Paper · 2024 · Asian Research Journal of Agriculture

Influence of Nipping and Hormonal Spray on Growth Parameters and Seed Yield in Cowpea Variety (Vigna unguiculata L.)

Nikhil Kumar; Mousmi Syed; Santosh Pandey; et al.

6
claims
13
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted to know the influence of nipping and hormonal sprays on growth and seed yield of cowpea variety at the Organic Research Farm (HRF), Karguanji, Department of Seed Science and Technology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi (U.P.) India. In the present experiment, days to 50 percent flowering and no. of leaves at 30 DAS was not influenced by the combined effect of nipping and foliar sprays but the plant height, number of branches, number of leaves at 60 DAS and at harvest and dry matter production at various stages was influenced. The plant height was relatively more at all the stages of growth in non nipped plants with all the hormonal sprays GA350 ppm (N1H3), while number of leaves were more at 60 DAS and at harvest, number of branches per plant at all stage and dry matter at harvest were more in nipping at tendril stage combined to 1000 ppm lihocin spray (N2H2).The various seed yield traits were also higher in nipping at tendril stage and sprayed with growth hormones lihocin 1000 ppm (H2N2). The present investigation has indicated a relatively more beneficial influence of both nipping and hormonal spray on number of pods per plant, pod length, number of seeds per pod, pod wt. per plant, seed yield per plant and seed yield per hectare.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined nipping and foliar sprays did not influence days to 50 percent flowering.

Treatment
nipping and foliar sprayse0
Outcome
days to 50 percent floweringe0
Direction
not influencede0

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

e0

“days to 50 percent flowering and no. of leaves at 30 DAS was not influenced by the combined effect of nipping and foliar sprays”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 327–454 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined nipping and foliar sprays did not influence leaves at 30 DAS.

Treatment
nipping and foliar sprayse0
Outcome
no. of leaves at 30 DASe0
Direction
not influencede0

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

e0

“days to 50 percent flowering and no. of leaves at 30 DAS was not influenced by the combined effect of nipping and foliar sprays”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 327–454 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined nipping and foliar sprays influenced height, branches, later leaves and dry matter production.

Treatment
nipping and foliar sprayse1
Outcome
plant height, number of branches, number of leaves at 60 DAS and at harvest and dry matter production at various stagese0

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

e0

“plant height, number of branches, number of leaves at 60 DAS and at harvest and dry matter production at various stages was influenced”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 463–597 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
e1

“days to 50 percent flowering and no. of leaves at 30 DAS was not influenced by the combined effect of nipping and foliar sprays”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 327–454 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Non-nipped plants with GA350 ppm had relatively greater height at all growth stages.

Treatment
non nipped plants with all the hormonal sprays GA350 ppme0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
relatively moree0

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

e0

“plant height was relatively more at all the stages of growth in non nipped plants with all the hormonal sprays GA350 ppm (N1H3)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–730 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nipping at tendril stage with lihocin gave more leaves at 60 DAS and harvest, branches and dry matter at harvest.

Treatment
nipping at tendril stage combined to 1000 ppm lihocin spraye0
Outcome
number of leavese0
Direction
moree0

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

e0

“number of leaves were more at 60 DAS and at harvest, number of branches per plant at all stage and dry matter at harvest were more in nipping at tendril stage combined to 1000 ppm lihocin spray”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 738–931 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nipping at tendril stage with lihocin produced higher seed yield traits.

Treatment
nipping at tendril stage and sprayed with growth hormones lihocin 1000 ppme0
Outcome
seed yield traitse0
Direction
highere0

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

e0

“various seed yield traits were also higher in nipping at tendril stage and sprayed with growth hormones lihocin 1000 ppm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 943–1063 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cowpea Variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑

application · phenology · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

application · growth · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

59 papers: 53 positive, 6 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

55 papers more in this group

See all 59 papers →

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

126 papers: 112 positive, 14 negative or no effect

111 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

122 papers more in this group

See all 126 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.