Refine ·

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics

More filters

Clear filters
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Artificial defoliation did not reduce alfalfa leaf node development rate as much as larval feeding.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
Artificial defoliatione3
Outcome
rate of leaf node developmente3
Direction
did not cause a comparable reductione3
Comparator
feeding of Hypera postica (Gyllenhal) larvaee0

Verbatim

e0

“The growth habit and yield response of alfalfa to the feeding of Hypera postica (Gyllenhal) larvae was measured in growth chambers at densities of 2–16 larvae/stem”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–163
e3

“Artificial defoliation did not cause a comparable reduction in the rate of leaf node development”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 511–607

Title

Alfalfa Weevil: Host Response to Larval Feeding12

A. H. Showalter; R. L. Pienkowski; D. D. Wolf Journal of Economic Entomology 1975. doi:10.1093/jee/68.5.619

Other claims from this paper (4)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Aphid development time did not differ among wheat shading treatments.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Shadinge1
Interactor
Sitobion avenaeSitobion avenaee2pest
Outcome
development timee0
Direction
no differencese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“there were no differences in development time or fecundity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 885–943
e1

“Shading was applied between either GS 31 and 39 (1st node detectable → flag leaf ligule just visible) or GS 39 and 55”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–446
e2

“grain aphid Sitobion avenae”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 102–129
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 33–45

Title

The effect of reducing growth in winter wheat on the population dynamics of the grain aphid Sitobion avenae (F.)

F. Beed; L. Winder; A. Marchesi; et al. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 1999. doi:10.1046/j.1461-9563.1999.00038.x

Other claims from this paper (3)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Aphid fecundity did not differ among wheat shading treatments.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Shadinge1
Interactor
Sitobion avenaeSitobion avenaee2pest
Outcome
fecunditye0
Direction
no differencese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“there were no differences in development time or fecundity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 885–943
e1

“Shading was applied between either GS 31 and 39 (1st node detectable → flag leaf ligule just visible) or GS 39 and 55”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–446
e2

“grain aphid Sitobion avenae”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 102–129
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 33–45

Title

The effect of reducing growth in winter wheat on the population dynamics of the grain aphid Sitobion avenae (F.)

F. Beed; L. Winder; A. Marchesi; et al. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 1999. doi:10.1046/j.1461-9563.1999.00038.x

Other claims from this paper (3)

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.