Abstract
Nitrogen fertilizer requirements of ultra‐narrow row (UNR) cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) are not well established, and lint yield of UNR relative to conventional‐row (CR) cotton has been variable. Objectives of this study were to compare UNR and CR N requirements based on lint yield, fiber quality, and plant architecture, and to compare the yield potential of UNR and CR cotton. The location was the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Farm, Burleson County, TX. Treatments were N fertilizer rates of 0, 50, 101, and 151 kg ha −1 and row spacings of 19, 38 (both UNR), and 76 cm (CR). By design, per‐hectare plant populations were greatest in 19‐ and least in 76‐cm row spacings. Plots were hand harvested. Reductions in row spacing decreased plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and subset (first position bolls at nodes 6–10) individual boll weight. Greater N increased plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and both whole‐plant and subset individual boll weight. Lint percentage was increased by reduction in row spacing and not affected by N. Treatment effects on fiber quality were limited. Lint yield did not differ among row spacings. Significant increases in lint yield occurred with each increase in N, suggesting that the optimal N rate was not surpassed. Nitrogen by row spacing interaction on lint yield was not significant, implying a similar response of each row spacing to N over the fertilizer rates tested. The N fertilizer requirements of UNR do not appear to be lower than those of CR cotton.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Narrower rows reduced cotton plant height, main-stem nodes, and subset boll weight.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Reductions in row spacinge0
- Outcome
- plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and subset (first position bolls at nodes 6–10) individual boll weighte0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reductions in row spacing decreased plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and subset (first position bolls at nodes 6–10) individual boll weight.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen increased cotton height, nodes, and boll weight.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Greater Ne0
- Outcome
- plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and both whole‐plant and subset individual boll weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Greater N increased plant height, main stem nodes plant −1 , and both whole‐plant and subset individual boll weight.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Narrower rows increased lint percentage.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- reduction in row spacinge0
- Outcome
- Lint percentagee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lint percentage was increased by reduction in row spacing and not affected by N.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen did not significantly affect lint percentage.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Ne0
- Outcome
- Lint percentagee0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lint percentage was increased by reduction in row spacing and not affected by N.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment effects on cotton fiber quality were limited.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- Treatment effects on fiber quality were limitede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatment effects on fiber quality were limited.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Lint yield did not differ among row spacings.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- row spacingse0
- Outcome
- Lint yielde0
- Direction
- did not differe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lint yield did not differ among row spacings.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Each nitrogen rate increase significantly raised lint yield.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- each increase in Ne0
- Outcome
- lint yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant increases in lint yield occurred with each increase in N, suggesting that the optimal N rate was not surpassed.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The nitrogen by row spacing interaction on lint yield was not significant.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Nitrogene0
- Outcome
- lint yielde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen by row spacing interaction on lint yield was not significant, implying a similar response of each row spacing to N over the fertilizer rates tested.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude ultra-narrow rows do not require less nitrogen than conventional rows.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- N fertilizer requirements of UNR do not appear to be lower than those of CR cottone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The N fertilizer requirements of UNR do not appear to be lower than those of CR cotton.”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 65 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →density · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 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.