Abstract
Narrow or ultra narrow row production system has been suggested as an alternative strategy instead of conventional to increase yield and to reduce cotton input cost. However, the performance of this production system at different regions around the world cotton belt may need more evaluation. This study was conducted to evaluate this prospect in a marginal cotton belt. In this task, we compared three cropping systems in terms of conventional row (CR; 96 cm 16 plants/m(2)), narrow row high plant density (NRHPD; 48 cm, 32 plants/m(2)) and narrow row low plant density (NRLPD; 16 plants/m(2)). Effects of these systems on seedcotton yield, boll weight and its components, seed weight and lint quality parameters, were studied during two growing seasons. The seed cotton yield was significantly (P <= 0.05) higher in NRHPD compared to CR and NRLPD, but this fact seemed to be dependent upon the weather conditions. Boll weight and its components were constantly lower (P <= 0.05) in NRHPD compared to CR and NRLPD. From the examined lint properties, micronaire and 50% span length were negatively affected (P <= 0.05) by high plant density in narrow row. The other lint quality parameters were not consistently affected by plant density and row spacing.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
NRHPD had significantly higher seed cotton yield than CR and NRLPD, depending on weather.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- NRHPDe0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- dependent upon the weather conditionse0
- Comparator
- CR and NRLPDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton”
e0“The seed cotton yield was significantly (P <= 0.05) higher in NRHPD compared to CR and NRLPD, but this fact seemed to be dependent upon the weather conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
NRHPD had significantly lower boll weight and its components than CR and NRLPD.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- NRHPDe0
- Outcome
- Boll weight and its componentse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- CR and NRLPDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton”
e0“Boll weight and its components were constantly lower (P <= 0.05) in NRHPD compared to CR and NRLPD.”
Claim · model-written summary
High plant density in narrow rows negatively affected lint micronaire and 50% span length.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- high plant density in narrow rowe0
- Outcome
- micronaire and 50% span lengthe0
- Direction
- negatively affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton”
e0“From the examined lint properties, micronaire and 50% span length were negatively affected (P <= 0.05) by high plant density in narrow row.”
Claim · model-written summary
Other lint quality parameters were not consistently affected by density and spacing.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- plant density and row spacinge0
- Outcome
- other lint quality parameterse0
- Direction
- not consistently affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton”
e0“The other lint quality parameters were not consistently affected by plant density and row spacing.”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.