Abstract
Abstract The effects of mepiquat chloride (1,1‐dimethylpiperidinium chloride) on cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) growth and yield have been widely studied but few studies have investigated cultivar response to this plant growth regulator. Since the response to a pesticide or a plant growth regulator may vary among cultivars, a knowledge of cultivar response to that chemical is an important consideration when developing recommendations for its use. A 3‐year study was conducted in eight environments to determine if 14 cultivars respond differently to mepiquat chloride. Cultivars evaluated were ‘Coker 304’, ‘Coker 310’, ‘Coker 315’, ‘Coker 420’, ‘Deltapine 41’, ‘Deltapine 55’, ‘Deltapine 70’, ‘McNair 220’, ‘McNair 235’, ‘Rex 713’, ‘SC 1’, ‘Stoneville 213’, ‘Stoneville 506’, and ‘Stoneville 825’. Mepiquat chloride at a rate of 49 g/ha increased lint yield 10 to 28% in three environments and decreased yield 5% in one environment. Earlier maturity was usually observed. Plant height was reduced 11 to 26%, and reductions in plant height were closely correlated with final height of the untreated cotton. Mepiquat chloride increased both boll weight and seed weight 3 to 10%, and slightly increased fiber length. The effect on micronaire was variable, but in most environments there was a small reduction. There was little to no effect on number of seed per boll, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformity. Lint percent was decreased 0.4 to 0.8% in most environments as a result of the increased seed weight. There were no mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactions for lint percent, fiber length, boll weight, seed weight, number of seed per boll, number of bolls produced, plant height, or maturity. Cultivar by mepiquat chloride interactions for yield, micronaire, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformity were observed in only one environment. All observed mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactions were small and, considering the infrequency of occurrence, were probably not of practical significance. This study indicated that cultivar selection should not be a consideration in deciding whether to apply mepiquat chloride.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride raised lint yield 10 to 28% in three environments.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- Mepiquat chloride at a rate of 49 g/hae0
- Outcome
- lint yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 10 to 28%e0
- Setting
- three environmentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mepiquat chloride at a rate of 49 g/ha increased lint yield 10 to 28% in three environments”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride reduced lint yield 5% in one environment.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloride at a rate of 49 g/hae0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Setting
- one environmente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mepiquat chloride at a rate of 49 g/ha increased lint yield 10 to 28% in three environments and decreased yield 5% in one environment”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride usually advanced maturity.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee1
- Outcome
- maturitye0
- Direction
- Earliere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Earlier maturity was usually observed.”
e1“Cotton Cultivar Response to Mepiquat Chloride1”
e2“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride reduced plant height by 11 to 26%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee1
- Outcome
- Plant heighte0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 11 to 26%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant height was reduced 11 to 26%”
e1“Cotton Cultivar Response to Mepiquat Chloride1”
e2“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Height reduction correlated closely with final untreated cotton height.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- reductions in plant heighte0
- Comparator
- final height of the untreated cottone0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reductions in plant height were closely correlated with final height of the untreated cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride raised boll weight by 3 to 10%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee0
- Outcome
- boll weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3 to 10%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mepiquat chloride increased both boll weight and seed weight 3 to 10%”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride raised seed weight by 3 to 10%.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee0
- Outcome
- seed weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3 to 10%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mepiquat chloride increased both boll weight and seed weight 3 to 10%”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride slightly raised fiber length.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee0
- Outcome
- fiber lengthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- slightlye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mepiquat chloride increased both boll weight and seed weight 3 to 10%, and slightly increased fiber length”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Micronaire response varied, with a small reduction in most environments.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee1
- Outcome
- micronairee0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Qualifier
- in most environmentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The effect on micronaire was variable, but in most environments there was a small reduction.”
e1“Cotton Cultivar Response to Mepiquat Chloride1”
e2“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat chloride had little to no effect on seed count, fiber strength and length uniformity.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee1
- Outcome
- number of seed per boll, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformitye0
- Direction
- little to no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was little to no effect on number of seed per boll, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformity.”
e1“Cotton Cultivar Response to Mepiquat Chloride1”
e2“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Lint percent declined 0.4 to 0.8% in most environments.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume2
- Treatment
- Mepiquat chloridee1
- Outcome
- Lint percente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 0.4 to 0.8%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lint percent was decreased 0.4 to 0.8% in most environments as a result of the increased seed weight.”
e1“Cotton Cultivar Response to Mepiquat Chloride1”
e2“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
No cultivar interaction was found for eight listed traits.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- no mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactionse0
- Direction
- noe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were no mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactions for lint percent, fiber length, boll weight, seed weight, number of seed per boll, number of bolls produced, plant height, or maturity.”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar interactions for four other traits appeared in one environment only.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- Cultivar by mepiquat chloride interactions for yield, micronaire, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformitye0
- Setting
- one environmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cultivar by mepiquat chloride interactions for yield, micronaire, fiber strength, and fiber length uniformity were observed in only one environment.”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The observed interactions were small and likely of little practical importance.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactionse0
- Qualifier
- probably not of practical significancee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All observed mepiquat chloride by cultivar interactions were small and, considering the infrequency of occurrence, were probably not of practical significance.”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar selection need not guide the decision to apply mepiquat chloride.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- cultivar selection should not be a consideration in deciding whether to apply mepiquat chloridee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cultivar selection should not be a consideration in deciding whether to apply mepiquat chloride”
e1“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
chloride · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →mepiquat chloride · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →mepiquat chloride · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →chloride · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →mepiquat chloride · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
66 papers more in this group
See all 70 papers →chloride · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
66 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 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.