Abstract
In cotton production, a plant growth regulator is a management tool used to limit excessive cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) vegetative growth, but over-application can promote early cut-out and potentially decrease yield. Specific information on how different plant growth regulator application strategies perform in a conservation tillage system is limited. The objective of this research was to compare how different plant growth regulator strategies affected plant growth and yield across two N rates in a conservation tillage system during the 2006 to 2008 growing seasons in Alabama. Treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with a split-plot treatment restriction and four replications across five site-years. Main plots were two N rates (101 and 134 kg N/ha), and subplots were six mepiquat chloride application strategies. The 134 kg N/ha rate increased plant height two out of three years, but the most effective strategy to control plant height varied across growing season. No clear application strategy was identified that consistently minimized height to node ratios. Whole plant biomass decreased with a high mepiquat chloride application rate and late application, but only for one site-year out of five. Yield responses to mepiquat chloride application were inconsistent across growing seasons and varied from a 16% yield decrease to a 9% yield increase. Variable environmental conditions occurred across growing seasons that likely resulted in inconsistent cotton yield response to mepiquat chloride application. Although variable, our results suggest that cotton, grown in a conservation system, responded comparably to mepiquat chloride applications in conventional systems.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
The higher nitrogen rate increased cotton height in two of three years.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- 134 kg N/hae0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- two out of three yearse0
- Comparator
- 101e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 134 kg N/ha rate increased plant height two out of three years”
t0“Cotton”
e1“two N rates (101 and 134 kg N/ha)”
Claim · model-written summary
The most effective mepiquat strategy for height control varied by growing season.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- most effective strategy to control plant heighte0
- Direction
- variede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the most effective strategy to control plant height varied across growing season”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
No strategy consistently minimized height-to-node ratios.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- height to node ratiose0
- Direction
- No clear application strategye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No clear application strategy was identified that consistently minimized height to node ratios”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
High, late mepiquat application reduced biomass in one of five site-years.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- high mepiquat chloride application rate and late applicatione0
- Outcome
- Whole plant biomasse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- only for one site-year out of fivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Whole plant biomass decreased with a high mepiquat chloride application rate and late application, but only for one site-year out of five”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Mepiquat effects on yield varied from a 16% decline to a 9% increase.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- mepiquat chloride applicatione0
- Outcome
- Yield responsese0
- Direction
- inconsistente0
- Value
- 16% yield decrease to a 9% yield increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield responses to mepiquat chloride application were inconsistent across growing seasons and varied from a 16% yield decrease to a 9% yield increase”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Variable environmental conditions likely explained inconsistent cotton yield responses.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- inconsistent cotton yield responsee0
- Qualifier
- Variable environmental conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Variable environmental conditions occurred across growing seasons that likely resulted in inconsistent cotton yield response to mepiquat chloride application”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton in conservation tillage responded comparably to mepiquat as cotton in conventional systems.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- responded comparablye0
- Comparator
- conventional systemse0
- Setting
- conservation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cotton, grown in a conservation system, responded comparably to mepiquat chloride applications in conventional systems”
The same questions in other papers
mepiquat chloride · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 38 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →chloride · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 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.