Search claims · PlantClaims

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Green plant Group I MORC genes were further divided into Group I-1 and Group I-2.

Taxon: green plantsViridiplantaee0
Gene: MORCe0
Outcome: Group I can be subdivided into Group I-1 and Group I-2e0

Verbatim

e0
“MORC genes in green plants uncovered that Group I can be subdivided into Group I-1 and Group I-2”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 869–965

Title

MORC Domain Definition and Evolutionary Analysis of the MORC Gene Family in Green Plants

Wei Dong; Alessandro Vannozzi; Fei Chen; et al. Genome Biology and Evolution 2018. doi:10.1093/gbe/evy136

Other claims from this paper (8)

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)

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 effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on cucumber leaves.
Intervention effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on paprika leaves.
Intervention effect On bean leaves the result did not correlate with the applied B. cinerea group.

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 effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on grape leaves.
Intervention effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on paprika leaves.
Intervention effect On bean leaves the result did not correlate with the applied B. cinerea group.

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)

Intervention effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on grape leaves.
Intervention effect Group II of Botrytis cinerea showed more competitive infection than group I on cucumber leaves.
Intervention effect On bean leaves the result did not correlate with the applied B. cinerea group.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group III phenotypes performed best, followed by Group I and Group II.

Taxon: MaizeZea mayst0
Material: Group IIIe0
Outcome: best performancee0
Direction: beste0
Comparator: Group I, and finally Group IIe0

Verbatim

e0
“The phenotypes in Group III exhibited the best performance, followed by those in Group I, and finally Group II.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 839–950

t0
“Maize Accessions”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–62

Title

Comprehensive Evaluation and Selection of 192 Maize Accessions from Different Sources

Mengting Hu; Huijuan Tian; Kaizhi Yang; et al. Plants 2024. doi:10.3390/plants13101397

Other claims from this paper (4)

Observation The 192 maize accessions showed pronounced phenotypic diversity and complex trait interrelationships.
Method / resource PCA reduced 14 phenotypic traits to three indicators.
Method / resource Cluster analysis divided 192 accessions into three groups.
Recommendation Selection among the three groups depends on breeding objectives.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Group I nodules evolved more hydrogen than group II nodules.

Taxon: soybeansGlycine maxt0
Interactor: group I strainse0symbiont
Outcome: hydrogene0
Direction: moree0
Comparator: group II strainse0

Verbatim

e0
“nodules formed with group I strains evolved more hydrogen than those formed with group II strains”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1252–1349

t0
“soybeans”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 66–74

Title

RhizobiumStrain Effects on Nitrogen Transport and Distribution in Soybeans

MARIA C. P. NEVES; AGOSTINHO D. DIDONET; FERNANDO F. DUQUE; et al. Journal of Experimental Botany 1985. doi:10.1093/jxb/36.8.1179

Other claims from this paper (9)

Observation Group I strains produced more nodule mass with lower efficiency.
Observation Group II strains produced less nodule mass while fixing the same nitrogen amount.
Intervention effect Group I-inoculated plants remobilized leaf nitrogen faster.
Intervention effect Group I-inoculated plants lost more nitrogen in senesced leaves.
Observation Total xylem nitrogen transport was similar among strains.
Intervention effect Group I plants had less ureide nitrogen in xylem sap.
Intervention effect Group I plants had lower nitrogen harvest indexes than group II plants.
Association Ureide content correlated significantly with nitrogen partitioning.
Association Ureide content correlated significantly with yield.

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

The vc-group I isolates are compatible with the Swiss vc-group I.

Taxon: Eßkastaniet0
Interactor: Cryphonectria parasiticaCryphonectria parasiticat0pathogen
Outcome: compatible with the Swiss vc‐group Ie0

Verbatim

t0
“Eßkastanie (Cryphonectria parasitica)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 16–53

e0
“They are compatible with the Swiss vc‐group I”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 326–371

Title

Rindenkrebs der Eßkastanie (Cryphonectria parasitica) in Südwestdeutschland

D. Seemann; J. Zajonc European Journal of Forest Pathology 1994. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0329.1994.tb00991.x

Other claims from this paper (5)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Relative growth rate was high in Group II, moderate in Group I and low in Group III.

Taxon: temperate treest0
Outcome: Relative growth rate (RGR)e0
Direction: highe0
Qualifier: Group II, moderate in Group I and low in Group IIIe0

Verbatim

e0
“Relative growth rate (RGR) was high in Group II, moderate in Group I and low in Group III.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 348–438

t0
“temperate trees”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–50

Title

Differences in nitrogen economy of temperate trees

T. Shinano; M. Osaki; M. Kato Tree Physiology 2001. doi:10.1093/treephys/21.9.617

Other claims from this paper (8)

Method / resource Twenty-four tree species were classified into three nitrogen economy groups.
Association The RGR versus leaf nitrogen regression coefficient was higher in Group II than Group I.
Association No RGR versus leaf nitrogen relationship was observed in Group III.
Association RGR per unit leaf nitrogen was important in all three groups.
Association Leaf nitrogen allocation was particularly important in Groups I and II.
Observation Dark respiration to net photosynthesis ratio was higher in Group I than Group II.
Association Leaf nitrogen concentration and net photosynthetic rate had a linear relationship in Group II.
Association That relationship was not evident in Group I.

“group I”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics