Abstract
New transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) technologies Bollgard II/Roundup Ready Flex (BGII/RRF) provide additional mechanisms for the cotton crop to retain early initiated fruiting structures positioned in the lower canopy. It may be possible, therefore, for early fruit retention to become too high with these new technologies resulting in early cutout and reduced yield. The objective of this investigation was to determine if glyphosate‐induced differences in early season retention occur between BGII/RRF and the older Bollgard/Roundup Ready (BG/RR) technologies and if so, to test if these differences in retention impact crop maturity, yield, or quality under irrigated and nonirrigated conditions. A study was conducted in 2004 and 2005 at two locations in southwestern Georgia to compare the two technologies under dryland vs. irrigation with or without flower removal. The BG/RR matured later than BGII/RRF when glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stages. The BG/RR compensated for fruit loss by producing heavier remaining bolls. The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications and produced a higher percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR. The BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes while BG/RR produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes. Flower removal did not negatively affect BGII/RRF or BG/RR yields. Few differences in fiber quality were observed. The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR but also cutout earlier. Yield differences between the two technologies may be due to agronomic performance of the variety backgrounds used.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR cotton matured later than BGII/RRF when glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stages.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume7 - Material
- BG/RRe0
- Organ / stage
- seventh and 11th leaf stagese0
- Treatment
- glyphosate was applied latee0
- Outcome
- maturede0
- Direction
- latere0
- Comparator
- BGII/RRFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BG/RR matured later than BGII/RRF when glyphosate was applied late at the seventh and 11th leaf stages”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR cotton compensated for fruit loss by producing heavier remaining bolls.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BG/RRe0
- Outcome
- remaining bollse0
- Direction
- heaviere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BG/RR compensated for fruit loss by producing heavier remaining bolls”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cotton maturity was unaffected by late glyphosate applications.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Treatment
- late glyphosate applicationse0
- Outcome
- maturitye0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cotton produced a higher percentage of plants with a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Organ / stage
- lower canopye0
- Outcome
- percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- BG/RRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF maturity was unaffected by the late glyphosate applications and produced a higher percentage of plants having a harvestable boll in the lower canopy than BG/RR”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Organ / stage
- first sympodial position at lower main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- boll number and weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF cotton had increased boll number and weight at the first sympodial position at lower main stem nodes”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BG/RR cotton produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BG/RRe0
- Organ / stage
- upper main stem nodese0
- Outcome
- bollse0
- Direction
- more and heaviere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“while BG/RR produced more and heavier bolls on upper main stem nodes”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Flower removal did not negatively affect BGII/RRF or BG/RR cotton yields.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BGII/RRF or BG/RRe0
- Treatment
- Flower removale0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flower removal did not negatively affect BGII/RRF or BG/RR yields”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Few differences in cotton fiber quality were observed between the technologies.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Outcome
- fiber qualitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Few differences in fiber quality were observed”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cotton retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume7
- Material
- BGII/RRFe0
- Outcome
- early reproductive structurese0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- BG/RRe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR but also cutout earlier”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
BGII/RRF cotton cut out earlier than BG/RR.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The BGII/RRF retained more early reproductive structures than BG/RR but also cutout earlier”
e7“transgenic cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
glyphosate · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.