Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation

Irrigation improves the consistency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield during seasons with inadequate or poor rainfall distribution, but comparisons of irrigation methods, including overhead sprinkle (OSI) and sub-surface drip (SSD), are limited. Irrigation may affect the response of cotton to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of cotton science 2006, Vol.10 (2)
Hauptverfasser: Nuti, R.C, Casteel, S.N, Viator, R.P, Lanier, J.E, Edmisten, K.L, Jordan, D.L, Grabow, G.L, Barnes, S, Mathews, J, Wells, R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2
container_start_page
container_title The journal of cotton science
container_volume 10
creator Nuti, R.C
Casteel, S.N
Viator, R.P
Lanier, J.E
Edmisten, K.L
Jordan, D.L
Grabow, G.L
Barnes, S
Mathews, J
Wells, R
description Irrigation improves the consistency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield during seasons with inadequate or poor rainfall distribution, but comparisons of irrigation methods, including overhead sprinkle (OSI) and sub-surface drip (SSD), are limited. Irrigation may affect the response of cotton to mepiquat chloride and the response of glyphosate resistant cotton to glyphosate. The objectives of this study were to compare the response of cotton with OSI and SSD irrigation and to determine if any responses to glyphosate and mepiquat chloride were different between irrigation systems. Field trials were conducted from 2001 through 2003 at the Peanut Belt Research Station in North Carolina to evaluate eight treatment combinations of glyphosate application method, mepiquat chloride application, and irrigation method. Glyphosate isopropylamine salt at 0.84 kg acid equivalent (a.e.) ha-1 was applied over-the-top at the four-leaf stage or non-precision post-directed at the eight-leaf stage. Mepiquat chloride was applied according to North Carolina Extension Service recommendations. Lint yield, which averaged 1400 and 1470 kg ha-1 under OSI and SSD, respectively, was not affected by mepiquat chloride application. Non-precision post-directed glyphosate reduced lint yield by 160 kg ha-1 in 2002, but did not affect yield in 2001 or 2003. Compared with untreated cotton, cotton treated with mepiquat chloride was 31 cm shorter with 2 fewer nodes in 2001 and 2003, and averaged 0.6 fewer first position bolls and 0.2 mm longer fiber. The two irrigation systems produced similar yields, and non-precision glyphosate applications reduced yield. In this study, irrigated cotton did not exhibit sufficient vegetative growth to benefit from the recommended applications of mepiquat chloride.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>fao</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_fao_agris_US201301090680</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>US201301090680</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-f179t-e8d8c407dec2b3f5057a90f6d682c9bcf716e2f68d6fd052fdc8759d176baff43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNjNFKwzAUQIM4cG5-g_mBwk3SJumjVJ2DycDZ53Gb5NbqTEba6e8ruAefzjkv54LNRSXLQilQl__8il2P4zuAVNKIOXt5xoh9-Axx4ol4k6YpRb7K6TvyNvqQ-fYr5LeAnu-OeYgfh8Ax_sapK8ZTJnSB3-fhyNc5Dz1OQ4pLNiM8jOHmzAVrHx9em6dis12tm7tNQcLUUxGst64E44OTnaIKKoM1kPbaSld3jozQQZK2XpOHSpJ31lS1F0Z3SFSqBbv9-xKmPfZ5GPftToJQIKAGbUH9AH9vSnk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Nuti, R.C ; Casteel, S.N ; Viator, R.P ; Lanier, J.E ; Edmisten, K.L ; Jordan, D.L ; Grabow, G.L ; Barnes, S ; Mathews, J ; Wells, R</creator><creatorcontrib>Nuti, R.C ; Casteel, S.N ; Viator, R.P ; Lanier, J.E ; Edmisten, K.L ; Jordan, D.L ; Grabow, G.L ; Barnes, S ; Mathews, J ; Wells, R</creatorcontrib><description>Irrigation improves the consistency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield during seasons with inadequate or poor rainfall distribution, but comparisons of irrigation methods, including overhead sprinkle (OSI) and sub-surface drip (SSD), are limited. Irrigation may affect the response of cotton to mepiquat chloride and the response of glyphosate resistant cotton to glyphosate. The objectives of this study were to compare the response of cotton with OSI and SSD irrigation and to determine if any responses to glyphosate and mepiquat chloride were different between irrigation systems. Field trials were conducted from 2001 through 2003 at the Peanut Belt Research Station in North Carolina to evaluate eight treatment combinations of glyphosate application method, mepiquat chloride application, and irrigation method. Glyphosate isopropylamine salt at 0.84 kg acid equivalent (a.e.) ha-1 was applied over-the-top at the four-leaf stage or non-precision post-directed at the eight-leaf stage. Mepiquat chloride was applied according to North Carolina Extension Service recommendations. Lint yield, which averaged 1400 and 1470 kg ha-1 under OSI and SSD, respectively, was not affected by mepiquat chloride application. Non-precision post-directed glyphosate reduced lint yield by 160 kg ha-1 in 2002, but did not affect yield in 2001 or 2003. Compared with untreated cotton, cotton treated with mepiquat chloride was 31 cm shorter with 2 fewer nodes in 2001 and 2003, and averaged 0.6 fewer first position bolls and 0.2 mm longer fiber. The two irrigation systems produced similar yields, and non-precision glyphosate applications reduced yield. In this study, irrigated cotton did not exhibit sufficient vegetative growth to benefit from the recommended applications of mepiquat chloride.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1524-3303</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-3303</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>application methods ; application timing ; crop growth stage ; crop management ; crop yield ; glyphosate ; Gossypium hirsutum ; herbicide resistance ; lint cotton ; lint yield ; mepiquat ; mepiquat chloride ; microirrigation ; plant growth control ; plant response ; sprinkler irrigation ; subsurface irrigation</subject><ispartof>The journal of cotton science, 2006, Vol.10 (2)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nuti, R.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casteel, S.N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viator, R.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lanier, J.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edmisten, K.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordan, D.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grabow, G.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnes, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathews, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wells, R</creatorcontrib><title>Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation</title><title>The journal of cotton science</title><description>Irrigation improves the consistency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield during seasons with inadequate or poor rainfall distribution, but comparisons of irrigation methods, including overhead sprinkle (OSI) and sub-surface drip (SSD), are limited. Irrigation may affect the response of cotton to mepiquat chloride and the response of glyphosate resistant cotton to glyphosate. The objectives of this study were to compare the response of cotton with OSI and SSD irrigation and to determine if any responses to glyphosate and mepiquat chloride were different between irrigation systems. Field trials were conducted from 2001 through 2003 at the Peanut Belt Research Station in North Carolina to evaluate eight treatment combinations of glyphosate application method, mepiquat chloride application, and irrigation method. Glyphosate isopropylamine salt at 0.84 kg acid equivalent (a.e.) ha-1 was applied over-the-top at the four-leaf stage or non-precision post-directed at the eight-leaf stage. Mepiquat chloride was applied according to North Carolina Extension Service recommendations. Lint yield, which averaged 1400 and 1470 kg ha-1 under OSI and SSD, respectively, was not affected by mepiquat chloride application. Non-precision post-directed glyphosate reduced lint yield by 160 kg ha-1 in 2002, but did not affect yield in 2001 or 2003. Compared with untreated cotton, cotton treated with mepiquat chloride was 31 cm shorter with 2 fewer nodes in 2001 and 2003, and averaged 0.6 fewer first position bolls and 0.2 mm longer fiber. The two irrigation systems produced similar yields, and non-precision glyphosate applications reduced yield. In this study, irrigated cotton did not exhibit sufficient vegetative growth to benefit from the recommended applications of mepiquat chloride.</description><subject>application methods</subject><subject>application timing</subject><subject>crop growth stage</subject><subject>crop management</subject><subject>crop yield</subject><subject>glyphosate</subject><subject>Gossypium hirsutum</subject><subject>herbicide resistance</subject><subject>lint cotton</subject><subject>lint yield</subject><subject>mepiquat</subject><subject>mepiquat chloride</subject><subject>microirrigation</subject><subject>plant growth control</subject><subject>plant response</subject><subject>sprinkler irrigation</subject><subject>subsurface irrigation</subject><issn>1524-3303</issn><issn>1524-3303</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNjNFKwzAUQIM4cG5-g_mBwk3SJumjVJ2DycDZ53Gb5NbqTEba6e8ruAefzjkv54LNRSXLQilQl__8il2P4zuAVNKIOXt5xoh9-Axx4ol4k6YpRb7K6TvyNvqQ-fYr5LeAnu-OeYgfh8Ax_sapK8ZTJnSB3-fhyNc5Dz1OQ4pLNiM8jOHmzAVrHx9em6dis12tm7tNQcLUUxGst64E44OTnaIKKoM1kPbaSld3jozQQZK2XpOHSpJ31lS1F0Z3SFSqBbv9-xKmPfZ5GPftToJQIKAGbUH9AH9vSnk</recordid><startdate>2006</startdate><enddate>2006</enddate><creator>Nuti, R.C</creator><creator>Casteel, S.N</creator><creator>Viator, R.P</creator><creator>Lanier, J.E</creator><creator>Edmisten, K.L</creator><creator>Jordan, D.L</creator><creator>Grabow, G.L</creator><creator>Barnes, S</creator><creator>Mathews, J</creator><creator>Wells, R</creator><scope>FBQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2006</creationdate><title>Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation</title><author>Nuti, R.C ; Casteel, S.N ; Viator, R.P ; Lanier, J.E ; Edmisten, K.L ; Jordan, D.L ; Grabow, G.L ; Barnes, S ; Mathews, J ; Wells, R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-f179t-e8d8c407dec2b3f5057a90f6d682c9bcf716e2f68d6fd052fdc8759d176baff43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>application methods</topic><topic>application timing</topic><topic>crop growth stage</topic><topic>crop management</topic><topic>crop yield</topic><topic>glyphosate</topic><topic>Gossypium hirsutum</topic><topic>herbicide resistance</topic><topic>lint cotton</topic><topic>lint yield</topic><topic>mepiquat</topic><topic>mepiquat chloride</topic><topic>microirrigation</topic><topic>plant growth control</topic><topic>plant response</topic><topic>sprinkler irrigation</topic><topic>subsurface irrigation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nuti, R.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Casteel, S.N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Viator, R.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lanier, J.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edmisten, K.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jordan, D.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grabow, G.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnes, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mathews, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wells, R</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><jtitle>The journal of cotton science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nuti, R.C</au><au>Casteel, S.N</au><au>Viator, R.P</au><au>Lanier, J.E</au><au>Edmisten, K.L</au><au>Jordan, D.L</au><au>Grabow, G.L</au><au>Barnes, S</au><au>Mathews, J</au><au>Wells, R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation</atitle><jtitle>The journal of cotton science</jtitle><date>2006</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>2</issue><issn>1524-3303</issn><eissn>1524-3303</eissn><abstract>Irrigation improves the consistency of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yield during seasons with inadequate or poor rainfall distribution, but comparisons of irrigation methods, including overhead sprinkle (OSI) and sub-surface drip (SSD), are limited. Irrigation may affect the response of cotton to mepiquat chloride and the response of glyphosate resistant cotton to glyphosate. The objectives of this study were to compare the response of cotton with OSI and SSD irrigation and to determine if any responses to glyphosate and mepiquat chloride were different between irrigation systems. Field trials were conducted from 2001 through 2003 at the Peanut Belt Research Station in North Carolina to evaluate eight treatment combinations of glyphosate application method, mepiquat chloride application, and irrigation method. Glyphosate isopropylamine salt at 0.84 kg acid equivalent (a.e.) ha-1 was applied over-the-top at the four-leaf stage or non-precision post-directed at the eight-leaf stage. Mepiquat chloride was applied according to North Carolina Extension Service recommendations. Lint yield, which averaged 1400 and 1470 kg ha-1 under OSI and SSD, respectively, was not affected by mepiquat chloride application. Non-precision post-directed glyphosate reduced lint yield by 160 kg ha-1 in 2002, but did not affect yield in 2001 or 2003. Compared with untreated cotton, cotton treated with mepiquat chloride was 31 cm shorter with 2 fewer nodes in 2001 and 2003, and averaged 0.6 fewer first position bolls and 0.2 mm longer fiber. The two irrigation systems produced similar yields, and non-precision glyphosate applications reduced yield. In this study, irrigated cotton did not exhibit sufficient vegetative growth to benefit from the recommended applications of mepiquat chloride.</abstract></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1524-3303
ispartof The journal of cotton science, 2006, Vol.10 (2)
issn 1524-3303
1524-3303
language eng
recordid cdi_fao_agris_US201301090680
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects application methods
application timing
crop growth stage
crop management
crop yield
glyphosate
Gossypium hirsutum
herbicide resistance
lint cotton
lint yield
mepiquat
mepiquat chloride
microirrigation
plant growth control
plant response
sprinkler irrigation
subsurface irrigation
title Management of Cotton Grown Under Overhead Sprinkle and Sub-surface Drip Irrigation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T16%3A43%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-fao&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Management%20of%20Cotton%20Grown%20Under%20Overhead%20Sprinkle%20and%20Sub-surface%20Drip%20Irrigation&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20cotton%20science&rft.au=Nuti,%20R.C&rft.date=2006&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=2&rft.issn=1524-3303&rft.eissn=1524-3303&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cfao%3EUS201301090680%3C/fao%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true