Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 2:30 PM

Cotton Yield and Plant Growth Across Row Spacings, Tillage Systems, and Herbicide Technologies

Kipling S. Balkcom1, Andrew J. Price1, Francisco J. Arriaga1, and Dennis P. Delaney2. (1) USDA-ARS, NSDL 411 S. Donahue Drive, Auburn, AL 36832, (2) ACES, 106 Extension Hall, Auburn, AL 36849

Cotton producers can have a difficult task when making decisions about choosing cotton varieties. Complex economics are involved in choosing varieties and herbicide systems due to the availability of both conventional and herbicide resistant varieties. Herbicide resistant varieties typically include technology fees that increase seed costs. Producers choose varieties and herbicide systems based upon both agronomic considerations as well as ease of weed management. Narrow row cotton consists of planting cotton rows 7.5 inches to 15 inches apart. Potential advantages associated with this system are moisture conservation and weed suppression, due to the faster canopy closure. Plant populations in narrow row cotton are higher, but more plants per acre can increase cotton yields. Unfortunately, growers have not been able to capitalize on the yield advantage because narrow row cotton has been traditionally harvested with a stripper harvester, which increases trash contents. Growers are substantially penalized for the trash content, eliminating the economic incentive of narrow rows. One equipment manufacturer has engineered a spindle harvester capable of harvesting 15-inch cotton rows. This equipment advancement addresses a major limitation of narrow row cotton. Our experiment was designed to compare 3 varieties with different genetics (conventional, RoundUp Ready, and Liberty Link) in standard and 15-inch row patterns across a conventional and conservation tillage system at the E.V. Smith Field Crops Unit in Shorter, AL during the 2004-2006 growing seasons. Preliminary results indicate that 15-inch cotton can improve cotton productivity, but our results were not consistent over years. Growers interested in changing should consider the economics associated with increased seeding costs and equipment modifications.

Recorded presentation