Abstract
Abstract Over the past century, the average surface temperature and recurrent heatwaves have been steadily rising, especially during the summer season, which is affecting the yield potential of most food crops. Hence, diversification in cropping systems with suitable fertilizer management is an urgent need to ensure high yield potential during the summer season. Since intercropping has emerged as an important strategy to increase food production, the present study comprises five intercropping systems in the main plot (sole cowpea, sole baby corn, cowpea + baby corn in 2:1, 3:1, and 4:1 row ratio), three levels of fertilizer viz . 100 (N 20 P 40 ), 125 (N 25 P 50 ), and 150% (N 30 P 60 ) recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) in the subplot, along with two stress-mitigating chemicals (0.5% CaCl 2 and 1% KNO 3 ) in the sub-sub plots. A split-split plot system with four replications was established to carry out the field experiment. The effect of intercropping, fertilizer levels, and stress-mitigating chemicals on crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR), plant temperature, relative water content (RWC) and chlorophyll content of cowpea and baby corn, as well as cowpea equivalent yield (CEY), was investigated during the summer seasons of 2019 and 2020. The experiment was conducted at Agriculture University, Kota (Rajasthan), India. Results showed that CGR, RGR, RWC and chlorophyll content of both crops and CEY were maximum under intercropping of cowpea and baby corn in a 2:1 row ratio compared to other intercropping systems. However, the plant temperature of both crops was significantly lower under this system. CEY, CGR, RGR, and chlorophyll content were considerably greater in the subplots with a fertilizer application of 150% RDF compared to lower levels of fertilizer (100 and 125% RDF). Our findings further show that foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5% at the flowering and pod-developing stages of cowpea dramatically boosted CEY, CGR, RGR, RWC, and chlorophyll content of both crops and lowered the plant temperature.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Crop growth rate, relative growth rate and relative water content of cowpea and baby corn were maximum under 2:1 row-ratio cowpea and baby corn intercropping compared with other intercropping systems.
Verbatim
e1“CGR, RGR, RWC and chlorophyll content of both crops and CEY were maximum under intercropping of cowpea and baby corn in a 2:1 row ratio compared to other intercropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorophyll content of both crops and cowpea equivalent yield were maximum under 2:1 row-ratio cowpea and baby corn intercropping compared with other intercropping systems.
Verbatim
e1“CGR, RGR, RWC and chlorophyll content of both crops and CEY were maximum under intercropping of cowpea and baby corn in a 2:1 row ratio compared to other intercropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant temperature of both crops was significantly lower under the 2:1 cowpea and baby corn intercropping system.
Verbatim
e1“CGR, RGR, RWC and chlorophyll content of both crops and CEY were maximum under intercropping of cowpea and baby corn in a 2:1 row ratio compared to other intercropping systems”
e2“the plant temperature of both crops was significantly lower under this system”
Claim · model-written summary
Cowpea equivalent yield, crop growth rate and relative growth rate were considerably greater with 150% RDF fertilizer than with lower fertilizer levels.
Verbatim
e1“CEY, CGR, RGR, and chlorophyll content were considerably greater in the subplots with a fertilizer application of 150% RDF compared to lower levels of fertilizer (100 and 125% RDF)”
t0“cowpea-baby corn intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Chlorophyll content was considerably greater with 150% RDF fertilizer than with lower fertilizer levels.
Verbatim
e1“CEY, CGR, RGR, and chlorophyll content were considerably greater in the subplots with a fertilizer application of 150% RDF compared to lower levels of fertilizer (100 and 125% RDF)”
t0“cowpea-baby corn intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar CaCl2 at 0.5% at flowering and pod development of cowpea boosted cowpea equivalent yield, crop growth rate and relative growth rate of both crops.
- Taxon
- both cropse1
- Organ / stage
- flowering and pod-developing stagese1
- Treatment
- foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5%e1
- Outcome
- CEY, CGR, RGRe1
- Direction
- boostede1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5% at the flowering and pod-developing stages of cowpea dramatically boosted CEY, CGR, RGR, RWC, and chlorophyll content of both crops and lowered the plant temperature”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar CaCl2 at 0.5% boosted relative water content and chlorophyll content of both crops.
- Taxon
- both cropse1
- Organ / stage
- flowering and pod-developing stagese1
- Treatment
- foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5%e1
- Outcome
- RWC, and chlorophyll contente1
- Direction
- boostede1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5% at the flowering and pod-developing stages of cowpea dramatically boosted CEY, CGR, RGR, RWC, and chlorophyll content of both crops and lowered the plant temperature”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar CaCl2 at 0.5% lowered plant temperature of both crops.
- Taxon
- both cropse1
- Organ / stage
- flowering and pod-developing stagese1
- Treatment
- foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5%e1
- Outcome
- the plant temperaturee1
- Direction
- lowerede1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“foliar application of CaCl 2 0.5% at the flowering and pod-developing stages of cowpea dramatically boosted CEY, CGR, RGR, RWC, and chlorophyll content of both crops and lowered the plant temperature”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 85 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
288 papers more in this group
See all 292 papers →Vigna unguiculata · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →Zea mays subsp. mays · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
59 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
90 papers more in this group
See all 94 papers →Vigna unguiculata · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
106 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →Zea mays subsp. mays · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
intercropping · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →intercropping · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
137 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
180 papers more in this group
See all 184 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.