Verification record
Every claim in this article was checked against the abstracts of the papers it cites, by a separate pass that was given those abstracts and nothing else. A claim marked supported carries the sentence that supports it, quoted verbatim below.
- References
- 14
- Claims checked
- 6
- Fully supported
- 2
- Checked on
- Oct 29, 2026
Claim by claim
In a three-season rainfed castor field experiment, applying the full recommended basal nitrogen rate followed by 2% urea foliar sprays at 30 and 60 days after sowing produced a seed yield of 1546 kg per hectare, which the authors report as significantly higher than the other modules tested.
Partially supportedField trialField trial
“Specifically, application of 100% RRBN through soil (20 kg ha -1 ), followed by foliar sprays of 2% Urea at 30 and 60 DAS, improved growth and yield traits of castor. Consequently, it produced significantly higher seed yield (1546 kg ha −1 )”
While the abstract confirms the experiment conditions, treatment details, and a 'significantly higher seed yield (1546 kg ha −1)', it does not specify what the yield was significantly higher than (i.e., whether it was statistically superior to all other tested modules).
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
The same treatment recorded the highest oil content (42.7%) and nitrogen uptake (34.9 kg per hectare) in the trial.
Partially supportedField trialField trial
“Consequently, it produced significantly higher seed yield (1546 kg ha −1 ), oil content (42.7%), and N uptake in castor (34.9 kg ha −1 ).”
The abstract states that this treatment produced 'significantly higher' oil content (42.7%) and N uptake (34.9 kg ha−1), rather than explicitly identifying them as the absolute highest in the trial.
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
Foliar sprays of 2% urea outperformed nano urea applied at 2 ml per litre for castor growth and yield traits.
Partially supportedField trialField trial
“Aqueous solution of urea (2%) proved effective than Nano-Urea (2 ml L -1 ) for foliar fertilization of N. Specifically, application of 100% RRBN through soil (20 kg ha -1 ), followed by foliar sprays of 2% Urea at 30 and 60 DAS, improved growth and yield traits of castor.”
The abstract states that 2% urea was more effective than nano urea for foliar fertilization and that a specific regimen improved growth and yield traits, but does not explicitly combine these into a direct claim that 2% urea outperformed nano urea specifically for growth and yield traits.
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
Partial factor productivity was 67.8 to 106 kg seed per kg nitrogen under foliar feeding, compared with 32.5 kg per kg under soil-only nitrogen application.
SupportedField trialField trial
“N substituted via foliar fertilization enhanced the partial factor productivity (67.8–106 kg kg -1 ) compared to soil-only N application (32.5 kg kg -1 ).”
The abstract directly reports the partial factor productivity values for foliar-substituted nitrogen compared to soil-only application.
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
The authors report a positive nitrogen balance index of 10.7 to 12.1 under foliar fertilisation and describe it as depletion of the soil nitrogen pool.
SupportedField trialField trial
“Foliar fertilization depletes the soil N pool as observed through +ve N balance index (10.7-12.1).”
The abstract explicitly links the positive nitrogen balance index of 10.7–12.1 under foliar fertilization to the depletion of the soil nitrogen pool.
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
The evidence comes from a single field experiment with three replications over three consecutive Kharif seasons; the abstract reports no second location.
Partially supportedField trialField trial
“a field experiment was conducted over three consecutive Kharif seasons (2022-2024)”
The abstract describes a single field experiment with three replications across three Kharif seasons, but the full claim includes meta-commentary about what the abstract does not report, which cannot be captured in a single verbatim quote.
Checked by google/gemini-3.8-flash on Oct 29, 2026
What this does and does not prove
It proves that every DOI cited resolves to a real registered work whose returned DOI matches the one requested, that none of them is retracted, and that each claim has a named sentence in a cited abstract behind it.
It does not prove that the paper as a whole supports the claim. An abstract can overstate its own findings, and a sentence can be read out of context. That is why the quote is printed here rather than summarised: if the check is wrong, you can see that it is wrong.
Evidence grading is automatic and conservative. Anything it cannot classify is marked unclassified rather than flattered upward.