Cotton Variety Guide 2016 W 285 UT Cotton Agronomy University of Tennessee
TN Cotton Variety Guide 2016 Tyson B. Raper, Cotton and Small Grains Specialist Contributing Authors Ryan H. Blair Fred Allen Matt Ross Randi C. Dunagan Dalton McCurley J. Richard Buntin Philip W. Shelby Jake Mallard Extension Area Specialist UT Extension Professor Research Associate Research Associate West TN Research and Education Center Research Specialist Ext Agent III & Director, Crockett Co UT Extension Ext Agent III, Gibson Co UT Extension Extension Agent II, Madison Co UT Extension 2015 Tennessee Cotton Variety Trials The University of Tennessee Cotton Agronomy Program provides an unbiased evaluation of experimental and commercial varieties available for production in Tennessee each year. The 2015 program consisted of three major types of trials: the Official Variety Trials (OVTs), large replicated on-farm variety trials, and the County Standard Trials (CSTs). The OVTs are small plot, replicated variety trials typically located on AgResearch and Education Centers and are composed of experimental and commercial varieties. The large replicated on-farm trials and CSTs are large plot variety trials located throughout the Western and Central regions of Tennessee and are only composed of major commercial cultivars. Six OVTs, four large replicated trials, and 14 CSTs were conducted during the 2015 season (Fig.1). Figure 1: County map of Tennessee, with counties participating in the 2015 Large-Plot Variety Trial Program highlighted in orange. Red points represent planted locations of the 2015 Official Variety Trials. Samples from each plot were ginned at the University of Tennessee Cotton MicroGin located at the West Tennessee AgResearch and Education Center in Jackson, Tennessee. This is a 20-saw gin equipped with a stick machine, inline cleaners and two lint cleaners. No heat was applied at ginning. Lint yields on a per plot basis were calculated from gin turnouts and harvested plot areas. A subsample of lint from each ginned sample was submitted to the USDA Cotton Classing Office in Memphis, Tennessee, for HVI analysis. Information reported in this publication includes average gin turnout, lint yield, and fiber quality averaged by program. This brief report serves as a precursor for the 2015 Tennessee Cotton Variety Trial Results (PB 1742). Specific results from each trial location and plant growth measurements are included in PB 1742. This publication is intended to help cotton producers identify varieties that are high yielding, stable in yield performance across environments and years, and consistently produce high quality fiber; therein, included information should also provide those in the seed industry, crop consultants, and UT Extension insight into varietal adaptation of all tested varieties to Tennessee field environments.
Large On-Farm Trial Results Replicated On-Farm Variety Trials Lint yield, gin turnout, fiber quality and CCC loan value of 8 entries entered in the 2015 Cotton Incorporated, Tennessee Replicated Large Plot Variety Trial Program.* Rank Variety Lint Gin Turnout Mic Length (in.) HVI Color *Mean and LSD values were calculated from 8 entries replicated three times at four independent locations during the 2015 season. Loan Value ( /lb) 1 PHY 444 WRF 1309 39.1 3.7 1.29 33.0 84.6 31 55.60 2 DP 1518 B2XF 1212 38.3 4.0 1.21 31.4 83.1 41 54.80 3 PHY 312 WRF 1198 37.5 4.2 1.23 32.9 84.3 41 54.90 4 DP 1522 B2XF 1194 38.1 4.6 1.20 32.2 84.4 31 55.45 5 DG 3385 B2XF 1193 38.5 4.6 1.19 31.0 84.4 31 55.25 6 PHY 333 WRF 1142 38.6 4.2 1.22 33.1 83.8 41 54.85 7 ST 4946 GLB2 1124 36.8 4.6 1.20 33.8 84.2 41 54.80 8 ST 5115 GLT 1116 36.8 4.1 1.19 32.8 82.8 31 55.40 Mean 1186 38.0 4.2 1.22 32.5 84.0 41 55.10 LSD (p<0.05) 63 0.6 0.2 0.01 0.8 0.6 - - County Standard Trials Lint yield, gin turnout, fiber quality, and CCC loan value of 14 entries entered in the 2015 Tennessee County Standard Trial Program.** Rank Variety Lint Gin Turnout Mic Length (in.) HVI Color Loan Value ( /lb) 1 PHY 312 WRF 1264 37.7 4.3 1.22 33.1 84.8 41 54.95 2 DP 1522 B2XF 1241 38.7 4.7 1.20 32.1 84.4 41 54.75 3 PHY 444 WRF 1237 39.0 3.8 1.29 33.2 85.2 31 55.75 4 DP 1321 B2RF 1200 38.7 4.7 1.18 32.5 84.2 41 54.65 5 DP 1518 B2XF 1197 38.6 4.1 1.21 31.5 83.0 41 54.80 6 DG 3385 B2XF 1180 38.8 4.7 1.18 31.0 84.3 31 55.25 7 PHY 333 WRF 1168 39.1 4.3 1.21 32.7 83.9 41 54.80 8 ST 4747 GLB2 1166 37.2 4.4 1.22 32.7 83.4 41 54.65 9 PHY 495 W3RF 1156 39.6 4.3 1.17 34.1 84.8 41 54.70 10 DP 1311 B2RF 1144 39.4 4.2 1.19 31.3 83.1 41 54.80 11 ST 4946 GLB2 1115 37.0 4.6 1.20 33.5 84.5 31 55.50 12 ST 5032 GLT 1105 36.5 4.1 1.24 33.4 83.9 41 54.85 13 DG 2570 B2RF 1092 37.0 4.6 1.19 32.7 84.1 31 55.45 14 ST 5115 GLT 1035 37.0 4.1 1.19 33.3 82.9 31 55.45 Mean 1164 38.2 4.3 1.21 32.6 84.0 41 53.60 LSD (p<0.05) 91 1.0 0.2 0.02 1.0 0.7 **Mean and LSD values were calculated from 14 varieties planted and harvested in eight independent 2015 Tennessee County Standard Trials.
Official Variety Trial Results Commercial Varieties and Experimental Lines Lint yield, gin turnout, and fiber quality of 36 entries entered in the 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trial Program.* Rank Variety Lint Gin Turnout Mic Length (in.) 1 PHY 333 WRF 1519 38.4 4.2 1.21 31.6 83.9 2 PHY 499 WRF 1519 38.5 4.6 1.19 32.8 84.3 3 ST 4747 GLB2 1499 38.4 4.4 1.21 31.4 82.1 4 DP 1614 B2XF 1483 39.8 4.6 1.22 30.6 84.0 5 NG 3405 B2XF 1476 38.2 4.4 1.17 28.8 83.0 6 PHY 222 WRF 1475 37.9 4.5 1.18 31.1 83.2 7 DG CT15426 B2XF 1446 39.2 4.6 1.18 30.7 83.8 8 PHY 339 WRF 1444 37.4 4.2 1.20 32.1 83.5 9 ST 5115 GLT 1434 38.0 4.2 1.21 32.6 83.5 10 DP 1522 B2XF 1433 38.1 4.6 1.21 31.8 84.2 11 AMDG 7824 1430 38.4 4.3 1.18 28.9 83.2 12 NG 3406 B2XF 1428 37.8 4.4 1.18 31.0 83.7 13 PHY 444 WRF 1420 37.9 4.1 1.25 32.0 83.9 14 ST 4949 GLT 1418 39.2 4.4 1.19 31.7 83.3 15 DP 1612 B2XF 1402 37.1 4.5 1.22 33.2 84.3 16 PHY 312 WRF 1402 37.9 4.3 1.21 31.7 83.5 17 BX 1634 GLT 1399 38.2 4.5 1.21 33.2 84.1 18 ST 5032 GLT 1399 37.3 4.2 1.23 32.8 83.2 19 DP 1518 B2XF 1372 37.6 4.1 1.21 30.3 83.4 20 ST 4848 GLT 1366 38.1 4.3 1.19 30.8 83.4 21 ST 4946 GLB2 1362 37.4 4.5 1.18 33.2 83.0 22 MON 15R513 B2XF 1360 37.6 4.4 1.23 32.0 83.9 23 PHY 495 W3RF 1347 38.5 4.5 1.19 33.3 84.3 24 PHY 496 W3RF 1344 38.2 4.4 1.22 32.3 83.9 25 BRS 335 1330 36.7 4.3 1.19 32.9 82.9 26 DG CT14515 B2RF 1329 38.4 4.4 1.21 34.0 83.8 27 CG 3475 B2XF 1324 36.5 4.5 1.19 31.6 84.1 28 SSG HQ 210 CT 1319 36.4 4.5 1.19 33.5 84.0 29 PHY 427 WRF 1317 36.7 4.1 1.19 32.3 83.4 30 BX 1532 GLT 1291 40.0 4.4 1.19 30.9 83.3 31 DG 3385 B2XF 1275 37.4 4.6 1.20 32.1 84.1 32 PHY 487 WRF 1253 37.1 4.3 1.18 31.9 83.4 33 SSG UA 222 1253 36.2 4.2 1.24 31.3 83.0 34 BRS 293 1242 37.0 4.5 1.19 34.0 82.9 35 BX 1531 GLT 1221 38.4 4.5 1.19 31.8 82.9 36 BRS 286 1189 36.1 4.3 1.19 33.6 82.7 Average 1376 37.8 4.4 1.20 31.9 83.5 LSD (p<0.05) 206 2.0 0.3 0.04 1.8 1.2 *Mean and LSD lint values were calculated from 36 entries replicated four times at four separate 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trials. Mean and LSD fiber quality values were calculated from 36 representative samples from three 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trials.
Official Variety Trial Results Two Year OVT Averages Lint yield, gin turnout, and fiber quality of 19 like-entries entered in the 2014 and 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trial Programs.* Rank Variety Lint Gin Turnout Mic Length (in.) 1 PHY 333 WRF 1587 40.5 4.2 1.17 31.0 81.7 2 ST 4747 GLB2 1419 38.1 4.3 1.17 29.7 80.4 3 PHY 312 WRF 1405 37.8 4.2 1.19 30.6 82.3 4 PHY 499 WRF 1387 39.3 4.5 1.16 32.5 82.8 5 ST 4946 GLB2 1385 38.1 4.5 1.15 32.0 82.1 6 ST 5115 GLT 1378 38.1 4.1 1.16 31.1 82.1 7 PHY 495 W3RF 1357 39.5 4.3 1.16 32.8 83.2 8 PHY 339 WRF 1353 37.6 4.1 1.17 31.2 82.6 9 PHY 444 WRF 1316 38.3 3.8 1.23 31.5 82.0 10 PHY 427 WRF 1293 36.7 4.0 1.16 31.4 82.0 11 PHY 487 WRF 1275 37.3 4.2 1.14 30.8 81.8 12 BX 1531 GLT 1205 39.3 4.4 1.16 29.9 81.9 13 BX 1532 GLT 1188 41.0 4.2 1.16 29.8 82.0 14 SSG UA 222 1170 36.9 4.2 1.21 30.8 81.9 15 SSG HQ 210 CT 1165 35.7 4.4 1.15 32.5 82.6 16 DG CT14515 B2RF 1159 37.7 4.3 1.18 32.4 82.3 17 BRS 335 1127 36.0 4.3 1.16 31.8 81.4 18 BRS 293 1115 36.4 4.5 1.16 33.2 82.4 19 BRS 286 1027 35.7 4.3 1.15 32.3 81.5 Average 1279 37.9 4.3 1.17 31.4 82.1 LSD (p<0.05) 116 1.5 0.2 0.03 1.3 1.0 *Mean and LSD values were calculated from 18 identical-entries in the 2014 and 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trials. Table compiled from UTIA AgResearch data of Raper et al. (2014) and Raper et al. (2015). Three Year OVT Averages Lint yield, gin turnout, and fiber quality of 9 like-entries in the 2012, 2013 and 2014 Tennessee Official Variety Trial Programs.** Rank Variety Lint Gin Turnout Mic Length (in.) 1 PHY 333 WRF 1625 39.9 4.0 1.17 31.6 82.0 2 PHY 339 WRF 1463 37.1 4.0 1.18 31.1 82.7 3 ST 4946 GLB2 1456 37.4 4.5 1.16 32.0 82.6 4 PHY 444 WRF 1419 38.2 3.6 1.25 32.0 82.3 5 PHY 499 WRF 1419 38.7 4.3 1.15 31.1 82.4 6 PHY 427 WRF 1379 36.4 4.1 1.17 31.5 82.0 7 PHY 487 WRF 1378 36.9 4.0 1.14 30.6 81.7 8 SSG UA 222 1302 36.4 4.1 1.22 31.0 82.4 9 SSG HQ 210 CT 1259 35.3 4.3 1.15 32.6 82.3 Average 1411 37.4 4.1 1.18 31.5 82.3 LSD (p<0.05) 89 1.1 0.2 0.02 1.1 0.9 **Mean and LSD values were calculated from 9 identical-entries in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 Tennessee Official Variety Trials. Table compiled from UTIA AgResearch data of Wiggins et al. (2013), Raper et al. (2014) and Raper et al. (2015)..
For more information visit your county Extension Office or utcrops.com AG.TENNESSEE.EDU The University of Tennessee. All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced and distributed for nonprofit educational purposes providing that credit is given to University of Tennessee Extension. Programs in agriculture and natural-resources, 4-H youth development, family and consumer sciences, and resource development. University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture and county governments cooperating. UT Extension provides equal opportunities in programs and employment.