Cotton yield and fiber quality affected by row spacing and shading at different growth stages

被引:43
|
作者
Echer, Fabio R. [1 ]
Rosolem, Ciro A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Sao Paulo State Univ, Coll Agr Sci, Dept Crop Sci, BR-18610307 Botucatu, SP, Brazil
关键词
Photosynthesis; Boll weight; Light; Plant population; ULTRA-NARROW ROW; PLANT-DENSITY; LINT YIELD; RESPONSES; MATURITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.eja.2015.01.001
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Carbohydrate production and reproductive structure development in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) depends on light availability, a determinant of cotton yield. Light availability is decreased by cloud cover or self-shading when cotton plants are grown in dense populations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of shading during cotton growth and its interactions with plant row spacings on yield and fiber quality. Three independent experiments were conducted as follows: in Paranapanema (23 degrees 39'S; 48 degrees 58'W), cotton was planted in November in row spacings of 0.45, 0.75 and 0.96m; in Primavera do Leste (15 degrees 33'S; 54 degrees 11'W), planting was in January with at row spacings of 0.45 and 0.76 m; and in Chapaddo do Ceu (18 degrees 38'S; 52 degrees 40'W), cotton was planted in February in rows spaced at 0.45 and 0.90 m. Plants were exposed to shading during the phenological stages B1 (floral bud), F1 (early flowering), PF (peak flowering) and 3OB (fruit maturity). In addition, there was one treatment without shade. There were no interactions of crop spacing with shading. Increasing plant population and shading both decreased net photosynthetic rate. The number of bolls m(-2) increased with higher plant populations only when planting was delayed, and were not affected by shading. When cotton was planted in November and January, higher yields were obtained at 0.75/0.76 m, but when planting was delayed to February, 0.45 m resulted in higher yields with no effect on fiber quality. Shading for eight or ten days decreases boll weight and yields, but do not affect fiber quality. Cotton yield is the most decreased when shading occurs during flowering. These results may be used to build management strategies to minimize shading effects by adjusting cotton sowing time and plant density, by selecting cultivars with increased shade tolerance and by choosing an adequate irrigation period to improve yield. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:18 / 26
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Apple yield and quality as affected by training and shading
    Chen, K
    Hu, GQ
    Lenz, F
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND WORKSHOP ON POME FRUIT QUALITY, 1998, (466): : 53 - 58
  • [22] Dwarf sunflower response to row spacing, stand reduction, and defoliation at different growth stages
    Johnson, BL
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE, 2003, 83 (02) : 319 - 326
  • [23] Study on Dissolution and Modification of Cotton Fiber in Different Growth Stages
    Deng, Xiaonan
    Ye, Sihong
    Wan, Lingzhong
    Wu, Juan
    Sun, Hui
    Ni, Ying
    Liu, Fangzhi
    MATERIALS, 2022, 15 (07)
  • [24] EFFECTS OF VARYING ROW SPACING ON LINSEED YIELD AND QUALITY
    ELSAHOOKIE, MM
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE, 1978, 58 (04) : 935 - 937
  • [25] Influence of plantation row spacing on quality and yield of hops
    Koren, J.
    PLANT SOIL AND ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 53 (06) : 276 - 282
  • [26] Effects of tillage, ridging and row spacing on seedling emergence and yield of cotton
    Ozpinar, S
    Isik, A
    SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2004, 75 (01): : 19 - 26
  • [27] Optimal row spacing configuration to improve cotton yield or quality is regulated by plant density and irrigation rate
    Zuo, Wenqing
    Wu, Baojian
    Wang, Yuxuan
    Xu, Shouzhen
    Chen, Minzhi
    Liang, Fubin
    Tian, Jingshan
    Zhang, Wangfeng
    FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2024, 305
  • [29] Effect of mulching and row spacing on growth and yield of strawberry
    Sharma, V. K.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE, 2009, 66 (02) : 271 - 273
  • [30] Emergence and seed yield of redtop as affected by row spacing and sowing rate
    Szczepanek, Malgorzata
    ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION B-SOIL AND PLANT SCIENCE, 2015, 65 (06): : 537 - 543