Abstract
SUMMARY Insect infestation and damage in cowpea ( Vigna unguiculala ), planted sole or intercropped with tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum ) was monitored in 1987 and 1988 in Akure, Nigeria. Infestation of cowpea by Empoasca dolichi was significantly reduced by intercropping with tomato in both years, except in the early season of 1988. Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilis, Aphis craccivora, Megalurothrips sjosledti and Maruca testulalis was not affected by intercropping with tomato in either year. Damage by pod-sucking bugs and Heliothis armigera was significantly higher in sole cowpea than in cowpea intercropped with tomato, in both years. Sole cowpea had a significantly lower seed yield than cowpea intercropped with tomato. Observaciones en cuanto a la infestación de insectos y daños en el caupí (Vigna unguiculata) sembrado en forma simultánea con tomate (Lycopersicon esculentum) en una zona de bosque tropical en Nigeria
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
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato intercropping reduced Empoasca dolichi infestation of cowpea in both years except early 1988.
- Taxon
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatae0 - Treatment
- intercropping with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Empoasca dolichiMatsumurasca dolichie0
- Outcome
- Infestation of cowpea by Empoasca dolichie0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- except in the early season of 1988e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Infestation of cowpea by Empoasca dolichi was significantly reduced by intercropping with tomato in both years, except in the early season of 1988”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato intercropping did not affect Ootheca mutabilis infestation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- intercropping with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Ootheca mutabilisOotheca mutabilise0
- Outcome
- Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilise0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilis, Aphis craccivora, Megalurothrips sjosledti and Maruca testulalis was not affected by intercropping with tomato in either year”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato intercropping did not affect Aphis craccivora infestation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- intercropping with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Aphis craccivora
Aphis craccivorae0 - Outcome
- Infestation of cowpeae0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilis, Aphis craccivora, Megalurothrips sjosledti and Maruca testulalis was not affected by intercropping with tomato in either year”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato intercropping did not affect Megalurothrips sjosledti infestation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- intercropping with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Megalurothrips sjosledtie0
- Outcome
- Infestation of cowpeae0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilis, Aphis craccivora, Megalurothrips sjosledti and Maruca testulalis was not affected by intercropping with tomato in either year”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato intercropping did not affect Maruca testulalis infestation.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- intercropping with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Maruca testulalis
.jpg?width=60)
Maruca testulalise0 - Outcome
- Infestation of cowpeae0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Infestation of cowpea by Ootheca mutabilis, Aphis craccivora, Megalurothrips sjosledti and Maruca testulalis was not affected by intercropping with tomato in either year”
Claim · model-written summary
Pod-sucking bug damage was higher in sole cowpea than intercropped cowpea.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- cowpea intercropped with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- pod-sucking bugse0
- Outcome
- Damage by pod-sucking bugse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole cowpeae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Damage by pod-sucking bugs and Heliothis armigera was significantly higher in sole cowpea than in cowpea intercropped with tomato, in both years”
Claim · model-written summary
Heliothis armigera damage was higher in sole cowpea than intercropped cowpea.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- cowpea intercropped with tomatoe0
- Interactor
- Heliothis armigera
_gusano_cogollero.png?width=60)
Helicoverpa armigerae0 - Outcome
- Damagee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole cowpeae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_gusano_cogollero.png?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Damage by pod-sucking bugs and Heliothis armigera was significantly higher in sole cowpea than in cowpea intercropped with tomato, in both years”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole cowpea had lower seed yield than cowpea intercropped with tomato.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- cowpea intercropped with tomatoe0
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- Sole cowpeae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sole cowpea had a significantly lower seed yield than cowpea intercropped with tomato”
The same questions in other papers
Solanum lycopersicum · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
intercropping · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →intercropping · Aphis craccivora · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
intercropping · pest · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →intercropping · Ootheca mutabilis · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
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.