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 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 (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kennedy, C. W. Articles by Hutchinson, R. L. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kennedy, C. W. Articles by Hutchinson, R. L. Agricola Articles by Kennedy, C. W. Articles by Hutchinson, R. L. Related Collections Other Crop Management Cotton

Cotton Growth and Development under Different Tillage Systems

^a 104 Sturgis Hall, Dep. of Agronomy, Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
^b Northeast Research Station, Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Center, St. Joseph, LA 71366

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Rainfall from 50 d prior to 140 d after planting and maximum and minimum daily temperatures from 10 d prior to 140 d after planting. Rainfall data were taken less than 1 km from the experiment, and temperature data were taken about 10 km away.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Tillage effects on crop growth rate (CGR) over the growing season for cotton cv Stoneville 453 on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Error bars represent SE. Differences in means ±SE reflect significant t-test differences.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Tillage effects on leaf area index (LAI) over the growing season for cotton cv Stoneville 453 on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Error bars represent LSD 0.05 unless subtended by (LSD 0.10). Differences between points at a given time not having an error bar are NS.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Tillage effects on net assimilation rate (NAR) over the growing season for cotton cv Stoneville 453 on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Error bars represent SE. Differences in means ±SE reflect significant t-test differences.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Tillage effects on flower bud production and boll set over the season for cotton cv Stoneville 453 on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Error bars represent LSD 0.05 unless subtended by (LSD 0.10). Differences between points at a given time not having an error bar are NS.

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Tillage effects on dry matter accumulation of first position bolls located on sympodia off Mainstem Nodes (MSN) 5 to 8 and 9 to 12 for cotton cv Stoneville 453 grown on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Error bars represent LSD 0.05 unless subtended by (LSD 0.10). Differences between points at a given time not having an error bar are NS.

View larger version (41K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Tillage effects on lint yield of cotton cv Stoneville 453 grown on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Differences between bars subtended by the same letter are NS (P < 0.05) for a given year.

View larger version (49K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Tillage effects on plant population of cotton cv Stoneville 453 on a Gigger silt loam in 1991, 1992, and 1994. Tillage treatments had been in place since 1987. Differences between bars subtended by the same letter are NS (P < 0.05) for a given year.