Late Planted DPL451BR Cotton Responses to Plant Growth
Enhancement Products Applied at Three Crop Development
Stages in the Palo Verde Valley, 2003
M. D. Rethwisch, M. Reay, G. Chaffin, R. Perez, J. Grudovich, J. Wellman and E. Hawpe
Abstract
An experiment to investigate the effects of several plant growth enhancement
products (AuxiGro7 WP, FirstChoice7 Bollster, CalMax, FoliGro7 BollSet) on DPL
451BR was conducted in the Palo Verde Valley. The cotton field chosen for this
project was planted in April 2003, and flowering and boll/lint production was
highly affected by summer heat, therefore product effectiveness was tested under
the extreme high temperatures conditions that existed in 2003. Products were
applied July 11 (shortly after first bloom), August 1st and/or August 15. Three
rates (1, 2, 4 oz./acre) of AuxiGro7 WP were applied at each date, although just a
single rate of other products was evaluated. Data collected included plant mapping
following the first two application dates as well as lint yield and quality at harvest
on October 20-23. Data indicated rate effects for treatments containing AuxiGro7
WP as noted in response to applications on August 1 (retention rates) and August
15 (cotton quality factors). These responses were signficantly different than the
untreated check, and were often signficantly different than the Bollster fertilizer
treatment itself as though Bollster was also included with AuxiGro7 WP treatments.
Although yields for any treatment and the untreated check were not significantly
different, previously noted differences for retention for the AuxiGro7 WP treatments
may not have been realized due to the high temperatures and extended periods of
not only Level 1 but Level 2 stress during the course of the experiment. Cotton
values per acre were highest ($609.85/acre) in the 4 oz/acre of AuxiGro7 applied on
August 15, due to highest valued lint as a result of micronaire of 5.2 combined with
increased fiber strength and fiber length. Application of CalMax resulted in a
significant increase in fiber strength following two applications of 4 oz./acre of
AuxiGro7 + Bollster, but CalMax following two applications of Bollster did not
affect fiber strength when compared with each of the two application treatments. A
third application of FoliGro7 BollSet was detrimental for cotton yields and strength
compared with only two applications of this product, although both treatment
regimens resulted in shorter fibers that were not quite as strong as the untreated
check.
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
64
Introduction
Plant growth enhancing chemistries for cotton have historically been hormonally based. In the past few years,
however, several new products have become commercially available that enhance growth yet are not hormonally based.
Experimentation in 2002 in the Palo Verde Valley of far eastern California documented increased quality factors when
one of these products (AuxiGro7 WP, active ingredients = gamma aminobutyric acid, L-glutamic acid; Emerald
BioAgriculture Corp.) was applied in conjunction with foliar fertilizers resulting in cotton yield and lint value increases
of $190/acre (Rethwisch et al., 2003).
Data from the 2002 experiment indicated that AuxiGro7 rates elucidated different responses, as 8 oz./acre of AuxiGro7
WP when combined with a full foliar (N-P-K) fertilizer resulted in highest quality cotton, while 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7
WP + CalMax resulted in highest yields and overall highest value per acre. The effects noted may also have partially
been due to the fertilizer used with AuxiGro7 however. This experiment was initiated primarily to document and
determine the responses of cotton to three rates of AuxiGro7 WP as affected by stage of crop development at application,
and also evaluated several other products used for cotton production.
Methods and Materials
A large cotton field that was planted on April 26, 2003, after harvest of two alfalfa cuttings in early 2003 was chosen for
this experiment. This field was irrigated on May 4 to initiate germination. The field differed in respect to cotton growth,
with the eastern half of the field robust in growth (soil type primarily Imperial sandy loam), while the western half (soil
type = Imperial silty clay) was much shorter and somewhat stressed in comparison with the eastern half of the field. As
plots had an east-west orientation, treatments were fairly uniformly exposed to both soil types.
Applications were made shortly after first bloom, first boll, and full bloom. Experimentation commenced on July 11
when the field was averaging 2.1 open flowers/plant. Each plot was 0.755 acres in size and consisted of eight rows of
cotton (40 inch row spacing) that were 1,236 ft long. Treatments were replicated four times in a randomized complete
block design. Applications for all treatments were applied with a Melroe SprayCoup sprayer calibrated to deliver 32.5
gal/acre at 5.5 mph using T-Jet 8006 nozzle tips at 40 psi. Treatments on this date consisted of 1 qt/acre of First Choice7
Bollster (10-0-9, 9% Ca, 1% B, 0.2% Zn; 13.35 lbs./gal; Western Farm Service), 1 qt/acre of Foli-Gro7 Boll-Set (5% Ca,
1.25% Zn; 10.18 lbs./gal Wilbur Ellis Co), and 1, 2, and 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP. All AuxiGro7 WP treatments also
inlcuded 1 qt./acre of Bollster. All treatments had the surfactant BreakThru (Plant Health Technologies; marketed by
Western Farm Service) added at the rate of 8 oz/100 gal. of solution. BreakThru by itself at this rate (2.6 oz/acre; 8
oz/100 gal) was also included as a treatment.
The second application date was August 1st, when cotton had 17-18 nodes of growth. Treatments were applied in the
same manner as on July 11. Treatments applied on August 1st were initial applications 1, 2, and 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7
WP (all included 1 qt./acre of Bollster), and 1 qt./acre of Bollster, thus creating a set of comparative treatments as
affected by crop development stage. Additional treatments on August 1 included plots receiving their second application
of 1 qt/acre of Foli-Gro7 Boll-Set, 1 qt./acre of Bollster, and 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP plus 1 qt./acre of Bollster. All
treatments had BreakThru added at 8 oz/100 gallons with the exception of Bollster treatments.
The third application was made on August 15. Cotton had been in in bloom for over 5 weeks at this date and
developing bolls were present. Treatments were applied in the same manner as on July 11 and August 1. Treatments
applied on August 15th were initial applications 1, 2, and 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP (all included 1 qt./acre of Bollster),
and 1 qt./acre of Bollster, thus creating a third set of comparative treatments as affected by crop development stage. An
additional application was made of Foli-Gro7 Boll-Set, resulting in plots treated either twice or thrice. One-half of the
plots that had previously received two applications of 1 qt./acre of Bollster, or two applications of 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7
WP plus 1 qt./acre of Bollster, were then treated with 1 qt./acre of CalMax (10-0-0, 11% Ca, 1.2% Mg, 0.05% B, 0.05%
Cu, 0.1% Fe, 0.05% Zn, 0.001% Mo, 0.1% Mn; 12.52 lbs./gal; Western Farm Service), thus creating four treatments
(AuxiGro7 +/-CalMax, Bollster+/- CalMax). All treatments had BreakThru added at the rate of 8 oz/100 gal. of solution.
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
65
Treated plots were plant mapped following each of the first two applications, with first plant mapping occuring on July
28-29, and the second August 11-13. Plant mapping was completed using five plants per plot; data were obtained for
plant height, total nodes, first fruiting node, and fruiting site retention at site 1-3 for each fruiting node as applicable. For
each plot the following averages were calculated: height:node ratio; plant height, first fruiting node, nodes, average
retention for positions (fruiting sites) 1, 2, 3; and retention for positions 1-2 and positions 1-3.
Plots were harvested on October 21-24 with a John Deere 9940 four row cotton picker. All eight rows of each plot
were harvested. After each plot was harvested, seed cotton was emptied into a boll buggy which was set up on scales.
Cotton from plots receiving the same treatment was then transferred after weighing to either a trailer or module and kept
from being mixed with cotton from other treatments, so that seed cotton for all four plots of each treatment could be then
ginned by Modern Gin (Blythe, CA) and thus allowing quality data to be collected for each treatment.
Cotton lint yields for each plot were calculated by multiplying average turn-out (31.6%) from the entire treated area
for each treatment. Quality data for each bale from the respective plots were obtained from Modern Gin and average
quality factors calculated for each treatment. Values for cotton lint were also calculated using data from each individual
bale using the average premium or discount applied to the lint based on the CCC loan schedule.
Means and separations for all treatments were calculated using Fisher's least significant difference (Statgraphics Plus
for Windows, version 3; Manuguistics, Inc.). Quality data used a completely randomized design as cotton from all plots
of a single treatment was co-mingled, however, each treatment had a minimum of four ginned bales for data analyses.
Results
The later than optimal planting date resulted in a later than normal blooming and production period, which in 2003
coincided with extremely high temperatures and very high levels of stress (Figures 1, 2). These high stress levels
resulted in extreme fruiting structure shed during this experiment. This field was also one of the first harvested for the
area (October), thus little/no top crop was made and did not interfere with yield/quality results.
Plant mapping
July 28-29
High temperatures causing level 2 stress (Figure 1) and high levels of associated fruiting structure shed affected cotton
retention throughout the area during the summer of 2003. High fruit shed was evident on ground at time of second
application (August 1st) as flowers had been abscised. Plant mapping data were obtained several days prior to second
application (Figure 2). Height:node ratios averaged from 1.3-1.4 at this first plant mapping, and no significant
differences were noted between treatments (Table 1). Significant differences for the first fruiting node did exist, with
untreated cotton setting/holding fruiting structures lower (node 4.8) than any treated cotton. BreakThru (node 6.9) and the
2 oz/acre rate of AuxiGro7 (node 6.3) had significantly higher first fruiting branches than the untreated check. A
minimum increase of 0.5 nodes for first fruting node was noted from any treated cotton.
No significant differences from the untreated check was noted for treatments for cotton retention for any single
position (1, 2, or 3), although FoliGro7 BollSet had least retention for combined positions 1-2 (41.6%) and 1-3 (42.4%),
with the latter being statistically less than the untreated check, which had the highest retention for positions 1-3 (50.6%).
Aug. 11-13
Height:node ratios increased for all treatments fom the previous plant mapping, while percent retentions decreased.
Several treatments (August 1st applications of Bollster (1.8) as well as 4 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro7 WP (1.82), and two
applications of FoliGro7 BollSet (1.78)) had significantly higher ratios than did the untreated check, which had a lower
ratio (1.67) than any treatment (Table 2).
All treated cotton had higher retention rates than did untreated cotton for positions 1-2 (32%) and 1-3 (31.1%) at this
plant mapping. Unlike the first plant mapping, four treatments resulted in significantly higher retentions rates than the
untreated check with these treatments being all three rates of AuxiGro7 WP applied August 1st (1 oz = 38.4%, 2 oz =
39.5%, 4 oz = 41.6%) as well as the the 2 oz./acre rate applied July 11 (37.9%). Retention rates from the August 1st
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
66
application of AuxiGro7 WP treatments appear correlated with rate of AuxiGro7 WP, as increasing rates resulted in
increased retentions at positions 1-2 (Figure 3).
All three rates of AuxiGro7 WP applied August 1st also had the highest retention percentages for positions 1-3
(37.7+0.2%) and were the only treatments having significantly greater retention rates than the untreated check. Two
applications of 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP did not respond the same as a single application of this rate on August 1st, as
these treatments (2 applications vs. a single August 1st application) differed significantly for height:node ratio, and
retention at nodes 1, 2, 1-2, and 1-3, perhaps in part due to the earlier application. Retentions and ratios for the two
application treatment of 4 oz/acre of AuxiGro7 WP and the earlier single application (July 11) of this rate were not
significantly different.
October 20
Several plots had plants entirely plant mapped just prior to harvest. Retentions at harvest had declined from the
previous plant mapping, as untreated check plots averaged 16.4% retention for positions 1-2 (two replicates mapped).
Retention data from plots treated with 4 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro which were significantly higher than the untreated
check at the time of the Aug. 11-13 mapping were very similar to data from corresponding data from untreated check
replicates. This indicates that the AuxiGro7 treated plants were unable to sustain the increased retentions previously
noted at positions 1-2 for the AuxiGro7 treatments applied August 1st when growing under such severe heat stress
conditions in this experiment.
Yields
No treatment differed significantly (Table 3) from the untreated check (825 lbs. lint/acre), as lint yields ranged from a
high of 900 lbs./acre (Bollster applied on Aug. 1) and 877 lbs./acre (two applications of 4 oz./acre AuxiGro7 WP) to 757
lbs./acre (three applications of FoliGro7 BollSet) and 800 lbs./acre (BreakThru). Applications of CalMax on August 15
following two applications of Bollster or 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP resulted in less lint yield than two applications of
either treatment without CalMax. The third application of FoliGro BollSet also resulted in a 72 lb./acre decrease in lint
when compared to the two application treatment of this material.
Quality
Grades
The vast majority of lint from bales was classed as grade 21. Several treatments applied on August 1 resulted in other
grades of lint from cotton from some bales, including both FoliGro7 BollSet treatments (31), and the 2 and 4 oz./acre
rates of AuxiGro7 (31). The 2 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro on this application date also had cotton lint from one bale grade
11.
Leaf
Most treatments were not significantly different from the untreated check (1.8) with the exception of the treatment
consisting of two consecutive applications of 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP (1.16). Two consecutive applications of 4
oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP followed by an application of CalMax was very similar (1.2). Highest leaf (2.0) was noted for
Bollster applied on on August 1.
Length/Staple
Cotton fiber lengths ranged from a low of 1.12-1.16 inches in length. Longest fibered cotton (1.16") was noted in the 4
oz./acre rate of AuxiGro7 WP applied on August 1st. Three other treatments resulted in fiber lengths that were
significnalty longer than the untreated check (1.14"). These treatments were Bollster applied on August 1, and both
treatments consisting of two applications of 4 oz./acre+CalMax (all 1.15"). Four of five bales of cotton treated with 4
oz/acre of AuxiGro7 on August 15 also had fiber lengths of 1.15". Treatments which resulted in significantly shorter
fiber lengths included the 1 oz/acre rate of AuxiGro7 applied on July 11 (1.12") as well as when applied on Aug. 15th
(1.13"), and both FoliGro7 BollSet treatments (both 1.13").
Micronaire
Micronaire values of cotton treatments were very similar, ranging from only 5.2-5.3. Most treatments were identical in
micronaire values with the exception of BreakThru. As micronaire value is a very important factor in determining cotton
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
67
lint values (large deduction for 5.3) these small differences are critical. Treatments do not appear to consistently affect
micornaire values with the possible exception of the 4 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro7 WP, as all applications applied August
1st or later resulted in micronaire values of 5.2. The August 15 application of CalMax to plots previously receiving two
applications of AuxiGro7 WP did result in an increase in micronaire, however, as well as increasing fiber strength. This
was not true for the CalMax applied after two Bollster applications however. Three applications of FoliGro7 BollSet also
resulted in a 5.3 micronaire value vs. 5.2 for two applications of this material. All three treatment timings of AuxiGro7
WP at 1 oz./acre resulted in 5.3 micronaire.
Fiber Strength
Fiber strength of cotton in this experiment ranged from 26.5-30.5 g/tex,with most treatments not signficantly different
than the untreated check (27.9 g/tex). A few treatments were either significantly lower or higher than this value however.
Lowest fiber strength was noted for cotton receiving three applications of FoliGro7 BollSet (26.5 g/tex), followed by
Bollster on August 15 (26.8 g/tex) and 2 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 WP on August 1 (26.9 g/tex). Significant increases in
fiber strength were noted only for cotton treated with 4 oz/acre of AuxiGro7 WP on August 15 (29.4 g/tex), and the two
applications of 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7 + CalMax (30.5 g.tex). Four of five cotton bales from plots that were treated with
AuxiGro7 WP on August 15 had fiber strengths of 30.3 g/tex. The only other treatment for which cotton fiber strength
exceeded 28.5 g/tex was the 2 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro7 applied on August 15.
Data indicate a rate response for the AuxiGro7 WP application on August 15, as fiber strength increases with rate of
AuxiGro7. This is not evident at previous applications, as fibers were not present at first applications (2.1 flower), and
fewer fibers would have been present on August 1 than on August 15. This may be due to increased calcium availability
as Kinnersley (1997) noted "the correlation between GABA-mediated increases in plant growth and increases in tissue
potassium content led to a working hypothesis that GABA bioactivity in plants is similar to its mechanism of action in
animals, where it is known to affect transport of calcium and potassium@. Previous experimentation in desert cotton
(Rethwisch et al., 2003) also had documented that the strongest fibers (34.7 g/tex) as well as lowest micronaire (5.1)
occured in a 2002 experiment on DPL 655BR cotton with the highest rate of AuxiGro7 WP (8 oz./acre) tested + 2
qts/acre of Foliar Pride.
Color +b
Several treatments resulted in cotton lint with color +B values greater than 8.0. These treatments included Bollster
applied July 11 (8.04) and August 15 (8.23), two applications of FoliGro7 BollSet (8.03), and 4 oz./acre of AuxiGro7
applied August 1st (8.2). Means for this factor from cotton from all other treatments was not significantly different than
the untreated check (7.70).
Value/lb of lint
Significant differerences existed for lint value when using CCC loan values, with values ranging from -4.98 to +5.14.
Micronaire discount was noted between 5.2 and 5.3, and almost every treatment that had 5.3 micronaire was heavily
discounted (Table 4). Highest valued cotton lint (+5.14) was noted for the 4 oz/acre rate of AuxiGro7 WP applied on
August 15, as cotton receiving this treatment had 5.2 micronaire, second strongest fiber (29.4 g/tex), and average length
of 1.144 inches. Untreated cotton had an overall CCC value of -3.16.
Lowest valued fibers (-4.98) were noted from cotton receiving three applications of FoliGro7 BollSet, although cotton
treated just twice with this product was +2.32, indicating that the August 15 treatment was detrimental to cotton quality.
Although both treatments resulted in cotton with fiber length of 1.13 inches, the three application treatment had higher
micronaire and lower strength, as well as differing significantly in color +B. The latter value for the three application
treatment (7.64) was very similar to the untreated check (7.7) although the two application treatment value was 8.03.
Value of cotton per acre
Value of cotton was calculated by multiplying cotton lint values (based on CCC loan schedule) and lint yields per acre.
Cotton values per acre were highest ($609.85/acre) in the 4 oz/acre of AuxiGro7 applied on August 15, followed by the
treatment consisting of two applications of this product ($601.58), and the 2 oz./acre rate of AuxiGro7 WP applied on
August 1 ($594.57). This was a gross increase in value/acre by $99.93, $91.66, and 84.65 for the three treatments
respectively when compared with the untreated check. Lowest valued cotton on a per acre basis was noted for the three
applications of FoliGro7 BollSet ($454.05), however only two applications of this material was valued at $558.26,
indicating that the third application (or application at this time of cotton development) was detrimental to cotton value.
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
68
Summary
Data indicate that treatments containing AuxiGro7 WP had rate effects as noted from certain cotton plant growth
parameters in response to applications on August 1 (retention rates) and August 15 (cotton quality factors). These
responses were signficantly different than the untreated check, and were often signficantly different than the Bollster
fertilizer treatment itself even though Bollster was included with AuxiGro7 WP treatments.
Although yields for any treatment and the untreated check were not significantly different, previously noted
differences for retention for the AuxiGro7 WP treatments may not have been realized due to the high temperatures and
extended periods of not only Level 1 but Level 2 stress during the course of the experiment. Cotton values per acre were
highest ($609.85/acre) in the 4 oz/acre of AuxiGro7 applied on August 15, due to highest valued lint as a result of
micronaire below 5.2 combined with increased fiber strength and fiber length.
Application of CalMax resulted in a significant increase in fiber strength following two applications of 4 oz./acre of
AuxGro7 + Bollster, but CalMax following two applications of Bollster did not affect fiber strength when compared with
each of the two application treatments. A third application of FoliGro7 BollSet was detrimental for cotton yields and
strength compared with only two applications, although both treatment regimens resulted in shorter fibers that were not
quite as strong as the untreated check.
Data for this experiment may have had more pronounced results and differences if the field had been planted earlier
which would have allowed a larger root mass as well as a shift to an earlier flowering/reproductive cycle prior to the
extreme summer heat noted in 2003.
Literature Cited
Kinnersley, A. M. 1997. The role of gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) in plant growth and productivity. (Abstract)
National Center for Environmental Research, Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Science
to
Achieve
Results
(STAR)
Program.
http://us.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/sbir/other/pp/kinnersl.html
Rethwisch, M. D., E. Duran, J. Seiler, J. Nelson, and P. Hayden. 2003a. Effects of calcium in foliar fertilizers on late
planted cotton yields, quality and value in the Palo Verde Valley, 2000. In 2003 University of Arizona College of
Agriculture Cotton Report, Series P-136. J. Silvertooth, ed. 220 pp.
Rethwisch, M. D, R. Sufflé, M. Reay, and R. Murphey. 2003b. Effects of AuxiGro WP and Fertilizers on Upland
Cotton in the Palo Verde Valley, 2002. Pp. 175-178. In University of Arizona College of Agriculture 2003 Cotton
Report, Series P-136. J. Silvertooth, ed. 220 pp.
Acknowledgements
We thank La Paz Co. Cooerative Extension for use of trailer scales for obtaining weights, and Paul Brown and
Bruce Russell (AZMET) for heat stress data for the Parker Valley. We also thank Emerald BioAgriculture for their
finanical support of this project as well as providing product for evaluation. We also thank Western Farm Service
and Wilbur Ellis Company for supplying product for evaluation.
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
69
Table 1. Height:node ratios and fruiting structure retention percentages, July 28-29, following treatment application on July
11, 2003, Ripley, CA.
Treatment and Rate/Acre
N
Ht:Node 1st Fruit
ratio
Node Pos. 1
Percent Retention at various fruiting positions
Pos. 2 Pos. 3 Pos 1-2 Pos. 1-3
Untreated check
4
1.30a
4.8a
43.9ab 52.4a
55.6a
48.2ab 50.6a
BreakThru
4
1.39a
6.9 c
44.2ab 51.7a
44.1a
48.0ab 46.7ab
12
1.33a
5.3ab
41.5ab 50.9a
45.7a
46.2ab 46.0ab
AuxiGro 1 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
1.31a
6.2abc
48.9a
48.8a
42.7a
48.9ab 46.8ab
AuxiGro 2 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
1.35a
6.3 bc
40.5ab 49.1a
46.1a
44.8ab 45.2ab
AuxiGro 4 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
12
1.41a
5.4ab
45.5a
51.4a
43.9a
48.5a
46.9ab
8
1.40a
5.8abc
37.8 b
45.5a
44.0a
41.6 b
42.4 b
Bollster @ 1 qt/acre
FoliGro BollSet @ 1 qt
Means in columns followed by the same letter are not statistically different at the p<0.05 level (Fishers LSD test)
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
70
Table 2. Height:node ratios and fruiting structure retention percentages, August 11-13, 2003, Ripley, CA.
Treatment Date
Ht:Node
Treatment and Rate/Acre
Percent Retention of Fruiting Structures
N
July 1 Aug.1
Ratio
Pos. 1
Pos. 2
Pos. 3
Untreated check
4
----
----
1.67a
29.8a
34.3a
29.2ab 32.0a
31.1a
BreakThru
4
x
----
1.74abcd
31.6ab
33.7a
32.3ab 32.7ab
32.5a
Bollster @ 1 qt/acre
4
x
----
1.75abcd
35.3a-d
37.3ab
31.0ab 36.3a-e
34.5abcd
AuxiGro 1 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
x
----
1.77abcd
29.6a
37.6ab
30.4ab 33.6abc 32.5a
AuxiGro 2 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
x
----
1.76abcd
36.0a-d
39.8ab
27.5a
AuxiGro 4 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
x
----
1.77abcd
33.6a-d
36.1ab
31.7ab 34.9a-d
33.8ab
Bollster @ 1 qt/acre
4
----
x
1.78 bcd
32.6abc 35.7ab
33.9ab 34.1a-d
34.0abc
AuxiGro 1 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
----
x
1.75abcd
37.3bcd 39.5ab
36.8 b
AuxiGro 2 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
----
x
1.70ab
39.5 cd 39.6ab
33.4ab 39.5 de 37.5 bcd
AuxiGro 4 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
4
----
x
1.82
Bollster @ 1 qt/acre
8
x
x
1.80 cd
32.3ab
36.0a
31.8ab 34.2abc 33.4a
AuxiGro 4 oz/acre + Bollster @ 1qt/acre
8
x
x
1.72abc
31.4ab
34.6a
32.9ab 33.0a
33.0a
FoliGro Bollset @ 1 qt/acre
8
x
x
1.78 bcd
29.7a
34.8a
31.3ab 32.3a
31.9a
d 39.8 d
43.4 b
29.9ab 41.6
Means in columns followed by the same letter are not statistically different at the p<0.05 level (Fishers LSD test)
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
71
Pos. 1-2 Pos. 1-3
37.9 b-e 34.4abcd
38.4 c-e 37.9
e 37.7 cd
d
Table 3. DPL 451BR cotton yields and lint values/acre, Ripley, CA, 2003.
Treatment and Rates/acre
Application date
July 11 Aug. 1 Aug. 15
Yields (lbs.
lint /acre
Value1
$/acre
Bollster 1 qt.
x
----
----
820abc 565.32
55.40
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
----
----
858ab
526.99
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
----
----
833abc 515.48
5.56
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
----
----
826abc 511.36
1.44
vs. check
17.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bollster 1 qt.
----
x
----
900a
556.46
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
x
----
827abc 511.53
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
x
----
872ab
594.57
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
x
----
831abc 566.42
56.50
46.54
1.61
84.65
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bollster 1 qt.
----
----
x
841abc 578.01
68.09
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
----
x
856ab
524.97
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
----
x
812abc 502.42 - 7.50
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
----
----
x
870ab
609.85
15.05
99.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
x
x
-----
877ab
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
+ CalMax 1 qt.
x
----
x
----
----x
825abc 534.41
x
x
-----
850ab
x
----
x
----
----x
840abc 577.70
Bollster 1 qt.
Bollster 1 qt.
+ CalMax 1 qt.
601.58
91.66
24.49
584.03
74.11
67.78
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FoliGro BollSet 1 qt
x
x
-----
FoliGro BollSet 1 qt
x
x
x
757 c
454.05 -55.87
BreakThru
x
----
----
800 bc
508.68
----
----
----
825abc 509.92
Untreated Check
829abc 558.26
48.34
-1.24
-----
Means in columns followed by the same letter are not signficantly different at the p<0.05 level (Fisher's LSD test).
1
Value of cotton lint based on CCC loan schedule of discounts and premiums and assuming a base value of 65.00 cent/lb.
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
72
Table 4. Cotton lint quality data from DPL 451BR cotton, Ripley, CA, 2003.
Application date
Treatment and Rates/acre July 11 Aug. 1 Aug. 15
Bales
# of
Grade
Leaf
Staple
Mic
g/tex
Strength Color
+b
Unifor
0.01 in
Length
Value
Bollster 1 qt.
x
------5
21
1.6abc
37
5.2
27.2a-d
8.04 efg 82.0
114 cd
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
------5
*
1.2ab
36.2
5.3
27.1a-d
7.84 a-e
81.2
112a
-3.58 ef
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
------5
21
1.6abc
37
5.3
27.5 b-e 7.94 c-f
81.0
114 cd
-3.11 de
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt
x
------5
21
1.2ab
37
5.3
28.0 def 7.86a-e
82.0
114 cd
-3.10 de
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bollster 1 qt.
---x
---5
21
2.0 c
37
5.3
28.2 ef
7.90cde
81.2
115 e
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
---x
---5
21
1.4abc
37
5.3
27.9 c-f
7.78a-d
82.0
114 cd
-3.12 de
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
---x
---6
***
1.33ab
37
5.2
26.9ab
7.90cde
81.0
114 cd
2.97 b
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
---x
---4
**
1.75abc
37
5.2
27.0a-d
8.2 fg
82.0
116 f
3.18 b
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bollster 1 qt.
------x
6
21
1.33ab
37
5.2
26.8ab
8.23 g
82.0
114 cd
AuxiGro 1 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
------x
5
21
1.60abc
36
5.3
27.0abc
7.70abc
82.0
113 b
-3.70 ef
AuxiGro 2 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
------x
5
21
1.20ab
37
5.3
28.8 fg
7.90 cde 82.0
114 cd
-3.12 e
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
------x
5
21
1.40abc
36.8
5.2
29.4 g
7.62a
82.0
114.4de
5.14a
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
x
x
----6
21
1.16a
37
5.2
27.6 b-e 7.83a-e
82.0
115 e
3.61ab
AuxiGro 4 oz. + Bollster 1 qt.
x
x
----5
21
1.20ab
37
5.3
30.5 h
7.82a-e
82.0
115 e
-0.19 c
+ CalMax 1 qt.
------x
Bollster 1 qt.
x
x
----5
21
1.60abc
37
5.2
26.9ab
7.88 b-e 82.0
114 cd
Bollster 1 qt.
x
x
----5
21
1.80 bc
37
5.2
26.9ab
7.88 b-e 82.0
114 cd
+ CalMax 1 qt.
------x
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FoliGro BollSet 1 qt
x
x
----4
**
1.75abc
36
5.2
27.4a-e
8.03d-g
82.0
113 b
2.32 b
FoliGro BollSet 1 qt
x
x
x
5
****
1.40abc
36
5.3
26.5a
7.64ab
82.0
113 b
-4.98 f
BreakThru
x
------5
21
1.60abc
36.2
5.28
28.4 ef
7.72abc
82.0
113.4bc
-1.45 cd
Untreated Check
---------5
21
1.80 bc
37
5.3
27.9 c-f
7.70abc
82.0
114 cd
Means in columns followed by the same letter are not signifcantly different at the P<0.05 level (Fisher's LSD test).
Note: Notations under grade are as follows: * = 21 (4 bales), 31 (1 bale); ** = 21 (3 bales), 31 (1 bale); *** = 21 (3 bales), 31 (2 bales), 11 (1 bale); **** = 21 (3 bales), 31 (2 bales)
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
73
3.912ab
-3.20
3.71ab
3.74ab
3.80ab
-3.16 e
e
60
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
DATE
74
15-Sep
13-Sep
11-Sep
9-Sep
7-Sep
5-Sep
3-Sep
1-Sep
30-Aug
28-Aug
26-Aug
24-Aug
22-Aug
20-Aug
18-Aug
16-Aug
14-Aug
12-Aug
10-Aug
8-Aug
1st plant
mapping
6-Aug
2nd application
August 1
4-Aug
2-Aug
31-Jul
29-Jul
27-Jul
25-Jul
23-Jul
21-Jul
19-Jul
First
application
date (July
11)
17-Jul
15-Jul
13-Jul
11-Jul
9-Jul
7-Jul
80
5-Jul
90
3-Jul
1-Jul
TE MP E RATURE S S UMME R 2003, RIP LE Y, CA
120
110
100
3rd application
date August 15
70
2nd plant
mapping
AVE RAGE COTTON TE MP E RATURE S - P ARKE R
VALLE Y, AZ, 2003
90
88
Level 2
stress
86
84
82
Level 1
stress
80
July 11
August 1
August 15
78
76
LEVEL 2 STRESS =
86 F or ABOVE
74
LEVEL 1 STRESS =
82.4 - 86.0 F
72
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
75
14
Se 8
pt
.1
1
5
2
30
27
24
1
21 8
-A
ug
15
12
9
6
3
31
28
25
22
19
16
13
10
7
4
1Ju
l
70
Arizona Cotton Report (P-138) May 2004
ul
y
oz
y
ea
kT
ul
1
11
Au
g.
-J
Br
oz
11
Treatment
76
Au
xi
G
CH
ro
EC
4o
K
z-J
ul
y
11
,A
ug
.1
hr
u
ul
y1
1,
Bo
Au
lls
g.
te
1
r-J
ul
y
11
Bo
,A
ug
llS
.1
et
-J
ul
y1
1,
Au
g.
1
et
-J
1
ul
y
,A
ug
.1
11
% Retention (positions 1&2)
60
Bo
llS
Gr
o
1
11
,A
ug
.1
-J
11
Ju
ly
Bo
lls
te
r-
ro
4o
z-J
Au
xi
Au
xi
G
4
ul
y
ug
ug
.1
ug
.1
ul
y1
1
-A
-A
-A
-J
r-
oz
oz
oz
oz
lls
te
2
1
2
4
r-J
Gr
o
lls
te
Au
xi
Bo
Bo
ro
Gr
o
Gr
o
Gr
o
Au
xi
G
Au
xi
Au
xi
Au
xi
RE TE NTION OF COTTON RE P RODUCTIVE S TRUCTURE S
AFTE R TRE ATME NTS AP P LIE D J ULY 11 &/or AUG. 1, 2003,
RIP LE Y, CA
July 28-29
Aug 11-13
50
40
30
20
10
0