ArticlePloS one2025
GEOTrat Points as a free resource in QGIS for mapping the performance of agricultural experiments.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Agricultural experimentation requires careful selection of the experimental design and model for analyzing treatment data. However, even with rigorous experimental control, the discrepancies between treatments are so subtle that traditional statistical models fail to highlight statistically significant differences that occur in field practice. The incorporation of geotechnologies offers the ability to map agricultural variability, but a gap still exists in the availability of tools designed to map and evaluate the effectiveness of agricultural experiments. To overcome this limitation and promote the wider application of Geographic Information Systems in agriculture, the scope of this study focuses on the development of a resource in QGIS software, aimed at evaluating agricultural experiments using a randomized block design with up to five treatments. The resource developed incorporates spatial interpolation techniques using geostatistical kriging, map generation, and statistics. The study used yield samples from six different crops to identify quantitative and spatial differences between two-treatment experiments in terms of yield gain. The performance evaluation included statistical measures such as Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) and Pearson's correlation coefficient to validate the accuracy of interpolated surfaces. The results consisted of two surfaces representing the study area treated with each of the treatments, as well as a surface reflecting the yield gain of the reference treatment in relation to the control treatment, accompanied by relevant descriptive statistics measures on this gain surface. The experiments showed that RMSE varied between 4.6% and 69.71%, depending on the crop and treatment, while Pearson's correlation ranged from -0.16 to 0.86, indicating varying degrees of agreement between interpolated and observed data. The tool successfully generated yield gain maps, allowing spatial visualization of treatment differences, with an accuracy of up to 95.40% in detecting spatial and numerical variations between treatments. The tool, called GEOTrat - Points, offers the flexibility to evaluate agricultural experiments of various designs, encompassing different crops and different quantities of samples, providing both numerical and spatial analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.