Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Yield could be increased by shifting the sowing date from dry season to long rains, if blight-resistant cultivars with acceptable agronomic traits are identified.

A claim from Evaluation of chickpea genotypes for resistance to Ascochyta blight (Ascochyta rabiei) disease in the dry highlands of Kenya · 2013

Intervention effecthypothesisoriginal resultpositiveprojected

Claim · model-written summary

Yield could be increased by shifting the sowing date from dry season to long rains, if blight-resistant cultivars with acceptable agronomic traits are identified.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinume0
Treatment
shifting the sowing date from dry season to long rain (winter)e6
Outcome
yielde6
Direction
increasede6
Qualifier
if AB resistant cultivars with acceptable agronomic traits could be identifiede6

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue

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

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) is an edible legume”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–46
e6

“However yield could be increased by shifting the sowing date from dry season to long rain (winter) thus avoiding terminal drought if AB resistant cultivars with acceptable agronomic traits could be identified.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1720–1929

Title

Evaluation of chickpea genotypes for resistance to Ascochyta blight (Ascochyta rabiei) disease in the dry highlands of Kenya

Paul KIMURTO; Bernard TOWETT; Richard MULWA; et al. DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) 2013. doi:10.14601/phytopathol_mediterr-11825

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-d656e27ecdf4e8db5bbd2cbba57abd5a722edc12918b10a85ff93084108eba7d · schema claims-v0.9 · position 10 in the model’s answer

drought · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ

54 papers: 11 positive, 43 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this claim · 43 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. negative

45 papers more in this group

See all 54 papers →

rainfall · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 4 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. no effect
  6. positive
  7. positive
See all 8 papers →

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. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. no effect
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. negative

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.