Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:40:53.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intra-varietal variability and response to single plant selection in Gossypium hirsutum L.: I. Phenotypic variability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. J. Thomson
N. J. Thomson
Affiliation:
Division of Land Research, CSIRO, P.O. Box 1666, Canberra City, A.C.T. 2601, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Populations of spaced plants of each of the four American upland cotton varieties Deltapine Smooth Leaf, Rex Smooth Leaf, Pope, and Rex and one African upland variety, Bar 7/8, were grown in the 1965–6 wet season at Kimberley Research Station, in the Ord River valley, Western Australia. The number of bolls, boll weight, lint percentage, seed cotton yield, lint yield, micronaire value, mature height, and morphological type were recorded for each plant.

For all varieties the range of each attribute was wide; for example, for a typicalvariety, boll weight ranged from 3·0 to 7·8 g, lint percentage from 30·5 to 43·5%, micronaire value from 3·3 to 5·9 units, and mature height from 78 to 195 cm.

The most variable varieties judged on coefficients of variation were those maintained at the station for the longest period without selection while the most recent accession was the least variable.

Frequency distributions for all attributes in each population departed significantly from normality: the majority showed both significant skewness and kurtosis. Positive skewness shown for the yield parameters seed-cotton yield, lint yield, boll number and boll weight in all varieties suggested there was scope for improvement by selection. Negative skewness for lint percentage was found in three varieties, suggesting previous intense selection for this trait. The coefficient of variation of lint percentage with one variety (Deltapine Smooth Leaf) was considerably less than that recorded 30 years earlier for its predecessor D x PL 11 A.

Covariance adjustments to seed cotton yield of individual plants, based on various hypotheses of the relationship between a plant's yield and that of its neighbours failed to give reductions of consequence in the variability of yield. It was concluded that inter-plant influences were far more complex than the models assumed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 80 , Issue 1 , February 1973 , pp. 135 - 145
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Arnold, M. H. (1970). Cotton improvement in East Africa. In Crop Improvement in East Africa (ed. Leakey, C. L. P.), pp. 178–208. Farnham: Royal Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Bary, A. A. A. & Bishr, M. A. (1967). Fundamental studies for the improvement of Egyptian cotton. 4. Giza 59 cotton. Alex. J. agric. Res. 14, 55–99.Google Scholar
Bary, A. A. A. & Bishr, M. A. (1969). Evaluation of the new cotton variety Giza 69. Cott. Grow. Rev. 46, 98–104.Google Scholar
Bishr, M. A. & Bary, A. A. A. (1967). Effect of selection within selfed lines on yield and other fibre properties in Egyptian cotton, Giza 45. Cott. Grow. Rev. 44, 184–9.Google Scholar
Brown, H. B. & Ware, J. O. (1958). Cotton. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc.Google Scholar
Dunlavy, H. (1923). Correlation of characters in Texas cotton. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 15, 444–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A., Immer, F. R. & Tedin, O. (1932). The genetical interpretation of statistics of the third degree in the study of quantitative inheritance. Genetics, Princeton 17, 107–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harland, S. C. (1949). Methods and results of selection experiments with Peruvian Tanguis cotton. I. A survey of present methods of cotton breeding and a description of the ‘Mass Pedigree System’. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 26, 163–74.Google Scholar
Hodson, E. A. (1920). Correlations of certain characters in cotton. Bull. Ark. agric. Exp. Stn, p. 169.Google Scholar
Humphrey, L. M. (1940). Effects of inbreeding cotton with special reference to staple length and lint percentage. Bull. Ark. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 387.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, J. B. (1955). Sources of gene material for cotton improvement. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 32, 102–7.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, J. B. (1959). The Application of Genetics to Cotton Improvement. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Immer, F. R. (1942). Distribution of yields of single plants of varieties and F 2 crosses of barley. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 34, 844–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Innes, N. L. (1966). Promising selections from Albar A (57) 12 in the Sudan. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 43 263–72.Google Scholar
Justus, N. (1960). Residual heterozygosity in a variety of Upland cotton as measured by micronaire, lint percent, percent first harvest, and yield of lint. Agron. J. 52, 555–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kira, T., Ogawa, H. & Sakazaki, N. (1953). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. 1. Competition–yield–density interrelationships in regularly dispersed populations. Inst. Polytech., Osaka City Univ. D 4, 1–16.Google Scholar
Lee, B. J. S. (1962). Modal and positive bulks in plant breeding. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 39, 181–7Google Scholar
Manning, H. L. (1963). Realized yield improvement from twelve generations of progeny selection in a variety of upland cotton. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. F.), pp. 329–49. Publ. No. 982. Washington D.C.: National Academy of Sciences–National Research Council.Google Scholar
Mead, R. (1967). A mathematical model for the estimation of inter-plant competition. Biometrics 23, 189–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mead, R. (1968). Measurement of competition between individual plants in a population. J. Ecol. 56, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, V. G. (1969). Some effects of genes, cytoplasm, and environment on male sterility of cotton (Gossypium). Crop Sci. 9, 237–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moosberg, C. A. (1953). Breeding cottons resistant to bacterial blight disease. Bull. Ark. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 534.Google Scholar
Parker, M. W. & Cralley, E. M. (1963). Naming and release of a commercial variety of upland cotton-Rex Smoothleaf. University of Arkansas and ARS-U.S.D.A. (prooessed).Google Scholar
Ramey, H. H. (1966). Historical review of cotton variety development. Proc. Beltwide Cott. Res. Conf. 18th Cott. Imp. Conf. pp. 310–26.Google Scholar
Richmond, T. R. (1951). Procedures and methods of cotton breeding with special reference to American cultivated species. Adv. Genet. 4, 213–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riggs, T. J. (1967). Response to modal selection in upland cotton in Northern and Eastern Uganda. Cott. Grow. Rev. 44, 176–83.Google Scholar
Rose, M. F. (1951). The Nuba Mountains cotton crop: some factors affecting yield. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 28, 103–13.Google Scholar
Smith, A. L. (1964). Leaf trichomes of upland cotton varieties. Crop. Sci. 4, 348–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, W. R. (1965). The effect of density on the performance of individual plants in subterranean clover swards. A.uat. J. agric. Res. 16, 541–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroman, G. N. (1930). Biometrical relationships of certain characters of Upland cotton. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 22, 327–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoday, J. M. (1959). Effects of disruptive selection. Genetic flexibility. Heredity, Lond. 13, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, N. J. (1965). Cotton variety trials in the Ord valley, north-western Australia. 2. Performance of a group of varieties over three seasons. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 42, 249–62.Google Scholar
Thomson, N. J. (1966). Cotton variety trials in the Ord valley, north-western Australia. 4. Natural crossing of cotton. Emp. Cott. Grow. Rev. 43, 18–21.Google Scholar
Thomson, N. J. (1970). Comparisons of cotton varieties in the Ord valley, Western Australia. Cott. Grow. Rev. 47, 174–90.Google Scholar
Walker, J. T. (1965). Modal selection in upland cotton. Cott. Grow. Corp. Res. Memo. no. 55.Google Scholar