Paper · 2013 · Journal of Agricultural and Crop Research

Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) clipping management technology 1: A potential for fodder production, sustained growth and food security in the savannah regions of Nigeria

Banake E. Sambo; E. C. Odion; L. Aliyu

8
claims
14
verbatim quotes
2
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) is a fast growing crop which covers the soil surface and produces large quantities of (organic) plant biomass. It has been difficult to improve the growth and productivity of these varieties of crop. However, it has been observed that if the dual purpose cowpea is cut before senescence, it can regenerate and re-produce good crop growth in the savannah regions of the tropics. Therefore, this study was carried out on the research field of the Institute for Agricultural Research, Ahmadu Bello University, Samaru, Zaria, Nigeria, during the 2002 to 2005 wet seasons, to evaluate the influence of intra-row spacing, innovative clipping management and time on the growth of dual purpose cowpea. The treatments were laid out in a Randomized Complete Block (RCB) design, replicated three times. The data was analyzed statistically using the analysis of variance test (ANOVA), and the means compared using the Duncan Multiple Range Test (DMRT). The result of this investigation indicated that number of branches plant -1 and vine length was highest at the closest (15 cm) intra-row spacing. While leaf fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and stem fresh and dry weights plant -1 were generally higher at 30 cm intra-row spacing. Lower number of branches plant -1 , stem fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and vine length plant -1 were recorded at 64 DAP. Conversely, fresh fodder yield of plots clipped at 74 and 84 DAP were 62 and 59% higher than those of the control (unclipped) plots. On the whole, clipped cowpea showed a 100% potential regenerative capacity. Thus large amounts (15 tha -1 ) of fresh organic plant material or biomass (clipped fodder) were produced on-farm/in-situ. It can be concluded that the adoption of this innovative clipping management technology could facilitate sustain growth of the cowpea crop and holds a veritable potential towards enhancing the food security situation of the vast majority of these low income and low technology farmers in the savannahs of sub-Saharan Africa. Indeed, the large amounts of (organic) plant material or biomass (clipped fodder biomass) produced on-farm could be profitably used for organic soil fertility maintenance and/or improvement or alternatively utilized or sold as animal feed (fodder) to generate and/or supplement family incomes for these low inputs, low technology, resource poor farmers. This underscores the encouraging impact this technology holds as a veritable tool towards improved economic/living conditions of these predominantly poor rural farmers. In this manner, the negative effects of poverty are ameliorated through positive impacts on food insecurity in the region.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The closest 15 cm spacing maximized branch number and vine length.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Treatment
15 cm) intra-row spacinge0
Outcome
number of branches plant -1 and vine lengthe0
Direction
higheste0

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

“number of branches plant -1 and vine length was highest at the closest (15 cm) intra-row spacing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1026–1123 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 30 cm spacing, leaf fresh and dry weight and stem fresh and dry weight were generally higher.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Treatment
30 cm intra-row spacinge0
Outcome
leaf fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and stem fresh and dry weights plant -1e0
Direction
highere0

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

“leaf fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and stem fresh and dry weights plant -1 were generally higher at 30 cm intra-row spacing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1130–1257 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 64 DAP, branch number, stem fresh and dry weight, and vine length were lower.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Outcome
number of branches plant -1 , stem fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and vine length plant -1e0
Direction
Lowere0
Qualifier
64 DAPe0

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

“Lower number of branches plant -1 , stem fresh and dry weights plant -1 , and vine length plant -1 were recorded at 64 DAP.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1258–1381 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipping at 74 DAP increased fresh fodder yield 62% over unclipped control.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Treatment
clipped at 74e0
Outcome
fresh fodder yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
62e0
Comparator
control (unclipped) plotse0

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

“fresh fodder yield of plots clipped at 74 and 84 DAP were 62 and 59% higher than those of the control (unclipped) plots.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1394–1514 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipping at 84 DAP increased fresh fodder yield 59% over unclipped control.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Treatment
84 DAPe0
Outcome
fresh fodder yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
59%e0
Comparator
control (unclipped) plotse0

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

“fresh fodder yield of plots clipped at 74 and 84 DAP were 62 and 59% higher than those of the control (unclipped) plots.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1394–1514 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipped cowpea showed 100% regenerative capacity.

Treatment
clippede0
Outcome
potential regenerative capacitye0
Value
100%e0

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

“clipped cowpea showed a 100% potential regenerative capacity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1529–1590 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipped cowpea produced 15 t per hectare of fresh biomass on farm.

Taxon
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)Vigna unguiculatat0
Outcome
fresh organic plant material or biomasse0
Value
15 tha -1e0
Setting
on-farm/in-situe0

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

“large amounts (15 tha -1 ) of fresh organic plant material or biomass (clipped fodder) were produced on-farm/in-situ.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1596–1713 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–36 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend clipping management to sustain cowpea growth and improve food security.

Outcome
adoption of this innovative clipping management technologye0
Qualifier
could facilitate sustain growthe0

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 adoption of this innovative clipping management technology could facilitate sustain growth of the cowpea crop and holds a veritable potential towards enhancing the food security situation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1739–1930 · show in text ↑

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

15 papers: 14 positive, 1 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

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

63 papers: 50 positive, 13 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

59 papers more in this group

See all 63 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.