Paper · 1980 · Agronomy Journal

Drought Adaptation of Cowpea. I. Influence of Drought on Seed Yield1

Kenneth J. Turk; Anthony E. Hall; C. W. Asbell

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
160
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Field studies were conducted to determine cowpea [ Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] response to different intensities of drought at different stages of growth to guide programs for the development of improved cultivars and improved management practices for semi‐arid zones. Two cowpea cultivars were subjected to different levels of irrigation using a line‐source sprinkler system in the field on a coarse‐loamy, mixed, thermic Haplic Durixeralf soil during 2 years with contrasting weather patterns. Well‐watered plants were irrigated weekly. In other treatments, water was not supplied during either the vegetative, flowering, or pod filling stages. Dry seed yields of well‐watered treatments were negatively correlated with degree days above 35 C during flowering. Yields of both cultivars were not reduced by drought during the vegetative stage, compared with the weekly irrigated treatment, providing subsequent environmental conditions were conducive to rapid recovery of growth and efficient pod set. Drought during the flowering stage substantially reduced yields, but partial yield recovery was observed where drought caused all flowers to abscise and the subsequent environment, after irrigation was resumed, permitted a new flush of flowers to produce pods. Drought during pod filling substantially reduced yields of both cultivars in both years. Variations in yield due to environmental stresses were mainly due to variations in number of pods/m 2 except for drought during pod filling which resulted in both low pod density and small seed. Yield with abundant water or drought during pod filling appeared to be partially source limited, whereas intermediate levels of drought at other stages may have resulted in sink limitations on yield because these treatments produced the heaviest seed.

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 9

Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Well-watered cowpea seed yield was negatively correlated with hot degree days during flowering.

Treatment
well‐watered treatmentse0
Outcome
Dry seed yieldse0
Direction
negatively correlatede0
Qualifier
degree days above 35 C during floweringe0

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

“Dry seed yields of well‐watered treatments were negatively correlated with degree days above 35 C during flowering.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 658–773 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vegetative-stage drought did not reduce yield relative to weekly irrigation if recovery conditions were favorable.

Treatment
drought during the vegetative stagee0
Outcome
Yieldse0
Direction
not reducede0
Qualifier
providing subsequent environmental conditions were conducive to rapid recovery of growth and efficient pod sete0
Comparator
weekly irrigated treatmente0

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

“Yields of both cultivars were not reduced by drought during the vegetative stage, compared with the weekly irrigated treatment, providing subsequent environmental conditions were conducive to rapid recovery of growth and efficient pod set.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 774–1013 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flowering-stage drought substantially reduced yield.

Treatment
Drought during the flowering stagee0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
reducede0

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

“Drought during the flowering stage substantially reduced yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1014–1077 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield partly recovered when flowering resumed after drought and irrigation.

Outcome
partial yield recoverye0
Qualifier
after irrigation was resumede0

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

“partial yield recovery was observed where drought caused all flowers to abscise and the subsequent environment, after irrigation was resumed, permitted a new flush of flowers to produce pods.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1083–1274 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod-filling drought substantially reduced yield in both cultivars in both years.

Treatment
Drought during pod fillinge0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
both cultivars in both yearse0

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

“Drought during pod filling substantially reduced yields of both cultivars in both years.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1275–1363 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stress-related yield variation was mainly associated with pod density.

Organ / stage
pods/m 2e0
Outcome
Variations in yielde0

Not reportedDirection

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

“Variations in yield due to environmental stresses were mainly due to variations in number of pods/m 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1364–1465 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod-filling drought produced low pod density and small seed.

Treatment
drought during pod fillinge0
Outcome
low pod density and small seede0
Direction
lowe0

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

“drought during pod filling which resulted in both low pod density and small seed.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1477–1558 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Abundant water or pod-filling drought appeared partly source limited.

Treatment
abundant water or drought during pod fillinge0
Outcome
Yielde0
Qualifier
partially source limitede0

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

“Yield with abundant water or drought during pod filling appeared to be partially source limited”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1654 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intermediate drought at other stages may have limited yield through sinks.

Treatment
intermediate levels of drought at other stagese0
Outcome
sink limitations on yielde0
Qualifier
heaviest seede0

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

“intermediate levels of drought at other stages may have resulted in sink limitations on yield because these treatments produced the heaviest seed.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1664–1810 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–28 · show in text ↑

drought · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

46 papers: 7 positive, 39 negative or no effect

38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
    Drought stress reduced cowpea yields.

    Assessment of cowpea genotypes for variability to drought tolerance. · 2011 · compared with non-stress conditions

    Same directionCites this paper

  3. negative

42 papers more in this group

See all 46 papers →

stage · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 18 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 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.