Abstract
SUMMARY The effects of three irrigation regimes on growth, yield and quality of cotton were investigated for two seasons in relation to earliness, quality and water-use efficiency, expressed as m. of water/kg. cotton produced. Light irrigations of cotton, at 75 mm. per irrigation every ten days, were economically better than the traditionally-accepted practice of irrigating every 14 days, and markedly better than prolonging the irrigation cycle to 20 days, mainly due to increased market value of the crop. The results also showed that irrigation intervals of 20 days, besides depressing yield, had a deleterious effect on fibre strength, though the different water regimes did not seem to affect other quality tests.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Ten day light irrigation was economically better than 14 day irrigation and markedly better than a 20 day cycle.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- 75 mm. per irrigation every ten dayse0
- Outcome
- economically bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- irrigating every 14 dayse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Light irrigations of cotton, at 75 mm. per irrigation every ten days, were economically better than the traditionally-accepted practice of irrigating every 14 days, and markedly better than prolonging the irrigation cycle to 20 days”
Claim · model-written summary
Twenty day irrigation intervals depressed yield.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation intervals of 20 dayse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- depressinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation intervals of 20 days, besides depressing yield”
t0“Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton under Three Water Regimes in the Sudan”
Claim · model-written summary
Twenty day irrigation intervals harmed fibre strength.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation intervals of 20 dayse0
- Outcome
- fibre strengthe0
- Direction
- deleteriouse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“irrigation intervals of 20 days, besides depressing yield, had a deleterious effect on fibre strength”
t0“Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton under Three Water Regimes in the Sudan”
Claim · model-written summary
Other cotton quality tests appeared unaffected by water regime.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- different water regimese0
- Outcome
- other quality testse0
- Direction
- did not seem to affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the different water regimes did not seem to affect other quality tests”
t0“Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton under Three Water Regimes in the Sudan”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →irrigation · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
60 papers in the same direction as this paper · 73 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
130 papers more in this group
See all 134 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.