• 1998 Demonstration Project of Arizona Irrigated Cotton Production

      Dittmar, Stefan H.; Ellsworth, Peter C.; Hartman, Philip MacD; Martin, Edward C.; McCloskey, William B.; Olsen, Mary W.; Roth, Robert L.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Tronstad, Russell E.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      The Demonstration project was conducted on the Demonstration Farm at the Maricopa Agricultural Center. In this project all current guidelines and recommendations disseminated by the University of Arizona were integrated in a systems approach. The management decisions were made by the Extension Specialists in agronomy, entomology, irrigation management, weed sciences, and plant pathology following the University recommendations. On a 50.5 acre field 80% Bt and 20% non-Bt cotton was planted dry and watered up. Due to the cold spring and sand-blasting, only a stand of 30,900 plants/A could be established with 84% terminal damage. 72 acreinches of water were used with 41.3 acre-inches in postplant irrigations. Weed control could be achieved with one preplant application and three cultivations. Three sprays against Lygus and one spray against whiteflies were necessary after the thresholds were exceeded. A total of 4120 lb seedcotton per acre were harvested, with 32.7% lint turnout (2.81 bales/A) and 45.9% seed turnout (1891 lb/A). After harvesting a field budget was established. The variable costs per acre were $915, the total cost $1266/acre. In spite of the lack of replications this project validates the usefulness and compatibility of University recommendations and the potential for integration of all disciplinary guidelines in one system.
    • 1998 Seed Treatment Evaluations

      Norton, Eric C.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Cottonseed was treated with several fungicide treatments in an effort to protect the seed and seedling from disease. Seed germination and vigor was evaluated in three Arizona locations; Maricopa, Marana, and Safford. Stand counts were taken after emergence at all three locations and percent emergence (PEM) was calculated. Significant differences in percent emergence due to seed treatments were observed in the both sample dates at Marana. Maricopa and Safford showed no statistically significant differences due treatment.
    • The 1999 Arizona Cotton Advisory Program

      Brown, P.; Russell, B.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Ellsworth, Peter C.; Olsen, Mary W.; Husman, Stephen H.; Walser, R.; Clark, L.; Dunn, D.; Schneider, M.; et al. (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Arizona Cooperative Extension generates and distributes weather-based Planting Date and Cotton Development Advisories for 19 cotton production areas (Aguila, Buckeye, Cochise Co., Coolidge, Eloy, , Laveen, Litchfield Pk., Marana, Maricopa, Mohave Valley, Paloma, Parker, Pinal Co., Queen Creek, Roll, Safford and Yuma Valley). Planting Date Advisories are distributed from legal first planting date until the end of April and provide updates on heat-unit-based planting windows, recent and forecasted weather conditions, heat unit accumulations, variety selection, soil temperatures, recommended plant population, and early insect management and control. Cotton Development Advisories are distributed from early May through early September and provide updates on crop development, insects, weather and agronomy. The Cotton Advisory Program will continue in 1999, and growers may obtain advisories by mail/fax from local extension offices or by computer from the AZMET Internet Web Page (http://ag.arizona.edu/azmet). Major program changes planned for 1999 include 1) use of historical AZMET weather data for local normals and 2) elimination of the computer bulletin board as a computer-based means of retrieving the advisories.
    • Agronomic Evaluations of Transgenic Cotton Varieties, 1998

      Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeff; University of Arizona (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Several field experiments were conducted in many of the cotton growing areas of Arizona in 1998 for the purpose of evaluating agronomic characteristics of many new transgenic Upland cotton varieties. In many cases, the new transgenic lines were compared directly with their recurrent (nontransgenic) parents. Evaluations were carried out by collecting plant mapping data from each variety on a regular 14 day interval throughout the season and relating the resultant information to established baselines for Upland cotton in Arizona. Lint yield measurements were also taken on each variety at all locations. Results indicate that all transgenic lines tested are very similar to their recurrent parents in terms of growth, development, and yield. Some subtle differences were noted but they were very slight and should not impact management of the varieties significantly in comparison to their recurrent parents.
    • Arizona Upland Cotton Variety Testing Program, 1998

      Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Norton, Randy; Clark, L.; Walser, R.; Husman, Stephen H.; Knowles, Tim; Moser, H.; Silvertooth, Jeff; University of Arizona Cooperative Extension (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Ten field experiments were conducted in major cotton growing areas of Arizona in 1998 for the purpose of evaluating Upland cotton varieties in terms of adaptability and performance. Eight commercial cottonseed companies participated in the program. A maximum of two varieties were submitted by each company at each location. Experiments were conducted on a commercial level on grower-cooperator fields in most cases. Locations used in the program spanned the range of conditions common to cotton producing areas of the state from about 100 ft. to 4,000 ft. elevation. Each of the participating seed companies offer a compliment of varieties that can serve to match various production strategies commonly employed in the state. The 1998 cotton season was a very difficult one for many cotton producing areas in AZ below ~2,000 ft. elevation, characterized by a cool wet spring, late planting, a delayed crop, and a strong monsoon season that reduced fruit retention in many cases. Many varieties commercially available performed well at several locations demonstrating good adaptation to Arizona conditions.
    • Cotton Defoliation Evaluations, 1998

      Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A field experiment was conducted near Marana, AZ in 1998 to evaluate the effectiveness of a number of defoliation treatments on Upland (var. Stoneville 474) cotton.. All treatments consisted of materials commercially available in Arizona. Results reinforce general recommendations regarding the use of low rates (relative to the label ranges) under warm weather conditions and increasing rates as temperatures cool. Defoliation treatments of Ginstar alone did a satisfactory job of defoliation and regrowth/topgrowth contol and were very similar to Dropp + Def combination treatments. Adding Prep to Ginstar in this experiment did not improve defoliation or topgrowth control.
    • Development of a Yield Projection Technique for Arizona Cotton

      Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A series of boll measurements were taken at numerous locations in cotton producing areas across Arizona in 1998 in an attempt to continue to develop a yield prediction model with a project that began in 1993. Results from 1995 showed the strongest relationship between final open boll counts and yield compared to a number of other measurements. Based on these results, data collection on boll counts began in 1996 and has continued in 1997 and 1998. Boll counts were taken as the number of harvestable bolls meter-1. All boll count measurements were made within one week of harvest. Number of bolls per unit area were then correlated to lint yield and an estimate for the number of bolls per area needed to produce a bale of lint was calculated. Estimates using all three years data combined indicate that approximately 38 bolls meter-1 are needed to produce one bale of lint per acre.
    • Evaluation of a Feedback Approach to Nitrogen and Pix Applications, 1998

      Norton, E. J.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A single field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Marana, AZ to evaluate a scheduled (based upon stage of growth) versus a feedback approach (based upon growth parameters and crop conditions) to nitrogen (N) and mepiquat chloride (PixTM) applications on upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). The parameters used in evaluating feedback applications for both N and Pix included fruit retention (FR) levels and height to node ratios (HNRs) with respect to established baselines for cotton grown in the desert Southwest. Scheduled and feedback Pix applications were made for a total of 1.5 and 2.5 pint Pix/acre, respectively, with the feedback treatments receiving a late season application at approximately 3100 heat units after planting (HUAP 86/550 F threshold). Scheduled Pix treatments received a single 1.5 pint Pix/acre application prior to peak bloom (approximately 2000 HUAP). Scheduled applications of fertilizer N totaled 205 lbs. N/acre from three applications. Feedback applications of N received a total of 100 lbs. N/acre from two applications. Treatments consisted of all combinations of feedback and scheduled applications of both N and Pix. The highest lint yields occurred in the treatment consisting of Pix feedback and N feedback (treatment two), however, there were no significant differences (P≥0.05) among any of the treatments with respect to yield.
    • Evaluation of a Foliar Applied Seed Bed Calcium Soil Conditioner in in Irrigated Cotton Production System

      Griffin, J. R.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A multi-site experiment was conducted at Paloma Ranch, west of Gila Bend in Maricopa County and at Wellton in Yuma County Arizona. NuCotn 33B was dry planted and watered-up on 28 April 1998. Various rates of application of nitrogen (N) and calcium (Ca) from CN-9 [9-0-0-11Ca (5Ca(NO₃)₂•NH₄NO₃•10H₂O)] was used to evaluate the check. The CN-9 was applied as a foliar application directly to the seed bed on 27 April 1998. Treatment 1 was the check plot that received no CN-9. Treatment 2 received a 12 gal./acre application of CN-9 while treatment 3 received a 15 gal./acre application of CN-9. Each gal of CN-9 weighs approx. 12.2 lbs. and contains 1.1 lbs. of N and 1.4 lbs. of Ca. Treatment 2 received a total of 13 N/acre while treatment 3 received a total of 17 N/acre via CN-9. Treatment 1 received only farm standard applications of UAN-32. Treatments 2 and 3 each received farm standard applications of UAN-32 after the application of CN-9 for continued crop N needs. A total of 17 lbs./acre of Ca was applied to treatment 2 and 21 lbs./acre of Ca was applied to treatment 3. No significant differences were found among the various treatments in terms of plant growth, soil water content, ECₑ values, and sodium absorption ratios. Lint yields were not significantly different (P<0.05).
    • Evaluation of an Acid Soil Conditioner in an Irrigated Cotton Production System

      Griffin, J. R.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A single field study was conducted on a sodium-affected soil at the University of Arizona’s Maricopa Agricultural Center (MAC) in 1998. NuCotn 33B was dry planted and watered-up on 5 May 1998. Two treatments were evaluated; treatment 1 received no acid and treatment 2 received water-run acid applications. The acid used in this evaluation was sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄). The acid was applied at approximately 11 gallons acid/acre at each scheduled irrigation throughout the entire growing season. All other agronomic inputs and decisions were uniformly applied to both treatments in the same manner throughout the season. The experiment was arranged in a randomized complete block design with two treatments and six replications. Significant differences were found among the two treatments in terms of plant growth and soil water content (P<0.05). Lint yields were significantly different (P=0.0013) with the check having the highest yield.
    • Evaluation of Planting Date Effects on Crop Growth and Yield for Upland Cotton, 1998

      Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      A field study was conducted in 1998 at the University of Arizona Marana Agricultural Center (1,974 ft. elevation) to evaluate the effects of three planting dates on yield and crop development for three Upland varieties. Planting dates ranged from 9 April to 28 May and 342-885 heat units accumulated since Jan 1 (HU/Jan 1, 86/55o F thresholds). Crop monitoring revealed early season fruit loss leading to increased vegetative growth tendencies with all three planting dates. General trends also showed decreasing lint yield with the later dates of planting for all varieties. The more determinate variety (STV 474) was able to set and a fruit load more rapidly than the other varieties in this study at several dates of planting, which resulted in higher yields.
    • Evaluation of the Effects Added Nitrogen Interaction on Nitrogen Recovery Efficiency Calculations

      Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Two studies were conducted in 1996 and 1997 at the University of Arizona Maricopa Agricultural Center (MAC) to evaluate the added nitrogen interaction (ANI) or ‘priming effect’ on the determination of nitrogen recovery efficiencies (NRE). The method employed was to compare NRE’s as calculated by two different methods; the difference technique and the isotopic technique. The difference in NREs observed between the two methods indicates the extent of an ANI. Results demonstrated no statistical differences between NRE’s calculated by the two methods. Therefore, no ANI was observed in the field. These results indicate that the less expensive method of calculating NREs (difference technique) is sufficient under irrigated cotton production systems in the desert Southwest.
    • Fertility Management and Calibration Evaluations on Upland and Pima Cotton

      Thelander, A. S.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Various field experiments were conducted during the 1997 and 1998 cotton season involving macro and micronutrient fertilization. A total of six experiments were conducted at various locations in Arizona. Each of the field experiments studied the effects of different nutrients and nutrient combinations on both Upland and Pima varieties. The purpose of these experiments were to evaluate University of Arizona fertility guidelines with respect to soil test results and to possibly fine-tune or calibrate these guidelines for common Arizona soils and cotton growing regimes. Results from these experiments based on soil test information, quantitative plant measurements, and lint yield showed no significant difference due to treatments for all the studies except for a phosphorus study conducted in Graham County.
    • Nitrogen Management Experiments for Upland and Pima Cotton, 1998

      Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Norton, Eric R.; Silvertooth, Jeff (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      Two field experiments were conducted in Arizona in 1998 at two locations (Maricopa and Marana). The Maricopa experiment has been conducted for nine consecutive seasons, the Marana site was initiated in 1994. The purposes of the experiments were to validate and refine nitrogen (N) fertilization recommendations for Upland cotton. The experiments each utilized N management tools such as pre-season soil tests for NO3 --N, in-season plant tissue testing (petioles) for N fertility status, and crop monitoring to ascertain crop fruiting patterns and crop N needs. At each location, treatments varied from a conservative to a more aggressive approach of N management. Results at each location revealed a strong relationship between the crop fruit retention levels and N needs for the crop. This pattern was further reflected in final yield analysis as a response to the N fertilization regimes used. The higher, more aggressive, N application regimes did not benefit yields at any location. In 1998, fruit retention levels were low and crop vigor was high. As a result, even slight increases in N fertilization and crop vigor translated into lower yield.
    • Preliminary Evaluation of the "Next Generation" of Bt Cotton

      Sieglaff, D. H.; Ellsworth, Peter C.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Hamilton, E.; Silvertooth, Jeff; The University of Arizona, Department of Entomology & Maricopa Agricultural Center; Department of Plant Sciences; Monsanto Company, Chesterfield, MO (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)
      The next generation of Bollgard® cotton was evaluated for agronomic and insecticidal efficacy under central Arizona growing conditions. Two novel lines were compared with their recurrent parents, DP50 and DP50B. There were no seasonlong differences observed among the varieties in most plant development and insect parameters. However, DP50 had significantly lower emergence than the other lines tested (possibly related to seed quality). The lower plant population may have been responsible for greater whitefly abundance observed on two dates mid-season. During early-season ratings of secondary “pests” (15 DAP) (scaled on damage and/or presence), the two test lines received lower ratings for thrips and flea beetle when compared with DP50, DP50B and DP50Bu (untreated for Lepidoptera). However, these difference are likely as a result of the difference in seed treatments that the two test lines received (Gaucho®) and the others did not. This seed treatment does have known activity against thrips and beetle pests. In mid-season, the two test lines received lower ratings for beet armyworm when compared to DP50, DP50B and DP50Bu (although, not significantly different from DP50B or DP50Bu). Efficacy against pink bollworm (PBW) was assessed one time at the end of the season (we were limited to this time, so as to not affect yield), and DP50 was the only variety in which PBW exit holes were observed and PBW larvae collected. However, the low Lepidoptera pressure experienced during the season limited assessments of the two novel lines’ efficacy toward PBW. There was no significant difference in yield (bale/A) among the varieties. Although, one of the test lines had a lower lint turnout than each other variety. The two novel Bollgard lines performed well under our growing conditions, but continued evaluations will be necessary under more conditions and more insect pressures before “varietal” performance and gene efficacy can be assessed adequately.