View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Intercrop gross return per hectare was higher than sole crop gross return .
sole crop system e0 Verbatim
e0 “Maize /groundnut intercrop gross return and BCR per hectare were found higher than from sole crop system ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1313–1417 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
T3 had the highest gross return , net return and BCR.
gross return, net return and BCR e0 Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “the highest gross return , net return and BCR were recorded in the T3 treatment ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1910–1988 Other claims from this paper (10) Observation observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
The two combined treatments produced higher gross return and gross margin.
gross return and gross margin e0 Verbatim
e0 “Higher gross return and gross margin were also obtained from the same treatments. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1474–1555 t0 “cotton ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 30–36 Other claims from this paper (5) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Gross return , gross margin and benefit cost ratio were higher under T2.
Gross return, gross margin and benefit cost ratio e0 Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Gross return , gross margin and benefit cost ratio were also observed higher in T2. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 736–818 Other claims from this paper (2) Observation observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
T8 gross return was Rs. 17,000.
Verbatim
e0 “gross return (Rs. 17,000) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1557–1582 Other claims from this paper (8) Observation observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
CS2 gave the highest gross return .
Verbatim
e0 “The highest gross return was obtained with CS2. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1570–1617 t0 “rice ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 47–51 Other claims from this paper (5) Observation observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
The brinjal–mungbean system had gross return of Tk.312750/ha.
Not reported Taxon
Verbatim
e0 “gross return (Tk.312750/ha) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1295–1322 Other claims from this paper (8) Observation observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
Gross monetary return was associated with lint yield.
Gross monetary return e0 Not reported Direction
Verbatim
e0 “Gross monetary return was associated with lint yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 453–505 t0 “Cotton cultivars ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–68 Other claims from this paper (7) Observation observed original result positive significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Paparri produced higher gross return , net return and benefit cost ratio.
gross return, net return and benefit cost ratio e0 Verbatim
e0 “significantly higher gross return , net return and benefit cost ratio was recorded from Paparri variety ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–998 Other claims from this paper (7) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
RDF+WL maximized gross return , net return and benefit-cost ratio.
Gross return, net return, benefit: cost ratio e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Gross return , net return , benefit: cost ratio was highest in RDF+WL. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2345–2413 t0 “wheat ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–57 Other claims from this paper (19) Intervention effect RDF improved tiller density, shoot emergence ratio, height and dry matter, at par with SSNM-7 and SSNM-8. Intervention effect RDF minimized lodging angle, lodged area and lodging score. Intervention effect RDF maximized grain yield, harvest index and financial returns. Intervention effect RDF maximized grain nitrogen and phosphorus uptake, while SSNM-8 maximized potassium uptake. Intervention effect Nutrient doses above RDF favoured lodging. Intervention effect GR2 increased emergence and tiller density and reduced mortality. Intervention effect GR2 increased dry matter, leaf area index and thousand-grain weight. Intervention effect GR1 minimized height and internode length and had higher grain yield and harvest index. Intervention effect RDF with GR1 lowered lodging angle, lodged area and score. Intervention effect RDF with GR2 increased thousand-grain weight. Intervention effect RDF with GR1 maximized grain yield and harvest index. Intervention effect Experiment 2 treatments did not affect tiller density, shoot emergence ratio or height. Intervention effect RDF+WL maximized dry matter, leaf area index, peduncle and internode length and time to maturity. Intervention effect RDF plus nano-silicon minimized lodging angle, lodged area and score. Intervention effect RDF+WL maximized thousand-grain weight, at par with RDF+IL plus nanosilicon. Intervention effect RDF+WL maximized grain, biological and straw yield and harvest index. Intervention effect Ethrel, KC1 and nano-silicon improved recovery from induced lodging, with nano-silicon most effective. Intervention effect Chemical recovery was incomplete and yield remained much lower than RDF+WL. Recommendation The authors recommend RDF with cycocel to minimize wheat lodging and increase grain yield. 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.
Arachis hypogaea
Zea mays
Gossypium hirsutum
Oryza sativa
Triticum aestivum