Abstract
In dry land areas of the western half of Iran, chickpea due to exposure to rotation with wheat and barley play an important role in maintaining survival of agriculture in these regions. Seed priming is a simple and cheap method and is highly efficient and acceptable, especially in areas with low fertility. In this study, effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) were examined in a randomized complete block design with three replicates in 2010. Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control). The results of this experiment showed that the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant. However, there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected main branch and lateral branch number in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinume0 - Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- main branch and lateral branch numbere2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected number of pod per plant in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- number of pod per plante2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected biological yield in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- biological yielde2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected grain yield in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- grain yielde2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloome2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments significantly affected pod forming and growth length in chickpea; direction was not stated.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriming treatmentse2
- Outcome
- pod forming and growth lengthe2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e2“the effect of hydropriming treatments for main branch and lateral branch number, number of pod per plant, biological yield, grain yield, time from planting to emergence, emergence to flowering, flowering to bloom and pod forming and growth length was significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments did not differ significantly for plant height in chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriminge0
- Outcome
- plant heighte3
- Direction
- no significant differencee3
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e3“there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments did not differ significantly for number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight in chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriminge0
- Outcome
- number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weighte3
- Direction
- no significant differencee3
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e3“there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments did not differ significantly for harvesting index in chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriminge0
- Outcome
- harvesting indexe3
- Direction
- no significant differencee3
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e3“there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments did not differ significantly for pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity in chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriminge0
- Outcome
- pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturitye3
- Direction
- no significant differencee3
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e3“there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.”
Claim · model-written summary
Hydropriming treatments did not differ significantly for percentage of seed protein in chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- hydropriminge0
- Outcome
- percentage of seed proteine3
- Direction
- no significant differencee3
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effects of different times of hydropriming on yield, yield components, phenological characteristics and percentage of protein of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”
e1“Seeds of chickpea were exposed at six different hydropriming times (2 h, 4 h, 6 h, 8 h, 10 h and control).”
e3“there was no significant difference between treatments in terms of plant height, number of seed per pod, number of empty pod, seed thousand weight, harvesting index, pod forming to seed pods and blooming to maturity, and percentage of seed protein.”
The same questions in other papers
seed treatment · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 76 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 papers →seed treatment · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 82 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
86 papers more in this group
See all 90 papers →seed treatment · phenology · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
seed treatment · quality: protein · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- 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.