Search claims · PlantClaims

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In the weedy plot, grain yield did not differ significantly between rice varieties.

Taxon: upland riceOryza sativat0
Treatment: weedy plote1
Outcome: grain yielde1

Verbatim

t0
“upland rice”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–41

e1
“In the weedy plot, grain yield did not differ significantly between varieties”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 679–756

Title

Effect of weed competition on upland rice production in north-eastern Nigeria

Friday Ekeleme; A. Y. Kamara; Sylvester O. Oikeh; et al. CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) 2007

Other claims from this paper (9)

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sweet-potato varieties did not differ significantly in yield per plot.

Taxon: sweet potatoIpomoea batatast0
Outcome: computed yield per plote0
Direction: no significant differencese0

Verbatim

e0
“computed yield per plot showed no significant differences”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 690–747

t0
“Sweet Potato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–36

Title

Varietal Performance of Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas l.) Planted in Between Mulberry (Morus alba l.) Trees

Mark Anthony A. Boisa; Lilia O. Sampaga; Lieslea M. Wagayen Journal of Agroforestry and Environment 2025. doi:10.55706/jae1823

Other claims from this paper (3)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Orienting corn seed at planting did not show a plot-level yield advantage.

Taxon: cornZea mays subsp. mayse4
Treatment: orienting corn seed at plantinge4
Outcome: plot level yielde4
Direction: did not show an advantagee4

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e4
“The plot level yield did not show an advantage to orienting corn seed at planting”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 716–797

Title

Evaluation of Corn Seed Orientation

Randal K Taylor; Adrian A Koller; Arzu Yazgi; et al. 2015 ASABE International Meeting 2015. doi:10.13031/aim.20152134331

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Corn leaf angles under the 0 and +/-30 degree seed orientations were less than under the +/-90 degree orientation.
Intervention effect Corn leaf angles under the 0 and +/-30 degree seed orientations were similar.
Recommendation The authors infer that some level of seed placement error is acceptable for mechanically planted corn seed.
Intervention effect Seeding rate had a significant yield effect at two locations in corn.
Intervention effect The by-plant regression showed some potential yield advantage from orienting corn seed at planting.
Observation Seed and leaf angle parameter estimates in the by-plant regression are in direct conflict.
Observation More than 40 percent of the corn seed angle values were 0 degrees.
Intervention effect The estimated yield benefit from corn leaf angles perpendicular to the row is similar to that from previous research.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant density did not change soybean plot yield.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxt0
Treatment: Plant densitye0
Outcome: plot yieldse0
Direction: did not influencee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Plant density did not influence plot yields but did affect yield components of injured and uninjured plants.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 787–895

t0
“soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 269–300

Title

Soybean Yield Responses and Intraspecific Competition from Simulated Seedcorn Maggot Injury

Leon G. Higley; Larry P. Pedigo Agronomy Journal 1991. doi:10.2134/agronj1991.00021962008300010031x

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Plant density affected yield components of injured and uninjured soybean.
Association Injured plant proportion affected plot yield in 1983 and 1984.
Association Injured plant proportion did not affect plot yield in 1985 or 1986.
Observation Uninjured soybean competed more strongly than injured soybean.
Mechanism Competition from uninjured plants reduced injured soybean yield.
Mechanism Competition appeared to increase shading of injured soybean.
Mechanism Competition appeared to reduce assimilate availability of injured soybean.
Method / resource Replacement series design was effective for describing competition after insect injury.

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The F1 generation showed no association with F4 hill-plot yield (r = -0.02).

Taxon: triticales×Triticosecalet0
Outcome: association with F4 hill-plot yielde1
Value: -0.02¦0.12e1

Verbatim

t0
“The predictive value of parental, F1 and early generation hill-plot testing for yield among rapidly advanced hexaploid triticales”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–129

e1
“The F1 (r = -0.02¦0.12) provided no association with F4 hill-plot yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1026–1097

Title

The predictive value of parental, F1 and early generation hill-plot testing for yield among rapidly advanced hexaploid triticales

RM Trethowan; NL Darvey Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 1994. doi:10.1071/ar9940051

Other claims from this paper (10)

Method / resource Mid-parent, F2 and F3 hill-plot yield predicted F4 hill-plot yield at least as well as dry matter and harvest index.
Observation Average heterosis for yield in this triticale material was 22%.
Association Hill-plot yield correlated with large-plot grain yield at the same site in the same year (r = 0.54).
Association Dry matter correlated with large-plot grain yield at the same site in the same year (r = 0.51).
Method / resource Mid-parent hill-plot yield was a best predictor of F4 hill-plot yield (phenotypic correlation 0.26).
Method / resource F2 hill-plot yield was a best predictor of F4 hill-plot yield (phenotypic correlation 0.35).
Method / resource F3 hill-plot yield was a best predictor of F4 hill-plot yield (phenotypic correlation 0.44).
Intervention effect Dry matter and yield means were lower in inter-karyotypic crosses than in intra-karyotypic crosses.
Association The relationship between generations appeared to be independent of karyotype.
Intervention effect Visual selection of individual spikes from hill-plots gave a response for dry matter and grain yield at two sites.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit number and size changes did not affect overall yield per plot area.

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Outcome: overall yield per plot areae0
Direction: did not have an effecte0

Verbatim

e0
“which did not have an effect on overall yield per plot area”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1379–1438

t0
“tomato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–27

Title

Yield of determinate tomato cultivars grown in a closed hydroponic system as affected by plant spacing

Martin M Maboko; Christian P Du Plooy; Silence Chiloane Horticultura Brasileira 2017. doi:10.1590/s0102-053620170217

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation Marketable yield did not differ significantly among cultivars in either season.
Observation Mion had higher blossom end rot incidence than other cultivars.
Observation Mariana had the highest spring/summer fruit rot among cultivars.
Intervention effect Marketable yield increased with plant density in spring/summer, peaking at 25 plants/m2.
Intervention effect Plant density had no significant effect on total yield in summer/fall.
Intervention effect Plant density had no significant effect on marketable yield in summer/fall.
Association Summer/fall yield tended to decline with greater density.
Intervention effect Fruit number per plant decreased as density rose in both seasons.
Intervention effect Fruit size decreased as density rose in both seasons.
Recommendation The authors recommend 25 plants/m2 for spring/summer marketable yield.
Recommendation The authors consider 10 plants/m2 more cost effective in summer/fall.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phenotypic and genotypic variance coefficients were the same for biological yield and plot yield.

Taxon: SafflowerCarthamus tinctoriuse0
Outcome: both valuese4
Direction: samee4
Qualifier: biological yield and plot yielde4

Verbatim

e0
“Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) is well known oilseed crop”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–62

e4
“However, both values were same in biological yield and plot yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1009–1074

Title

ASSESSMENT OF GENETIC DIVERSITY BY USING AGROMORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS IN LOCAL SAFFLOWER GENOTYPES UNDER RAINFED CONDITIONS OF POTHOHAR, PAKISTAN

Saadia; Ghulam Nabi; Muhammad Rizwan; et al. Agricultural Sciences Journal 2025. doi:10.56520/asj.v6i3.423

Other claims from this paper (11)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield ranking was generally unaffected by plot border type.

Taxon: barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment: type of plot bordere0
Outcome: ranking of the different genotypese0
Direction: not influencede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“the ranking of the different genotypes was not influenced by the type of plot border”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 370–454

t0
“BARLEY”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–58

Title

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PLOT BORDERS ON GRAIN YIELDS IN BARLEY AND WHEAT

K. W. MAY; R. J. MORRISON Canadian Journal of Plant Science 1986. doi:10.4141/cjps86-006

Other claims from this paper (3)

Association Plot yields rose as border competition fell.
Intervention effect A highly competitive barley border changed wheat genotype yield ranking.
Recommendation The authors conclude border type matters little for yield selection if the border is no more competitive than the plot.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The damage in Plot A was about equal to the damage in Plot D.

Taxon: tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
Treatment: Plot Ae1
Outcome: damagee1
Direction: about equale1
Comparator: Plot De1

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
“The damage in Plot A was about equal to that in Plot D”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1036–1090

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 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 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.

Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No whole-plot by subplot interaction was detected for yield

Taxon: tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
Outcome: whole-plot × subplot interactione5

Verbatim

e5
“No whole-plot × subplot interaction was detected for the yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1285–1347

t0
“in Greenhouse Tomato”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 123–143

Title

Pre-Plant Biofumigation and Integrated Post-Plant Strategies for Management of Nacobbus aberrans and Meloidogyne incognita in Greenhouse Tomato

Marco Antonio Magallanes-Tapia; Ignacio Cid del Prado-Vera; Howard Ferris; et al. Agronomy 2025. doi:10.3390/agronomy15102284

Other claims from this paper (10)

Intervention effect Biofumigation reduced pre-transplant N. aberrans populations by 86% compared with non-biofumigated plots
Intervention effect Biofumigation lowered the AUNPC of N. aberrans by 39% compared with non-biofumigated plots
Intervention effect Whole-plot yields in biofumigated plots did not differ from non-biofumigated plots
Observation Meloidogyne incognita remained at a very low density throughout the trial
Intervention effect Fluopyram decreased the AURDC by about 22%
Intervention effect Fluopyram more than doubled tomato yield (63 vs. 26 t ha−1; +142%)
Intervention effect Fluopyram left the AUNPC of N. aberrans unchanged
Intervention effect Biological and botanical packages reduced damage indices in some cases
Intervention effect Biological and botanical packages did not increase tomato yield
Recommendation Sorghum-based biofumigation with a low-risk nematicide can be embedded in integrated nematode-management programmes for greenhouse tomato

“yield/plot”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics