Research Article

Effect of Irrigation Intervals on the Yield and Fibre Characteristics of Cotton Genotypes

Najeeb Ullah1, Abdul Aziz Khakwani1, Niamat Ullah Khan2*, Muhammad Safdar Baloch1 and Ejaz Ahmad Khan1

1Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Gomal University Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan; 2Cotton Research Station, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan.

Received | February 10, 2018; Accepted | April 08, 2018; Published | May 18, 2018

*Correspondence | Niamat Ullah Khan, Cotton Research Station, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Najeeb Ullah, A.A. Khakwani, N.U. Khan, M.S. Baloch and E.A. Khan. 2017. Effect of irrigation intervals on the yield and fibre characteristics of cotton genotypes . Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 34(2): 342-348.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2018/34.2.342.348

Keywords | Cotton, Irrigation intervals, Genotypes, Yield, Quality

Introduction

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plays a significant role in the economy of Pakistan (Ibrahim et al., 2007). It provides raw materials to the textile industry. It is called silver fiber, due to its unique fiber quality (Arshad and Anwar, 2007). Cotton is used for several products ranging from clothes to home furnishings and medical products. So, cotton is continuously in demand due to its diversified usages and is connected to the powers and weaknesses of the overall economy of Pakistan. Worldwide, Pakistan is the fifth largest producer but fourth largest consumer of cotton however, the largest exporter of cotton yarn (APTMA, 2015). In Pakistan, cotton area is about 3.20 million hectares having 2.15 million tons production (PCCC, 2015). Cotton contribution to GDP was 1.5%, 60 % to foreign exchange and 7.0 % to agriculture (Government of Pakistan, 2016). Low yield of cotton can be attributed to man factors such as use of low quality seed resulting in poor germination, low seed rate, low plant population, poor management practices, conventional sowing methods, insect pests attack, improper nutrition, water stress and use of inferior cotton genotypes. It indicated a vast scope for increasing the average seed cotton yield taking care for yield constraints. It requires maximum use the available agricultural and agronomic resources for greater benefits. Irrigation intervals management for different cotton genotypes are of vital importance in this regard. Optimum irrigation plays key role in yield potential; similarly, suitable genotype for a region is essential for optimum growth and development. For enhancing cotton yield in Pakistan, it is needed to study different cotton varieties under different environment for better use of sources accessible for successful crop production (McAlavy, 2004).Cotton production is fully dependent upon the accessibility of irrigation water either from canal or tube well. Irrigation water applied less or more than optimum badly affects cotton yield (Howell, 2001; Deng et al., 2004). Proper irrigation scheduling is essentially required which saves water and energy, boosts up cotton yield and quality. It is therefore, vital to decide appropriate time and amount of irrigation water. Irrigation of cotton crop affected canopy development water use efficiency (Bhattarai, 2005). Proper water management and enhanced water use is a probable selection standard for increasing cotton yield under water stress. Cotton crop wanted less amount of moisture per hectare than other crops (Hearn, 2000). Proficient use of irrigation saves rain and canal water as well. Efficient use of water to cotton is an important thought, because, rainfall is not sufficient for the crop (Ertek et al., 2001). Additionally, recent increases in energy prices have attracted attention of crop producers asking how to manage inputs to maximize efficiency of their water resources (Varlev et al., 2000). To benefit from irrigation scheduling we must have an efficient irrigation system. The prime consideration with reference to water need for the crop is to decide the time and amount of irrigation. Irrigation water, applied less or more than the optimum requirement of cotton crop, adversely affects the cotton yield. Water balance irrigation scheduling is the day-to-day accounting of the amounts of water coming into and going out of the effective root zone of a crop. It is based on estimating the soil water content in the crop root zone viewed as a system (Harris, 2005).

Keeping in view the importance of efficient use of irrigation water by proper scheduling for cotton production, the present study was carried out to investigate the effect of number of irrigations on the yield and fiber characteristics of cotton genotypes.

Materials and Methods

Experimental site, soil and climate

Research trial was conducted at Cotton Research Station, Dera Ismail Khan (31º49΄N, 70°55΄E, 165m above sea level), Pakistan. The site is comparatively flat with dominant clay characteristics. It is an arid to semi-arid region having limited rain fall (about 200 mm mean annual rainfall) which is not enough for growing crops. Experimental site is hyperthermic, and typic Torrifluvents (SSS, 2009).The detail physico-chemical Characteristics are given in Table 1. Weather data was monitored on Meteorological Station located near Cotton Research Station. Detailed air temperature and rainfall were presented in Table 2.

Table 1: Physico-chemical properties of the experimental soil.

Table 2: Average air temperature and rainfall at Cotton Research Station, Dera Ismail Khan during 2016 growing season.

Table 3: Mean square values of boll number, weight per boll, seed cotton yield, ginning out turn and fibre length as affected by Irrigation intervals and genotypes.

Data were recorded on bolls per plant-1, weight per boll (g), yield of seed cotton (kg ha-1), ginning out-turn (GOT %), fibre length (mm). Five representative plants were tagged in each treatment for the purpose of recording data. Boll number was recorded by counting bolls of five representative plants and converted to average number of bolls plant-1. For recording boll weight, 50 bolls were randomly selected from already tagged plants in each plot. Total bolls weight was divided by 50 and mean boll weight was recorded in gram. Seed cotton yield was recorded by harvesting central 2 rows of each plot manually. Seed cotton samples were sundried and cleaned by removing inert matter from the samples. After drying and cleaning they were weighed and ginned separately by using electric ginning machine. GOT is the ratio of the lint weight to the total seed cotton weight. The lint of each sample was weighed and ginning out turn (GOT) was calculated by applying formula, GOT (%) = (lint yield/ seed cotton yield)*100 (Xian et al., 2014). For fiber length, representative samples of cotton lint were taken from each plot and mean length was obtained by using high volume instrument (HVI) system in Central Cotton Research Institute, Multan, Pakistan.

Statistical analysis

Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using a split-plot within a randomized complete block design accordance to procedures outlined by Steel and Torrie (1997). Least significant difference tests were applied where data were found statistically significant according to MSTATC software.

Results and Discussion

Bolls plant−1

Bolls is the prime yield contributing element of cotton yield. Bolls per plant significantly respond to irrigation intervals, genotypes and their interaction (Table 3). Interaction results indicated that genotype-CIM-602 irrigated at 20 days interval produced maximum number bolls plant-1 (Figure 1).Too short (10 days) or long (25 days) irrigation intervals resulted in lower number of bolls for all genotypes. In longer irrigation interval, flowering coincided with high moisture stress that probably resulted in abortion of flowers and young bolls and thus there were lower boll retention per plant as reported by some researchers (Rajput, 2006; Onder et al., 2009). The flower initiation was also affected by less or more number of irrigation intervals. Improper irrigation water encouraged vegetative growth resulted in declined flowering (Onder et al., 2009). These results in agreement with that of (Ertek et al., 2001) who concluded that sufficient interval of irrigation to cotton produced more bolls per plant. The genotype CIM-602 is of bushy type, maintained 2-3 monopodia and more number of sympodia.

Table 4: Boll number, boll weight, seed cotton yield, ginning out turn and fibre length as affected by irrigation intervals and genotypes.

producing maximum number of bolls per plant under less frequencies of irrigation. Bolonhezi et al., (2000) reported analogous results who reported that different cotton cultivars were different in number of bolls due to differences in irrigation intervals.

Boll weight (g)

Weight per boll was influenced significantly by irrigation intervals and genotypes, however, interaction effects of irrigation intervals and genotypes were not significant. (Table 3). Heaviest boll weight was recorded in I3 (irrigation at 20 days interval) compared to other irrigation intervals (Table 4). Contrary to this shorter irrigation interval had lower boll weight probably due to more attacks of insect pests. Moreover, crop at shorter irrigation interval is more prone to insect pests and diseases attack due to vigorous cotton plant growth. On the other hand, flowerings in too longer interval coincided with high moisture stress that also adversely affected boll growth and development (Yazar et al., 2002; Naveed, 2003). Among genotypes, CIM-602 produced highest boll weight. Our results are in line with those of (Wang et al., 2004) who stated that irrigation regimes significantly affected boll weight of different cotton cultivars.

Seed cotton yield (kg ha-1)

Seed cotton yield had significant response to irrigation intervals, genotypes and irrigations × genotypes interactions (Table 3). Interaction effects showed that CIM-602 produced highest seed cotton yield when irrigated at 20 days interval (Figure 3). The cotton yield was low in shorter irrigation interval, probably the more vegetative growth that resulted in lower seed cotton yield (El-Shahawy and Abd-El-Malik, 2005; Singh et al., 2010). Regarding the excess of water, several studies such as Wanjura et al. (2002) and Karam et al. (2006) showed that cotton productivity can be reduced due to water excess. Higher seed cotton yield may be ascribed of higher bolls and boll wt. Optimum irrigation intervals probably improved root growth and consequent nutrient and water uptake, resulted in higher seed cotton yield (Ertek et al., 2001). The results indicate that there were significant variations among cultivars for seed cotton yield under different irrigation intervals as also reported by Rajput, (2006).

GOT had significant response to irrigation intervals and genotypes while their interactions were not significant (Table 3). Mean values for irrigation intervals revealed that GOT was highest when crop received irrigation at 20 days interval (I3) (Table 4). All other irrigation intervals had lower values of GOT. CIM-602 gave highest GOT among the genotypes. The results suggested that I3was higher yielding than I4 or I1 and I2. Karam et al. (2006) reported that every fortnight delay in irrigation beyond I3 resulted in a significant decrease in GOT /lint yield. Increased GOT might be associated with the physiological response to the culture under higher irrigation water (Cetin and Bilgel et al., 2002). In case of irrigation interval at 20 days the higher the water availability in the soil the greater the ability of the roots to absorb nutrients and the photosynthetic efficiency of the leaves. In case of irrigation interval at 20 days optimum water supply and higher nutrients absorption, contributed towards boll growth and boll filling that probably resulted in higher lint yield as confirmed by Rajput et al. (2006).

Fiber length (mm)

Fiber length showed significant response to genotypes, however, irrigation intervals and their interactions were not significant (Table 3). CIM-602 had higher fiber length during the growing season (Table 4). These results are in line with those of (El-Shahawy and Abd-El-Malik, 2005; Ashokkumar and Ravikesavan, 2011) who concluded that staple length was not influenced by irrigation frequencies, and this character is probably associated with the genetic makeup of a variety.

Conclusions

This study comprised of four irrigation intervals (10, 15, 20 and 25 days intervals) and two genotypes (CIM-602 and CIM-616). In conclusion, results of this study suggest that higher cotton yield and quality can be attained, under Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan conditions, when cotton genotype CIM-602 is planted with 20 days irrigation interval.

Author’s Contribution

Najeeb Ullah: As a principal author conducted the research

Abdul Aziz Khakwani: Supervised the study and provided technical input at every step

Niamat Ullah Khan: revised the manuscript

Muhammad Safdar Baloch: Analysed the lab work

Ejaz Ahmad Khan: Assisted in prepration of final draft.

References

APTMA. 2015. World Cotton and non-Cotton Fiber Consumption. Available online at http://www.aptma.

Arshad, M. and M. Anwar. 2007. Best methods/practices to increase per acre cotton yield. Ministry of Textile Industry, Pakistan.

Arshad, M., M. Afzal, M.I. Khan and R. Mahmood. 2003. Performances of newly developed cotton strains for economic and fibre traits in national coordinated varietal trials. Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 46(5): 373-375.

Ashokkumar, K. and R. Ravikesavan. 2011. Morphological diversity and per se performance in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). J. Agric. Sci. 3(2):107-113. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v3n2p107

Bhattarai, S.P. 2005. The physiology of water use efficiency of crops subjected to subsurface drip irrigation, oxygation and salinity in a heavy clay soil. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Biology & Environmental Science, Faculty of Arts, Health & Science, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton.

Bolonhezi, A.C., M.M. Justi, R.C. Oliveira and C. Bolonhezi. 2000. Narrow spacing for varieties of herbaceous cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), plant development and retention of reproductive structures. Field Crop Res. 53(5): 611-613.

Cetin, O. and L. Bilgel. 2002. Effects off different irrigation methods on shedding and yield of cotton. Agric. Water Manage. 54(01):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00138-X

Deng, X.P., L. Shan, H.P. Zhang and N.C. Turner. 2004. Improving agricultural water use efficiency in arid and semiarid areas of China. New Directions for a Diverse Planet. Proceeding of the 4th International Crop Science Conference, Brisbane.

El-Shahawy, M.I.M. and R.R. Abd-El-Malik. 2005. Response of Giza 87 cotton cultivar (Gossypium barbadense L.) to irrigation intervals and nitrogen fertilization levels. Egyp. J. Agric. Res.77: 841-856.

Ertek, A. and R. Kanber. 2001. Effects of different irrigation programs on the growth of cotton under drip irrigation. Turkish J. Agric. For. 25: 415-425.

Government of Pakistan. 2016. Economic Survey of Pakistan. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, Finance Division, Economic advisor wing, pp. 20.

Hearn, B. 2000. The Science of Water Balance: Why Do We Need to Know? Proceedings of the 10th Australian Cotton Conference Brisbane. 16-18: 351-360.

Harris, G. 2005. Irrigation water balance scheduling. AFFS Farming Systems, DPI and Staff of Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre, 1-5.

Howell, T.A. 2001. Enhancing water use efficiency in irrigated agriculture. Agron. J. 93: 281-289. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2001.932281x Ibrahim, M., J. Akhtar, M. Younis, M.A. Riaz, M. Anwar-ul-Haq and M. Tahir. 2007. Selection of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes against NaCl stress. Soil Environ. 26: 59-63.

Karam, F., Kabalan, R., Breidi, J., Rouphael, Y., Oweis, T. Yield and water production functions of two durum cotton cultivars grown under different irrigation and nitrogen regimes. Agric. Water Manag. 96:603-615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2008.09.018

McAlavy, T.W. 2004. Researchers Investigate Cotton Irrigation Strategies. Agricultural Communications Taxas A & M University System.

Naveed, A. 2003. Effect of irrigation scheduling on the growth, yield and quality of two cotton genotypes. M.Sc thesis Deptt. Of Agronom Universi of Faisal Abad, Pakistan.

PCCC. 2015. Pakistan Central Cotton Committee, Ministry of Commerce & Textile Industry, Government of Pakistan.

Rajput, H.A. 2006. Effect of different irrigation regimes on the performance of different cotton cultivars. Master’s Thesis, Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam.

Singh, Y., S.S. Rao, P.L. Regar. 2010. Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on seed cotton yield, water productivity and yield response factor in shallow soils of semi-arid environment. Agric. Water Manag. 97: 965-970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.01.028

Soil Survey Staff. 2009. Keys to Soil of NWFP, FATA and Northern Areas. National Institute of Research in Soils and Geomatics, Lahore, Pakistan. p. 76.

Steel, R.G.D. and J.H. Torrie. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Onder, D., Y. Akiscan, S. Onder, M. Mert. 2009. Effect of different irrigation water level on cotton yield and yield components. Afr. J. Biotech. 8:.1536-1544.

Varlev, I., Z. Popova and I. Gospodinov. 2000. Furrow Surge Irrigation as a Water Saving Technique. Water and the Environment: Innovation in Irrigation and Drainage. Proceedings of the 1st Inter-Regional Conference, Lisbon, 16-18 September 1998, 131-139.

Wang, C., A. Isoda and P. Wang. 2004. Growth and yield performance of some cotton cultivars in Xinjiang, China, an arid area with short growing period. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 190 (3): 177-183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00090.x

Wanjura, D.F., D.R. Upchurch, J.R. Mahan and J.J. Burke. 2002. Cotton yield and applied water relationships under drip irrigation. Agric. Water Manag. 55: 217-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00175-5

Xian, G., M. Jun, G. Yuping, S. Mizhen1, Zhoujiajia, Y. Yanchao, Z. Tianzhen, S. Xuezhen and S. Xianliang. 2014. The relationship between fiber initiation and Lint percentage in cotton. Pak. J. Bot. 46(6): 2227-2238.

Yazar, A., S.M. Sezen, S. Sesveren. 2002. LEPA and trickle irrigation of cotton in the Southeast Anatolia Project (GAP) area in Turkey. Agric. Water Manag. 54: 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00179-2