Abstract
ABSTRACT Cowpeas are of high socioeconomic importance in the North and Northeast regions of Brazil, whereby the search for alternatives that offer increased productivity with financial returns has become an important challenge. Thus, the objective of this study was to estimate and evaluate the economic indicators of cowpea production in 2015 and 2016 when applying drip irrigation to different depths. Irrigation treatments were based on crop evapotranspiration (ETc). The experiment was laid in a randomized complete blocks design with four treatments (0, 25, 50, and 100% ETc) and six replications. For economic analysis, the results were extrapolated to an area of one hectare. Productivity in 2015 was lower than that in 2016; however, in all treatments, it was always higher when plants were grown under adequate water supply. In both years, the total operating costs were higher under irrigation than under rainfed conditions. The 100% ETc treatment resulted in a greater number of cowpea bags (60 kg) produced and a higher gross revenue than the rainfed treatment by 17 bags ha-1, equivalent to 1,020 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 711.48) and 16 bags ha-1, equivalent to 960 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 867.12), in 2015 and 2016, respectively. Water deficit limited cowpea yield in both years but made cultivation economically unfeasible only in 2015.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea productivity was lower in 2015 than in 2016.
- Taxon
- Cowpea
Vigna unguiculatat0 - Outcome
- Productivitye0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- 2016e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Productivity in 2015 was lower than that in 2016”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Adequate water supply increased cowpea productivity across treatments.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- adequate water supplye0
- Outcome
- highere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- all treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in all treatments, it was always higher when plants were grown under adequate water supply”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation raised total operating costs relative to rainfed conditions in both years.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- irrigatione0
- Outcome
- total operating costse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- rainfed conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both years, the total operating costs were higher under irrigation than under rainfed conditions.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Full evapotranspiration irrigation yielded 17 more cowpea bags per hectare than rainfed cultivation in 2015.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- 100% ETc treatmente0
- Outcome
- cowpea bags (60 kg) producede0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 17 bags ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 2015e0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 100% ETc treatment resulted in a greater number of cowpea bags (60 kg) produced and a higher gross revenue than the rainfed treatment by 17 bags ha-1, equivalent to 1,020 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 711.48) and 16 bags ha-1, equivalent to 960 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 867.12), in 2015 and 2016, respectively.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Full evapotranspiration irrigation yielded 16 more cowpea bags per hectare than rainfed cultivation in 2016.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- 100% ETc treatmente0
- Outcome
- cowpea bags (60 kg) producede0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 16 bags ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 2016e0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 100% ETc treatment resulted in a greater number of cowpea bags (60 kg) produced and a higher gross revenue than the rainfed treatment by 17 bags ha-1, equivalent to 1,020 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 711.48) and 16 bags ha-1, equivalent to 960 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 867.12), in 2015 and 2016, respectively.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Full evapotranspiration irrigation increased gross revenue in 2015.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- 100% ETc treatmente0
- Outcome
- gross revenuee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- US$ 711.48e0
- Qualifier
- 2015e0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 100% ETc treatment resulted in a greater number of cowpea bags (60 kg) produced and a higher gross revenue than the rainfed treatment by 17 bags ha-1, equivalent to 1,020 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 711.48) and 16 bags ha-1, equivalent to 960 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 867.12), in 2015 and 2016, respectively.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Full evapotranspiration irrigation increased gross revenue in 2016.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- 100% ETc treatmente0
- Outcome
- gross revenuee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- US$ 867.12e0
- Qualifier
- 2016e0
- Comparator
- rainfed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 100% ETc treatment resulted in a greater number of cowpea bags (60 kg) produced and a higher gross revenue than the rainfed treatment by 17 bags ha-1, equivalent to 1,020 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 711.48) and 16 bags ha-1, equivalent to 960 kg ha-1 (gross revenue US$ 867.12), in 2015 and 2016, respectively.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Water deficit limited cowpea yield in both years.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Treatment
- Water deficite0
- Outcome
- cowpea yielde0
- Direction
- limitede0
- Comparator
- adequate water supplye1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water deficit limited cowpea yield in both years”
e1“adequate water supply”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
Claim · model-written summary
Water deficit made cowpea cultivation economically unfeasible only in 2015.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatat0
- Outcome
- cultivation economically unfeasiblee0
- Qualifier
- only in 2015e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water deficit limited cowpea yield in both years but made cultivation economically unfeasible only in 2015.”
t0“Economic indicators for cowpea cultivation under different irrigation depths”
The same questions in other papers
drought · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 papers →irrigation · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results
49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- 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.