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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of Cotton VarietiesJanuary 2013Dr. Mark Kelley, Extension Agronomist - CottonMr. Chris Ashbrook, Extension Assistant - CottonTexas A&M AgriLife Extension ServiceLubbock, TXCharacteristics commonly evaluated in small-plot testing include lint yield, turnout percentages,fiber quality, and earliness. Current small-plot variety testing programs are inadequate in scaleand design to investigate the economic impact of new transgenic varieties with value-addedtraits. The objective of this project was to evaluate the profitability of cotton varieties inproducers' fields in the Texas High Plains. Three replications of each variety were included atthe Farwell and Plains locations with four replications at the Blanco location. At harvest, plotweights were determined using a boll buggy with integral electronic scales. Grab samples weretaken from each plot for ginning and fiber quality analysis.In 2012, yields were below what would normally be expected due to continued droughtconditions across the Texas High Plains region. A total of three irrigated locations were initiatedin 2012. These locations included Blanco, Farwell, and Plains, and the numbers of varieties ateach location were 14, 12, and 20, respectively. All locations were well maintained by thecooperating producers, but the continued drought conditions took a toll on variety yields. At theFarwell location, during the growing season, all plots received light dose application (drift or tankcontamination) of a sorghum herbicide but the damage was minimal. All locations weresubjected to an early freeze event on 8-October. However, the Plains location was the only onethat indicated significant effects with the earlier maturity varieties benefitting most. Lint yieldsaveraged 817 lb/acre, 902 lb/acre and 456lb/acre at Farwell, Plains and Blanco respectively. Atthe Farwell location, loan values ranged from a high of $0.5658/lb (FiberMax 1944GLB2) to alow of $0.4900/lb (Croplan Genetics 3156B2RF) with a test average of $0.5392. A test averagenet value of $458.18/acre was observed, however, differences among varieties were notsignificant. Loan values at Plains averaged $0.5551/lb with a high of $0.5810/lb and a low of$0.5270 for NexGen 4111RF and Croplan Genetics 3156B2RF, respectively. After adding lintand seed values and subtracting ginning costs and seed/technology fees, net values averaged$530.37/acre. Individual variety net values ranged from a high of $619.63/acre for NexGen1511B2RF to a low of $461.57/acre for FiberMax 9058F, a difference of $158.06. Four varietieswere included in the statistical upper tier at Plains. These included NexGen 1511RF, CroplanGenetics 3787B2RF, Deltapine 1212B2RF, and All-Tex Nitro-44 B2RF with net values ($/acre)of $619.63, $587.32, $576.96, and $572.46, respectively. Lint loan values derived from grabsamples taken at harvest at the Blanco site averaged $0.5326/lb and ranged from a high of$0.5630/lb for Croplan 3787B2RF to a low of $0.5003/lb for All-Tex Edge B2RF. After addinglint and seed values, and subtracting ginning and seed/technology fee costs, the average netvalue across varieties was $285.84/acre. Five varieties were included in the statistical uppertier for net value at Blanco. These included PhytoGen 499WRF ($335.21/acre), FiberMax9170B2F ($310.45/acre), Croplan Genetics 3787B2RF ($308.22/acre), NexGen 1511B2RF($305.23/acre), and Deltapine 1219B2RF ($304.66/acre).These data indicate that substantial differences can be observed in terms of net value/acre dueto variety and technology selection. The differences in net value/acre, were not significant atthe Farwell location. However, when comparing the top and bottom varieties at the Plains andBlanco locations, differences were approximately $158 and $84, respectively. Additional multisiteand multi-year applied research is needed to evaluate varieties across a series ofenvironments.1
Agronomic and Economic Evaluation of Cotton VarietiesJanuary 2013Dr. Mark Kelley, Extension Agronomist - CottonMr. Chris Ashbrook, Extension Assistant - CottonTexas A&M AgriLife Extension ServiceLubbock, TXIntroductionSmall-plot cotton variety testing generally includes evaluation of genetic components but notgenetics in concert with management programs. Characteristics commonly evaluated in smallplottesting include lint yield, turnout percentages, fiber quality, and earliness. Over the lastseveral years, High Plains cotton producers have increased planted acreage of transgeniccotton (glyphosate- and glufosinate-herbicide tolerant and Bt insect-resistant types) fromapproximately 300 thousand in 1997 to approximately 3 million in 2010.Industry continues to increase the number of herbicide-tolerant, insect-resistant, and "stackedgene" varieties. Liberty Link Ignite herbicide-tolerant varieties (from Bayer CropScience) werefirst marketed in 2004. The first commercial "stacked Bt gene" system (Bollgard II fromMonsanto) was launched in 2004. Varieties containing Monsanto=s Roundup Ready Flex genesystem were commercialized in 2006. Widestrike "stacked Bt gene" technology from DowAgroSciences was available in some PhytoGen varieties in 2005, with additional RoundupReady Flex "stacked" types in the market in 2006. Liberty Link with Bollgard II types were alsocommercialized in 2006. In 2011, Bayer CropScience made Glytol and Glytol stacked withLiberty Link available to producers in limited quantities. Furthermore, in 2012, Bayer introducedseveral Glytol/Liberty Link varities stacked with Bollgard II technology. New transgenic varietiescontinue to be marketed in the High Plains by All-Tex, Americot/NexGen, Croplan Genetics,Delta and Pine Land/Monsanto, Dyna-Gro, the Bayer CropScience FiberMax/Stoneville brands,and the Dow AgroSciences PhytoGen brand. More transgenic varieties are expected to bereleased by these companies in the future. Additional cotton biotechnologies are alsoanticipated in the near future. These technologies include Extend from Monsanto/Deltapine andEnlist from Dow AgroSciences/PhytoGen. Extend technology with impart resistance to threeherbicide molecules, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Varieties with Enlist technology willbe resistant to a new formulation of the 2,4-D herbicide. The proliferation of transgenic varietiesin the marketplace is expected to continue over the next several years.Current small-plot variety testing programs are inadequate in scale and design to investigate theeconomic impact of new transgenic varieties with value-added traits. The objective of thisproject was to evaluate the profitability of cotton varieties in producers' fields in the Texas HighPlains.Materials and MethodsFor scientific validity, three replications of each variety were included at the Farwell and Plainslocations, with four replications included at Blanco. In previous years, plots were of sufficientsize to enable the combining of all replications of each individual variety into a single module atharvest. Variety modules would then be followed through the commercial ginning process. Afterseveral years of comparing results from commercial ginning and ginning of grab samples, astrong relationship was observed. Therefore, the decision was made by Extension personneland the producers to forgo moduling and utilize grab samples from each plot at each location. A2
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 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 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 56 and 57: Replicated Sub-Surface Drip Irrigat
Page 58 and 59:
Results and Discussion:Agronomic da
Page 60 and 61:
Table 2. Final plant map results fr
Page 62 and 63:
Entry Lint Seed Bur cotton Lint See
Page 64 and 65:
Replicated Sub-Surface Drip Irrigat
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:
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:
Replicated LESA Irrigated RACE Vari
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:
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?