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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 7. Inseason plant measurement results from the irrigated large plot replicated systems variety demonstratrion, Mark Appling Farm, Blanco, TX, 2012.Test average 2.8 36,572 7.9 7.1 3.6CV, % 9.9 9.9 7.5 6.6 18.9OSL 0.4791 0.3985 0.1618 0.0576 † 0.4720LSD NS NS NS 0.6 NSFor NAWF, numbers represent an average of 5 plants per variety per rep (15 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 significantEntryPlant population Nodes Above White Flower (NAWF) for week ofplants/row ft plants/acre24-Jul 31-Jul 10-Aug15NexGen 1511B2RF 2.6 34,122 8.6 7.5 3.8All-Tex Edge B2RF 2.8 35,937 7.7 6.9 3.6All-Tex Nitro-44 B2RF 3.0 39,749 8.0 6.8 3.1Croplan Genetics 3156B2RF 3.0 39,023 7.6 6.5 2.9Croplan Genetics 3787B2RF 2.5 32,670 7.5 7.3 3.7Deltapine 1044B2RF 2.7 34,848 8.1 7.1 3.5Deltapine 1219B2RF 3.0 38,841 8.7 7.7 4.0FiberMax 2011GT 2.8 36,845 7.3 6.8 3.4FiberMax 2989GLB2 2.7 35,393 7.8 7.1 3.6FiberMax 9170B2F 2.9 37,389 7.5 6.7 3.5FiberMax 9250GL 3.0 38,660 7.5 6.5 3.1NexGen 4012B2RF 2.6 33,941 7.7 7.4 4.3PhytoGen 367WRF 2.9 38,478 7.9 7.4 3.7PhytoGen 499WRF 2.8 36,119 8.3 7.4 4.1
Table 8. Final plant map results from the irrigated large plot replicated systems variety demonsrtation, Mark Appling Farm, Blanco, TX, 2012.Test average 20.0 6.4 15.9 1.3 10.5 72.1CV, % 10.3 8.0 6.2 11.6 8.5 16.7OSL 0.0098 0.0328 0.0317 0.5119 0.0587 † 0.0284LSD 3.5 0.9 1.7 NS 1.2 20.2For 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 significantEntryFinal plant map 11-Septplant height(inches)node of firstfruiting branchtotal mainstemnodesheight to noderatiototal fruitingbranches open boll (%)16All-Tex Edge B2RF 19.3 6.2 15.9 1.2 10.6 80.5All-Tex Nitro-44 B2RF 19.5 6.6 15.8 1.2 10.3 73.6Croplan Genetics 3156B2RF 17.5 6.1 14.6 1.2 9.5 88.7Croplan Genetics 3787B2RF 20.9 6.2 15.1 1.4 9.8 58.6Deltapine 1044B2RF 20.4 5.9 16.3 1.3 11.4 63.8Deltapine 1219B2RF 21.7 6.2 15.9 1.4 10.7 53.7FiberMax 2011GT 16.9 5.6 14.2 1.3 9.2 82.1FiberMax 2989GLB2 20.1 6.6 16.1 1.3 10.5 67.5FiberMax 9170B2F 18.2 7.3 16.2 1.1 9.9 75.8FiberMax 9250GL 17.6 6.2 15.8 1.1 10.6 89.3NexGen 1511B2RF 23.8 6.4 17.1 1.4 11.6 66.4NexGen 4012B2RF 22.8 7.1 17.5 1.3 11.4 65.2PhytoGen 367WRF 21.5 6.0 16.3 1.3 11.3 77.0PhytoGen 499WRF 20.1 6.6 15.9 1.3 10.3 66.7
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 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 34 and 35: Replicated Sub-Surface Drip Irrigat
Page 40 and 41: Replicated LEPA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 48 and 49: Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
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 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
Page 90 and 91:
Results and Discussion:Agronomic da
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:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Replicated Dryland LargePlot Demons
Page 120 and 121:
Insecticides:Fertilizer management:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
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?