Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The hypothesis that winter-sown chickpeas yield substantially more than spring crops held in the regional trials.

A claim from Ascochyta blight and winter sowing of chickpeas. · 1984

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The hypothesis that winter-sown chickpeas yield substantially more than spring crops held in the regional trials.

Taxon
chickpeasCicer arietinume0
Treatment
winter-sowne0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
The hypothesis stood the teste1
Comparator
spring crope0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the hypothesis that winter-sown chickpeas produce substantially higher yield than spring crop was put to wider test”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1061–1176
e1

“The hypothesis stood the test”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1377–1406

Title

Ascochyta blight and winter sowing of chickpeas.

Mohini Saxena; Karam B. Singh MELSpace (ICARDA (The International Center for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas)) 1984

Record rev-9d91ac51660f9fe47b96001c712d71a0de30faca56300498bc7370fa110a7415 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

sowing time · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

85 papers: 68 positive, 17 negative or no effect

67 papers in the same direction as this claim · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    In 1984/85, winter sowing raised ILC3279 yield by 65% over spring sowing.

    Effect of supplementary irrigation during reproductive growth on winter and spring chickpea (Cicer arietinum) in a Mediterranean environment · 1990 · compared with spring

    Same directionCites this paper

  2. negative
    In noninoculated treatments, emergence and yield were lower when seeded in late May than at earlier dates.

    Effects of soil temperature, seeding depth, and seeding date on rhizoctonia seedling blight and root rot of chickpea · 2004 · compared with the earlier seeding dates

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Sowing time had no significant effect on chickpea pod number in season 1.

    Effect of tillage method and sowing time on phenology, yield and yield components of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under semi-arid conditions in Kenya · 2010

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Fertilizer along with seed lowered chickpea yield.

    EFFECT OF FERTILIZATION AND SEED SIZE ON NODULATION, YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF CHICKPEA (CICER ARIETINUM L.) · 2017

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Sowing date and fungicides generally did not affect disease parameters or seed yield.

    Effect of integrated management on Fusarium wilt progression and grain yield of chickpea in Syria · 2015

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Delayed planting imposed greater stress on chickpea and its yield.

    Heat Tolerance Responses of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes in the Thermal Zone of Ethiopia, a Case of Werer Station · 2018

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Delay in sowing time significantly reduced the grain yield of C235

    Heat Unit Required in Relation to Phenology of Chickpea Cultivars as Influenced by Sowing Time and Seed Rate · 2018

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Early planting reduced yield up to 25.32% at Alem Ketema.

    Host resistance by sowing date interaction reduced Fusarium wilt pressure and improved grain yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in North Shoa, Ethiopia · 2023 · compared with late planting

    Opposite direction

76 papers more in this group

See all 85 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.