Paper · 1999

Effect of irrigation on phenology, growth and yield of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata)

R. Selvaraju

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
2
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The response of cowpea to supplemental irrigation at various growth stages was compared with a rainfed and a full irrigation (no stress) treatments during rainy season of 1992 and 1993 at Coimbatore. Withholding irrigation at flowering and pod filling stages of crop enhanced the process of maturity. Among the yield components pod density was most sensitive to irrigation. Crop without water stress in any part of the plant growth recorded four times higher yield (8.69 q/ha) than rainfed treatment (2.19 q/ha). Supplemental irrigation during flowering and vegetative stages alone increased the seed yield by 94% (4.24 q/ha) and 75% (3.84 q/ha), respectively, over the rainfed crop. Two irrigations given either at flowering and pod filing stages or vegetative and flowering stage increased seed yield by 172% and 160% in comparison to rainfed treatmentrespectively. Irrigations at vegetative, flowering and pod filling stages produced comparable yields as that of full irrigation treatment. Supplemental irrigation only at flowering stage recorded maximum water use efficiency (155 kg DMP/ha/mm).

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Withholding water at flowering and pod filling accelerated maturity.

Treatment
Withholding irrigation at flowering and pod filling stagese0
Outcome
process of maturitye0
Direction
enhancede0

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

“Withholding irrigation at flowering and pod filling stages of crop enhanced the process of maturity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 200–299 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod density was the yield component most sensitive to irrigation.

Outcome
pod density was most sensitive to irrigatione0

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

“Among the yield components pod density was most sensitive to irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 301–372 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Full irrigation yielded four times as much as rainfed crop, 8.69 versus 2.19 q/ha.

Treatment
without water stress in any part of the plant growthe0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
8.69 q/hae0
Qualifier
2.19 q/hae0
Comparator
rainfed 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

“Crop without water stress in any part of the plant growth recorded four times higher yield (8.69 q/ha) than rainfed treatment (2.19 q/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 374–511 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flowering-stage irrigation increased seed yield by 94% over rainfed crop.

Treatment
Supplemental irrigation during floweringe0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
94%e0
Qualifier
4.24 q/hae0
Comparator
rainfed crope0

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

“Supplemental irrigation during flowering and vegetative stages alone increased the seed yield by 94% (4.24 q/ha) and 75% (3.84 q/ha), respectively, over the rainfed crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 513–682 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vegetative-stage irrigation increased seed yield by 75% over rainfed crop.

Treatment
vegetative stages alonee0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
75%e0
Qualifier
3.84 q/hae0
Comparator
rainfed crope0

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

“Supplemental irrigation during flowering and vegetative stages alone increased the seed yield by 94% (4.24 q/ha) and 75% (3.84 q/ha), respectively, over the rainfed crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 513–682 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at flowering and pod filling increased seed yield 172% versus rainfed.

Treatment
flowering and pod filing stagese0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
172%e0
Comparator
rainfed 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

“Two irrigations given either at flowering and pod filing stages or vegetative and flowering stage increased seed yield by 172% and 160% in comparison to rainfed treatmentrespectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 684–866 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at vegetative and flowering stages increased seed yield 160% versus rainfed.

Treatment
vegetative and flowering stagee0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
160%e0
Comparator
rainfed 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

“Two irrigations given either at flowering and pod filing stages or vegetative and flowering stage increased seed yield by 172% and 160% in comparison to rainfed treatmentrespectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 684–866 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Three-stage irrigation produced yields comparable to full irrigation.

Treatment
Irrigations at vegetative, flowering and pod filling stagese0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
comparablee0
Comparator
full irrigation 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

“Irrigations at vegetative, flowering and pod filling stages produced comparable yields as that of full irrigation treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–991 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flowering-only irrigation attained maximum water use efficiency of 155 kg DMP/ha/mm.

Treatment
Supplemental irrigation only at flowering stagee0
Outcome
water use efficiencye0
Direction
maximume0
Value
155 kg DMP/ha/mme0

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

“Supplemental irrigation only at flowering stage recorded maximum water use efficiency (155 kg DMP/ha/mm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 993–1097 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 55–61 · show in text ↑

drought · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

46 papers: 7 positive, 39 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

42 papers more in this group

See all 46 papers →

stage · physiology: water · 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 →

irrigation · physiology: water · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 18 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

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

26 papers: 18 positive, 8 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 papers →

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

61 papers: 50 positive, 11 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

57 papers more in this group

See all 61 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.