Paper · 2010 · http://www.idosi.org/wjas/wjas6(3)/7.pdf

Effects of Variety and Spatial Arrangement on Pest Incidence, Damage and Subsequent Yield of Cowpea in a Cowpea/Maize Intercrop

A. A. Oso; M. J. Falade

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract: A field experiment was carried out to investigate the effects of variety and spatial arrangement on pest incidence, damage and subsequent yield of cowpea in a cowpea/maize intercrop. Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown) and two spatial arrangements (2:3 maize / cowpea & 1:1maize / cowpea intercrops) were investigated. There was Lower population density of Maruca vitrata among the 1:1 and 2:3 maize/cowpea intercrops compared with the population of Megalurothrips sjostedti. were observed on Ife brown was infested by a higher number of M. sjostedti and M. vitrata than Tvu 13076. Ife brown had higher number of beetles infesting its leaves than Tvu 13076 at the first and fourth weeks but was not significant. The incidence and damage caused by Ootheca mutabilis on the 2:3maize / cowpea intercrop were not significantly higher than on the 1:1maize / cowpea intercrop. Ife brown produced significantly higher seed yield (93.62a) than Tvu13076 (64.53b) while 2:3 maize/cowpea intercrop gave significantly higher seed yield (129.43a) than 1:1 maize / cowpea intercrop (32.72b). Consideration of planting pattern in intercropping appears to be a determinant factor for leaf infestation by this beetle. Intercropping may not necessarily reduce pest load in any given situation it depends on the crop and the pest in question. Key words: Intercropping Spatial arrangement Megalurothrips sjostedti Maruca vitrata

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

Population density of Maruca vitrata was lower in 1:1 and 2:3 maize/cowpea intercrops than the Megalurothrips sjostedti population

Treatment
1:1 and 2:3 maize/cowpea intercropse1
Interactor
Maruca vitrataMaruca vitratae1pest
Outcome
population density of Maruca vitratae1
Direction
Lowere1
Comparator
Megalurothrips sjostedtie1

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 ↗
Maruca vitrata
Maruca vitrata · InteractorRavi Vaidyanathan · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e1

“There was Lower population density of Maruca vitrata among the 1:1 and 2:3 maize/cowpea intercrops compared with the population of Megalurothrips sjostedti”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 343–498 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ife brown cowpea was infested by a higher number of M. sjostedti and M. vitrata than Tvu 13076

Material
Ife browne2
Interactor
M. sjostedtiMegalurothrips sjostedtie2pest
Second interactor
M. vitrataMaruca vitratae2pest
Outcome
infestede2
Direction
highere2
Comparator
Tvu 13076e2

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 ↗
Maruca vitrata
Maruca vitrata · Second interactorRavi Vaidyanathan · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e2

“Ife brown was infested by a higher number of M. sjostedti and M. vitrata than Tvu 13076”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 517–604 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Ife brown cowpea had a higher number of beetles infesting its leaves than Tvu 13076, not significant

Material
Ife browne3
Interactor
beetlesColeopterae3pest
Outcome
number of beetles infesting its leavese3
Direction
highere3
Qualifier
at the first and fourth weekse3
Comparator
Tvu 13076e3

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e3

“Ife brown had higher number of beetles infesting its leaves than Tvu 13076 at the first and fourth weeks but was not significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 606–734 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Incidence and damage caused by Ootheca mutabilis were not significantly higher on 2:3 than on 1:1 maize/cowpea intercrop

Treatment
2:3maize / cowpea intercrope4
Interactor
Ootheca mutabilisOotheca mutabilise4pest
Outcome
incidence and damage caused by Ootheca mutabilise4
Direction
highere4
Comparator
1:1maize / cowpea intercrope4

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e4

“The incidence and damage caused by Ootheca mutabilis on the 2:3maize / cowpea intercrop were not significantly higher than on the 1:1maize / cowpea intercrop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 736–893 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Ife brown cowpea produced significantly higher seed yield (93.62) than Tvu13076 (64.53)

Material
Ife browne5
Outcome
seed yielde5
Direction
highere5
Value
93.62ae5
Qualifier
64.53be5
Comparator
Tvu13076e5

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e5

“Ife brown produced significantly higher seed yield (93.62a) than Tvu13076 (64.53b)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 895–977 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The 2:3 maize/cowpea intercrop gave significantly higher seed yield (129.43) than the 1:1 intercrop (32.72)

Treatment
2:3 maize/cowpea intercrope6
Outcome
seed yielde6
Direction
highere6
Value
129.43ae6
Qualifier
32.72be6
Comparator
1:1 maize / cowpea intercrope6

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e6

“2:3 maize/cowpea intercrop gave significantly higher seed yield (129.43a) than 1:1 maize / cowpea intercrop (32.72b)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 984–1100 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Planting pattern in intercropping appears to be a determinant factor for leaf infestation by the beetle

Treatment
planting pattern in intercroppinge7
Interactor
beetlee7pest
Outcome
leaf infestation by this beetlee7

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e7

“Consideration of planting pattern in intercropping appears to be a determinant factor for leaf infestation by this beetle”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1102–1223 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping may not necessarily reduce pest load, depending on crop and pest

Treatment
Intercroppinge1
Outcome
pest loade1
Direction
reducee1
Qualifier
may not necessarilye1

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

“Two varieties of cowpea (Tvu 13076 and Ife brown)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 193–242 · show in text ↑
e1

“Intercropping may not necessarily reduce pest load in any given situation it depends on the crop and the pest in question”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1225–1346 · show in text ↑

Zea mays · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 18 positive, 9 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

intercropping · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

103 papers: 63 positive, 40 negative or no effect

62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

99 papers more in this group

See all 103 papers →

intercropping · Maruca vitrata · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

intercropping · Ootheca mutabilis · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
See all 2 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.