Abstract
Ultra‐narrow row spacing (UNR) of 25 cm or less may be a viable alternative to wide‐row spacing for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA but yield and quality in relation to wide‐row cotton have been variable. Field experiments were conducted from 1997 through 2000 on Gigger silt loam (fine‐silty, mixed, thermic Typic Fragiudalfs) to: (i) determine the effects of plant density (128000, 256000, and 385000 plants ha −1 ) and N rate (90, 112, 134, and 157 kg ha −1 ) on irrigated and rain‐fed UNR cotton and (ii) compare performance of UNR cotton to wide‐row cotton (102‐cm row spacing) at a density of 116000 plants ha −1 and fertilized with 90 kg N ha −1 . Increase in plant density decreased lint yield of irrigated cotton and had no effect on yield of rain‐fed cotton. Increase in plant density of irrigated cotton decreased boll number plant −1 and individual boll weight but had no effect on boll number m −2 . Yield components of rain‐fed cotton were not affected by varying plant density. Increasing N rate did not affect yield or yield components of irrigated or rain‐fed cotton. Plant density, N rate, and row spacing affected fiber properties but effects were small and would not affect value or utilization. Under irrigation, UNR cotton averaged 771 kg lint ha −1 and wide‐row cotton averaged 1069 kg lint ha −1 . Without irrigation, UNR cotton averaged 377 kg lint ha −1 and wide‐row cotton averaged 586 kg lint ha −1 . Maximum yields of UNR cotton were attained from plant densities in the range of 128000 to 256000 ha −1 and a N rate of 90 kg ha −1
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing plant density decreased lint yield of irrigated cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- Increase in plant densitye1
- Outcome
- lint yield of irrigated cottone1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e1“Increase in plant density decreased lint yield of irrigated cotton and had no effect on yield of rain‐fed cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing plant density had no effect on yield of rain-fed cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Increase in plant densitye1
- Outcome
- yield of rain‐fed cottone1
- Direction
- had no effecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e1“Increase in plant density decreased lint yield of irrigated cotton and had no effect on yield of rain‐fed cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing plant density decreased boll number per plant and individual boll weight of irrigated cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Increase in plant density of irrigated cottone2
- Outcome
- boll number plant −1 and individual boll weighte2
- Direction
- decreasede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e2“Increase in plant density of irrigated cotton decreased boll number plant −1 and individual boll weight but had no effect on boll number m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing plant density had no effect on boll number per square metre of irrigated cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Increase in plant density of irrigated cottone2
- Outcome
- boll number m −2e2
- Direction
- had no effecte2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e2“Increase in plant density of irrigated cotton decreased boll number plant −1 and individual boll weight but had no effect on boll number m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield components of rain-fed cotton were not affected by varying plant density.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- varying plant densitye3
- Outcome
- Yield components of rain‐fed cottone3
- Direction
- not affectede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e3“Yield components of rain‐fed cotton were not affected by varying plant density”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing N rate did not affect yield or yield components of irrigated or rain-fed cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Increasing N ratee4
- Outcome
- yield or yield componentse4
- Direction
- did not affecte4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e4“Increasing N rate did not affect yield or yield components of irrigated or rain‐fed cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant density, N rate and row spacing affected cotton fiber properties, but the effects were small.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Plant density, N rate, and row spacinge5
- Outcome
- fiber propertiese5
- Qualifier
- effects were small and would not affect value or utilizatione5
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e5“Plant density, N rate, and row spacing affected fiber properties but effects were small and would not affect value or utilization”
Claim · model-written summary
Under irrigation, ultra-narrow row cotton yielded lower lint than wide-row cotton (771 vs 1069 kg/ha).
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- UNR cottone6
- Outcome
- linte6
- Direction
- lowerinferrede6
- Value
- 771 kg lint ha −1e6
- Qualifier
- wide‐row cotton averaged 1069 kg lint ha −1e6
- Comparator
- wide‐row cottone6
- Setting
- Under irrigatione6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e6“Under irrigation, UNR cotton averaged 771 kg lint ha −1 and wide‐row cotton averaged 1069 kg lint ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
Without irrigation, ultra-narrow row cotton yielded lower lint than wide-row cotton (377 vs 586 kg/ha).
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- UNR cottone7
- Outcome
- linte7
- Direction
- lowerinferrede7
- Value
- 377 kg lint ha −1e7
- Qualifier
- wide‐row cotton averaged 586 kg lint ha −1e7
- Comparator
- wide‐row cottone7
- Setting
- Without irrigatione7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) in the Mid‐South USA”
e7“Without irrigation, UNR cotton averaged 377 kg lint ha −1 and wide‐row cotton averaged 586 kg lint ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum lint yields of ultra-narrow row cotton were attained at 128000 to 256000 plants/ha and 90 kg N/ha.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- plant densities in the range of 128000 to 256000 ha −1e1
- Outcome
- Maximum yields of UNR cottone1
- Qualifier
- a N rate of 90 kg ha −1e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maximum yields of UNR cotton were attained from plant densities in the range of 128000 to 256000 ha −1 and a N rate of 90 kg ha −1”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 papers →density · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 130 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
167 papers more in this group
See all 171 papers →nitrogen · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 286 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
339 papers more in this group
See all 343 papers →irrigation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
94 papers in the same direction as this paper · 304 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
395 papers more in this group
See all 399 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.