Influence of early defoliation on cotton yield, seed quality, and fiber properties

Snipes, Charles E.; Baskin, Charles C.

doi:10.1016/0378-4290(94)90042-6

Cited by 71 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Night temperature of 16°C has been found most suitable for defoliation (Cathey, 1986). Cotton defoliation is often practiced when 60% of bolls are opened to avoid loss in yield and fibre quality (Snipes and Baskin, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Harvest – Aid Defoliants and Environmental Conditions in High Density Cotton

Mrunalini¹,

Rekha²,

Murthy³

2018

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Harvest – Aid Defoliants and Environmental Conditions in High Density Cotton

Mrunalini¹,

Rekha²,

Murthy³

2018

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Defoliating cotton to improve grade can negatively affect yield and yield components (Barker et al, 1976). If cotton is defoliated too early, yields can be compromised significantly because boll development is incomplete, whereas delaying defoliation allows immature bolls to develop, potentially enhancing yields (Snipes and Baskin, 1994). However, delaying defoliation increases risks of yield loss to early frosts and inclement weather, both of which are possible in North Carolina during the later boll development period.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using OBPD as a predictive model for defoliant timing, Snipes and Baskin (1994) report yield losses and decreases in micronaire resulting from early defoliation and recommend that defoliants be applied after 60% of the bolls are open. Sassenrath‐Cole and Hedin (1996) later report boll opening may be more reflective of boll age rather than maturity, thus using OBPD as a benchmark for timing defoliation may result in significant deviations from optimal fiber quality.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Defoliation Timing on Yields and Quality of Two Cotton Cultivars

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

laying defoliation allows immature bolls to develop, potentially enhancing yields (Snipes and Baskin, 1994). The timing of certain cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) managementHowever, delaying defoliation increases risks of yield practices varies according to the yield potential and quality characterloss to early frosts and inclement weather, both of which istics associated with a variety. A defoliation timing study was perare possible in North Carolina during the later boll formed to (i) determine if certain cultivars respond differently to defoliation timings and (ii) compare the use of the open boll percent-development period. Defoliation timing also affects varage at defoliation (OBPD), nodes above cracked boll (NACB), and ious cotton quality characteristics. Later applications of micronaire readings at defoliation for their effectiveness in timing defoliants can result in increased length (UHM), length defoliation. The study was conducted in 1999, 2000, and 2001. Treatuniformity (UI) (Laferney et al., 1963), and micronaire ments consisted of two proprietary cultivars (ST 474 and DP 5409), (Kelley and Boman 1999, 2000). This situation results in each defoliated on the basis of OBPD measurements. At the time of extremely difficult management decisions that indirectly defoliation, NACB was recorded and lint samples were retained for protect against high micronaire readings yet may negalater high volume instrumentation (HVI) analysis. Neither variety tively affect yields and length potential.produced consistently higher yields than the other in this study. In Cultivar selection is a critical management tool since 2000, delaying defoliation from 40 to 60 OBPD would have resulted both yield and quality characteristics are influenced by in a significant addition of approximately 75 kg lint ha Ϫ1 for either variety. Stoneville 474 micronaire was highest in all years suggesting NACB as a means of timing defoliation, provided the P.O. Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695; Randy Wells, North Carolina State crop is uniform in emergence and fruiting

show abstract

“…the total from two or more sequential harvests (Harris and Smith, 1980;Kerby et al, 1990;Munir et al, 2015), the proportion of bolls harvested on early-fruiting sites (Fry, 1985), the nodes above the white flower (McConnell et al, 1993), the node number of the first fruiting branch (Ray and Richmond, 1966;Kerby et al, 1990), the percentage of open bolls (Snipes and Baskin, 1994;Bange et al, 2010), and the nodes above the cracked boll (Bednarz et al, 2002;Faircloth et al, 2004;Bange et al, 2010). The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of shading at early flowering and N top-dressing rates on relative cotton earliness using plant mapping.…”

Section: Shading and Nitrogen Effects On Cotton Earliness Assessed Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

Shading and Nitrogen Effects on Cotton Earliness Assessed by Boll Yield Distribution

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shading and N fertilization affect fruit distribution in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), but there is no detailed information on earliness of crop maturity according to phenological development. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of shading at early flowering and N top‐dressing rates on relative cotton earliness using plant mapping. Field experiments were conducted in Itapeva (16 d of shading; and 0, 60, 120, and 180 kg N ha−1) and Chapadão do Sul (17 d of shading; 0, 80, and 160 kg N ha−1; and early‐ and full‐season cultivars), Brazil. Seed cotton yield was grouped by phenological position (PP) according to the standard phenological scale, for interpolation calculation at each 10% increment in accumulated harvestable yield (Ac), weighted average PP (PPwa) determination, and logistic‐regression analysis. Crop maturity earliness was predicted based on the reduction in PPwa and in PP. Shading increased PP up to 10 and 30% of Ac due to a decrease of 33 and 40% in the number of bolls on early fruiting sites in Itapeva and Chapadão do Sul, respectively, but did not affect PPwa. Increases in PP up to high Ac percentages and in PPwa values were observed at the two higher N rates in both experiments, mainly due to lower and higher boll number at earlier and later fruiting sites, respectively. Short‐term shading during early flowering of cotton changed yield distribution by decreasing boll number on early fruiting sites, but did not affect the earliness of crop maturity. Earliness was decreased by high N rates due to higher cumulative seed cotton yield at later fruiting sites.

show abstract

Influence of early defoliation on cotton yield, seed quality, and fiber properties

Cited by 71 publications

References 2 publications

Effectiveness of Harvest – Aid Defoliants and Environmental Conditions in High Density Cotton

Effectiveness of Harvest – Aid Defoliants and Environmental Conditions in High Density Cotton

The Influence of Defoliation Timing on Yields and Quality of Two Cotton Cultivars

Shading and Nitrogen Effects on Cotton Earliness Assessed by Boll Yield Distribution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About