Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T20:53:34.179Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to Flame Cultivation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Simone Seifert  and
Charles E. Snipes
Simone Seifert
Affiliation:
Mississippi State University, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, P.O. Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762, E-mail: [email protected]
Charles E. Snipes
Affiliation:
Mississippi State University, Delta Research and Extension Center, P.O. Box 197, Stoneville, MS 38776
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies to evaluate the response of cotton to flame cultivation were conducted in 1994, 1995, and 1996. Flame cultivation at different liquid propane-gas (LP-gas) pressure settings (100 and 175 kPa) with or without watershield protection was applied to cotton at two stages of growth (20 to 25 cm and 40 to 45 cm tall). In 1994, younger cotton was more susceptible to flame cultivation than older cotton, and flaming at an LP-gas pressure of 175 kPa without watershield protection increased plant injury regardless of growth stage, whereas injury was not evident in 1995 and 1996. Injury caused by flame cultivation was a transient browning of lower leaf margins. The use of a watershield sprayed above the burner reduced injury. Flame cultivation applied to cotton 20 to 25 cm tall slightly elevated the first fruiting node, but no effects were noted on other vegetative and reproductive growth parameters or yield regardless of pressure setting or watershield protection. Flame cultivation applied to cotton 40 to 45 cm tall did not affect the position of the first fruiting node. Although flame cultivation caused some injury one year, total seed cotton and cotton lint yields were not reduced.

Keywords

Cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘DES 119’ and ‘DPL 50.'Flamingthermal weed controlfirst fruiting positionwatershield protectionFFN, first fruiting nodeH2, highest sympodia with two nodal positionsLP-gas, liquid propane-gasWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 1998 , pp. 470 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Baker, R. S. 1968. Weed control by heat. In Baker, R. S., ed. Principles of Plant and Animal Pest Control. Volume 2. Weed Control. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Public. 1597. pp. 81–84.Google Scholar
Barr, H. T. 1947. Flame cultivation. Louisiana Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 415:1–15.Google Scholar
Bourland, F. M. and Watson, C. E. Jr. 1990. COTMAP, a technique for evaluating structure and yield of cotton plants. Crop Sci. 30:224–226.Google Scholar
Bridge, R. R. and McDonald, L. D. 1987. Beltwide efforts and trends in development of varieties for short-season production systems. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 11:81–84.Google Scholar
Brown, S. M. and Byrd, J. D. Jr. 1994. A burning interest in the old ways: a review of information on flame cultivation. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 18:1697.Google Scholar
Bryson, C. P. and Houston, W. 1971. Flame cultivation. Mississippi Coop. Ext. Serv., Info. Sheet 453:1–2.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr., Brown, S. M., and Snipes, C. E. 1994. A rekindled interest in flame cultivation in cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 47:178–180.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr., Seifert, S., and Snipes, C. E. 1995. Flame cultivation for weed management in cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 19:127–128.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr. and Snipes, C. E. 1994. Flame cultivation in cotton. Mississippi Coop. Ext. Serv., Info. Sheet 1500:1–2.Google Scholar
Creasy, L. E. and Barr, H. T. 1950. A flame cultivation guide. Louisiana Circ. No. 3.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, M. 1989. Abflammtechnik. Alternative Konzepte 58. Karlsruhe: C. F. Mueller Verlag.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J. N., McCarty, J. C. Jr., and Parrot, W. L. 1990. Effectiveness of fruiting sites in cotton: yield. Crop Sci. 30:365–369.Google Scholar
Matthews, E. L. and Smith, H. Jr. 1971. Water-shielded, high-speed flame weeding of cotton. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 24:393–398.Google Scholar
Mauney, J. R. 1986. Vegetative growth and development of fruiting sites. In Mauney, J. R. and McD. Steward, J., eds. Cotton Physiology. Number 1. The Cotton Foundation Reference Book Series. Memphis, TN: The Cotton Foundation. pp. 11–28.Google Scholar
Parker, R. E., Holstrum, J. T., and Fulgham, F. E. 1965. Flame Cultivation, Equipment and Techniques. USDA Agric. Res. Serv. Prod. Res. Rep. 86.Google Scholar
Patin, T. R., Mayeux, M. M., Standifer, L. C., and Wright, M. E. 1966. Preliminary studies on the measurement of the cambial temperature in flame-exposed cotton stems. Proc. South. Weed Conf. 19:505–511.Google Scholar
Seifert, S. and Snipes, C. E. 1996. Influence of flame cultivation on mortality of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) pests and beneficial insects. Weed Technol. 10:544–549.Google Scholar
Snipes, C. E., Byrd, J. D. Jr., and Seifert, S. 1995. Application of flame cultivation in cotton and other agronomic crops. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:76.Google Scholar
Wells, R. and Meredith, W. R. Jr. 1984a. Comparative growth of obsolete and modern cotton cultivars. 11. Reproductive dry matter partitioning. Crop Sci. 24:863–868.Google Scholar
Wells, R. and Meredith, W. R. Jr. 1984b. Comparative growth of obsolete and modern cotton cultivars. III. Relationship of yield to observed growth characteristics. Crop Sci. 24:868–872.Google Scholar
Williamson, E. B., Woolen, O. B., and Fulgham, F. E. 1956. Flame Cultivation. Mississippi State Coll. Bull. 545.Google Scholar
Williford, J. R., Wooton, O. B., Baker, R. S., and Barrentine, W. L. 1973. Water-shielded flame cultivation for cotton and soybeans. Mississippi Agric. & For. Exp. Stn. Info. Sheet 1217:1–2.Google Scholar