Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T13:20:22.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developing short-season cotton genotypes with high harvest index might be an advantageous option under late duration plantings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2020

Muhammad Iqbal ,
Mueen Alam Khan Open the ORCID record for Mueen Alam Khan [Opens in a new window]  and
Waqas Shafqat Chattha
Muhammad Iqbal
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, University College of Agriculture & Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
Mueen Alam Khan*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, University College of Agriculture & Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
Waqas Shafqat Chattha
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, University College of Agriculture & Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mueen.alam@iub.edu.pk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Short duration cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivar may be more profitable for the growers, as it will have shortened critical growth window for drought, heat and insect pests. Therefore, in the present research work, two cotton advance lines IUB-71 and IUB-73 along with an approved cotton cultivar IUB-13 were tested under four different sowing dates i.e. S1 (25th April), S2 (10th May), S3 (25th May) and S4 (10th June) in 2017 and 2018 under field condition. Field layout was RCBD factorial with four sowing dates as one factor and three cotton genotypes as another factor with three replications. Data were recorded for plant height, total number of nodes, bolls per plant, seed cotton yield (SCY), above ground fresh biomass (AGFB) and harvest index (HI). An overall decreasing trend with increasing sowing dates was observed in all the traits except HI that relatively increased in all the three genotypes. Within each sowing date, a higher value for each trait was observed for genotype IUB-73 except for AGFB might be due to higher reproductive allocation. It is concluded that IUB-73 due to superior SCY and HI specifically under late planting is best fit for short cotton seasons with reduced critical window for cotton management.

Keywords

above ground fresh biomasscritical windowharvest indexseed cotton yield
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , June 2020 , pp. 190 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2020

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

Austin, RB, Bingham, J, Blackwell, RD, Evans, LT, Ford, MA, Morgan, CL and Taylor, M (1980) Genetic improvements in winter wheat yields since 1900 and associated physiological changes. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 94: 675–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baloch, MJ, Khan, NU, Jatoi, WA, Hassan, G, Khakhwani, AA, Soomro, ZA and Veesar, NF (2011) Drought tolerance studies through wssi and stomata in upland cotton. Pakistan Journal of Botany 43: 2479–2484.Google Scholar
Batool, S, Khan, NU, Makhdoom, K, Bibi, Z, Hassan, G, Marwat, KB, Farhatullah, M, Raziuddin, F and Khan, IA (2010) Heritability and genetic potential of upland cotton genotypes for morpho-yield traits. Pakistan Journal of Botany 42: 1057–1064.Google Scholar
Cook, C and El-Zik, K (1993) Fruiting and lint yield of cotton cultivars under irrigated and non-irrigated conditions. Field Crops Research 33: 411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodges, HF, Reddy, KR, McKinion, JM and Reddy, VR (1993) Temperature effects on cotton. Mississippi Agric. For. Exp. Sta. Bull., 990, Mississippi State, MS.Google Scholar
Hussain, M, Ahmad, A and Zamir, SI (2007) Evaluation of agro-qualitative characters of five cotton cultivars (Gossypium hirsutum L.) grown under Toba Tek Singh conditions. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 44: 575–580.Google Scholar
Li, X, Yan, W, Agrama, H, Jia, L, Jackson, A, Moldenhauer, K, Yeater, K, McClung, A and Wu, D (2012) Unraveling the complex trait of harvest index with association mapping in rice (Oryza sativa L.). PLoS ONE, 7, 1–10.Google ScholarPubMed
Liu, T, Gu, L, Dong, S, Zhang, J, Liu, P and Zhao, B (2015) Optimum leaf removal increases canopy apparent photosynthesis, 13C-photosynthate distribution and grain yield of maize crops grown at high density. Field Crops Research 170: 32–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, H, Dai, J, Li, W, Tang, W, Zhang, D, Eneji, AE and Dong, H (2017) Yield and economic benefits of late planted short-season cotton versus full-season cotton relayed with garlic. Field Crops Research 200: 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, Q (2011) Temperature thresholds and crop production: a review. Climatic Change 109: 583–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, X, Ma, C, Yue, Y, Hu, K, Li, Y, Duan, Z, Wu, M, Tu, J, Shen, J, Yi, B and Fu, T (2015) Unravelling the complex trait of harvest index in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) with association mapping. BMC Genomics 16: 379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munir, S, Hussain, SB, Manzoor, H, Quereshi, MK, Zubair, M, Nouman, W and Manzoor, SA (2016) Heterosis and correlation in interspecific and intraspecific hybrids of cotton. Genetics and Molecular Research 15: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nasim, W, Ahmad, A, Belhouchette, H, Fahad, S and Hoogenboom, G (2016) Evaluation of the OILCROP-SUN model for sunflower hybrids under different agro-meteorological conditions of Punjab-Pakistan. Field Crops Research 188: 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PWQCP (Pest Warning & Quality Control of Pesticides) (2018) Official reports of Pest Warning and Quality control of Pesticides, Punjab. Unpublished data available Office of DG Agriculture House 21-Davis Road Lahore, Pakistan.Google Scholar
Quisenberry, JE and Roark, B (1976) Influence of indeterminate growth habit on yield and irrigation water-use efficiency in upland cotton. Crop Science 16: 762–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, M, Ullah, I, Ahsraf, M, Stewart, JM and Zafar, Y (2008) Genotypic variation for drought tolerance in cotton. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 28: 439–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, KR, Hodges, HF and Reddy, VR (1992) Temperature effects on cotton fruit retention. Agronomy Journal 84: 26–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahid, MR, Mahmood, A, Farooq, J, Shahid, MTH, Asif, M, Ramzan, M, Akram, M and Iqbal, MS (2014) The impact of sowing dates and varieties on the incidence of Oxycarenus laetus and Dysdercus koenigii on cotton. Comunicata Scientiae 5: 412–418.Google Scholar
Stiller, WN (2000) Use of physiological measurements in breeding cotton for improved water use efficiency. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Wells, R and Meredith, WR (1984) Comparative growth of obsolete and modern cotton cultivars. III. Relationship of yield to observed growth characteristics. Crop Science 24: 868–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, G, Tang, H, Nie, Y and Zhang, X (2011) Responses of cotton growth, yield, and biomass to nitrogen split application ratio. European Journal of Agronomy 35: 164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, L and Wu, J (2012) Germplasm for genetic improvement of lint yield in upland cotton: genetic analysis of lint yield with yield components. Euphytica 187: 247–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Iqbal et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S2

Download Iqbal et al. supplementary material(File)
File 20.6 KB