Crop Science Grow Your Career with CSSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published in Crop Sci 19:567-570 (1979)
© 1979 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dilbeck, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Quisenberry, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Dilbeck, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Quisenberry, J. E.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dilbeck, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Quisenberry, J. E.

Stormproof Boll in Upland Cotton. I. Development of Instrumentation and an Inheritance Study1

R. E. Dilbeck and J. E. Quisenberry2

The stormproof boll is a desirable trait for cultivars of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) grown for once-over stripper-type harvest. The purpose of this study was to develop instrumentation to measure stormproofness (lock tenacity) and to determine the inheritance of the stormproof boll in a particular cross using this instrumentation. Parental, F1, F2, and backcross populations from a cross between ‘Acala 1517 Br-2’ (non-stormproof) and Z-2557 (stormproof) were scored for visual appearance and measurement of lock tenacity to study qualitative inheritance patterns. Analysis of variance and joint scaling tests were conducted on the lock tenacity data for quantitative determinations of inheritance.

The instrumentation developed was capable of detecting differences between stormproof and non-stormproof boll types. Differences between combinations (pulls per boll x number of bolls per entry) were not significant, while differences between entries were significant. Visual classification of segregating populations indicated that a single dominant gene controlled the stormproof character. However, data from lock tenacity determinations made on these same populations indicated a more complex mode of inheritance. Estimates from the joint scaling test suggested that additive, dominant, and epistatic genetic effects controlled the expression of lock tenacity.

Key Words: Lock tenacity • Storm loss • Gossypium hirsutum L. • Mechanical harvest • Qualitative inheritance • Quantitative inheritance

1 Contribution from AR, SEA, USDA, in cooperation with the Texas Agric. Exp. Stn.

2 Research technician and research geneticist, Route 3, AR, SEA, USDA, Lubbock, TX 79401.

Received for publication October 13, 1978.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 1979 by the Crop Science Society of America.