View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Intervention effect observed original result measured Claim · model-written summary
Sub- surface application of water hyacinth had a higher decomposition rate constant (0.041% week-1) than surface application (0.029% week-1).
Treatmentsub-surface application e3 Directionhigher inferred e3 Comparatorsurface application e3 Verbatim
e0 “with water hyacinth were carried out ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 298–334 e3 “rate constants of surface and sub- surface application were 0.029% week-1 and 0.041% week-1 ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–930 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result no effect measured Claim · model-written summary
Upper- surface application matched lower- surface application in one trial at all concentrations and in another at higher concentrations.
TreatmentUpper‐surface application e0 Qualifierat the higher concentrations e0 Verbatim
e0 “Upper‐ surface application was as effective as lower in one trial at all concentrations, and in another at the higher concentrations ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 816–947 t0 “coffee rust ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–26 Other claims from this paper (14) Intervention effect observed original result positive significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Subsurface application caused fewer predator losses than surface application .
Treatmentsub‐surface treatment e0 Comparatorsurface treatment e0 Verbatim
e0 “These losses were significantly reduced in the sub‐ surface treatment compared with the surface treatment. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 417–522 e1 “cabbage transplants ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–207 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result negative significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Surface application of non-mobile fertilizer significantly reduced application efficiency.
Treatmentsurface application of ‘non-mobile’ fertiliser t1 Outcomefertiliser application efficiency e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “a significant loss of fertiliser application efficiency ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1326–1381 t0 “SUGARCANE ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–68 t1 “surface application of ‘non-mobile’ fertiliser ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1176–1222 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Surface application improved A. spinosa control.
TreatmentSurface application e0 InteractorA. spinosa e0 weed Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Surface application provided better control of Amaranthus hybridus and A. spinosa . ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 604–686 t0 “CUCURBITS ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 35–44 Other claims from this paper (9) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Biochar application increased root surface area by 39%.
Treatmentbiochar application e0 Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “Overall, biochar application increased root biomass (+32%), root volume (+29%) and surface area (39%) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 437–538 Other claims from this paper (12) Intervention effect observed original result no effect not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Application surface did not significantly affect translocation.
Treatmentapplication surface e0 Directiondid not significantly affect e0 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “application surface did not significantly affect translocation. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 719–782 t0 “red maple ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 131–140 Other claims from this paper (10) Recommendation author interpretation original result basis n/a Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend avoiding surface application on windy days to reduce biochar loss.
Outcomeavoiding surface application on windy days e0 Verbatim
e0 “avoiding surface application on windy days ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–554 e1 “field crops ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 54–65 Other claims from this paper (8) Recommendation author interpretation original result positive basis n/a Claim · model-written summary
Surface application may be beneficial to annual and perennial crops.
Taxonannual and perennial crops e0 Outcomesurface application e0 Verbatim
e0 “surface application may be beneficial to annual and perennial crops ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1391–1458 Other claims from this paper (14) Intervention effect observed original result positive measured Claim · model-written summary
Ditch application gave greater yield than surface application .
TreatmentDitch application e0 Comparatorsurface application e0 Verbatim
e0 “Ditch application recorded greater values over surface application ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 722–788 t0 “Wheat and Rice Crops ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 47–67 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.