Paper · 2019 · ˜The œjournal of cotton science/Journal of cotton science

1-Methylcyclopropene Effects on Field-Grown Cotton: Morphological Characteristics and Yield

Murilo M. Maeda; J. Tom Cothren; James L. Heilman; et al.

5
claims
8
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is an important socioeconomic crop throughout most of the southern U.S. In Texas, cotton is the lead cash crop and its productivity is often limited by abiotic stress events such as drought and elevated ambient temperatures. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) applications triggered by canopy temperature and forecasted ambient temperatures on field-grown cotton plants. Yield and crop morphological responses to 1-MCP applications were investigated in field studies conducted during the summers of 2012 to 2014 at the Texas A&M University Field Laboratory in Burleson County, TX. Positive effects of 1-MCP were found for fruit retention in 2013 and 2014 for both irrigated and dryland studies; however, a negative impact was found in the 2012 irrigated study. By harvest, 1-MCP applications had no effect on final cotton yield or fiber quality parameters. Applications of 1-MCP affected some morphological characteristics of cotton plants; however, it did not improve crop yield.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP increased cotton fruit retention in 2013 and 2014 under irrigation and dryland conditions.

Treatment
1-MCPe0
Outcome
fruit retentione0
Direction
Positive effectse0
Qualifier
2013 and 2014 for both irrigated and dryland studiese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Positive effects of 1-MCP were found for fruit retention in 2013 and 2014 for both irrigated and dryland studies; however, a negative impact was found in the 2012 irrigated study.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 670–849 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 44–50 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP negatively affected cotton fruit retention in the irrigated 2012 study.

Treatment
1-MCPe0
Outcome
fruit retentione0
Direction
negative impacte0
Qualifier
2012 irrigated studye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Positive effects of 1-MCP were found for fruit retention in 2013 and 2014 for both irrigated and dryland studies; however, a negative impact was found in the 2012 irrigated study.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 670–849 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 44–50 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP had no effect on final cotton yield.

Treatment
1-MCP applicationse0
Outcome
final cotton yielde0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“By harvest, 1-MCP applications had no effect on final cotton yield or fiber quality parameters.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–945 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP had no effect on cotton fiber quality parameters.

Treatment
1-MCP applicationse0
Outcome
fiber quality parameterse0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“By harvest, 1-MCP applications had no effect on final cotton yield or fiber quality parameters.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–945 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 44–50 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

1-MCP affected some cotton morphological characteristics without a stated direction.

Treatment
Applications of 1-MCPe0
Outcome
morphological characteristics of cotton plantse0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Applications of 1-MCP affected some morphological characteristics of cotton plants; however, it did not improve crop yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 946–1069 · show in text ↑

1-methylcyclopropene · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

13 papers: 11 positive, 2 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

1-methylcyclopropene · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.