Abstract
Abstract Quantitative information regarding biomass accumulation and partitioning in chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.) is limited or inconclusive. The objective of this study was to obtain baseline values for extinction coefficient ( K S ), radiation use efficiency (RUE, g MJ −1 ) and biomass partitioning coefficients of chickpea crops grown under well‐watered conditions. The stability of these parameters during the crop life cycle and under different environmental and growth conditions, caused by season and sowing date and density, were also evaluated. Two field experiments, each with three sowing dates and four plant densities, were conducted during 2002–2004. Crop leaf area index, light interception and crop biomass were measured between emergence and maturity. A K S value of 0.5 was obtained. An average RUE of 1 g MJ −1 was obtained. Plant density had no effect on RUE, but some effects of temperature were detected. There was no effect of solar radiation or vapour pressure deficit on RUE when RUE values were corrected for the effect of temperature. RUE was constant during the whole crop cycle. A biphasic pattern was found for biomass partitioning between leaves and stems before first‐seed stage. At lower levels of total dry matter, 54 % of biomass produced was allocated to leaves, but at higher levels of total dry matter, i.e. under favourable and prolonged conditions for vegetative growth, this portion decreased to 28 %. During the period from first‐pod to first‐seed, 60 % of biomass produced went to stems, 27 % to pods and 13 % to leaves. During the period from first‐seed to maturity, 83 % of biomass was partitioned to pods. It was concluded that using fixed partitioning coefficients after first‐seed are not as effective as they are before this stage. Environmental conditions (temperature and solar radiation) and plant density did not affect partitioning of biomass.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
The light extinction coefficient K S of chickpea was 0.5.
- Taxon
- Chickpea
Cicer arietinumt0 - Outcome
- K Se1
- Value
- 0.5e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“A K S value of 0.5 was obtained”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The average radiation use efficiency of chickpea was 1 g MJ −1.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- RUEe2
- Value
- 1 g MJ −1e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“An average RUE of 1 g MJ −1 was obtained”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant density had no effect on the radiation use efficiency of chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- plant densitye3
- Outcome
- RUEe3
- Direction
- no effecte3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Plant density had no effect on RUE, but some effects of temperature were detected”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Temperature had some effects on the radiation use efficiency of chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- temperaturee3
- Outcome
- RUEe3
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Plant density had no effect on RUE, but some effects of temperature were detected”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Solar radiation and vapour pressure deficit had no effect on radiation use efficiency once temperature was corrected for.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- solar radiation or vapour pressure deficite4
- Outcome
- RUEe4
- Direction
- no effecte4
- Qualifier
- when RUE values were corrected for the effect of temperaturee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“There was no effect of solar radiation or vapour pressure deficit on RUE when RUE values were corrected for the effect of temperature”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Radiation use efficiency of chickpea was constant during the whole crop cycle.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- RUE was constant during the whole crop cyclee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“RUE was constant during the whole crop cycle”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
A biphasic pattern was found for biomass partitioning between leaves and stems in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- biomass partitioning between leaves and stemse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“A biphasic pattern was found for biomass partitioning between leaves and stems before first‐seed stage”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At lower total dry matter, 54 % of biomass produced was allocated to chickpea leaves.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- was allocated to leavese7
- Value
- 54 %e7
- Qualifier
- lower levels of total dry mattere7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“At lower levels of total dry matter, 54 % of biomass produced was allocated to leaves”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At higher total dry matter, the biomass share allocated to chickpea leaves decreased to 28 %.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- higher levels of total dry mattere0
- Outcome
- this portione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 28 %e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“but at higher levels of total dry matter, i.e. under favourable and prolonged conditions for vegetative growth, this portion decreased to 28 %”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Between first-pod and first-seed, 60 % of biomass produced went to stems in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- biomass produced went to stemse0
- Value
- 60 %e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“During the period from first‐pod to first‐seed, 60 % of biomass produced went to stems, 27 % to pods and 13 % to leaves”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Between first-pod and first-seed, 27 % of biomass produced went to pods in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- to podse0
- Value
- 27 %e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“During the period from first‐pod to first‐seed, 60 % of biomass produced went to stems, 27 % to pods and 13 % to leaves”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Between first-pod and first-seed, 13 % of biomass produced went to leaves in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- to leavese0
- Value
- 13 %e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“During the period from first‐pod to first‐seed, 60 % of biomass produced went to stems, 27 % to pods and 13 % to leaves”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Between first-seed and maturity, 83 % of biomass was partitioned to pods in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- was partitioned to podse0
- Value
- 83 %e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“During the period from first‐seed to maturity, 83 % of biomass was partitioned to pods”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fixed biomass partitioning coefficients are less effective after first-seed than before this stage in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- fixed partitioning coefficientse0
- Comparator
- before this stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“It was concluded that using fixed partitioning coefficients after first‐seed are not as effective as they are before this stage”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Temperature, solar radiation and plant density did not affect biomass partitioning in chickpea.
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Treatment
- Environmental conditions (temperature and solar radiation) and plant densitye0
- Outcome
- partitioning of biomasse0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Environmental conditions (temperature and solar radiation) and plant density did not affect partitioning of biomass”
t0“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
density · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.