Cotton lint yield response to accumulated heat units and soil water supply

or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. U pland cotton is a crop with an indeterminate fruiting habit that is influenced by the environment in which the plant grows. Effective flowering (flowering on fruiting sites that contribute to economic yield) begins about 60 d after the crop is planted and continues for about 4 to 6 wk (Bruns, 2009), depending on cultivar and environmental conditions. Flower production begins at the bottom of the cotton plant (usually between mainstem nodes 5 and 7) and flowers are formed on adjacent nodes up the plant every 2 to 3 d, and on adjacent sympodial positions every 4 to 6 d (Bednarz and Nichols, 2005). This indeterminate fruiting habit also allows the crop to compensate for temporary unfavorable conditions (Bednarz and Nichols, 2005;Pettigrew, 1995) by replacing bolls lost early in the season by producing additional fruiting sites on other parts of the plant later in the season. Cotton yield has been described as the product of environmental conditions, genetic background, and management practices, including plant density, plant growth regulator management, insect pressure, and irrigation management. An analysis of within-plant boll distribution known as plant mapping is a method of plant measurement that has been used to quantify the effects of the variables described above on boll production and retention.Jenkins et al. (1990) observed that cultivar maturity characteristics and irrigation rate can both affect boll production and retention. Although a long flowering and fruiting interval can allow cotton plants to recover from transient stresses, this characteristic also means that when a cotton plant undergoes stress, it must partition its limited carbohydrate resources to ensure maximized fruit production. Bednarz and Nichols (2005) and Jenkins et al. (1990) found that earlier maturing cultivars produced a greater percentage of their total lint yields at lower main stem nodes than later maturing cultivars, and that early maturing cultivars also respond to stress differently than later maturing cultivars. Early-fruiting cultivars retain more fruit lower in the plant, while later-fruiting cultivars tend to produce additional fruit in the upper portions of the plant (Pettigrew, 2004). Bednarz and Nichols (2005) stated that in regions with long growing season, such as Georgia and South Texas, later maturing cultivars may produce more stable yields and recover from exposure to brief periods of drought more successfully than earlier maturing cultivars. In these locations, cotton plants can accumulate more than 1400 growing degree days (GDD 15.6 ). However, in regions with shorter growing seasons, like the northern Texas Panhandle, plants are often limited by environments where there are fewer than 1150 GDD 15.6 (Howell et al., 2004). In a short-season environment, the shift of boll production to higher nodes may be detrimental to later maturing cultivars, AbstrACtThe boll...

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple Irrigation Levels Affect Boll Distribution, Yield, and Fiber Micronaire in Cotton

Snowden

Ritchie

Cave³

et al. 2013

“…The expansion of the more drought tolerant cotton into these regions as a substitute for maize ( Zea mays L.) with its large water requirements can also help lessen the irrigation water supply burden on the Ogallala Aquifer (Gowda et al, 2007). According to Peng et al (1989) in areas with a cotton monoculture production system, cotton production in the Great Plains is often limited by three major environmental constraints: available thermal energy, lack of adequate and/or timely precipitation resulting in water stress, and the nutrient supply of N and P.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cotton Water Use and Lint Yield in Four Great Plains Soils

Tolk

Howell

2010

The development of earlier maturing, cool temperature tolerant varieties of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) has allowed cotton production to expand into regions with shorter, cooler growing seasons. The objective of this research was to evaluate the interactive effect of soil type, irrigation, and meteorological conditions on the water use and lint yield of cotton grown in four U.S. Great Plains soils. Cotton was grown in 2005 through 2007 in 48 weighing lysimeters which contained clay loam, silt loam, sandy loam, or fine sand at Bushland, TX, with irrigation beginning after emergence. The seasonal heat units (HU) from planting to harvest were 1010°C in 2005, 1075°C in 2006, and 985°C in 2007. From seedling to beginning boll development, reference evapotranspiration averaged 7.6 mm in 2005, 8.5 mm in 2006, and 6.7 mm in 2007. Lint yield was significantly related to open boll number at harvest in all soils and years. Averaged cotton lint yields for the 2005 and 2007 full and deficit irrigation treatments were significantly larger in the fine sand (160 g m−2) than in the other soils (126 g m−2). In 2006, cotton lint yield in the fine sand was significantly smaller (101 g m−2) than the average of the other soils (147 g m−2). Cotton lint yield increased in the silt loam soil and decreased in the fine sand as seasonal HU increased. Early season meteorological conditions which influenced square shedding and boll development may have affected lint yields interactively with soil texture and irrigation.

“…Many cotton irrigation studies have recognized the impacts of water deficit on cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality (Dağdelen et al, 2009;DeTar, 2008;Gerik et al, 1996;Howell et al, 2004;Peng et al, 1989;Pettigrew, 2004), and a considerable amount of research has been conducted on the effects of severe, moderate, and low water stress on cotton boll distribution and mass (Ritchie et al, 2009;Snowden et al, 2013;Yang and Zhou, 2010), but it is relatively unknown if equal or more efficient boll production results could be achieved with less irrigation applied at precise intervals. Another limitation of existing work is that there is not a defined response to the interaction between various periods of water stress on cotton production.…”

Section: Irrigation Timing and Rate Affect Cotton Boll Distribution Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Irrigation Timing and Rate Affect Cotton Boll Distribution and Fiber Quality

Schaefer

Ritchie

Bordovsky³

et al. 2018

Decreased aquifer water in the Texas High Plains has increased the risks associated with irrigation, including lower irrigation volume and the need to balance seasonal water demands among crops, requiring management of both irrigation rate and timing. Boll distribution measurements in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) can be used to quantify the effects of irrigation on productivity and were used in a study of irrigation rate × timing from 2011 to 2013 in Halfway, TX. Field experiments quantified cotton boll distribution using three in-season irrigation levels (maximums of 0 , 3.2 , and 6.4 mm d -1 ) during three different irrigation periods determined by accumulated growing degree days (GDD) based on the threshold of 15.6°C: period 1 (P1, <525 GDD), period 2 (P2, 525-750 GDD), and period 3 (P3, >750 GDD). Combinations of these factors resulted in 27 irrigation treatments, applied with a low energy precision application (LEPA) pivot. Heavy irrigation early in the growing season used more water, did not increase boll number, and was often detrimental to yield. Mid-and late-season irrigation improved yield and fiber quality, with P2 irrigation influencing yield in the middle of the plant and P3 irrigation controlling yield at the top of the plant. Moderate irrigation later in the season minimized effects of short-term water deficit observed in other similar studies. These results provide insight into optimizing cotton water use in a region with declining crop water availability, increased pumping restrictions, and a challenging climate.