View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Bulk density , particle density and pH of soil were not significantly affected by the treatments after harvest.
bulk density (Mg m-3), particle density (Mg m-3), pH e2 Verbatim
t0 “soil in cowpea ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 70–84 e2 “except on bulk density (Mg m-3), particle density (Mg m-3), pH and EC (dSm-1) of soil after harvest ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–625 Other claims from this paper (5) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Particle density and size were not directly proportional.
direct proportionality between the particle density and their size e0 particle density and their size e0 Verbatim
e0 “Simple direct proportionality between the particle density and their size was not observed in any case, nevertheless, bigger particle s were more abundant in fractions of higher density . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 587–772 t0 “leaves of Phaseolus vulgaris L. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 33–64 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Treatments did not significantly affect bulk density , particle density or porosity after harvest.
different treatments e0 bulk density, particle density and porosity e0 did not affect e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “application of different treatments did not affect the bulk density , particle density and porosity significantly after harvest of pigeon pea in both the years ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–670 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture content, waterholding capacity, bulk density and particle density showed no significant differences among cropping patterns.
cropping patterns e0 Moisture content, waterholding capacity, bulk density and particle density of the soil e0 did not show significant difference e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Moisture content, waterholding capacity, bulk density and particle density of the soil did not show significant difference with cropping patterns. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 950–1096 t0 “COCONUT LEAVES ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 47–61 Other claims from this paper (8) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Bulk density , particle density and porosity were not significantly affected by tillage or cropping pattern
bulk density, particle density and porosity e1 Verbatim
e1 “Soil physical properties viz. bulk density , particle density and porosity showed insignificant result due to tillage practices and cropping patterns ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 545–693 e4 “Deep tillage with dhaincha (Sesbania rostrata ) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) biomass incorporation conserved moisture in the soil profile ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 768–915 Other claims from this paper (6) Association observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Particle size grade rate and palatability of popcorn were not influenced by increasing density .
increasing of density e6 Particle size grade rate of popcorn and palatability e6 no_change inferred e6 Verbatim
t0 “Effects of Planting Density on Yield and Quality of Popcorn ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–59 e6 “Particle size grade rate of popcorn and palatability of the three varieties would not be influenced with the increasing of density ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 828–958 Other claims from this paper (13) Association Yield of the three popcorn varieties increased with increasing planting density between 525000 and 825000 plants/hm2. Intervention effect In one of the three varieties, yield at the highest density was 12.8% higher than at 600000 plants/hm2. Intervention effect In one of the three varieties, yield at the highest density was 8.4% higher than at 600000 plants/hm2. Intervention effect In one of the three varieties, yield at the highest density was 20.2% higher than at 600000 plants/hm2. Association With increasing density, rows per ear, kernels per row and 100-kernel weight decreased, to a small extent. Association With increasing density, ear diameter and ear length decreased, to a small extent. Association With increasing density, ear number increased. Association Shelling percentage was largest at a density of 600000 plants/hm2 and smaller at higher densities. Association Exploded multiples of popcorn increased obviously with increasing density. Association Popcorn shape was not influenced by increasing density. Association Starch percentage of popcorn increased with increasing density, to a small extent. Association Protein percentage of popcorn decreased with increasing density, to a small extent. Association Oil percentage of popcorn showed almost no change with increasing density. Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Bulk density , particle density , maximum water holding capacity and porosity did not vary among the treatments.
different treatments e1 bulk density, particle density, maximum water holding capacity and porosity e1 no_change inferred e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “growth and yield parameters of maize ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 290–326 e1 “There was no much variation in physical properties i.e., bulk density , particle density , maximum water holding capacity and porosity by the different treatments ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1190–1350 Other claims from this paper (15) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
MRP did not affect postharvest soil bulk density , particle density , pH, EC, or organic carbon.
bulk density, particle density, pH, EC & organic carbon content of the post harvest soil e0 Not reported Treatment Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “The bulk density , particle density , pH, EC & organic carbon content of the post harvest soil were not affected ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1380–1490 e1 “fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graceum) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 32–69 Other claims from this paper (17) Observation observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Soil physical properties (bulk density , particle density , pore space) were not significant.
bulk density (Mg m-3), particle density (Mg m-3) and pore space (%) e4 Verbatim
t0 “Mustard (Brassica juncea L.) Cv. Varuna ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–152 e4 “Soil physical properties such as bulk density (Mg m-3), particle density (Mg m-3) and pore space (%) were found to be non-significant ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 685–818 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer levels did not significantly affect soil bulk density and particle density .
different levels of fertilizer recommendation based on soil test values e0 bulk density and particle density of soil e0 Not reported Comparator Direction
Verbatim
e0 “bulk density and particle density of soil was found to be non-significant in different levels of fertilizer recommendation based on soil test values ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 535–683 t0 “Mustard (Brassica juncea L.) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–129 Other claims from this paper (8) 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.
Vigna unguiculatat0
Phaseolus vulgaris
Cajanus cajan
Zea mays
Trigonella foenum-graecum
Brassica juncea