HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Reddy, K. R. Articles by Reddy, V. R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Reddy, K. R. Articles by Reddy, V. R. Agricola Articles by Reddy, K. R. Articles by Reddy, V. R. Related Collections Agroclimatology Crop Growth and Development Nitrogen Cotton Global Change Plant and Environment Interactions

Interactive Effects of Carbon Dioxide and Nitrogen Nutrition on Cotton Growth, Development, Yield, and Fiber Quality

^a Dep. of Plant and Soil Sci., 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State Univ., Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
^b USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Res. Cent., P.O. Box 19687, New Orleans, LA 70179, USA
^c USDA-ARS, Alternate Crops and Syst. Lab., Bldg. 001, Rm. 342, BARC-W, 10300 Baltimore Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705, USA

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Temporal trends in cotton leaf N concentrations as influenced by N and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]). Fitted regressions are (a) subambient [CO2]: y = –0.113 (±0.052) x + 47.65 (±2.3), r2 = 0.30 for N+ (N supplied throughout the plant growth period) and y = –0.36 (±0.048) x + 52.81 (±02.15), r2 = 0.84 for N– (N withdrawn from nutrient solution from flowering to harvest) treatments; (b) ambient [CO2]: y = –0.21 (±0.049) x + 49.14 ( ± 2.1), r2 = 0.63 for N+ and y = –0.404 (±0.045) x + 44.52 (±2.02), r2 = 0.88 for N–; and (c) elevated [CO2]: y = –0.22 (±0.046) x + 44.74 (±2.04), r2 = 0.68 for N+ and y = –0.408 (±0.041) x + 37.77 (±1.82), r2 = 0.90 for N– treatments.

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Fiber length, diameter, and short fiber content as a function of leaf N concentrations (g kg–1) during the boll maturation period in cotton. Observations are from plants that were grown under three levels of carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]), two levels of N, and seven groups of bolls grouped based on flowering dates. Fitted regressions are (a) y = –0.0003x2 + 0.0224x + 0.6968, r2 = 0.63, n = 42 for mean fiber length (mm); (b) y = –0.0031x2 + 0.118x + 12.394, r2 = 0.61, n = 42 for mean fiber diameter (µ); and(c) y = –0.005x2 + 0.189x + 17.647, r2 = 0.50, n = 42 for short fiber content (%).

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Micronafis (µAFIS), cross-sectional area, and circularity as a function of leaf N concentrations (g kg–1) during the boll maturation period in cotton. Observations are from plants that are grown under three levels of carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]), two levels of N, and seven groups of bolls grouped based on flowering dates. Fitted regressions are (a) y = –0.002x2 + 0.0612x + 4.2543, r2 = 0.65, n = 42 for micronafis; (b) y = –0.0387x2 + 1.335x + 105.8, r2 = 0.76, n = 42 for average cross-sectional area (µm2); and (c) y = –0.0002x2 + 0.0069x + 0.4545, r2 = 0.74, n = 42 for average circularity ().

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Immature fiber fraction and fine fiber fraction as a function of leaf N concentrations (g kg–1) during the boll maturation period in cotton. Observations are from plants that are grown under three levels of carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]), two levels of N, and seven groups of bolls grouped based on flowering dates. Fitted regressions are (a) y = 0.0102x2 – 0.3354x + 13.487, r2 = 0.65, n = 42 for immature fiber fraction (%) and (b) y = 0.019x2 – 0.662x + 19.744, r2 = 0.67, n = 42 for fine fiber fraction (%).