Search claims · PlantClaims

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A light interception model described varietal light interception profiles.

Taxon: barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Outcome: light interception profilese0
Comparator: varietiese0

Verbatim

e0
“A light interception model was developed to describe the light interception profiles of the varieties.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 898–1000

t0
“barley varieties”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–51

Title

Weed suppression ability of spring barley varieties

S. CHRISTENSEN Weed Research 1995. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.1995.tb01786.x

Other claims from this paper (9)

Observation Weed suppression differed significantly among spring barley varieties.
Observation Weed dry matter with Ida was 48% below the varietal mean.
Observation Weed dry matter with Grit was 31% above the varietal mean.
Association Varietal grain yield loss rankings corresponded to weed dry matter rankings.
Association Pure stand yield did not correspond with barley competitiveness.
Method / resource Canopy height model precisely described development and maximum canopy height.
Association Weed dry matter correlated with canopy height development rate and light interception profile.
Association After standardizing for year, weed dry matter did not correlate with light interception parameters.
Method / resource Maximum canopy height, maximum light interception and temporal displacement described varietal differences well.

Observationobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The grapevine light model found light interception was maximal for tall, closely spaced, north-south rows.

Taxon: grapevineVitise1
Outcome: Light interceptione0
Direction: maximale0

Verbatim

t0
“Vineyards”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–34

e0
“Light interception was maximal for tall, closely spaced, north-south rows.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 379–453

e1
“grapevine light interception”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 21–49

Title

Sunlight Interception by Vineyards

Richard E. Smart American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 1973. doi:10.5344/ajev.1973.24.4.141

Other claims from this paper (3)

Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Light interception, light interception rate and light conversion rate in relay soybean increased with increasing bandwidth.

Taxon: relay soybeane4
Treatment: increasing bandwidthe4
Outcome: light interception, light interception rate, light conversion ratee4
Direction: increasede4

Verbatim

e4
“The light interception, light interception rate, light conversion rate and LUE in relay maize all decreased significantly with increasing bandwidth, but they increased in relay soybean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1521

Title

Optimizing trade-offs between light transmittance and intraspecific competition under varying crop layouts in a maize–soybean strip relay cropping system

Liang Feng; Kai Shi; Xin Liu; et al. The Crop Journal 2024. doi:10.1016/j.cj.2024.10.010

Other claims from this paper (18)

Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Light interception, light interception rate and light conversion rate in relay maize decreased significantly with increasing bandwidth.

Taxon: relay maizee4
Treatment: increasing bandwidthe4
Outcome: light interception, light interception rate, light conversion ratee4
Direction: decreasede4

Verbatim

e4
“The light interception, light interception rate, light conversion rate and LUE in relay maize all decreased significantly with increasing bandwidth, but they increased in relay soybean”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1521

Title

Optimizing trade-offs between light transmittance and intraspecific competition under varying crop layouts in a maize–soybean strip relay cropping system

Liang Feng; Kai Shi; Xin Liu; et al. The Crop Journal 2024. doi:10.1016/j.cj.2024.10.010

Other claims from this paper (18)

Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vertical H. funifera leaves reduced seasonal variation in light interception and summer midday light interception.

Taxon: Hesperaloe funiferaHesperaloe funiferat0
Outcome: seasonal variation in light interception and midday light interceptione0
Direction: reducede0
Qualifier: Vertical orientation of leavese0

Verbatim

e0
“Vertical orientation of leaves reduced seasonal variation in light interception and midday light interception during summer months.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 445–576

t0
“Hesperaloe funifera”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–46

Title

Photosynthetic Pathways of Hesperaloe funifera and H. nocturna (Agavaceae): Novel Sources of Specialty Fibers

Damian A. Ravetta; Steven P. McLaughlin American Journal of Botany 1993. doi:10.2307/2445367

Other claims from this paper (18)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional orchards attain high light interception slowly.

Taxon: orchardse0
Outcome: high light interceptione0
Direction: very slowlye0

Verbatim

e0
“Conventional orchards attain high light interception very slowly.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 540–605

Title

Conversaziones, 1972

Notes and Records the Royal Society Journal of the History of Science 1973. doi:10.1098/rsnr.1973.0015

Other claims from this paper (3)

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant density significantly affected light interception.

Taxon: groundnutArachis hypogaeat0
Treatment: plant densitiese0
Outcome: light interceptione0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

t0
“groundnut”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–100

e0
“plant densities showed significant impact on light interception”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–897

Title

Influence of planting densities and phosphorus levels on light interception and quality of groundnut

T Sunil Kumar; Y ReddiRamu,; A R Nirmal Kumar; et al. The Andhra Agricultural Journal 2024. doi:10.61657/aaj.2024.86

Other claims from this paper (5)

Intervention effect Density of 4.44 lakh ha -1 had higher light interception at 25 DAS and harvest.
Intervention effect Density of 8.88 lakh ha -1 had higher light interception at 50 and 75 DAS.
Intervention effect Planting density and phosphorus levels did not influence protein content.
Intervention effect Planting density and phosphorus levels did not influence oil content.
Intervention effect Phosphorus levels had no significant impact on light interception.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

2000-7L had maximum light interception of 56%.

Taxon: LentilLens culinarist0
Outcome: maximum light interceptione0
Value: 56%e0

Verbatim

e0
“maximum light interception (56%)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1821–1853

t0
“Lentil”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 42–48

Title

Canopy architecture and stem stiffness in lentil

T. G. Hanlan University Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) 2004

Other claims from this paper (18)

Observation Locally adapted cultivars had greater biomass, seed yield, light interception, branching, and height than unadapted genotypes.
Observation Adapted cultivars had higher seed yield.
Observation Adapted cultivars had higher maximum light interception.
Observation Adapted cultivars had higher final branch number.
Observation Adapted cultivars had greatest overall plant height.
Observation Large green cultivars with Laird-like canopies had weak stems and were more prone to lodging.
Observation CDC Milestone and Crimson had higher harvest index than large green cultivars.
Observation CDC Milestone and Crimson had 30% less lodging than large green cultivars.
Observation Unadapted genotypes produced less biomass than locally adapted cultivars.
Observation Unadapted genotypes had reduced lodging compared with locally adapted cultivars.
Observation Among unadapted genotypes, 2000-7L had higher biomass.
Observation 2000-7L had a branch number of 18.
Observation 2000-7L had a height of 0.30 m.
Observation 2000-7L had yield of 53 g m-2.
Observation 2000-7L had the second lowest lodging in 2001.
Recommendation The authors identified 2000-7L as the best unadapted crossing candidate for improving lodging resistance.
Observation Weather variation between 2001 and 2002 made lodging data inconsistent.
Observation The authors considered 2001 lodging data most representative of genotypic differences.

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

An optimization algorithm found a tree shape maximizing light interception.

Taxon: treee0
Outcome: light interceptione0
Direction: maximizee0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Verbatim

e0
“Optimization algorithm is used to find tree shape that can maximize the light interception”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 125–215

Title

Optimize Tree Shape: Targeting for Best Light Interception

Jing Hua; Mengzhen Kang 2013

Other claims from this paper (1)

Observation The resulting simulated shape was judged reasonable and similar to a real tree.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hedging reduced light interception

Taxon: PEACHESt0
Treatment: hedginge0
Outcome: hedging reduced light interception.e0
Direction: reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0
“hedging reduced light interception.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 939–974

t0
“EXPERIENCES WITH SUMMER PRUNING CLINGSTONE PEACHES”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–50

Title

EXPERIENCES WITH SUMMER PRUNING CLINGSTONE PEACHES

Curt R. Rom; R. Bourne; K. Kupperman; et al. HortScience 1992. doi:10.21273/hortsci.27.11.1168f

Other claims from this paper (9)

Intervention effect Preharvest pruning increased blush and flesh firmness in year one
Intervention effect Preharvest pruning reduced soluble solids in year one
Intervention effect Summer pruning reduced yield per tree in year two
Intervention effect Summer pruning reduced fruit drop in year two
Intervention effect Summer pruning did not affect fruit size, blush or SSC in year two
Intervention effect Postharvest or twice pruned trees had smaller height, spread and trunk diameter
Intervention effect Thinning improved light penetration
Intervention effect Thinning reduced the percentage of fungal rotted fruit
Intervention effect Thinning did not affect fruit quality

“light interception”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics