Paper · 2019 · Legume Research - An International Journal

Morpho-Physiological responses of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars to drought stress

Sultan Kýymaz; Ramazan Beyaz

4
claims
11
verbatim quotes
6
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Common bean (P. vulgaris L.) is the most important food legume in the diet of people and drought stress causes severe yield loss in this crop. This study was conducted to investigate morpho-physiological responses, yield and WUE of four common bean (P. vulgaris L.) cultivars (namely : “Sarýkýz”, “Sazova”, “Kýrk günlük”, and “Gina”) under different (I1.00: 100%-control of field capacity, I0.75: 75% of field capacity and I0.50: 50% of field capacity) water regimes. The investigation was conducted in a pots and experiments were carried out randomized plot design with ten replicates. The results of this investigation show that yield, yield components, LRWC, leaf area and chlorophyll contents were reduced, while WUE increase depending on the different water regimes in all cultivars. Consequently, cv. “Gina” may have the potential to be used in drought areas.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced water regimes lowered yield and yield components across all common bean cultivars.

Taxon
common beanPhaseolus vulgarist0
Treatment
different water regimese0
Outcome
yield, yield componentse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
100%-control of field capacityt1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Phaseolus vulgaris
Phaseolus vulgaris · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield, yield components, LRWC, leaf area and chlorophyll contents were reduced, while WUE increase depending on the different water regimes in all cultivars.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 631–788 · show in text ↑
t0

“common bean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–45 · show in text ↑
t1

“100%-control of field capacity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 358–388 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced water regimes lowered LRWC, leaf area and chlorophyll contents across all cultivars.

Taxon
common beanPhaseolus vulgarist0
Treatment
different water regimese0
Outcome
LRWC, leaf area and chlorophyll contentse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
100%-control of field capacityt1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Phaseolus vulgaris
Phaseolus vulgaris · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield, yield components, LRWC, leaf area and chlorophyll contents were reduced, while WUE increase depending on the different water regimes in all cultivars.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 631–788 · show in text ↑
t0

“common bean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–45 · show in text ↑
t1

“100%-control of field capacity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 358–388 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

WUE increased across cultivars depending on water regime.

Taxon
common beanPhaseolus vulgarist0
Treatment
different water regimese0
Outcome
WUEe0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
100%-control of field capacityt1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Phaseolus vulgaris
Phaseolus vulgaris · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“WUE increase depending on the different water regimes in all cultivars.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 717–788 · show in text ↑
t0

“common bean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–45 · show in text ↑
t1

“100%-control of field capacity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 358–388 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors suggest Gina may be suitable for drought areas.

Taxon
common beanPhaseolus vulgarist0
Material
“Gina”e0
Outcome
used in drought arease0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Phaseolus vulgaris
Phaseolus vulgaris · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cv. “Gina” may have the potential to be used in drought areas.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 803–865 · show in text ↑
t0

“common bean”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–45 · show in text ↑

irrigation · physiology: pigments · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

irrigation · physiology: water · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 23 positive, 7 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

irrigation · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

122 papers: 87 positive, 35 negative or no effect

86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

118 papers more in this group

See all 122 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.