, Volume 54, Issue 4, pp 502–507 | Cite as

Cultivar variation in cotton photosynthetic performance under different temperature regimes

  • W. T. PettigrewEmail author
Original papers


Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) yields are impacted by overall photosynthetic production. Factors that influence crop photosynthesis are the plants genetic makeup and the environmental conditions. This study investigated cultivar variation in photosynthesis in the field conditions under both ambient and higher temperature. Six diverse cotton cultivars were grown in the field at Stoneville, MS under both an ambient and a high temperature regime during the 2006–2008 growing seasons. Mid-season leaf net photosynthetic rates (P N) and dark-adapted chlorophyll fluorescence variable to maximal ratios (Fv/Fm) were determined on two leaves per plot. Temperature regimes did not have a significant effect on either P N or Fv/Fm. In 2006, however, there was a significant cultivar × temperature interaction for P N caused by PeeDee 3 having a lower P N under the high temperature regime. Other cultivars’ P N were not affected by temperature. FM 800BR cultivar consistently had a higher P N across the years of the study. Despite demonstrating a higher leaf Fv/Fm, ST 5599BR exhibited a lower P N than the other cultivars. Although genetic variability was detected in photosynthesis and heat tolerance, the differences found were probably too small and inconsistent to be useful for a breeding program.

Additional key words

abiotic stress gas exchange maximum quantum yield thermotolerance water-use efficiency 



intercellular CO2 concentration




days after planting


transpiration rate


minimal chlorophyll fluorescence


maximal chlorophyll fluorescence


variable chlorophyll fluorescence


chlorophyll fluorescence variable to maximal ratio


stomatal conductance


net photosynthetic rate


water-use efficiency


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bednarz C.W., van Iersel M.W.: Temperature response of wholeplant CO2 exchange rates of four upland cotton cultivars differing in leaf shape and leaf pubescence.–Commun. Soil Sci. Plan. 32: 2485–2501, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burke J.J., Mahan J.R., Hatfield J.L.: Crop-specific thermal kinetic windows in relation to wheat and cotton biomass production.–Agron. J. 80: 553–556, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burke J.J., Wanjura D.F.: Plant responses to temperature extremes.–In: Stewart J.M., Oosterhuis D.M., Heitholt J.J., Mauney J.R. (ed.): Physiology of Cotton. Pp. 123–128. Springer, New York 2009.Google Scholar
  4. Clement J.D., Constable G.A., Conaty W.C.: CO2 exchange rate in cotton does not explain negative associations between lint yield and fiber quality.–J. Cotton Sci. 17: 270–278, 2013.Google Scholar
  5. Cottee N.S., Tan D.K.Y., Bange M.P. et al.: Multi-level determination of heat tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under field conditions.–Crop Sci. 50: 2553–2564, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crafts-Brandner S.J., Law R.D.: Effect of heat stress on the inhibition and recovery of the ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase activation state.–Planta 212: 67–74, 2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Crafts-Brandner S.J., Salvucci M.E.: Rubisco activase constrains the photosynthetic potential of leaves at high temperature and CO2.–P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 13430–13435, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crafts-Brandner S.J., Salvucci M.E.: Analyzing the impact of high temperature and CO2 on net photosynthesis: biochemical mechanisms, models and genomics.–Field Crop. Res. 90: 75–85, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feller U., Crafts-Brander S.J., Salvucci M.E.: Moderately high temperature inhibit ribulose-1,5-bisphospahte carboxylase/ oxygenase (Rubisco) activase-mediated activation of Rubisco.–Plant Physiol. 116: 539–546, 1998.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall T.D., Chastain D.R., Horn P.J. et al.: Changes during leaf expansion of fPSII temperature optima in Gossypium hirsutum are associated with the degree of fatty acid lipid saturation.–J. Plant Physiol. 171: 411–420, 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Littell R.C., Milliken G.A., Stroup W.W., Wolfinger R.D.: SAS System for Mixed Models. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. Lokhande S., Reddy K.R.: Quantifying temperature effects on cotton reproductive efficiency and fiber quality.–Agron. J. 106: 1275–1282, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Oosterhuis D.M., Snider J.L.: High temperature stress on floral development and yield of cotton.–In: D.M. Oosterhuis (ed.): Stress Physiology in Cotton. Pp. 1–24. The Cotton Foundation, Memphis 2011.Google Scholar
  14. Perry S.W., Krieg D.A., Hutmacher R.B.: Photosynthetic rate control in cotton.–Plant Physiol. 73: 662–665, 1983.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Pettigrew W.T.: The effect of higher temperatures on cotton lint yield production and fiber quality.–Crop Sci. 48: 278–285, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pettigrew W.T., Heitholt J.J., Vaughn K.C.: Gas exchange differences and comparative anatomy among cotton leaf-type isolines.–Crop Sci. 33: 1295–1299, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pettigrew W.T., Meredith W.R.: Leaf gas exchange parameters among cotton genotypes.–Crop Sci. 34: 700–705, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pettigrew W.T., Meredith W.R.: Genotypic variation in physiological strategies for attaining cotton lint yield production.–J. Cotton Sci. 16: 179–189, 2012.Google Scholar
  19. Pettigrew W.T., Turley R.B.: Variation in photosynthetic components among photosynthetically diverse cotton genotypes.–Photosynth. Res. 56: 15–25, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Quisenberry J.E., McDonald L.D., McMichael B.L.: Response of photosynthetic rates to genotypic differences in sink-to-source ratios in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.).–Environ. Exp. Bot. 34: 245–252, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reddy K.R., Doma P.R., Mearns L.O. et al.: Simulating the impacts of climate change on cotton production in the Mississippi delta.–Clim. Res. 22: 271–281, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reddy V.R., Baker D.N., Hodges H.F.: Temperature effects on cotton canopy growth, photosynthesis and respiration.–Agron. J. 83: 699–704, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rosenthal W.D., Gerik T.J.: Radiation use efficiency among cotton cultivars.–Agron. J. 83: 655–658, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Snider J.L., Chastain D.R., Collins G.D.: Field-grown cotton exhibits seasonal variation in photosynthetic heat tolerance without exposure to heat-stress or water-deficit conditions.–J. Agron. Crop Sci. 201: 312–320, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Snider J.L., Oosterhuis D.M., Collins G.D. et al.: Fieldacclimated Gossypium hirsutum cultivars exhibit genotype and seasonal differences in photosystem II thermostability.–J. Plant Physiol. 170: 489–496, 2013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Snider J.L., Oosterhuis D.M., Kawakami E.M.: Genotypic differences in thermotolerance are dependent upon prestress capacity for antioxidant protection of the photosynthetic apparatus in Gossypium hirsutum.–Physiol. Plantarum 138: 268–277, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Snider J.L., Oosterhuis D.M., Skulman B.W., Kawakami E.M.: Heat stress-induced limitations to reproductive success in Gossypium hirsutum.–Physiol. Plant. 137: 125–138, 2009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Institute of Experimental Botany 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA-ARS Crop Production Systems Res. UnitStonevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations