Summary
The response of the cotton plant (Gossypium hirsutum L.) to 9.0 and 12.5 cm intra- and 75.0 and 96.5 cm inter-row spacing was studied under irrigation with saline water (5.5 dS/m, SAR 18). In general, the dry weight per plant matter, the leaf area, number of bolls and flowers, and yield per plant were all affected significantly by intra-row spacing but, not by inter-row spacing. However, on a unit area basis, they were affected only by the inter-row spacing. This indicates that competition between plants exists when intra-row spacing is reduced, whereas no significant competition occurs due to a decrease in the inter-row spacing. Although the effect of intra-row spacing on yield for a unit area was found to be not significant, the effect of inter-row spacing was significant. Yield in plots with the conventional spacing (96.5 cm between rows and 12.5 cm between plants in the row) was 4863 kg/ha, whereas the yield in plots with 75 cm between rows was about 23% higher (5974 kg/ha). The lint percentage and the plant height were not affected significantly by either intra- or inter-row spacings.
References
Bridge R R et al. 1973 Agron. J. 65, 104–109.
François L E 1982 Irrig. Sci. 3, 149–156.
Galanopoulou-Sendouka N et al. 1980 Agron. J. 72, 347–353.
Hawkins B S and Peacock M A 1970 Agron. J. 62, 578–580.
Hawkins B S and Peacock M A 1973 Agron. J. 65, 47–51.
Keren R and Shainberg I 1978 Hassadeh 58, 963–979 (in Hebrew).
Longenecker D E 1973 Soil Sci. 115, 294–302.
Maas J E and Hoffman C J 1977 J. Irrig. Drainage. Div. ASCE 103(IR2); 115–134.
Meiri A and Poljakoff-Mayber A 1970 Soil Sci. 109, 26–34.
Smith C W et al. 1979 Agron. J. 71, 858–860.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Contribution from the Institute of Soils and Water, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel. No.676-E, 1983 series.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keren, R., Meiri, A. & Kalo, Y. Plant spacing effect on yield of cotton irrigated with saline waters. Plant Soil 74, 461–465 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02181364
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02181364