Refine

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics

More filters

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on grape leaves.

Taxon
grapee1
Treatment
group IIe1
Interactor
group IIe1pathogen
Second interactor
group Ie1pathogen
Outcome
competitive infectione1
Direction
moree1
Comparator
group Ie1

Verbatim

e1

“competitive infection of group II was more on grape, cucumber and paprika leaves, than group I”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–423

Title

Pathogenicity differences between group I and group II of Botrytis cinerea

Mojtaba Asadollahi; Éva Fekete; Erzsébet Fekete; et al. Acta Agraria Debreceniensis 2011. doi:10.34101/actaagrar/43/2642

Other claims from this paper (3)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on cucumber leaves.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse1
Treatment
group IIe1
Interactor
group IIe1pathogen
Second interactor
group Ie1pathogen
Outcome
competitive infectione1
Direction
moree1
Comparator
group Ie1

Verbatim

e1

“competitive infection of group II was more on grape, cucumber and paprika leaves, than group I”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–423

Title

Pathogenicity differences between group I and group II of Botrytis cinerea

Mojtaba Asadollahi; Éva Fekete; Erzsébet Fekete; et al. Acta Agraria Debreceniensis 2011. doi:10.34101/actaagrar/43/2642

Other claims from this paper (3)
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on paprika leaves.

Taxon
paprikae1
Treatment
group IIe1
Interactor
group IIe1pathogen
Second interactor
group Ie1pathogen
Outcome
competitive infectione1
Direction
moree1
Comparator
group Ie1

Verbatim

e1

“competitive infection of group II was more on grape, cucumber and paprika leaves, than group I”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–423

Title

Pathogenicity differences between group I and group II of Botrytis cinerea

Mojtaba Asadollahi; Éva Fekete; Erzsébet Fekete; et al. Acta Agraria Debreceniensis 2011. doi:10.34101/actaagrar/43/2642

Other claims from this paper (3)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group II contained only Helixanthera.

Taxon
HelixantheraHelixantherae0
Outcome
Group IIe0

Verbatim

e0

“Group II and Group III contain only Helixanthera and Loranthus respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1165–1241

Title

Pollen morphology of the Loranthaceae from China

Han Rong Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica 2004

Other claims from this paper (11)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 104 SBP-box genes divide into group I and II, and group II further into subgroups II-1 and II-2 by phylogenetic analysis.

Taxon
land plantsEmbryophytat0
Outcome
divided into group I and IIe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“These genes are divided into group I and II, and the latter is further divided into two subgroups (subgroup II-1 and II-2) based on phylogenetic analysis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 995–1148
t0

“land plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–56

Title

Evolution and divergence of SBP-box genes in land plants

Shu-Dong Zhang; Li-Zhen Ling; Ting-Shuang Yi BMC Genomics 2015. doi:10.1186/s12864-015-1998-y

Other claims from this paper (9)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group I was sister to Group II, and Group III was sister to Group IV.

Taxon
AnthuriumAnthuriumt0
Outcome
Group I was the sister group of Group II, as well as Group III to Group IVe0

Verbatim

e0

“Group I was the sister group of Group II, as well as Group III to Group IV.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1223–1298
t0

“Anthurium”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–29

Title

ANALISIS TAKSOMETRI Anthurium SCHOTT (ARACEAE)

Muhammad Falah; Pudji Widodo; Hexa Apriliana Hidayah Scripta Biologica 2014. doi:10.20884/1.sb.2014.1.1.34

Other claims from this paper (7)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group II had higher mortality than group I.

Taxon
MalusMalust0
Material
Group IIe0
Outcome
mortalitye0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
group Ie0

Verbatim

e0

“Group II differs from group I mainly by a higher mortality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–680
t0

“Malus Taxa and Hybrids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 26–48

Title

Susceptibility of Grafted Malus Taxa and Hybrids to Apple Proliferation Disease

Sylvia Kartte; E. Seemüller Journal of Phytopathology 1991. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0434.1991.tb04739.x

Other claims from this paper (11)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nine group II strains differed from the group II core in molecular and host specificity tests.

Taxon
Phaseolus vulgarisPhaseolus vulgarise1
Outcome
some differences from the core of group IIe0
Value
nine distinct strainse0

Verbatim

e0

“the same nine distinct strains of group II showing some differences from the core of group II (54 strains)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1139–1245
e1

“common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 60–92

Title

Polyphasic characterization of rhizobia that nodulate Phaseolus vulgaris in West Africa (Senegal and Gambia).

A Diouf; P de Lajudie; M Neyra; et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY 2000. doi:10.1099/00207713-50-1-159

Other claims from this paper (2)
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Many species in shrub group I were negatively associated with species in group II.

Taxon
species in Group Ie0
Outcome
association with the species in Group IIe0
Direction
negativee0
Comparator
species in Group IIe0

Verbatim

e0

“Many species in Group I had a significantly negative association with the species in Group II”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1173–1266

Title

[Interspecific association between understory species in a southern highland plantation].

Lile Hu; Boqian Yan; Qijing Liu; et al. PubMed 2005

Other claims from this paper (13)
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UPGMA Group II contained two landraces.

Outcome
Group IIe0
Value
twoe0

Verbatim

e0

“Group II contained two”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1137–1159
t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–28

Title

Genetic diversity in cassava landraces grown on farms in Alta Floresta-MT, Brazil

A.V. Tiago; A.A.B. Rossi; P.V. Tiago; et al. Genetics and Molecular Research 2016. doi:10.4238/gmr.15038615

Other claims from this paper (13)

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.