Search claims · PlantClaims

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total fruit yield per plot was least under black polythene mulch (16.82 kg/plot).

Taxon: okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
Treatment: black polythene mulche5
Outcome: total fruit yield of okra per plote5
Direction: leaste5
Value: 16.82 kg/plote5

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“on yield contributing characters and yield of okra”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 160–210

e5
“The maximum total fruit yield of okra per plot was obtained in paddy straw mulch (19.21 kg/plot) and least in (16.82 kg/plot) in black polythene mulch”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 856–1006

Title

Effect of different types of Mulches on yield contributing characters and yield of Okra ( Abelmoschus esculentus )

Vimal Bhobhriya; Navdeep Gandhi; Ashu Loona Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 2019

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Plant height was maximal under paddy straw mulch, above the unmulched control.
Intervention effect Plant height was minimal under black polythene mulch.
Observation Plant height under white plastic mulch was 55.22 cm.
Intervention effect Average fruit weight was maximal under paddy straw mulch (9.22 g).
Intervention effect Fruit length was maximal under paddy straw mulch (9.00 cm).
Intervention effect Total fruit yield per plot was maximal under paddy straw mulch (19.21 kg/plot).
Observation The control treatment gave the second-best results.
Observation Black plastic mulch gave the least results.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean showed a significant yield gap relative to demo plot yield.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe0
Outcome: yield gape0
Comparator: demo plot yielde0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“the study shows significant yield gap of soybean with respect to check and demo plot yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 450–540

Title

The Miracle Bean: Tapping Unrealized Potential

Deepak Shah Economic Affairs 2024. doi:10.46852/0424-2513.3.2024.2

Other claims from this paper (4)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean yield in the SI plot was lower than in the RI plot.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe1
Treatment: SI plote0
Interactor: Bradyrhizobium japonicum USDA110Bradyrhizobium japonicume2symbiont
Outcome: yield (kg/10a)e0
Direction: lowere0
Comparator: RI plote0

Verbatim

e0
“the yield (kg/10a) of SI plot was lower than that of RI plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 610–670

e1
“soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–157

e2
“Bradyrhizobium japonicum USDA110”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–78

Title

Effect of Difference of Inoculation Method of Bradyrhizobium japonicum USDA110 on Production of Soybean (Glycine max L. Meer.)

Yoko Fukushima; Takeo Yamakawa Kyushu Daigaku Nogakubu Gakugei Zasshi 2006

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The weedy check had lower yield than the weed-free plot.

Taxon: riceOryza sativat0
Treatment: weedy check plote0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: loweste0
Comparator: weed free plote0

Verbatim

e0
“The yield on weedy check plot produced the lowest yield as compared to weed free plot.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1958–2044

t0
“rice”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 76–80

Title

Effect of different weed management practices on growth and yield of spring rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Banke, Nepal

Samiksha Bista; Sandesh Bhatta; Kamal B.K.; et al. Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources 2023. doi:10.3126/janr.v6i1.71862

Other claims from this paper (12)

Observation The plot contained 11 weed species across broadleaf, grass, and sedge groups.
Observation Sedges dominated over broadleaf weeds and grasses.
Intervention effect Sequential Pendimethalin and Bispyribac Na produced the most effective tillers.
Intervention effect Sequential Pendimethalin and Bispyribac Na produced the most grains per panicle.
Intervention effect Sequential pre- and post-emergence treatment had the lowest weed density at 60 DAT.
Intervention effect Sequential herbicides increased grain yield.
Intervention effect Sequential herbicides increased straw yield.
Observation Sequential herbicides produced a harvest index of 52.55%.
Intervention effect Sequential herbicides had the least sterility.
Intervention effect Sequential herbicides increased thousand grain weight.
Observation Named sedge weeds dominated over named dicots and grasses.
Recommendation The authors rated sequential pre- and post-emergence herbicide as the best treatment overall.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SC301 had the lowest plot grain yield, 11.80 kg/plot.

Taxon: maizeZea mayse0 t0
Material: SC301e0
Outcome: dry grain yielde0
Direction: leaste0
Value: 11.80 kg/plote0

Verbatim

e0
“The highest dry grain yield was from SC419 (21.33 kg/plot), whereas the least was from SC301 (11.80 kg/plot)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1190

t0
“maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 47–52

Title

Growth and yield responses of new short season maize varieties (Zea mays L.) grown in Zimbabwe low rainfall areas under hand hoe basin technique

Mvumi C International Journal of Biosciences (IJB) 2019. doi:10.12692/ijb/14.2.311-318

Other claims from this paper (10)

Observation Cultivar affected plant height and leaf length significantly.
Observation Cultivar affected dry grain weight per plant and plot yield significantly.
Observation Plant height and leaf length increased over weeks in all cultivars.
Observation SC419 growth differed significantly from the standard.
Observation SC419 had the heaviest dry grain weight, 334.2 g/plant.
Observation SC301 had the lightest dry grain weight, 154.8 g/plant.
Observation SC419 had the highest plot grain yield, 21.33 kg/plot.
Observation SC419 was highest across all parameters at 14 weeks.
Observation SC403 ranked second highest.
Recommendation The authors recommend SC419 first and SC403 second for semi-arid farmers using basins.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The average yield of the un-control plot was 9.63 t/hm2 lower than that of the control plot.

Taxon: potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
Treatment: un-control plote5
Outcome: average yielde5
Direction: lowere5
Value: 9.63 t/hm2e5
Comparator: control plote5

Verbatim

t0
“Effect of meteorological factors on occurrence regulation of potato late blight”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–79

e5
“The average yield of the un-control plot is 9.63 t/hm2 lower than the yield of the control plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1007

Title

Effect of meteorological factors on occurrence regulation of potato late blight.

Chi ZaiXiang; Yao Lu; Jun Xiao; et al. 2009

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The calcified and manured plot had a slightly lower yield than the plot also receiving mineral fertilizer.

Treatment: calcified and manured plote0
Outcome: yielde0
Direction: lowere0
Comparator: addition of mineral fertilizere1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“A barely lower yield was achieved on the calcified and manured plot”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 719–786

e1
“with the addition of mineral fertilizer”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 678–717

Title

Influence of amelioration on the productivity of alfalfa on acid soil types vertisols

Jelena Stojiljković; Vera Rajičić; Dragan Terzić; et al. Selekcija i semenarstvo 2021. doi:10.5937/selsem2101025s

Other claims from this paper (2)

Intervention effect Alfalfa yield was significantly higher with limestone, manure and mineral fertilizer than on the control plot.
Observation The control plot with mineral fertilizer alone had the lowest alfalfa yield.

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.

“yield/plot”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics