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
Interactions between plant spacing variability and emergence variability were not significant for corn yield .
interactions between the two factors e0 Not reported Comparator Direction
Verbatim
e0 “interactions between the two factors were not significant ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1662–1719 e1 “did not affect yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1636–1656 t0 “Corn ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–16 Other claims from this paper (7) Association observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
The interaction between emergence and spacing variability was not significant.
interactions between the two factors e0 Not reported Taxon Treatment Direction
Verbatim
e0 “interactions between the two factors were not significant ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1661–1718 Other claims from this paper (6) Observation observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
No-till corn yield variability was similar to conventional.
yield variability e1 Verbatim
e0 “similar in the NT (corn and winter wheat phases) systems ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1970–2026 e1 “Compared to the CT system, yield variability was 40% lower in the LI (corn phase), 33% lower in the NT (soybean phase) and similar in the NT (corn and winter wheat phases) systems ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1847–2026 Other claims from this paper (10) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Yield variation was unrelated to vine vigour.
variation in vine vigour e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “patterns of yield variation are neither temporal ly stable nor related to variation in vine vigour ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 888–985 t0 “Sauvignon Blanc ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–85 Other claims from this paper (7) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Yield variation was unrelated to inherent block characteristics.
underlying characteristics of the block e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “patterns of yield variation are neither temporal ly stable nor related to variation in vine vigour or the inherent underlying characteristics of the block ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 888–1041 t0 “Sauvignon Blanc ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–85 Other claims from this paper (7) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Under the conditions of the study, no relationship could be established between leaf chlorophyll index and cocoa yield .
no_change inferred e1 Verbatim
e1 “Under the conditions of this study, it was not possible to establish a relationship between leaf chlorophyll index and cocoa yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1000–1130 Other claims from this paper (3) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Soil fertility amendments did not alleviate yearly maize yield variability .
Soil fertility amendments e0 year‐to‐year variability observed in the corn ( Zea mays L.) yield e0 did not alleviate e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Soil fertility amendments did not alleviate year‐to‐year variability observed in the corn ( Zea mays L.) yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1482 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer did not elicit a yield response where manure was applied.
fertilizer application e0 where manure had been applied e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “no response to fertilizer application was observed where manure had been applied ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1043–1123 e1 “Grain yield increased with increasing N application rate without manure ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1037 t0 “Maize ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–5 Other claims from this paper (5) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Fractal dimension did not significantly differ between manure or fertilizer treatments.
no significant difference e0 Verbatim
e0 “There was no significant difference between D values for manure or fertilizer treatments ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1282–1370 t0 “Maize ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–5 Other claims from this paper (5) Association observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) simulated Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane yield had no significant relationship with solar radiation changes.
changes in solar radiation e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “sugarcane yield had no significant relationship with changes in solar radiation ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1752–1831 Other claims from this paper (17) Observation Projected sugarcane dry-matter yield increases under RCP4.5 were 3.6, 4.7 and 5.8 t ha−1 for the 2030s, 2060s and 2090s against baseline. Observation Projected sugarcane dry-matter yield increases under RCP8.5 were 2.9, 5.4 and 8.5 t ha−1 for the 2030s, 2060s and 2090s against baseline. Observation Projected sugarcane sucrose yield increases under RCP4.5 were 5.2, 7.0 and 8.3 t ha−1 across the future periods. Observation Projected sugarcane sucrose yield increases under RCP8.5 were 4.3, 7.2 and 10.8 t ha−1 across the future periods. Association Sugarcane yield was significantly correlated with rainfall changes. Association Sugarcane yield was significantly correlated with temperature changes. Association Combined radiation, rainfall, temperature and elevated CO2 changes may explain 69% of sugarcane DM yield changes. Association Combined radiation, rainfall, temperature and elevated CO2 changes may explain 76% of sugarcane sucrose yield changes. Association Increased temperature caused a small increase in sugarcane yield. Association Increased rainfall significantly increased sugarcane yield until a limit was exceeded. Association Sugarcane yield decreased when rainfall exceeded a certain limit. Association Sucrose yield increased with temperature at constant radiation. Association Sucrose yield decreased when radiation exceeded a certain limit. Association Temperature changes increased sucrose yield only when radiation and temperature increased together. Association Rainfall increased sucrose yield, though the amplitude was limited. Association Radiation increased sucrose yield, though the amplitude was limited. Recommendation The authors recommend supplemental irrigation to improve sugarcane yield under future climate change. Method / resource observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
There were no substantial differences in soybean yield prediction performance among the deep learning architectures.
no substantial differences e3 DL architectures e3 Verbatim
e0 “predicting within-field soybean yield s ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 208–246 e3 “There were no substantial differences in performance among the DL architectures ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1186 Other claims from this paper (5) 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.
Zea mays subsp. mayst0
Theobroma cacao
Zea mays
Glycine max