Paper · 2025 · Agronomy

Canopy-Level Regulation of Within-Boll Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang

Na Zhang; Yachen Yang; Wenxiu Xu; et al.

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Freshwater scarcity severely limits sustainable cotton production in arid regions. This study aimed to establish the optimal salinity threshold for staged saline water supplemental irrigation (SWSI) and elucidate its canopy-level mechanisms in optimizing within-boll yield components and fiber quality. A two-year field trial (2023–2024) was conducted in Awati County, Xinjiang, using mulched drip irrigation at five SWSI levels (3.5–9.5 g L−1) and a freshwater control (CK). Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%, boll number per plant by 22.45%, and fibers per seed by 6.01–10.59%, while fiber length and strength rose by 6.98–10.38% and 2.69–6.00%, respectively. When salinity reached 8.0 g L−1, yield declined by 8.5%, and a salinity of 9.5 g L−1 reduced yield by 24.52%. Spatially, mid-fruiting branches (nodes 4–6) remained stable, maintaining high lint mass per seed even under high salinity, whereas upper branches (≥node 7) were most sensitive; at 9.5 g L−1, the boll number (0.36) was 56.6% lower than at 3.5 g L−1 (0.83), and the Q-score decreased by 6.7%. These results demonstrate that SWSI with ≤5.0 g L−1 salinity (optimum 3.5 g L−1) simultaneously enhances lint yield and fiber quality, providing a practical strategy for efficient saline water use in arid cotton regions.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 3.5 g L−1, lint yield increased 31.4% over freshwater control.

Treatment
3.5 g L−1 treatmente0
Outcome
lint yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
31.4%e0
Comparator
CKe0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–557 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 3.5 g L−1, boll number per plant increased 22.45% over freshwater control.

Treatment
3.5 g L−1 treatmente0
Outcome
boll number per plante0
Direction
increasede0
Value
22.45%e0
Comparator
CKe0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%, boll number per plant by 22.45%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–590 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 3.5 g L−1, fibers per seed increased 6.01–10.59%.

Treatment
3.5 g L−1 treatmente0
Outcome
fibers per seede0
Direction
increasede0
Value
6.01–10.59%e0
Comparator
CKe0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%, boll number per plant by 22.45%, and fibers per seed by 6.01–10.59%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–626 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 3.5 g L−1, fiber length rose 6.98–10.38% over freshwater control.

Treatment
3.5 g L−1 treatmente0
Outcome
fiber lengthe0
Direction
rosee0
Value
6.98–10.38%e0
Comparator
CKe0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%, boll number per plant by 22.45%, and fibers per seed by 6.01–10.59%, while fiber length and strength rose by 6.98–10.38% and 2.69–6.00%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 3.5 g L−1, fiber strength rose 2.69–6.00% over freshwater control.

Treatment
3.5 g L−1 treatmente0
Outcome
strengthe0
Direction
rosee0
Value
2.69–6.00%e0
Comparator
CKe0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“Compared with CK, 3.5 g L−1 treatment significantly increased lint yield by 31.4%, boll number per plant by 22.45%, and fibers per seed by 6.01–10.59%, while fiber length and strength rose by 6.98–10.38% and 2.69–6.00%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–708 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield declined 8.5% at salinity 8.0 g L−1.

Treatment
salinity reached 8.0 g L−1e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
declinede0
Value
8.5%e0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“When salinity reached 8.0 g L−1, yield declined by 8.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–765 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield declined 24.52% at 9.5 g L−1 salinity.

Treatment
a salinity of 9.5 g L−1e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
reducede0
Value
24.52%e0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“a salinity of 9.5 g L−1 reduced yield by 24.52%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 771–818 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mid-fruiting branches maintained high lint mass per seed under high salinity.

Organ / stage
mid-fruiting branches (nodes 4–6)e0
Outcome
high lint mass per seede0
Direction
remained stablee0
Qualifier
high salinitye0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“mid-fruiting branches (nodes 4–6) remained stable, maintaining high lint mass per seed even under high salinity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 831–942 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 9.5 g L−1, upper-branch boll number was 56.6% lower than at 3.5 g L−1.

Organ / stage
upper branches (≥node 7)e0
Treatment
9.5 g L−1e0
Outcome
boll numbere0
Direction
lowere0
Value
56.6%e0
Comparator
3.5 g L−1e0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“upper branches (≥node 7) were most sensitive; at 9.5 g L−1, the boll number (0.36) was 56.6% lower than at 3.5 g L−1 (0.83)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 952–1075 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 9.5 g L−1, the upper-branch Q-score decreased 6.7%.

Treatment
9.5 g L−1e0
Outcome
Q-scoree0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
6.7%e0
Comparator
3.5 g L−1e0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“at 9.5 g L−1, the boll number (0.36) was 56.6% lower than at 3.5 g L−1 (0.83), and the Q-score decreased by 6.7%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 998–1110 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend supplemental irrigation salinity no higher than 5.0 g L−1, with 3.5 g L−1 optimal.

Outcome
SWSI with ≤5.0 g L−1 salinity (optimum 3.5 g L−1)e0
Setting
Xinjiangt0

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

“SWSI with ≤5.0 g L−1 salinity (optimum 3.5 g L−1) simultaneously enhances lint yield and fiber quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1143–1245 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Under Staged Saline Water Supplemental Irrigation in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–131 · show in text ↑

salinity · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

58 papers: 9 positive, 49 negative or no effect

48 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

54 papers more in this group

See all 58 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.