Systems Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of Cotton Varieties in ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1. Final plant map results from the Floyd County dryland RACE variety demonstration, Gary Nixon Farm, Floydada, TX, 2012.Test average 18.5 7.9 15.3 1.2 8.4 82.2CV, % 7.5 5.9 4.2 6.1 5.1 14.9OSL 0.3661 0.0276 0.1535 0.3670 0.0104 0.0355LSD NS 0.8 NS NS 0.7 21.4For Final plant map, numbers represent and average of 6 plants per variety per rep (18 plants per variety)CV - coefficient of variation.OSL - observed significance level, or probability of a greater F value.LSD - least significant difference at the 0.05 level, NS - not significantEntryFinal plant map 27-Septplant height(inches)node of firstfruiting branchtotal mainstemnodesheight to noderatiototal fruitingbranches open boll (%)115All-Tex Edge B2RF 18.0 7.2 15.1 1.2 8.8 94.3Dyna-Gro 2400RF 19.0 8.1 15.3 1.2 8.3 94.0Deltapine 0912B2RF 18.0 7.4 14.7 1.2 8.3 92.7Deltapine 1044B2RF 17.2 8.1 15.0 1.1 7.9 70.1FiberMax 9170B2F 18.7 8.6 16.3 1.1 8.8 66.6NexGen 4111RF 20.0 7.6 15.7 1.3 9.2 91.8PhytoGen 499WRF 19.1 8.4 15.2 1.3 7.7 79.9Stoneville 5458B2RF 17.9 8.1 15.2 1.2 8.2 68.5
Table 2. Final plant map results from the Floyd County dryland RACE variety demonstration, Gary Nixon Farm, Floydada, TX, 2012.total retention(%)Test average 72.4 27.6 5.9 49.4 28.3 40.23CV, % 8.3 21.8 16.4 13.4 26.6 14.8OSL 0.0545 † 0.0545 † 0.3892 0.6944 0.0917 † 0.8868LSD 8.7 8.7 NS NS 10.8 NSFor Final plant map, numbers represent and average of 6 plants per variety per rep (18 plants per variety)CV - coefficient of variation.OSL - observed significance level, or probability of a greater F value.LSD - least significant difference at the 0.05 level, † indicates significance at the 0.10 level, NS - not significantEntryFruiting and Retention 27-Sept% of fruit from1st position% of fruit from2nd position total fruit1st positionretention (%)2nd positionretention (%)116All-Tex Edge B2RF 63.8 36.2 7.0 49.7 38.9 44.95Dyna-Gro 2400RF 66.9 33.1 5.7 45.4 34.8 40.14Deltapine 0912B2RF 76.4 23.6 5.9 53.9 24.5 41.27Deltapine 1044B2RF 76.4 23.6 5.5 51.4 23.2 39.31FiberMax 9170B2F 78.2 21.8 6.1 51.5 24.2 39.82NexGen 4111RF 68.0 32.0 6.6 45.5 32.7 39.87PhytoGen 499WRF 70.8 29.2 5.2 47.0 27.7 38.78Stoneville 5458B2RF 78.4 21.6 5.6 51.2 20.1 37.67
Page 2 and 3:
Systems Agronomic and EconomicEvalu
Page 4 and 5:
Scott Russell, EA-IPM, Terry/Yoakum
Page 6 and 7:
Replicated No-Till LESA Irrigated R
Page 8 and 9:
Agronomic and Economic Evaluation o
Page 10:
andomized complete block design was
Page 14 and 15:
not significant at this location. H
Page 16 and 17:
Table 1. Inseason plant measurement
Page 18 and 19:
Table 3. HVI fiber property results
Page 20 and 21:
Entry Lint Seed Bur cotton Lint See
Page 22 and 23:
Table 7. Inseason plant measurement
Page 24 and 25:
Table 9. Final plant map results fr
Page 26 and 27:
Table 11. HVI fiber property result
Page 28 and 29:
Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 30 and 31:
Results and Discussion:Agronomic da
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Replicated Sub-Surface Drip Irrigat
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Replicated LEPA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73: Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 74 and 75: Results and Discussion:Agronomic da
Page 76 and 77: Table 2. Final plant map results fr
Page 78 and 79: Entry Lint Seed Bur cotton Lint See
Page 80 and 81: Replicated No-Till LESA Irrigated R
Page 82 and 83: Results and Discussion:Acknowledgme
Page 88 and 89: Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 90 and 91: Results and Discussion:Agronomic da
Page 96 and 97: Replicated LEPA Supplemental (Limit
Page 98 and 99: lb/acre for FiberMax 2989GLB2. Lint
Page 100 and 101: Table 2. HVI fiber property results
Page 102 and 103: Texas Panhandle Cotton Variety Tria
Page 104 and 105: Biopolymer Research Institue for HV
Page 106 and 107: Location 2 - DumasAt the Dumas loca
Page 108 and 109: cotton yields to determine lint and
Page 118 and 119: Replicated Dryland LargePlot Demons
Page 120 and 121: Insecticides:Fertilizer management:
Page 126 and 127: Replicated Dryland Cotton Variety T
Page 128 and 129: Results and Discussion:Significant
Page 130 and 131: Table 2. HVI fiber property results
Page 132 and 133: 125Plains Dryland Systems Variety T
Page 134 and 135: 127Blanco Dryland Systems Variety T
Page 136 and 137: 129Dawson County Dryland RACE Demon
Page 138 and 139: 131Lynn County Irrigated RACE Demon
Page 140 and 141: Subsurface Drip Irrigation Pre-plan
Page 142 and 143: Effects of Variable In-Season Irrig
Page 144 and 145: Table 1. Response of commercially a
Page 146 and 147: Table 1. cont. †BrandVarietyVerti
Page 148 and 149: There were six locations planted in
Page 150 and 151: Table 2. HVI ratings for varieties
Page 152 and 153: Table 4. HVI ratings for varieties
Page 154 and 155: Table 6. Effect of variety on HVI r
Page 156 and 157: Table 7. cont.Variety bRel.ValueRan
Page 158 and 159: High Plains (TASS 1N and 1S)Planted
Page 160 and 161: Lubbock Air TemperaturesMay, 2012Te
Page 162 and 163: Lubbock Air TemperaturesSeptember,
Page 164 and 165: Precipitation (inches)4.0LTA20123.0
Page 166 and 167: Are side-by-side plots more valuabl
Page 168: Is a one-year test valid, or are se
show all

Systems Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of Cotton Varieties in ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?