Paper · 2018 · AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY

Effect of water deficit at different stages of development on the yield components of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) genotypes

DAOUDA Abdoul Karim TOUDOU; Sanoussi ATTA; Maman Maarouhi INOUSSA; et al.

7
claims
19
verbatim quotes
15
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Cowpea cultivation is widespread in West Africa where it is an important source of protein. This study is aimed at determining the effects of water deficit applied at different stages of cowpea development on yield and its components (pod number, seed number, seed yield, aerial biomass yield, harvest index and root biomass of the plant). The experiments were carried out in pots during the rainy season of 2016 under natural conditions of illumination, temperature and relative humidity. Three water regimes were applied to plants at different stages of cowpea development: total suspension of watering at flowering phase (43 days after sowing) (S1); suspension of watering at the beginning of pod formation on the 46th day after sowing (S2); and normal watering as control until harvest (S0). At the water regime level, yield components had higher values in S0 followed by S2. The lowest values were obtained at S1 level. The root to aerial biomass ratios was higher under water deficit than in the control. In conditions of water deficiency, Suvita2, IT96D-610, and ISV128 genotypes gave the highest seed yields and Tiligré the lowest yield. The harvest index showed a genotypic variation according to the water regime. Suvita2 and ISV128 gave the best harvest index in all water regimes. This study may have contributed to the selection of genotypes adapted to drought. Key words: Cowpea, harvest index, water deficit, yields, Niger.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield components were highest under normal watering, followed by deficit at pod formation.

Treatment
suspension of watering at the beginning of pod formatione2
Outcome
yield componentse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
normal wateringe1

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

“At the water regime level, yield components had higher values in S0 followed by S2.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–879 · show in text ↑
e1

“normal watering as control until harvest (S0)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–794 · show in text ↑
e2

“suspension of watering at the beginning of pod formation on the 46th day after sowing (S2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 653–743 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield components were lowest when watering stopped at flowering.

Treatment
total suspension of watering at flowering phasee2
Outcome
yield componentse1
Direction
loweste0
Comparator
normal wateringe3

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 lowest values were obtained at S1 level.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 880–924 · show in text ↑
e1

“yield components”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 823–839 · show in text ↑
e2

“total suspension of watering at flowering phase (43 days after sowing) (S1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 576–651 · show in text ↑
e3

“normal watering as control until harvest (S0)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 749–794 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root to aerial biomass ratio was higher under water deficit than control.

Treatment
water deficite0
Outcome
root to aerial biomass ratiose0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
controle0

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 root to aerial biomass ratios was higher under water deficit than in the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 925–1010 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Suvita2, IT96D-610 and ISV128 had the highest seed yields under water deficiency.

Material
Suvita2, IT96D-610, and ISV128e0
Outcome
seed yieldse0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
water deficiencye0

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

“In conditions of water deficiency, Suvita2, IT96D-610, and ISV128 genotypes gave the highest seed yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1115 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tiligré had the lowest seed yield under water deficiency.

Material
Tiligrée0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
loweste0
Qualifier
water deficiencye0

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

“In conditions of water deficiency, Suvita2, IT96D-610, and ISV128 genotypes gave the highest seed yields and Tiligré the lowest yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1145 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Harvest index varied among genotypes according to water regime.

Treatment
water regimee0
Outcome
harvest indexe0

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

“The harvest index showed a genotypic variation according to the water regime.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1146–1223 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Suvita2 and ISV128 had the best harvest index in every water regime.

Material
Suvita2 and ISV128e0
Outcome
harvest indexe0
Direction
beste0
Qualifier
all water regimese0

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

“Suvita2 and ISV128 gave the best harvest index in all water regimes.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1224–1292 · show in text ↑
t0

“cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–120 · show in text ↑

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

26 papers: 18 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

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

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 50 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

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.