Search claims · PlantClaims

2020s 18

Show all 18 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll and relative water content of tomato tended to decrease as stress level increased.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: increase in stress levele5
Outcome: chlorophyll and the relative water contente5
Direction: decreasee5

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0
“tomato genotypes”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 107–123

e5
“physiological parameters, namely chlorophyll and the relative water content tended to decrease, while the rate of water loss and proline content tended to increase following an increase in stress level”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1211

Title

Assessing the impact of different water stresses on physio-chemical properties and yield-related traits in tomato genotypes: Insights into stability and response

Veerendra K. VERMA; Krishnappa RANGAPPA; Amit KUMAR; et al. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 2025. doi:10.15835/nbha53114113

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf relative water content fell 25% in experiment 1.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: water-deficit stresst0
Outcome: leaf relative water contente0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 25e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“25 and 29% decrease in leaf relative water content”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 997–1047

t0
“tomato under water-deficit stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–170

Title

Effects of an Ascophyllum nodosum seaweed extract application dose and method on growth, fruit yield, quality, and water productivity of tomato under water-deficit stress

Mostak Ahmed; Hayat Ullah; Kanokkorn Piromsri; et al. South African Journal of Botany 2022. doi:10.1016/j.sajb.2022.09.045

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect At 50% field capacity, fruit yield fell 67% in experiment 1.
Intervention effect At 50% field capacity, fruit yield fell 52% in experiment 2.
Intervention effect Fruit length fell 11% under severe deficit in both experiments.
Intervention effect Leaf relative water content fell 29% in experiment 2.
Intervention effect Total soluble solids increased 38% in experiment 1.
Intervention effect Total soluble solids increased 49% in experiment 2.
Intervention effect Soil drench at 5 mL/L raised yield 225% at 50% FC.
Intervention effect Foliar spray at 5 mL/L raised yield 271% at 50% FC.
Intervention effect Untreated plants had lower water productivity at all soil moisture levels.
Intervention effect Water productivity was greatest at 5 mL/L across moisture levels.
Observation A 5 mL/L soil drench produced 523.3 g per plant yield.
Observation A 5 mL/L foliar spray produced 397.1 g per plant yield.
Recommendation The authors recommend 5 mL/L ASE for tomato.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf relative water content fell 29% in experiment 2.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: water-deficit stresst0
Outcome: leaf relative water contente0
Direction: decreasee0
Value: 29%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“25 and 29% decrease in leaf relative water content”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 997–1047

t0
“tomato under water-deficit stress”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–170

Title

Effects of an Ascophyllum nodosum seaweed extract application dose and method on growth, fruit yield, quality, and water productivity of tomato under water-deficit stress

Mostak Ahmed; Hayat Ullah; Kanokkorn Piromsri; et al. South African Journal of Botany 2022. doi:10.1016/j.sajb.2022.09.045

Other claims from this paper (13)

Intervention effect At 50% field capacity, fruit yield fell 67% in experiment 1.
Intervention effect At 50% field capacity, fruit yield fell 52% in experiment 2.
Intervention effect Fruit length fell 11% under severe deficit in both experiments.
Intervention effect Leaf relative water content fell 25% in experiment 1.
Intervention effect Total soluble solids increased 38% in experiment 1.
Intervention effect Total soluble solids increased 49% in experiment 2.
Intervention effect Soil drench at 5 mL/L raised yield 225% at 50% FC.
Intervention effect Foliar spray at 5 mL/L raised yield 271% at 50% FC.
Intervention effect Untreated plants had lower water productivity at all soil moisture levels.
Intervention effect Water productivity was greatest at 5 mL/L across moisture levels.
Observation A 5 mL/L soil drench produced 523.3 g per plant yield.
Observation A 5 mL/L foliar spray produced 397.1 g per plant yield.
Recommendation The authors recommend 5 mL/L ASE for tomato.

1990s 3

Show all 3 →

Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shoots of tomato plants with only half of the roots watered showed no decrease in relative water content.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
Treatment: only half of the roots were waterede4
Outcome: relative water contente4
Direction: no decreasee4

Verbatim

e1
“The expression of four genes, le4, le16, le20, and le25, which require increased 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 watered showed no decrease in relative water content and no increase in ABA content; however, three of the four genes, le4, le16, and le20, were induced”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1362

Title

Shoot induction of ABA-requiring genes in response to soil drying

Allen Griffiths; Elizabeth A. Bray Journal of Experimental Botany 1996. doi:10.1093/jxb/47.10.1525

Other claims from this paper (5)

Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shoots of tomato plants with only half of the roots watered showed no increase in ABA content.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
Treatment: only half of the roots were waterede4
Compound: ABAe4
Outcome: ABA contente4
Direction: no increasee4

Verbatim

e1
“The expression of four genes, le4, le16, le20, and le25, which require increased 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 watered showed no decrease in relative water content and no increase in ABA content; however, three of the four genes, le4, le16, and le20, were induced”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1362

Title

Shoot induction of ABA-requiring genes in response to soil drying

Allen Griffiths; Elizabeth A. Bray Journal of Experimental Botany 1996. doi:10.1093/jxb/47.10.1525

Other claims from this paper (5)

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In shoots of tomato plants with only half of the roots watered, three of the four genes le4, le16 and le20 were induced.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
Treatment: only half of the roots were waterede4
Gene: le4, le16, and le20e4
Outcome: three of the four genese4
Direction: inducede4

Verbatim

e1
“The expression of four genes, le4, le16, le20, and le25, which require increased 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 watered showed no decrease in relative water content and no increase in ABA content; however, three of the four genes, le4, le16, and le20, were induced”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1362

Title

Shoot induction of ABA-requiring genes in response to soil drying

Allen Griffiths; Elizabeth A. Bray Journal of Experimental Botany 1996. doi:10.1093/jxb/47.10.1525

Other claims from this paper (5)

2010s 2

Show all 2 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Long-term water deficiency decreased osmotic potential, relative water content and chlorophyll concentration in greenhouse tomato leaves compared with well-watered plants.

Taxon: Solanum lycopersicumSolanum lycopersicume0
Treatment: long-term WDe1
Outcome: osmotic potential, relative water content and chlorophyll concentratione2
Direction: decreasee2
Comparator: well-waterede1
Setting: greenhousee1

Verbatim

e0
“Solanum lycopersicum”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 289–309

e1
“in the greenhouse under well-watered or long-term WD conditions”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 817–880

e2
“The decrease of the osmotic potential, relative water content and chlorophyll concentration”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 882–973

Title

Controlled long-term water deficiency and its impact on the fluorescence emission of tomato leaves during stress and re-watering

Burkard Kautz; Georg Noga; Mauricio Hunsche European Journal of Horticultural Science 2014. doi:10.1079/ejhs.2014/4258560

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Steady water tables at 5 and 10 cm did not restrain relative leaf expansion rate.

Taxon: tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: steady water table at 5-cm and 10-cm depthe0
Outcome: relative leaf expansion rate (RLER)e0
Direction: did not restraine0
Comparator: Untreated control plantse1

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

Title

Steady shallow water table did not decrease leaf expansion rate, specific leaf weight, and specific leaf water content in tomato plants

Mei Meihana; STIPER Sriwigama, Palembang 30137, Indonesia; Benyamin Lakitan; et al. Australian Journal of Crop Science 2017. doi:10.21475/ajcs.17.11.12.pne808

Other claims from this paper (4)

Method / resource A zero intercept linear model was selected for tomato leaf area estimation.
Intervention effect Specific leaf fresh weight did not differ significantly between treated and untreated plants.
Intervention effect Specific leaf water content did not differ significantly between treated and untreated plants.
Observation Steady shallow water tables at 5 cm or deeper did not affect tomato growth.

2000s 1

Show all 1 →

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate and severe stress reduced tomato leaf water potential relative to controls, more under severe stress.

Taxon: tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicumt0
Treatment: Moderate and severe water stresse0
Outcome: Ψ we0
Direction: decreasee0
Qualifier: more pronounced for severely stressed plantse0
Comparator: control plantse0

Verbatim

e0
“Moderate and severe water stress (i.e. Ψs= ‐0.51 and ‐1.22 MPa, respectively) caused a decrease in Ψ w for all treated (water‐stressed) plants compared with control plants, with the reduction being more pronounced for severely stressed plants.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 568–811

t0
“Tomato Plants”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 160–173

Title

Effects of Different Levels of Water Stress on Leaf Water Potential, Stomatal Resistance, Protein and Chlorophyll Content and Certain Anti‐oxidative Enzymes in Tomato Plants

Hatem Zgallaï; Kathy Steppe; Raoul Lemeur Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 2006. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7909.2006.00272.x

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Water stress significantly affected stomatal resistance without a stated direction.
Intervention effect Water stress decreased leaf soluble protein content.
Intervention effect Water stress decreased chlorophyll content.
Intervention effect Catalase activity remained constant under water stress.
Intervention effect SOD activity increased in water-stressed relative to unstressed plants.
Mechanism The authors suggest SOD may protect plants under water stress.
Recommendation The authors suggest using SOD activity as a water-stress screening criterion.

“decrease in relative water content”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics

2020s 18

1990s 3

2010s 2

2000s 1