Abstract
A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out towards developing an integrated pest management of M. vitrata on cowpea. The experiment was laid out in split-split plot design. Intra-row spacing and sowing dates were respectively allocated to the main and sub-plot while pesticides were allocated to the sub-sub-plot. The treatments were randomized and replicated three times. Data collected were subjected to the analysis of variance and means were separated using LSD at 5%. The result showed that varying intra-row spacings did not have any significant effect (P>0.05) on cowpea flower damage by M. vitrata at 10 WAS in all the years and the combine except in 2016. Close spacing was observed to record the least flower damage. Early sowing was observed to significantly (P<0.05) recorded the highest percentage flower damage in all the years and the combine (22.95, 22.78 and 22.85). Pesticide treated plots (13.06, 13.06 and 11.67) significantly (P<0.05) recorded the least percentage flower damage compared with the control plots (26.30). The effect of pesticides was statistically similar, however plots treated with Cyper diforce during recorded the least percentage flower damage. There was no significant difference on the effect of varying intra-row spacing on percentage cowpea pod damaged by M. vitrata 10 WAS. However, delay in sowing to SD3 significantly recorded least percentage pod damage (4.89, 14.03 and 2.94) than early sowing SD1 (24.47, 30.14 and 12.74) which recorded the highest. The effect of pesticides showed that plots treated with MaviMNPV significantly (P<0.05) recorded the least percentage damage (6.69) compared with the control (13.08). However, treatments effects were statistically similar. The effect of varying sowing dates showed that sowing cowpea at SD3 significantly (P<0.05) reduce dried cowpea pod damage at harvest (5.55% and 6.81%) than early sowing SD1 (12.85% and 10.61%) during 2016 and the combine respectively. It is therefore recommended that varying sowing date and use of Cyper diforce reduce cowpea damage in the study area and is hereby recommended.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Intra-row spacing has no significant effect on cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata at 10 weeks after sowing.
- Taxon
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatae0 - Treatment
- intra-row spacingse1
- Interactor
- M. vitrata
Maruca vitratae0pest - Outcome
- flower damagee1
- Direction
- did not have any significant effecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e1“varying intra-row spacings did not have any significant effect (P>0.05) on cowpea flower damage by M. vitrata at 10 WAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Close spacing records the least cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- Close spacinge2
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- flower damagee2
- Direction
- leaste2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e2“Close spacing was observed to record the least flower damage”
Claim · model-written summary
Early sowing records the highest percentage of cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata (22.95, 22.78 and 22.85).
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- Early sowinge3
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage flower damagee3
- Direction
- higheste3
- Value
- 22.95, 22.78 and 22.85e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e3“Early sowing was observed to significantly (P<0.05) recorded the highest percentage flower damage in all the years and the combine (22.95, 22.78 and 22.85)”
Claim · model-written summary
Pesticide-treated plots record the least percentage of cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata (13.06, 13.06 and 11.67) compared with control plots.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- Pesticide treated plotse4
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage flower damagee4
- Direction
- leaste4
- Value
- 13.06, 13.06 and 11.67e4
- Qualifier
- 26.30e4
- Comparator
- control plotse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e4“Pesticide treated plots (13.06, 13.06 and 11.67) significantly (P<0.05) recorded the least percentage flower damage compared with the control plots (26.30)”
Claim · model-written summary
Plots treated with Cyper diforce record the least percentage of cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- plots treated with Cyper diforcee5
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage flower damagee5
- Direction
- leaste5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e5“The effect of pesticides was statistically similar, however plots treated with Cyper diforce during recorded the least percentage flower damage”
Claim · model-written summary
The effects of the pesticides on cowpea flower damage by Maruca vitrata are statistically similar.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- pesticidese5
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage flower damagee5
- Direction
- statistically similare5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e5“The effect of pesticides was statistically similar, however plots treated with Cyper diforce during recorded the least percentage flower damage”
Claim · model-written summary
Intra-row spacing has no significant effect on percentage cowpea pod damage by Maruca vitrata at 10 weeks after sowing.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- varying intra-row spacinge6
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage cowpea pod damagede6
- Direction
- no significant differencee6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e6“There was no significant difference on the effect of varying intra-row spacing on percentage cowpea pod damaged by M. vitrata 10 WAS”
Claim · model-written summary
Delayed sowing to SD3 records the least cowpea pod damage by Maruca vitrata (4.89, 14.03 and 2.94) compared with early sowing SD1.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- delay in sowing to SD3e7
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- percentage pod damagee7
- Direction
- leaste7
- Value
- 4.89, 14.03 and 2.94e7
- Qualifier
- 24.47, 30.14 and 12.74e7
- Comparator
- early sowing SD1e7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e7“delay in sowing to SD3 significantly recorded least percentage pod damage (4.89, 14.03 and 2.94) than early sowing SD1 (24.47, 30.14 and 12.74) which recorded the highest”
Claim · model-written summary
Plots treated with MaviMNPV record the least percentage damage by Maruca vitrata (6.69) compared with the control (13.08).
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- plots treated with MaviMNPVe6
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Second interactor
- MaviMNPVe6biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- percentage damagee6
- Direction
- leaste6
- Value
- 6.69e6
- Qualifier
- 13.08e6
- Comparator
- controle6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e6“plots treated with MaviMNPV significantly (P<0.05) recorded the least percentage damage (6.69) compared with the control (13.08)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sowing cowpea at SD3 reduces dried cowpea pod damage at harvest (5.55% and 6.81%) compared with early sowing SD1 (12.85% and 10.61%).
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Treatment
- sowing cowpea at SD3e7
- Interactor
- M. vitrataMaruca vitratae0pest
- Outcome
- dried cowpea pod damage at harveste7
- Direction
- reducee7
- Value
- 5.55% and 6.81%e7
- Qualifier
- 12.85% and 10.61%e7
- Comparator
- early sowing SD1e7
- Setting
- during 2016 and the combinee7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A combination of intra-row spacings, sowing dates, and pesticides on cowpea damage and control caused by M. vitrata was carried out”
e7“sowing cowpea at SD3 significantly (P<0.05) reduce dried cowpea pod damage at harvest (5.55% and 6.81%) than early sowing SD1 (12.85% and 10.61%) during 2016 and the combine respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Varying sowing date and use of Cyper diforce are recommended to reduce cowpea damage in the study area.
- Taxon
- cowpeaVigna unguiculatae0
- Outcome
- varying sowing date and use of Cyper diforcee0
- Setting
- in the study areae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“varying sowing date and use of Cyper diforce reduce cowpea damage in the study area and is hereby recommended”
The same questions in other papers
density · Maruca vitrata · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
sowing time · Maruca vitrata · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
insecticide · Maruca vitrata · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.