Hail Damage to Upland Cotton¹

Abstract

There has been very little scientific data published on the effect of hail damage on Upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) because of the nature of the problem and difficulty in setting up an appropriate, experimentally sound investigation. A hailstorm on June 26, 1971 made it possible to collect data on the effect of differential damage to individual Upland cotton plants. Three injury classes were established: 1) slight — some stem and leaf damage; 2) moderate — terminal bud lost plus some leaf and stem damage; 3) severe — terminal bud lost plus extensive stem and leaf damage. Effects of hail damage were determined by tagging 5 plants per injury class within each of 10 replications of 5 cultivars. Data were obtained from each of the five plants per injury class for each of the characteristics reported. An application of 47 kg/ha additional N after the hailstorm did not increase the yield of cotton. The lack of response to N, however, may have been caused by the 78 kg/ha N applied before the hail damage occurred. This amount of N is usually adequate for cotton grown on Cecil sandy loam. The number of productive plants was significantly higher in the slight‐ and moderate‐injury classes than in the severe class. As injury increased, individual plant yield decreased significantly in a ratio of 5:3:1 for the slight, moderate, and severe classes, respectively. Plants in the severe‐injury class had a lower lint percentage than plants in slight‐ or moderate‐injury classes. There was no significant effect on fiber length or strength, but finer fibers were produced by plants in the severe‐injury class.

Effect of physical damage to early‐ and late‐maturing cotton cultivars

“…Lint turnout was affected when damage occurred at greater intensity at early‐season timings. These results agree with the findings of Peacock and Hawkins (1974), who found that plants severely injured early in the season had less lint turnout than plants with no injury or moderate injury. However, Smith and Varvil (1981) conducted research that did not observe any differences in lint turnout regardless of damage.…”

“…No differences in micronaire were observed when damage occurred at first bloom or first bloom + 4 wk regardless of damage intensity. Similar findings were reported by Peacock and Hawkins (1974) as well as Smith and Varvil (1981) who found micronaire decreased as damage intensity increased. However, while differences in micronaire were observed, they did not affect price discount.…”

“…Differences in micronaire could be attributed to the lack of fiber wall development indicating immaturity of lint fibers rather than mature fibers with low micronaire. An in‐depth explanation of this observation is described by Peacock and Hawkins (1974); delayed maturity is commonly associated with lower micronaire.…”

“…This variation is greatly influenced by the growth stage or timing at which the damage occurs as well as the severity or intensity of the damage itself (MSU, 2014; Smith & Varvil, 1981). Lane (1959), Smith and Varvil (1981), and Peacock and Hawkins (1974) all attempted to quantify yield loss due to crop damage. Several environmental factors affected final cotton yield after physical damage occurred such as temperature, soil moisture, and disease pressure.…”

Response of Upland Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to Fruiting Branch Removal

“…In addition, hail storm could also damage terminal buds, causing severe yield loss in cotton. For example, in an assessment of five cotton cultivars after a natural hail storm, Peacock and Hawkins (1974) found that terminal bud loss at the early growth stage accounted for 39 % yield reduction. In contrast, manual excising of plant growing tips/terminal buds before squaring in Australia resulted in increased yields owing to a significant increase in lateral branch growth that later contributed to a higher fruiting potential and increased light interception (Lei and Gaff 2003).…”