Tuesday, July 3, 2012

COTTON HARVEST AID RESULTS

Here are the seven day ratings  (TABLE 1) for the Cotton Harvest Aid Trial that was established on the Claude Otahal Farm on June 26, 2012.  The cotton variety is FM 835 LLB2 and was treated at 20% open boll with a mean plant height of 21 inches..  The spray application was made between 11 am and 11:30 am with a spray volume of 11 gal per acre @ 32 psi with Turbo TeeJet 11002 spray tips.The harvest aid application was made with a Spider Sprayer by Gary Schwarzlose of Bayer CropScience.  Ratings were made by Dr. Dan Fromme, Extension Agronomist and myself.

The cotton was severely drought stressed at time of harvest aid application.  A rainfall event July 1 yielded 1.6 inches on the field.



Table 1. Comparison of treatment rates and estimated cost per acre, 7 days after treatment, Otahal Farm, Nueces County, 2012.
Trt No.
Treatment
Product Rate
per acre
Estimated Cost1
Defoliation (%)
Desiccation (%)
Green Leaf (%)
1
Thidiazuron
Non-ionic surfactant (NIS)
1.6 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$1.82
30
0
70
2
Thidiazuron
NIS
3.2 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$3.59
40
0
60
3
Thidiazuron
Def
NIS
1.6 fl oz
4.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$3.66
70
5
25
4
Thidiazuron
Def
NIS
1.6 fl oz
8.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$5.50
80
5
15
5
Ginstar
NIS
3.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$5.44
30
0
70
6
Ginstar
Crop oil concenrate (COC)
3.0 fl oz
1.0 % v/v
$5.50
87
3
10
7
Ginstar
Ethephon
NIS
3.0 fl oz
24.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$10.72
70
3
27
8
Thidiazuron
Ginstar
NIS
1.6 fl oz
2.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$5.42
30
1
69
9
Thidiazuron
Ginstar
Ethephon
NIS
1.6 fl oz
0.8 fl oz
24.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$8.54
70
10
20
10
Aim
Ethephon
COC
1.0 fl oz
24.0 fl oz
1.0 % v/v
$7.05
19
1
80
11
ET
Ethephon
COC
1.5 fl oz
24.0 fl oz
1.0 % v/v
$9.42
14
1
85
12
Gramoxone Inteon
NIS
8.0 fl oz
0.25 % v/v
$2.04
39
1
60
1Estimated cost is for educational purposes only and prices listed are not actual “carry out” prices.
 
Trade names of commercial products used in this report is included only for better understanding and clarity. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Texas AgriLife Extension Service and the Texas A&M University System is implied. Readers should realize that results from one experiment do not represent conclusive evidence that the same response would occur where conditions vary.