The document discusses various morphoframe manipulations in cotton including the use of growth regulators, nipping, removing monopodials, applying boron, and defoliation. It provides tables showing the effects of these manipulations on cotton yield and its components. Growth regulators like NAA can increase boll number, boll weight, and seed cotton yield. Nipping (detopping) reduces plant height and increases boll load and yield. Applying boron through foliar sprays at flowering stages increases boll number, boll weight, lint yield, and fiber quality.

2. SIDDU M
PG15 AGR7052

3. Sequence of seminar
Introduction
Cotton scenario
Morphoframe manipulations
Conclusion
Growth regulators
Nipping
Removing monophodials
Application of boron
Defoliation

4. Introduction

5. Cotton- KING OF FIBRES / WHITE GOLD
 More than 80 countries
 12 major cotton producing countries in the world (India, USA,
China, Pakistan, Turkey, Brazil, Turkmenistan, Greece, Australia,
Uzbekistan, Argentina and Egypt)
 82% - acreage & 86% - production
 India : Area – I Production – II
Introduction

7. Cotton scenario
 World wide cotton is grown on area of 32.30 m ha with
production of 40.0 mt and productivity of 725 kg ha-1
 In India, cotton has an area of 12.80 m ha with a production
of 38 m bales and productivity of 504 kg lint ha-1
 Karnataka, cotton occupies an area of 5.40 lakh ha with a
production of 14.0 lakh bales and with productivity of 434
kg lint per ha
 As per the estimates 47.5 m bales of lint is required to meet
the domestic and export requirements by 2020 AD.
(Cotton Advisory Board 2014-15)

8. Morphoframe manipulations

9. • By using growth regulators
• By nipping
• By removing monopodials
• By application of boron
• By defoliation
Morphoframe manipulations

10. Growth regulators

11. Growth promoters
• Plant growth promoters increase cotton
vegetative growth
• Enhance the axuin, cytokinins and gibberellins
activity
• Enhance the nutrient translocation and
enzymatic activity

13. Table1: Effect of growth regulators on yield and
yield components of cotton
Treatments Boll number
per plant
Boll
weight(g)
Yield
(g/plant)
Yield
(kg/ha)
Chamatkar (500 ppm) at 90 DAS 21.1 5.25 45.82 848.51
Chamatkar (750 ppm) at 45 DAS 23.8 5.25 39.42 729.99
Chamatkar (750 ppm) at 90 DAS 23.2 5.15 53.27 986.47
Chamatkar (1000 ppm) at 90 DAS 25.4 5.58 56.18 1040.42
Lihocin (1000 ppm) at 45 DAS 17.6 4.80 31.57 584.62
Lihocin (1000 ppm) at 90 DAS 19.0 5.40 41.55 769.44
NAA(20 ppm) at 90 DAS 27.8 5.56 71.87 1330.91
Control 23.8 5.41 50.20 929.62
S.Em+/- 1.34 0.17 3.44 63.85
C.D.at 5% 0.02 0.139 2.19 0.055
Kiran kumar et al. (2003)
ARS, Dharwad

14. Table2: effect of NAA concentrations on number
of opened bolls and seed cotton yield
Treatments Number of
opened bolls
plant-1
Seed cotton
yield
(g plant-1)
Boll weight (g)
0 9.65 21.31 2.21
5ppm 10.02 23.04 2.30
10ppm 10.73 25.57 2.38
15ppm 11.55 27.16 2.35
20ppm 11.19 26.91 2.41
25ppm 11.04 25.81 2.34
LSD 0.05 0.80 2.05 0.10
Zakaria et al. (1998)
CRI, Giza (Egypt)

15. Table3: Effect of physiological manipulation on growth
parameters of Bt cotton at 90 DAS
Treatments Plant height (cm) No.of Sympodia
plant -1
No.of bolls plant-1
2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009
Control 90.82 86.67 14.93 11.4 10.26 14.33
Ethrel @ 30ppm at 45DAS 97.68 100.13 18.28 14.6 14. 24 20.93
Ethrel @ 45 ppm at 45DAS 97.71 100.20 17.53 14.33 21.21 23.00
Removal of squares manually 107.75 100.67 16.98 14.33 20.13 20.00
S.Em+/- 4.35 1.81 0.52 0.558 0.87 1.15
CD (P=0.05) 12.55 5.25 1.49 1.61 2.53 3.33
Kumari and Mridula (2014)
RARS, Guntur

16. Table4: Effect of physiological manipulation on yield and
yield attributing characters of cotton
Treatments Seed cotton yield
(Kg ha-1)
Harvest index Lint index (g)
2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009
Control 2716 1733 0.324 0.361 5.22 5.36
Ethrel @ 30ppm at
45DAS
3116 2084 0.361 0.471 5.42 6.18
Ethrel @ 45 ppm at
45DAS
2821 1927 0.326 0.441 5.64 6.78
Removal of squares
manually upto 55 DAS
2727 2029 0.312 0.419 5.48 6.56
S.Em+/- 133.85 66.2 0.017 0.025 0.19 0.13
CD (P=0.05) 386.49 191.3 0.049 0.064 NS 0.40
Kumari and Mridula (2014)
RARS, Guntur

18. Growth Retardants
• Plant growth retardants decrease cotton
vegetative growth
• Modifying the production of plant harmones
such as gibberellins, auxins and cytokinins
• Commonly used growth retardants
 Mepiquat pentaborate
 Chloromequat chloride
 Mepiquat chloride

22. Table5: Effect of mepiquat chloride on cotton yield
MC rate (g ha-1) Seed cotton yield
(g plant-1)
Seed cotton yield
(kg ha-1)
Lint yield (kg ha-1)
Control 30.04 b 2926.3 b 1034.5 b
48 at 75 DAS + 24 at
90 DAS
32.90 a 3206.1 a 1130.5 a
LSD 0.05 1.33 128.9 45.4
Zakaria (2006)
CRI, Giza(Egypt)

23. Table6:Effect of mepiquat chloride (MC) on morphological,
physiological and yield parameters on cotton
Treatment Plant height
at maturity
(cm)
Leaf
nitrogen (%)
Open
bolls/m2
Earliness
index
Harvest
index (%)
MC @25 g ha-1
at 80DAS
111 2.29 19.7 0.64 24.1
Control 126 2.12 18.5 0.57 21.2
S.E m+/- 2.3 0.023 0.86 0.011 0.49
CD@ 5% 5.1 0.050 NS 0.023 1.08
Venugopalan et al. (2016)
CICR, Nagpur

24. Table7: Effect of Stance (mepiquat chloride) on cotton
Treatments
plant height (cm) bolls per plant yield (kg ha-1)
2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008
Control 148.2 a 148.6 a 19.00 b 18.67 b 2884c 1397b
250 ml ha-1 at 45DAS 123.0 f 124.1 f 13.00 d 12.67 d 1544f 767d
500 ml ha-1 at 45DAS 120.0 g 121.6 f 14.00 d 14.00 d 2153e 1041c
250 ml ha-1 at 60DAS 134.7 c 138.4 c 17.00 c 17.00 c 2246d 1074c
500 ml ha-1 at 60 DAS 131.8 d 134.0 d 19.67 b 20.00 b 2961b 1471ab
250 ml ha-1 at 75 DAS 140.8 b 144.0 b 19.33 b 19.33 b 2947bc 1416b
500 ml ha-1 at 75 DAS 128.2 e 128.1 e 21.67 a 22.00 a 3181a 1528a
LSD 0.05 1.188 2.958 1.470 1.418 70.69 79.55
Ghulam et al. (2010)
ARF, Karor (Pakistan)

25. Figure 1: Effect of 1-MCP on chlorophyll fluorescence
Eduardo et al. (2010)
AREC,Fayetteville (USA)

26. Figure2: Effect of 1-MCP on cotton yield
AREC,Fayetteville (USA) Eduardo et al. (2010)

27. Table8: Bioefficacy of plant growth regulators on yield and yield
components at harvest in Bt cotton (JK-99)
Jyothi et al. (2007)
AC, Dharwad

29. Nipping (Detopping)
The main aim of detopping is to get good
architecture
Plant can get required sunlight with minimum
of mutual shading
Detopping resulted in reduced plant height
and lodging
Increase the boll load, boll weight and yield
without much changes in lint quality

32. Table9: Effect of different treatments on growth and yielding
characters of cotton (Pooled data of 3 years)
Treatment Plant hieght
(cm)
Seed cotton yield
(kg ha-1)
Lint yield
(kg ha-1)
Sympodial
plant-1
Control 92 3239 1062 12.33
Detopping at 60 DAS 84 3191 1045 13.60
Detopping at 75 DAS 81 3728 1249 14.93
ethrel@40ppm at 60 DAS 87 3301 1081 14.07
MH@30ppm at 60 DAS 87 3138 1026 14.27
Detopping at 60 DAS + ethrel@40ppm at
80 DAS
85 3383 1126 13.48
Detopping at 60 DAS + MH@30ppm at 80
DAS
85 3439 1124 13.80
Detopping at 75 DAS + ethrel@40ppm at
90 DAS
84 3293 1094 13.99
Detopping at 75 DAS + MH@30ppm at 90
DAS
82 3923 1317 15.89
S. Em +/- 1.0 122 40 0.4
CD (p=0.05) 3.0 347 115 1.1
Kataria et al. (2017)
CRS, Junagadh

33. Table10: Effect of detopping on growth and yield
attributes of cotton
Detopping (D) Plant height
(cm) at harvest
Number of
harvested bolls
plant-1
Boll weight (g) Seed cotton
yield (g plant-1)
Detopping at
80 DAS
82.59 36.06 4.78 127.50
No detopping 123.22 23.37 3.34 88.50
S.Em± 2.01 0.55 0.03 0.58
C.D. at 5% 12.14 3.38 0.20
3.56
Shwetha et al.(2008)
AC, Raichur

34. Table11: Effect of detopping on sucking pests of
cotton at 90 DAS
Detopping (D) Aphids population
(leaf-1 plant-1)
Jassids population
(leaf-1 plant-1)
Thrips population
(leaf-1 plant-1)
Detopping at 80
DAS 4.15 3.33 9.00
No detopping
8.55 5.33 11.00
S.Em± 0.14 0.03 0.19
C.D. at 5% 0.85 0.18 1.12
Shwetha et al.(2008)
AC, Raichur

35. Application of Boron
Boron increases the carbohydrate metabolism
and sugar translocation in cotton
Boron accelerates the translocation of nitrogen
compounds
Increases protein synthesis and stimulates
fruiting
Boron support the growth and development of
cotton fibers in the boll

37. Table 12: Effect of foliar application of zinc and
boron on seed cotton yield
Treatments (kg ha-1) Seed cotton yield (kg ha-1) Relative yield (%)
Zn B 2007 2008 Average
0.00 0.00 1977c 1933d 1955d -
0.75 0.00 2029b 2070bc 2049b 104.83
0.00 1.00 1983c 2017c 2000c 102.30
0.75 1.00 2110a 2257a 2183a 111.68
1.50 0.00 2107a 2211a 2159a 110.43
0.00 2.00 2010bc 2133b 2071b 105.95
1.50 2.00 2104a 2205a 2154a 110.20
LSD (0.05) 27.12 67.40 44.51
Ali et al. (2011)
ARF, Vehari (Pakistan)
Foliar spray of Zn and B as per treatment was carried out at flowering and peak flowering
stages.

38. Table 13: Effect of different B foliar application rate on
yield and yield components of cotton
B application rate
(g ha-1 )
Boll number
(plant-1)
Boll weight (g) Lint yield
(kg ha-1)
0 14.1c 6.15b 1400c
500 16.8b 6.49ab 1562b
1000 18.1a 7.02a 1752a
Mohsen et al. (2012)
IAU ,Takestan (Iran)
Boron foliar spray at first flower stage and repeated two weeks after.

39. Table 14: Effect of different B foliar application rate on
cotton fiber properties
B application rate
(g ha-1 )
Fiber length
(mm)
Fiber strength
(g tex -1)
Fiber fineness
0 29.2b 28.1a 4.9b
500 31.4a 28.2a 5.7a
1000 31.7a 28.6a 5.8a
Mohsen et al. (2012)
IAU ,Takestan (Iran)
Boron foliar spray at first flower stage and repeated two weeks after.

40. Table15: Effect of different B foliar application rate on
yield and yield components of cotton
B application
rate (g ha-1 )
Boll number
(plant-1)
Boll weight (g) Seed cotton
yield (kg ha-1)
Lint yield
(kg ha-1)
0 14.1 c 6.15 b 3541 b 1400 c
500 16.8 b 6.49 ab 3991 ab 1562 b
1000 18.1 a 7.02 a 4428 a 1752 a
Rikhtegar et al. (2014)
DES&T, Qeshm (Iran)
foliar application of boron at first flower stage

41. Defoliantion
• Mechanized picking
• clean and smooth picking of seed cotton
• Adjust the plant growth and to improve lint
yield and fibre quality

44. Table16: Effect of defoliants on bolls, boll weight and
seed cotton yield
Treatments Open bolls plant-1 Boll weight (g) Seed cotton yield
(kg ha-1 )
Control 44.0 4.09 2730.0
Dropp ultra @200 ml
ha-1
50.0 3.98 3018.7
Dropp ultra @225 ml
ha-1
42.6 3.79 2516.9
Ethrel @ 2000 ppm 45.8 3.96 2820.1
LSD(P=0.05) 1.87 0.11 117.0
Singh et al. (2014)
RRS, Faridkot (PAU)
Foliar spray of defoliants at 130 and 150 DAS

45. Removing Monopodials

46. Table17: Effect of Removal monopodial on nutrient
uptake and yield of cotton
Removal of monopodia Nitrogen
(kg ha-1)
Phosphorus
(kg ha-1)
Potassium
(kg ha-1)
Seed cotton
yield
(q ha-1)
Removal of one
monopodial
98.36 20.13 105.04 24.47
Removal of two
monopodial
96.43 19.66 104.41 24.35
Removal of three
monopodial
94.17 18.45 102.24 24.13
Retaining all the
monopodia
100.52 21.26 107.60 24.50
S.Em± 1.04 0.74 1.27 0.22
C.D. at 5% 3.20 2.14 3.68 NS
Shwetha et al.(2008)
AC, Raichur