Abstract
Short‐season cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) production systems may be more important in the northern Mississippi River Delta than in areas further south with a longer growing season. The purpose of this research was to evaluate cotton yield response to a combination of controlled inputs under Missouri growing conditions. Main effects and interactions among irrigation, mepiquat chloride (MC) application, row spacing, and N management on cotton yield were investigated from 1987 to 1989 at Portageville, MO, on a Tiptonville silt loam (fine, silty, mixed, thermic Typic Argiudoll). From 1987 to 1989, average yield increases were 137 and 52 lb lint/acre for irrigated vs. dryland and MC vs. no MC applications, respectively, regardless of other experimental treatments. Cotton treated with MC had significantly higher (14%) petiole NO 3 − ‐N content than non‐MC treated cotton in 1987 with trends toward increased petiole NO 3 − ‐N levels in 1988 and 1989. Cotton yield response to row spacing and N management was variable and dependent on other inputs. Thirty‐inch row cotton benefitted more from MC application and increased N management than did 38‐in. cotton. In 1987, petiole NO 3 − ‐N concentrations ranged from 37% to 114% higher in 38‐ than in 30‐in. cotton, depending upon N management. In 1989, irrigated MC‐treated 30‐in. cotton, yielded 235 lb lint/acre more than the 38‐in. counterpart. The physiological pathways responsible for yield responses to increased inputs in the 30‐in. system were not identified, but self competition for light, water, nutrients, and rooting space may be involved.
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
Irrigation increased average cotton lint yield by 137 lb/acre versus dryland.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- irrigatede0
- Outcome
- yield increasese0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 137e0
- Comparator
- drylande0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“average yield increases were 137 and 52 lb lint/acre for irrigated vs. dryland and MC vs. no MC applications, respectively”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
MC increased average cotton lint yield by 52 lb/acre versus no MC.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- MCe0
- Outcome
- yield increasese0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 52 lb lint/acree0
- Comparator
- no MCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“average yield increases were 137 and 52 lb lint/acre for irrigated vs. dryland and MC vs. no MC applications, respectively”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
MC raised cotton petiole nitrate-N content by 14% in 1987.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- MCe0
- Outcome
- petiole NO 3 − ‐N contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 14%e0
- Qualifier
- in 1987e0
- Comparator
- non‐MC treated cottone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton treated with MC had significantly higher (14%) petiole NO 3 − ‐N content than non‐MC treated cotton in 1987”
Claim · model-written summary
MC showed a trend toward increased cotton petiole nitrate-N in 1988 and 1989.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- MCe0
- Outcome
- petiole NO 3 − ‐N levelse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- in 1988 and 1989e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton treated with MC had significantly higher (14%) petiole NO 3 − ‐N content than non‐MC treated cotton in 1987 with trends toward increased petiole NO 3 − ‐N levels in 1988 and 1989.”
t0“cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton yield response to row spacing varied with other inputs.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- row spacinge0
- Outcome
- yield responsee0
- Qualifier
- variable and dependent on other inputse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton yield response to row spacing and N management was variable and dependent on other inputs.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton yield response to N management varied with other inputs.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- N managemente0
- Outcome
- yield responsee0
- Qualifier
- variable and dependent on other inputse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton yield response to row spacing and N management was variable and dependent on other inputs.”
Claim · model-written summary
Thirty-inch cotton benefited more from MC than 38-inch cotton.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- MC applicatione0
- Outcome
- benefitted moree0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- Thirty‐inch row cottone0
- Comparator
- 38‐in. cottone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Thirty‐inch row cotton benefitted more from MC application and increased N management than did 38‐in. cotton.”
Claim · model-written summary
Thirty-inch cotton benefited more from increased N management than 38-inch cotton.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- increased N managemente0
- Outcome
- benefitted moree0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- Thirty‐inch row cottone0
- Comparator
- 38‐in. cottone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Thirty‐inch row cotton benefitted more from MC application and increased N management than did 38‐in. cotton.”
Claim · model-written summary
In 1987, petiole nitrate-N concentrations were 37–114% higher in 38-inch than 30-inch cotton, depending on N management.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- 38‐e0
- Outcome
- petiole NO 3 − ‐N concentrationse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 37% to 114%e0
- Qualifier
- depending upon N managemente0
- Comparator
- 30‐in. cottone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 1987, petiole NO 3 − ‐N concentrations ranged from 37% to 114% higher in 38‐ than in 30‐in. cotton, depending upon N management.”
Claim · model-written summary
In 1989, irrigated MC-treated 30-inch cotton yielded 235 lb lint/acre more than 38-inch cotton.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- irrigated MC‐treated 30‐in. cottone0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 235 lb lint/acree0
- Comparator
- 38‐in. counterparte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 1989, irrigated MC‐treated 30‐in. cotton, yielded 235 lb lint/acre more than the 38‐in. counterpart.”
The same questions in other 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
- no effect
- no effect
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
- no effect
- no effect
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →mepiquat chloride · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
chloride · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
irrigation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
303 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
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.