Paper · 2014 · Engenharia Agrícola

Yield of cotton/cowpea and sunflower/cowpea crop rotation systems during the reclamation process of a saline-sodic soil

Carlos H. C. de Sousa; Claudivan F. de Lacerda; Francisco L. B. da Silva; et al.

5
claims
7
verbatim quotes
6
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of subsoiling, gypsum and organic matter associated with the cultivation of cotton, sunflower and cowpea in crop rotation, seeking the reclamation and use of a saline-sodic soil. The treatments were arranged in a randomized block design in split plots with four replications, during two crop cycles (2009/2010 and 2010/2011). The plots were formed by the treatments: T1. Subsoiling (S); T2. S + 20 Mg ha-1 of gypsum; T3. S + 40 Mg ha-1 of organic matter; T4. S + 10 Mg ha-1 of gypsum + 20 Mg ha-1 of organic matter; T5. S + 20 Mg ha-1 of gypsum + 40 Mg ha-1 of organic matter and the sub-plots consisted of the cotton-cowpea (C/CP) and sunflower-cowpea (S/CP) crop rotation. The use of gypsum and organic matter contributed to decrease the soil salinity and sodicity. Cotton was not affected by the treatments, while the sunflower crop was favored by the application of amendments only in the second production cycle. Higher yields of cowpea in T5 treatment, during the 2009/2010 cycle, are indicative that higher doses of gypsum and organic matter applied in this treatment accelerate the reclamation process. For other treatments with amendment application there was a beneficial effect for this crop only in the second cycle, when the values of productivity were similar to T5.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gypsum and organic matter decreased soil salinity and sodicity.

Treatment
gypsum and organic mattere0
Outcome
soil salinity and sodicitye0
Direction
decreasee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Helianthus annuus
Helianthus annuus · TaxonJon Sullivan · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of gypsum and organic matter contributed to decrease the soil salinity and sodicity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–818 · show in text ↑
e1

“cultivation of cotton, sunflower and cowpea in crop rotation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 113–173 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton was not affected by the treatments.

Treatment
treatmentse0
Outcome
Cottone0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cotton was not affected by the treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 820–861 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sunflower benefited from amendments only in the second production cycle.

Taxon
sunflowerHelianthus annuuse0
Treatment
application of amendmentse0
Outcome
sunflower crope0
Direction
favorede0
Qualifier
only in the second production cyclee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Helianthus annuus
Helianthus annuus · TaxonJon Sullivan · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the sunflower crop was favored by the application of amendments only in the second production cycle”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 869–968 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cowpea yield was higher under T5 during 2009/2010.

Treatment
T5 treatmente0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
Highere0
Qualifier
during the 2009/2010 cyclee0

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

“Higher yields of cowpea in T5 treatment, during the 2009/2010 cycle”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1037 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Other amendment treatments benefited cowpea only in the second cycle, with productivity similar to T5.

Treatment
other treatments with amendment applicatione0
Outcome
productivitye0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
T5e0

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

“For other treatments with amendment application there was a beneficial effect for this crop only in the second cycle, when the values of productivity were similar to T5”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1163–1331 · show in text ↑
e1

“Higher yields of cowpea in T5 treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1009 · show in text ↑

organic · soil: chemistry · Helianthus annuus (common sunflower)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

organic · soil: chemistry · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 9 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

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

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

organic · soil: chemistry · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

lime · soil: chemistry · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

lime · soil: chemistry · Helianthus annuus (common sunflower)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

lime · soil: chemistry · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.