Effects of Defoliation and Ripening Agent on Yield and Fiber Quality of Cotton Cultivars in Light and Simplified Regional Trials

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-0771

Abstract

Abstract:

Aiming to study the effects of defoliation and ripening agent on yield and fiber quality of cotton cultivars in the light and simplified regional trials, so as to clarify the reasonable methods for spraying defoliation and ripening agent in Shandong. The paper analyzed the effects of defoliation and ripening agent on yield traits and fiber quality of different cotton varieties from the light and simplified regional trials of 2023 and 2024. 600 g thidiazuron (50% wettable powder) and 3000 mL ethephon (40% aqueous solution) per hectare were used at 60 days after topping, with spraying the equivalent volume of running water as the control. Results showed that defoliation and ripening agent exhibited no significant impact on seed cotton yield, fiber length, fiber strength, and uniformity index in the light and simplified regional trials. However, the extent of influence varied among the tested varieties, with approximately 50% of the varieties demonstrating either a decrease or no change compared to the control group across the two years. Defoliation and ripening agent significantly affected boll weight and seed index in cotton varieties under light and simplified cultivation. Specifically, boll weight decreased by an average of 4.23% to 6.0%, while seed index declined by an average of 5.51% to 8.31%, compared to the control group. Additionally, these agents considerably influenced lint percentage and micronaire, with the degree of influence differing among various cotton varieties across different years. Variance analysis indicated that the interaction between the defoliation and ripening agent and variety types had a highly significant effect on seed index but did not significantly affect seed cotton yield, lint percentage, fiber length, fiber strength, or micronaire. The interaction effect on boll weight was significantly influenced by both variety type and climatic conditions. In a word, reasonable application of defoliation and ripening agent has no significant impact on the yield and fiber quality of cultivars in the light and simplified regional trials. It is initially recommended that the application of defoliation and ripening agent in the light and simplified regional trials of cotton in Shandong should be 60 days after topping. The recommended application rate is 600 g thidiazuron (50% wettable powder) and 3000 mL ethephon (40% aqueous solution) per hectare. However, specific applications need to be adjusted based on the characteristics of the variety and the climatic conditions of the year.

Key words: the light and simplified regional trial, defoliation and ripening agent, thidiazuron, ethephon, yield, fiber quality

ZHANG Guizhi, ZHAO Hongjun, WANG Wenliang, CHEN Lan, ZHANG Xiaojie, LIU Guodong. Effects of Defoliation and Ripening Agent on Yield and Fiber Quality of Cotton Cultivars in Light and Simplified Regional Trials[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(7): 22-29.

Figures/Tables 5

References 27

[1]	喻树迅, 张雷, 冯文娟. 快乐植棉——中国棉花生产的发展方向[J]. 棉花学报, 2015, 27(3):283-290. doi: 10.11963/issn.1002-7807.201503013
[2]	崔正鹏, 代建龙, 李维江, 等. 优化棉作制度,创新种植模式,为山东棉业发展插上科技的翅膀[J]. 中国棉花, 2021, 48(2):13-16. doi: 10.11963/1000-632X.czpdhz.20210128
[3]	李亚兵, 韩迎春, 冯璐, 等. 我国棉花轻简化栽培关键技术研究进展[J]. 棉花学报, 2017, 29(增刊):80-88. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.lyblyb.20170825
[4]	JIN D, WANG X, XU Y, et al. Chemical defoliant promotes leaf abscission by altering ROS metabolism and photosynthetic efficiency in Gossypium hirsutum[J]. International journal of molecular sciences, 2020, 21(8):2738-2738. doi: 10.3390/ijms21082738 URL
[5]	刘韬奋, 罗单, 张启鹏, 等. 乙烯利催熟对机采棉铃重和纤维品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(1):209-218. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2024.34039
[6]	王希, 杜明伟, 田晓莉, 等. 黄河流域棉区棉花脱叶催熟剂的筛选研究[J]. 中国棉花, 2015, 42(5):15-21. doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.201505006
[7]	王香茹, 张恒恒, 胡莉婷, 等. 新疆棉区棉花脱叶催熟剂的筛选研究[J]. 中国棉花, 2018, 45(2):8-14. doi: 10.11963/1000-632X.wxrzxl.20180126
[8]	徐道青, 郑曙峰, 王维, 等. 不同脱叶催熟剂在安徽的应用效果研究[J]. 中国棉花, 2016, 43(3):4-9. doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.201603002
[9]	姜伟丽, 马艳, 马小艳, 等. 不同脱叶催熟剂在棉花上的应用效果[J]. 中国棉花, 2013, 40(10):11-14. doi: 10.11963/issn.1000-632X.20131004
[10]	张丽娟, 夏绍南, 崔爱花, 等. 几种棉花脱叶催熟剂在鄱阳湖棉区的应用效果初探[J]. 江西农业学报, 2013, 25(5):16-18.
[11]	杜振翠. 莒南植棉区噻苯隆不同剂量对棉花的脱叶效果[J]. 棉花科学, 2022, 44(5):45-49.
[12]	陈兵, 张国蕾, 王静, 等. 机采棉等行距密植模式下棉花脱叶催熟效果研究[J]. 西北农业学报, 2019, 28(10):1594-1601.
[13]	徐敏, 金路路, 孙丽园, 等. 棉花化学脱叶剂在辽河流域棉区的应用效果研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(12):47-54. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0680
[14]	张煦怡, 田景山, 杨延龙, 等. 北疆棉区棉花单铃损伤对脱叶催熟剂及铃期的响应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2018, 55(7):1186-1193. doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2018.07.002
[15]	Larson J A, Gwathmey C O, Hayes R M. Cotton defoliation and harvest timing effects on yields, quality, and net revenues[J]. Journal of cotton science, 2002, 6:13-27.
[16]	马立刚, 王树林, 王燕, 等. 脱叶催熟剂用量对不同棉花品种脱叶效果及产量构成与品质的影响[J]. 山西农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 39(5):16-22.
[17]	宋兴虎, 徐东永, 孙璐, 等. 在不同棉区噻苯隆和乙烯利用量及配比对脱叶催熟效果影响[J]. 棉花学报, 2020, 32(3):247-257. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.sxhlzh.20200512
[18]	梁发瑞, 龙遗磊, 杜霄, 等. 棉花脱叶催熟剂及其应用技术研究进展[J]. 中国棉花, 2024, 51(9):1-7.
[19]	KULVIR S, PANKAJ R, KULDEEP S. Dose and time dependent efficacy alteration of different defoliants on seed cotton yield[J]. Journal of environmental biology, 2015, 36(4):891-895. pmid: 26364466
[20]	张煦怡. 新疆棉区脱叶催熟剂对棉铃发育及纤维品质形成的影响[D]. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2018:5-8.
[21]	周先林, 覃琴, 王龙, 等. 脱叶剂对两种机采模式下棉花脱叶效果及纤维品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2020, 22(11):144-152. doi: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2019.0628
[22]	张文, 冯杨, 刘铨义, 等. 脱叶剂不同施用方法对棉花脱叶吐絮及产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国棉花, 2018, 45(5):26-28. doi: 10.11963/1000-632X.zwlt.20180515
[23]	李江峰, 艾合买提·哈里克, 王大光, 等. 棉铃发育不同时期的质量变化研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(21):15-19. doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0638
[24]	毛廷勇, 胡守林, 陈国栋, 等. 新疆南疆阿拉尔垦区主栽陆地棉品种(系)棉铃发育的特征[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(12):2157-2168. doi: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2019.12.001
[25]	胡莎莎. 脱叶剂对棉花纤维品质及种子活力的影响研究[D]. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2022:5-9.
[26]	田景山, 张煦怡, 王文敏, 等. 棉花脱叶催熟剂对纤维品质的影响及应用时间的确定[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(9):1388-1397. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.94196
[27]	王文敏, 田景山, 张煦怡, 等. 棉花喷施脱叶剂对棉铃蔗糖代谢影响及与纤维比强度的关系[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2016, 53(9):1580-1586.

年份	品种	密度/(万株/hm²)	播种日期(月-日)	打顶日期(月-日)	脱叶催熟剂喷施日期(月-日)
2023	Q1、Q2、Q3、Q4、Q5、Q6、Q7、Q8、Q9、Q10、Q11	8.0	05-06	07-21	09-19
2024	J1、J2、J3、J4、J5、J6、J7、J8、J9、J10、J11	8.3	05-06	07-19	09-18

年份	品种	密度/(万株/hm²)	播种日期(月-日)	打顶日期(月-日)	脱叶催熟剂喷施日期(月-日)
2023	Q1、Q2、Q3、Q4、Q5、Q6、Q7、Q8、Q9、Q10、Q11	8.0	05-06	07-21	09-19
2024	J1、J2、J3、J4、J5、J6、J7、J8、J9、J10、J11	8.3	05-06	07-19	09-18

年份	品种	处理	衣分/%	单铃重/g	籽指/g	籽棉产量/(kg/hm²)
2023	Q1	T	40.75±0.33Bbc	6.1±0.22BCbc	11.08±0.06EFfg	4508±175Bb
	Q1	CK	41.39±0.11ABb	6.27±0.14BCbc	11.51±0.01DEe	4491±105BCb
	Q2	T	40.63±0.04Bbc	6.02±0.04BCc	10.73±0.31EFg	5072±442Aa
	Q2	CK	39.99±0.04Bc	6.32±0.36Bbc	11.64±0.06DEde	4812±84ABab
	Q3	T	42.73±0.52Aab	5.38±0.03CDd	9.97±0.04Gh	4689±284ABab
	Q3	CK	42.19±0.69ABab	5.44±0.14CDd	10.8±0.17EFfg	4998±128ABab
	Q4	T	41.35±0.2ABb	6.46±0.25ABb	10.86±0.06EFfg	4339±150BCbc
	Q4	CK	41.57±0.04ABab	6.44±0.23ABb	10.65±0.18Fg	3965±213Cc
	Q5	T	42.28±0.31ABab	5.79±0.16Ccd	10.1±0.06Gh	4710±150ABab
	Q5	CK	42.1±0.3ABab	6.11±0.19BCbc	10.09±0.23Gh	4810±386ABab
	Q6	T	41.87±0.21ABab	5.57±0.08CDd	10.2±0.13FGh	4631±77ABb
	Q6	CK	40.93±0.69Bbc	5.68±0.02CDcd	11.18±0.18Eef	4540±439ABb
	Q7	T	40.84±0.79Bbc	5.27±0.17Dd	11.1±0.2EFf	4499±88BCb
	Q7	CK	41.55±0.83ABb	5.83±0.16BCcd	11.92±0.01Dd	4439±378BCb
	Q8	T	42.82±0.22Aa	5.52±0.25CDd	11.11±0.25EFf	4854±314ABab
	Q8	CK	42.19±0.43ABab	6.3±0.03Bbc	13.01±0.36Bb	4777±278ABab
2023	Q9	T	41.31±0.06ABb	6.03±0.08BCc	11.77±0.12Dde	4352±92BCbc
	Q9	CK	40.1±0.33Bc	6.87±0.06Aa	13.63±0.24Aa	4440±159BCb
	Q10	T	41.31±0.09ABb	6.15±0.28BCbc	11.8±0.11Dde	4672±299ABb
	Q10	CK	41.01±2.06Bbc	6.69±0.21ABab	12.79±0.13BCbc	4820±689ABab
	Q11	T	41.2±0.35ABbc	5.74±0.11CDcd	12.58±0.09Cc	4620±312 ABb
	Q11	CK	40.68±0.66Bbc	5.85±0.1BCcd	13.09±0.23Bb	4859±352ABab
2024	J1	T	40.9±0.28ABab	5.56±0.06Bc	10±0.06Gh	5280±180ABab
	J1	CK	39.7±0.93Bbc	5.62±0.04Bc	9.85±0.06Gh	4997±221ABbc
	J2	T	41.14±0.23ABab	5.72±0.01Bbc	10.24±0.09FGgh	5099±124ABab
	J2	CK	40.48±0.42ABab	6.04±0.01ABab	10.74±0.11EFfg	5131±53ABab
	J3	T	39.89±0.21Bbc	5.93±0.05ABb	11.78±0.03CDd	5332±10ABab
	J3	CK	38.89±0.85Bc	6.24±0.08Aa	12.95±0.08ABab	5119±40ABab
	J4	T	39.18±0.06Bc	5.75±0.01Bbc	11.03±0.04Ef	5171±183ABab
	J4	CK	38.76±0.21Bc	6.01±0.09ABab	11.08±0.09Eef	5108±293ABab
	J5	T	41.21±0.67ABab	5.74±0.27Bbc	10.47±0.11Fg	4941±43Bbc
	J5	CK	40.59±0.88ABab	6.05±0.1ABab	10.78±0.08EFf	5094±69ABab
	J6	T	40.31±0.11ABbc	5.8±0.37Bbc	10.86±0.22EFf	4973±39ABbc
	J6	CK	39.79±0.19Bbc	5.58±0.16Bc	11.51±0.28Dde	5261±41ABab
	J7	T	40.65±0.25ABab	5.91±0.13ABb	11.32±0.08DEef	5065±202ABb
	J7	CK	40.11±0.58ABbc	6.01±0.19ABab	12.91±0.13ABb	5148±282ABab
	J8	T	41.64±0.62Aa	5.68±0.15Bbc	11.6±0.13Dde	4637±125Bc
	J8	CK	40.81±0.29ABab	6.05±0.01ABab	11.98±0.04CDcd	4662±65Bc
	J9	T	37.76±0.40Cd	5.87±0.08ABbc	11.7±0.31Dd	5106±59ABab
	J9	CK	36.81±1.06Cd	5.93±0.1ABb	12.11±0.23Cc	4877±40Bbc
	J10	T	39.33±0.42Bbc	5.11±0.08Cd	10.3±0.16FGg	5251±135ABab
	J10	CK	39.03±0.18Bc	5.62±0.13Bc	11.33±0.08DEe	5155±247ABab
	J11	T	40.19±0.35ABbc	5.81±0.16Bbc	12.62±0.02Bb	5435±73Aa
	J11	CK	40.37±0.85ABb	6.03±0.06ABab	13.21±0.12Aa	5436±394Aa

年份	品种	处理	衣分/%	单铃重/g	籽指/g	籽棉产量/(kg/hm²)
2023	Q1	T	40.75±0.33Bbc	6.1±0.22BCbc	11.08±0.06EFfg	4508±175Bb
	Q1	CK	41.39±0.11ABb	6.27±0.14BCbc	11.51±0.01DEe	4491±105BCb
	Q2	T	40.63±0.04Bbc	6.02±0.04BCc	10.73±0.31EFg	5072±442Aa
	Q2	CK	39.99±0.04Bc	6.32±0.36Bbc	11.64±0.06DEde	4812±84ABab
	Q3	T	42.73±0.52Aab	5.38±0.03CDd	9.97±0.04Gh	4689±284ABab
	Q3	CK	42.19±0.69ABab	5.44±0.14CDd	10.8±0.17EFfg	4998±128ABab
	Q4	T	41.35±0.2ABb	6.46±0.25ABb	10.86±0.06EFfg	4339±150BCbc
	Q4	CK	41.57±0.04ABab	6.44±0.23ABb	10.65±0.18Fg	3965±213Cc
	Q5	T	42.28±0.31ABab	5.79±0.16Ccd	10.1±0.06Gh	4710±150ABab
	Q5	CK	42.1±0.3ABab	6.11±0.19BCbc	10.09±0.23Gh	4810±386ABab
	Q6	T	41.87±0.21ABab	5.57±0.08CDd	10.2±0.13FGh	4631±77ABb
	Q6	CK	40.93±0.69Bbc	5.68±0.02CDcd	11.18±0.18Eef	4540±439ABb
	Q7	T	40.84±0.79Bbc	5.27±0.17Dd	11.1±0.2EFf	4499±88BCb
	Q7	CK	41.55±0.83ABb	5.83±0.16BCcd	11.92±0.01Dd	4439±378BCb
	Q8	T	42.82±0.22Aa	5.52±0.25CDd	11.11±0.25EFf	4854±314ABab
	Q8	CK	42.19±0.43ABab	6.3±0.03Bbc	13.01±0.36Bb	4777±278ABab
2023	Q9	T	41.31±0.06ABb	6.03±0.08BCc	11.77±0.12Dde	4352±92BCbc
	Q9	CK	40.1±0.33Bc	6.87±0.06Aa	13.63±0.24Aa	4440±159BCb
	Q10	T	41.31±0.09ABb	6.15±0.28BCbc	11.8±0.11Dde	4672±299ABb
	Q10	CK	41.01±2.06Bbc	6.69±0.21ABab	12.79±0.13BCbc	4820±689ABab
	Q11	T	41.2±0.35ABbc	5.74±0.11CDcd	12.58±0.09Cc	4620±312 ABb
	Q11	CK	40.68±0.66Bbc	5.85±0.1BCcd	13.09±0.23Bb	4859±352ABab
2024	J1	T	40.9±0.28ABab	5.56±0.06Bc	10±0.06Gh	5280±180ABab
	J1	CK	39.7±0.93Bbc	5.62±0.04Bc	9.85±0.06Gh	4997±221ABbc
	J2	T	41.14±0.23ABab	5.72±0.01Bbc	10.24±0.09FGgh	5099±124ABab
	J2	CK	40.48±0.42ABab	6.04±0.01ABab	10.74±0.11EFfg	5131±53ABab
	J3	T	39.89±0.21Bbc	5.93±0.05ABb	11.78±0.03CDd	5332±10ABab
	J3	CK	38.89±0.85Bc	6.24±0.08Aa	12.95±0.08ABab	5119±40ABab
	J4	T	39.18±0.06Bc	5.75±0.01Bbc	11.03±0.04Ef	5171±183ABab
	J4	CK	38.76±0.21Bc	6.01±0.09ABab	11.08±0.09Eef	5108±293ABab
	J5	T	41.21±0.67ABab	5.74±0.27Bbc	10.47±0.11Fg	4941±43Bbc
	J5	CK	40.59±0.88ABab	6.05±0.1ABab	10.78±0.08EFf	5094±69ABab
	J6	T	40.31±0.11ABbc	5.8±0.37Bbc	10.86±0.22EFf	4973±39ABbc
	J6	CK	39.79±0.19Bbc	5.58±0.16Bc	11.51±0.28Dde	5261±41ABab
	J7	T	40.65±0.25ABab	5.91±0.13ABb	11.32±0.08DEef	5065±202ABb
	J7	CK	40.11±0.58ABbc	6.01±0.19ABab	12.91±0.13ABb	5148±282ABab
	J8	T	41.64±0.62Aa	5.68±0.15Bbc	11.6±0.13Dde	4637±125Bc
	J8	CK	40.81±0.29ABab	6.05±0.01ABab	11.98±0.04CDcd	4662±65Bc
	J9	T	37.76±0.40Cd	5.87±0.08ABbc	11.7±0.31Dd	5106±59ABab
	J9	CK	36.81±1.06Cd	5.93±0.1ABb	12.11±0.23Cc	4877±40Bbc
	J10	T	39.33±0.42Bbc	5.11±0.08Cd	10.3±0.16FGg	5251±135ABab
	J10	CK	39.03±0.18Bc	5.62±0.13Bc	11.33±0.08DEe	5155±247ABab
	J11	T	40.19±0.35ABbc	5.81±0.16Bbc	12.62±0.02Bb	5435±73Aa
	J11	CK	40.37±0.85ABb	6.03±0.06ABab	13.21±0.12Aa	5436±394Aa

变异来源	2023年F值				2024年F值
变异来源	衣分	单铃重	籽指	籽棉产量	衣分	单铃重	籽指	籽棉产量
品种	5.50^**	17.87^**	112.95^**	5.22^**	17.18^**	8.32^**	167.24^**	5.21^**
处理	2.84	41.46^**	239.65^**	0.9	14.59^**	25.33^**	196.87^**	0.3
品种×处理	1.02	2.82^*	13.94^**	0.7	0.49	2.07	12.88^**	1.06