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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Results and Discussion:Significant differences were noted for lint turnout and net value (Table 1). Lintturnout averaged 22.2% with a high of 23.8% and low of 20.4% for Deltapine1044B2RF and Stoneville 5458B2RF, respectively. After subtracting ginning,seed costs and technology fees, the net value/acre among varieties ranged from ahigh of $94.44/acre (Deltapine 1044B2RF) to a low of $63.50/acre (Phytogen375WRF), a difference of $30.94.Significant differences were observed among varieties for micronaire, elongation,leaf, and reflectance (Table 2). Micronaire values ranged from a low of 3.0 forStoneville 5458B2RF to a high of 3.9 for All-Tex Epic RF. Elongation averaged7.0% across varieties with a high of 7.8% for Phytogen 499WRF and a low of 6.3%for Stoneville 5458B2RF. Color grade components of Rd (reflectance) and +b(yellowness) averaged 80.4 and 8.5, respectively.These data indicate that differences can be obtained in terms of net value/acre dueto variety selection. Additional multi-site and multi-year applied research isneeded to evaluate varieties across a series of environments.Acknowledgments:Appreciation is expressed to Cody Walters for the use of his land, equipment andlabor for this demonstration..Disclaimer Clause:Trade names of commercial products used in this report are included only forbetter understanding and clarity. Reference to commercial products or tradenames is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and noendorsement by the Texas A&M System is implied. Readers should realize thatresults from one experiment do not represent conclusive evidence that the sameresponse would occur where conditions vary.121
Table 1. Harvest results from the Dryland Production Trial, Cody Walters Farm, Loop, TX, 2012.Entry Lint Seed Bur cotton Lint Seed Lint loan Lint Seed Total Ginning Seed/technologyturnout turnout yield yield yield value value value value cost costNetvalue-------- % -------- ------------- lb/acre ------------- $/lb ------------------------------------------------- $/acre -------------------------------------------------Deltapine 1044B2RF 23.8 39.9 924 220 369 0.5495 120.78 46.12 166.90 27.73 44.74 94.44 aAll-Tex Epic RF 22.8 38.2 957 218 366 0.5248 114.30 45.69 159.99 28.70 37.21 94.07 aAll-Tex Edge B2RF 21.4 39.2 1011 217 396 0.5492 119.00 49.53 168.53 30.32 44.39 93.82 aPhytoGen 499WRF 22.4 37.0 989 222 366 0.5482 121.75 45.74 167.49 29.68 47.84 89.96 abFiberMax 2989GLB2 21.6 37.5 945 204 354 0.5282 107.61 44.30 151.91 28.35 48.51 75.05 abcStoneville 5458B2RF 20.4 38.7 995 203 385 0.5027 102.12 48.12 150.24 29.85 47.51 72.88 bcDeltapine 1219B2RF 23.1 38.6 845 195 326 0.5143 100.27 40.74 141.01 25.36 44.74 70.91 bcPhytoGen 375WRF 22.0 36.5 834 184 304 0.5353 98.36 37.98 136.34 25.01 47.84 63.50 cTest average 22.2 38.2 937 208 358 0.5315 110.52 44.78 155.30 28.12 45.3581.83CV, % 4.2 5.5 11.1 11.3 11.2 4.8 11.1 11.2 11.1 11.1 --OSL 0.0134 0.5117 0.3471 0.4499 0.1852 0.2832 0.1536 0.1846 0.2266 0.3452 --LSD 1.6 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS --For net value/acre, means within a column with the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 probability level.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 significant.Note: some columns may not add up due to rounding error.17.30.0807†20.30Assumes:$3.00/cwt ginning cost.$250/ton for seed.Value for lint based on CCC loan value from grab samples and FBRI HVI results.122
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:
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:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
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 84 and 85: Table 2. Final plant map results fr
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 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?