Page Banner

United States Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service


item Miller, Herbert
item Jenkins, Johnie
item Mccarty, Jack

Submitted to: National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/5/2004
Publication Date: 5/1/2004
Citation: Miller, H.T., Jenkins, J.N., McCarty Jr, J.C. 2004. Growth and fruiting habits of DP 555 BG/RR in various row patterns and plant spacings [abstract]. Proceedings National Cotton Council Beltwide Cotton Conference. p. 1117.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: A study to evaluate the response of Deltapine 555 BG/RR at three different row patterns (one planted : one skipped, two planted : one skipped, and solid) and three specific plant spacings (3, 6, and 12 inches between plants) was conducted at the Mississippi State University Plant Science Farm in 2003. The variables observed during the season were height and number of mainstem nodes, number of white flowers per plot, and node above white flower. At 48 and 55 days after planting the plants in the 3" spacing were significantly taller than plants in the 6" and 12" plant spacings. Differences in the total number of nodes were observed 55 and 62 DAP with the 12" spacing having more total nodes than the 3" spacing. Row pattern had no effect on plant height or number of nodes. Number of white flowers observed per plot differed 65 DAP as the 3" spacing had a higher bloom count due to the higher number of plants per row. There were interactions between plant spacing and row patterns for node above white flower data. Further investigation is required to explain this interaction. Preliminary yield data suggest that plant spacing exhibits essentially no effect on seedcotton yield; whereas row pattern had a significant impact. Seedcotton yield for 1:1, 2:1, and solid were 7364, 5778, and 3748 1bs a-1, respectively. These yields are based on a planted acre basis. Further data analysis will be done to determine the effects of row pattern and plant spacing on distribution of fruit on the plant. Plants were box mapped before harvest; however, analysis of this data has not been completed.

Last Modified: 05/29/2017
Footer Content Back to Top of Page