Paper · 2013 · PubMed

[Effects of water and nitrogen regulation on the yield and water and nitrogen use efficiency of cotton in south Xinjiang, Northwest China under plastic mulched drip irrigation].

Zhong Deng; Dan Bai; Guo-Liang Zhai; et al.

20
claims
40
verbatim quotes
17
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment with three irrigation amounts and five nitrogen application levels was conducted to investigate the effects of water and nitrogen regulation on the growth characteristics, yield component factors, and water and nitrogen use efficiency of cotton in south Xinjiang under mulched drip irrigation. With the increasing amount of irrigation, the plant height, leaf number on main stem, boll number, LAI, and dry matter accumulation in leaf and stem improved significantly, but the root growth was restrained. As compared with low and high irrigation amounts (4950 and 6750 mm x hm(-2), respectively), medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2)) increased the available bolls per plant and the single boll mass averagely by 0.96 and 0.4 and by 0.22 and 0.11 g, respectively. When the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), as compared with other nitrogen application levels, the stem diameter increased significantly, and the growth of bud, boll, and root was accelerated. Moreover, the allocation ratio of dry matter from nutritional organs to reproductive organs under medium irrigation amount increased by 5.1% and 29.6% respectively, as compared with that under low and high irrigation amounts. Irrigation amount had significant effects on the cotton yield but little effects on the lint percentage, whereas nitrogen application level had definite effects on the cotton yield and lint percentage. However, low irrigation amount restrained the effects of nitrogen application on yield enhancement. In this experiment, when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, 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 20

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing irrigation significantly improved cotton height, main-stem leaf number, and boll number.

Treatment
increasing amount of irrigatione0
Outcome
plant height, leaf number on main stem, boll numbere0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“With the increasing amount of irrigation, the plant height, leaf number on main stem, boll number, LAI, and dry matter accumulation in leaf and stem improved significantly, but the root growth was restrained.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–521 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing irrigation significantly improved cotton LAI and leaf and stem dry matter accumulation.

Treatment
increasing amount of irrigatione0
Outcome
LAI, and dry matter accumulation in leaf and steme0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“With the increasing amount of irrigation, the plant height, leaf number on main stem, boll number, LAI, and dry matter accumulation in leaf and stem improved significantly, but the root growth was restrained.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–521 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing irrigation restrained cotton root growth.

Treatment
increasing amount of irrigatione0
Outcome
root growthe0
Direction
restrainede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“With the increasing amount of irrigation, the plant height, leaf number on main stem, boll number, LAI, and dry matter accumulation in leaf and stem improved significantly, but the root growth was restrained.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 313–521 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased available bolls by 0.96 per plant versus low irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2))e0
Outcome
available bolls per plante0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.96e0
Comparator
lowe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“As compared with low and high irrigation amounts (4950 and 6750 mm x hm(-2), respectively), medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2)) increased the available bolls per plant and the single boll mass averagely by 0.96 and 0.4 and by 0.22 and 0.11 g, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–786 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased available bolls by 0.4 per plant versus high irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2))e0
Outcome
available bolls per plante0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.4e0
Comparator
high irrigation amountse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“As compared with low and high irrigation amounts (4950 and 6750 mm x hm(-2), respectively), medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2)) increased the available bolls per plant and the single boll mass averagely by 0.96 and 0.4 and by 0.22 and 0.11 g, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–786 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased single boll mass by 0.22 g versus low irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2))e0
Outcome
single boll masse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.22e0
Comparator
lowe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“As compared with low and high irrigation amounts (4950 and 6750 mm x hm(-2), respectively), medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2)) increased the available bolls per plant and the single boll mass averagely by 0.96 and 0.4 and by 0.22 and 0.11 g, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–786 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased single boll mass by 0.11 g versus high irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2))e0
Outcome
single boll masse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.11 ge0
Comparator
high irrigation amountse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“As compared with low and high irrigation amounts (4950 and 6750 mm x hm(-2), respectively), medium irrigation amount (5850 mm x hm(-2)) increased the available bolls per plant and the single boll mass averagely by 0.96 and 0.4 and by 0.22 and 0.11 g, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–786 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen at 300 kg x hm(-2) significantly increased stem diameter over other levels.

Treatment
300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
stem diametere0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
other nitrogen application levelse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“When the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), as compared with other nitrogen application levels, the stem diameter increased significantly, and the growth of bud, boll, and root was accelerated.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 787–993 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen at 300 kg x hm(-2) accelerated bud, boll, and root growth.

Treatment
300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
growth of bud, boll, and roote0
Direction
acceleratede0
Comparator
other nitrogen application levelse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“When the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), as compared with other nitrogen application levels, the stem diameter increased significantly, and the growth of bud, boll, and root was accelerated.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 787–993 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased dry matter allocation to reproductive organs by 5.1% versus low irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amounte0
Outcome
allocation ratio of dry matter from nutritional organs to reproductive organse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
5.1%e0
Comparator
lowe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“the allocation ratio of dry matter from nutritional organs to reproductive organs under medium irrigation amount increased by 5.1% and 29.6% respectively, as compared with that under low and high irrigation amounts.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1004–1219 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medium irrigation increased dry matter allocation to reproductive organs by 29.6% versus high irrigation.

Treatment
medium irrigation amounte0
Outcome
allocation ratio of dry matter from nutritional organs to reproductive organse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
29.6%e0
Comparator
high irrigation amountse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“the allocation ratio of dry matter from nutritional organs to reproductive organs under medium irrigation amount increased by 5.1% and 29.6% respectively, as compared with that under low and high irrigation amounts.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1004–1219 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation amount significantly affected cotton yield.

Treatment
Irrigation amounte0
Outcome
cotton yielde0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“Irrigation amount had significant effects on the cotton yield but little effects on the lint percentage, whereas nitrogen application level had definite effects on the cotton yield and lint percentage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1421 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation amount had little effect on lint percentage.

Treatment
Irrigation amounte0
Outcome
lint percentagee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“Irrigation amount had significant effects on the cotton yield but little effects on the lint percentage, whereas nitrogen application level had definite effects on the cotton yield and lint percentage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1421 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen application level affected cotton yield and lint percentage.

Treatment
nitrogen application levele0
Outcome
cotton yield and lint percentagee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“Irrigation amount had significant effects on the cotton yield but little effects on the lint percentage, whereas nitrogen application level had definite effects on the cotton yield and lint percentage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1421 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low irrigation restrained nitrogen-driven yield enhancement.

Treatment
low irrigation amounte0
Outcome
effects of nitrogen application on yield enhancemente0
Direction
restrainede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“low irrigation amount restrained the effects of nitrogen application on yield enhancement.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1521 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined 5850 mm x hm(-2) irrigation and 300 kg x hm(-2) nitrogen treatment optimized plant shape and promoted dry matter allocation.

Treatment
irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramaticallye0
Direction
promoted dramaticallye0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1542–2014 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined treatment increased available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage.

Treatment
irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentagee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1542–2014 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined treatment gave the highest cotton yield of 6992.33 kg x hm(-2).

Treatment
irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
cotton yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
6992.33 kg x hm(-2)e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1542–2014 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water use efficiency under the combined treatment was 1.45 kg x m(-3).

Treatment
irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
watere0
Value
1.45 kg x m(-3)e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1542–2014 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen use efficiency under the combined treatment was 45.9%.

Treatment
irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2)e0
Outcome
nitrogen use efficiencye0
Value
45.9%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“when the irrigation amount was 5850 mm x hm(-2) and the nitrogen application level was 300 kg x hm(-2), the cotton grew healthily, the plant shape structure was optimized, the dry matter allocation to reproductive organs was promoted dramatically, the available bolls, single boll mass, and lint percentage increased, the cotton yield reached the highest (6992.33 kg x hm(-2)), and the water and nitrogen use efficiency amounted to 1.45 kg x m(-3) and 45.9%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1542–2014 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

103 papers: 65 positive, 38 negative or no effect

64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. no effect

99 papers more in this group

See all 103 papers →

irrigation · nutrient: efficiency · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 16 positive, 3 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

nitrogen · nutrient: efficiency · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

36 papers: 27 positive, 9 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

32 papers more in this group

See all 36 papers →

in vitro · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 30 positive, 9 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 papers →

irrigation · quality: grain · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

134 papers: 73 positive, 61 negative or no effect

72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

130 papers more in this group

See all 134 papers →

irrigation · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

144 papers: 101 positive, 43 negative or no effect

100 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

140 papers more in this group

See all 144 papers →

nitrogen · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

153 papers: 129 positive, 24 negative or no effect

128 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

149 papers more in this group

See all 153 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

343 papers: 286 positive, 57 negative or no effect

285 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

339 papers more in this group

See all 343 papers →

8 of 10 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.