Paper · 2015 · International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences (IJACS)

Effect of Varying Water Applications on Evapotranspiration and Yield of Cowpea under Sprinkler Irrigation System

Oluwaseun Temitope Faloye; M. O. Alatise

15
claims
30
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata, L. walp) was subjected to varying water applications under sprinkler irrigation system. The experiment was conducted between January and April of 2013 and 2014 at Teaching and Research Farm of the Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Akure under four levels of water management. In this study, evapotranspiration and Crop coefficient (kc) of Cowpea were determined using drainage lysimeter. Meteorological data during the growing season were obtained from a meteorological station located within the site of the experiment for the determination of reference evapotranspiration (ETr). Soil samples were collected to determine the soil physical properties such as bulk density and moisture content. The highest reference evapotranspiration (ETr) value of 5.17mm/day occurred during 4WAP and lowest value 4.20mm/day occurred at crop maturity (9 WAP). The mean crop coefficient (Kc) values for emergence, vegetative, flowering/fruiting and maturity stages were 0.37, 0.74, 0.88 and 0.84 respectively. The highest ET was recorded in the treatment block that received the highest amount of irrigation water. There was significant difference in the grain yield and biomass yield among treatments at 5% level significance (p =0.023). The highest grain yield and biomass yield of 1.06 tons/ha and 6.95 tons/ha were observed with fully irrigation, while the lowest grain yield and biomass yield of 0.71 tons/ha and 3.48 tons/ha were observed in the lowest irrigation treatment as a result of moisture availability that contributed to the yield. Therefore, the grain yield and biomass yield increase progressively with water application. The findings from the research could serve as useful guide in the irrigation of cowpea in similar soil and climate.

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 15

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reference evapotranspiration was highest at 4WAP at 5.17mm/day.

Organ / stage
4WAPe0
Outcome
reference evapotranspiration (ETr)e0
Direction
higheste0
Value
5.17mm/daye0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The highest reference evapotranspiration (ETr) value of 5.17mm/day occurred during 4WAP”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 761–848 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reference evapotranspiration was lowest at maturity at 4.20mm/day.

Organ / stage
crop maturity (9 WAP)e0
Outcome
reference evapotranspiration (ETr)e0
Direction
loweste0
Value
4.20mm/daye0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The highest reference evapotranspiration (ETr) value of 5.17mm/day occurred during 4WAP and lowest value 4.20mm/day occurred at crop maturity (9 WAP).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 761–911 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean Kc at emergence was 0.37.

Organ / stage
emergencee0
Outcome
crop coefficient (Kc)e0
Value
0.37e0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The mean crop coefficient (Kc) values for emergence, vegetative, flowering/fruiting and maturity stages were 0.37, 0.74, 0.88 and 0.84 respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1060 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean Kc at vegetative stage was 0.74.

Organ / stage
vegetativee0
Outcome
crop coefficient (Kc)e0
Value
0.74e0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The mean crop coefficient (Kc) values for emergence, vegetative, flowering/fruiting and maturity stages were 0.37, 0.74, 0.88 and 0.84 respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1060 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean Kc at flowering and fruiting was 0.88.

Organ / stage
flowering/fruitinge0
Outcome
crop coefficient (Kc)e0
Value
0.88e0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The mean crop coefficient (Kc) values for emergence, vegetative, flowering/fruiting and maturity stages were 0.37, 0.74, 0.88 and 0.84 respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1060 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean Kc at maturity was 0.84.

Organ / stage
maturity stagese0
Outcome
crop coefficient (Kc)e0
Value
0.84e0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The mean crop coefficient (Kc) values for emergence, vegetative, flowering/fruiting and maturity stages were 0.37, 0.74, 0.88 and 0.84 respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1060 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ET was highest with the most irrigation water.

Treatment
highest amount of irrigation watere0
Outcome
ETe0
Direction
higheste0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The highest ET was recorded in the treatment block that received the highest amount of irrigation water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1061–1165 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield differed significantly among irrigation treatments.

Treatment
treatmentse0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Value
p =0.023e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“There was significant difference in the grain yield and biomass yield among treatments at 5% level significance (p =0.023).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1289 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Biomass yield differed significantly among irrigation treatments.

Treatment
treatmentse0
Outcome
biomass yielde0
Value
p =0.023e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“There was significant difference in the grain yield and biomass yield among treatments at 5% level significance (p =0.023).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1289 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Full irrigation yielded the highest grain yield, 1.06 tons/ha.

Treatment
fully irrigatione0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1.06 tons/hae0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The highest grain yield and biomass yield of 1.06 tons/ha and 6.95 tons/ha were observed with fully irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1290–1400 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Full irrigation yielded the highest biomass yield, 6.95 tons/ha.

Treatment
fully irrigatione0
Outcome
biomass yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
6.95 tons/hae0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“The highest grain yield and biomass yield of 1.06 tons/ha and 6.95 tons/ha were observed with fully irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1290–1400 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lowest irrigation yielded the lowest grain yield, 0.71 tons/ha.

Treatment
lowest irrigation treatmente0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
loweste0
Value
0.71 tons/hae0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“the lowest grain yield and biomass yield of 0.71 tons/ha and 3.48 tons/ha were observed in the lowest irrigation treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1408–1530 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lowest irrigation yielded the lowest biomass yield, 3.48 tons/ha.

Treatment
lowest irrigation treatmente0
Outcome
biomass yielde0
Direction
loweste0
Value
3.48 tons/hae0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“the lowest grain yield and biomass yield of 0.71 tons/ha and 3.48 tons/ha were observed in the lowest irrigation treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1408–1530 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield increased progressively with water application.

Treatment
water applicatione0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasee0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“the grain yield and biomass yield increase progressively with water application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1610–1690 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biomass yield increased progressively with water application.

Treatment
water applicatione0
Outcome
biomass yielde0
Direction
increasee0

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

t0

“Cowpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 72–78 · show in text ↑
e0

“the grain yield and biomass yield increase progressively with water application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1610–1690 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

61 papers: 50 positive, 11 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  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.