




































In ternationa l
Scholars
Journa ls

 

African Journal of Agricultural Marketing ISSN 2375-1061 Vol. 8 (9), pp. 001-004, September, 2020. Available online 
at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals 

 

Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. 
 

 

Full Length Research Paper 

 

The effects of some cryptogamic extracts on the 

primary productivity of Vigna unguiculata L. Walp 

 
P. O. Fatoba* and O. Rebecca Akolo 

 
Department of Plant Biology, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. 

 
Accepted 13 May, 2020 

 
The effect of hot and cold aqueous extracts of Barbula lambarenensis, Dryopteris flix-max; Nephrolepis 
davalloides, Phymatodes scolopenta, Platycerium angolense and Azadrachta indica and Karate 2.5EC 
(chemical) on the primary productivity of cowpea were investigated. The extracts of the plant materials 
and the chemical were appropriately used to irrigate the cowpea twice a week during flowering. The 
number of pods per plant, length of pods, number of seeds per pod, number of seeds per plant, filling 
potentials and the weight of seeds per plant were determined for each of the 14 regimes. It was found 
that all the treatments other than cold extracts of B. lambarenensis, extracts of Dryopteris and 
Nephrolepis showed better performance than the untreated in the measured variables. Cowpea treated 
with hot aqueous B. lambarenensis extracts, hot and cold extracts of P. scolopenta, P. angolense and 
A. indica compared favourably and even better than the one treated with Karate 2.5EC (Lambda – 
cyhalothrin), a universally used chemical. This shows that these plants can serve as good materials or 
alternatives to Karate and can therefore be integrated into use for the production of cowpea. 

 
Key words: Productivity, cryptogamic, Barbula lambarenensis Nephrolepis davalloides, Vigna unguiculata, 

Dryopteris flix-max. 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

 
Primary productivity is the rate at which energy is bound 
or organic materials created by photosynthesis per unit of 
the earth`s surface per unit time (Whittaker, 1975). The 
essence of cultivation is to have some yields/harvest and 
when harvested, is to satisfy ones food requirement 
and/or have some money or be economically empowered 
if sold. The primary productivity of a particular crop 
depends on soil fertility, soil type, climate, good farming 
management, adequate weeding, absence of pests and 
other plant pathogens. Adequate weeding is required as 
the weeds compete with crop for light (Singh and Rachie, 
1985), nutrients (Enyi, 1973) and water (Moody, 1973). 
All these materials are essential raw materials for 
photosynthesis to take place.  

Most of the foods that man consumes in Nigeria is 

carbohydrate and less of protein thus, resulting to mal-

nutrition and kwashiorkor (protein deficiency) in children.  
 
 
 
*Corresponding author. E-mail: pofatoba57@yahoo.com. 

 
 
 
 
 
The cheapest source of protein is cowpea and other 
legumes. Cowpea contributes 24% crude protein 
(Bressani, 1985) or 24.8% crude protein (Davis et al., 
1991), unfortunately many people care less about its 
consumption as they cannot afford it or due to lack of 
interest. Cowpea, Vigna unguiculata is one of the most 
ancient human food source and has probably been used 
as a crop plant since Neolithic time (Summerfield et al., 
1985). Cowpea was reported to have originated in Africa, 
Asia and South America (Johnson, 1970; NgN and 
Marechal, 1985; Summerfield et al., 1985). Cowpea is 
chiefly used as a grain crop for many feeders or as 
vegetable. Cowpea seed is valued as a nutritious 
supplement to cereals and an extender of nutrient.  

The productivity of this crop is usually challenged by a 
wide range of pests and pathogens that attack the crop at 
all stages of its growth (Davis et al., 1991; Drees and 
Jackman, 1999). These include bacteria, viruses, fungi 
and insects. Many insects have been indicted in reducing 
the yields of cowpea such as cowpea curculio, Mexican 
bean beetles, aphids, bean leaf beetles, green stink bugs 

file:///C:\Users\user\Documents\REPUBLICATION\AGRICULTURAL%20SCIENCES\AppData\Local\Temp\www.internationalscholarsjournals.org


 
 
 

 

and lesser cornstalk borer (Davis et al., 1991; TJAI, 
2004). Due to the great importance of cowpea and its 
usages, its productivity needs to be well managed so as 
to optimize its production. In order to do this, all the pests 
and the pathogens must be checkmated, thus, removing 
or reducing their limiting effects on the productivity of 
cowpea.  

Generally, plants are reservoirs of secondary metabo-
lites, the active principles (Belandrin et al., 1985; Fatoba 
et al., 2003; Jacobson, 1989) are the raw materials for 
medicine. Moreover, the natural products of some plants 
offer a great potential for the development of some new 
pesticides and fungicides. There is an immense docu-
mentation on the use of neem products as pesticides and 
fungicides (TJAI, 2004) . Antimicrobial potentials of some 
cryptogams have also been reported. In spite of this, 
there seems to be a rather limited documentation in 
Africa on how it should be used in practical crop protec-
tion with regards to methods of application, dosage and 
target pest. These potentials could be harnessed in 
boosting food production.  

This study was therefore designed to investigate the 

effects of some aqueous cryptogamic extracts on the 
primary productivity of Vigna unguiculata. 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 
 
The effects of some plants` extracts were investigated on the pri-
mary productivity of cowpea. Seeds of V. unguiculata (L.) Walp (Ife 
brown variety) were purchased from the Kwara State Ministry of 
Agriculture, Ilorin, Nigeria. Four pteridophytic plants: Dryopteris flix-
max (L.) Schott. (leaves); Nephrolepis davalloides (Sw) Kunze 
(leaves); Phymatodes scolopenta (whole plant) and Platycerium 
angolense Welw., Bak. (shoots) were collected from their natural 
populations in Adeyemi College of Education Campus, Ondo, 
Nigeria (07°C 05´N, 04°55´E ) and Barbula lambarenensis C. Mull. 
(Moss) (whole plant) and twigs of Azadrachta indica A. Juss (Angio-
sperm) were also collected from the University of Ilorin permanent 
site, Ilorin, Kwara State ( 08°30´N 08´E) and Karate, an insecticide 
commonly used in Kwara state for cowpea production was bought 
in the Agro-chemical store in Ilorin, Kwara state.  

The cowpea seeds were subjected to viability test, using 
floatation method. The viable seeds used for planting Twenty eight 
different ridges were made, two per treatment, with each of them 
accommodating twenty stands of V. unguiculata planted at 30cm 
apart with 1 m space in between ridges to exclude interference. A 
Complete Randomnized Block Design (CRBD) was used for the 
experiment. The experiment was replicated twice. Planting was 

done on August 13
th

, 2005 and weeding was carried out twice 
within the first five weeks of planting.  

8 g of each of the air-dried plant materials was squeezed and cut 
into pieces into 1 L of distilled water (cold extracts) and boiled (hot 
extract). Each extract was decanted and used to irrigate the 
cowpea appropriately twice a week during flowering. Two different 
controls: Untreated and the other one was irrigated with karate.  

The treated and untreated plants were monitored and the pro-
ductivity variables were measured as follows: The numbers of pods 
per plant were counted for ten stands and the mean value 
calculated. The mean length of pod was calculated from the 
measurements of twenty matured pods with metre rule, that is, two 
matured pods from each stand. The number of seeds per pod was 
taken by counting the seeds in 2 pods each from the ten randomly 
selected stands per treatment and the mean values calculated. The 

  
  

 
 

 
filling potential of the cowpea was calculated with the formula: 

 
Length of pod (cm) 

 
Filling potential =   

Number of seeds in the pod 
 
The mean number of seeds per plant was calculated as the product 
of the mean number of seeds per pod and mean number of pods 
per plant. Three stands per treatment were randomly selected and 
the weight of the seeds of each plant taken separately. The mean 
value was thereafter calculated.  

The data generated from the study were compared with the 

controls using Paired Student’s t- test. These were further subjected 
to Analysis of Variance to show whether there were significant 
differences among the treatments. 

 

OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS 

 

Table 1 shows the effects of the different treatments on 
the measured variables of the pods of V. unguiculata. 
Table 1 further shows that all the selected plants are 
assumed to have insecticidal and fungicidal properties 
except the cold extract of B. lambarenesis and the two 
extracts of D. flix-max. This is because of the exclusion of 
pests from the treated stands resulting into better yields. 
Their effects are better appreciated when compared with 
the 2 controls as the entire twelve treatments showed 
positive effects (Tables 1 and 2) . The highest number of 
pods per plant was recorded in the regime treated with 
hot extract of A. indica (9.3) followed by its cold extract 
(Table 1).  

Table 1 further shows that the pteridophytic extracts - 
treated plants produced higher numbers of pods though 
less than those of Neem. The hot extracts of B. 
lambarenensis, P. s colopenta and the two extracts of P. 
angolense and A. indica and Karate, facilitate the 
production of higher number of pods than the untreated 
(Table 1) . Their values are significantly higher than 
untreated at 0.05% level of probability. Furthermore, the 
plant extracts were better off than the chemical (karate) 
(Tables 1 and 2)  

The length of pods of the different regimes showed that 
the cryptogamic extracts (moss and pteridophytes) had 
longer pods than those of neem and the chemical (Table 
1). Table 2 shows the effects of the different extracts on 
the production of seeds in V. unguiculata. Plants irrigated 
with cryptogamic extracts had greater number of seeds 
per pod than neem -treated and the controls. However, 
there were no significant differences in their pods lengths. 
The number of seeds per pods in the treated cowpea was 
better and significantly higher than untreated (Table 2). 
This study showed that plant extracts are better than 
karate in boosting the primary productivity of cowpea. 
This statement is further supported by the number of 
seeds per plant (Table 2).  

The highest number of seeds per plant was recorded in 

regime treated with cold extract of Neem (c 82) followed 

by cold extract of P. angolense (75), then the hot extract 



 
 
 

 
Table 1. Effects of some plant extracts on the production of pods in V. unguiculata.  

 
 

Extract Mean number of pod/plant ± SD 
Mean length of pod/plant ±  

 

 SD of pod/plant ± SD  
 

    
 

 Moss    
 

 B. lambareensis (hot) 
b
5.3 ± 1.5* 

a
15.7 ± 6.8  

 

 B. lambareensis (cold) 
e
1.0 ± 0.0 

c
4.8 ± 0.0  

 

 Pteridophytes 
e
1.0 ± 0.0 

b
8.0 ± 0.0 

 
 

 D. flix-max (hot)  
 

 D. flix-max (cold) 
e
1.0 ± 0.0 

b
7.9 ± 0.0  

 

 N. davalloides (hot) 
e
1.6 ± 0.8 

a
12.7 ± 0.0  

 

 N. davalloides (cold) 
d
2.6 ± 1.5 

a
14.0 ± 0.0  

 

 P. scolopenta (hot) 
c
4.0 ± 2.3* 

a
16.5 ± 1.9  

 

 P. scolopenta (cold) 
e
1.6 ± 1.1 

a
14.9 ± 4.0  

 

 P. angolense (hot) 
bc

5.0 ± 3.3* 
a
15.2 ± 0.3  

 

 P. angolense (cold) 
b
6.5 ± 3.8* 

a
14.7 ± 1.0  

 

 Angiosperm    
 

 A. indica (hot) 
a
9.3 ± 4.7* 

a
14.2 ± 2.5  

 

 A. indica (cold) 
a
8.5 ± 4.7* 

a
13.4 ± 4.2  

 

 Controls    
 

 Karate (chemical) 
c
3.8 ± 1.8* 

a
13.3 ± 2.4  

 

 No treatment 
d
2.8 ± 1.3 

a
13.5 ± 2.4  

 

 N 20 20  
 

 
Values with asterisks are significantly higher than no treatment. Values with same alphabet in the same 

column are the same statistically. 
 
 

 
Table 2. Effects of some plant extracts on the production of seeds in V. unguiculata.  

 
 

Extract 
Mean number of 

Filling potential 
Mean number of Mean weight of 

 

 
seeds/pod ± SD seed/plant seeds/plant ± SD  

   
 

        

 Moss 
c
7.6 ± 0.5* 

 
c
40.28 

a
16.5 ± 1.0* 

 

 B. lambareensis (hot) 2.0 
 

 B. lambareensis (cold) 0.0 ± 0.0 0 0 
e
2.1 ± 1.3 

 

 Pteridophytes     
e
2.0 ± 1.1 

 

 D. flix-max (hot) 0.0 ± 0.0 0 0 
 

 D. flex-max (cold) 0.0 ± 0.0 0 0 
e
1.6 ± 0.8 

 

 N. davalloides (hot) 
c
6.0 ± 0.0* 2.11 

e
9.6 

bc
11.5 ± 0..0* 

 

 N. davalloides (cold) b8.5 ± 0.7* 1.64 
d
22 

a
16.5 ± 1..0* 

 

 P. scolopenta (hot) 
a
11.5 ± 0.7* 1.43 b46 

b
13.3 ± 2..0* 

 

 P. scolopenta (cold) 
a
9.5 ± 2.6* 1.56 

e
15.2 

ab
14.7 ± 1.0* 

 

 P. angolense (hot) 
a
10.3 ± 1.5* 1.47 

b
51.5 

b
12.7 ± 0.9* 

 

 P. angolense (cold) 
a
11.5 ± 3.6* 1.27 

a
74.75 

c
10.3 ± 1.5* 

 

 Angiosperm 
b
7.8 

  
a
72.54 

a
17.1 ± 2.1* 

 

 A. indica (hot) ± 4.3* 1.82 
 

 A. indica (cold) 
a
9.6 ± 3.2* 1.39 

a
81.6 

a
15.2 ± 1.7* 

 



 
       

 Table 2. Cont’d.      
       

 Controls      

 Karate (chemical) b6.3 ± 3.3* 2.11 d23.94 ab14.3 ± 1.1*  

 No treatment d4.9 ± 0.7 1.82 e13.92 d.5 ± 0.6  

 N 20 20 20 20  
 

Values with asterisks are significantly higher than no treatment. Values with same alphabet in the same column are statistically same. 
 

 

of neem (73), hot extract of P. angolense (52), hot extract 
of P. scolopenta (46) and hot extract of B. lambarenensis 
(46), all these were significantly higher than the cowpea 
treated with karate and the untreated (Table 2). This 
confirmed the relevance of these plants extracts in 
boosting the production of cowpea. The weight of seeds 
produced per plant treated was significantly higher than 
the untreated at 0.05% even most of those treated with 
plant extracts were better than those treated with karate 
(Table 2). 
 

 

DISCUSSION 

 

The uses of bryophytes and pteridophytes in Medicare 
have since been identified, while their medicinal poten-
tials have been documented by Fatoba et al. (2003) and 
Wilson and Loomis (1987). Natural products from some 
plants offer a great potential for the development of some 
new pesticides and fungicides .This is based on the 
noticeable resistance of some plants to fungi or some 
killing or repelling insects. The use of A. indica, neem has 
been on increase since the discovery of its fungicidal and 
insecticidal potential. Busungo and Mushobozy (1999) 
reported that the leaf powder of neem mixed with the 
beans at 5% concentration was effective against Mexican 
bean weevils. The water extracts of fresh leaves of neem 
gave a good control of the stem borers in maize, 
Chlopertellus, when applied into the plant whorls in 
Mozambique (Segeren, 1993). Generally, neem has been 
found to exhibit antifecdant, insect repellent and insect 
sterilization properties. Furthermore, extracts of neem as 
low as 1 ppm will totally repel certain insects (Jacobson, 
1989; Segeren, 1993). This extract interferes with 
ecdysome, the insect molting hormone and prevents 
larval and pupae from completing the molting process.  

Since the extracts of some of the selected cryptogams 
specifically B. lambarenensis, P. scolopenta and P. 
angolense gave comparative effects in respect of the 
number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod and 
subsequently per plant, length of pods and weight of seed 
per plants with A. indica extracts. One could infer that 
these plants are presumably fungicidal and insect-cidal 
like neem. This is further supported by their better 
performances in the primary productivity parameters than 
the generally acclaimed chemical, karate. Therefore, 
extracts of B. lambarenensis, P. scolopenta and P. 

 
 

 

angolense can be recommended for use in boosting the 

production of cowpea. These plants` extracts are deemed 

to be better than the chemical as they are natural, more 

effective, non-toxic, environmental friendly free and non 
polluting unlike the chemical karate. 
 

 
REFERENCES 
 
Belandrin MF, Klock JA, Wurtele ES, Bollinger WH (1985). Natural plant 

chemicals Sources of industrial and medicinal materials. Science, 
228: 1154-60. 

Bressani IR (1985). Nutritive value of cowpea. In Cowpea Research:  
Production and Utilization. John Wiley and Sons; London, UK.  

Busungo DG, Mushobozy DMK (1999). Using natural pesticides: current 
and future perspectives. A report for the plant protection improvement 
programmes in Botswana, Zambia and Tanzania. 

Davis DV, Oelke EA, Oplinger EJ, Doll JD, Hanson CV, Putnam DH 
(1991). Cowpea Alternative Field Crops Manual. University of 
Minnesota, pp. 1-10. 

Drees BM, Jackman J (1999). Field guide to Texas insects. Gulf 
Publishing Company, Houston, Texas.  

Enyi BA (1973). Effects of intercropping maize or sorghum with cowpea, 
pea or beans. Experimental Agric., 9: 83-90.  

Fatoba PO, Omojasola P, Awe S, Ahmed FG (2003). Phytochemical 
screening of some selected Tropical Africa mosses. NISEB J., 3(4): 
49-52. 

Jacobson M (1989). Focus on phytochemical pesticides. The neem tree, 
CRC Press, Boca Raton FL., 1: 178. 

Johnson DT (1970). The cowpea in the area of Rhodesia. Rhodesia 
Agric. J., 1(6): 61-64. 

Moody K (1973). Weed control in cowpea. Proceedings of the 3
rd

 
Nigerian Weed Science Group meeting of Nigerian Savanna Institute 
of Agricultural Research, p. 1322.  

Ng NQ, Marechal R (1985). Cowpea taxonomy, origin and germplasm. 
In Cowpea Research, Production and Utilization. Singh and Rachie 
(Eds) John Wiley and Sons, New York. pp. 11-21. 

Segeren P (1993). Pesticidas naturais: uma alternativa para o sector 
familiar? Extra –Revista para o deslvolvimento e a extensao rural, 
Centro do Farmacao Agraria e de Desenvolvimento Rural, Maputo 
Mocambique. 12: 34-38.  

Singh SR, Rachie RO (1985). Cowpea Research; Production and 
Utilization. John Wiley and Sons, London U.K. p. 357.  

Summerfield RJ, Fate JS, Roberts EH, Wien HC (1985). Physiology of 
Cowpea. In Cowpea Research, Production and Utilization Singh and 
Rachie Eds John Wiley and Sons, New York. pp. 66 -101. 

Thomas Jefferson Agricultural Institute (TJAI) (2004). Cowpea; A 
versatile legume for hot and dry condition. In Growing cowpea 
production tips, economic and more. Columbia, home / Crops 
Publication, p. 1-7.  

Whittaker RH (1975). Communities and Ecosystem, Macmillan Press, 
London. pp. 192- 201. 

Wilson M, Loomis J (1987). Evolution of land plants. Academic Press, 

London. p. 10. 


