Abstract
Abstract The majority of irrigated cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) soils in Australia are poorly drained, and the short‐term waterlogging associated with extended furrow irrigation reduces cotton yield, partly by reducing the uptake of N. Foliar application of N before irrigation can overcome a transient shortage, but yield responses have been variable. Seasonal and soil N fertility effects on the response of waterlogged cotton to foliar‐applied N fertilizer were studied over three seasons at Narrabri, N.S.W., Australia. A cracking grey clay soil (Typic Pellustert) was waterlogged by furrow irrigations lasting 4 to 32 h. Climatic and soil fertilizer conditions included a cool, moist season with optimal soil fertilizer N; a hot, arid season with high soil fertilizer N; and a hot, arid season with a wide range of soil fertilizer N. Foliar N was applied at 0, 5, 10, and 20 kg ha −1 in the first season, 0, 15, 30, and 60 kg ha −1 in the second season, and 0, 60, 120, and 180 kg ha −1 in the third season. Increased waterlogging reduced N uptake and lint yield. Nevertheless, there was no response to foliar N in the cool, moist season because factors other than N limited growth and yield whether or not N was supplied to the foliage. Lack of response to foliar N in the hot, arid season with high soil N fertility was attributed to high uptake of N (163 kg N ha −1 ) by untreated shoots, which compensated for reduced uptake by the roots during waterlogging. A three‐factor interaction in the third season confirmed that more cotton yield was recovered by applying foliar N under more severe waterlogging when soil N levels were not high. At N rates of 120 and 180 kg ha −1 , shoots recovered more soil‐applied N than foliar‐applied N. Recoveries were similar at 60 kg N ha −1 . The results confirmed that foliar N can ameliorate the effects of waterlogging in cotton, defined some of the conditions under which responses to foliar N occur, and explained some of the variability in response to foliar N found under commercial conditions.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
More waterlogging reduced cotton N uptake and lint yield.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increased waterlogging reduced N uptake and lint yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar N produced no response in the cool moist season.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“there was no response to foliar N in the cool, moist season”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar N also produced no response in the hot arid season with high soil N.
- Treatment
- foliar Ne0
- Outcome
- responsee0
- Direction
- Lack of responsee0
- Qualifier
- hot, arid season with high soil N fertilitye0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Lack of response to foliar N in the hot, arid season with high soil N fertility”
Claim · model-written summary
Untreated shoots took up 163 kg N ha −1 in the high-N season, compensating for lower root uptake.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“high uptake of N (163 kg N ha −1 ) by untreated shoots, which compensated for reduced uptake by the roots during waterlogging”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar N recovered more cotton yield under more severe waterlogging when soil N was not high.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- applying foliar Ne0
- Outcome
- cotton yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- under more severe waterlogging when soil N levels were not highe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more cotton yield was recovered by applying foliar N under more severe waterlogging when soil N levels were not high”
Claim · model-written summary
At N rates of 120 and 180 kg ha −1, shoots recovered more soil-applied than foliar-applied N.
- Treatment
- soil‐applied Ne0
- Outcome
- Ne0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- At N rates of 120 and 180 kg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- foliar‐applied Ne0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“At N rates of 120 and 180 kg ha −1 , shoots recovered more soil‐applied N than foliar‐applied N.”
Claim · model-written summary
At 60 kg N ha −1, soil and foliar N recoveries were similar.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“Recoveries were similar at 60 kg N ha −1 .”
The same questions in other papers
application · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 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.