Abstract
Sodicity in Vertosols used for agricultural production can adversely affect the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants. Cotton produced in sodic soils has reduced dry matter and lint yield and can develop toxic plant tissue concentrations of sodium (Na) but limited tissue concentrations of phosphorus (P,) potassium (K), and micronutrients. Crops produced on sodic soils frequently suffer from aeration stress after an irrigation or rainfall event, and it was hypothesised that the adverse physical and/or chemical conditions of sodic soils may exacerbate the effects of waterlogging. We measured the impacts of sodicity on the growth, nutrition, and root recovery time of cotton during and after waterlogging in two experiments. In the first, cotton plants were subjected to a 7-day period of inundation in Grey Vertosols with a range of exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) values from 2 to 25%; 32P was placed in the pots and its accumulation in the plant was used to indicate root activity and recovery after the waterlogging event. In a second experiment, agar was dissolved in nutrient solutions with a range of Na concentrations (9, 30, and 52 mm) matching soil solution Na concentrations in sodic soils, in order to simulate a waterlogging event. Following the waterlogging event, the solutions were labelled with 32P, in order to determine the effect of sodic soil solution chemistry on the rate of recovery of cotton root function after the event. Plant nutrient analysis was used to determine the effects of sodicity and waterlogging on cotton nutrition. In both experiments, waterlogging reduced root activity and reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by the cotton plants, decreased plant P and K concentrations, and increased the plant Na concentrations. Sodicity exacerbated the effects of waterlogging on root function and cotton nutrition in the soil experiment but not in the nutrient solution experiment, suggesting that any contribution of waterlogging to the patterns of nutrient accumulation in cotton crops produced in sodic fields occurs due to soil physical factors rather than soil solution chemistry.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
Waterlogging reduced cotton root activity.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutume7 - Treatment
- waterlogginge0
- Outcome
- root activitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“waterlogging reduced root activity and reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by the cotton plants”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by cotton plants.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume7
- Treatment
- waterlogginge0
- Outcome
- uptake and transport of labelled Pe0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“waterlogging reduced root activity and reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by the cotton plants”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging decreased plant P and K concentrations in cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume7
- Treatment
- waterlogginge0
- Outcome
- plant P and K concentrationse1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“waterlogging reduced root activity and reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by the cotton plants”
e1“decreased plant P and K concentrations”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging increased plant Na concentrations in cotton.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume7
- Treatment
- waterlogginge0
- Outcome
- plant Na concentrationse2
- Direction
- increasede2
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“waterlogging reduced root activity and reduced the uptake and transport of labelled P by the cotton plants”
e2“increased the plant Na concentrations”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Sodicity exacerbated the effects of waterlogging on cotton root function and nutrition in the soil experiment.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume7
- Treatment
- Sodicitye3
- Outcome
- root function and cotton nutritione3
- Direction
- exacerbatede3
- Setting
- soil experimente3
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Sodicity exacerbated the effects of waterlogging on root function and cotton nutrition in the soil experiment”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Sodicity did not exacerbate the effects of waterlogging on cotton root function and nutrition in the nutrient solution experiment.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutume7
- Treatment
- Sodicitye3
- Outcome
- root function and cotton nutritione3
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede4
- Setting
- nutrient solution experimente4
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Sodicity exacerbated the effects of waterlogging on root function and cotton nutrition in the soil experiment”
e4“but not in the nutrient solution experiment”
e7“the growth and nutrition of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging effects on nutrient accumulation in sodic-field cotton are attributed to soil physical factors rather than soil solution chemistry.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume5
- Treatment
- waterlogginge5
- Outcome
- patterns of nutrient accumulatione5
- Qualifier
- soil physical factors rather than soil solution chemistrye5
- Setting
- sodic fieldse5
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorDirectionValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“suggesting that any contribution of waterlogging to the patterns of nutrient accumulation in cotton crops produced in sodic fields occurs due to soil physical factors rather than soil solution chemistry”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →salinity · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →flooding · nutrient: content · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- 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.