Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Crop and Pasture Science Crop and Pasture Science Society
Plant sciences, sustainable farming systems and food quality
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > CP > AR07423
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 59(8)

Managing yields of high fruit retention in transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) using sowing date

Michael P. Bange A C , Sarah J. Caton A and Stephen P. Milroy B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A CSIRO Plant Industry and Cotton Catchment Communities Cooperative Research Centre, Locked Bag 59, Narrabri, NSW 2390, Australia.

B CSIRO Plant Industry, Private Bag 5, Wembley, WA 6913, Australia.

C Corresponding author. Email: Michael.Bange@csiro.au

Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 59(8) 733-741 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR07423
Submitted: 13 November 2007  Accepted: 9 May 2008   Published: 29 July 2008

Abstract

Recently, genetically engineered (transgenic) cottons expressing genes from Bacillis thuringiensis (Bt) have been made available to cotton growers throughout the world. In Australia, cotton growers have access to Bt cotton that contains genes expressing the insecticidal proteins Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab (Bollgard II®). Bollgard II offers significant potential to reduce pesticide use for the control of major Lepidopteran pests (particularly Helicoverpa spp. in Australia). As a consequence of the improved insect control, retention of squares (flower buds) and young bolls is higher in Bollgard II varieties than in non-Bollgard varieties. A concern raised by Australian cotton growers is that in some regions, yield potential for Bollgard II may be limited because the demands of earlier high fruit retention reduce resources for continued growth and fruiting, thus leading to earlier maturity and reduced yield. Non-Bollgard crops with high early retention are known to mature earlier sometimes reducing yield.

Three field experiments over three seasons, which varied sowing date and compared non-Bollgard II and Bollgard II cotton cultivars, were conducted to test the hypothesis that delaying sowing date in Bollgard II will increase canopy size (without delaying crop development) and alleviate the potential concerns for the effect of higher fruit retention reducing canopy size and the time to maturity, limiting the yield of Bollgard II. In non-Bollgard II crops, larger canopies resulting from early loss of fruit or apical meristem damage can support more fruit growth for longer, provided season length allows fruit to mature. Results showed that delayed sowing did not increase the yield of the Bollgard II cultivar through increased leaf area index at flowering compared with normal sowing dates. However, in comparison with the conventional cultivar, which had yields that became lower with later sowings, Bollgard II maintained its yield presumably through the shorter fruiting cycle (because of its consistently higher earlier fruit retention), allowing time to support growth of the same number of bolls as earlier sowings. Improvements in fibre quality were also recorded with later sowings for both cultivars. Varying sowing dates for Bollgard II in different production regions may offer opportunities for Australian growers to help optimise yield, fibre quality, and reduce risks associated with poor crop establishment when crops are sown too early.

Additional keywords: transgenic Bt cotton, Bollgard, leaf area, yield.


Acknowledgments

Thanks to Greg Constable and other reviewers for helpful discussion and comments on the manuscript. Thanks also to Graeme Rapp and Darin Hodgson for assistance in the field, and Cotton Seed Distributors for providing the seed. This work was partially funded by the Australian Cotton Research and Development Corporation.


References


Bange MP, Milroy SP (2000) Timing of crop maturity in cotton—impact of dry matter production and partitioning. Field Crops Research 68, 143–155.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Bange MP, Milroy SP (2004) Growth and dry matter partitioning of diverse cotton genotypes. Field Crops Research 87, 73–87.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Bauer PJ, Frederick JR, Bradow JM, Sadler EJ, Evans DE (2000) Canopy photosynthesis and fiber properties of normal- and late-planted cotton. Agronomy Journal 92, 518–523. open url image1

Brook KD, Hearn AB, Kelly CF (1992) Response of cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L., to damage by insect pests in Australia: manual simulation of damage. Journal of Economic Entomology 85, 1368–1377. open url image1

Constable GA, Harris NV, Paull RE (1976) The effect of planting date on the yield and some fibre properties of cotton in the Namoi Valley. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 16, 265–271.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Constable GA , Shaw AJ (1988) Temperature requirements for cotton. Agfact P5.3.5. Division of Plant Industries, New South Wales Department of Agriculture.

Cothren JT (1999) Physiology of the cotton plant. In ‘Cotton origin, history, technology, and production’. (Eds C Wayne Smith, JT Cothren) pp. 207–269. (John Wiley and Sons Inc.: Chichester, UK)

Deutscher SA , Wilson LJ , Mensah R (2004) ‘Integrated pest management guidelines for cotton production systems in Australia.’ (The Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre: Narrabri, NSW)

Dong H, Li W, Tang W, Li Z, Zhang D, Niu Y (2006) Yield, quality and leaf senescence of cotton grown at varying planting dates and plant densities in the Yellow River Valley of China. Field Crops Research 98, 106–115.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Fitt GP (1994) Cotton pest management: Part 3. An Australian perspective. Annual Review of Entomology 39, 543–562.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Fitt GP (2000) An Australian approach to IPM in cotton: integrating new technologies to minimise insecticide dependence. Crop Protection 19, 793–800.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Gibb D (1999) Monitoring fruit retention. IPM Guidelines Supporting Document 10. (Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre: Narrabri, NSW)

Hearn AB (1969) The growth and performance of cotton in a desert environment. II. Dry matter production. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 73, 75–86. open url image1

Hearn AB (1972) The growth and performance of rain-grown cotton in a tropical upland environment. II. The relationship between yield and growth. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 79, 137–145. open url image1

Hearn AB , Constable GA (1984) Cotton. In ‘The physiology of tropical field crops’. (Eds PR Goldsworthy, NM Fisher) pp. 495–527. (John Wiley and Sons Ltd: Chichester, UK)

Hearn AB , Fitt GP (1992) Cotton cropping systems. In ‘Ecosystems of the world—field crop ecosystems’. (Ed. CJ Pearson) pp. 85–142. (Elsevier: London)

Hofs JL, Hau B, Marais D (2006) Boll distribution patterns in Bt and non-Bt cotton cultivars. I. Study on commercial irrigated farming systems in South Africa. Field Crops Research 98, 203–209.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Kelly D, Bange MP, Constable GA (2006) Micronaire and heat in 2005–06. Australian Cottongrower 27, 8–12. open url image1

Kelly D , McLennen A , Pyke B , Hickman M , Deutscher SA , Kauter G (2004) Industry perceptions on management issues associated with Bollgard II®. In ‘Proceedings Australian Cotton Conference’. pp. 215–220. (Australian Cotton Growers Research Association: Broadbeach, Qld)

Mason TG (1922) Growth and abscission in sea island cotton. Annals of Botany 36, 457–484. open url image1

Mauney JR (1986) Vegetative growth and development of fruiting sites. In ‘Cotton physiology’. (Eds JR Mauney, McD Stewart) pp. 11–28. (The Cotton Foundation: Memphis, TN)

May OL, Bourland FM, Nichols RL (2003) Challenges in testing transgenic and nontransgenic cotton cultivars. Crop Science 43, 1594–1601. open url image1

Oosterhuis DM , Jernstedt J (1999) Morphology and anatomy of the cotton plant. In ‘Cotton origin, history, technology, and production’. (Eds C Wayne Smith, JT Cothren) pp. 175–206. (John Wiley and Sons Inc.: Chichester, UK)

Perlak FJ, Deaton RW, Armstrong TA, Fuchs RL, Sims SR, Greenplate JT, Fischhoff DA (1990) Insect resistant cotton plants. Bio-Technology 8, 939–943.
| PubMed |
open url image1

Pettigrew WT, Adamczyk JJ (2006) Nitrogen fertility and planting date effects on lint yield and Cry1Ac (Bt) endotoxin production. Agronomy Journal 98, 691–697.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Reddy KR, Hodges HF, McKinion JM (1997) Crop modeling and applications: a cotton example. Advances in Agronomy 59, 225–290.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Sadras VO (1996) Cotton compensatory growth after loss of reproductive organs as affected by availability of resources and duration of recovery period. Oecologia 106, 432–439.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Taylor I , Charles G (2002) Managing Roundup Ready® Cotton. In ‘WEEDpak’. (Eds G Charles, S Johnson, G Roberts, I Taylor) pp. E2.1–E2.8. (The Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre: Narrabri, NSW)

Wilson LJ , Mensah RK , Fitt GP (2004) Implementing integrated pest management in Australian cotton. In ‘Novel aproaches to isect pst mnagement in feld and potected cops’. (Eds A Rami Horowitz, I Ishaaya) pp. 97–118. (Springer-Verlag: Berlin)

Wilson LJ, Sadras VO, Heimoana SC, Gibb D (2003) How to succeed by doing nothing: cotton compensation after simulated early season pest damage. Crop Science 73, 2125–2134. open url image1