Paper · 2026 · Journals & Books Hosting (International Knowledge Sharing Platform)

Assessing the impact of deficit irrigation and effective microorganisms (EM) for optimizing water productivity on bell pepper production in arid climatic area of northern Ghana.

M. M, Abdalla,

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Deficit irrigation strategy that are combined with other organic fertilizer amendments like effective microorganisms (EM) play a major role in vegetable production, specifically in the water scarcity area of Northern Ghana, where long-term erratic and uneven distribution of rainfall is observed annually. In recent years, few studies have been conducted on assessing the impact of deficit irrigation and effective microorganisms (EM) to maintain high vegetable yields while at the same time increasing water productivity. In this context, an experiment was designed during the two cropping seasons (May 2023 to February 2024) at the WACWISA field plot in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replicates whereby 90% ETc, 75%ETc, 50%ETc and 35%ETc of crop evapotranspiration were applied. Four EM treatments, T1 (0.8L/m2/d), T2 (0.60L/m2/d), T3 (0.4L/m2/d) and T4 (0L/m2/d) (Control) were applied to the crop at the initial, development, middle, and late stages of the crop growing seasons. CROPWAT 8.0 Software was used to estimate crop water requirements during the entire crop season. Meteorological data for 20 years (2004–2024) was obtained from the Savannah Agricultural Research Institute (SARI) in Ghana, Northern Region. Climatic, soil, and crop parameter data were used to calculate the crop water requirement, irrigation amount needed during each growth stage, and finally the irrigation scheduling of bell peppers using the Penman-Monteith method as described by FAO Paper 56. In this study, the results revealed that bell pepper yields due to the application of effective microorganisms (EM) and deficit irrigation were higher and consistent in both cropping seasons, even though there were significant differences between deficit irrigation regimes of 50% ETc and 35% ETc. The study revealed that by utilizing T1 (0.80L/m2/d) and T2 (0.60L/m2/d) EM treatments, high pepper market yields were observed at 16.6 tons/ha and 15.3 tons/ha, respectively, with reasonable increased water productivity of 28% and 15%, respectively. To put into conclusion, deficit irrigation regimes of 90% ETc and 75% ETc were comparatively recommended for increasing pepper yield production and maximizing water productivity scenarios under the arid climatic conditions of northern Ghana. Keywords: deficit irrigation, effective microorganisms (EM), CROPWAT 8.0 software, water productivity and Bell pepper DOI: 10.7176/JBAH/16-1-01 Publication date: May 31st 2026

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

EM and deficit irrigation produced higher, consistent pepper yields in both seasons.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
application of effective microorganisms (EM) and deficit irrigatione0
Outcome
bell pepper yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
both cropping seasonse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“bell pepper yields due to the application of effective microorganisms (EM) and deficit irrigation were higher and consistent in both cropping seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1545–1694 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The 50% ETc and 35% ETc irrigation regimes differed significantly.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
50% ETce0
Outcome
differencese0
Comparator
35% ETce0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“significant differences between deficit irrigation regimes of 50% ETc and 35% ETc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1719–1800 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T1 EM yielded 16.6 tons/ha of marketable pepper.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
T1 (0.80L/m2/d)e0
Outcome
pepper market yieldse0
Direction
highe0
Value
16.6 tons/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“T1 (0.80L/m2/d) and T2 (0.60L/m2/d) EM treatments, high pepper market yields were observed at 16.6 tons/ha and 15.3 tons/ha, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1839–1976 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T2 EM yielded 15.3 tons/ha of marketable pepper.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
T2 (0.60L/m2/d)e0
Outcome
pepper market yieldse0
Direction
highe0
Value
15.3 tons/hae0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“T1 (0.80L/m2/d) and T2 (0.60L/m2/d) EM treatments, high pepper market yields were observed at 16.6 tons/ha and 15.3 tons/ha, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1839–1976 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T1 EM increased water productivity by 28%.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
T1 (0.80L/m2/d)e0
Outcome
water productivitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
28%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“T1 (0.80L/m2/d) and T2 (0.60L/m2/d) EM treatments, high pepper market yields were observed at 16.6 tons/ha and 15.3 tons/ha, respectively, with reasonable increased water productivity of 28% and 15%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1839–2051 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T2 EM increased water productivity by 15%.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Treatment
T2 (0.60L/m2/d)e0
Outcome
water productivitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
15%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“T1 (0.80L/m2/d) and T2 (0.60L/m2/d) EM treatments, high pepper market yields were observed at 16.6 tons/ha and 15.3 tons/ha, respectively, with reasonable increased water productivity of 28% and 15%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1839–2051 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommended 90% ETc and 75% ETc irrigation to increase yield and maximize water productivity.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Outcome
deficit irrigation regimes of 90% ETc and 75% ETce0
Setting
northern Ghanae0

Verbatim

e0

“deficit irrigation regimes of 90% ETc and 75% ETc were comparatively recommended for increasing pepper yield production and maximizing water productivity scenarios under the arid climatic conditions of northern Ghana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2077–2293 · show in text ↑
t0

“bell pepper”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 114–125 · show in text ↑

inoculation · yield · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Results differ

37 papers: 34 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

33 papers more in this group

See all 37 papers →

irrigation · yield · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results

61 papers: 44 positive, 17 negative or no effect

43 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. 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.