Abstract
In North Carolina, double cropping cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) often results in sub-optimal cotton yield and minimal investment return, most often due to lack of sufficient stand as a result of moisture limitations and a short growing season. Relay intercropping of cotton in wheat prior to harvest may be an alternative to traditional double cropping. A relay intercropping system was tested at five locations over three years in North Carolina to determine thrips infestation, cotton yield, and economic return following relay intercropping of cotton and wheat. Relay intercropped wheat yield ranged from 65% to 85% of conventional wheat plantings. Cotton yields were not affected by the presence of relay-intercropped wheat, but plant maturity was delayed in some experiments. Intercropped cotton plants exhibited similar morphology to cotton planted in a traditional strip tillage system with wheat terminated two wks prior to planting with increased nodes above cracked boll, suggesting delayed plant development. In four of five locations, thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae ) populations were lower in the intercropped cotton, most likely due to interference of the ability of thrips to locate cotton seedlings. Thrips levels when seed was treated with abamectin plus thiamethoxam plus azoxystrobin and an additional in-furrow application of aldicarb or acephate applied to foliage were less than that of seed treated with azoxystrobin alone. Estimated economic return of intercropped cotton and wheat equaled that of conventional cotton planting and exceeded double cropping of wheat followed by soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] most years when cotton, soybean, and wheat prices were set at $1.98 kg -1 lint, $0.44 kg -1 , and $0.25 kg -1 , respectively.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Relay intercropped wheat yielded 65% to 85% of conventional wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Relay intercroppede0
- Outcome
- wheat yielde0
- Value
- 65% to 85%e0
- Comparator
- conventional wheat plantingse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Relay intercropped wheat yield ranged from 65% to 85% of conventional wheat plantings”
Claim · model-written summary
Relay intercropped wheat did not affect cotton yield.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- presence of relay-intercropped wheate0
- Outcome
- Cotton yieldse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cotton yields were not affected by the presence of relay-intercropped wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Relay intercropping delayed cotton maturity in some experiments.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Relay Intercropping with Wheatt0
- Outcome
- plant maturitye0
- Direction
- delayede0
- Qualifier
- some experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant maturity was delayed in some experiments”
t0“Cotton Response to Relay Intercropping with Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped cotton had similar morphology to strip-till cotton, with more nodes above cracked boll.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- Intercroppede0
- Outcome
- nodes above cracked bolle0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- cotton planted in a traditional strip tillage systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropped cotton plants exhibited similar morphology to cotton planted in a traditional strip tillage system with wheat terminated two wks prior to planting with increased nodes above cracked boll”
Claim · model-written summary
Thrips populations were lower in intercropped cotton at four of five locations.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- intercroppede0
- Outcome
- thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae ) populationse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- four of five locationse0
ThripsNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In four of five locations, thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae ) populations were lower in the intercropped cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed treatment with abamectin, thiamethoxam and azoxystrobin plus aldicarb or acephate reduced thrips relative to azoxystrobin alone.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- abamectin plus thiamethoxam plus azoxystrobin and an additional in-furrow application of aldicarb or acephate applied to foliagee0
- Outcome
- Thrips levelse0
- Direction
- less thane0
- Comparator
- seed treated with azoxystrobin alonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Thrips levels when seed was treated with abamectin plus thiamethoxam plus azoxystrobin and an additional in-furrow application of aldicarb or acephate applied to foliage were less than that of seed treated with azoxystrobin alone”
t0“Cotton Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped cotton and wheat had economic return equal to conventional cotton.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- intercropped cotton and wheate0
- Outcome
- Estimated economic returne0
- Direction
- equalede0
- Comparator
- conventional cotton plantinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Estimated economic return of intercropped cotton and wheat equaled that of conventional cotton planting”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped cotton and wheat exceeded wheat-soybean double cropping in estimated economic return most years.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- intercropped cotton and wheate0
- Outcome
- Estimated economic returne0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Qualifier
- most yearse0
- Comparator
- double cropping of wheat followed by soybeane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Estimated economic return of intercropped cotton and wheat equaled that of conventional cotton planting and exceeded double cropping of wheat followed by soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] most years”
The same questions in other papers
Triticum aestivum · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →abamectin · Thrips · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
azoxystrobin · Thrips · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Triticum aestivum · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
thiamethoxam · Thrips · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →aldicarb · Thrips · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
9 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →acephate · Thrips · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
10 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →intercropping · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
84 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
100 papers more in this group
See all 104 papers →8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.