View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Added 27 mM NaCl did not significantly decrease biomass production or harvest photosynthesis parameters relative to Control_2.
addition of 27 mM NaCl e0 biomass production, or in photosynthesis-related parameters at harvest e0 did not result in any significant decrease e0 Verbatim
e0 “Compared to Control_2, the addition of 27 mM NaCl in the nutrient solution did not result in any significant decrease in biomass production, or in photosynthesis -related parameters at harvest ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1847–2038 t0 “Lettuce ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–7 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Mowing did not decrease vitamin C or anthocyanin contents.
Mowing treatments e0 Vitamin C and anthocyanin contents e0 did not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Mowing treatments promoted photosynthesis , and did not decrease soluble sugar, sucrose, soluble protein, Vitamin C and anthocyanin contents ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 948–1087 t0 “lettuce ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–108 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Mowing did not decrease soluble sugar, sucrose and soluble protein contents.
Mowing treatments e0 soluble sugar, sucrose, soluble protein e0 did not decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Mowing treatments promoted photosynthesis , and did not decrease soluble sugar, sucrose, soluble protein, Vitamin C and anthocyanin contents ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 948–1087 t0 “lettuce ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–108 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
At 0.1 to 1.0μL L-1 ethylene, lettuce photosynthesis and transpiration rates did not decrease across tested photon flux densities.
0.1 to 1.0μL L-1 of ethylene e1 rates of lettuce plant e1 under any photosynthetic photon flux density (130, 270, and 380μmol m-2 s-1) e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
t0 “Lettuce ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–104 e1 “no decrease s in the rates of lettuce plant were observed at 0.1 to 1.0μL L-1 of ethylene under any photosynthetic photon flux density (130, 270, and 380μmol m-2 s-1) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 417–582 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Mild RDI did not significantly decrease net photosynthetic rate or stomatal conductance.
net photosynthetic rate( Pn) and stomatal conductance( Gs) e0 did not significantly decrease e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The net photosynthetic rate( Pn) and stomatal conductance( Gs) did not significantly decrease by the mild RDI( W1) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 700–814 t0 “island cotton ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 142–155 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
After 30 days, mild RDI did not significantly decrease four fluorescence measures versus normal irrigation.
Fv / Fm,ΦPSⅡ,q P,NPQ e0 did not significantly decrease e0 Verbatim
e0 “After flowering 30 days, the W1 treatment compared with CK the Fv / Fm,ΦPSⅡ,q P,NPQ did not significantly decrease ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1274 t0 “island cotton ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 142–155 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Yield decrease caused by waterlogging was compensated to a level similar to Enrei and Shinpaldalkong2 through enhanced nodule growth in the recovery stage.
because of its enhanced nodule growth during the recovery stage e3 Enrei and Shinpaldalkong2 e3 Verbatim
t0 “supernodulating soybean cultivars ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 76–109 e2 “Kanto100 and SS2-2 exhibits a marked decrease in dry matter production by waterlogging ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1755–1841 e3 “yield decrease is compensated to level similar to that of Enrei and Shinpaldalkong2 because of its enhanced nodule growth during the recovery stage ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1847–1994 Other claims from this paper (8) Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Photosynthesis -related parameters did not noticeably differ among the apple trees.
Photosynthesis-related parameters e1 the difference among trees was not noticeable e2 Verbatim
e0 “we assessed the drought tolerance of 1-year-old apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) trees exposed to extreme water stress, focusing on growth and physiological responses ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 15–179 e1 “Photosynthesis -related parameters also showed a substantial decrease as the soil water potential changed ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1025–1129 e2 “but the difference among trees was not noticeable ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1131–1180 Other claims from this paper (15) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
In the Atlantic cultivar, water replenishment had no effect on photosynthesis compared with nutrient solution replacement.
water replenishment e2 no_change inferred e1 nutrient solution replacement e3 closed hydroponic systems e0 Verbatim
e0 “Superior (medium-to-early maturing) and Atlantic (mid-late) potato cultivars grown in closed hydroponic systems ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 111–222 e1 “Decrease d growth of shoots and tubers occurred without affecting photosynthesis in the Atlantic cultivar ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1421–1525 e2 “In water replenishment, recycling of nutrient solution resulted in a progressive decrease in EC and an increase in pH ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1047–1164 e3 “Root activity increased by 93% and 59% in the Superior and Atlantic cultivars, respectively, compared with the nutrient solution replacement ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1306 Other claims from this paper (11) Observation Under ion control, nitrate, phosphorus and potassium concentrations in the nutrient solution could be maintained at target levels. Observation In water replenishment, the EC of the recycled nutrient solution decreased progressively. Observation In water replenishment, the pH of the recycled nutrient solution increased progressively. Intervention effect Root activity in the Superior cultivar increased by 93% compared with nutrient solution replacement. Intervention effect Root activity in the Atlantic cultivar increased by 59% compared with nutrient solution replacement. Intervention effect In the Superior cultivar, these changes decreased photosynthesis, plant growth and water use. Intervention effect In the Superior cultivar, these changes decreased tuber growth. Intervention effect In the Atlantic cultivar, growth of shoots and tubers decreased compared with nutrient solution replacement. Intervention effect Root activity, photosynthesis and plant growth did not differ significantly between ion control and EC control. Intervention effect Under ion control, tuber growth increased compared with EC control, possibly as a result of the constant supply of nutrients. Recommendation High tuber growth and maintained solution nutrient concentration are highly desirable for closed hydroponic systems. Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Defoliation did not significantly affect seed number per pod or thousand seed weight in B. campestris and B. juncea .
seed number per pod and thousand‐seed weight e0 Not reported Comparator Direction
Verbatim
e0 “In B. campestris and B. juncea , a decrease in seed yield by defoliation was associated with a decrease in the number of pods per plant as seed number per pod and thousand‐seed weight were not significantly affected by this treatment. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 167–401 Other claims from this paper (9) 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.
Lactuca sativa
Glycine max
Malus domestica
Solanum tuberosum
Brassica juncea.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera