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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 7. cont.Variety bRel.ValueRankValueRel.YieldRankYieldRel.WiltRankWiltRel.DefolRankDefolDP 0949B2RF 0.650 42 0.714 36 0.492 18 0.668 37DP 1048B2RF 0.648 43 0.651 51 0.699 45 0.676 40FM 9103GT 0.635 44 0.691 40 0.621 41 0.609 27DynaGro-10 0.633 45 0.675 45 0.428 10 0.575 22DynaGro-8 0.628 46 0.662 47 0.511 21 0.777 50All-Tex 10WR585RF 0.627 47 0.627 54 0.747 48 0.460 6DynaGro-1 0.625 48 0.614 56 0.699 46 0.637 30DynaGro-5 0.614 49 0.655 50 0.579 37 0.517 13All-Tex 789381RF 0.613 50 0.661 48 0.816 53 0.641 31DynaGro-2 0.612 51 0.623 55 0.687 44 0.794 51All-Tex Rapid B2RF 0.604 52 0.666 46 0.487 16 0.936 56DynaGro-6 0.603 53 0.642 52 0.757 49 0.614 29DynaGro-7 0.583 54 0.635 53 0.715 47 0.705 46AM 1550B2RF 0.581 55 0.675 44 0.554 32 0.866 54All-Tex CR106466B2RF 0.575 56 0.657 49 0.624 42 0.664 36All-Tex 91139B2RF 0.435 57 0.491 57 1.099 57 0.900 55a Every variety in each test is placed in a 0 to 1 scale, where the actual yield is divided by thehighest mean yield for a variety at that site, or the highest wilt value, or the highest defoliationvalue. A ranking of 1 is the best and 57 is the worse.b AM=Americot, AT = All Tex, BX = Experimental for Bayer CropScience, DP=Deltapine, DG =DynaGro, FM = Fibermax, NG = NexGen, PG=Phytogen, ST = Stoneville.149
2012 Texas High PlainsProduction and Weather150
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:
Page 80 and 81:
Replicated No-Till LESA Irrigated R
Page 82 and 83:
Results and Discussion:Acknowledgme
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
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 110 and 111: Entry Lint Seed Bur cotton Lint See
Page 118 and 119: Replicated Dryland LargePlot Demons
Page 120 and 121: Insecticides:Fertilizer management:
Page 122 and 123: Table 1. Final plant map results fr
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 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?