Physiological and molecular adjustment of cotton to waterlogging at peak-flowering in relation to growth and yield

Zhang, Yanjun; Song, Xuezhen; Yang, Guozheng; Li, Zhenhuai; Lu, Hequan; Kong, Xiangqiang; Eneji, A. Egrinya; Dong, Hezhong

doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2015.05.001

Cited by 74 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(53 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reduction in the chlorophyll content could lower the efficiency of cotton to convert light energy into chemical energy, thereby suppressing the photosynthetic rate, reducing the total amount of organic synthesis, and ultimately leading to a reduction in the biomass of cotton plants. Furthermore, some experts declared that early reduction in photosynthesis is regulated by internal damage to photosystem II (PSII) and ultimately limits light interception in cotton [9,24–26]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When subjected to waterlogging stress, cotton plants can trigger the mechanisms of escape, static adaptation, and regeneration-compensation to adapt to waterlogging stress and mitigate waterlogging damage[26–27]. Through the waterlogging experiment at the whole growth stage of cotton, we found that the cotton plants exhibited a strong regeneration-compensation capacity after waterlogging at the seedling stage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Waterlogging Duration at Different Growth Stages on the Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, a soil culture experiment was set up in barrels to investigate the effect of waterlogging duration at different growth stages on the growth, yield, and quality of cotton in the Huang-Huai Region of China during summer. The experiment was conducted at four growth stages of cotton (seedling, squaring, flowering, and boll opening), and the waterlogging duration at each stage was set to five levels (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 d) and the waterlogging depth was 5cm. Twenty different treatment combinations were established, and one group without waterlogging throughout the whole growth period was used as the control (CK). The results showed that the waterlogging treatments at the different growth stages reduced the morphological and yield parameters of the cotton plants as well as the physiological parameters of the cotton leaves, and the extent of the reduction in these parameters increased with the extension of the waterlogging duration. The effect of waterlogging at different growth stages on the cotton decreased in the order of the flowering, squaring, seedling, and boll-opening stages, and the highest yield reduction rates for the four stages were 38.8%, 27.9%, 18.3%, and 7.6% respectively. Additionally, waterlogging decreased the quality parameters of cotton such as the upper-half mean length, uniformity index, micronaire value, elongation, yellowness, and lint percentage at the squaring, flowering, and boll-opening stages. Furthermore, at the seedling stage waterlogging for no more than 6 d allowed the morphological and yield parameters to recover in the boll-opening stage upon timely drainage, and these parameters showed no significant decreases compared with the CK level. The critical duration of waterlogging at the squaring stage was 4 d. However, at the flowering stage, even 2 d of waterlogging could lead to the stagnation of morphological development and prevent the recovery of the cotton yield to the CK level. Therefore, when waterlogging disasters occur in cotton fields, the implementation of appropriate surface and subsurface drainage schemes for the different growth stages is needed as soon as possible to mitigate the damage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Waterlogging Duration at Different Growth Stages on the Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Negative effects of individual stresses, that is waterlogging and shade on growth and yield of cotton have already been documented (Echer and Rosolem , Zhang et al. ); however, limited data are available on cotton responses to the combined stresses of WL and shade (Liu et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, Zhang et al. ). In addition, increased ethylene production in WL cotton tissues can induce fruit loss (Najeeb et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Incident Light Combined with Partial Waterlogging Impairs Photosynthesis and Imposes a Yield Penalty in Cotton

Ullah

Bange

Atwell

et al. 2016

J Agronomy Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through field studies, cotton responses to dual stresses -waterlogging and low light (shade) were investigated. The hypothesis was that shade would amplify yield losses in waterlogged (WL) cotton. Either early or late in the reproductive phase, the crop was WL (96 h and 120 h, in 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, respectively) and/or shaded (6 days or 9 days in 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, respectively). Waterlogging at early reproductive phase significantly reduced lint yield (17 % averaged across both years) of cotton, although shade-induced yield losses (18 %) were only significant in 2013-2014. Shade significantly exacerbated yield losses only when the impact of waterlogging damage was modest (2013-2014). More intense waterlogging impaired lint yield independently of the light levels. Yield reductions in these experiments were the consequence of both accelerated fruit abscission and fewer fruiting nodes produced. Plants had lower leaf nitrogen levels and photosynthetic rates after waterlogging and/or shade treatments and produced fewer fruiting nodes. Although long-term shade increased specific leaf area (30 %) and leaf N (20 %) immediately following 5 days of waterlogging, it did not restore shoot growth, node formation or lint yield because of suppressed photosynthetic performance (area basis) and carbohydrate supply.

show abstract

“…Waterlogging-induced yield losses in cotton have already been reported (Najeeb et al, 2015, Zhang et al, 2015, where increased fruit loss was the major cause of yield reduction. This study investigated the effect of waterlogging on the fruiting pattern of cotton across the canopy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cotton growth and yield dynamics across canopy layers in response to soil waterlogging

Ullah¹,

Tan

Bange³

2016

Aust J Crop Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to an indeterminate growth habit, we hypothesised that different canopy layers of cotton might be variably influenced by soil waterlogging. The field-grown cotton cultivar (Sicot 71BRF) was waterlogged at early (WL early , 77 days after planting [DAP]) and late reproductive phases (WL late , 101 DAP) for 120 h. Data from different canopy layers e.g. bottom eight (MSN 1-8 ), middle five (MSN 9-13 ), and upper five main stem nodes (MSN 14+ ) were collected 1 d (post-WL) and 7 d after termination of waterlogging (postrecovery). Both waterlogging events significantly reduced post-WL dry biomass, leaf N concentration and fruit development on MSN 1-8 . In addition, WL early significantly reduced photosynthesis and increased total soluble sugars (TSS) in the MSN 1-8 and MSN 14+ leaves, although MSN 14+ leaves restored photosynthesis, N levels and TSS at recovery. It suggested that WL plants maintained photosynthesis of the upper leaves possibly by transporting N from the lower canopy leaves. Reduction (22%) in seed cotton yield under WL early was the result of fruit loss from first position fruits of the upper and lower sympodial fruiting branches (FB 1-5 and FB 11+ ). Despite restoring the growth through improved photosynthesis and N supply, no yield recovery on FB 11+ suggested that the plants used these assimilates for growth of the established fruits. No significant yield reduction in response to WL late suggested that the established cotton bolls were less sensitive to abscission across all canopy layers.Keywords: Canopy layers, lint yield, growth phase, leaf development, nitrogen re-mobilisation, photosynthesis. Abbreviation: DAP_days after planting; DW_dry weight; FR_fruit retention; FB 1-5 _lower 5 fruiting nodes; FB 5-10 _middle 5 fruiting nodes; FB 11-15 _top 5 fruiting nodes; GB_green bolls; LAI_leaf area index; MS N1-8 _lower 1-8 main stem nodes; MS N9-13 _middle 9-13 main stem nodes; MS N14-18 _top 14-18 main stem nodes; NWL_non-waterlogged; P n _photosynthesis; post-recovery_7 days after termination of waterlogging; post-WL_ day after termination of waterlogging; pre-WL_pre-waterlogging; SLA_specific leaf area; SLN_specific leaf nitrogen; TSS_total soluble sugars; WL early _waterlogging at early reproductive phase; WL late _waterlogging at late reproductive phase; WL_waterlogged.

show abstract

Physiological and molecular adjustment of cotton to waterlogging at peak-flowering in relation to growth and yield

Cited by 74 publications

References 52 publications

Effect of Waterlogging Duration at Different Growth Stages on the Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton

Effect of Waterlogging Duration at Different Growth Stages on the Growth, Yield and Quality of Cotton

Low Incident Light Combined with Partial Waterlogging Impairs Photosynthesis and Imposes a Yield Penalty in Cotton

Cotton growth and yield dynamics across canopy layers in response to soil waterlogging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About