4.7 Article

Managing mepiquat chloride and plant density for optimal yield and quality of cotton

期刊

FIELD CROPS RESEARCH
卷 149, 期 -, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.04.014

关键词

Plant growth regulator; Lint yield; Yield components; Fiber length; Fiber strength; Micronaire

类别

资金

  1. '948' Program [2011-G19]
  2. Transgenic major project [2012ZX08013010]
  3. program of the Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System [CARS-18-18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The growth regulator mepiquat chloride (MC) is used in cotton production across the globe to control plant growth and maximize yield and quality of cotton. With the conversion from hand picking to mechanical harvesting in China, plant densities are increased, and more compact plants are required, leading to the need to reconsider MC application schedules. Experiments were carried out in 2009 and 2010 to identify optimal use schedules of MC at four plant densities: 3.0, 4.5, 6.0 and 7.5 plants m(-2). Eleven MC schedules were compared with respect to their effect on cotton yield and quality. Application of MC at squaring stage or at both squaring and flowering stages significantly improved cotton quality parameters: fiber length (by 1.7%) and fiber strength (by 2.8%) at all tested plant densities without significant loss of yields. However, average lint yield of all MC treatments over all densities and years was decreased by 4.6% due to a decrease in boll density and lint percentage which was only partly offset by an increase in boll weight. No effects on yield were also observed if MC applications were started at flowering stage, but such later starting application schedules only slightly improved fiber quality. The results suggest that use of MC at squaring or at both squaring and flowering stages is a viable strategy to improve cotton architecture, productivity and quality at high plant density in mechanized cotton production in the Yellow River cotton growing region in China. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据