Abstract
The desi variety DZ10-11 was used as the female parent in a cross with the kabuli variety ICCU2. Two methods of crossing were used: emasculation and pollination on the same day at 09.00 h, and emasculation at 16.00 h followed by pollination at 08.30 h the following day. Crosses were made by 2 people, everyday for 7 days. It is concluded that crossing in the field gave better results than crossing in the greenhouse, that the 2 people were equally good at making crosses and that the different methods gave no difference in results. The success rate differed considerably among days as high minimum temperatures and high humidity had deleterious effects.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Crossing in the field gave better results than crossing in the greenhouse in chickpea.
- Taxon
- Chickpeas
Cicer arietinumt0 - Treatment
- crossing in the fielde0
- Outcome
- resultse0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- crossing in the greenhousee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Artificial Cross Pollination of Chickpeas at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia”
e0“crossing in the field gave better results than crossing in the greenhouse”
Claim · model-written summary
The two people making the crosses were equally good in chickpea cross pollination.
- Taxon
- ChickpeasCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- making crossese0
- Qualifier
- equally goode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Artificial Cross Pollination of Chickpeas at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia”
e0“the 2 people were equally good at making crosses”
Claim · model-written summary
The two emasculation and pollination methods gave no difference in chickpea crossing results.
- Taxon
- ChickpeasCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- emasculation and pollination on the same day at 09.00 he0
- Outcome
- resultse1
- Direction
- no differencee1
- Comparator
- emasculation at 16.00 h followed by pollination at 08.30 h the following daye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Artificial Cross Pollination of Chickpeas at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia”
e0“Two methods of crossing were used: emasculation and pollination on the same day at 09.00 h, and emasculation at 16.00 h followed by pollination at 08.30 h the following day”
e1“the different methods gave no difference in results”
Claim · model-written summary
Success rate of crosses differed considerably among days in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeasCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- success ratee0
- Direction
- differed considerablye0
- Setting
- among dayse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Artificial Cross Pollination of Chickpeas at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia”
e0“The success rate differed considerably among days”
Claim · model-written summary
High minimum temperatures and high humidity had deleterious effects on the success rate of chickpea crosses.
- Taxon
- ChickpeasCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- high minimum temperatures and high humiditye1
- Outcome
- success ratee0
- Direction
- deleterious effectse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Artificial Cross Pollination of Chickpeas at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia”
e0“The success rate differed considerably among days”
e1“high minimum temperatures and high humidity had deleterious effects”