View: List Claim type Research area Organism Taxon as written Decade Paper Mechanism author interpretation original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
The decrease in growth ultimately caused a decrease in wheat yield .
QualifierThis decrease in growth e5 Verbatim
t0 “Wheat Germplasm ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–29 e5 “This decrease in growth ultimately caused a decrease in yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 674–735 Other claims from this paper (4) Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Any increase or decrease in sowing rates away from the optimum led to a decrease in amaranth yield .
Treatmentincrease or decrease in sowing rates e1 Not reported Comparator
Verbatim
e1 “Any increase or decrease in sowing rates led to a decrease in the yield level ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1896–1973 t0 “Amaranth ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–8 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect Amaranth field uniformity fell from 70% at 0.2 million seeds/ha to 60% at 1.2 million seeds/ha, a 10% decrease. Intervention effect At the seedling stage amaranth had 14 plants at a 0.2 million seeds/ha sowing rate, rising to 72 plants/m2 at 1.2 million seeds/ha. Intervention effect Amaranth plant survival during the vegetation period fell sharply with increasing sowing density, from 86% at 0.2 million seeds/ha to 45% at 1.2 million seeds/ha. Observation Before harvesting, amaranth plant density was adjusted to 12-32 plants/m2. Observation The best combination of yield structure elements was 21 plants/m2, with a grain weight per plant of 20.4 g. Observation The best combination of yield structure elements was also found at 26 plants/m2, with a grain weight per plant of 16.1 g. Observation The highest grain yield of amaranth variety Kharkivskyi 1, 4.28 t/ha, was obtained at a sowing rate of 0.4 million seeds/ha. Observation The highest grain yield of amaranth variety Kharkivskyi 1, 4.20 t/ha, was obtained at a sowing rate of 0.6 million seeds/ha. Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
A 58% population decrease caused only a 12% soybean yield decrease .
Treatment58% population decrease e0 Comparator164 000 plants ha −l e0 Verbatim
e0 “A 58% population decrease from 164 000 plants ha −l resulted in a yield decrease of only 12% ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 880–972 e1 “Soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–33 Other claims from this paper (8) Intervention effect observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
KCl tended to decrease yield in all cultivars.
Not reported Taxon Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “In KCl treatment yield tended to decrease in all cultivars. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 971–1030 Other claims from this paper (12) Mechanism author interpretation original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
The decrease in kernels per ear largely caused the decrease in maize grain yield .
Outcomedecrease in grain yield e4 Qualifierlargely caused by the decrease in kernels per ear e4 Verbatim
t0 “Differential responses of maize yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–37 e4 “The decrease in grain yield was largely caused by the decrease in kernels per ear (r2 = 0.88, P < 0.001) ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 909–1013 Other claims from this paper (6) Mechanism author interpretation original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
The yield decrease at the tillering stage is mainly caused by a decrease in biological yield .
Organ / stagetillering stage e4 Outcomedecrease in the yield of the rice e4 Qualifierdecrease in its biological yield e4 Verbatim
e4 “The decrease in the yield of the rice at tillering stage is maily caused by the decrease in its biological yield while that at ear primordial stage is due to the decrease in its harvest index(HI) ”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 576–773 Other claims from this paper (5) Observation observed review summary negative basis n/a Claim · model-written summary
Smoke exposure can decrease vineyard yield .
Verbatim
e0 “decrease yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1153–1167 t0 “vineyards and grapes ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–91 Other claims from this paper (7) Association observed original result negative measured Claim · model-written summary
Yield tended to decrease with later planting dates.
Treatmentlater planting dates e0 Not reported Taxon Setting
Verbatim
e0 “yield tended to decrease with later planting dates ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 13–63 t0 “Short Staple Planting Dates ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–41 Other claims from this paper (6) Intervention effect observed original result negative not significant (as stated) measured Claim · model-written summary
Lara yield decrease on optimal sowing dates was not significant.
Not reported Treatment Comparator
Verbatim
e0 “while with the other two cultivars (Lara and Sara), the decrease was not significant. ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 961–1046 t0 “Sugar beet ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–10 t1 “decrease of yield ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–898 Other claims from this paper (6) Method / resource author interpretation original result simulated Claim · model-written summary
Isareg was judged appropriate for estimating grain yield decrease .
Outcomeappropriate to estimate the grain yield decrease e0 Not reported Comparator Value
Verbatim
e0 “The Isareg model is appropriate to estimate the grain yield decrease ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1028 t0 “WATER DEFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE GRAIN YIELD DECREASE IN THE CATARINENSE FAR WEST ”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–78 Other claims from this paper (6) 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.