Abstract
Abstract Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) is sometimes grown on soils with low B concentration. However, most of the literature regarding the effects of supplemental B on cotton was obtained from obsolete, low‐yielding genotypes rather than modern, high‐yielding genotypes. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effects of soil‐ and foliarapplied B on leaf blade B concentration, boll retention, and lint yield of modern cotton genotypes. In 1991, three genotypes (DES 119, DES 24‐8 ne normal leaf, and DES 24‐8 ne okra leaf) and in 1992, two genotypes (Deltapine 20 and Deltapine 5415) of cotton were grown in the field on a Beulah fine sandy loam (coarse‐loamy, mixed, thermic Typic Dystrochrepts) having 0.11 mg kg −1 hot water extractable B concentration. Treatments included preplant soil and foliar (first flower to end of bloom) B (78% Na 2 B 8 O 13 ·4H 2 O, 20% Na 2 B 4 O 7 ·5H 2 O) applications for seasonal totals of 0, 0.89, or 1.78 (1992 only) kg B ha −1 . The lowest rate of foliar‐applied B increased leaf blade B concentration from 25 to 70 mg kg −1 in 1991 and from 54 to 108 mg kg −1 in 1992. In 1992, the highest rate of foliar B applications resulted in a leaf blade concentration of 154 mg B kg −1 . Soil‐applied B did not alter leaf blade B concentration in 1991, but slightly increased leaf blade B concentration in 1992 from 54 to 71 mg kg −1 . Soil B concentrations were higher during the midseason than the preplant period, suggesting that preplant soil B analysis may not accurately foreshadow soil B supply during the season. Soil B or foliar B applications did not affect boll retention percentage, flower number, or lint yield in either year. Supplemental B did not affect boll distribution in 1991, but in 1992, foliar B applications increased the percentage of fruit on monopodial branches. In both years, supplemental B did not greatly affect fiber properties with the exception that supplemental B increased fiber micronaire reading of Deltapine 20 in 1992. The results suggest that modern cultivars may not always need supplemental B when soil B concentration is moderately low.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Lowest-rate foliar boron raised leaf blade B concentration from 25 to 70 mg/kg in 1991.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- foliar‐applied Be1
- Outcome
- leaf blade B concentratione1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 25 to 70 mg kg −1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e1“The lowest rate of foliar‐applied B increased leaf blade B concentration from 25 to 70 mg kg −1 in 1991 and from 54 to 108 mg kg −1 in 1992”
Claim · model-written summary
Lowest-rate foliar boron raised leaf blade B concentration from 54 to 108 mg/kg in 1992.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- foliar‐applied Be1
- Outcome
- leaf blade B concentratione1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 54 to 108 mg kg −1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e1“The lowest rate of foliar‐applied B increased leaf blade B concentration from 25 to 70 mg kg −1 in 1991 and from 54 to 108 mg kg −1 in 1992”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest foliar boron rate gave a leaf blade B concentration of 154 mg/kg in 1992.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- highest rate of foliar B applicationse3
- Outcome
- leaf blade concentratione3
- Direction
- increaseinferrede3
- Value
- 154 mg B kg −1e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e3“In 1992, the highest rate of foliar B applications resulted in a leaf blade concentration of 154 mg B kg −1”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil-applied boron did not alter leaf blade B concentration in 1991.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Soil‐applied Be4
- Outcome
- leaf blade B concentratione4
- Direction
- did not altere4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e4“Soil‐applied B did not alter leaf blade B concentration in 1991, but slightly increased leaf blade B concentration in 1992 from 54 to 71 mg kg −1”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil-applied boron slightly increased leaf blade B concentration in 1992, from 54 to 71 mg/kg.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Soil‐applied Be4
- Outcome
- leaf blade B concentratione4
- Direction
- slightly increasede4
- Value
- 54 to 71 mg kg −1e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e4“Soil‐applied B did not alter leaf blade B concentration in 1991, but slightly increased leaf blade B concentration in 1992 from 54 to 71 mg kg −1”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil or foliar boron applications did not affect boll retention percentage, flower number or lint yield in either year.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Soil B or foliar B applicationse6
- Outcome
- boll retention percentage, flower number, or lint yielde6
- Direction
- did not affecte6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e6“Soil B or foliar B applications did not affect boll retention percentage, flower number, or lint yield in either year”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar boron applications in 1992 increased the percentage of fruit on monopodial branches.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- foliar B applicationse7
- Outcome
- percentage of fruit on monopodial branchese7
- Direction
- increasede7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e7“in 1992, foliar B applications increased the percentage of fruit on monopodial branches”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental boron did not greatly affect fiber properties in either year.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- supplemental Be1
- Outcome
- fiber propertiese1
- Direction
- did not greatly affecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e1“In both years, supplemental B did not greatly affect fiber properties”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental boron increased fiber micronaire reading of Deltapine 20 in 1992.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Material
- Deltapine 20e1
- Treatment
- supplemental Be1
- Outcome
- fiber micronaire readinge1
- Direction
- increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e1“with the exception that supplemental B increased fiber micronaire reading of Deltapine 20 in 1992”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental boron did not affect boll distribution in 1991.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Supplemental Be1
- Outcome
- boll distributione1
- Direction
- did not affecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
e1“Supplemental B did not affect boll distribution in 1991”
Claim · model-written summary
Modern cotton cultivars may not always need supplemental boron when soil B is moderately low.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- supplemental Be1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“modern cultivars may not always need supplemental B when soil B concentration is moderately low”
t0“Modern Cotton Genotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil B concentrations were higher in midseason than in the preplant period.
- Outcome
- Soil B concentrationse1
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e1“Soil B concentrations were higher during the midseason than the preplant period”
The same questions in other papers
boron atom · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →boron atom · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
11 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →application · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →application · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →application · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 58 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
73 papers more in this group
See all 77 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.