Helm Research Farm Summary Report 2015

Transcription

1 Improving Life Through Science nd Technology Lubbock-Pecos-Hlfwy Helm Reserch Frm Summry Report 2015 Technicl Report 16-3 Texs AgriLife Reserch / Crig Nessler, Director The Texs A&M University System / College Sttion, Texs

2 Tble of Contents Projects nd Investigtors Introduction Cotton Irrigtion Timing Using Subsurfce Drip Irrigtion (SDI) (Field 2)...4 Jmes Bordovsky, Joe Mustin, nd Csey Hrdin Cotton Response to Pre-plnt nd Erly Seson Irrigtion Amounts with SDI (Field 3)...5 Jmes Bordovsky, Joe Mustin, nd Csey Hrdin Effects of Crop Rottion, Tillge, nd Irrigtion on Soil Aggregte Distribution (Field 5ef)...6 Ktie Lewis, Dustin Kelley, Joseph Burke, nd Jmes Bordovsky The Effect of Crop Rottion, Irrigtion Rte, nd Tillge on Verticillium Wilt (Field 5cde)...7 Terry Wheeler, Jmes Bordovsky, nd Wyne Keeling Continuous Cotton Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Level (Field 5)...9 Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin, nd Joe Mustin Cotton Following Whet Grin Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5c)...10 Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin, nd Joe Mustin Cotton Plnted into Terminted Whet Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field d)...11 Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin, nd Joe Mustin Cotton Following Sorghum Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5e)...12 Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin, nd Joe Mustin Grin Sorghum Following Cotton Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5f)...13 Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin, nd Joe Mustin Byer Cotton Agronomic Performnce Tril (Field 6)...14 Wyne Keeling, Mrth Zwonitzer, Joel Webb, nd Justin Sprdley PhytoGen Vriety Response to Irrigtion Level (Field 6)...15 Wyne Keeling, Justin Sprdley, Joel Webb, nd Mrth Zwonitzer Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Cotton Flehopper Dmge Potentil nd Crop Response to Injury..16 Megh N. Prjulee, Abdul Hkeem, Chndr Dhkl, Sen Coyle, Stnley Crroll, nd Jmes Bordovsky Appendix Hlfwy nd Helm Rinfll nd Irrigtion Amounts...18 Officil Log of Opertions

3 Texs AgriLife Reserch - Texs AgriLife Extension Lubbock / Hlfwy Reserch Prticipnts Nme Specilty Assocition E-mil Address Jroy Moore, Ph.D. Resident Director AgriLife Reserch j-moore@tmu.edu Jmes P.Bordovsky, M.S. Ag. Engineering-Irrigtion AgriLife Reserch j-bordovsky@tmu.edu Joseph Burke, B.S. Soil Chemistry nd Fertility AgriLife Reserch joseph.burke@g.tmu.edu Stnley C. Crroll, M.S. Entomology-Cotton AgriLife Reserch s-crroll2@tmu.edu Sen Coyle, B.S. Entomology-Cotton AgriLife Reserch sen.coyle@g.tmu.edu Chndr Dhkl, M.S. Emtomology-Cotton Texs Tech University chndr.dhkl@ttu.edu Csey Hrdin, B.S. Frm Reserch Service Mnger AgriLife Reserch-Hlfwy cwhrdin@g.tmu.ed Abdul Hkeem, Ph.D. Cotton Entomology AgriLife Reserch bdul.hkeem@g.tmu.edu Wyne Keeling, Ph.D. Agronomy-Weed Science AgriLife Reserch w-keeling@tmu.edu Dustin Kelley, B.S. Soil Chemistry nd Fertility AgriLife Reserch dustin.kelley@g.tmu.edu Ktie Lewis, Ph.D. Soil Chemistry nd Fertility AgriLife Reserch ktie.lewis@g.tmu.edu Joe Mustin, B.S. Engineering-Irrigtion AgriLife Reserch-Hlfwy jmustin@tmu.edu Megh Prjulee, Ph.D. Cotton Entomology AgriLife Reserch m-prjulee@tmu.edu Justin Sprdley, M.S. Agronomy-Weed Science AgriLife Reserch jsprdley@g.tmu.edu Joel Webb, M.S. Agronomy-Weed Science AgriLife Reserch cjwebb@g.tmu.edu Terry Wheeler, Ph.D. Plnt Pthology AgriLife Reserch twheeler@g.tmu.edu Mrth Zwonitzer, M.S. Agronomy-Weed Science AgriLife Reserch mrth.zwonitzer@g.tmu.edu 2

4 Introduction The Texs A&M University System purchsed 373 cres of frmlnd from the estte of Ardell Helm in December, 1999, for the sole purpose of conducting lrge scle reserch nd extension progrms to enhnce producer profitbility nd sustinbility in n irrigted environment. The frm is locted 2 miles south of the Texs A&M AgriLife Reserch nd Extension Center t Hlfwy in Hle County. Current projects t the Helm Reserch Frm involve production options nd economics of Subsurfce drip irrigtion (SDI). Other reserch projects include weed nd insect control, plnt breeding nd yield trils for severl commodities nd production systems projects. Irrigted experiments were conducted under the 130 cre center pivot nd on 86-cres of SDI. The soils re predominntly deep cly loms nd silty cly loms, with 0-1% nd 1-3% slopes, modertely to modertely slowly permeble subsoils nd high wter nd fertility holding cpcities. Supplementl wter for irrigtion comes from five wells, 320 to 340 feet deep, pumping t rtes of 150 to 250 gllons per minute ech 3

5 Cotton Irrigtion Timing Using Subsurfce Drip Irrigtion (SDI) (Field 2). Jmes Bordovsky, Joe Mustin, nd Csey Hrdin Objective: Determine cotton lint yield, wter use efficiency nd reltive wter vlue of three irrigtion timing tretments using subsurfce drip irrigtion. Methodology: The primry reserch question reltes to efficiency of soil profile irrigtion storge when subsurfce drip irrigtion (SDI) is pplied erly in the growing seson t times when irrigtion cpcity is greter thn crop ET. This field study ws irrigted with SDI hving 30-in. dripline spcing nd focused on three irrigtion timing tretments replicted in RCB design. Tretments were: T1 - miniml irrigtion for plnt estblishment, no irrigtion during vegettive period, 0.15 in/dy rte during reproductive nd mturtion periods; T2 - irrigtion t 0.15 in/dy rte during preplnt for up to 30 dys, no irrigtion during vegettive period, 0.15 in/dy rte during reproductive nd mturtion periods; nd T3 - Figure 1. Instlltion of subsurfce drip irrigtion for experiments t the Helm Reserch Frm, Hlfwy, TX. miniml irrigtion for plnt estblishment, 0.15 in/dy rte during vegettive, reproductive, nd mturtion periods. A tretment hving sufficient irrigtion for plnt estblishment with no further sesonl irrigtion (drylnd) ws lso included. Cotton ws grown nd tests hrvested with commercil hrvesting equipment. Yields, fiber qulity, nd wter productivity from the different tretments were determined. Results: On June 2, following hil nd wind events tht destroyed the first plnting, cotton ws replnted with DeltPine 1219 B2RF t 54,000 seeds/c. Annul rinfll ws higher thn norml up to the second plnting (> 16 inches) which msked the effects of preplnt irrigtions of T2. Additionl rin during the vegettive period prevented irrigtion during tht period in T1, therefore T1 nd T3 becme identicl tretments. Tretments resulted in low cotton yields rnging from 791 to 889 lb/c with no significnt differences (Tble 1). Irrigtion WUE ws greter for T1 nd T3 where preplnt irrigtion ws not pplied thn for T2. Tble 1. Yield, irrigtion wter use efficiency, reltive wter vlue, nd lint qulity prmeters resulting from irrigtion timing tretments using subsurfce drip irrigtion, Irr. Used (in) Yield (lb/c) IWUE (lb/c-in) Wter Vlue ($/c-in) Mic Length Unif. Streng. Elon. Rd +b Lef Lon ($/lb) Drylnd T T T

6 Cotton Response to Pre-plnt nd Erly Seson Irrigtion Amounts with SDI (Field 3). Jmes Bordovsky, Joe Mustin nd Csey Hrdin Objective: Determine cotton lint yield nd wter use efficiency of pre-plnt nd erly seson irrigtion tretments using SDI. Methodology: The proposed study quntifies differences in wter productivity of SDI cotton during irrigtion periods hving the highest evportion losses in the Texs South Plins. Tretment fctors included pre-plnt irrigtion quntity nd erly seson irrigtion cpcity resulting in six tretments in ddition to "pre-plnt only" check (Tble 1). SDI lterls were spced 60 in. prt with ech irrigting 2 30-in. crop rows. Due to poor plnt stnds cused by hevy rins nd hil, cotton ws replnted on 2 June. Results: Continued rin in June nd July eliminted the need for irrigtion during the vegettive nd much of the reproductive periods nd reduced or eliminted plnned irrigtions. Tretment T1 ws modified to provide 3.6 inches of sesonl irrigtion, tretments T2 nd T3 were irrigted identiclly using 2.3 inches of irrigtion, nd tretments T4, T5 nd T6 were irrigted identiclly using 4 inches of irrigtion (Tble 1). Hil nd hevy rin on 28 August resulted in the termintion of dditionl irrigtions. Results re in Tble 2. The only significnt tretment difference occurred in the yields of the T0 tretment (no irrigtion, 590 lb/c) compred to tretments receiving sesonl irrigtion ( lb/c); nd in the sesonl irrigtion wter use efficiencies (SIWUE) where tretments receiving lower sesonl irrigtions (T2 nd T3) resulted in higher SIWUEs compred to other tretments. This experiment will be repeted next yer. Tble 1. Irrigtion tretment numbers, their plnned ppliction rtes, nd the ctul irrigtion mount ppied in vrious cotton growth periods in Tret. No. Proposed Irrigtion Rte (in/dy) Reproduc Pre-plnt Vegettive Period tive Period Mturtion Period Actul Irrigtion Amount (in) Reproduc Vegettive Period tive Period Mturtion Period Pre-plnt Totl T T T T T T T Tble 2. Cotton yield, sesonl irrigtion wter use efficiency nd fiber chrcteristics, nd lint lon vlue of irrigtion timing tretments, Tret No Yield (lb/c) SIWUE (lb/c-in) Mic Length Unif. Streng. Lon ($/lb) T0 590 b b T b 3.2 b T b T b T b 3.1 b T b 3.2 b T b 3.3 b

7 Effects of Crop Rottion, Tillge, nd Irrigtion on Soil Aggregte Distribution (Field 5ef) Ktie Lewis, Dustin Kelley, Joseph Burke, nd Jmes Bordovsky Objective: Evlute the cumultive effects of crop rottion, tillge, nd irrigtion level on soil bulk density nd ggregte formtion. Methodology: Soil smples were collected t depth (0-6, 6-12, nd inches) in Jnury 2016 from cropping systems (continuous cotton, sorghum following cotton, nd cotton following sorghum) under reduced nd conventionl tillge nd irrigtion levels of 1.5*bse irrigtion (BI) nd 0.5*BI. Soil smples were dried t 105 C for 72 hours. Dry weights were recorded. An liquot (100 g) of ech smple ws seprted into size frctions, including lrge mcroggregtes (4 mm - 2 mm), smll mcroggregtes (2 mm mm), microggregtes (0.25 mm mm), nd silt nd cly (<0.053 mm). After sieving frction weights were recorded nd used to clculte ggregte men weight dimeter (MWD). Results: The men weight dimeter is commonly used to express ggregte stbility s it determines the size distribution of ggregtes nd is essentilly mesure of mcro-ggregte stbility s ffected by soil mngement prctices. Within the 0-6 soil depth, MWD ws generlly greter under reduced tillge regrdless of crop rottion or irrigtion level (Fig. 1). The lower irrigtion level consistently resulted in smller MWD. This is most likely due to less biomss produced both bove- nd below-ground nd reduced microbil ctivity. Similr trends were observed t 6-12 (Fig. 1b); however, MWD differences between reduced nd conventionl tillge were not s gret t the deeper soil depth. Figure 1. Men weight dimeter (MWD) of soil ggregtes s ffected by crop rottion [continuous cotton (C-C), cotton following sorghum (C 15, S-C), nd sorghum following cotton (S 15, C-S], irrigtion level (1.5BI nd 0.5BI), nd tillge (reduced nd conventionl) t soil depths of 0-6 () nd 6-12 (b). 6

8 The Effect of Crop Rottion, Irrigtion Rte, nd Tillge on Verticillium Wilt (Field 5cde) Terry Wheeler, Jmes Bordovsky, nd Wyne Keeling, Texs A&M AgriLife Reserch Objective: Evlute the effects of crop rottions, irrigtion levels, nd tillge on Verticillium Wilt. Methodology: A lrge scle cropping systems/irrigtion project ws initited in Verticillium wilt ws found t the test site in 2007 nd hs continued to impct cotton yield since then. For 13 yers, prt of the circle ws involved with 2-yr cotton nd 1-yr sorghum rottion (CCS), nd prt of the circle ws in continuous cotton (CCC). There were three irrigtion rtes, bse (medium rte), nd 50% bove nd below this bse rte. In 2010, some res in CCC were plced in cotton/sorghum rottion (CS). Strting in 2014 nd continuing in 2015, new cotton rottion system ws initited (whet/fllow rotted with cotton, WC), nd compred ginst CS nd CCC, with nd without whet cover. However, the originl CCC re ws rotted to sorghum due to its high disese levels nd terrible cotton yields, nd two new CCC res were designted (they hd previously been in long-term CCS, nd hd reltively low levels of Verticillium wilt compred to the previous CCC wedge). In ddition, tillge system comprison ws initited with conventionl tillge nd beds versus reduced tillge nd flt ground. Ech yer, soil smples were tken in the winter to monitor Verticillium dhlie (the fungus tht cuses Verticillium wilt) spore levels in the soil, nd wilt incidence ws mesured during the growing seson. Results: There were moderte to high densities of Verticillium dhlie in the soil before plnting in 2015, with the higher densities ssocited with the wedges tht hd originlly been in long-term cotton rottion (Tble 1). However, Verticillium wilt ws the lowest in ll the yers tht it hd been mesured (Fig. 1). Though wether, prticulrly in August impcts how severe the disese is, it is not well understood why there ws so little wilt in The temperture nd soil moisture were not highly conducive for wilt, but they lso weren t tht limiting either. Figure 2 shows the temperture nd moisture mesured in vrious plots t the Helms field in 2014 (verge wilt = 15%), nd 2015 (verge wilt = 1%). Tble 1. Effect of historic crop rottion on density of Verticillium dhlie microscleroti (Ms). Wedge MS/cm 3 soil 2014 crop Rottion in Rottion in A 23 bc 1 cotton cotton/sorghum cotton B 14 cd cotton cotton/cotton/sorghum cotton/cotton/sorghum C 16 cd whet cotton/cotton/sorghum cotton/cotton/sorghum D 12 d cotton cotton/cotton/sorghum cotton/cotton/sorghum E 58 sorghum cotton cotton F 30 b sorghum cotton/sorghum cotton 1 Men seprtion ws for P=0.05 nd bsed on squre root trnsformtion of microscleroti density. 7

9 60 50 Wilt incidence CCC/0.5B CCC/1.0B CCC/1.5B SCC/0.5B SCC/1.0B SCC/1.5B CS/0.5B CS/1.0B CS/1.5B WC/0.5B WC/1.0B WC/1.5B Figure 1. Incidence of Verticillium wilt from , s ffected by crop rottion nd irrigtion rte. CCC=Continuous cotton, SCC = Sorghum/Cotton/Cotton (3 yer) rottion, CS = Cotton/Sorghum (2 yer) rottion, nd WC = Whet/fllow/Cotton rottion. The irrigtion rtes were bse (1.0B), nd 50% bove (1.5B) nd 50% below (0.5B) the bse rte. During the 2008 nd 2009 growing sesons, the bse rte trgeted n evpotrnspirtion rte (ET) of 80% (when pumping cpcity llowed), nd from , 1.0B trgeted 60% ET %Wilt 20 %Wilt F Soil temperture (F) %Soil moisture Figure 2. Reltionship between soil temperture or soil moisture (t 4-inch depth) nd incidence of Verticillium wilt in 2014 nd 2015 t the Helms frm. 8

10 Yield (lb/c) Fiber Qulity (Lon Vlue $/lb) Continuous Cotton Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Level (Field 5) Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin nd Joe Mustin Objective: Determine yield nd wter productivity of continuous cotton t three irrigtion levels under conventionl nd reduced tillge systems. Methodology: These results re prt of comprehensive crop rottion-tillge-irrigtion study being conducted on 125 cres irrigted by LEPA. In this 22-cre test re, continuous cotton hs been grown since Two tillge systems, conventionl tillge (in pivot spns 4, 6, nd 8) nd reduced tillge (in spns 3, 5, nd 7), were used. Specific field opertions for ech tillge method re detiled in the ttched ppendix. In ddition, ech pivot spn ws divided into three sections with ech section delivering one of three irrigtion quntities (or levels) to the soil surfce below. The irrigtion levels were designte s bse irrigtion rte (1.0BI); 50% of bse rte (0.5BI); nd 150% of bse rte (1.5BI). The pivot irrigtion cpcity t 1.0BI meets pproximtely 60% ET of cotton in yers of verge rinfll. Specific irrigtions, cotton vrieties, pesticides, nd nutrient pplictions re listed in the ppendix. Results: 2015 nnul rinfll exceed 36 inches, twice the long term verge t this loction. Cooler tempertures, blowing snd, nd hil lso occurred. Although cotton ws not replnted, the crop ws injured nd developed slowly resulting in lower thn verge production nd inconclusive results. Totl sesonl irrigtions were pproximtely 1.9, 3.6 nd 5.3 inches in the three respective irrigtion tretment res of ech pivot spn. Cotton yields were greter (p<0.05) in the conventionl thn in the reduced tilled res t the 0.5BI nd 1.0BI irrigtion levels (Figure 1). Conventionlly tilled, irrigted yields were only slightly higher thn non-irrigted yields. Fiber qulity s reflected in the lint lon price resulted in no significnt differences due to tillge tretments nd generlly declined with incresed sesonl irrigtion (Figure 2) Continuous Cotton, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till b b Continuous Cotton, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 1. Cotton lint yield from res of continuous cotton using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm Figure 2. Lint lon vlues from cotton grown in res of continuous cotton using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm

11 Yield (lb/c) Fiber Qulity (Lon Vlue $/lb) Cotton Following Whet Grin Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5c) Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin nd Joe Mustin Objective: Determine yield nd wter productivity of cotton following whet/fllow period with cotton irrigted t three levels under conventionl nd reduced tillge systems. Methodology: These results re prt of comprehensive crop rottiontillge-irrigtion study being conducted on 125 cres irrigted by LEPA. In this 22-cre test re, cotton hs been plnted (2015) following whet hrvested for grin nd summer fllow period (2014). Two tillge systems, conventionl tillge (in pivot spns 4, 6, nd 8) nd reduced tillge (in spns 3, 5, nd 7), were used. Specific field opertions for ech tillge method re detiled in the ttched ppendix. In ddition, ech pivot spn ws divided into three sections with ech section delivering one of three irrigtion quntities (or levels) to the soil surfce below. The irrigtion levels were designte s bse irrigtion rte (1.0BI); 50% of bse rte (0.5BI); nd 150% of bse rte (1.5BI). The pivot irrigtion cpcity t 1.0BI meets pproximtely 60% ET of cotton in yers of verge rinfll. Specific irrigtions, cotton vrieties, pesticides, nd nutrient pplictions re listed in the ppendix. Results: 2015 nnul rinfll exceed 36 inches, twice the long term verge t this loction. Cooler tempertures, blowing snd, nd hil lso occurred. Although cotton ws not replnted, the crop ws injured nd developed slowly resulting in lower thn verge production nd inconclusive results. Totl sesonl irrigtions were pproximtely 1.8, 3.3 nd 4.8 inches in the three respective irrigtion tretment res of ech pivot spn. Cotton yields were not significntly different (p<0.05) between conventionl nd reduced tilled systems t ny irrigtion level (Figure 1). Irrigted yields were only slightly higher thn non-irrigted yields with little difference due to irrigtion level. Fiber qulity s reflected in the lint lon price resulted in no significnt differences due to tillge tretments (Figure 2) Cot. fter Whet, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till Cot. fter Whet, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 1. Cotton lint yield from res of cotton following whet nd summer fllow using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 2. Lint lon vlues from cotton following whet hrvested for grin nd summer fllow using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm

12 Fiber Qulity (Lon Vlue $/lb) Yield (lb/c) Cotton Plnted into Terminted Whet Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5d) Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin nd Joe Mustin Objective: Determine yield nd wter productivity of cotton plnted into terminted whet with cotton irrigted t three levels under conventionl nd reduced tillge systems. Methodology: These results re prt of comprehensive crop rottion-tillgeirrigtion study being conducted on 125 cres irrigted by LEPA. In this 22-cre test re, cotton ws plnted into terminted whet in both 2014 nd Two tillge systems, conventionl tillge (in pivot spns 4, 6, nd 8) nd reduced tillge (in spns 3, 5, nd 7), were used. Specific field opertions for ech tillge method re detiled in the ttched ppendix. In ddition, ech pivot spn ws divided into three sections with ech section delivering one of three irrigtion quntities (or levels) to the soil surfce below. The irrigtion levels were designte s bse irrigtion rte (1.0BI); 50% of bse rte (0.5BI); nd 150% of bse rte (1.5BI). The pivot irrigtion cpcity t 1.0BI meets pproximtely 60% ET of cotton in yers of verge rinfll. Specific irrigtions, cotton vrieties, pesticides, nd nutrient pplictions for 2015 re listed in the Cont. Cot. in Term. Whet, 2015 ppendix Conv Till Reduced Till 0.0BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 1. Cotton lint yield from res of cotton following terminted whet using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm tretment res of ech pivot spn. Cotton yields were not significntly different (p<0.05) between conventionl nd reduced tilled systems t ny irrigtion level (Figure 1). Irrigted yields were no more thn 100 lb/c greter thn non-irrigted, conventionlly tilled tretment yields with differences due to irrigtion levels rnging between 780 nd 880 lb/c. Fiber qulity s reflected in the lint lon price resulted in no significnt differences due to tillge tretments nd consistently declined s sesonl irrigtion levels incresed (Figure 2). Results: 2015 nnul rinfll exceed 36 inches, twice the long term verge t this loction. Cooler tempertures, blowing snd, nd hil lso occurred. Although cotton ws not replnted, the crop ws injured nd developed slowly resulting in lower thn verge production nd inconclusive results. Totl sesonl irrigtions were pproximtely 1.9, 3.6 nd 5.3 inches in the three respective irrigtion Cont. Cot. in Term. Whet, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till 0.0BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 2. Lint lon vlues from cotton following terminted whet using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm

13 Fiber Qulity (Lon Vlue $/lb) Yield (lb/c) Cotton Following Sorghum Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5e) Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin nd Joe Mustin Objective: Determine yield nd wter productivity of cotton following grin sorghum in two yer rottion with cotton irrigted t three levels under conventionl nd reduced tillge systems. Methodology: These results re prt of comprehensive crop rottion-tillge-irrigtion study being conducted on 125 cres irrigted by LEPA. In this 22-cre test re, cotton ws plnted following grin sorghum in two yer rottion. Two tillge systems, conventionl tillge (pivot spns 4, 6, nd 8) nd reduced tillge (spns 3, 5, nd 7), were used. Specific Cot. fter Grin Sorgh, 2015 Conv Till Reduced Till 0.0BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 1. Cotton lint yield from res of cotton following grin sorghum using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm Figure 2. Lint lon vlues from cotton following grin sorghum using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm Cot. fter Grin Sorgh, BI 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment b Conv Till Reduced Till field opertions for ech tillge method re detiled in the ppendix. In ddition, ech pivot spn ws divided into three sections with ech section delivering one of three irrigtion quntities (or levels) to the soil surfce below. The irrigtion levels were designte s bse irrigtion rte (1.0BI); 50% of bse rte (0.5BI); nd 150% of bse rte (1.5BI). The pivot irrigtion cpcity t 1.0BI typiclly meets 60% ET of cotton in yers of verge rinfll. Irrigtion mounts, cotton vrieties, pesticides, nd nutrient pplictions for 2015 re listed in the ppendix. Results: 2015 nnul rinfll exceed 36 inches, twice the long term verge t this loction. Cooler tempertures, blowing snd, nd hil lso occurred. Although cotton ws not replnted, the crop ws injured nd developed slowly resulting in lower thn verge production nd inconclusive results. Totl sesonl irrigtions were pproximtely 1.8, 3.4 nd 4.9 inches in the three respective irrigtion tretment res of ech pivot spn. Cotton yields were numericlly higher in the reduced tilled versus the conventionlly tilled plots nd were significntly higher (p<0.05) t the 1.5BI irrigtion level (Figure 1). Most of the irrigted yields were only mrginlly higher thn those in the non-irrigted, conventionlly tilled tretment. Fiber qulity, s reflected in the lint lon price, showed no significnt difference due to tillge tretments in irrigted tretments nd ws consistently lower thn tht of the 0.0BI tretment (Figure 2). 12

14 Grin Sorghum Yield (lb/c) Grin Sorghum Yield (lb/c) Grin Sorghum Following Cotton Response to Tillge nd Irrigtion Levels (Field 5f) Jmes Bordovsky, Wyne Keeling, Csey Hrdin nd Joe Mustin Objective: Determine yield nd wter productivity of grin sorghum following cotton in two yer rottion with cotton irrigted t three levels under conventionl nd reduced tillge systems. Methodology: These results re prt of comprehensive crop rottion-tillge-irrigtion study being conducted on 125 cres irrigted by LEPA. In this 22- cre test re, grin sorghum ws plnted following cotton in two yer rottion. Two tillge systems, conventionl tillge (pivot spns 4, 6, nd 8) nd reduced tillge (spns 3, 5, nd 7), were used. Specific field opertions for ech tillge method re in the ppendix. In ddition, ech pivot spn ws divided into three sections with ech section delivering one of three irrigtion quntities (or levels) to the soil surfce below. The irrigtion levels were designte s the bse irrigtion rte (1.0BI); 50% of bse rte (0.5BI); nd 150% of bse rte (1.5BI). The pivot irrigtion cpcity t 1.0BI typiclly meets 60% ET of grin sorghum in yers of verge rinfll. Irrigtion mounts, sorghum hybrids, pesticides, nd nutrient pplictions for 2015 re listed in the ppendix. Results: 2015 nnul rinfll exceed 36 inches, twice the long term verge t this loction. Totl sesonl irrigtions were pproximtely 2.0, 4.0 nd 6.2 inches in the three respective irrigtion tretment res of ech pivot spn. Sorghum yields for 2014 nd 2015 re in Figures 1 nd 2, respectively. Unlike 2014, the 2015 sorghum yields were higher in the reduced tilled versus the conventionlly tilled plots in irrigtion tretments of 1.0BI nd 1.5BI. Non-irrigted yield in the conventionlly tilled res ws high t 4200 lb/c. Yields my hve been impcted by infesttions of sugr cne phid which were spryed twice in Tillge effects within this rottion will become more evident with time Grin Sorghum fter Cotton, Grin Sorghum fter Cotton, Conv. Till Reduced Till 2000 Conv. Till Reduced Till 0 0.5BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 1. Grin sorghum yield from tretment res following cotton using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm BI 1.0BI 1.5BI Irrigtion Tretment Figure 2. Grin sorghum yield from tretment res following cotton using conventionl nd reduced tillge systems t three irrigtion levels, Helm Frm

15 Byer Cotton Agronomic Performnce Tril (Field 6) Wyne Keeling, Mrth Zwonitzer, Joel Webb, nd Justin Sprdley Objective: Compre yield, fiber qulity, nd gross revenue s function of Byer CropScience experimentl nd commercil vrieties nd irrigtion levels. Methodology: Irrigtions were t bse (M), 1.5x bse (H), nd 0.5x bse (L) levels. See ppendix. Results: Twelve FiberMx nd Stoneville vrieties including commercil nd experimentls were plnted under three levels of subsurfce drip irrigtion in Due to much bove-verge rinfll, in-seson irrigtion mounts were only 1.34, 1.95, nd 2.59 /A for the three irrigtion levels, respectively. Excessive erly-seson rinfll resulted in less thn idel cotton stnds, nd slowed erly-seson growth. When verged cross vrieties, yields rnged from 918 to 1346 lbs lint/a, with higher yields t ech irrigtion level. When verged cross irrigtion level, yield differences were determined between vrieties. The three experimentls produced yields similr to the highest yielding commercil vriety. Irrigtion level or vriety did not ffect lon vlue. Gross revenues incresed with incresed irrigtion level, but ws similr for ll vrieties, when verged cross irrigtion level. Cotton lint yields, lon vlues, nd gross revenues re summrized in Tble 1. Tble 1. Effect of cultivr nd irrigtion level on cotton lint yield (lbs/a), lon vlue (cents/lb), nd revenue ($/A). Irrigtion Levels Cultivr Low (1.34) Bse (1.95) High (2.59) Averge lbs/a ST 4747 GLB DE FM 2007 GLT BCDE FM 1830 GLT CDE FM 1900 GLT E BX 1636 GLT AB BX 1637 GLT ABCDE FM 2334 GLT CDE FM 2322 GL A FM 2484 B2F ABCD ST 4946 GLB AB FM 2011 GT ABC FM 1911 GLT (BX 1635 GLT) ABC 918 C 1063 B 1346 A cents/lb ST 4747 GLB A FM 2007 GLT A FM 1830 GLT A FM 1900 GLT A BX 1636 GLT A BX 1637 GLT A FM 2334 GLT A FM 2322 GL A FM 2484 B2F A ST 4946 GLB A FM 2011 GT A FM 1911 GLT (BX 1635 GLT) A A A A $/A ST 4747 GLB A FM 2007 GLT A FM 1830 GLT A FM 1900 GLT A BX 1636 GLT A BX 1637 GLT A FM 2334 GLT A FM 2322 GL A FM 2484 B2F A ST 4946 GLB A FM 2011 GT A FM 1911 GLT BX 1635 GLT) A 516 C 590 B 760 A 14

16 PhytoGen Vriety Response to Irrigtion Level (Field 6) Wyne Keeling, Justin Sprdley, Joel Webb, nd Mrth Zwonitzer Objective: Compre yield, fiber qulity, nd gross revenue s function of PhytoGen experimentl nd commercil vrieties nd irrigtion levels. Methodology: Irrigtions were t bse (M), 1.5x bse (H), nd 0.5x bse (L) levels. See ppendix. Results: PhytoGen experimentl nd commercil vrieties were evluted under three irrigtion levels. Due to bove norml rinfll throughout the growing seson, only limited mounts of irrigtion were pplied ( /A in seson). When verged cross irrigtion levels, yields rnged from 881 to 1229 lbs lint/a (Tble 1). When verged cross vrieties, yields for the twelve entries rnged from lbs lint/a. Irrigtion level did not ffect lon vlue, but incresed irrigtion incresed totl revenue ($/A). Tble 1. Effect of cultivr nd irrigtion level on cotton lint yield (lbs/a), lon vlue (cents/lb), nd revenue ($/A). Irrigtion Levels Cultivr Low (1.34) Bse (1.95) High (2.59) Averge lbs/a PHY 222 WRF ABCDE PHY 312 WRF AB PHY 333 WRF ABCD PHY 339 WRF ABCD PHY 417 WRF CDEF PHY 444 WRF ABC PHY 308 WRF (PX ) F PHY 243 WRF (PX ) ABCD PHY 223 WRF (PX ) EF PX WRF BCDE FM 2484 B2F DEF FM 2011 GT A Averge 881 C 996 B 1229 A cents/lb PHY 222 WRF BCDE PHY 312 WRF BCD PHY 333 WRF CDE PHY 339 WRF A PHY 417 WRF E PHY 444 WRF A PHY 308 WRF (PX ) DE PHY 243 WRF (PX ) BCD PHY 223 WRF (PX ) BCD PX WRF BC FM 2484 B2F AB FM 2011 GT BCDE Averge A A A $/A PHY 222 WRF BCDE PHY 312 WRF AB PHY 333 WRF ABCD PHY 339 WRF AB PHY 417 WRF EF PHY 444 WRF A PHY 308 WRF (PX ) F PHY 243 WRF (PX ) ABC PHY 223 WRF (PX ) DEF PX WRF BCDE FM 2484 B2F CDE FM 2011 GT AB Averge 455 C 506 B 640 A 15

17 Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer On Cotton Flehopper Dmge Potentil nd Crop Response to Injury M.N. Prjulee, A. Hkeem, C.K. Dhkl, S.D. Coyle, S.C. Crroll, J.P. Bordovsky Objective: The objective ws to evlute the effect of nitrogen fertilizer ppliction rtes on cotton flehopper dmge potentil nd cotton s response to flehopper injury. Methodology: A high-yielding FiberMx cultivr, FM 9180B2F, ws plnted t trgeted rte of 54,000 seeds/cre on My 18, The experiment ws split-plot rndomized block design with five nitrogen fertility rte tretments s min plot, two insect ugmenttion tretments s sub-plots, nd five replictions. The five min-plot tretments included pre-bloom side-dress pplictions of ugmented nitrogen fertilizer rtes of 0, 50, 100, 150, nd 200 lbs N/cre using soil pplictor injection rig on July 16. Pre-tretment soil smples (consisting of three soil cores; 0 to 24-inch depth), were collected from ech of the 25 experiment plots on June 26. Two 10-ft. sections of uniform cotton were flgged in the middle two rows of ech 16-row min-plot tht served s two insect tretment sub-plots. The sub-plot tretment included two cotton flehopper tretments (5 dults per plnt vs. no flehopper s control), contined in multiplnt cges, within designted row sections pplied to ech of the five nitrogen rtes two weeks into cotton squring (July 21), the most criticl phenologicl stge of cotton for flehopper mngement in the Texs High Plins, to simulte n cute infesttion of cotton flehoppers. Crop growth nd fruiting ptterns were monitored during the crop seson. Results: Two weeks into squring, experimentl plnts hd pproximtely 9 squres per plnt. Cotton flehoppers induced ~25% squre bscission cross ll N tretments (Fig. 1). All N ugmented plots hd higher lint yields thn on zero N plots, but the crop response to vrition in N level ws not well defined (Fig. 2). Combined over ll N tretments, the cute infesttion of flehoppers rendered the lint yield reduction from 910 lb/cre in the control to 877 lb/cre in flehopper plots. Lint yield ws not significntly ffected by ~25% flehopper-induced squre loss t both zero N nd 200 lb/cre plots, either vi pruning of undesirble fruit lod (zero N) or compenstion (200 lb N). On the other hnd, lint yield ws significntly lower in flehopper ugmented 100 lb/cre plots compred to tht in uninfested plots, clerly suggesting tht the plnt response to cotton flehopper injury is gretly influenced by the vilbly of nitrogen fertility. Fig. 1. Per plnt squre lod t the time of cotton flehopper ugmenttion (top pnel) nd percent squre bscission (bottom pnel) in control versus flehopper ugmented tretments, s influenced by vrible rtes of nitrogen ppliction, Fig. 2. Effect of nitrogen ugmenttion rtes on lint yield following single cute infesttion of cotton flehopper versus uninfested control,

18 APPENDIX 17

19 18

20 19

21 20

22 21

23 22

24 23

25 24

26 25

27 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 1 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 11/18/2014 Shred F.1 South 12/8/2014 Shred F.1 North 12/22/2014 Disk 2 Trips F.1 North 3/16/2015 List on 30" F.1 North 5/11/2015 Rotry Hoe F.1 North 5/24/2015 Rotry Hoe F.1 North 6/12/2015 Cultivte F.1 North 10/29/2015 Shred F.1 South N Field 1 Fertility 4/9/ gl/c North ppled thru coulter rig 4/9/ gl/c North pplied thru coulter rig 6/8/ gl/c North pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 11/19/2014 5/1/2015 5/12/2015 VNS 45 lbs/c cover crop F.1 South Mixed Vrieties of corn Dr. Xu's Plots F.1 North FiberMx 2011 GT 56,000 seed/c plnted into cover crop F.1 South 6/2/2015 DeltPine 1219 B2RF 54,129 seeds/c Replnt F.1 South Herbicide/Growth Regultor 4/2/2015 Mkze 48 oz/c F.1 South 5/1/2015 Atrizine 2.5 pt/c Wrrnt 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c F.1 North 5/12/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Wrrnt 3 pt/c F.1 South 6/5/2015 Fusilde 12 oz/c Mkze 32 oz/c F.1 South 6/11/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Atrizine 1pt/c F.1 North 6/26/2015 7/2/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% F.1 South Wrrnt 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% F.1 South 7/31/2015 8/14/2015 Penti 16 oz/c F.1 South Penti 16 oz/c F.1 South Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/ /29/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% F.1 South Helm Qut 1qt/c Mximizer 1% F.1 South Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting Sesonl Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting Sesonl 26

28 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 2 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 12/8/2014 Shred 2/10/2015 Disk 2/12/2015 Field Cultivtor 3/30/2015 List on 60" 4/30/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/11/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/18/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/24/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/1/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/12/2015 Cultivte 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/26/2015 Cultivte 7/15/2015 Cultivte (Red Br) Fertility 7/20/2015 4/7/2015 4/20/2015 Cultivte nd Dike / gl/c pplied thru coulter rig gl/c pplied thru coulter rig 4/20/2015 Zinic 9 gl/c pplied through coulter rig 8/4/ lbs of N/c (32-0-0) for Zones 1,3,5,6,8,9 ( Injected into drip lines ) Plnting 5/11/2015 NexGin 1511 B2RF 73,181 seeds/c 6/2/2015 DeltPine 1219 B2RF 54,129 seeds/c Replnt Herbicide/Growth Regultor 1/12/2015 Triflurlin HF 1qt/c 5/4/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c 5/11/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 7/1/2015 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Wrrnt 3 pt/c N Field 2 Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% 10/28/2015 Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/18 to 5/3 Trt in.; Trt in.; Trt in.; Dry 0.00 in. Sesonl 8/3 to 8/25 Avg. for Zones 1-9 = 3.01 in.; Dry = 0.00 in. Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 27

29 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 3 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 2/10/2015 Field Cultivtor 2/12/2015 Field Cultivtor 3/30/2015 List on 60" 4/30/20105 Rotry Hoe 5/11/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/18/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/24/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/1/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/26/2015 Cultivte 7/23/2015 Cultivte nd Dike N Field 3 Fertility 4/17/ / gl/c pplied thru coulter rig 4/20/ gl/c Applied through coulter rig 8/5-7/ lbs of N/c (32-0-0) for ll Zones ( Injected into drip lines ) Plnting 5/11/2105 6/2/2015 Herbicide/Growth Regultor NexGin 1511 B2RF t 54,139 seed/c West 16 Rows 73,181 seeds/c DeltPine 1219 B2RF 54,129 Replnt 1/12/2015 Triflurlin HF 1qt/c 5/4/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c 5/11/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 7/1/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% 10/28/2015 Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/18 to 5/3 Zones 1,3, in ; Zones 2,5, in ; Border 0.00 in Sesonl 8/3 to 8/22 1 = 3.56 in.; 2 = 2.37 in.; 3 = 2.24 in.; 4 = 4.16 in.; 5 = 4.08 in.; 6 = 3.96 in.; 7 = 0.05 in. Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 28

30 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5 Spn 2,4,6,8 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 12/17/2014 Shred 3/13/2015 StripTill 3/16/2015 Field Cultivtor 3/24/2015 Field Cultivtor 3/26/2015 List on 30" 4/10/2015 Dike 5/2/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/12/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 5/25/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/1/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/25/2015 Cultivte 6/27/2105 Cultivte nd Dike Fertility 4/6/2015 4/6/2015 4/8/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/27/ High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 5/25/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F 54,129 seeds/c Field 5A, S 4,6,8 N Herbicide/Growth Regultor 3/23/2015 Triflurlin HF 1pt/c 5/25/215 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/18/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl 7/29/215 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/2015 1/28/2015 Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/16 to 4/ in Spn 2 Only 4/16 to 4/22 Bse 1.00 in; Bse -50% 1.00 in; Bse +50% 1.00 in; Dry 1.00 in. Spn 4,6,8 Only Sesonl 7/31 to 8/27 7/31 to 8/ in. Spn 2 Only Bse 3.60 in; Bse -50% 1.95 in; Bse+50% 5.25 in.; Dry 0.00 in. spn 4,6,8 Only Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% 29

31 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5 Spns 3,5,7 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 5/12/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 7 Only 6/4/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe Field 5A, S 3,5,7 N Fertility 4/6/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/6/ / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/8/ / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/27/ High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 5/25/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F 54,129 seeds/c Herbicide/Growth Regultor 3/26/2015 Slvo 1 pt/c 4/10/2015 Stelth 3 pt/c 5/25/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/18/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% 10/28/2015 Helm Qut 1 pt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/16 to 4/22 Sesonl 7/31 to 8/27 Bse 1.00 in; Bse -50% 1.00 in; Bse +50% 1.00 in; Dry 1.00 in. Bse 3.60 in; Bse -50% 1.95 in; Bse+50% 5.25 in.; Dry 0.00 in. Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 30

32 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5b Exp. Design Whet Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge Field 5B N Fertility 4/6/ gl/c pplied though coulter rig Plnting 11/26/2014 TAM lbs/c Yield Herbicide/Growth 3/26/2015 Slvo 1 pt/c Regultor 8/14/2015 Slvo 1 pt/c Mkze 32oz/c Mximizer 1% 10/15/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Insecticide Hrvest id Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/6 to 5/1 Sesonl 4.00 in. Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 31

33 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5c (Spn 3,5,7) Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 9/5/2014 Strip Till 6/1/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe Field 5C, S 3,5,7 N Fertility 4/6/2015 4/6/2015 4/8/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/28/ gl/c High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 5/26/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F 54,129 seeds/c 11/24/2015 TAM lbs/c Yield Herbicide/Growth 3/26/2015 Slvo 1 pt/c Regultor 4/10/2015 Stelth 3 pt/c 5/27/20105 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/26/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/ /29/2015 Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/6/2015 Sesonl 6/5 to 8/28 Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/31 Sesonl 6-1 to 9/24 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Bse 1.00 in.; Bse-50% 1.00 in.; Bse+50% 1.00 in.; Dry 1.00 in. Bse 3.30 in.; Bse-50% 1.80 in.; Bse+50% 4.80 in.; Dry 0.00 in in in. 32

34 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5c Spns 2,4,6,8 Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 9/5/2014 Strip Till 3/24/2015 Filed Cultivtor 3/27/2015 List on 30" 4/9/2015 Dike 5/2/2015 Rotry Hoe 5/11/205 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 5/25/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/1/2015 RotryHoe 6/4/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe 6/23/2015 Cultivte 6/28/2015 Cultivte nd Dike Field 5C, S 4,6,8 N Fertility 4/6/2015 4/6/2015 4/8/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/28/ gl/c High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 5/26/ /24/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F 54,129 seeds/c TAM lbs/c Yield Herbicide/Growth Regultor 3/23/2015 Triflurlin HF 1 qt/c 5/27/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/26/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/ /29/2015 Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/6/2015 Bse 1.00 in.; Bse-50% 1.00 in.; Bse+50% 1.00 in.; Dry 1.00 in. Spns 4,6,8 4/6/ in. Spn 2 Only Sesonl 6/5 to 8/28 6/5 to 8/28 Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Bse 3.30 in.; Bse-50% 1.80 in.; Bse+50% 4.80 in.; Dry 0.00 in. Spns 4,6, in. Spn 2 Only 33

35 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5d Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 6/4/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 6/15/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 6/23/2015 Cultivte Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 6/28/2015 Cultivte nd Dike Spns 2,4,6,8 Only Field 5D, S 4,6,8 N Fertility 4/6/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/6/ / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/8/ / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/28/ gl/c High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 11/19/2014 VNS 70 lbs/c Cover Crop 5/26/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F t 54,129 seed/c Spns 3,4,5,6,7,8 5/27/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F t 54,129 seed/c Spn 2 Herbicide/Growth Regultor 11/23/2015 VNS 80 lbs/c Cover Crop 4/2/2015 Mkze 48 oz/c 4/10/2015 Stelth 3 pt/c 5/27/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/18/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 7/29/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/ /29/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/11/ in. Spn 2 Only 4/11/2015 Bse 1.00 in.; Bse-50% 1.00 in.; Bse+50% 1.00 in.; Dry 1.00 in. Spns 3-8 Sesonl 6/5 to 8/28 6/5 to 8/ in. Spn 2 Only Bse 3.60 in.; Bse-50% 1.95 in.; Bse+50% 5.25 in.; Dry 0.00 in. Spns 3-8 Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 34

36 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5d Est Exp. Design Cotton Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge Field 5D, S 3,5,7 N Fertility 4/6/2015 4/6/2015 4/8/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/28/ gl/c High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 11/19/2014 VNS 70 lbs/c Cover Crop 5/26/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F t 54,129 seed/c Spns 3,4,5,6,7,8 5/27/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F t 54,129 seed/c Spn 2 Herbicide/Growth Regultor 11/23/2015 VNS 80 lbs/c Cover Crop 4/2/2015 Mkze 48 oz/c 4/10/2015 Stelth 3 pt/c 5/27/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/18/2015 Stple 3 oz/c Mkze 22 oz/c 7/24/2015 7/29/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% Choice 4 pt/100 Gl Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/ /29/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/11/ in. Spn 2 Only Sesonl 4/11/2015 6/5 to 8/28 6/5 to 8/28 Bse 1.00 in.; Bse-50% 1.00 in.; Bse+50% 1.00 in.; Dry 1.00 in. Spns in. Spn 2 Only Bse 3.60 in.; Bse-50% 1.95 in.; Bse+50% 5.25 in.; Dry 0.00 in. Spns 3-8 Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 35

37 Opertions Summry Yer 2015 Frm Helm Field ID Field 5e (Spn 2,4,6,8) Exp. Design Cotton. Soil Type Field Opertions Dte Activity Tillge 12/17/2014 Shred Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 3/13/2015 StripTill Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 3/16/2015 Field Cultivtor spns 2,4,6,8 Only 3/24/2015 Field Cultivtor spns 2,4,6,8 Only 3/25/2015 List on 30" Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 4/10/2015 Dike Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 6/4/2015 Rotry Hoe Spn 8 Only 6/17/2015 Rotry Hoe Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 6/26/2015 Culitvte Spns 2,4,6,8 Only 6/28/2015 Culitvte nd Dike Spns 2,4,6,8 Only Field 5E, S 4,6,8 N Fertility 4/6/ / gl/c Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/6/ / gl/c Low Wter pplied thru coulter rig 4/8/ / /Sulfer 26.7 gl/c High Wter pplied thru coulter rig 7/28/ gl/c High & Med. Wter pplied thru coulter rig Plnting 5/27/2015 FiberMx 2484B2F 54,129 seeds/c Herbicide/Growth Regultor 3/23/2015 Triflurlin HF 1 qt/c 5/27/2015 Cotton Pro 3 pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c 6/9/2015 Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% 7/2/2015 Wrrnt 3pt/c Mkze 32 oz/c Mximizer 1% 7/29/2015 Wrrnt 3 pt/c Insecticide Hrvest id 10/14/2015 Boll Buster 32 oz/c AIM 1 oz/c Mximizer 1% 10/29/2015 Helm Qut 1 qt/c Mximizer 1% Irrigtion Amt. PrePlnt & Plnting 4/13/2015 4/13/ in. Spn 2 Only Bse 1.00 in.; Bse-50% 1.00 in.; Bse+50% 1.00 in.; Dry 1.00 in. Spns 4,6,8 Sesonl 6/4 to 8/ in. Spn 2 Only 6/4 to 8/28 Bse 3.40 in.; Bse-50% 1.85 in.; Bse+50% 4.95 in.; Dry 0.00 in. Spns 4,6,8 Rinfll PrePlnt & Plnting 1/5 to 5/ in. Sesonl 6-1 to 9/ in. 36