Yield and Yield Components as Affected by Delaying Sowing Dates in Some Egyptian Cotton Varieties

INTRODUCTION

Cotton an international agricultural commodity of which quality and quantity are subject to various whines of nature, occupies an important position in global status of commercial crops with annual impact of about >50 billion dollars in worlds economy (OECD)/FAO, 2019) the lint quality in general and particularly seed cotton yield is highly sensitive to climatic conditions.

Sustainable cotton production in the future will depend on the development of cotton varieties with higher yield potential and quality of seed cotton as well as better Tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses (Aiken 2006).The sowing time of cotton plays important rolein obtaining better seed cotton yield in a country where the climatic conditions. Vary Saraz, (2008), Soomro et al., 2000and Usman and Ayatullah (2016) stated that sowing time of cotton crop plays main role in cotton production through its effect onvegetative and reproductive phases and thus total duration of crop. To decide the best time of cultivation in a specific area can often be complex. Seed cotton and fiber quality parameters could be assessed by sowing at different late sowing times.

In Egypt, the cotton farmers got used to delay sowing of cotton to April and the first of May in order to take one or two extra cuts from Egyptian clover and large areas are planted now withe beans and wheat in competition with cotton and other summer crops. This delay in cotton sowing was always accompanied by a significant decrease in seed cotton yield and cotton fiber quality with different magnitudes which changed according to cotton genotypes. Ebaidet al.(1988),studied delay in sowing date of cotton and they found that the number of open bolls/plant, boll weight, lint percentage and seed index were not significantly affected by sowing date however, early sowing date increased seed cotton yield by 13 to 14 % compared with the late sowing date.Ali and El Sayed (2001), recorded that the early sowing date (25 march) significantly increased number of open bolls per plant, boll weight, seed index, lint percentage, the number of days to the first flower, days to first opening boll seed cotton yield/plant and seed cotton yield/feddan. However, plant height was not significantly affected by sowing date. Gadallah(2002), concluded that delaying cotton sowing from 20 march to 25 April was accompanied by a gradual decrease in plant height, seed cotton yield/plant, seed cotton yield was decreased by 38.91 and 63.16% when delaying cotton sowing to 10 and 25April. When we compared with first sowing date at 20 March in both seasons. The average was 33.91 and 55.57% regarding fiber length at 2.5% span length and uniformity ratio. Also, the Presley index decreased with delaying sowing date of cotton. In addition, lint percentage and seed index responses were distinctive, where both traits increased when cotton was sown late. Hayatullaet al. (2011), showed that, sowing cotton on 25 April significantly increased fiber traits compared tolate sowing on 15 May. Emera (2012), cleared that sowing date hadsignificant effects on all growth parameters such as; number of bolls/plant, boll weight, seed index and seed cotton yield/feddan, while sowing date didn't exhibit any significant effect on lint percentage, number of opening bolls/plant, boll weight, seed index and seed cotton yield/feddan, on the other side, sowing date didn't appear to had any significant effecton lint percentage. Also, he cleared that Giza 86 cotton variety gave a significant increase in all growth traits, boll weight, seed index, number of open bolls/plant and seed cotton yield/feddan due to earliness in sowing date (30 march)but, had no significant effecton lint percentage compared with the late sowing date on 30 April. Elayonet al.(2013), studied and evaluated three sowing dates (25 March, 25 April and 25May) and the results showed that sowing date had significant effects on plant growth traits, yield and yield components. Also, they cleared that, delaying sowing recorded that significant increase in plant height, number of days to opening first flower, but the results indicated that sowing cotton on 25 March was superior in seed index and seed cotton yield Kentar/feddan.Ali and EL-Sayed(2001), reported that the Egyptian cotton cultivarGiza 88 recorded a significant increase in number of open bolls/plant, seed index, lint percentage, boll weight and number of days to opening first flower, seed cotton yield/plant and seed cotton yield/feddan in early sowing dates. EL sayed and EL Menshawi(2011), found that Giza 88 variety recorded a significant decrease in seed cotton due to late sowing date at the last week of April. EL – Zekyet al.(2007), stated that, the Egyptian cotton variety Giza 86 showed a significant decrease in boll weight, lint percentage, number of open bolls/plant, seed cotton yield/plant and seed cotton yield/feddanas the result of late sowing date.

The objective of this present investigation was to determine the effect of delaying sowing dates on yield and yield components of three Egyptian cotton varieties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

                This investigation was carried out by Plant Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University, Alexandria Egypt, during 2018 and 2019 seasons to study the effect of delaying sowing dates on yield and yield components of threeEgyptian cotton varieties. The experiments were conduct at Sakha Agriculture Research Station, Agriculture Research Center, Egypt. The design of the experiment was split plot design with three replicates the experimental plot size was 2.1 x 5 m (10.5 m2). Three Egyptian cotton varieties (factor A) were allocated to the main plots and five sowing dates (Factor B) were allocated to the sub plots. The treatments details are as follows:

Factor A (three Egyptian cotton varieties):

A₁           =              Giza 86

A₂           =              Giza 92

A₃           =              Giza 94

Factor B (five sowing dates)

B₁=  the first sowing date in 15^th and 16^thApril in 2018 and 2019 seasons,respectively.

B₂=  the first sowing date in 27^th and 25^th April in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively.

B₃= the first sowing date in 7^th and 8^th May in 2018 and 2019 seasons,respectively.

B₄= the first sowing date in 17^th and18^th May in 2018 and 2019 seasons,respectively.

B₅= the first sowing date in 27^th and28^th May in 2018 and 2019 seasons,respectively.

                The chemical fertilizers were applied atthe recommended doses by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied in the form of urea (46%) in two doses, the first dose was added at the first irrigation and the second dose was added before the second irrigation. phosphorus fertilizer was applied in the form of (18% P2O5) and was applied to the soil at the time of sowing. Potassium fertilization was added as foliar fertilizer in the form of Potesin F. The row spacing was 70 cm apart and the distance between hills was 30 cm. All cultural practices were performed as recommended by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation. Ten plants from each sub plot were chosen at random to measure the studied characters. These plants were tagged and numbered separately. Data were recorded for the following parameters:

The studied characters were:

1. Boll weight (BW gm.)

2. Number of bolls per plant (No. B/P)

3. Seed cotton yield per plant (gm) (SCY/P)

4. Seed cotton yield per feddan(SCY kentar/feddan).

5. Lint cotton yield per plant (gm.) (LCY/P).

6. Lint cotton yield (LCY kentar/feddan).

7. Lint percentage (L %)

8. Seed index (gm.) (SI).

The data collected were subjected to statistical analysis of variance according to Gomez and Gomez (1984)and Duncan multiple range values were used to test the differences between treatment means. The statistical analyses was performed using MSTAT-C computer statistical software, M-stat c (1986).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

                The mean squares of the analyses of variance and means of the studied characters ofthe three cotton varieties and five sowing dates and the interaction between them for yield and yield components are presented as follows.

                Boll weight (BW gm) and number of bolls per plant (No. B/P):

                The mean squares of boll weight and number of bolls per plant are presented at Table (1). The results showed highly significant effect due to the three Egyptian cotton varieties (factor A) and sowing dates (factor B) in the two seasons 2018 and 2019, respectively. In addition, the results also cleared that the interaction between cotton varieties and sowing dates (A x B) was highly significant for boll weight (BW) and significant for number of bolls per plant (No. B/P) in both seasons. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Ali and EL-Sayed (2001),Elayonet al (2008) and EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2011).

Table (1): Mean squares of boll weight and number of bolls per plant for2018 and 2019 seasons

Factor A= cotton varieties, Factor B= sowing dates

*, **Significant at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively.

The mean performance of the three Egyptian cotton varieties, five sowing dates and the interaction between them for boll weight (BW) and number of bolls per plant (No. B/P) are presented in Table (2). The results showed that (A3) Giza 94 variety gave the highest mean values for boll weight (3.41 and 3.48 gm) and number of bolls per plant(12.78 and 11.94) in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. On the other hand, the lowest mean values were recorded by Giza 92 for boll weight(2.95 and 2.66 gm) and number of bolls per plant (9.47 and 10.04) in both seasons, respectively. These results are in agreement with those of Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005) and Elayonet al (2008).

As for the effect of sowing dates on boll weight (BW)and number of bolls per plant the results cleared that the highest mean values for boll weight were recorded by the second sowing date (B2) with the mean values of (3.36 and 3.20 gm) while the lowest mean values were recorded by the last sowing date (B5) with mean values of (2.76 and 2.79 gm) in2018 and 2019, respectively. Likewise, the first sowing date (B1) recorded the highest mean values for number of bolls per plant with the mean values of(13.40 and 13.49 bolls/plant), respectively. While, the lowest mean values were given by the last sowing date (B5) with the mean values of (9.08 and 8.27 bolls/ plant), in the two seasons, respectively. These results are in agreement with those of Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005); Elayonet al. (2008.); Pettigrew et al.(2009) and Hayatallahet al.(2011).

For the interaction (A x B) the results cleared that the highest mean values for boll weight were recorded by (A3 x B3 in 2018 and A3 x B2 in 2019 seasons with the mean values of(3.64 and 3.73 gm), respectively, while the lowest mean values were given by the interaction A2 x B5 with the mean values of (2.29 and 2.44 gm) in 2018 and 2019, respectively. For the number of bolls per plant (No.B/P). The results cleared that the highest interaction mean values were recorded by A3x B1 in 2018 and A1 xB1 in 2019 with the mean values of (14.34 and 14.22), respectively, while, the lowest interaction values was recorded by (A2 x B4) in (2018 and (A2 x B5) in2019 with the mean values of(7.86 and 6.87 bolls/Plant), respectively. These results are in agreement with those of Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005 and 2011) and Elayonet al.(2013).

Table (2):The mean performances of Three Egyptian cotton varieties, five sowing dates and their interactions for boll weight and number of bolls per plant for 2018 and 2019 seasons

In the same column, under the same trait, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Duncan’s Multiple Range test, DMRT.

Seed cotton yield gram per plant (SCY/P) and seed cotton yield kentar per fed (SCY /fedd.):

                The mean square of seed cotton yield per plant (SCY/P) and seed cotton yield per faddan (SCY/feddan) were calculated and the results are presented in Table (3). The results cleared highly significant effect among all three Egyptian cotton varieties (factor A) and sowing dates (Factor B) for the above two studied traits. The results also showed that the interaction between Egyptian cotton varieties and sowing dates (A x B) were significant for the two studied traits, these results are in agreement with many other, among them Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Arian et al.(2001);Akhtar et al. (2002); Aiken (2006) and Emara (2012).

Table (3): Mean squares of seed cotton yield per plant and seed cotton yield per feddan for 2018 and 2019 seasons

Factor A= cotton varieties, Factor B= sowing dates

*, **Significant at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively

The date for seed cotton yield per plant and seed cotton yield per feddan are presented in Table (4). there were highly significant differences between the three cotton varieties  and the highest mean values for the seed cotton yield per plant was recorded for  Giza 94 (43.53 and 41.50 gm/plant),and (12.73 and 12.14 Kent/feddan)for seed cotton yield per feddan in2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. On the other hand the lowest mean values for seed cotton yield per plant(28.04 and 27.01 gm/plant) and seed cotton yield per feddan(8.20 and 7.90 Kent./feddan) were given by Giza 92 (A2) in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. These results in agreement with of Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005); Elayonet al.(2008) and Hayatallahet al.(2011).

Results in Table (4) showed highly significant differences between the five sowing dates. The results cleared that the highest mean values for seed cotton yield per plant were recorded by the first sowing date (B1) with the mean values of (42.43 and 41.52 gm per plant), while the lowest mean values for the same traits were given by the last sowing date (B5) with the mean values of(25.45 and 23.57 gm/plant)in both seasons, respectively. In addition the highest mean value for the seed cotton yield per feddan (12.41 and 12.15 kentar/feddan) were given by the first sowing date (B1) and the lowest mean values were recorded by (B5) with the mean values of (7.45 and 6.90 kentar/feddan) inseasons2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. These results are in agreement with many researchers i.e.: Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005); Emara (2012) and Elayonet al.(2013).

The result for the interaction between factors A and B showed that the highest mean values for these traits were given by (A3 x B1) with the mean values of (46.65 and 45.00 gm/plant) for seed cotton yield / plant and (13.65 and 13.17 kentar/feddan) for seed cotton yield/feddan in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. While the lowest mean values for seed cotton yield/plant (gm) and seed cotton yield/feddan were given by (A2 x B5) with the mean values of (18.56 and 16.73 gm/plant) for seed cotton yield/plant and (5.43 and 4.90 kentar/feddan) for seed cotton/feddan in both seasons, respectively as shown in Table (4). These results agreed with these of many researchers i.e.: Hassan et al (2003); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005); Elayon (2008); Pettigrew et al. (2009) and Hayatallahet al.(2011).

Table (4): The mean performances of three Egyptian cotton varieties; five sowing dates and their interactions for seed cotton yield per plant and seed cotton yield per feddan for 2018 and 2019 seasons

In the same column, under the same trait, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Duncan’s Multiple Range test, DMRT.

Lint cotton yield gram per plant (LCY/P) and lint cotton yield kentar/feddan(LCY/fed.)

                The mean squares of lint cotton yield/plant and lint cotton yield/feddan in 2018 and 2019 seasons are presented in Table (5). The results showed highly significant difference between the three Egyptian cotton varieties (A) and the five sowing dates (B), while, the interaction between them (A x B) for the same traits was significant in both season 2018 and 2019. These results are in agreement with of; Gadullah (2002); Hassan et al.(2003); Emara (2012); and Wenqinget al.(2012).

Table (5):Mean squares of lint cotton yield per plant and lint cotton yield per feddan for 2018 and 2019 seasons

Factor A= cotton varieties, Factor B= sowing dates

*, **Significant at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively

The mean values of the three Egyptian cotton varieties (factor A), five sowing dates (factor B) and their interaction for lint cotton yield / plant (g) and lint cotton yield (Kentar/feddan)are presented in Table (6). The results showed that the highest mean values were recorded by A3 (Giza 94) with the mean values of(16.86 and 16.51 g/plant)for lint cotton yield / plant, and (15.45 ad 15.13 kentar/fedd.) for lint cotton yield/feddan in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. While, the lowest mean values were given by A2 (Giza 92) with the mean values of (9.84 and 9.64 g/plant) for lint cotton yield / plant, and (9.02 ad 8.83 kentar/feddan) for lint cotton yield/feddan in both season, respectively.

Concerning sowing dates effect, the results cleared that the highest mean values were recorded by the first sowing date (B1) with the mean values of(15.66 and 15.51 gm/plant)for lint cotton yield per plant, and (14.35 ad 14.21 kentar/feddan) for lint cotton yield per feddan in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively, but the lowest mean values were given byB5 with the mean values of (9.96 and 9.43 gm/plant) for lint cotton yield per plant, and (9.13 ad 8.64 kentar/feddan) for lint cotton yield per feddan in both season, respectively.

On the other hand, the interaction (A x B) for these traits cleared that the highest mean values were recorded by (A3 x B1) and (A3 x B2) with the mean values (18.04 and 18.22 gm/plant) for lint cotton yield per plant, and (16.53 and 16.70 kentar/feddan) for lint cotton yield per feddan in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. On the other hand, the lowest mean values were recorded by (A2 x B5) with the mean values of (6.86 and 6.25 gm/plant) for lint cotton yield per plant, and (6.29 and 5.73 kentar/feddan) for lint cotton yield per feddan in both seasons, respectively. These results are in agreement with of researchers Ali and EL-Sayed(2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2011); Emara(2012) and Elayonet al (2013).

Table (6): The mean performances of three Egyptian cotton varieties; five sowing dates and their interactions for lint cotton yield per plant and lint cotton yield per feddan for 2018 and 2019 seasons

In the same column, under the same trait, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Duncan’s Multiple Range test, DMRT.

Lint percentage (L %) and seed index (SI) :

                Mean squares of lint percentage and seed index in 2018 and 2019 season, are presented in Table (7). The results showed highly significant different between the Egyptian cotton varieties (factor A) and sowing days (factor B) for the two traits in 2018 and 2019 seasons., in addition the interaction between factor (A and factor B) was significant for the same traits in 2018 and 2019 seasons. These results are in agreement with those obtained by EL-Sayed and EL- Menshawi (2005) and (2011); Hayatallahet al.(2011) and Emara (2012).

Table (7):Mean squares of lint percentage and seed index for 2018 and 2019 seasons

Factor A= cotton varieties, Factor B= sowing dates

*, **Significant at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively

The mean values of the three Egyptian cotton varieties five sowing dates and the interaction between them for lint percentage (L %) and seed index in 2018 and 2019 seasons are presented in Table (8).

For lint percentage, the results cleared highly significant differences among all studied Egyptian cotton varieties and the highest mean values were recorded by A3 (Giza 94) with the mean values of(38.78 and 39.85%)in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively, also, the lowest mean values were given by A2 (Giza 92) with the means of(35.31 and 35.87 %) at the two studied season, respectively. For sowing dates (factor B) the results showed that the highest mean value was recorded by B5 and B4 in 2018 season and by B5 in 2019 season, with the mean values (38.28,38.94 and 39.66 %), respectively.  Also, the results showed that the lowest mean value was recorded by B1, B2 and B3 in 2018 and 2019 seasons, with the mean values of (36.78, 36.38, 36.98, 37.21, 36.81 and 37.18%), respectively. Also, the results for the interaction between (A x B) cleared that the highest mean values was found for (A1 xB4 and A1 x B5) in 2018 season and by (A3 x B5) in 2019 season with the mean values of (40.06, 40.30 and 40.95), respectively. While, the lowest interaction was given by (A2x B1, A2 x B2, A2x B3 and A2xB4) with insignificant differences between them in 2018 and 2019 seasons. These results are in agreement with many researchers i.e.: Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Zekyet al.(2007);Hayatallahet al.(2011) and Emara (2012).

Regarding character of seed index, the results showed that the highest mean values were recorded by A3 (Giza 94) with the mean values of(11.48 and 10.57gm), also, the lowest mean values were given  by G86 and G92 varieties with the mean value of(9.81, 9.91, 9.71 and 9.68),in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. Also, the results for factor B showed highly significant differences among all studied sowing dates, and the highest seed index (SI) value was recorded by the first sowing date (B1) with the mean values of(11.19 and 10.62 gm) in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. While, the lowest mean values of seed index were given by the last sowing date (B5) with the mean values of (9.23 and 8.95 gm) in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. For the interaction (A x B) the results cleared that the highest means of seed index were recorded by (A3x B1) with the man values of (12.84 and 11.46 gm) in 2018 and 2019 seasons, respectively. But the lowest mean values were given by (A2 x B5) in 2018 season and (A1 x B5) in 2019 season with the mean values of(8.99 and 8.64 gm), respectively. These results are in agreement with those of Ali and EL-Sayed (2001); Gadullah (2002); EL-Sayed and EL-Menshawi (2005); Elayonet al 2008; Emara (2012) and Elayonet al (2013).

Table (8): The mean performances of three Egyptian cotton varieties; five sowing dates and their interactions for lint percentage and seed index for 2018 and 2019 seasons