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


     

Published in Crop Sci 23:695-698 (1983)
© 1983 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 Wilson, F. D.
Right arrow Articles by George, B. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, F. D.
Right arrow Articles by George, B. W.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, F. D.
Right arrow Articles by George, B. W.

Effect of Pink Bollworm on Agronomic Properties of Resistant and Susceptible Cotton1

F. D. Wilson and B. W. George2

Little is known about the differential effects of the attack of pink boilworm (PBW), Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders), on agronomic properties of resistant and susceptible cottons, Gossypium spp. The major objective of this study was to determine and compare those effects in a susceptible cultivar and a resistant breeding stock of upland cotton, G. hirsutum L., and a susceptible cultivar of Pima cotton, G. barbadense L. Other objectives were to compare an x-ray method with a visual boll-grading method of determining damage done by the insect, and to study the relationship of seed damage with selected agronomic properties. The three cottons were grown for two seasons in untreated field plots and in plots treated for PBW control Seed cotton was harvested weekly as boils opened, seed samples were x-rayed to determine seed damage, and agronomic properties were measured. At the end of the season, all bolls were removed from five plants/plot and boils were graded into damage classes. Pink bollworm mainly damaged rather than destroyed seed. Damaged bolls did not abscise but remained on the plant. The Pima entry, ‘Pima S-5’ had more dry, unharvestable bolls than the two upland entries, ‘Deltapine 61’ and AET-5. Damage was higher in unsprayed than in sprayed plots. The resistant AET-5 had less seed damage and fewer damaged bolls than the other two entries, and its agronomic properties were less affected by PBW attack. The x-ray method failed to integrate data from unharvestable bolls, and the graded-boll method failed to quantify the amounts of damage in the damaged-boll category. The percentages of variation in decreases in agronomic properties, attributable to increases in seed damage, were higher in unsprayed than in sprayed plots, but also differed among the three cottons. Thus, direct comparison of the effects of PBW on agronomic properties among cottons in unsprayed plots could be misleading because these effects would be superimposed on different natural patterns of decrease in those properties as the season progressed.

Key Words: Gossypium barbadense L. • Gossypium hirsutum L. • Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders) • Host plant resistance • Yield components • Insecticides • Genotype x environment interaction

1 Contribution from USDA-ARS, Phoenix, Ariz, in cooperation with the Arizona Agric. Exp. Stn.

2 Research geneticist and research entomologist, respectively, USDA-ARS, Western Cotton Res. Lab., 4135 East Broadway Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85040.

Received for publication May 24, 1982.




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 © 1983 by the Crop Science Society of America.