Paper · 1976 · Crop Science

Breeding Potentials of Noncultivated Cottons. III. Inheritance of Date of First Flower1

F. D. Wilson; R. L. Wilson

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
2
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Date of first flower was analyzed in parental, F 1 F 2 , and backcross generations of two cultivars and three Texas race stocks of cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.). The cultivar ‘Deltapine 16’ (DPL) differed from Texas 203 (T‐203) by an additive component and from Texas 40Y (T‐40Y) by an additive and an epistatic component. T‐203 and T‐40Y were similar phenotypically but showed slight genetic differences from one another in flowering response. Both differed from the third race stock, Texas 711 (T‐711), by at least two genetic factors. DPL‐16 differed from T‐711 by more factors for flowering response than T‐203 or T‐40Y. The other cultivar, ‘Stoneville 7A’ (St 7A), seemed closely related phenotypically to DPL‐16. However, the hybrid combination between the two revealed significant additive, dominance, and epistatic effects. St 7A differed genetically from T‐40Y but not from T‐203 for date of first flower. St 7A, like DPL‐16, was quite different from T‐711. Favorable F 1 ‐midparent heterosis was exhibited by two of the 10 hybrid combinations, DPL‐16 ✕ T‐711 and St 7A ✕ T‐711.

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 11

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Deltapine 16 differed from Texas 203 for flowering by an additive component.

Material
Deltapine 16e0
Outcome
additive componente0
Comparator
Texas 203e0

Not reportedDirection

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

“The cultivar ‘Deltapine 16’ (DPL) differed from Texas 203 (T‐203) by an additive component”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 164–254 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Deltapine 16 differed from Texas 40Y by additive and epistatic components.

Outcome
additive and an epistatic componente0
Comparator
Texas 40Ye0

Not reportedMaterialDirection

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

“from Texas 40Y (T‐40Y) by an additive and an epistatic component”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 259–323 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Texas 203 and Texas 40Y were phenotypically similar but genetically differed slightly in flowering response.

Material
T‐203 and T‐40Ye0
Outcome
slight genetic differences from one another in flowering responsee0

Not reportedDirection

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

“T‐203 and T‐40Y were similar phenotypically but showed slight genetic differences from one another in flowering response”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–445 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Texas 203 and Texas 40Y each differed from Texas 711 by at least two genetic factors.

Material
Texas 711e0
Outcome
at least two genetic factorse0

Not reportedDirection

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

“Both differed from the third race stock, Texas 711 (T‐711), by at least two genetic factors”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 447–538 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

DPL-16 differed from Texas 711 by more flowering factors than Texas 203 or Texas 40Y.

Material
DPL‐16e0
Outcome
factors for flowering responsee0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
T‐203 or T‐40Ye0

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

“DPL‐16 differed from T‐711 by more factors for flowering response than T‐203 or T‐40Y”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 540–625 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stoneville 7A seemed phenotypically close to DPL-16.

Material
Stoneville 7Ae0
Outcome
closely related phenotypicallye0
Comparator
DPL‐16e0

Not reportedDirection

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

“‘Stoneville 7A’ (St 7A), seemed closely related phenotypically to DPL‐16”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 647–719 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The Stoneville 7A by DPL-16 hybrid showed significant additive, dominance, and epistatic effects.

Outcome
additive, dominance, and epistatic effectse0

Not reportedDirection

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

“the hybrid combination between the two revealed significant additive, dominance, and epistatic effects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 730–832 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stoneville 7A differed genetically from Texas 40Y for first flowering date.

Material
St 7Ae0
Outcome
date of first flowere0
Comparator
T‐40Ye0

Not reportedDirection

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

“St 7A differed genetically from T‐40Y but not from T‐203 for date of first flower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–915 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stoneville 7A did not differ genetically from Texas 203 for first flowering date.

Material
St 7Ae0
Outcome
date of first flowere0
Comparator
T‐203e0

Not reportedDirection

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

“St 7A differed genetically from T‐40Y but not from T‐203 for date of first flower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–915 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stoneville 7A, like DPL-16, was quite different from Texas 711.

Material
St 7Ae0
Outcome
quite differente0
Comparator
T‐711e0

Not reportedDirection

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

“St 7A, like DPL‐16, was quite different from T‐711”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 917–967 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two crosses with Texas 711 showed favorable F1 midparent heterosis.

Outcome
Favorable F 1 ‐midparent heterosise0
Value
two of the 10 hybrid combinationse0

Not reportedDirection

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

“Favorable F 1 ‐midparent heterosis was exhibited by two of the 10 hybrid combinations, DPL‐16 ✕ T‐711 and St 7A ✕ T‐711”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 969–1088 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–162 · show in text ↑