Cotton Response to Surface Applications of Potassium Fertilizer: A 10-Year Summary

Abstract

Field studies were conducted for 10 yr on a Limestone Valley soil (Dewey silt loam, a fine, kaolinitic, thermic Typic Paleudults) in north Alabama to evaluate cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield and lint quality response to long‐term surface applications of K. Potassium rates were 0,60,120, and 180 lb K2O/acre for the first 3 yr of the study. Fertilizer was broadcast in the spring or split applied in fall and spring. No K fertilizer was applied during the fourth year (1990). After the fourth year, half of the treatments were left in residual and remaining treatments continued to receive annual applications of K (1991‐1996). The experiment was a split plot arrangement of a randomized complete block. From 1987 to 1989, two varieties were compared, which served as whole plots. From 1991 through 1996, one variety was grown and annual vs. residual K fertilization served as whole plots. Potassium treatments were used as subplots throughout the test. From 1987 to 1989 there were no differences between ‘Stoneville 825’ and ‘Deltapine 50’. Lint yields were increased significantly by K fertilization in 6 of 9 yr that cotton was grown on this low K soil. Potassium fertilization increased lint yields by as much as 450 lb/acre in responsive years. From 1991 through 1996, residual K produced lesser yields than where K was applied annually. There were no differences in lint yield among split (fall‐spring), fall, or spring applied K. In responsive years, micronaire increased with K rate. Our results support the calibration currently used by the Auburn University Soil Testing Lab for Limestone Valley soils. Research Question This field study was initiated in the fall of 1986 on a Tennessee Valley soil in north Alabama that had been in alfalfa production for 5 yr. The objectives of the study were: (i) evaluate cotton varietal differences to K fertilization; (ii) evaluate cotton response to long‐term applications of K fertilizer; (iii) evaluate cotton response to annual and residual K. fertilization; (iv) determine cotton yield response to spring, fall, and split (fall/spring) application of K. fertilizer; and (v) evaluate lint quality as affected by K fertilization. Literature Summary Late season K deficiency has been observed across the U.S. Cotton Belt leading to renewed interest in soil test calibration for K in many states. In recent years, cotton response to K fertilizer rates and placement as well as foliar feeding has been evaluated. Responses of cotton to K fertilization in many of these relatively short‐term studies have been inconsistent. Previous work in Alabama has shown that cotton yields are more affected by inadequate K than soybean and grain crops. Limited data are available to describe the response of cotton to fall vs. spring applications of K. There are also limited data available to describe varietal differences in cotton response to K fertilization. Study Description A 10 yr (cotton grown 1987–1989 and 1991–1996) field test was conducted on a Limestone Valley soil (Dewey silt loam) in north Alabama. The test ...

Cottonseed yield and its quality as affected by mineral fertilizers and plant growth retardants

“…Cakmak et al [92] found that, the K nutrition had pronounced effects on carbohydrate partitioning by affecting either the phloem export of photosynthates (sucrose) or growth rate of sink and/or source organs. Mullins et al [93] Mean data from a four replicate composites for the two seasons. c L.S.D.…”

Influence of Potassium Rates and Sources on Seed Cotton Yield and Yield Components of Some Elite Cotton Cultivars

“…This exploration of soils is likely to lead to the ORDER REPRINTS severe depletion of K þ and eventually limit efficiency of other nutrients. [7] Various researchers [4,[8][9][10] reported significant increase in cotton lint yield to added K fertilizer ranging from 50 to 200 kg K 2 O ha À1 . [2] Among the major nutrients, K has been found to be a key component of nutrition program for production of high yields of quality cotton.…”

“…[5] These data suggest that the addition of potassium fertilizer made soil well buffered for sustained supply of K þ to cotton crop. [9,10] Cultivars differed significantly in their response to K-fertilization (Tables 2a, b). It is apparent that the ability of the soil to supply K þ to the roots is more important in determining K þ uptake than the ability of the roots to absorb K þ .…”

Nitrogen, potassium and plant growth retardant effects on oil content and quality of cotton seed

“…Cakmak et al (1994) found that, the potassium nutrition had pronounced effects on carbohydrate partitioning by affecting either the phloem export of photosynthates (sucrose) or the growth rate of sinks and/or source organs. Mullins et al (1999) evaluated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) yield under a long-term soil application of K at 75-225 kg K 2 O ha Ϫ1 , and found that K application increased yield. Results obtained in this study are similar to those of Howard et al (2000); Gormus (2002).…”