Abstract
Experiments were conducted to examine the growth responses of cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L. cv. Coker 315) to CO 2 enrichment under different light regimes. Plants were exposed to 350 or 700 μl l −1 CO 2 and six light treatments differing in photosynthetic period length (8 or 16 h) and in photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) for 32 days of vegetative growth. Higher PPFD (1 100 μmol m −2 s −1 ) was provided by a combination of high intensity discharge and incandescent lamps (HID), and lower PPFD (550 μmol m −2 s −1 ) was provided by fluorescent and incandescent lamps (F) or HID and incandescent lamps with shade cloth (HID s ). Growth was generally much slower with the 8‐h photosynthetic periods, but the growth stimulation by CO 2 enrichment was larger than with 16‐h photosynthetic periods. After 28 to 32 days of treatment, the growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment was 152 and 78% for 8‐ and 16‐h photosynthetic periods, respectively, under HID; 100 and 77% in F, and 77 and 56% in HID s . The higher PPFD of HID positively influenced the CO 2 effect only at the slower growth rate in the 8‐h light period. The stimulation of leaf area expansion by CO 2 enrichment was also greater with the 8‐h photosynthetic period for all light sources. These results, and others on net assimilation rate, shoot to root dry weight ratios and specific leaf weights, suggest that the growth response to CO 2 enrichment with the longer photosynthetic period was depressed by limiting factors, perhaps nutritional, in the growth environment. The results also show that extensive variability in CO 2 response can occur under light intensities which are often used in growth chamber experiments.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton growth was slower under 8-hour than 16-hour photosynthetic periods.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- 8‐h photosynthetic periodse0
- Outcome
- Growthe0
- Direction
- slowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Growth was generally much slower with the 8‐h photosynthetic periods”
e1“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2 growth stimulation was larger under 8-hour than 16-hour periods.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- growth stimulatione0
- Direction
- largere0
- Comparator
- 16‐h photosynthetic periodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the growth stimulation by CO 2 enrichment was larger than with 16‐h photosynthetic periods”
e1“8‐h photosynthetic periods”
e2“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under HID, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 152% with an 8-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente0
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 152e0
- Qualifier
- under HIDe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment was 152 and 78% for 8‐ and 16‐h photosynthetic periods, respectively, under HID”
e1“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under HID, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 78% with a 16-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente0
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 78%e0
- Qualifier
- under HIDe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment was 152 and 78% for 8‐ and 16‐h photosynthetic periods, respectively, under HID”
e1“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under F lighting, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 100% with an 8-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente1
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 100e0
- Qualifier
- in Fe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“100 and 77% in F”
e1“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment”
e2“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under F lighting, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 77% with a 16-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente1
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 77%e0
- Qualifier
- in Fe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“100 and 77% in F”
e1“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment”
e2“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under shaded HID, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 77% with an 8-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente1
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 77e0
- Qualifier
- in HID se0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“77 and 56% in HID s”
e1“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment”
e2“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Under shaded HID, CO2 enrichment enhanced growth by 56% with a 16-hour photoperiod.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente1
- Outcome
- growth enhancemente1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 56%e0
- Qualifier
- in HID se0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“77 and 56% in HID s”
e1“growth enhancement with CO 2 enrichment”
e2“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher PPFD enhanced the CO2 effect only under 8-hour light.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- higher PPFD of HIDe0
- Outcome
- CO 2 effecte0
- Direction
- positively influencede0
- Qualifier
- only at the slower growth rate in the 8‐h light periode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The higher PPFD of HID positively influenced the CO 2 effect only at the slower growth rate in the 8‐h light period.”
e1“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
CO2-stimulated leaf area expansion was greater under 8-hour photoperiods for all light sources.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- CO 2 enrichmente0
- Outcome
- leaf area expansione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- for all light sourcese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The stimulation of leaf area expansion by CO 2 enrichment was also greater with the 8‐h photosynthetic period for all light sources.”
e1“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors inferred that limiting factors possibly depressed the CO2 growth response under longer photoperiods.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- growth response to CO 2 enrichmente0
- Qualifier
- limiting factors, perhaps nutritionale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the growth response to CO 2 enrichment with the longer photosynthetic period was depressed by limiting factors, perhaps nutritional, in the growth environment”
e1“cotton”
The same questions in other papers
co2 · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 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.