Try:droughtFusariumnitrogen fertilizerArabidopsisseed germination

“yield/plot”

229 matches

Claim types

Direction of the findings

plus 92 non-evaluative

Over time

1950 ’60 ’70 ’80 ’90 2000 ’10 ’20

plus 47 earlier · 1910s–1940s

Refine ·

More filters

Clear filters

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gross plot yield of cocoa exceeded guarded plot yield by about 17%.

Taxon: CocoaTheobroma cacaot0
Outcome: gross plot yielde1
Direction: exceedse1
Value: about 17%e1
Comparator: guarded plot yielde1

Verbatim

t0
“Edge Effects in a Cocoa Shade and Manurial Experiment”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–53

e1
“the gross plot yield exceeds the guarded plot yield by about 17%”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 122–186

Title

Edge Effects in a Cocoa Shade and Manurial Experiment

A. J. Vernon Journal of Horticultural Science 1968. doi:10.1080/00221589.1968.11514241

Other claims from this paper (3)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Since 1953, the 25% plot approached the 0% plot in yield.

Taxon: Satsuma orangeCitrus unshiut0
Treatment: 25% plote0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: approachede0
Qualifier: Since 1953e0
Comparator: 0% plote0

Verbatim

e0
“Since 1953, the yield of 25% plot approached to that of the 0% plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1369

t0
“Satsuma orange”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–66

Title

Effects of long-term application of green manure on Satsuma orange. I

T. SAKAMOTO; S. OKUCHI; T. YAMAMOTO; et al. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science 1961. doi:10.2503/jjshs.30.215

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect Chemical fertilizer alone yielded more than full green manure in 1946 to 48.
Intervention effect The two endpoint treatments had nearly equal yield in 1949 to 51.
Intervention effect Full green manure yielded more than chemical fertilizer alone since 1952.
Intervention effect Intermediate green manure proportions produced intermediate yields.
Intervention effect Since 1953, the 75% plot approached the full green manure plot in yield.
Observation Trees in the 0% plot gradually lost vigor and were exhausted by 1957.
Intervention effect The 50% plot had intermediate yield.
Association More green manure was associated with larger fruit size.
Association More green manure was associated with flatter fruit shape.
Intervention effect Fruit growth was better with full green manure than none.
Association Larger green manure amounts reduced storage loss due to molds.
Association Tree volume was larger with larger green manure amounts.
Association Trunk circumference was larger with larger green manure amounts.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Since 1953, the 75% plot approached the full green manure plot in yield.

Taxon: Satsuma orangeCitrus unshiut0
Treatment: 75% plote0
Outcome: yielde1
Direction: approachede1
Qualifier: Since 1953e1
Comparator: 100% plotse0

Verbatim

e0
“and the 75% plot to 100% plots.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1371–1402

e1
“Since 1953, the yield of 25% plot approached to that of the 0% plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1369

t0
“Satsuma orange”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–66

Title

Effects of long-term application of green manure on Satsuma orange. I

T. SAKAMOTO; S. OKUCHI; T. YAMAMOTO; et al. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science 1961. doi:10.2503/jjshs.30.215

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect Chemical fertilizer alone yielded more than full green manure in 1946 to 48.
Intervention effect The two endpoint treatments had nearly equal yield in 1949 to 51.
Intervention effect Full green manure yielded more than chemical fertilizer alone since 1952.
Intervention effect Intermediate green manure proportions produced intermediate yields.
Intervention effect Since 1953, the 25% plot approached the 0% plot in yield.
Observation Trees in the 0% plot gradually lost vigor and were exhausted by 1957.
Intervention effect The 50% plot had intermediate yield.
Association More green manure was associated with larger fruit size.
Association More green manure was associated with flatter fruit shape.
Intervention effect Fruit growth was better with full green manure than none.
Association Larger green manure amounts reduced storage loss due to molds.
Association Tree volume was larger with larger green manure amounts.
Association Trunk circumference was larger with larger green manure amounts.

Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Control plot yield was judged a good indicator of soil fertility for the yielding ability of an adjacent plot.

Taxon: Triticum aestivumTriticum aestivume1
Outcome: yield of a control plote0
Setting: adjacent plote0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“the yield of a control plot provides a good measure of the soil fertility in terms of the yielding ability of an adjacent plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 454–580

e1
“Triticum aestivum var. Manitou”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 17–47

Title

IMPLICATIONS CONCERNING THE FREQUENCY OF CONTROL PLOTS IN WHEAT BREEDING NURSERIES

K. G. Briggs; L. H. Shebeski Canadian Journal of Plant Science 1968. doi:10.4141/cjps68-027

Other claims from this paper (2)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco yield by 5% compared with the untreated check plot.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Inoculation was made 15 days after transplantinge2
Interactor: cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O)cucumber mosaic cucumoviruse3pathogen
Outcome: yielde4
Direction: decreasese4
Value: 5%e4
Comparator: untreated check plote1

Verbatim

t0
“Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

e1
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

e2
“Plot C Inoculation was made 15 days after transplanting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 531–586

e3
“The ordinary strain of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O) was used for virus inoculum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–345

e4
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

Title

Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco

Yukiharu KASHIHARA; Zyun HIDAKA Japanese Journal of Phytopathology 1962. doi:10.3186/jjphytopath.27.143

Other claims from this paper (19)

Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco yield by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco yield by 55% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco yield by 36% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco yield by 20% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco quality by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco quality by 39% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco quality by 41% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco quality by 24% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco quality by 0% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 71% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 74% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 18% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.
Intervention effect Damage was most severe in Plots B and C and relatively small in Plot E.
Association Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease losses in earnings were about equal to those of tobacco mosaic disease.
Observation Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease affects tobacco yield rather than quality.
Recommendation Damage from tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease may be estimated accurately from the time of infection if weather is taken into account.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco yield by 36% compared with the untreated check plot.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Inoculation was made 30 days after transplantinge2
Interactor: cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O)cucumber mosaic cucumoviruse3pathogen
Outcome: yielde4
Direction: decreasese4
Value: 36%e4
Comparator: untreated check plote1

Verbatim

t0
“Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

e1
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

e2
“Plot D Inoculation was made 30 days after transplanting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 587–642

e3
“The ordinary strain of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O) was used for virus inoculum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–345

e4
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

Title

Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco

Yukiharu KASHIHARA; Zyun HIDAKA Japanese Journal of Phytopathology 1962. doi:10.3186/jjphytopath.27.143

Other claims from this paper (19)

Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco yield by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco yield by 55% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco yield by 5% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco yield by 20% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco quality by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco quality by 39% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco quality by 41% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco quality by 24% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco quality by 0% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 71% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 74% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 18% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.
Intervention effect Damage was most severe in Plots B and C and relatively small in Plot E.
Association Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease losses in earnings were about equal to those of tobacco mosaic disease.
Observation Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease affects tobacco yield rather than quality.
Recommendation Damage from tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease may be estimated accurately from the time of infection if weather is taken into account.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco yield by 20% compared with the untreated check plot.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Inoculation was made 45 days after transplantinge2
Interactor: cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O)cucumber mosaic cucumoviruse3pathogen
Outcome: yielde4
Direction: decreasese4
Value: 20%e4
Comparator: untreated check plote1

Verbatim

t0
“Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

e1
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

e2
“Plot E Inoculation was made 45 days after transplanting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 643–698

e3
“The ordinary strain of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O) was used for virus inoculum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–345

e4
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

Title

Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco

Yukiharu KASHIHARA; Zyun HIDAKA Japanese Journal of Phytopathology 1962. doi:10.3186/jjphytopath.27.143

Other claims from this paper (19)

Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco yield by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco yield by 55% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco yield by 5% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco yield by 36% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco quality by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco quality by 39% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco quality by 41% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco quality by 24% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco quality by 0% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 71% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 74% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 18% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.
Intervention effect Damage was most severe in Plots B and C and relatively small in Plot E.
Association Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease losses in earnings were about equal to those of tobacco mosaic disease.
Observation Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease affects tobacco yield rather than quality.
Recommendation Damage from tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease may be estimated accurately from the time of infection if weather is taken into account.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco yield by 55% compared with the untreated check plot.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Inoculation was made on the day of transplantinge2
Interactor: cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O)cucumber mosaic cucumoviruse3pathogen
Outcome: yielde4
Direction: decreasese4
Value: 55%e4
Comparator: untreated check plote1

Verbatim

t0
“Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

e1
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

e2
“Plot B Inoculation was made on the day of transplanting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 475–530

e3
“The ordinary strain of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O) was used for virus inoculum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–345

e4
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

Title

Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco

Yukiharu KASHIHARA; Zyun HIDAKA Japanese Journal of Phytopathology 1962. doi:10.3186/jjphytopath.27.143

Other claims from this paper (19)

Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco yield by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco yield by 5% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco yield by 36% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco yield by 20% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco quality by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco quality by 39% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco quality by 41% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco quality by 24% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco quality by 0% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 71% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 74% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 18% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.
Intervention effect Damage was most severe in Plots B and C and relatively small in Plot E.
Association Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease losses in earnings were about equal to those of tobacco mosaic disease.
Observation Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease affects tobacco yield rather than quality.
Recommendation Damage from tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease may be estimated accurately from the time of infection if weather is taken into account.

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Clonal and small plot yield performance were highly significantly correlated.

Taxon: wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome: yield performancee1
Comparator: small plote1

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

t0
“CLONAL PROPAGATION OF WHEAT PLANTS”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–34

e1
“Correlations between clonal and small plot yield performance were highly significant”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 792–876

Title

CLONAL PROPAGATION OF WHEAT PLANTS FOR THE EVALUATION OF YIELD

W. J. White Canadian Journal of Plant Science 1962. doi:10.4141/cjps62-099

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco yield by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Inoculation was made to tobacco plants in the seedbed 15 days before transplantinge2
Interactor: cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O)cucumber mosaic cucumoviruse3pathogen
Outcome: yielde4
Direction: decreasese4
Value: 30%e4
Comparator: untreated check plote1

Verbatim

t0
“Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78

e1
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

e2
“Plot A Inoculation was made to tobacco plants in the seedbed 15 days before transplanting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 385–474

e3
“The ordinary strain of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV-O) was used for virus inoculum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–345

e4
“When compared with the untreated check plot, the decreases in yield were 30% in Plot A, 55% in Plot B, 5% in Plot C, 36% in Plot D, and 20% in Plot E”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 699–848

Title

Effects of tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease on the yield and quality of tobacco

Yukiharu KASHIHARA; Zyun HIDAKA Japanese Journal of Phytopathology 1962. doi:10.3186/jjphytopath.27.143

Other claims from this paper (19)

Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco yield by 55% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco yield by 5% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco yield by 36% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco yield by 20% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco quality by 30% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco quality by 39% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco quality by 41% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco quality by 24% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco quality by 0% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot A reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot B reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 71% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot C reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 74% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot D reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 51% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect Inoculation in Plot E reduced tobacco value per unit acreage by 18% compared with the untreated check plot.
Intervention effect The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.
Intervention effect Damage was most severe in Plots B and C and relatively small in Plot E.
Association Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease losses in earnings were about equal to those of tobacco mosaic disease.
Observation Tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease affects tobacco yield rather than quality.
Recommendation Damage from tobacco/cucumber mosaic disease may be estimated accurately from the time of infection if weather is taken into account.

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.

“yield/plot”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics