10.80–13.33% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- petiolee1
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 10.80–13.33%e1
- Qualifier
- 6.58–15.63%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, whole plant were significantly increased by 8.32–16.18%, 10.80–13.33%, 14.93–20.13%, 14.12–15.43%, and 10.65–15.32%, 6.58–15.63%, 15.37–20.94%, 12.68–16.85%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
e3“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased root dry matter accumulation by 14.93–20.13% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- roote1
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 14.93–20.13%e1
- Qualifier
- 15.37–20.94%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, whole plant were significantly increased by 8.32–16.18%, 10.80–13.33%, 14.93–20.13%, 14.12–15.43%, and 10.65–15.32%, 6.58–15.63%, 15.37–20.94%, 12.68–16.85%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
e3“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping significantly increased whole-plant dry matter accumulation by 14.12–15.43% (C1Y) relative to C1N and C2N.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Organ / stage
- whole plante1
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- Dry matter accumulatione1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- 14.12–15.43%e1
- Qualifier
- 12.68–16.85%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Dry matter accumulation of leaf, petiole, root, whole plant were significantly increased by 8.32–16.18%, 10.80–13.33%, 14.93–20.13%, 14.12–15.43%, and 10.65–15.32%, 6.58–15.63%, 15.37–20.94%, 12.68–16.85%, respectively”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
e3“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Bio-organic fertilizer under continuous cropping increased the sugar beet root shoot ratio by 4.58–8.56%.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizatione2
- Outcome
- root shoot ratioe1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 4.58–8.56%e1
- Qualifier
- 4.52–7.35%e1
- Comparator
- C1N and C2Ne3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“Nonetheless, the root shoot ratio increased by 4.58–8.56% and 4.52–7.35%”
e2“designated as 0 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (N) and 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilization (Y)”
e3“Compared with C1N and C2N, the Pn, Ci, Tr, Gs of C1Y and C2Y were significantly increased by 12.79–22.50%, 14.76–16.47%, 4.76–13.08%, 8.51–12.70%, and 13.69–18.91%, 12.17–14.60%, 5.71–15.14%, 7.58–15.41%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Applying 6000 kg ha-1 bio-organic fertilizer could effectively promote sugar beet photosynthesis under continuous cropping.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizere1
- Outcome
- photosynthesis of sugar beete1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet”
e1“the application of 6000 kg ha −1 bio-organic fertilizer could effectively promote the photosynthesis of sugar beet”
The same questions in other papers
rotation · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
fertilization · physiology: photosynthesis · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →rotation · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →fertilization · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
105 papers more in this group
See all 109 papers →fertilization · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
236 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 papers →fertilization · physiology: gas exchange · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.