Abstract
New transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) technologies Bollgard II/Roundup Ready Flex (BGII/RRF) provide additional mechanisms for the cotton crop to retain early initiated fruiting structures positioned in the lower canopy. It may be possible, therefore, for early fruit retention to become too high with these new technologies resulting in early cutout and reduced yield. The objective of this investigation was to determine if glyphosate-induced differences in early season retention occur between BGII/RRF and the older Bollgard/Roundup Ready (BG/RR) technologies and if so, to test if these differences in retention impact crop maturity, yield, or quality under irrigated and nonirrigated conditions. A study was conducted in 2004 and 2005 at two locations in southwestern Georgia to compare the two technologies under dryland vs. irrigation with or without flower removal. The BG/RR matured later than BGII/RRF when glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stages. The BG/RR compensated for fruit loss by producing heavier remaining bolls. The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications and produced a higher percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR. The BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes while BG/RR produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes. Flower removal did not negatively affect BGII/RRF or BG/RR yields. Few differences in fiber quality were observed. The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR but also cutout earlier. Yield differences between the two technologies may be due to agronomic performance of the variety backgrounds used.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR matured later than BGII/RRF following late glyphosate application.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Material
- BG/RRe0
- Treatment
- glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stagese0
- Outcome
- maturede0
- Direction
- latere0
- Comparator
- BGII/RRFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BG/RR matured later than BGII/RRF when glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stages.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR compensated for fruit loss with heavier remaining bolls.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BG/RRe0
- Outcome
- remaining bollse0
- Direction
- heaviere0
- Qualifier
- fruit losse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BG/RR compensated for fruit loss by producing heavier remaining bolls.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Late glyphosate application did not affect BGII/RRF maturity.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Treatment
- late glyphosate applicationse0
- Outcome
- maturitye0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF had a higher percentage of plants with a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BGII/RRFe2
- Outcome
- percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- BG/RRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“produced a higher percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e2“The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications and produced a higher percentage”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF had increased boll number at the first sympodial position on lower nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Organ / stage
- first sympodial position at lower main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- boll numbere0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF had increased boll weight at the first sympodial position on lower nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Organ / stage
- first sympodial position at lower main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes”
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR produced more bolls on upper nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BG/RRe0
- Organ / stage
- upper main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- bollse0
- Direction
- moree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BG/RR produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR produced heavier bolls on upper nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BG/RRe0
- Organ / stage
- upper main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- bollse0
- Direction
- heaviere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BG/RR produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Flower removal did not negatively affect yields of either technology.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BGII/RRF or BG/RRe0
- Treatment
- Flower removale0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- did not negatively affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flower removal did not negatively affect BGII/RRF or BG/RR yields.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Few differences in fiber quality were observed.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Outcome
- fiber qualitye0
- Direction
- Few differencese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Few differences in fiber quality were observed.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Outcome
- early reproductive structurese0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- BG/RRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cut out earlier than BG/RR.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR but also cutout earlier.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield differences may reflect agronomic performance of the variety backgrounds.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Material
- variety backgroundse0
- Outcome
- Yield differencese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield differences between the two technologies may be due to agronomic performance of the variety backgrounds used.”
e1“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
glyphosate · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.