Cowpea Crude Protein as Affected by Cropping System, Site and Nitrogen Fertilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High protein content in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) is considered as major advantage for its use in nutritional components. In this way, an experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of cropping system, site, and nitrogen fertilization on cowpea crude protein. The study comprised of three cropping systems (Maize-cowpea rotation, monocropping cowpea and intercropped cowpea), three sites (Potchefstroom, Taung, and Rustenburg, South Africa) and two rates of nitrogen fertilizers applied in kg ha-1 at each site (0 and 20 at Potchefstroom, 0 and 17 at Rustenburg, 0 and 23 at Taung). Moreover, a factorial experiment randomized in complete block design with three replications was conducted during 2011/12 and 2012/13 planting seasons. The protein content was determined from green leaves harvested before flowering, immature green pods and seeds during reproductive stage and maturity. Results showed that cropping system had significant effect on cowpea leaf protein content (P < 0.05). Intercropped cowpea significantly gave higher leaf protein (26.7% more) content than rotational cowpea. Cowpea planted at Taung had significantly higher leaf protein (30.1% more) content as compared to cowpea planted at other sites. Application of nitrogen fertilizer contributed to higher protein content of immature pods. Moreover, cowpea protein content differs among the different locations due to different soil types and climatic conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".