Paper · 1999 · Journal of Plant Nutrition

Effects of foliar fertilization of texas southern high plains cotton: Leaf phosphorus, potassium, zinc, iron, manganese, boron, calcium, and yield distribution

C. W. Bednarz; N. W. Hopper; M. G. Hickey

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
12
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Foliar fertilizers are often used in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) production systems across the U.S. Cotton Belt. Their usefulness, however, in producing high yielding, high quality cotton remains to be resolved. This study was conducted to determine the effects of foliar fertilizers on cotton leaf phosphorous (P), potassium (K), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), boron (B), and calcium (Ca) concentrations and yield distribution. During the 1990 growing season, this study was conducted at the Texas Tech University Research Farm east of New Deal, TX on a Pullman clay loam (fine, mixed, superactive thermic, Torrertic Paleustoll). Six foliar treatments were incorporated into a randomized complete block design with six blocks. Treatments 2(15–2–0 with Ca), 3 (8–32–5 with Mn, Fe, Zn, and B), and 4 [8–8–8 with Mn, Fe, Zn, B, and copper (Cu)] were commercial products and were applied according to their manufacturers recommendations. Treatments 5 and 6 (46–0–0) were applied at various rates. During the 1991 growing season, this study was conducted at an on‐farm location northeast of Petersburg, TX. The soil at this location was also a Pullman clay loam. The same six foliar treatments were incorporated into a randomized complete block design with four blocks. Foliar treatments were applied during both growing seasons at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks after square initiation. One week after each treatment application, ten plants were removed from each plot and divided into three nodal horizons: (1) from node six to node nine, (2) from node ten to node thirteen, and (3) node fourteen and above. Leaf nutrient concentrations were determined by these nodal horizons. Numbers of first and second position fruit per plant were also determined within these nodal horizons. Leaf Zn, Fe, Mn, and B were increased by one of the commercial products in this investigation. However, none of these elements were deficient in the untreated plots and the observed increases were beyond the plant required concentrations. Cost‐benefit analyses were not conducted due to the lack of a significant yield response from the foliar fertilizers. We conclude that none of the costs associated with foliar fertilization will be recovered in net returns.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A commercial foliar fertilizer increased leaf Zn, Fe, Mn and B concentrations.

Organ / stage
Leafe0
Treatment
one of the commercial productse0
Outcome
Leaf Zn, Fe, Mn, and Be0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Leaf Zn, Fe, Mn, and B were increased by one of the commercial products in this investigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1791–1884 · show in text ↑
e1

“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 46–76 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

None of the measured elements was deficient in untreated cotton plots.

Outcome
none of these elements were deficiente0
Comparator
untreated plotse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“none of these elements were deficient in the untreated plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1895–1955 · show in text ↑
e1

“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 46–76 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fertilizers produced no significant yield response.

Treatment
foliar fertilizerse0
Outcome
yield responsee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“lack of a significant yield response from the foliar fertilizers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2082–2146 · show in text ↑
e1

“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 46–76 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors concluded that foliar fertilization costs would not be recovered in net returns.

Outcome
none of the costs associated with foliar fertilization will be recovered in net returnse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“none of the costs associated with foliar fertilization will be recovered in net returns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2165–2252 · show in text ↑
e1

“cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 46–76 · show in text ↑

application · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

283 papers: 253 positive, 30 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 253 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

279 papers more in this group

See all 283 papers →

fertilization · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

550 papers: 497 positive, 53 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 497 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

546 papers more in this group

See all 550 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.