Paper · 2011 · Agronomy Journal

Drought Effects on Gas Exchange, Chlorophyll, and Plant Growth of 1‐Methylcyclopropene Treated Cotton

Vladimir A. da Costa; J. Tom Cothren

11
claims
31
verbatim quotes
28
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Drought impacts cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.), affecting its physiological, morphological, and agronomic parameters. Ethylene, a growth hormone, can induce fruit abscission. Ethylene inhibitors, such as 1‐methylcyclopropene (1‐MCP), may minimize the loss of reproductive structures. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of 1‐MCP on gas exchange, plant growth/development, and yield components of cotton under drought during the reproductive phase. A 2‐yr greenhouse study was conducted as a 2 × 2 factorial design in a split‐block arrangement with five replications. Treatments were two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 ) during a 14‐h overnight incubation that were then subjected to two water regimes (control and drought). Drought started to impact gas exchange at a moderate water stress, 5 DAT (days after 1‐MCP treatment) (–1.4 MPa). The 1‐MCP increased water use efficiency (WUE) in well‐watered plants at 1 DAT. Many of the yield components, plant mapping, and biomass parameters investigated were adversely affected by drought. However, drought increased specific leaf weight (SLW), chlorophyll (Chl) content, and harvest index. The 1‐MCP improved reproductive node numbers mainly during drought, but did not lead to a better harvest index, since 1‐MCP caused high fruit abscission. In conclusion, 1‐MCP did not ameliorate the detrimental effects of drought on gas exchange when water stress started to impact cotton plants. Additionally, 1‐MCP had little or no positive effect on plant mapping, dry matter partitioning, and Chl content.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought affected cotton gas exchange by moderate stress at 5 DAT.

Treatment
Droughte0
Outcome
gas exchangee0
Value
–1.4 MPae0
Qualifier
5 DATe0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Drought started to impact gas exchange at a moderate water stress, 5 DAT (days after 1‐MCP treatment) (–1.4 MPa).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 748–861 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP increased water use efficiency in well-watered cotton at 1 DAT.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
water use efficiency (WUE)e0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
well‐watered plants at 1 DATe0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The 1‐MCP increased water use efficiency (WUE) in well‐watered plants at 1 DAT.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 862–941 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought adversely affected cotton yield components, plant mapping and biomass traits.

Treatment
droughte0
Outcome
yield components, plant mapping, and biomass parameterse0
Direction
adversely affectede0
Comparator
controle1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Many of the yield components, plant mapping, and biomass parameters investigated were adversely affected by drought.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–1058 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“water regimes (control and drought)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–746 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought increased cotton specific leaf weight and chlorophyll content.

Treatment
droughte0
Outcome
specific leaf weight (SLW), chlorophyll (Chl) contente0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
controle1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“drought increased specific leaf weight (SLW), chlorophyll (Chl) content, and harvest index.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1159 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“water regimes (control and drought)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–746 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought increased cotton harvest index.

Treatment
droughte0
Outcome
harvest indexe0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
controle1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“drought increased specific leaf weight (SLW), chlorophyll (Chl) content, and harvest index.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1159 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“water regimes (control and drought)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 711–746 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP improved cotton reproductive node numbers mainly during drought.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
reproductive node numberse0
Direction
improvede0
Qualifier
mainly during droughte0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The 1‐MCP improved reproductive node numbers mainly during drought”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1160–1226 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP did not improve cotton harvest index.

Treatment
1‐MCPe1
Outcome
harvest indexe0
Direction
did not lead to a bettere0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“did not lead to a better harvest index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1232–1270 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP caused high cotton fruit abscission.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
fruit abscissione0
Direction
highe0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“1‐MCP caused high fruit abscission.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1313 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP did not ameliorate drought damage to cotton gas exchange.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
gas exchangee0
Direction
did not amelioratee0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“1‐MCP did not ameliorate the detrimental effects of drought on gas exchange when water stress started to impact cotton plants.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1329–1455 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP had little or no positive effect on cotton plant mapping and dry matter partitioning.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
plant mapping, dry matter partitioninge0
Direction
little or no positive effecte0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“1‐MCP had little or no positive effect on plant mapping, dry matter partitioning, and Chl content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1470–1568 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP had little or no positive effect on cotton chlorophyll content.

Treatment
1‐MCPe0
Outcome
Chl contente0
Direction
little or no positive effecte0
Comparator
0e1

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“1‐MCP had little or no positive effect on plant mapping, dry matter partitioning, and Chl content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1470–1568 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 95–101 · show in text ↑
e1

“two 1‐MCP rates (0 and 2.4 g a.i. L −1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–643 · show in text ↑

1-methylcyclopropene · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

6 papers: 3 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

1-methylcyclopropene · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

13 papers: 11 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

1-methylcyclopropene · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

1-methylcyclopropene · physiology: gas exchange · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
See all 3 papers →

1-methylcyclopropene · physiology: water · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

drought · physiology: gas exchange · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 3 positive, 14 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

drought · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 19 positive, 63 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 63 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. negative

78 papers more in this group

See all 82 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.