Paper · 2010 · Journal of Irrigation and Drainage

Effects of Subsurface Waterlogging Following after Surface Waterlogging in Period of Cotton Budding to Flowering and Bearing Bolls on Leaf Photosynthesis

Wu Qixia

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Experiments of subsurface waterlogging following surface waterlogging related to cotton were done,and photosynthetic indices of functional leaf of the crop were observed during watery stress and after that phase.The results showed that the relevant indices such as relative value of chlorophyll(Rc),neat photosynthetic velocity(Pn),water use efficiency of leaf(WUEL) are reduced gradually along with increase of the extent of subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogging,while stomatal conductance of leaf(Gs) is towards increase,reduction of output was more than 22%,cotton yield of the most serious treatment reduced to a half.According to the trial results,and for purpose of cotton plants to restore their normal growth,the paper suggested that depressing the water level to 80 cm of ground in 3 to 6 days,and fertilizing into cotton field should be conducted moderately at the 5th day or 6th day after surface waterlogging to be eliminated.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf chlorophyll declined as subsurface waterlogging increased.

Treatment
subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogginge0
Outcome
relative value of chlorophyll(Rc)e0
Direction
reduced graduallye0

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

e0

“relative value of chlorophyll(Rc),neat photosynthetic velocity(Pn),water use efficiency of leaf(WUEL) are reduced gradually along with increase of the extent of subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–476 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf net photosynthesis declined with increasing subsurface waterlogging.

Treatment
subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogginge0
Outcome
neat photosynthetic velocity(Pn)e0
Direction
reduced graduallye0

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

e0

“relative value of chlorophyll(Rc),neat photosynthetic velocity(Pn),water use efficiency of leaf(WUEL) are reduced gradually along with increase of the extent of subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–476 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf water use efficiency declined with increasing subsurface waterlogging.

Treatment
subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogginge0
Outcome
water use efficiency of leaf(WUEL)e0
Direction
reduced graduallye0

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

e0

“relative value of chlorophyll(Rc),neat photosynthetic velocity(Pn),water use efficiency of leaf(WUEL) are reduced gradually along with increase of the extent of subsurface waterlogging after surface waterlogging”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–476 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf stomatal conductance increased.

Outcome
stomatal conductance of leaf(Gs)e0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

e0

“stomatal conductance of leaf(Gs) is towards increase”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 483–535 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Output fell by more than 22%.

Outcome
outpute0
Direction
reductione0
Value
more than 22%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

e0

“reduction of output was more than 22%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 536–573 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The most severe treatment halved cotton yield.

Treatment
the most serious treatmente0
Outcome
cotton yielde0
Direction
reducede0
Value
a halfe0

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

e0

“cotton yield of the most serious treatment reduced to a half”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 574–634 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend lowering the water level to 80 cm within 3 to 6 days after surface waterlogging.

Outcome
depressing the water level to 80 cm of ground in 3 to 6 dayse0

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

e0

“depressing the water level to 80 cm of ground in 3 to 6 days”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 755–815 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend moderate fertilization on day 5 or 6 after surface waterlogging ends.

Outcome
fertilizing into cotton field should be conducted moderately at the 5th day or 6th day after surface waterlogging to be eliminatede0

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

e0

“fertilizing into cotton field should be conducted moderately at the 5th day or 6th day after surface waterlogging to be eliminated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 820–950 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–91 · show in text ↑

flooding · physiology: pigments · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

6 papers: 0 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

flooding · physiology: photosynthesis · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 2 positive, 12 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

flooding · physiology: water · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 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.