J.A. Larson, C.O. Gwathmey, R.K. Roberts, L.E. Steckel, and D.F. Mooney. The University of Tennessee, Department of Agricultural Economics, 308G Morgan Hall, 2621 Morgan Circle, Knoxville, TN 37996
The way that technology fees for glyphosate-resistant cotton have been assessed has changed several times since 1996 when Roundup Ready cotton was first introduced. These alternative technology fee structures have impacted seed costs and profitability for both wide-row cotton and ultra-narrow-row cotton. As a result, cotton producers want information about alternative row spacing and planting patterns to evaluate ways to control production costs. Skip-row planting has been advocated as one possible way to reduce seed, technology fee and other in-row costs. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of row spacing and planting pattern on cotton net revenues under alternative herbicide-resistant technology fee regimes. Lint yield and fiber quality data from a 2003 to 2005 study produced in two contrasting field environments at the Milan (TN) Experiment Station were used for the analysis. The environments consisted of adjacent, irrigated and non-irrigated upland fields with similar soils. The cotton plantings were arrayed in 10, 30 and 40 inch rows using either solid-row or 2x1 skip-row configurations. Net revenues for the different row-spacing’s and configurations were estimated for each of the four glyphosate-resistant technology fee policies that have used since 1996. North Delta spot quotations were used to calculate the sum of the lint price differences for the fiber quality attributes for each row spacing and planting configuration. Machinery ownership and operating costs for planting and harvest were also included in the calculation of net revenues. The presentation will compare and contrast net revenues and production costs for the different row spacing and planting configuration under the different herbicide-resistant technology regimes.
Audio File