Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:18:30.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transplanting improves the allometry and fiber quality of Bt cotton in cotton–wheat cropping system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2019

Muhammad Asghar Shah ,
Mubshar Hussain ,
Muhammad Shahzad ,
Khawar Jabran ,
Sami Ul-Allah  and
Muhammad Farooq Open the ORCID record for Muhammad Farooq [Opens in a new window]
Muhammad Asghar Shah
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan-60000, Pakistan Department of Agronomy, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University, Bahawalpur-63100, Pakistan
Mubshar Hussain*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan-60000, Pakistan School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
Muhammad Shahzad
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University, Bahawalpur-63100, Pakistan
Khawar Jabran
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Sciences, Department of Plant Protection, Duzce University, Duzce-81620, Turkey
Sami Ul-Allah
Affiliation:
College of Agriculture, BZU Sub Campus, Layyah-31200, Pakistan
Muhammad Farooq*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, College of Agricultural and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Al-Khoud 123, Oman Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
*
*Corresponding authors: Emails: farooqcp@gmail.com; mubashiragr@gmail.com
*Corresponding authors: Emails: farooqcp@gmail.com; mubashiragr@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In cotton–wheat cropping system of Pakistan, wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is harvested in late April; however, the optimum sowing time of Bt cotton is mid-March. This indicates a time difference of 4–6 weeks between the harvest of wheat and cotton sowing. It is hypothesized that this overlapping period may be managed by transplanting cotton seedlings (30–45 days old) in late April, after the harvest of wheat due to better performance of already established seedlings. To this end, this study was conducted to evaluate the allometric traits and fiber quality of transplanted Bt cotton after harvesting wheat in the cotton–wheat cropping system. The Bt cotton–wheat cropping systems were flat sown wheat (FSW)–conventionally tilled cotton, FSW–zero tilled cotton, ridge sown wheat–ridge transplanted cotton using 30- and 45-days-old seedlings, and bed sown wheat (BSW)–bed transplanted cotton (BTC) also using 30- and 45-days-old seedlings. The study was conducted at Vehari and Multan in Punjab, Pakistan. Bt cotton in BSW–BTC with 45-days-old seedlings showed better performance for allometric (leaf area index; (LAI), net assimilation rate; (NAR), and crop growth rate; (CGR)), seed cotton yield, and fiber traits (fiber uniformity, fiber length, fiber strength, and fiber fineness) in comparison to other treatments. Most of the fiber quality traits were positively correlated with allometric traits and biological yield (dry matter yield at maturity) at both locations, except correlations of CGR and LAI with fiber fineness and fiber length and NAR with fiber length. As plant growth and fiber quality of transplanted cotton was significantly higher than conventionally grown cotton, our data indicate transplanting is an interesting management practice for improving productivity in wheat–cotton cropping systems.

Keywords

Cropping systemCotton transplantationAllometric traitsFiber quality
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 26 - 36
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmad, S., Faiz, S., Riaz, A., Bashir, I. and Zeb, A. (2016). Correlation analysis of morphological and fiber quality traits in upland Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). International Journal of Biosciences 9, 200–208.Google Scholar
Bange, M.P. and Milory, S.P. (2004). Growth and dry matter partitioning of diverse cotton genotypes. Field Crops Research 87, 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bange, M.P. and Milroy, S.P. (2001). Timing of crop maturity in cotton: impact of dry matter production and partitioning. Field Crops Research 2, 143–155.Google Scholar
Bednarz, C.W., Shurley, W.D., Anthony, W.S. and Nichols, R.L. (2005). Yield, quality and portability of cotton produced at varying plant densities. Agronomy Journal 97, 235–240.Google Scholar
Cathey, G.W. and Meredith, W.R. (1988). Cotton response to planting date and mepiquat chloride. Agronomy Journal 80, 463–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, J. and Dong, H. (2014). Intensive cotton farming technologies in China: Achievements, challenges and countermeasures. Field Crops Research 155, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, H.Z., Li, W.J., Tang, W., Li, Z.H. and Zhang, D.M. (2005b). Increased yield and revenue with a seedling transplanting system for hybrid seed production in Bt cotton. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 191, 116–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, H., Li, W., Tang, W., Li, Z. and Zhang, D. (2007). Enhanced plant growth, development and fiber yield of Bt transgenic cotton by an integration of plastic mulching and seedling transplanting. Industrial Crops and products 26, 298–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, P.R. and Gupta, R.K. (2003). Resource conserving technologies for wheat in the rice–wheat system. In Improving Productivity and Sustainability of Rice–Wheat Systems: Issues and Impact, 149–171 (Eds Ladha, Jagdish K., Hill, James E., Duxbury, John M., Gupta, Raj K. and Buresh, Roland J.). Madison, Wisconsin, USA: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Hunt, R. (1978). Plant Growth Analysis. The institute Biology’s studies in Biology No. 96. London, UK: Edward Arnold Ltd, 8–38.Google Scholar
Jahromi, A.M. and Mahboubi, M. (2012). Evaluate the cotton transplantation and its impact on yield performance components in saline lands. Advances in Environmental Biology 6, 1304–1306.Google Scholar
Johnson, J., Macdonald, S., Meyer, L., Skelly, C. and Stone, L. (2016). The World and United States Cotton Outlook. Washington DC, USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Khan, M.B., Yousaf, F., Hussain, M., Haq, M.W., Lee, D.J. and Farooq, M. (2012). Influence of planting methods on root development, crop productivity and water use efficiency in maize hybrids. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 72, 556–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klimek-Kopyra, A., Zając, T. and Rębilas, K. (2013). A mathematical model for the evaluation of cooperation and competition effects in intercrops. European Journal of Agronomy 51, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liptay, A., Bolton, E.F. and Dirks, V.A. (1982). A comparison of field seeded and transplanted tomatoes grown on a clay soil. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 62, 483–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mao, S.C., Li, P.C., Hang, Y.C., Wang, G.P., Li, Y.B. and Wang, X.H. (2008). Preliminary observation on morphological parameters of root system of the root-naked transplanting cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Cotton Science 20, 76–78 (in Chinese, with English abstract)Google Scholar
Men, X., Ge, F., Liu, X. and Yardin, E.N. (2003). Diversity of arthropod communities in transgenic Bt. and non-transgenic cotton agro-ecosystems. Environmental Entomology 32, 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, J.F. (1996). Cotton classification and quality. In The Cotton Industry in the United States, 51–57 (Eds Glade, E.H. Jr., Meyer, L.A. and Stults, H.). USDA-ERS Agric. Econ. Rep. 739. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Print. Office.Google Scholar
Shah, M.A., Farooq, M. and Hussain, M. (2016). Productivity and profitability of wheat-cotton system as influenced by relay intercropping of insect resistant transgenic cotton in bed planted wheat. European Journal of Agronomy 75, 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, M.A., Farooq, M. and Hussain, M. (2017b). Evaluation of transplanting BT cotton in a cotton-wheat cropping system. Experimental Agriculture 53, 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, M.A., Farooq, M., Shahzad, M., Khan, M.B. and Hussain, M. (2017a). Yield and phenological response of Bt cotton to different sowing dates in semi-arid climate. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 54, 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahzad, M., Farooq, M., Hussain, M. (2016). Weed spectrum in different wheat-based cropping systems under conservation and conventional tillage practices in Punjab, Pakistan. Soil and Tillage Research 163, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Six, J., Feller, C., Denef, K., Ogle, S.M., De Moraes Sa, J.C. and Albrecht, A. (2002). Soil organic matter, biota and aggregation in temperate and tropical soils-Effects of no-tillage. Agronomie 22, 755–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triplett, G.B. and Dick, W.A. (2008). No-Tillage crop production a revolution in agriculture. Agronomy Journal 100, 153–165.Google Scholar
Watson, D.J. (1947). Comparative physiological studies in the growth of field crops. I: Variation in net assimilation rate and leaf area between species and varieties, and within and between years. Annals of Botany 11, 41–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zając, T., Oleksy, A., Stokłosa, A., Klimek-Kopyra, A., Styrc, N., Mazurek, R. and Budzyński, W. (2014). Pure sowings versus mixtures of winter cereal species as an effective option for fodder-grain production in temperate zone. Field Crops Research 166, 152–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H.J., Dong, H.Z. and Li, W.J. (2011). Dead mycelium of Penicillium chrysogenum protects transplanted cotton plants agains fungal wilts in a saline field. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 873–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Shah et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Shah et al. supplementary material(File)
File 16.1 KB