Abstract
The cotton experiments were conducted at the water-saving irrigation experiment station of Shihezi University at the suburbs of Shihezi City, Xinjiang, China, College of Water & Architectural Engineering, Shihezi University, during 2010–11 by pot, measuring pit and plot experiments in three ways to study the effect of different cultivation patterns on the yield of sub-surface drip irrigated cotton in arid regions. Water shortage has seriously hindered the sustainable development of oasis agriculture in Xinjiang and the whole national economy. Water-saving irrigation occupies a pivotal position in Xinjiang, and can effectively inhibit evaporation, which is especially suitable for application in Xinjiang where evaporation is strong. Drip irrigation, especially that under mulch or in sub-surface, is the first that can simultaneously achieve less irrigation, evaporation suppression and water saving. In this study, three different treatments or cultivation patterns were set up, that is, seedling transplantation without mulch (T), transplantation with mulch (TM) and direct sowing with mulch (SM). And biomass and yield of sub-surface drip irrigated cottons with the above cultivation patterns were compared. The results showed that transplantation without mulch was favourable for root elongation and the increase of root/shoot ratio in length of sub-surface drip irrigated cotton, with intermediate shoot height, root weight, shoot weight, root/shoot ratio in weight and total biomass between those of other two cultivation patterns. Transplantation without mulch was favourable for increasing seed cotton yield and quality of sub-surface drip irrigated cotton. Seed cotton yield increased by 5.18–11.02% and lint percentage rose by 0.19–2.78 in TM compared with that in SM, respectively. There were no pronounced differences between T and TM, and mulch removal did not have a big effect on transplanted cottons with sub-surface drip irrigation. Drip irrigation coupled with the cultivation pattern of transplantation without mulch can bring higher yield and more income for cotton farmers, thus it is suitable for the sustainable development of the cotton planting industry in Xinjiang.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Transplantation without mulch favored root elongation and root to shoot length ratio.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- transplantation without mulche0
- Outcome
- root elongation and the increase of root/shoot ratio in lengthe0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“transplantation without mulch was favourable for root elongation and the increase of root/shoot ratio in length of sub-surface drip irrigated cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Without mulch, shoot height, root and shoot weights, weight ratio and biomass were intermediate between the other patterns.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- transplantation without mulche1
- Outcome
- intermediate shoot height, root weight, shoot weight, root/shoot ratio in weight and total biomasse0
- Direction
- intermediatee0
- Comparator
- other two cultivation patternse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with intermediate shoot height, root weight, shoot weight, root/shoot ratio in weight and total biomass between those of other two cultivation patterns”
e1“transplantation without mulch was favourable for root elongation”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Transplantation without mulch favored seed cotton yield and quality.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Transplantation without mulche0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yield and qualitye0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Transplantation without mulch was favourable for increasing seed cotton yield and quality of sub-surface drip irrigated cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
TM raised seed cotton yield by 5.18–11.02% versus SM.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- TMe0
- Outcome
- Seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5.18–11.02%e0
- Comparator
- SMe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seed cotton yield increased by 5.18–11.02% and lint percentage rose by 0.19–2.78 in TM compared with that in SM”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
TM raised lint percentage by 0.19–2.78 versus SM.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- TMe0
- Outcome
- lint percentagee0
- Direction
- rosee0
- Value
- 0.19–2.78e0
- Comparator
- SMe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seed cotton yield increased by 5.18–11.02% and lint percentage rose by 0.19–2.78 in TM compared with that in SM”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
T and TM had no pronounced differences.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Te0
- Outcome
- no pronounced differencese0
- Direction
- no pronounced differencese0
- Comparator
- TMe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were no pronounced differences between T and TM”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch removal had little effect on transplanted cotton under subsurface drip irrigation.
- Taxon
- cottonsGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- mulch removale0
- Outcome
- transplanted cottonse0
- Direction
- did not have a big effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mulch removal did not have a big effect on transplanted cottons with sub-surface drip irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend subsurface drip irrigation with transplantation without mulch for higher yield and income.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- transplantation without mulche0
- Outcome
- higher yield and more incomee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drip irrigation coupled with the cultivation pattern of transplantation without mulch can bring higher yield and more income for cotton farmers”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · quality: general · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →transplanting · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →mulching · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →transplanting · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →mulching · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →transplanting · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →mulching · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →transplanting · quality: general · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.