Paper · 2020 · Revista Caatinga

CHEMICAL DESICCANTS FOR ANTICIPATION OF HARVEST AND PHYSIOLOGICAL QUALITY OF COWPEA SEEDS

ELIZETH REGINA RAISSE; MIQUÉIAS DE OLIVEIRA ASSIS; EDUARDO FONTES ARAUJO; et al.

7
claims
20
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

ABSTRACT Information about the effect of herbicides on cowpea seed quality is scarce. The objective of this work was to evaluate the effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque, before and after storage. Two experiments were conducted: experiment 1 was conducted under a randomized block design, with four replications; the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment; anticipation of harvest, and seed water content, germination, and vigor were evaluated. The seeds were stored for six months in controlled environment and not-controlled environment rooms and evaluated for water content, germination, and vigor in Experiment 2, which was conducted in a 7^2+1 factorial arrangement, with four replications; the first factor consisted of the seven herbicides, the second factor was the two storage environments, plus a control treatment. The results showed 3 to 9 days of anticipation of harvest relative to the control. The glufosinate -ammonium herbicide negatively affected seed germination and vigor. The glyphosate herbicide decreased seed germination and vigor after storage. The physiological quality of cowpea seeds at the post -harvest period and after six months of storage was not affected by the carfentrazone-ethyl and flumioxazin herbicides. Paraquat and diquat were the most efficient herbicides for the anticipation of harvest (nine days). Glyphosate and glufosinate -ammonium were the most harmful herbicides to seed physiological quality. The controlled environment room was the most adequate environment for seed conservation.

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 resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-harvest chemical desiccants anticipated harvest of cowpea by 3 to 9 days relative to the control.

Treatment
chemical desiccantse0
Outcome
anticipation of harveste1
Direction
anticipatione1
Value
3 to 9 dayse1
Comparator
controle1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“The results showed 3 to 9 days of anticipation of harvest relative to the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1076–1157 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The glufosinate-ammonium herbicide negatively affected cowpea seed germination and vigor.

Treatment
glufosinate -ammonium herbicidee2
Outcome
seed germination and vigore2
Direction
negatively affectede2
Comparator
control treatmente1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–605 · show in text ↑
e2

“The glufosinate -ammonium herbicide negatively affected seed germination and vigor”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1159–1241 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The glyphosate herbicide decreased cowpea seed germination and vigor after storage.

Treatment
glyphosate herbicidee2
Outcome
seed germination and vigore2
Direction
decreasede2
Qualifier
after storagee2
Comparator
control treatmente1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–605 · show in text ↑
e2

“The glyphosate herbicide decreased seed germination and vigor after storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1243–1318 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The carfentrazone-ethyl and flumioxazin herbicides did not affect cowpea seed physiological quality at post-harvest and after six months of storage.

Treatment
carfentrazone-ethyl and flumioxazin herbicidese2
Outcome
physiological quality of cowpea seedse0
Direction
not affectede2
Comparator
control treatmente1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–605 · show in text ↑
e2

“was not affected by the carfentrazone-ethyl and flumioxazin herbicides”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1422–1492 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Paraquat and diquat were the most efficient herbicides for anticipating cowpea harvest, by nine days.

Treatment
Paraquat and diquate2
Outcome
anticipation of harveste2
Direction
most efficiente2
Value
nine dayse2
Comparator
control treatmente1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–605 · show in text ↑
e2

“Paraquat and diquat were the most efficient herbicides for the anticipation of harvest (nine days)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1494–1592 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glyphosate and glufosinate-ammonium were the most harmful herbicides to cowpea seed physiological quality.

Treatment
Glyphosate and glufosinate -ammoniume2
Outcome
seed physiological qualitye2
Direction
most harmfule2
Comparator
control treatmente1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“the treatments consisted of seven herbicides (carfentrazone-ethyl, saflufenacil, glyphosate, paraquat, flumioxazin, glufosinate-ammonium, and diquat) and a control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–605 · show in text ↑
e2

“Glyphosate and glufosinate -ammonium were the most harmful herbicides to seed physiological quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1594–1693 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The controlled environment room was the most adequate storage environment for cowpea seed conservation.

Treatment
controlled environment roome2
Outcome
seed conservatione2
Direction
most adequatee2
Comparator
not-controlled environment roomse1

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 effect of using chemical desiccants at pre-harvest on the anticipation of harvest and physiological quality of cowpea seeds of the cultivar BRS-Tumucumaque”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 129–288 · show in text ↑
e1

“The seeds were stored for six months in controlled environment and not-controlled environment rooms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 695–794 · show in text ↑
e2

“The controlled environment room was the most adequate environment for seed conservation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1695–1782 · show in text ↑

paraquat · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

6 papers: 3 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. no effect

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

flumioxazin · quality: general · 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 →

glyphosate · growth · 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 →

diquat · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

glufosinate · quality: general · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

herbicide · quality: general · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

herbicide · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 8 positive, 5 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.