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

This Article Figures Only 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 ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wilson, L. J. Articles by Gibb, D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Wilson, L. J. Articles by Gibb, D. Agricola Articles by Wilson, L. J. Articles by Gibb, D. Related Collections Crop Growth and Development Cotton Pest Management Systems

CROP ECOLOGY, MANAGEMENT & QUALITY

How to Succeed by Doing Nothing

Cotton Compensation after Simulated Early Season Pest Damage

^a CSIRO Division of Plant Industry and Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre, Narrabri, NSW, Australia, 2390
^b NSW Agriculture and Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre Cotton Research Unit, Locked Bag 59, Narrabri, NSW, Australia, 2390
^c CSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag No. 2, Glen Osmond, South Australia, 5064

^* Corresponding author (lewis.wilson{at}csiro.au).

Clarifying the amount of pest damage that can be tolerated without justifying insecticidal control will be useful in reducing insecticide use and in development of integrated pest management (IPM) systems. This study investigated the ability of irrigated, high-yielding cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) to recover from artificially applied damage simulating that of early season insect pests. Six experiments were done across five cotton-growing seasons. Damage included defoliation, terminal damage, and flower bud removal in a range of timings, combinations, and intensities. Crop yield was unaffected by defoliation applied before first flower buds appeared, even when 100% of true leaves were removed on three occasions (Nodes 2, 4, and 6). Crop maturity was affected by sustained high levels of leaf loss with a peak delay of 10 d after 100% defoliation three times. Up to three light tip damage events or one heavy damage event had no effect on yield and only a slight effect on crop maturity (<5-d delay to harvest). Heavy early fruit loss (100% fruit removal from the first four fruiting branches) did not affect yield but caused a delay in maturity of 7 d. Equations describing the relationship between damage type, intensity, and repetition and the yield and maturity of cotton were developed and used in sensitivity analysis to define tentative damage thresholds for IPM systems in cotton.

Abbreviations: DAS, days after sowing • DWT, dry weight • IPM, integrated pest management

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. T. LEI and L. J. WILSON Recovery of Leaf Area through Accelerated Shoot Ontogeny in Thrips-damaged Cotton Seedlings Ann. Bot., July 1, 2004; 94(1): 179 - 186. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]