Response of common bean (

Daba Etana, Amsalu Nebiyu

Open access · goldAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daba EtanaEthiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Jimma Agricultural Research Center, P. O. Box 192, Jimma, Ethiopia.

Amsalu NebiyuDepartment of Horticulture and Plant Sciences, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Jimma University, P.O. Box 307, Jimma, Ethiopia.

Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research · ETJimma University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study was design to investigate responses of four common bean (Polpole and Pantarkin, Deme and Nasir) varieties to four combinations of soil acidity treatments: lime and triple supper phosphate (TSP) fertilizer (+Lime, +TSP, +Lime + TSP, control) by using factorial randomized complete block design with sixteen treatments and three replications. The results of ANOVA showed statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in interactions of common bean varieties and soil amendments, except shoot fresh weight. The highest root fresh and dry matters weight were obtained from Pantarkin (18.12 g) and Polpole (2.70 g) with interaction of the plot treated with lime and TSP fertilizer, respectively. The highest Leaf area index (6.50 and 5.17), yield (3.84 and 3.33 t ha

Indexed as

Common bean farmer varietySoil acidity: lime: TSP fertilizerSoil fertility

Identifiers

PMID37101623

DOI10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15176

PMCPMC10123207

OpenAlexW4362663282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.