Paper · 1997 · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)

Evaluation of Different Tillage Practices for Monocultural Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) Production in Ibadan, South Western Nigeria

Ndaeyo, NU.; Aiyelari, EA.

12
claims
24
verbatim quotes
3
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-sa

Abstract

A two-season (rainy and dry) study was conducted in 1993 at the Teaching and Research Farm, University of Ibadan, Nigeria to assess the most productive tillage practice for monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production. Completely randomised block design with four replications was used and tillage treatments were : No till-Slash and Burn (NSB), No till-Herbicide applied (NH), Conventional-ploughed and harrowed (CT), and Minimum-ploughed only (MT). Results revealed that tillage practices had no significant effect on percentage emergence, leaf and branch number in both seasons. In the first season, plant height was significantly (P <0.05) influenced by tillage treatments at 2 and 4 weeks after sowing (WAS) with NH showing superiority over the other treatments. In the second season, plant height was significantly (P <0.05) higher in NSB and MT treatments at 6 and 8 WAS, respectively. Pod and grain yield (t ha-1) were not affected by tillage treatments in the first season but in the second season, NSB (1.84 t ha-1) and MT (1.53 t ha-1) showed significant superiority over other treatments. The highest cost of production was observed under NSB while CT produced the highest economie returns. Some soil properties were also influenced with NSB treatment having a higher soil bulk density at sowing and 6 WAS than the other treatments, while NH recorded a higher soil moisture content at 6 WAS than the other treatments. The study also suggests that with optimum precipitation, CT appears a better land preparation option for cowpea production.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-sa. 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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage practices had no significant effect on cowpea emergence percentage, leaf number or branch number.

Treatment
tillage practicese2
Outcome
percentage emergence, leaf and branch numbere2
Direction
no significant effecte2
Setting
Teaching and Research Farm, University of Ibadan, Nigeriae1

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e1

“Teaching and Research Farm, University of Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 64–121 · show in text ↑
e2

“tillage practices had no significant effect on percentage emergence, leaf and branch number in both seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 489–596 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No-till with herbicide (NH) gave superior cowpea plant height over the other treatments in the first season.

Treatment
NHe3
Outcome
plant heighte3
Direction
superioritye3
Qualifier
first seasone3
Comparator
the other treatmentse3

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e3

“In the first season, plant height was significantly (P <0.05) influenced by tillage treatments at 2 and 4 weeks after sowing (WAS) with NH showing superiority over the other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 598–782 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No-till slash and burn (NSB) increased cowpea plant height in the second season.

Treatment
NSBe4
Outcome
plant heighte4
Direction
highere4
Qualifier
second seasone4

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e4

“In the second season, plant height was significantly (P <0.05) higher in NSB and MT treatments at 6 and 8 WAS, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 784–907 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum ploughing (MT) increased cowpea plant height in the second season.

Treatment
MTe4
Outcome
plant heighte4
Direction
highere4
Qualifier
second seasone4

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e4

“In the second season, plant height was significantly (P <0.05) higher in NSB and MT treatments at 6 and 8 WAS, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 784–907 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pod and grain yield were not affected by tillage treatments in the first season.

Treatment
tillage treatmentse5
Outcome
Pod and grain yielde5
Direction
not affectede5
Qualifier
in the first seasone5

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e5

“Pod and grain yield (t ha-1) were not affected by tillage treatments in the first season but in the second season, NSB (1.84 t ha-1) and MT (1.53 t ha-1) showed significant superiority over other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 909–1115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No-till slash and burn (NSB) gave 1.84 t ha-1 pod and grain yield in the second season, superior to other treatments.

Treatment
NSBe5
Outcome
Pod and grain yielde5
Direction
superioritye5
Value
1.84 t ha-1e5
Qualifier
in the second seasone5
Comparator
other treatmentse5

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e5

“Pod and grain yield (t ha-1) were not affected by tillage treatments in the first season but in the second season, NSB (1.84 t ha-1) and MT (1.53 t ha-1) showed significant superiority over other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 909–1115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum ploughing (MT) gave 1.53 t ha-1 pod and grain yield in the second season, superior to other treatments.

Treatment
MTe5
Outcome
Pod and grain yielde5
Direction
superioritye5
Value
1.53 t ha-1e5
Qualifier
in the second seasone5
Comparator
other treatmentse5

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e5

“Pod and grain yield (t ha-1) were not affected by tillage treatments in the first season but in the second season, NSB (1.84 t ha-1) and MT (1.53 t ha-1) showed significant superiority over other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 909–1115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest cost of production was under NSB.

Treatment
NSBe6
Outcome
cost of productione6
Direction
higheste6

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e6

“The highest cost of production was observed under NSB while CT produced the highest economie returns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage (CT) produced the highest economic returns.

Treatment
CTe6
Outcome
economie returnse6
Direction
higheste6

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e6

“The highest cost of production was observed under NSB while CT produced the highest economie returns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NSB treatment had higher soil bulk density at sowing and 6 WAS than the other treatments.

Treatment
NSB treatmente7
Outcome
soil bulk densitye7
Direction
highere7
Qualifier
at sowing and 6 WASe7
Comparator
other treatmentse7

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e7

“Some soil properties were also influenced with NSB treatment having a higher soil bulk density at sowing and 6 WAS than the other treatments, while NH recorded a higher soil moisture content at 6 WAS than the other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1219–1444 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NH had higher soil moisture content at 6 WAS than the other treatments.

Treatment
NHe7
Outcome
soil moisture contente7
Direction
highere7
Qualifier
at 6 WASe7
Comparator
other treatmentse7

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

“monocultural cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 173–233 · show in text ↑
e7

“Some soil properties were also influenced with NSB treatment having a higher soil bulk density at sowing and 6 WAS than the other treatments, while NH recorded a higher soil moisture content at 6 WAS than the other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1219–1444 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

With optimum precipitation, conventional tillage appears a better land preparation option for cowpea.

Outcome
CT appears a better land preparation optione1
Qualifier
with optimum precipitatione1

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

e1

“with optimum precipitation, CT appears a better land preparation option for cowpea production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1475–1568 · show in text ↑

tillage · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

35 papers: 27 positive, 8 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

tillage · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree

7 papers: 7 positive, 0 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 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.