Search claims · PlantClaims

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield gap II exceeded yield gap I.

Taxon: rice and wheatOryza sativa Triticum aestivumt0
Outcome: yield gap-IIe0
Direction: more thane0
Comparator: yield gap-Ie0

Verbatim

e0
“The yield gap-II was more than the yield gap-I”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–692

t0
“rice and wheat”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 10–24

Title

Enhancing rice and wheat production by bridging yield gap in western Uttar Pradesh of India

Surendra Singh; R. K. Singh; Randhir Singh Journal of Cereal Research 2013

Other claims from this paper (3)

Observation All surveyed farms had a yield gap.
Observation Major yield-gap constraints included late planting, input cost and availability, funding, pests and diseases.
Recommendation Timely provision of sufficient quality inputs could reduce yield gaps.

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sorghum yield gap correlated significantly with N gap.

Outcome: yield gape0
Comparator: N gape0

Not reportedTaxonDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Path coefficient analysis indicated significant correlation of yield gap with N gap and P gap.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 951–1045

t0
“Sorghum Production”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–38

Title

Economics of Kharif Sorghum Production in Southern Dry Zone of Karnataka

S.C. Ramesh Kumar; A.B. Tejaswini; M.K. Prakashanaik; et al. Agropedology 2019. doi:10.47114/j.agroped.2016.jun4

Other claims from this paper (13)

Observation Sorghum production showed a -0.4% growth rate.
Observation Sorghum cultivation area declined by -3.8%.
Association Area effects contributed more to changes in sorghum production.
Observation Small sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs. 7264 per ha.
Observation Medium sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs 4503 per ha.
Observation Large sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs 1681 per ha.
Observation Present sorghum yield could be enhanced by 66 to 70% among farmers.
Recommendation Recommended input levels were considered essential to bridge the sorghum yield gap.
Association Sorghum yield gap correlated significantly with P gap.
Observation Rainfall variation was a major farmer constraint.
Observation Soil fertility problems were a major farmer constraint.
Observation Wild pigs severely damaged sorghum in the study area.
Mechanism Wild pig damage resulted in widely variable farmer incomes.

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sorghum yield gap correlated significantly with P gap.

Outcome: yield gape0
Comparator: P gape0

Not reportedTaxonDirection

Verbatim

e0
“Path coefficient analysis indicated significant correlation of yield gap with N gap and P gap.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 951–1045

t0
“Sorghum Production”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–38

Title

Economics of Kharif Sorghum Production in Southern Dry Zone of Karnataka

S.C. Ramesh Kumar; A.B. Tejaswini; M.K. Prakashanaik; et al. Agropedology 2019. doi:10.47114/j.agroped.2016.jun4

Other claims from this paper (13)

Observation Sorghum production showed a -0.4% growth rate.
Observation Sorghum cultivation area declined by -3.8%.
Association Area effects contributed more to changes in sorghum production.
Observation Small sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs. 7264 per ha.
Observation Medium sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs 4503 per ha.
Observation Large sorghum farmers had net returns of Rs 1681 per ha.
Observation Present sorghum yield could be enhanced by 66 to 70% among farmers.
Recommendation Recommended input levels were considered essential to bridge the sorghum yield gap.
Association Sorghum yield gap correlated significantly with N gap.
Observation Rainfall variation was a major farmer constraint.
Observation Soil fertility problems were a major farmer constraint.
Observation Wild pigs severely damaged sorghum in the study area.
Mechanism Wild pig damage resulted in widely variable farmer incomes.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Myanmar yield gap was largely a resource gap.

Outcome: resource yield gape0
Setting: Myanmare0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“The yield gap in Myanmar was largely attributed to the resource yield gap”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1418–1491

Title

Revisiting yield gaps and the scope for sustainable intensification for irrigated lowland rice in Southeast Asia

João Vasco Silva; Valerien O. Pede; Ando M. Radanielson; et al. Agricultural Systems 2022. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2022.103383

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation Yield gap was 75% of potential in Bago.
Observation Yield gap was 57% of potential in Yogyakarta.
Observation Yield gap was 47% of potential in Nakhon Sawan.
Observation Yield gap was 44% of potential in Can Tho.
Observation Vietnam yield gap was mostly technological.
Observation Vietnam dry-season gap included a resource gap.
Observation Vietnam wet-season gap included an efficiency gap.
Observation Thailand gap was explained equally by three components.
Observation Indonesia gap was mostly efficiency and technology.
Association Field response curves suggest less N use could increase rice yield in Indonesia.
Method / resource The study developed a framework for decomposing yield gaps.

Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The yield gap of 403 kg ha-1 indicates a technology gap.

Taxon: Field Peat0
Outcome: yield gape3
Value: 403 kg ha-1e3
Qualifier: technology gape3

Verbatim

t0
“Yield, Yield Gap and Economics of Field Pea”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–85

e3
“The yield gap of 403 kg ha-1 indicates that there is a technology gap”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 818–887

Title

Influence of Front-Line Demonstrations on Yield, Yield Gap and Economics of Field Pea under Hill Region of Arunachal Pradesh, India

S. K. Chaturvedi; Abhimanyu Chaturvedi; Hage Munth; et al. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports 2024. doi:10.9734/jsrr/2024/v30i102468

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Demonstration plots exceeded farmers plots in mean yield by 35.23% in 2019-20.
Intervention effect Demonstration plots exceeded farmers plots in mean yield by 36.03% in 2020-21.
Association Yield in the farmers plot and demonstration plot was higher in 2020-21 than in 2019-20.
Association VL Matar 42 had a mean yield of 1465 kg ha-1, lower than its potential yield.
Observation The average extension yield gap was lower, at 385 kg ha-1, during the study period.
Observation The technology index varied from 19.16 to 23.98 percent.
Intervention effect Improved technologies gave a higher net return than local farming practices.
Intervention effect Improved technologies gave a higher benefit cost ratio than farmers practices.

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield gap and PFPN gap were positively correlated.

Taxon: Summer MaizeZea mayst0
Outcome: yield gape0
Direction: positive correlatione0
Comparator: PFPN gape0

Verbatim

e0
“A positive correlation was observed between the yield gap and PFPN gap”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 934–1004

t0
“Summer Maize”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 61–73

Title

Factors Affecting Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Grain Yield of Summer Maize on Smallholder Farms in the North China Plain

Guangfeng Chen; Hongzhu Cao; Jun Liang; et al. Sustainability 2018. doi:10.3390/su10020363

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation Summer maize grain yield ranged from 6.6 to 14.2 t ha−1 and averaged 10.5 t ha−1.
Observation PFPN ranged from 15.4 to 96.1 kg kg−1 and averaged 49.1 kg kg−1.
Observation Laoling mean yield gap was 3.6 t ha−1 and PFPN gap 43.3 kg kg−1.
Observation Xushui mean yield gap was 2.2 t ha−1 and PFPN gap 24.5 kg kg−1.
Observation Quzhou mean yield gap was 2.8 t ha−1 and PFPN gap 41.1 kg kg−1.
Association Reducing yield gap 1 t ha−1 could reduce PFPN gap 6.0 kg kg−1.
Association High yield and PFPN fields had higher plant density than low yield and PFPN fields.
Association High yield and PFPN fields had lower nitrogen fertilizer rates.
Association Plant density contributed slightly more to the yield gap than other management practices.
Mechanism Low PFPN was mainly attributed to excess nitrogen fertilizer.
Recommendation The authors recommend programs to help farmers adopt optimal management practices.

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield gap I was 1013.47 kg/ha, higher than yield gap II.

Taxon: rabi sorghumt0
Outcome: yield gap-Ie0
Direction: highere0
Value: 1013.47 kg/hae0
Comparator: yield gap-IIe0

Verbatim

t0
“rabi sorghum”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 48–60

e0
“relatively higher yield gap-I (1013.47 kg/ha) than yield gap-II (441.06 kg/ha)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 500–578

Title

Yield Gaps And Constraints In The Production of Rabi Sorghum In Karnataka - A Path Coefficient Analysis

G.M. Gaddi; S.M. Mundinamani; H. Basavaraj Agricultural Economics Research Review 2002. doi:10.1177/0971344120020102

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation Total rabi sorghum yield gap was 1454.20 kg/ha.
Observation Yield gap II was 441.06 kg/ha.
Observation Farmers achieved 58.83 per cent of potential yield.
Observation Farmers achieved 69.78 per cent of potential farm yield.
Association Suboptimal plant nutrient use was a major factor in the yield gap.
Association Suboptimal human labour was a major factor in the yield gap.
Association Suboptimal bullock labour was a major factor in the yield gap.
Observation Input quality and cost, labour shortage, seed availability, climate, pests, and diseases limited sorghum productivity.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

About 10% of farmers had a high brinjal yield gap.

Outcome: yield gape0
Value: 10%e0
Qualifier: more than 65% gape0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“about 10% high yield gap (more than 65% gap)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 754–798

Title

Factors Affecting the Yield Gap of Brinjal Grown in Jhikargacha Upazila under Jashore District, Bangladesh

Mohammad Ashraful Islam; Gazi Hadiuzzaman Simoon; Biplob Deb Asian Research Journal of Arts & Social Sciences 2023. doi:10.9734/arjass/2023/v21i2462

Other claims from this paper (14)

Observationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The gap between potential and water-limited yield indicates yield gap that can be removed with irrigation.

Taxon: field cropst0
Outcome: gap between potential and water limited yielde7
Qualifier: can be removed with irrigatione7

Verbatim

e7
“The gap between potential and water limited yield is an indication of yield gap that can be removed with irrigation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1896–2011

t0
“field crops”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–33

Title

Yield gap analysis of field crops: Methods and case studies

Víctor O. Sadras; Kenneth G. Cassman; Patricio Grassini; et al. Lincoln (University of Nebraska) 2015

Other claims from this paper (6)

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation yield gap was larger than the dryland gap at both locations.

Taxon: SoybeanGlycine maxt0
Outcome: yield gape0
Direction: largeste0
Comparator: dryland environmente0

Verbatim

t0
“Soybean Yield”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 9–22

e0
“Under irrigation, yield gap was the largest as compared to the dryland environment in both locations”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 589–689

Title

Breaking Soybean Yield Barriers: A Cropping Systems Approach

I. A. Ciampitti; G. R. Balboa Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports 2016. doi:10.4148/2378-5977.1229

Other claims from this paper (3)

Intervention effect Ecological intensification had maximum soybean yield in dryland and irrigated environments at both locations.
Intervention effect Advanced plus had maximum soybean yield in dryland and irrigated environments at both locations.
Intervention effect Common practices had the lowest soybean yield in all four experiments.

“yield gap”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics