Paper · 1984 · Agronomy Journal

Cowpea Response to N Form, Rate, and Timing of Application1

R. B. Beverly; W. M. Jarrell

13
claims
26
verbatim quotes
15
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Cowpeas [ Vigna unguiculata (L.) walp.] grown in California may receive little or no N fertilizer, or as much as 100 kg ha −1 N, usually applied preplant. Research was undertaken to determine whether N management could increase seed yield of furrow‐irrigated cowpeas on a fine‐loamy, mixed, thermic Haplic Durixeralf soil. Treatments included no N fertilizer, 168 kg ha −1 N as ammonium nitrate broadcast preplant, and side‐dressing with two N sources [calcium nitrate or urea‐ammonium nitrate (UAN) solutions] at two rates (56 or 168 kg ha −1 N) applied either at bloom or during podfill. Nitrogen application increased seed yield, with side‐dress application being more effective than preplant fertilization. Side‐dress application at bloom increased yield relative to application during podfill, and UAN produced higher yields than calcium nitrate. The higher rate of side‐dress N did not significantly increase seed yield. Preplant fertilization increased vegetative growth, but shoot dry matter differences disappeared during the reproductive period. Symbiotic N 2 fixation decreased and mineral N uptake increased (as indicated by ureide‐N and NO − 3 −N concentrations in xylem exudate, respectively) in response to N fertilization. Differences between preplant‐fertilized and control plants for these parameters did not persist through reproductive growth, whereas side‐dress application did cause differences during podfill. The increase in seed yield due to N management did not appear to be explained by increased growth, N accumulation in plant parts, or N supply during podfill. We propose that seed yield increased due to decreased consumption of photosynthates by nodules following inactivation of N 2 fixation by N fertilization.

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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen application increased cowpea seed yield.

Treatment
Nitrogen applicatione0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Nitrogen application increased seed yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 599–640 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Side dressing increased seed yield more than preplant fertilization.

Treatment
side‐dress applicatione0
Outcome
more effectivee0
Direction
more effectivee0
Comparator
preplant fertilizatione0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“side‐dress application being more effective than preplant fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 647–718 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Side dressing at bloom increased yield compared with podfill application.

Treatment
Side‐dress application at bloome0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
application during podfille0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Side‐dress application at bloom increased yield relative to application during podfill”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–806 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

UAN produced higher cowpea yields than calcium nitrate.

Treatment
UANe0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
calcium nitratee0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“UAN produced higher yields than calcium nitrate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 812–859 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The higher side dress nitrogen rate did not significantly increase seed yield.

Treatment
higher rate of side‐dress Ne0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
did not significantly increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The higher rate of side‐dress N did not significantly increase seed yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 861–934 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preplant fertilization increased vegetative growth.

Treatment
Preplant fertilizatione0
Outcome
vegetative growthe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Preplant fertilization increased vegetative growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 936–986 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shoot dry matter differences disappeared during the reproductive period.

Outcome
shoot dry matter differencese0
Direction
disappearede0
Qualifier
during the reproductive periode0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“shoot dry matter differences disappeared during the reproductive period”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 992–1063 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen fertilization decreased symbiotic N2 fixation.

Treatment
N fertilizatione0
Outcome
Symbiotic N 2 fixatione0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Symbiotic N 2 fixation decreased and mineral N uptake increased (as indicated by ureide‐N and NO − 3 −N concentrations in xylem exudate, respectively) in response to N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1065–1246 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen fertilization increased mineral nitrogen uptake.

Treatment
N fertilizatione0
Outcome
mineral N uptakee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Symbiotic N 2 fixation decreased and mineral N uptake increased (as indicated by ureide‐N and NO − 3 −N concentrations in xylem exudate, respectively) in response to N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1065–1246 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Differences in nitrogen parameters between preplant fertilized and control cowpeas did not persist through reproductive growth.

Treatment
preplant‐fertilizede0
Outcome
these parameterse0
Direction
did not persiste0
Comparator
control plantse0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Differences between preplant‐fertilized and control plants for these parameters did not persist through reproductive growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1248–1371 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Side dressing did cause nitrogen parameter differences during podfill.

Treatment
side‐dress applicatione0
Outcome
differences during podfille0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“side‐dress application did cause differences during podfill”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1381–1440 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed yield gains did not appear explained by increased growth, nitrogen accumulation, or nitrogen supply during podfill.

Treatment
N managemente0
Outcome
increase in seed yielde0
Qualifier
did not appear to be explained by increased growth, N accumulation in plant parts, or N supply during podfille0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in seed yield due to N management did not appear to be explained by increased growth, N accumulation in plant parts, or N supply during podfill”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1442–1598 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Authors propose yield increased because nitrogen fertilization inactivated fixation and reduced photosynthate consumption by nodules.

Treatment
N fertilizatione0
Outcome
seed yield increasede0
Qualifier
decreased consumption of photosynthates by nodulese0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“We propose that seed yield increased due to decreased consumption of photosynthates by nodules following inactivation of N 2 fixation by N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1600–1752 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–6 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

68 papers: 62 positive, 6 negative or no effect

61 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

64 papers more in this group

See all 68 papers →

fertilization · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

143 papers: 131 positive, 12 negative or no effect

130 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

139 papers more in this group

See all 143 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.