View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
In the field, relative water content of Nicotiana glauca did not decrease with drought.
relative water content (RWC) e0 no_change inferred e0 Verbatim
t0 “in the cosmopolitan in vader Nicotiana glauca ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–95 e0 “In the field, water potential, photosynthetic rate (A) and stomatal conductance (gs), but not relative water content (RWC) decrease d because of drought ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 571–722 Other claims from this paper (12) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Shoots of tomato plants with only half of the roots water ed showed no decrease in relative water content .
only half of the roots were watered e4 relative water content e4 Verbatim
e1 “The expression of four genes, le4, le16, le20, and le25, which require in creased ABA content for expression, was studied in tomato plants ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 167–304 e4 “Shoots of plants in which only half of the roots were water ed showed no decrease in relative water content and no in crease in ABA content ; however, three of the four genes, le4, le16, and le20, were in duced ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1362 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Specific leaf water content did not significantly decrease during drought stress.
drought stress e0 did not significantly decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–131 e0 “SLFW and SLWC did not significantly decrease during drought stress period. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1290–1364 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Green manure did not decrease subsequent wheat season soil water content and storage in the first two years.
soil water content and storage e0 did not decrease e0 0–200 cm layer e0 Verbatim
e0 “GM did not decrease the soil water content and storage (0–200 cm layer) during the subsequent winter wheat season, relative to BL ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1276 Other claims from this paper (18) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
None of the tested maple species showed a significant decline in leaf relative water content under drought.
one month long summer drought e1 leaf relative water content e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “none from tested species showed a significant decrease in leaf relative water content in dicating stress. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 634–738 t0 “maples (Acer sp.) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 50–67 e1 “reactions of juvenile plants of eight maple species to one month long summer drought ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 427–511 Other claims from this paper (5) Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Before visible wilt, in fected leaves showed no changes in relative water content , permeability, RNA, or protein.
relative water content, tissue permeability, RNA, and protein levels e0 Verbatim
e0 “No changes in relative water content , tissue permeability, RNA, and protein levels and only a slight decrease in chlorophyll level were detected within in fected leaf tissue before the appearance of visible wilt. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 317–528 t0 “chrysanthemum ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–34 e1 “Verticillium dahliae Kleb. in vaded and colonized chrysanthemum leaf tissue before symptom expression. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 104–205 Other claims from this paper (3) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Drought days showed no change in the relative water content of F. rukam in Sekarmojo.
the number of DD e4 no_change inferred e4 Verbatim
t0 “Variation of Phenology of Flacourtia rukam in Two Different Habitats ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–68 e4 “the number of DD contributed to a decrease in the RWC value in PBG only, not in Sekarmojo ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1479–1568 Other claims from this paper (9) Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Mineral nutrition did not affect chlorophyll or MDA content in spring wheat.
mineral nutrition e4 Verbatim
e0 “Water stress significantly made relative water content (RWC) in spring wheat leaves drop sharply ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1–97 e4 “The phenomenon of RWC decrease caused by mineral nutrition was also observed ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1125–1201 e7 “But this decrease didn't affect Chl and MDA ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1203–1246 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Steady water tables at 5 and 10 cm did not restrain relative leaf expansion rate.
steady water table at 5-cm and 10-cm depth e0 relative leaf expansion rate (RLER) e0 did not restrain e0 Untreated control plants e1 Verbatim
e0 “steady water table at 5-cm and 10-cm depth did not restrain relative leaf expansion rate (RLER) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1045–1140 e1 “Untreated control plants ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 797–821 t0 “tomato plants ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–135 Other claims from this paper (4) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
The most negative leaf water potential was not associated with greatest leaf firing or decrease d leaf extension.
leaf firing or decrease in leaf extension e0 not associated e0 most negative LWP e0 Verbatim
e0 “The most negative LWP was not associated with the greatest leaf firing or decrease in leaf extension. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1222–1323 t0 “Creeping Bentgrass ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–79 Other claims from this paper (2) Lexical search (BM25). All words must match; if nothing does, any word. Organism names also match every spelling of the same organism. No semantic search yet.
Nicotiana glauca
Solanum lycopersicum
Capsicum
Triticum aestivum
Acer.jpeg?width=60){kind=small}
Chrysanthemum
Flacourtia rukam
Agrostis stolonifera