Paper · 2014 · ˜The œjournal of cotton science/Journal of cotton science

Cotton Growth, Yield, and Fiber Quality Response to Irrigation and Water Deficit in Soil of Varying Depth to a Sand Layer

Matthew Wiggins; Brian Leib; Thomas Mueller; et al.

8
claims
24
verbatim quotes
15
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN to investigate irrigation response in cotton. The objective of this study was to evaluate plant response to four different irrigation regimes by using main-stem node counts, quantification of canopy light interception, and canopy temperature, while making comparisons across two soils that vary in depth to a sandy layer. PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system in 9-m rows on 97-cm spacing with 10.5-12 seed m-1 of row. Irrigation was applied from drip tape lying in the row furrow at rates of 0, 1.27, 2.54, and 3.81 cm week-1. Comparisons were made across deep soils (no sand layer within the top 89 centimeters of soil) and shallow soils (sand layer within the top 61 centimeters of soil). Plant height, number of nodes, nodes above white flower (NAWF), canopy light interception, and canopy temperature were monitored during the blooming period of the crop each year to determine differences in irrigation response. Cotton plants grown in deep soils had higher vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to plants grown in the shallow soil. Similarly, irrigation increased cotton plant vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to dryland cotton. Results from this trial indicate that differences in physiological growth patterns, canopy density, canopy temperature, lint yield, and fiber quality are evident when compared across irrigation amounts and soil depths.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton grown in deep soils had higher vegetative biomass, total node number and plant height than in shallow soil.

Taxon
Cotton plantsGossypium hirsutume0
Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
deep soilse0
Outcome
vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant heighte0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
shallow soile0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“Cotton plants grown in deep soils had higher vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to plants grown in the shallow soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1046–1265 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton grown in deep soils had higher light interception, fiber quality and yield than in shallow soil.

Taxon
Cotton plantsGossypium hirsutume0
Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
deep soilse0
Outcome
light interception, fiber quality, yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
shallow soile0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“Cotton plants grown in deep soils had higher vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to plants grown in the shallow soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1046–1265 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton grown in deep soils had reduced canopy temperature compared with shallow soil.

Taxon
Cotton plantsGossypium hirsutume0
Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
deep soilse0
Outcome
canopy temperaturee0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
shallow soile0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“Cotton plants grown in deep soils had higher vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to plants grown in the shallow soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1046–1265 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation increased vegetative biomass, total node number and plant height of cotton compared with dryland cotton.

Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
irrigatione0
Outcome
vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant heighte0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
dryland cottone0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“irrigation increased cotton plant vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to dryland cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1468 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation increased light interception, fiber quality and yield of cotton compared with dryland cotton.

Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
irrigatione0
Outcome
light interception, fiber quality, yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
dryland cottone0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“irrigation increased cotton plant vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to dryland cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1468 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation reduced canopy temperature of cotton compared with dryland cotton.

Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Treatment
irrigatione0
Outcome
canopy temperaturee0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
dryland cottone0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“irrigation increased cotton plant vegetative biomass, total number of nodes, plant height, light interception, fiber quality, yield, and reduced canopy temperature compared to dryland cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1468 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Differences in physiological growth patterns, canopy density and canopy temperature are evident across irrigation amounts and soil depths.

Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Outcome
physiological growth patterns, canopy density, canopy temperaturee0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“differences in physiological growth patterns, canopy density, canopy temperature, lint yield, and fiber quality are evident when compared across irrigation amounts and soil depths”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1508–1687 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Differences in lint yield and fiber quality are evident across irrigation amounts and soil depths.

Material
PHY 375 WRF cottonseede2
Outcome
lint yield, and fiber qualitye0
Setting
West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TNe1

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

“differences in physiological growth patterns, canopy density, canopy temperature, lint yield, and fiber quality are evident when compared across irrigation amounts and soil depths”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1508–1687 · show in text ↑
e1

“Research was conducted in 2010 and 2011 at the West Tennessee Research and Education Center in Jackson, TN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–106 · show in text ↑
e2

“PHY 375 WRF cottonseed was planted in a no-tillage system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–486 · show in text ↑

irrigation · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

134 papers: 73 positive, 61 negative or no effect

72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

130 papers more in this group

See all 134 papers →

irrigation · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

144 papers: 101 positive, 43 negative or no effect

100 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

140 papers more in this group

See all 144 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.