1 / 31

Phosphorus Nutrition of Cotton

Phosphorus Nutrition of Cotton. Outline - P Nutrition of Cotton. U.S. cotton yields since 1975 Growth and development of the cotton plant Nutrient uptake General P nutrition and response P placement options Conclusions. Lint, lb/A. Year.

miette
Download Presentation

Phosphorus Nutrition of Cotton

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Phosphorus Nutritionof Cotton

  2. Outline - P Nutrition of Cotton • U.S. cotton yields since 1975 • Growth and developmentof the cotton plant • Nutrient uptake • General P nutrition andresponse • P placement options • Conclusions

  3. Lint, lb/A Year U.S. Cotton Yield,1975 to Present . . . An Increasing Trend Source: USDA-NASS

  4. May June July August September October Nov Emergence Squaring 1st bloom Peak bloom 1st open boll 95% mature Harvest 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 0 80 525 1060 1470 1640 2280 Approximate days after planting Approximate heat units after planting A Production Timeline for Irrigated Cotton in the Texas High Plains Source: R. Boman

  5. Early Season Root Development of the Cotton Plant Source: Oosterhuis, 1990

  6. Roots, ft/plant Based on 36,000 plants/A, there were 9,545 miles of roots /A First bloom 4 true leaves Late bloom/early boll filling Days after planting Cotton Root Length as Affected by Days After Planting (Field Study) Source: Schwab, Mullins & Burmester, 2000

  7. Dry Matter Accumulation,and Nitrogen andPhosphorus Uptake of Cotton Source: D. Krieg

  8. Cotton Nutrient Uptake Compared to Yield * Irrigated tests

  9. Location and year GA *CA *Israel AL 1942 1970 1976 1990 lb/A per day N 3.8 1.8 4.1 3.5 P 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.6 K 2.5 3.0 4.1 3.1 * Irrigated tests Cotton Peak Nutrient Uptake Rate 60 to 100 Days After Planting Source: Mullins and Burmester, 1990

  10. P Functions of Phosphorus in Cotton Production • Essential for vigorous root and shoot growth • Promotes early boll development and hastens maturity • Helps overcome the effects of compaction • Increases water use efficiency • Necessary for energy storage and transfer in plants • A two-bale crop can take up more than 50 lb P2O5/A

  11. 20 Shoots Leaves Burs Seed 15 Averaged across four varieties Deltapine 90, Stoneville 825, Coker 315, Paymaster 145 P, lb/A 10 5 0 0 21 35 49 63 77 91 105 119 Days after planting P Uptake by Modern Cotton Varieties – 880 lb/A Source: Mullins & Burmester, 1990

  12. P, mg Mature boll oven-dry weight ~ 6.5 grams Seed Bur (x 2) Fiber (x 2) Days After Pollination P Compartmentation by Developing Cotton Bolls Source: Leffler, H.R. 1986

  13. Reasons to BuildSoil Test P • Increase root growth for efficient uptake of other nutrients • Capitalize on “good weather” years • Minimize risk associated with “bad weather” years • Raise soil productivity • Increase yield potential of all crops in the rotation • Improve grower profit potential • Rules of thumb for raising soil test P • 6 to 14 lb P2O5 needed above crop removal to build soil test P by 1 lb/A on sandy loam to silt loam soils

  14. Category definitions vary among laboratories Probability of a Phosphorus Response . . . An Example

  15. Relative yield, % Soil test for 95% of maximum yield Cotton Relative Yield Response to Mehlich 3 Soil Test P in North Carolina Source: Cox, F.R. and J.S. Barnes, 2002

  16. Lint, lb/A Low initial soil P lb P2O5/A per year 6-Year Average Cotton Response to P Rate and Tillage in Tennessee Source: Howard & others, 2001

  17. Mehlich 1 P, ppm at 0 to 6 in. depth Tillage & Year DT=Disk-till NT=No-till lb P2O5/A per year Soil P Levels After 3 Years of P Fertilization on loessial Silt Loam Soil in Tennessee Source: Howard & others, 2001

  18. P Placement Options • Broadcast • Banded 2 x 2 (2 in. to the side and 2 in. below seed) • Surface banded • Deep banded • In-furrow with the seed (rates are limited due to possible seedling damage and toxicity) • Rates of 11-37-0 greater than 2.5 to 2.8 gal/A have been shown to reduce cotton stands and yield, and rates greater than 1.5 gal/A are not recommended (Burris et. al., 1992)

  19. Low Psoil (29 lb/A extractable P) High Psoil (126 lb/A extractable P) Relative yield, % Relative yield, % a a a a ab b No significant differences Effects of P Placement on Relative Cotton Yield lb P2O5/A applied and placement method Source: Nelson & others, 1949. See notes for application methods

  20. Low PDewey soil (CEC=10) 14 lb/A (7 ppm) Mehlich 1-P High PMarvyn soil (CEC=5) 88 lb/A (44 ppm) Mehlich 1-P Relative total root length % Relative total root length, % a a a a No significant differences b Effects of P Placement on Relative Cotton Root Length (Laboratory study) Applied P per pot was identical within a soil Source: Mullins, 1993

  21. Low PDewey soil (CEC=10) (14 lb/A Mehlich 1-P) High PMarvyn soil (CEC=5) (88 lb/A Mehlich 1-P) % of roots in P-treated volume % of roots in P-treated volume Effects of P Placement on Percent of Roots in Fertilized Soil (Laboratory study) Applied P per pot was identical within a soil Source: Mullins, 1993

  22. In-furrow Year Soil texture Check Starter Difference lint yield, lb/A 1990 Silt loam 1255 1400 145* 1991 Silt loam 1184 1191 7 1991 Silt loam 1503 1586 83* 1992 Silt loam 878 889 11 1992 Silt loam 922 911 -11 1992 Silt loam 999 1040 41 1992 Clay 515 697 182* 1992 Silt loam 734 837 103* 1993 Silt loam 941 1174 233* Average 992 1081 88 * Differences were significant a the 0.05 level of probability. 11-37-0 starter was applied at the rate of 1.5 gal/A. All soils tested high to very high in P. Effect of In-furrow Starter Fertilizer on Cotton Yield (Louisiana) Source: Kovar et. al., 1993.

  23. Surface Year Soil texture Check banded Difference lint yield, lb/A 1990 Silt loam 1,255 1,443 188* 1990 Silt loam 823 895 72 1990 Silt loam 1,045 1,032 -13 1991 Silt loam 1,184 1,331 147* 1991 Silt loam 949 1,073 124* 1992 Silt loam 999 1,144 145 1992 Silt loam 878 957 79* 1993 Silt loam 860 969 109* Average 999 1,106 106 * Differences were significant a the 0.05 level of probability. 11-37-0 starter was applied in a 3 inch surface band at the rate of 12 gal/A. All soils tested high to very high in P. Effect of Surface Banded Starter Fertilizer on Cotton Yield (Louisiana) Source: Kovar et. al., 1993.

  24. Check 1.5 gal/A 11-37-0 in-furrow 12 gal/A 11-37-0 surface banded Effects of Fertilizer Placement on Cotton Seedling Growth (Louisiana) Source: Kovar et. al., 1993. High soil test P level

  25. Check Surf. band (12 gal/A) In-furrow (1.5 gal/A) In-furrow (2.5 gal/A) 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 Root length density, cm/cm3 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0-4 inch 0-4 inch 4-8 inch ------- Early bloom ------- Seedling Effect of Starter Fertilizer (11-37-0) on Cotton Root Length Density (Louisiana) Source: Kovar et. al., 1993. High soil test P level

  26. 1000 800 600 Lint yield, lb/A a b c 972 c 400 916 818 824 200 0 Control Pre-plant Sidedress LEPA fertigation P fertilizer application method Effect of P Fertilizer and Delivery Method on three-year Average Irrigated Cotton Yield (Texas) Source: Reiter and Krieg - Means with same letter are not different at the 5% level

  27. 60 50 40 58 Bolls per sq. m 30 57 53 51 20 10 0 Control Pre-plant Sidedress LEPA fertigation P fertilizer application method P Fertilizer and Delivery Method effect on BollNumber in Irrigated Cotton (Texas) Source: Reiter and Krieg

  28. 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.66 Lint per boll, g 1.3 1.6 1.58 1.54 1.2 1.1 1 Control Pre-plant Sidedress LEPA fertigation P fertilizer application method Effect of P Fertilizer and Delivery Method on Boll Size in Irrigated Cotton (Texas) Source: Reiter and Krieg

  29. 45 40 35 Micronaire 39.3 39.7 30 35.6 36.6 25 20 Control Pre-plant Sidedress LEPA fertigation P fertilizer application method Effect of P Fertilizer and Delivery Method on Micronaire of Irrigated Cotton (Texas) Premium range 37-42 Source: Reiter and Krieg

  30. Conclusions • Adequate P nutrition is critical in optimizing yield, quality, and profit in cotton production. • While placement of P fertilizer is not as important as in the production of many other crops, banding P can increase yields in some situations (e.g., reduced or no-till, compacted soil conditions). • Soil test levels should be maintained in the medium to high range to assure consistent production, and that P does not limit cotton yield and quality.

  31. International Plant Nutrition Institute (IPNI) 655 Engineering Drive, Suite 110Norcross, GA 30092-28326047Phone: 770-447-0335; Fax: 770-448-0439E-mail: info@ipni.net Reference 06128

More Related