Key management recommendations for cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) management require estimates of the timing of crop phenology. Most commonly growing day degree (DD) (thermal time) approaches are used. Currently, across many cotton production regions, there is no consistent approach to predicting first square and flower timing. Day degree approaches vary considerably, with base thresholds different (12.0-15.6 ˚C) with no consistency using an optimum temperature threshold (i.e., temperature where development ceases to increase). As cotton is grown in variable and changing climates, and cultivars change, there is a need to ensure the accuracy of this approach for predicting timing of flowering for assisting cotton management. In this study new functions to predict first square and first flower were developed and validated using data collected in multiple seasons and regions (Australia and the United States). Earlier controlled environment studies that monitored crop development were used to assess in more detail how temperatures were affecting early cotton development. New DD functions developed predicted first square and first flower better than the existing Australian and U.S. approaches. The best performing functions had base temperatures like those of existing U.S. functions (15.6 ˚C) and an optimum threshold temperature of 32.0 ˚C. New universal DD targets for first square (343 DD [˚C]) and first flower (584 DD) were developed. Controlled environment studies supported this base temperature outcome; however, it was less clear that 32.0 ˚C was the optimum threshold temperature from these data. Precise predictions of cotton development will facilitate accurate growth stage assessments and hence better cotton management decisions.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This chapter looks at why the United States understands many doctrines of foreign relations law to be based on international comity, while continental European states do not. The U.S. understanding shows the influence of Justice Joseph Story, who made international comity the basis for choice of law and the enforcement of foreign judgments. U.S. courts later made comity the basis for other doctrines, including the act of statute doctrine, the presumption against extraterritoriality, foreign state compulsion, forum non conveniens, limits on antisuit injunctions, the privilege of foreign governments to bring suit in U.S. courts, and the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The continental European understanding shows the influence of Friedrich Carl von Savigny, who built a choice of law system on different foundations and with universalist aspirations. In recent years, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has started to tie together some of the doctrines that U.S. courts would label international comity under the heading of “mutual trust,” but mutual trust is more limited than international comity. This chapter argues that looking at doctrines of foreign relations law through a comity lens sharpens the distinction between national law and international law, emphasizes the freedom of each nation to shape doctrines of foreign relations law as it thinks best, and brings into better focus the interrelationships among those doctrines.