|Boykin Jr, James
Submitted to: Journal of Cotton Science
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 11/3/2010
Publication Date: 2/4/2011
Citation: Boykin Jr, J.C., Reddy, K.N. 2010. The effects of narrow-row and twin-row cotton on fFiber properties. Journal of Cotton Science. 14:205-211.
Interpretive Summary: Increasing crop yield is one of the primary objectives in keeping U.S. cotton farmers competitive in the world market. It is also important that cotton is processed efficiently while maintaining the quality demanded by the domestic and foreign consumers. Planting crops in alternate row patterns such as twin-row or narrow-row has been shown to reduce seeding rates and costs, improve canopy closure, and increase yields. This experiment was conducted to compare fiber properties for cotton in narrow-row (38-cm solid) and twin-row (25-cm paired) at different plant populations to those in conventional 102-cm rows at a standard plant population in non-irrigated and irrigated fields near Stoneville, MS. Separately, fiber properties for cotton in twin-row (38-cm paired) were compared to cotton in conventional 102-cm solid rows. The results of fiber quality demonstrated that cotton produced in 38-cm solid and 38-cm twin rows on 102-cm beds is equal to or better than cotton produced in conventional 102-cm rows. Furthermore, cotton production in 38-cm solid and 38-cm twin rows on 102-cm beds is a profitable option for farmers in the lower Mississippi River Valley alluvial flood plain who are seeking simple production practice that increase lint yield without compromising lint quality.
Technical Abstract: Planting crops in alternate row patterns such as skip row, twin-row, or narrow-row, in comparison to a conventional 102-cm single row pattern, has been shown to increase root spacing, canopy closure, and yields. Two studies were conducted to assess the effect of alternate cotton row patterns on fiber properties. The objective of the first study was to compare fiber properties for cotton in narrow-row (38-cm solid) and twin-row (25-cm paired on 102-cm beds) at different plant populations to cotton in conventional 102-cm solid rows at standard plant population. The objective of the second study was to compare fiber properties for cotton in twin-row (38-cm paired on 102-cm beds) to cotton in conventional 102-cm solid rows. In the first study, cotton was planted two years in both non-irrigated and irrigated fields near Stoneville, MS. Each field included the same eleven treatments: 38-cm solid and 25-cm paired rows at five plant populations and 102-cm rows at standard plant population. In the second study, two varieties were each planted two years in an irrigated field near Stoneville, MS. Lint quality samples in both studies were hand-picked from plots, ginned on a 10-saw gin stand, and analyzed by High Volume Instrument (HVI) and Advanced Fiber Information System (AFIS). In the first study, plant populations in the non-irrigated experiment ranged from 106,000 to 215,000 plants/ha in 38-cm rows; 99,000 to 217,000 plants/ha in 25-cm paired rows; and 126,000 plants/ha in 102-cm rows. Plant populations in the irrigated experiment ranged from 93,000 to 220,000 plants/ha in 38-cm rows; 90,000 to 194,000 plants/ha in 25-cm paired rows; and 127,000 plants/ha in 102-cm rows. No meaningful significant differences were found for HVI fiber properties (length, micronaire, strength, uniformity, reflectance, yellowness, or trash) or AFIS fiber properties (upper quartile length, short fiber content, nep count, seed coat nep count, fineness, immature fiber content, or maturity ratio) in comparing 38-cm solid or 25-cm paired rows to 102-cm solid rows in either non-irrigated or irritated experiments. In the second study, fiber quality analysis showed fewer neps in the 38-cm twin rows. Other properties were favorable for 38-cm twin rows but not consistent for the two years or two varieties tested. The results of fiber quality demonstrated that cotton produced in 38-cm solid and 38-cm twin rows on 102-cm beds was equal to or better than cotton produced in conventional 102-cm rows.