Paper · 2019 · Agronomy

Planting Density Induced Changes in Cotton Biomass Yield, Fiber Quality, and Phosphorus Distribution under Beta Growth Model

Aziz Khan; Xiangjun Kong; Ullah Najeeb; et al.

13
claims
26
verbatim quotes
30
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

High input costs combined with multiple management and material inputs have threatened cotton productivity. We hypothesize that this problem can be addressed by a single fertilization at flowering with late sowing in a moderately populated plant stand. Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the cotton biomass accumulation, phosphorus dynamics, and fiber quality under three planting densities (low, 3 × 104; moderate, 6 × 104; and dense, 9 × 104 ha−1) and two cultivars (Zhongmian-16 and J-4B). High planting density had 6.2 and 12.6% larger stems and fruiting nodes m−2, while low density produced a 37.5 and 59.4% maximum height node ratio. Moderate density produced 26.4–15.5%, 24.7–12.6%, and 10.5–13.6% higher biomass accumulation rate at the peak bloom, boll set, and plant removal stages over low and high density in both years, respectively. J-4B produced a higher reproductive organs biomass yield when compared with Zhongmian-16 in both years. This higher biomass formation was due to both the higher average (0.8 VT kg·ha−1·d−1) and maximum (1.0 VM kg·ha−1·d−1) reproductive organ phosphorus uptake, respectively. Plants with low density had 5.3–18.5%, 9.5–15%, and 7.8–12.8% greater length, strength, and micronaire values over moderate and dense plants, respectively. Conclusively, moderate density with J-4B is a promising option for improved biomass, phosphorus acquisition, and fiber quality under a short season.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High density increased stem number by 6.2%.

Treatment
High planting densitye0
Outcome
stemse0
Direction
largere0
Value
6.2e0

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

“High planting density had 6.2 and 12.6% larger stems and fruiting nodes m−2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 503–578 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High density increased fruiting node number by 12.6%.

Treatment
High planting densitye0
Outcome
fruiting nodes m−2e0
Direction
largere0
Value
12.6%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

e0

“High planting density had 6.2 and 12.6% larger stems and fruiting nodes m−2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 503–578 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low density raised maximum height node ratio.

Treatment
low densitye0
Outcome
maximum height node ratioe0
Value
37.5 and 59.4%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

e0

“low density produced a 37.5 and 59.4% maximum height node ratio”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 586–649 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate density increased peak bloom biomass accumulation rate.

Organ / stage
peak bloome0
Treatment
Moderate densitye0
Outcome
biomass accumulation ratee0
Direction
highere0
Value
26.4–15.5%e0
Comparator
low and high densitye0

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

“Moderate density produced 26.4–15.5%, 24.7–12.6%, and 10.5–13.6% higher biomass accumulation rate at the peak bloom, boll set, and plant removal stages over low and high density in both years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate density increased boll set biomass accumulation rate.

Organ / stage
boll sete0
Treatment
Moderate densitye0
Outcome
biomass accumulation ratee0
Direction
highere0
Value
24.7–12.6%e0
Comparator
low and high densitye0

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

“Moderate density produced 26.4–15.5%, 24.7–12.6%, and 10.5–13.6% higher biomass accumulation rate at the peak bloom, boll set, and plant removal stages over low and high density in both years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate density increased biomass accumulation at plant removal.

Organ / stage
plant removale0
Treatment
Moderate densitye0
Outcome
biomass accumulation ratee0
Direction
highere0
Value
10.5–13.6%e0
Comparator
low and high densitye0

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

“Moderate density produced 26.4–15.5%, 24.7–12.6%, and 10.5–13.6% higher biomass accumulation rate at the peak bloom, boll set, and plant removal stages over low and high density in both years, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–856 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

J-4B produced higher reproductive organ biomass than Zhongmian-16.

Material
J-4Be0
Outcome
reproductive organs biomass yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
Zhongmian-16e0

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

“J-4B produced a higher reproductive organs biomass yield when compared with Zhongmian-16 in both years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 858–960 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher average phosphorus uptake contributed to higher biomass.

Organ / stage
reproductive organe0
Outcome
phosphorus uptakee0
Direction
highere0
Value
0.8 VT kg·ha−1·d−1e0

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

“higher average (0.8 VT kg·ha−1·d−1) and maximum (1.0 VM kg·ha−1·d−1) reproductive organ phosphorus uptake”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1012–1117 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher maximum phosphorus uptake contributed to higher biomass.

Organ / stage
reproductive organe0
Outcome
phosphorus uptakee0
Direction
highere0
Value
1.0 VM kg·ha−1·d−1e0

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

“higher average (0.8 VT kg·ha−1·d−1) and maximum (1.0 VM kg·ha−1·d−1) reproductive organ phosphorus uptake”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1012–1117 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low density increased fiber length by 5.3–18.5%.

Treatment
low densitye0
Outcome
lengthe0
Direction
greatere0
Value
5.3–18.5%e0
Comparator
moderate and dense plantse0

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

“Plants with low density had 5.3–18.5%, 9.5–15%, and 7.8–12.8% greater length, strength, and micronaire values over moderate and dense plants, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1287 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low density increased fiber strength by 9.5–15%.

Treatment
low densitye0
Outcome
strengthe0
Direction
greatere0
Value
9.5–15%e0
Comparator
moderate and dense plantse0

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

“Plants with low density had 5.3–18.5%, 9.5–15%, and 7.8–12.8% greater length, strength, and micronaire values over moderate and dense plants, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1287 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low density increased fiber micronaire by 7.8–12.8%.

Treatment
low densitye0
Outcome
micronaire valuese0
Direction
greatere0
Value
7.8–12.8%e0
Comparator
moderate and dense plantse0

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

“Plants with low density had 5.3–18.5%, 9.5–15%, and 7.8–12.8% greater length, strength, and micronaire values over moderate and dense plants, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1287 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Moderate density with J-4B was recommended for biomass, phosphorus and fiber quality.

Material
J-4Be0
Outcome
moderate density with J-4B is a promising optione0

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

“moderate density with J-4B is a promising option for improved biomass, phosphorus acquisition, and fiber quality under a short season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1303–1436 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42 · show in text ↑

density · phenology · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 6 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

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

46 papers: 39 positive, 7 negative or no effect

38 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

42 papers more in this group

See all 46 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.