Evaluating Intraplant Cotton Fiber Variability

Abstract

It is well documented that cotton fiber variability exists across and within cultivars, across environments, soil quality, biotic and abiotic stresses. Having uniform fiber quality is a primary goal for cotton breeders to enhance profitability and sustainability. The objective of this research was to identify the within‐plant variability in fiber quality of six diverse genotypes of Gossypium hirsutum and Gossypium barbasense. This research was conducted in College Station, TX, for 3 yr in 2009, 2010, and 2011 at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research farm. Fiber samples were collected from individual sympodial branches of the plants in three replications and ginned on a tabletop saw gin. Fiber‐quality testing was done using the Advanced Fiber Information System. Statistical analyses inclusive of ANOVA and best linear unbiased predictors and fiber correlations were performed. A distinct pattern of within‐plant fiber variability was observed, with a trend showing that beneficial traits lie in the bottom sympodial fruiting positions while the poor‐quality bolls are located at the higher sympodial positions within the plant. This pattern was seen across all genotypes in all years. Percentage of difference in fiber length among the longest and shortest fibers within the plant showed that ‘FM 832’ had the maximal within‐plant fiber length variability while ‘DP HTO Pima’ had the least within‐plant length variability. Correlation analyses revealed a strong negative relationship between fiber length and standard fineness and a positive relationship between length and fiber maturity. A positive correlation was observed between short fiber content, immature fiber content and fiber neps.

Evaluating Within‐Plant Variability of Cotton Fiber Length and Maturity

“…Several studies have reported that lint produced at a distal position relative to the main apical node tends to have lower fiber quality (Bernhardt et al, 1986;Davidonis et al, 2004;Kothari et al, 2015). It could have an impact on the fiber-to-fiber variability of fiber quality within a bale (May and Jividen, 1999;Bauer et al, 2009), and ultimately on yarn quality.…”

“…Th ese sources of variability in fi ber quality contribute to within-bale fi ber-to-fi ber variability. One of the potential strategies to minimize the variability of fi ber quality among fi bers within a bale of cotton is to optimize the within-plant variability of cotton fi ber quality.Within-plant variability of cotton fi ber quality is determined by many factors, including the growth habit of the cotton plant, genetics, and environmental conditions during cotton fi ber development (Stewart, 1975;Faulkner et al, 2011;Kothari et al, 2015). Th e indeterminate fruiting habit of the cotton plant provides a signifi cant source of within-plant variation in cotton fi ber quality.…”

“…Within-plant variability of cotton fi ber quality is determined by many factors, including the growth habit of the cotton plant, genetics, and environmental conditions during cotton fi ber development (Stewart, 1975;Faulkner et al, 2011;Kothari et al, 2015). Th e indeterminate fruiting habit of the cotton plant provides a signifi cant source of within-plant variation in cotton fi ber quality.…”

Genotype by Environment Interactions on Cotton Fiber Traits and Their Implications on Variety Recommendation

“…Macedonia and Thrace may be the best environments for cotton cultivation, due to favorable and stable performance of cultivars used in these areas. Always the growing environment affects cotton fiber quality, but main fiber traits such as length, strength and elongation are high heritable and depend on the proper genotype cultivation (Smith et al, 2010;Campbell et al, 2012;Long et al, 2013;Kothari et al, 2015).…”

“…Fiber quality is a complex of various traits, such as fiber length, strength, uniformity etc. (Poehlman and Sleper, 1995) and thus it depends on both genetic and environmental factors that influence the plant's development (Bradow and Davidonis, 2000;Campbell and Jones, 2005;Basal et al, 2009a;Kothari et al, 2015).…”