Intervention effectmodel-written summary

100% RDF plus seed microbial consortia gave significantly higher seed yield, 797.9 kg ha-1, and was on par with soil application plus RDF.

A claim from Effect of different nitrogen sources on yield and economics of fodder cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) · 2024

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

100% RDF plus seed microbial consortia gave significantly higher seed yield, 797.9 kg ha-1, and was on par with soil application plus RDF.

Taxon
Vigna unguiculata L.Vigna unguiculatat0
Treatment
100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizer (RDF) + seed treatment with microbial consortia (Rhizobium + PSB+ KRB+ ZnSB @ 25g seed -1)e0
Interactor
RhizobiumRhizobiume0symbiont
Outcome
seede0
Direction
highere0
Value
797.9 kg ha-1e0
Qualifier
PSB+ KRB+ ZnSBe0
Comparator
100% RDF + soil application of microbial consortiae1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Rhizobium
Rhizobium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Ninjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“application of 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizer (RDF) + seed treatment with microbial consortia (Rhizobium + PSB+ KRB+ ZnSB @ 25g seed -1) registered significantly higher number of pods plant-1 (34.3), seeds plant-1 (544.4), seed (797.9 kg ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 365–613
e1

“it was statistically on par with the application of 100% RDF + soil application of microbial consortia (Rhizobium + PSB+ KRB+ ZnSB @ 5 kg ha-1).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 751–895
t0

“Vigna unguiculata L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 78–98

Title

Effect of different nitrogen sources on yield and economics of fodder cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.)

Sruthi G; Balazzii Naaiik RVT; Bhanu Rekha K; et al. International Journal of Research in Agronomy 2024. doi:10.33545/2618060x.2024.v7.i9h.1602

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-bcb4b113cfc145675b97a27fc3e85a4874430f298effa8dfdcc89ee03a326ee2 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

Rhizobium · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

47 papers: 47 positive, 0 negative or no effect

46 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
    Rhizobium + PSB significantly increased cowpea yield attributes over control.

    Effect of Vermicompost and Biofertilizers on Yield Attributes and Nutrient Content and it’s their Uptake of Cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.)Walp.] · 2017 · compared with control

    Same direction

  2. positive
    Rhizobium inoculation produced the highest grain yield of 1441 kg/ha.

    Effect of Bio Fertilizer and Fertility Levels on Yield, Protein Content and Nutrient Uptake of Cowpea [ Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] · 2011 · compared with rest of the treatments

    Same direction

  3. positive
    Combined Rhizobium and PSB inoculation increased cowpea growth and yield versus single inoculants.

    Influence of phosphorus and bio-fertilizers on growth and yield of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] in acidic soil of NEH region of India · 2017 · compared with single inoculation of Rhizobium and PSB

    Same direction

  4. positive
    Combined fertilizer and Rhizobium plus PSB increased pods per plant to 8.23.

    Effect of inorganic and bio-fertilizers on productivity and nutrients uptake in cowpea [Vigna Unguiculata (L.) Walp] · 2012 · compared with the control

    Same direction

  5. positive
    The three higher nutrient and inoculation treatments significantly increased cowpea growth traits compared with their lower counterparts.

    Integrated Nutrient Management in Summer Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) Under South Gujarat Condition · 2018 · compared with 50 % RDF (F1), FYM @ 0 t ha-1 (O1) and No inoculation (B1)

    Same direction

  6. positive
    Dual inoculation with P2O5 fertilizer gave 34 % better pod yield than dual inoculation without phosphatic fertilizer.

    Effects of Rhizobium, PSB Inoculation and Phosphorus Management on Soil Nutrient Status and Performance of Cowpea in Acid Soil of Arunachal Pradesh, India · 2017 · compared with duel inoculation without phosphatic fertilizer

    Same direction

  7. positive
    Rhizobium plus PSB inoculation increased seed, straw and biological yield relative to control and other treatments.

    Effect of vermicompost and biofertilizer on symbiotic efficiency and yield of cowpea in arid zone of Rajasthan · 2015 · compared with control and other treatments

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Rhizobium plus PSB inoculation increased cowpea seed, straw and biological yields over control and other treatments.

    Effect of vermicompost and biofertilizer on yield, quality and economics of cowpea · 2015 · compared with control and other treatments

    Same direction

38 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

seed treatment · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

29 papers: 27 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
    Fungicide seed treatment had no significant effect on cowpea grain yield.

    Influence of Bradyrhizobium Inoculation and Fungicide Seed Treatment on Development and Yield of Cowpea, Lablab, and Soybean · 2017 · compared with a control

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    Field grain yield did not differ significantly between seed dressing alone and dressing plus drench.

    Effect of Fungicides on Pathogens associated with Basal Stem Rots of Cowpea in Nigeria · 1980 · compared with seed dressing alone

    No difference from an alternative

  3. positive
    Halo priming with 1% CaCl2 for 12 h produced the highest branch number, 7.20.

    Stimulatory Effect of Seed Priming as Pretreatment Factors on Germination and Yield Performance of Yard Long Bean (Vigna unguiculata) · 2020

    Same direction

  4. positive
    Priming increased cowpea number of branches.

    Seed priming improves irrigation water use efficiency, yield and yield components of summer cowpea under limited water conditions · 2017

    Same direction

  5. positive
    Priming alone significantly increased cowpea yield against control.

    The Response of Sorghum, Groundnut, Sesame, and Cowpea to Seed Priming and Fertilizer Micro-Dosing in South Kordofan State, Sudan · 2015 · compared with control

    Same direction

  6. positive
    The multiple-isolate coating increased cowpea pod number per plant by 52%.

    Using microbial seed coating for improving cowpea productivity under a low‐input agricultural system · 2019 · compared with non-inoculated control plants

    Same direction

  7. positive
    Priming increased cowpea hay yield.

    EFFECT OF SEED PRIMING AND MICRO-DOSING OF FERTILIZER ON GROUNDNUT, SESAME AND COWPEA IN WESTERN SUDAN · 2011

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Nitramolybdenum pelleting produced 1.39 tons/ha seed yield, 21% above control.

    Effects of nitrogen, molybdenum and cultivar on cowpea growth and yield on an oxisol · 1982 · compared with control

    Same direction

20 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

inoculation · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

116 papers: 99 positive, 17 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
    Virus-inoculated cowpea had significantly lower growth and yield than buffer controls.

    Interactions of viruses in Cowpea: effects on growth and yield parameters. · 2007 · compared with buffer inoculated control plants

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Time of CPSMV inoculation had the most profound impact on cowpea yield.

    Effect ofCowpea severe mosaic viruson Crop Growth Characteristics and Yield of Cowpea · 2005

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Inoculation of cowpea with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi alone gave no significant increase in shoot biomass or yield, whatever the soil type.

    Response of Cowpea to Symbiotic Microorganisms Inoculation (Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Rhizobium) in Cultivated Soils in Senegal · 2015

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Inoculation with two effective local rhizobial strains gave no significant yield difference over uninoculated and N-fed cowpea

    Response of cowpea Vigna unguiculata L Walp to nitrogen and inoculation in Trinidad · 1984 · compared with uninoculated and N-fed treatments

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Bradyrhizobium inoculation had no significant effect on cowpea grain yield.

    Influence of Bradyrhizobium Inoculation and Fungicide Seed Treatment on Development and Yield of Cowpea, Lablab, and Soybean · 2017 · compared with a control

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Biofertilizer plus biochar produced about 2% fewer pods than SSP.

    EFFECT OF PLANT GROWTH PROMOTING RHIZOBACTERIA (PGPR) AND BIOCHAR ON SOIL PROPERTIES AND PERFORMANCE OF COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata (L.)Walp) · 2018 · compared with SSP

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Grain yield did not differ among seven rhizobia inoculations, mineral nitrogen fertilization and controls.

    Strategies for Improving Cowpea Grain Yield in the Eastern Amazon: Biological Nitrogen Fixation, Phosphorus Nutrition, and Molybdenum Seed Enrichment · 2023 · compared with the control (without inoculation and N fertilization)

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Artificial inoculation reduced cowpea yield by 25.29 to 53.50 per cent versus natural inoculation.

    Effect of Sowing Time and Plant Population on Bacterial Blight and Yield of Cowpea · 1989 · compared with natural

    Opposite direction

107 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

3 of 4 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.