404-1227-6000-L18O TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION B. YOUNGBLOOD, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS A BULLETIN NO. 374 JANUARY, 1928 DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED -———_—\ l“ A H K fieiiwnuawflkfilir; 1 . In i’ A i*i+iai=fi¥l’@' .1 a > weif? - 1 J d o Q . ‘ I . . .1 AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS T. O. WALTON, President STATION STAFF’; ADMINISTRATION: *B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Director A. B. CoNNER, M. S., Acting Director . E. KARPER, B. S., Acting Vice-Director . M. ScHAEDEL, Secretarg . P. HOLLEMAN, JR., ief Clerk . K. FRANcKLow. Assistant Chief Clerk CnEsTER Hiacs, Executive Assistant C. B. NEBI ETTE, Technical Assistant CHEMISTRY: a G. S. FRAPs, Ph. D., Chief; State Chemist E. C. CARLYLE, B. S., Chemist . S. E. AsBURY, M. S., Assistant Chemist WALDo H. WALKER, Assistant Chemist VELMA GRAHAM, Assistant Chemist . R. O. BRo0KE, M. S.. Assistant Chemist T. L. OGIER, B. S., Assistant Chemist J. G. EvANs, Assistant Chemist ATRAN J. STERGES, B. S., Assistant Chemist G. S. CRENsRAw, A. B., Assistant Chewist JEANNE M. FUEGAS, Assistant Chemist HORTICULTURE: Chief H. NEss, M. S., Berry Breeder RANGE ANIMAL HUSBANDRY: J. M. JoNEs, A. M., Chief; Sheep and Goat Investigations ~ J. L. LUSH, Ph. D., Animal Husbandman; Breeding Investigations i W. H. DAMERON, B. S., Wool Grader ENTOMOLOGY: F. L. THOMAS, Ph. D., Chief; State Entomologist _ . J. REINRARD, B. S., Entomologist . K. FLETCHER, M. A., Entomologist . L. OWEN, JR., M. S., Entomologist RANK M. HULL, M. S., Entomologist . C. GAiNEs, JR., M. S., Entomologist . J. TODD, B. S., Entomologist . F. BIBBY, B. S., Entomologist . E. McGREcoR, JR., Acting Chief Foulbrood Inspector . B. KENNERLY, F oulbrood Inspector LLIS GRAHAM, F oulbrood Inspector ugh; > Q m a wQ> an wgwm Q Z Q 2 "5 . B. REYNQLDs, M. S., Chief _ _ . B. CQNNER, M. S., Agronomist; Grain Sorghum Research . E. KARPER, B. S., Agronomist; Small Grain Research C. MANGELsDQRF, Sc. D., Agronomist; in charge of Corn and Small Grain Investi- ations _ . . KILLOUGH, M. S., Agronomist; Cotton Breeding . E. REA, B. S., Agronomist; Cotton Root Rot -Investigations . C. CUsRiNG, B. S., Assistant in Crops R. JOHNSON, B. S., Assistant in Soils YVWEUWDU>M SUBSTATIONS No. 1, Beeville, Bee County: R. A. HALL, B. S., Superintendent No. 2, Troup, Smith County: W. S. HoTcnxiss, Superintendent No. 3, Angleton, Brazoria County: R. H. STANsEL, M. S., Superintendent FRANK M. HULL, M. S., Entomologist No. 4, Beaumont, Jefferson County: R. H. WYCHE, B. S., Superintendent No. 5, Temple, Bell County: HENRY DUNLAVY, M. S., Superintendent B. F. DANA, M. S., Plant Pathologist H. E. REA, B. S., Agronomist; Cotton Root Rot Investigations No. 6, Denton, Denton County: P. B. DUNKLE, B. S., Superintendent No. 7, Spur, Dickens County: R. E. D1cKsoN, B. S., Superintendent N0. 8, Lubbock, Lubbock County: D. L. JoNEs, Superintendent FRANK GAiNEs, Irrigationist and Forest Nurseryman No. 9, Balmorhea, Reeves County: J. J. BAYLES, B. S., Superintendent Teachers in the School of Agriculture Carrying Cooperative Projects on the Station: é}. W. ADRiANcE, M. S., Associate Professor of Horticulture . W. BILSING, Ph. D., Professor of Entomology V. P. LEE, Ph. D., Professor of Mar_keting and Finance D. Sc0ATEs, A. E., Professor of Agricultural Engineering H. P. SMITH, M. S., Associate Professor of Agricultural Engineering TAs of December 1, 1927. *On leave. **Dean, School of Veterinary Medicine. _ ***In_ cooperation wit ****In cooperation with the School of Agriculture VETERINARY SCIENCE: **M. FRANcis. D. V. M., Chic, ~_; H. SCHMIDT, D. V. M., Veterinarian J. D. JoNEs, D. V. M., Veterinarian - PLANT PATHOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY: i J . J . TAUEENnAUs, Ph. D., ie L. J. PEssIN, Ph. D., Plant Pathologist and Laboratory Technician a f; W. J. BAcH, M. S., Plant Pathologist - J . PAUL LUsK, S. M., Plant Pathologist B. F.,DANA, M. S., Plant Pathologist FARM AND RANCH ECONOMICS: g L. P. GAEEARD, M. S., 'ef ‘j *B. YOUNGBLOOD, M. S., Ph. D., Farm and .. Ranch Economist f, G. L. CRAWFORD, M. S., Marketing Research , Specialist ‘ C. A. BoNNEN, M. Farm Management Research Specialist _ _ 1. V. L. CORY, M. S., Grazing Research Botanist ***T. L. GASTON, JR., B. S., Assistant; Farm Records and Accounts ***J. N. TATE, B. S., Assistant; Ranch Record: V and Accounts RURAL HOME RESEARCH: _ JEssiE WHITACRE, Ph. D., hief ,; MAMiE GRiiviEs, M. S., extiles and Clothing Specialist l- SOIL SURVEY: 7T’ ***W. T. CARTER, B. S., Chief H. W. HAWKER, Soil Surveyor E. H. TEMPLIN, B. S., Soil Surveyor T. C. REITCH, B. S., Soil Surveyor BOTANY: H. NEss, M. S., Chief PUBLICATIONS: A. D. JAcKsoN, Chief SWINE HUSBANDRY: FRED HALE, M. S., Chief DAIRY HUSBANDRY: ' , hie POULTRY HUSBANDRY: R. M. SRERwo0D, M. S., Chief ****AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING: MAIN STATION FARM: G. T. McNEss, Superintendent APICULTURE (San Antonio): H. B. PARKs, B. S., Chief A. H. ALEX, B. S., Queen Breeder FEED CONTROL SERVICE: F. D. FULLER, M. S., Chief . D. PEARCE, Secretary . HHRoGERs, Feed Inspector . L. R12.“ I y?‘ . Wo0D, Feed Inspector _ KIRKLAND, B. S., Feed Inspector . D. NoRTHcUTr, JR., B. S., Feed Inspector SIDNEY D. REYNQLDS, J R., Feed Inspector 1t P. A. MooRE, Feed Inspector . éxéwm No. 10, Feeding and Breeding Station, near College Station, Brazos County: R. M. SHERWOOD, S., Animal Husband man in Charge of Farm_ L. J. McCALL, Farm Superintendent No. ll, Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County: H. F. MoRRis, M. S., Superintendent - ***No. 12, Chillicothe, Hardeman County: J. R. QUiNEY, B. S., Superintendent _ ***J. C. STEPHENS, M. A., Junior Agronomi No. 14, Sonora, Sutton-Edwards Counties: E. W. THOMAS, B. S., Superintendent , Veterinarian _ V. L. CoRY, M. S., Grazing Research Botani ***O. G. BAEcocK, B. S., Collaborating Entomologist O. L. CARPENTER, Shepherd No. 15, Weslaco, Hidalgo County: W. H. FRIEND, B. S., Superintendent , Entomologist _ W. J . BACH, M. S., Plant Pathologist No. 16, Iowa Park, Wichita County: E. J. WiLsoN, B. S., Superintendent _ J . PAUL LUsK, S. M., Plant Pathologist h U. S. Department of Agricultu SYNOPSIS _ A comparative study 0f seventy-three varieties 0f cotton seed was made co-operatively by the Division of Agronomy of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering of the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas in order to determine more accurately the chemical differences which might be found in difierent varieties. The plantings were made on the same date, and each variety was allotted a separate row in a uni- form plat. A chemical study of the seed from these varieties showed that there is no relationship between the weight or size of the seed and the oil content. The seed having the highest percentage of meats and the lowest percentage of hulls car- ried the highest oil content. » The oil obtained from all varieties gave the same charac- teristic chemical reactions, indicating that there is no differ- ence in the character of the oil due to the variety. The protein content of the oil and water-free meats was highest in the seed having the highest oil content. CONTENTS PAGE Object of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .. 5 l The Varieties Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Classification of Varieties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 Description of Varieties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Method of Procedure” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 Table of Chemical Composition of Seeds and Meats . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Discussion of Results: Relation of Size of Seed to Percentage of Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Relation of Composition of Oil to Variety of Seed . . . . . . ; . . . . . 16 Relation of Length of Lint to Oil Content of Seed . . . . . . . . . .. 16 Relation of Variety of Seed to Oil Content . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . 17 Relation of Protein in Oil and Water Free Meats to Percentage of Oil in the Seed . . . . . . . . . . . .2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 BULLETIN NO. 374 JANUARY, 192s A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED* ~ M. T. HARRINGTON, Instructor This is a chemical study of several varieties of cotton seed which Were grown under like cultural conditions during 1926. There are numerous varieties of cotton on the market today which have been developed to meet certain requirements, and for each of which the originators claim certain distinguishing characteristics and qualities. Experimental work has been conducted at various times by the agricultural experiment stations of the states comprising the cot- ton-growing section of the United States to distinguish the differ- i‘ ences in varieties of cotton. - meal. THE VARIETIES OF COTTON USED The seed Were furnished by D. T. Killough, Agronomist, Cottont Breeding, of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station,from plants grown as described below. Seventy-three varieties and strains of cot- ton seed were selected for the study and were planted on a uniform at plot of ground on the Main Experiment Station Farm at College Sta- tion. The plot of ground used for the test had grown oats the previ- ous year and was plowed on November 14, 1925. The plot was fer- tilized at the rate of 300 pounds per acre in April, 1926, with fertil- izer consisting of two-thirds acid phosphate and one-third cottonseed The seed were planted May 14, 1926, and one row was used for each variety. The seed were planted by hand in hills three feet apart and the rows were three feet apart, which arrangement allowed uni- g form space for each plant. In each hill were planted three or four seed, and on June 3', 1926, the plants were thinned out and one plant was left in each hill. The cotton was cultivated five times with a one-row cultivator and two times with a twenty-four-inch sweep. The f weeds were hoed out of the rows at intervals of two weeks. The plants were dusted twice with calcium arsenate to kill boll-weevil and leaf- worm. The growing conditions were favorable and good stands of the plants were maintained throughout their growth. There were forty plants in each row. The cotton was harvested on September 20, 1926. The cotton used for this test was picked from the several end plants on each row and was labeled as to variety; it was also given asample number and a row number. The samples were ginned on a small electric saw-gin in the station *This work was done in the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineer- ing, under the supervision of Professor M. K. Thornton in partial fulfillment of i the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Chemical Engineering " at the A. and M. College of Texas. 6 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION laboratory on November 16, 1926. The ginning percentage Was cal- culated by dividing the Weight of the clean lint by thecombined Weight of the seed and lint and then multiplying the quotient by one hundred. The lint on a number of the seeds, collected at random, Was combed out and the length measured. Since these varieties of cotton seed Were grown on a uniform plat of ground and Kinder the same climatic conditions, the only remaining variable Was that of variety. There Was no apparent difference in growing conditions, in the planting, cultivation, harvesting, or gin- ning; so, any variation in the analysis or characteristics of the cotton seed should be due to the variety of cotton or to error of sampling. The comparison of the seed from these varieties of cotton Was made by means of chemical analyses. CLASSIFICATION OF VARIETIES The varieties of cotton used in this study can be placed in seven main groups, Which have the distinguishing characteristics shown in Table 1.' The length of lint is from actual measurement by Mr. Kil- lough. The other data are compiled from the literature. Table 1.—Some characteristics of varieties of cotton. Number Percentage Length of Name of olls ' of Lint Per Pound Lint in Inches Burnett Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70— 80 32——35 7/8———1 Delfos Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 75— 9O 29-32 1 1/ 16——1 3/16 Lone Star Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45— 60 33-40 1——1 1/8 Mebane Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50—— 70 35—40 15/16——1 1/16 Rowden Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 50—— 65 32—36 1—1 1 /8 Longer Staple Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80—11O 25-33 1 1/8—-1 1/2 Miscellaneous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45~—110 25—4O 7/8—1 3/16 Table 2 contains an outline of the habit of growth of the varieties compiled by Mr. Killough. Table 2.—Habit of growth of varieties of cotton. _ _ Length of Variety Height Internodes Size of Leaves Maturity Burnett. . . . . . . . . Low-compact. . Short . . . . . . . . . . . . . Small . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Very early Delfos . . . . . . . . . . Tall-open. . . . . . Medium . . . . . . . . . . . Small . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Early Lone Star . . . . . JMedium . . . . . . . Medium . . . . . . . . . . . Medium to large. . . . . Medium early Mebane . . . . . . . . Medium. . . . . . . Medium to short. . . Medium to large. . . . . Medium early Rowden . . . . . . . . Nledium . . . . . . . Medium . . . . . . . . . . . Large . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Medium early Longer Staple. . . Tall-open . . . . . . Long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Medium to small. . . . . Late Burnett Group includes: Burnett, 13-9-1, Westex. Delfos Group includes: Delfos, Delfos 631, Delfos 1374, Delfos 610? Lone Star Group includes: Lone Star, Startex, Lankhart, Russell. Mebane Group includes: Anton, Blue Wagon, Cliett, Harper, Kasch, Mebane, Mueck, N eW Boykin. A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 7 Rowden Group includes: Belton, Rowden, Sunshine. Longer Staple Group includes: Deltatype Webber, Express, Light- ning Express, Pima, Sea Island, Snowflake, Wacona. Miscellaneous includes: Acala, Bank Account, Cokers Delta, Cook, Durango, Greer, Half and Half, Ingold, King, New Roberts, Piedmont Cleveland, Sartartia Acala, Toole, Truitt, Trice, Wannamaker-Cleve- land, D. P. L., Wilson-Cleveland. DESCRIPTION OF VARIETIES The following descriptions of varieties are compiled from the liter- ature: l A6313 (5) (Medium-boll, medium-staple group) :, This variety was developed from seed obtained at Acala, in the State of Chiapas, South- ern Mexico, in 1906, by G. N. Collins and C. B. Doyle. The present strain was developed from a selection of twenty plants made by Dr. D. A. Saunders, in 1911, from an original field grown at Waco, Texas. Acala is grown extensively in Oklahoma, Texas, and western Arkansas. i. The plants are of medium height, with strong, erect main stem, few vegetative limbs; fruiting branches short-jointed; upper branches short, lower branches long; dark green leaves of medium size; bolls of medium size with short, blunt points; burs often ‘pendant, stormproof; fifty to fifty-five bolls per pound; length of lint, 1-1/16 to 1-3/16 inches; I staple extra strong and with good drag; percentage of lint, 32 to 35. , Bflykill (6) (Big-boll, medium-staple group): This variety is not grown extensively at present but was originated by W. L. Boykin, Kauf- g man, Kaufman County, Texas. The plants are large and stocky; fruiting branches long-jointed, 1 late-maturing; bolls large, majority five-locked, stormproof, but easily .' picked; lint of good length, seed large, fuzzy, brownish-gray ; fifty bolls y per pound; seed per pound, 3,280; length of lint, 1-1/32 inches; 9 strength of fiber, 5.2 grams; percentage of lint, 34. _ Burnett (Small-boll, medium-staple group) : This variety was orig- inally developed by Mr. O. B. Burnett at Memphis, Texas, about 1900, at the time when this northwest portion of Texas was not a cotton- i growing country. He abandoned the work, however, and the Experi- . ment Station at Lubbock, Texas, in 1914, obtained some of the seed and have grown and increased the variety since this time. This variety is high-producing for this part of the‘ country. The plant is low and open; small leaves; joints of fruiting branch ijshort; small seed with a green fuzz; very earlywmatiiring and not g 5 storm-resisting; staple length 15/16 inch; 81 bolls per pound; per- .1 centage of lint 33 to 34. Cleveland ('7) (Round-boll, short-staple group) : This variety was de- veloped by J. Cleveland, Straton, Mississippi, by twenty-five years 8 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of mass-selection work. The variety came into prominence about 1890.' It is not grown extensively at present, having been supplanted largely by strains developed from it, as Wannamaker Cleveland, Piedmont _ Cleveland, etc. _ yPlants are not uniform, being both semicluster, and open in growth; joints of fruiting branches short, making the variety medium-early maturing; bolls large, not stormproof ; seed medium large, fuzzy’, light brownish gray; about 60 bolls per pound; 3,100 seeds per pound, lint length, 15/16 inch; strength of fiber, grams; percentage of lint, 35 to 37’. Wannamaker Cleveland (7) (Round-boll, short-staple group): This strain of Cleveland was developed by the plant-to-row method of W. W. Wannamaker and Sons, of Saint Matthews, South Carolina. The work was started in 1908 but the seed were not placed o11 the market in a commercial way until 1916. It is earlier and more prolific; has smaller bolls, and is lower-growing and more spreading than the parent variety’. It is widely grown in hill-land districts east of the Mississippi River and to some extent in Arkansas and Louisiana. The plants are of medium height with medium foliage. The bolls are rounded with very blunt tip, sixty to sixty-nine per pound; 35 to 37 per cent lint; g to 1 inch lint. ' Piedmont Cleveland (*7) (Round-boll, short-staple group) : This is a strain selected from Cleveland Big-Boll by J. O. M. Smith and J. Collins, of Commerce, Georgia. It resembles theparent strain in habit of growth, but is earlier, more uniform, and more prolific. Cook or Cook’s Improved (6) (Round-boll, short-staple group) : This variety was originated by J. R. Cook at Ellaville, Georgia, in 1895. This is a medium-toJarge-bolled variety, yielding a high percentage of lint-and is medium early. Selections made by the Alabama Experi- ment Station have replaced the parent strain of Cook to a large extent. The bolls are round; seed medium i11 size; fuzzy, greenish or brown»- ish-gray; not stormproof and susceptible to boll rot; bolls per pound, sixty to sixty-five ; 1,000 seed per pound; length of lint, g inch; strength of lint, 6.8 grams; percentage of lint, 38.5. Delfes 5102 ('7) (Small-boll, long-staple group) : This variety sprang from a single outstanding plant selected in a field of Foster-120 at the Mississippi Delta Experiment Station, in 1916, by H. B. Brown. It is grown most extensively on -alluvial lands in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas. Delfos 6102 is very early and very prolific; it has a low-spreading open plant, with slender main stem and branches; the fruiting branches are long and numerous; leaves are small, having a pale-green color; bolls are narrowly ovate, short-pointed, four- and five-locked, open well, pick fairly vvell, and run seventy to eighty per pound of seed cot- ton; percentage of lint,'31 to 3'2; length of staple, 1% to 1-3/16 inches. A CHlYJMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 9 DeIfOS 631(7) (Big-boll, long-staple group): This variety arose from an individual plant selection made at the Mississippi Delta Branch Experiment Station, in 1916, by H. B. Brown. It is not grown as ex- tensively but in the same regions as Delfos 6102. . The plants are erect, of medium height, and rather open; leaves are small to medium in size; bolls are rather long, ovate, long-pointed, run- ning sixty-four to seventy per pound; bolls open well, are fairly storm- proof, and pick well; length of lint, 1-3/16 to 1% inches; percentage of lint, 30 to 31.5. ' EXPRESS (*7) (Small-boll, long-staple group): This variety was de- veloped from a single plant selected by Dr. D. N. Shoemaker from a mixed field of so-called “Bohemian” cotton growing near Paris, Texas, in 1904. This plant is early and prolific, but is not -used a great deal , in Texas since it is not stormproof, does not have large bolls, and is . lacking in drought-resistant qualities and high lint percentage. E. C. Ewing introduced this variety into the Mississippi Delta in 1911, and @- it has spread over this entire section and in neighboring states. How- ever, Delfos has been displacing it since 71920. i The plants are very distinct in appearance, tall, pyramidal, open and somewhat spreading; stem and branches long with long internodes ; f-fruiting, limbs somewhat short-jointed; leaves small to medium, light green in color; bolls rather small and long; seed small, covered with grayish-green fuzz; bolls per pound, seventy-three to seventy-eight; (seeds per pound, 3,900; length of lint, 1-3/ 16 inches; lint percentage, 7 28 to 29. , EXPreSS 359 (7) (Small-boll, long-staple group) : This strain is from La selection made by E. C. Ewing in 1913 and differs from the parent éplant in that the plants are shorter and more compact, more prolific, and more uniform. a * Lightning EXPIQSS ('7) (Small-boll, long-staple group): This strain was developed from Express 350 by the Pedigreed Seed Company, FHartsVille, South Carolina, and difiers from it by having a slightly thigher lint percentage and more uniform plants. ' Half and Half (7) (Round-boll, short-staple group) : Half and half .Was originated by H. H. Summerour, of Duluth, Georgia, in 1904. ook was the parent strain. Many cotton buyers object to Half and Half because of its short lint, but it has a very high percentage of int, which makes it popular with many growers. It is grown exten- Zively in hill-lands east of the Mississippi River, and to some extent west of it. g ‘ The plants are medium early, rather compact; leaves of medium size; polls rounded, about seventy-five per pound; lint length, g- to g- inch; 'nt percentage, 40 to 44. i King (6) and (*7) (Early small-boll, short-staple group) : T. J. King, ormerly of Louisburg, North Carolina, and later of Richmond, Vir- ‘ w“; 10 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ginia, discovered a very prolific stalk of cotton in his field of Sugar Loaf in 1890, and from this stalk, he developed what he called King, or King’s Improved. Some years afterward he sent seed of the Sugar Loaf variety and of his new improvement to several experiment sta- tions, and the reports convinced him that his new strain was practi- cally identical with the parent variety. This variety is sold under the names King’s Improved, King’s Early, Mascot, Greer, Spotted Bloom, Ninety Day, and Little Texas. i Sugar LOaf (6) (Early small-boll, short-staple group): This is an old variety which has been grown in North Carolina for many years. Selections from Sugar Loaf are being grown rather extensively at present in the southern and eastern sections of the cotton belt. The variety and its derivatives are characterized by blooms with red or purple spots .at the base of the petals. The plants are slender; leaves medium to small in size; bolls small, three-, four-, and five-locked, the majority four-locked; seeds small, covered with a short fuzz, brownish-gray in color; bolls per pound, ninety-three; seeds per pound, 5,600; average length of lint, 29/32 inch; percentage of lint, 35. Lime Star (8) (Big-boll, medium-staple group): This variety was developed by Dr. D‘. A. Saunders from a single superior plant found in a field of Jackson Cotton in the Colorado River bottom, near Smith- ville, Texas, in 1905. It is being grown extensively at present in Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. The plants are of medium height with one to four basal vegetative limbs; main stem short-jointed; fruiting branches numerous, long, medium short-jointed; leaves medium to large, very dark green; bolls very large, round, with very short, blunt points; bolls per pound, thirty- five to forty-five; fiber very strong; length of lint, 1 to 1-}; inches; lint percentage, 38 to 40. ROWdBII (6) (Big-boll, medium-staple group) : This variety was de- veloped fromBohemian Cotton by Bowden Brothers, at Wills Point, Van Zandt County, Texas, about 1890. It is medium early in ma- turity. It is still a very popular variety in Texas, Oklahoma, and parts of Arkansas. The plants arevigorous and stocky in growth; fruiting branches vary in length from two feet at the base to six inches on upper part of plant; joints regular and of medium length; bolls large and hang downward when ripe, giving the cotton some protection from the weather; seeds large, fuzzy, grayish-white in color; bolls per pound fifty to sixty, seeds per pound 3,360; average length of lint, 15/16 inch; strength of single fibers, 6.3 grams; percentage of lint, 35.4. Russell (6) (Big-boll, medium-staple group): This variety is also known as Big Boll Green Seed and Ozier Big Boll. It ‘was originated in 1895 J. T. Russell from an individual stalk found in a field of mixed Truitt at Alexander City, Oklahoma. This variety was widely A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 11 grown throughout the cotton belt in 1907, but has recently been sup- planted by other varieties." The plants are large-growing, vigorous; fruiting branches long; joints of medium length; leaxres large; bolls large, four- to five-locked; fairly stormproof; the burs very thick; seeds large,‘ covered by a dark-green fuzz; bolls per pound, fifty-six; seeds per pound, 3,100; length of lint, 31/32 inch; strength of single fibers, 5.5 grams; percentage of lint, 30.9. . T0018 (6) (Medium-late, small boll, short-staple group): This is a standard strain of Peterkin developed by “T. W. Toole, Augusta, Georgia. It is wilt-resistant and is grown in Georgia and other dis- tricts When cotton wilt is troublesome. The plants are similar to Peter- kin, but With a slight tendency to semicluster. The bolls are larger than those of Peterkin, fifty per cent five-locked ; seeds small, fuzzy, light brownish-gray; bolls per pound, seventy-three; seeds per pound, 5,110; average length of lint, 13/16 inch; strength of single fibers, 6.7 grams; percentage of lint, 37.5. COViIIgiOII-TOOIB ('7) (Medium-late, small-boll, short-staple group): This strain is a selection from Toole, made by W. F. Covington, Head- land, Alabama. It shows a decided resistance to wilt and is planted extensively in the eastern states of the cotton belt on wilty soils. Tri¢e (5) (Early, small-boll, short-staple group): This variety was _ developed by Professor S. M. Bain from an individual stalk found on the farm of Luke Trice, near Henderson, Chester County, Tennessee, in 1907. This variety is considered one of the earliest-maturing vari- ties grown today. It is grown extensively in northern parts of the cotton belt, especially in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri. The plants are two to five feet high, very prolific; fruiting branches numerous, medium in length, and short-jointed; leaves of medium size; light-green bolls, medium to large, ovate, three- to five-locked; seeds medium to small, covered with whitish or brownish tuft; bolls per pound, seventy to eighty; seed per pound, 3,600; length of lint, 15/16 to 1-1/16 inches; percentage of lint, 31 to 33. , Mississippi Siatipn Trice (7): This strain differs from the parent plant in having slightly more compact plants, smaller bolls, seventy- five to eighty-five per pound, and longer lint, 1 to 1-3/32 inches. This variety is very early, a good yielder, and adapted to rich soils free from wilt. It was selected by the Mississippi Experiment Station. Triumph (6) (Big-boll, medium-staple group) : This variety was de- veloped by A. D. Mebane, of Lockhart, Texas, from Boykin storm- proof, in 1889. It is grown extensively west of the Mississippi River, especially in Texas, Oklahoma, and Arizona. The plants differ from Boykin slightly, being earlier in maturity. The bolls and seeds are somewhat smaller and the percentage of lint is much higher. There are fifty-six bolls per pound; seeds per pound, 12 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 3,600; average length of lint, 1 to 1-1/16 inches; strength of single fibers, 6.7 grams; percentage of lint, 36 to 38. Trllitt (6) (Big-boll, medium-staple group): This is a standard variety developed by George W. Truitt, of La Grange, Troup County, Georgia, from selections of Wyche. Bolls per pound, 56; length of lint, 29/32 inch; percentage of lint, 34¢. Mebane (Big-boll, medium-staple group) : This variety of cotton was developed by A. D. Mebane, of Lockhart, Caldwell County, Texas, in 1882, from plants of Boykin variety. He selected those plants which had withstood the effects of a storm. He developed this variety for the quality of being stormproof, drouth-resisting, early-maturing, and at the same time having large bolls and a high percentage of lint. The plant is short and stocky, with short joints; large bolls, grow- ing one in a place and growing downward, five-locked; bolls, sixty to SlXty-HVB per pound; seed, about 3,500 per pound; length of lint, 1 to 1-1/16 inches; percentage of lint, 38 to a1. METHOD OF PROCEDURE The sample of ginned seed and lint from each variety of cotton, as received from the Experiment Station, were in paper sacks on which were written the name of the variety, its number as given by the Ex- periment Station, and the row number in which it was grown. Each variety was numbered and the samples were designated by these num- bers. The seed and lint were placed in glass-stoppered large-mouth bottles, and were labeled according to the number which was given that variety. The seed were piled on a paper and the pile was quartered. Op- posite quarters were then placed together, thoroughly mixed, and then quartered again. Opposite quarters were again taken, thoroughly mixed, and one hundred seeds counted. Samples of one hundred seeds each were then weighed and the Weight recorded. These seeds were then cut in half, with a pocketknife, and the meats or kernels separated from the hulls. The hulls and kernels were weighed separately, and the percentage of meats and hulls calcu- lated. Some of the seeds contained no meat because it had dried out, was immature, or damaged. The number of such seeds was recorded as damaged seed. , The meats and hulls were then dried for five hours in an electric oven, the temperature of which was 102 degrees“ centigrade. The sam- ples were allowed to cool in a desiccator and were Weighed. This was repeated until a constant weight was obtained. The loss in weight was calculated as percentage of water in the sample. i The methods of analysis which were used are those found in the offi- cial and tentative methods of analysis of the Association of Oflicial Agricultural Chemists, and Hedges and Bryant’s “Laboratory Manual of Agricultural Chemistry.” Oil was estimated by extraction with petroleum ether. A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 13 Table 3.—-Chemical composition of hulls. Hulls T. S. % % _ % ' % % % Nitro- Samplei—Name No. Oil Protein Crude \Nater Ash ‘gen-free Fiber Extract Acala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8606 .48 2.81 44.30 9.83 2.58 38.00 Acala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8609 .46 1.99 47.41 9.00 2.47 38.67 Anton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8591 .92 4.75 45.46 9.23 2.58 37 .06 B—9—1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6314 .39 2.81 44.64 9.21 2.56 40.49 Bank Account . . . . . . . . . . . 9127 .58 3.43 45.40 9.59 2.71 38.29 Belton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5984 .41 1.99 47.36 8.31 2.67 39.26 Burnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6314 .44 3.62 43.36 8.92 2.41 41.25 Cleveland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9126 .43 2.43 43.01 9.53 2.48 42.12 Cliett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8594 . 5O 3 . 62 47 . 37 9 . 53 2 . 63 36 . 40 Cokers Delta . . . . . . . . . . . . 9115 .50 5.18 46.93 9.59 2.54 35.26 Cook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8586 .43 2 .43 45.75 9.45 2.50 39.44 oo_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8587 53 2.81 46.44 9.50 2.51 38.21 Covington Toole. . .. . .. 9100 49 3.62 46.76 8.45 2.73 37.95 s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8602 44 3.62 44.20 9.12 2.59 40.03 Delfos 631 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8603 1 05 3.12 47.65 9.16 2.45 36.57 s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9102 58 2.81 45.75 8.30 2.51 42.05 Delfos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9107 46 2.81 46.80 8.87 2.75 38.31 Deltatype Webber . . . . . . . 9097 47 3 . 62 46.23 9.62 2.53 37.53 .L. No.5 . . . . . . . . . .. 8611 51 1.99 46.22 9.49 2.54 39.25 Durango . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3666 46 3.43 44.21 9.89 2.57 39.44 Durango . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9120 .15 4.31 47.04 9.04 2.46 36.64 Express . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9103 .45 2.43 45.26 9.24 2.66 39.96 Greer’sAN0. 9129 .41 2.81 44.50 9.00 2.66 40.62 Greer’s Staple B. B . . . . . . 9130 .46 2.43 47.21 9.54 2.60 37.76 Half and Half . . . . . . . . . . . 8604 .68 4.75 47.77 9.37 2.61 34.82 Half and Half . . . . . . . . . . . 9096 .50 5.18 41.23 9.27 2.56 41 .26 Harper’s . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . . 8607 .50 3.62 47.93 9.50 2.43 36.02 ‘Improved King . . . . . . . . . . 9098 .57 2.81 42.87 9.26 2.43 42.06 I old 9111 51 1.62 45.73 9.43 2.61 40.10 8585 52 4.37 43.98 9.40 2. 55 39. 18 _ _ 8593 .53 4.37 43.21 9.58 2.52 39.79 Lightning . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9117 .56 3.62 46.42 8.82 2.52 " 38.06 Lightning Express . . . . . . . 9099 .65 2.81 44.00 9.25 2.57 41 .09 Lightning Express No. 4. . 9125 .79 2.37 43.29 9.71 2.59 41 .25 Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8590 .43 2.43 44.02 8.56 2.56 42 .00 Lone Star. . . .. 9131 .48 2.81 47.60 8.82 2.48 37.81 Lone Star . . . . . . . 9132 .43 1.62 47.45 9.49 2.45 38.36 Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9133 .56 2.81 46.72 9.31 2.51 38.09 D. P._L. N0. 8 . . . . . . . . . .. 8612 .23 3.12 46.87 9.27 2.60 38.91 Mathis Wilt-Res. Toole.. . 9108 .40 2.81 43.75 8.49 2.58 41.97 Mebane. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804 ' .43 3.62 45.78 9.26 2.56 38.35 Mebane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4120 .53 2.43 44.05 8.54 2.62 41.83 Mebane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9105 .47 1.99 45.78 9.26 2.46 40.04 Mebane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9113 .47 1.99 47.24 9.31 2.50 38.49 Mebane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9135 .51 3.43 46.13 8.41 2.70 38.72 Mebane (Blue Wagon)... . 8601 .47 2.43 47.49 8.71 2.64 38.26 Miss. Station Trice . . . . .. 8597 .29 2.62 45.32 9.79 2.53 39.45 Mixon Express . . . . . . . . . . 9094 .39 1 .62 45.25 8 .49 2.46 41 .79 Mueck...._ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9104 .46 3.62 42.05 9.51 2.43 41.93 New Boykm . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8599 .50 2.43 46.51 9.33 2.78 38.45 New Boykin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9134 .50 2.43 47.64 9.68 2.67 37.08 New Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . 8604 .13 2.43 44.09 9.08 2.47 41 .80 Piedmont Cleveland . . . . . . 9124 .12 3.55 45.60 9.80 2.75 38.18 Rowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8613 .56 4.37 47.20 8.18 2.65 37 .04 Rowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9128 .35 1.62 46.50 9.16 2.50 39.85 Rowden . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .. ‘9128 .51 2.81 46.41 9.00 _ 2.55 38.66 Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9166 .59 3.62 46.01 8.82 2.56 38.40 Sartartia Acala . . . . . . . . . . .9123 .13 2.37 44.85 9.17 2.51 40.97 Snowflake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8595 .26 2.81 47.21 9.00 2.52 38.20 Startex 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7000 .48 2.81 43.42 8.55 2.61 42.13 Startex 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7000 .57 4.37 45.72 9.97 2.61 36.76 Startex 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7000 .45 3.43 47.06 9.73 2.60 36.73 Sunshine.._. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 8596 .56 2.81 46.75 9.18 2.57 38.13 Tople Prolific . . . . . . . . . . . . 9110 .51 3.62 46.78 8.73 2.49 37.87 Trice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9106 .50 1 .62 47.22 9.67 2.62 38.37 Trice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9114 .51 3.62 45.07 9.26 2.63 38.91 Truitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8610 .50 3.62 46.03 9.22 2.49 38.14 Truitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8610 .85 2.43 45.58 9.41 2.63 39.10 Wacona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8592 .49 2.81 47.38 9.57 2.61 37.14 Wannamaker Cleveland. . . 9101 . 52 1 . 62 46.88 9.19 2.73 39 .06 Wannamaker Cleveland. . . 9109 .45 1 .62 47 16 9.81 2.66 38.30 Westex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8487 .53 1 .62 47 36 9.00 2.70 38.79 Wilson Cleveland . . . . . . . . 9119 .41 3.43 47 29 9.42 2.66 36 19 14 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION dwwoi WEN mwvvuw m0 GOSMwOQEOO _moE60UI.0 Oiwdvm. N.0N 0 v0 00.w v .0 0w.0 00.w 00_00 0w N0 0w..0w 0000 00 00 w 0w00.Nw 0w\wlw0.v0 w0w0 1 . . . . . . . . . . . .230 oioQ 0.0N 95 mw. fie fins. 2: mw Nm mmaé 3.. 2 8 3 8.3. m. 8.0.5 0Qw|wm0n o?“ . . . . . . . . . . ...a..m 28; v.0N v.0v v0.0 00.0 w0.0 N0. w Nv. w0 00 .0N 00.0w 00.N0 v0.v0 v 000v.v 0\ wlw N00 0Nw0 0.02 wwgim micfiwfi v.vN N.00 0N.0 N0.0 N00 00.w 00.00 0w.0N N0.0w 00. w0 w0.00 N v00.0 0w\0lw 0.0N 0000 . . . . $2.001». 00150010 0.vN w.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 S: 00_00 00.00 00.0w 00 w0 0w.00 N 000.ww 0\v 0.v0 vww0 ...I........w=i5£m<~ fiwN 0.00 3.; £0 3w 8 N 00.0.0 N0.00 2...: 5.8. 00.00 N £0.12 35L 0.5 mama . . . . . . . . . . . ..fi§§=NJ fiwN N00 SN N00 0N0 2: Nw N... 3.5 3.2 5.8 2.2. 0 N232 3P4 :5 mwmw .....:....€£v_ NNN 0.00 2N $10 Nfiw 9: NvNw. 5N» 3.2 E9. 0N.00 I N32: H Qmm. SS . . . . . . . . IEowcw 0.0N 0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.w w0_00 00.0N N0..0w 00.00 N0.00 0 0w0v.v 0\v 0.N0 0000 . . . . . . 005M Q3/9550 HNN mew mm; $4. 20 2; mwmn 2.. 3 E 2 N0.00 00.00 m 5E1: i}; m?“ .83 . . . . . . . . . . . . zmnia: 0.0N 0.00 00.N w0.0 00.0 vv.w 00.00 v0_00 00.0w N0_v0 00.N0 0 00N00 0\v N.v0 0000 11-1.0705 Ucmba: 0.0N 00v 00.0w 00.0 000 0v.w 00.00 0N.0N 000w v0 00 00 00 0 00w0.0 0\0 0.00 0000 ...... 01w: E5 flu: 0.vN 0.00 0N.0 w0.0 0N 0 00.w N0.00 00 0N 00 0w 00.w0 00 00 0 0000.0w 0\w|w 0.00 00w0 ....m Mi 293w mnSQEU N.0N w.00 00.0 0v.0 00.0 00 w N0.00 w0..00 vw.0w 00.00 00.00 _0 00N0.ww 0w\0w N00 0Nw0 . . . . . ..w .0774 wvsmzmv 0.vN 0.00 NwN .220 2a MK; mfiNm NPNN wNi 00.00 ofiom N. Nowfw wli 0.0N 3E . . . . . . . . . . . . ..ww8Ewu 0.w0 w.00 0w.0 w0.0 v0_0 00.w 00.N0 v0.00 vw .vw N0 00 00.00 0 N0v0.ww 0w\wlw N. w0 0Nw0 . . . . . . . . . . . . dmcmhsfiw v.0N 0.00 wfi 00_0 0N.0 w0.w N0.00 00.w0 0w_0w 0000 N0.00 N v000.0 0w\0w v.w0 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . ..¢w.::=c 0.0N w.00 00 0 00 0 00.0 00.w 00.N0 0v.w0 00 vw 0w 00 v0.00 0 0000.0 0\v 0.00 :00 . . . . . I0 dz {w Q .C v.0N 0.00 00.w 0v.0 00.0 00. w w0.00 N0.00 00.0w 0N N0 v0.v0 0 0wN0.0 0w\0lw 0.0N v000 . . . £50003 onzfiwioQ 0.0N 0.00 N0.0 N0.0 N0.0 00.w 0w .00 00.0N 00.0w v0. w0 0w .00 0w 00vw.0 0\ wlw v.0N v0w0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...8..=@Q w.vN 0.00 00.w 00_0 v0.0 00.w 00.00 00.w0 00_0w N0.00 0w.00 0 v00N.0 0\wIwN.0N N0w0 ;..............w§@Q v.0N 0.00 v0.0 0v.0 Nv.0 00.w 00.00 00.0N 00.0w 00 00 0N.00 0 Nv000 0\ wlw 0.w0 0000 . . . . . . . . . ..w00 worofl msN msw ow. fie mm...“ ma; mwNm 0N.00 8 m: M: F. N0.00 N $00.0 2213.3. N600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Imozwc 0.0N 0.00 0w_0 w0.0 vv.0 0v.w 00.N0 w0.00 0N@0w 00 v0 00.N0 0 000N.0 0\0 0.00 00w0 . . . . . sBPN =SwE>ou 0.0N 0.N0 Nw v 8 0 v0.w 9: Nwp... mwbm 3 E 00.00 5.3 w mzzww im 0mm 5% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .380 0.vN 0.00 00_0 00_0 N0.0 00.w N0.w0 v0.N0 000w v0.00 00.00 N w000.0 0\0 0.00 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . QHQQU NNN Ne.» gm .2; 00.0 8p 00.5 hmwN 9W2 wNuN... i? 0 _.N.\.N.N w? 0.3 25 .....£_..Q 286w 0.vN v.00 00 w 0v.0 NN.0 00.w 00.00 00.w0 00.0w 00 N0 00.00 0 0w0N.0 0w\0w 0.00 0000 . . . . . . . . . . Z3300 N.0N 0.00 v0.w wv.0 w0.0 v0.w N0.00 N0.w0 00 0w 00.00 N0.00 0 N00w.0 0\v 0.w0 0Nw0 . . . . . . .e=fi@>2u 0.0N 0.00 00_ v0.0 00.0 N0.w N0.00 00.00 9X2 0000 00.w0 0 v000.v 0w\0w 0.N0 0w00 . . . . . . . . Ifiuflhflm 0.vN 0.00 00 0 00.0 0N.0 00.w 00.00 00.0N 00.0w N0.00 00.00 0 w00v.ww 0w\wlw 100 0000 . . . . . . . . . ..=o:@m 0.vN 0.00 v0@ 00.0 N0.v 00.w 00.N0 0N.00 0w.0w 00 00 0v.00 0 0000.0 0\v 0.N0 vNw0 .........0:=ooo< iam 0.0N 0.00 00.w 00.0 0N.0 00.w N0.00 00.00 00.0w 0000 w0.00 0 00N0.0 0w\0w 0.N0 0w00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..wl0lmw 0.00 0.N0 0N 0 w0.0 00.0 00.w w0.N0 0w.00 00.0w vv 00 0N.00 w 0vv0.0w w 0.00 w000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155:4 N.0N 0.v0 vNmw 00.0 0w.0 00.w N0.w0 N0.00 00.0w 00.v0 00.00 0 $3 ww w 0.N0 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40754 2N 3% N... H an 0 t. w 2 N Q N0 8 Nm wN m: 00.5. 91:. my 2% 0 NQI 0.N0 0000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12x3 2Q . “m % 3gb .605 E3 “You “Tm M N M W. M 1 Wd... dm d |com 0N4 $035 vwiiU Aim :0 mi H1 W... M50 mmw. Win H1 S $3 mpw -822 0. Q. 0 Q. 0. s3 mo .5 9a o0 31w. "5 . P19 a 1. @\. 9 a [a e a PB 9S1. qlu. 1a I oEw ||o QEm wad M9 a 9U SH WU Fm J9 .91. U N. Z _ m u... We m. P1 1 1 u ea su 0 1. 0 I. no no S O Ifi TJ . u m} W. 3x02 U. Mm. 15 P<¢>omo~~wwmwoo~wwmmmovowwm~woomohm§h awga;@4am@@@@@@@¢@@4@s~w4'@@e Q6666$QQQQQ66$Q€§€€€€€€€€€§€€€€bé&€€€ @@@@@@@¢@@@¢@@@@L AA&€AAAAQNéfiA'AAAAAfiAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAA mNwommhNomhwo~mmowo~Nmmovwmvwmm mwmzw i}: ma...“ i; . . . . 65:03.10 =8=3 Maw?“ w? ma». 2g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2883 22¢ 3m Wmm $5 waif/BU himimccw? Nwwms i». mam ES mEBP/SU §§§==m3 mmmhé 8 ~|~ Ham flaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2683 mfimfi Q12 9% 2% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ifiiih. 82¢ fir}: 9mm 2% ...:..:.......:::P 39mg: 23H 1% 3S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382k 88a H 9 E 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as? wwmma 2?: mam 2S .... ...Q=__.:m 030M. E2. . m M on.“ 3% . . . . . . . . .2225 Qagw z v.3 8E . . . . . 4km étwi owmmrofi o mam 8E . . . . . . . . . Immm 52.3w wmmwe. w ma». oooh . . . . . . . . . . w? x285 m¢m@.o_ ¢\~\_@.@~ mamw . . . . . . . . . . ..@xw=Bo=m wwfiwi z mam mNS . . . . . . 42x04 mflbwimm owww.@ @~\~,; ¢.@~ @@_@ . . . . .N . . . . . . . ..=@ww:- oooo dz o: filz new $5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . du13oI 3%.: o1 To mdm wNS . . . . . . . E . . . . . 522m iwwa 82L m. 5 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . iswaom mmmma 23H 3% 3.5 . . ¢=2§2u E¢E§m NSNa $12 o3. 3% ... .. . . atfiom 3oz wmfiww 2?: ma...“ £5 . . . . . . . Evian 3oz oiliw 23w w? oomw . . . . . doiom 3oz w~vm.o~ ~ m.>m voom . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..zQ@:~z NNom.w @_\_|_ m.mm vooo ........mmw~Qxm~ coxoez 25w $12 #3 8% . . . .85. =oafiw 2:2 8%? 2 _ 9S 5% . 50mm»)? 2am Baag mSQQ m5 filz mom £5 . . . . . . . . . . . . ..25fi.2 wafiw H oflm 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . ..2afi.2 Ema fi P? 8S owooo _ mam 8G wwzam Si: wan 3w mmm§> in o .3 we; 20oF ¢Qm¢=3 @552 83¢ i}: 9% 23 . . . . . zw dz .4 m .Q omfiw: wlw wuvm 3S . . . . . . . . . . . 53m 0:04 . mmdmi o n‘. om Nmwm . . . . . . . . . . 33am oflwfl l 16 BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ‘RELATION OF WEIGHT AND SIZE OF SEED TO PERCENTAGE OF OIL A The varieties of cotton seed Were grouped according to size of seed, which is indicated by the weight of one hundred seed. Those which weighed over eleven grams were in one group, those which weighed ten to eleven grams in another group, those weighing nine to ten grams in still another group, and those weighing under nine grams in the fourth group. - Table 5.—-Relation of weight and size of seed to percentage of oil. Per Cent Per Cent Per ‘Cent Hulls ' Weight of 100 Seeds Meats Oil Over 11 grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 49.7 50.3 16.19 10 to 11 grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 49.4 50.6 16.28 9 t0 1O grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 49.9. 50.1 15.70 Under 9 grams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49.5 50.5 16.05 Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49.6 50.4 16.06 The examination of these results shows that the Weight or size of the seed has no relation to the percentage of hulls, meats and oil. The percentage of oil in the seed was averaged for each size of seed. These results are given in Table 5 and the figures show that there was no relation between the size of the seed and the oil content. RELATION OF COMPOSITION OF OIL TO VARIETY OF SEED The index of refraction of the oil from each variety of cotton seed was determined by means of the Abbe Befractometer. The index of refraction is one of the best tests to show whether or not there is uni- formity and homogeneity between samples. It was found that all the samples of oil gave a reading on the refractometer between 1.4738 and 1.4740 at 20 degrees centigrade. Since there were practically no vari- ations in the readings, this test shows that the oil has a constant com- position regardless of the variety of seed from which it is obtained. The iodine value and the saponification number were determined on the oil from each variety of seed, and within the limits of experimental error in the analyses, these tests gave constant results. The oil had an average iodine value of 111.0 and an average saponification number _ of 193.1. The percentage of free fatty acids was determined on the samples of oil, and all of the samples showed the presence of no free fatty acids. RELATION OF LENGTH OF LINT TO OIL CONTENT OF SEED The results were studied to see if there is any relationship between the length of lint and the oil content. The averages are given in Table 6. the averages are given in Table A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 17 Table 6.—Relation of length of lint and percentage of oil in the seed. . _ _ Per Cent Length of Lint 1n Inches of Oil 1-1/8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14.77 1-1/16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16.02 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.28 15/16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16.00 7/8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.50 3/4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.70 The varieties of cotton having a length of lint between 81 and 1-1/ 16 inches had the greatest oil content. However, some of the varieties of short and long staple will have a high oil content. RELATION OF VARIETY OF SEED TO OIL CONTENT The Weight of one hundred seed, the percentage of hulls and the per- centage of meats, were averaged for the samples of each variety and 7. Table 7.—Relati0n of variety to chemical composition 0f seed. Weight _ of 100 Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent . Variety - Seed, Hulls Meats ~ Oil Protein Grams Acala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.45 47.37 52.63 16.65 27.55 Burnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.44 49.64 50.36 16.39 28.47 Cleveland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.88 49.08 50.92 15.25 27.30 Delfos . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.65 51.92 48.08 15.19 27.82 Half and Half . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.01 45.74 54.26 17.29 29.40 Lone Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.65 51.13 48.87 15.87 27.85 Long Staple Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.19 51.06 48.94 15.43 27.61 Mebane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.97 49.51 50.49 16.18 28.15 Rowden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.17 51.28 48.72 15.46 27.10 Table '7 shows that on an average the variety having the lowest per- centage of hulls and the highest percentage of meats will have the greatest amount of oi], regardless of the size of the seed. This is due in part at least to the fact that the oil comes from the meats and n6‘: from the hulls. Acala, Burnett, Half and Half, and Mebane are the varieties having the greatest amount of oil. BULLETIN NO. 374, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPE-RIMENT STATION 5mm ZJobo i010 18 Table 8.—Detailed results arranged by variety. Weight of 100 Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Seed. Hulls Meats Oil Protein Grams Acala: Acala 8606 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.67 51.20 48.80 16.28 26 Acala 8609 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.64 47.00 53.00 18.50 28 Burnett: Burnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.64 48.54 51.46 17.60 29 B—9—-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.42 50.39 49.61 15.09 29 Westex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.29 50.00 50.00 16. 50 27 Cleveland: Cleveland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.14 49.58 50.42 16.06 28 Piedmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.53 49.86 50.14 12.86 27 Wannamaker 9101 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.98 56.70 43.30 10.64 23 Wannamaker 9109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.12 43.67 56.43 19.30 29 Delfos: Delfos 8602 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.59 51 . 18 48.82 16.93 27.5 Delfcs 8603 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.66 49.80 50.20 14.99 28.7 Delfos 9102 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.21 54.82 45.18 14.46 27.1 Delfos 9107 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.17 51.87 48.13 14.39 28.0 Half and Half: Half and Half 8604 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.51 44.47 55.53 16.00 29.9 Hall‘ and Iialf 9096 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.52 47.02 52.98 18.58 28.9 Lone Star: Lone Star 8590 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.73 56.00 44.00 15.34 24.9 Lone Star 9131 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.38 50.45 49.55 16.14 28.2 Lone Star 9132 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.9? 52.84 47.16 14.96 26.1 Lone Star 9133 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.46 48.49 51.51 17.02 28.5 Lankart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.33 50.91 49.09 16.37 28.1 Startex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.82 50.61 49.39 15.66 27.9 Startex 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.35 49.18 50.82 17.00 29.3 Startex 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . 8.90 51.97 48.03 15.20 28.6 Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.89 49.72 50.28 15.33 29.0 Longer Staple: Delta Type Webber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 52 52 .23 47 .07 14.90 28.7 Express . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.66 49.90 50.10 16.28 27.4 Lightning Express . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . 8.88 51.59 48.41 14.41 27 .7 Lightning Express . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~. . 7.79 52.63 47.37 14.38 26.7 Snowflake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.55 48.52 51.48 18.57 27.0 Wacona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.73 50.82 49.18 14.05 28.1 lVIebane: Anton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.57 46.77 53.23 16.48 30.3 Cliett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.25 52.00 48.00 15.30 27.9 Harpen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.87 50.92 49.08 15.1? 29.1 Kaseh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.10 50.81 49.19 15.56 28.1 Mebane 804 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9.72 47.49 52.51 17.78 29.1 Mebane 4120 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.60 48.23 51.77 15.38 29.4 Mebane 9105 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8.59 49.62 50.38 17.58. 27.5 Mebane 9113 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8. 5 47.5? 52.41 17.17 28.3 Mebane 9135 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.00 48 40 51.60 17.03 28.6 Mebane (Blue Wagon) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.93 51 . 5F 48 .45 15.02 26.2 Mueck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10.24 53.1? 46.87 15.54 26.1 New Boykin 8599 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.41‘ 52.30 47.7( 14.5? 26.2 _ New Boykin 9134 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456C 54.40 17.80 29.1 Rbwden: Belton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.7! 50.52 49.48 14.48 27.9 Rowden 8613 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8? 53.64 46.46 15.36 26.3 Rowden 9128 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11.82 48.9.’ 51.05 16.02 27.8 Rowden 9128 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12.0? 48.67 51.‘ 16.70 28.6 Sunshine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7? 54.61 45.39 14.74 24.9 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In the preparation of this Bulletin, the Writer wishes to express his appreciation To Mr. M. K. Thornton, J r., Professor of Industrial Chemistry, who had direct charge of the work and who helped with timely suggestions as to method, application, and study of the research. A CHEMICAL STUDY OF VARIETIES OF COTTON SEED 19 To Mr. D. T. Killough, Agronomist, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, who furnished the lint and seed of the varieties and rendered information in regard to the growing of the varieties, their character- istics, and properties. ' And to Dr. C. C. Hedges, Head of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, who helped to keep up the enthusiasm and the spirit of the research. e SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 1. Analyses were made of the meats, hulls, and oil from 73 samples ‘ representing as many varieties and strains ofcotton grown 0n the Main Station farm of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station at College Station. A 2. X0 relation was found between the Weight and size of the seed and the percentage of oil in the seed. 3. N o appreciable variation Was found i11 the index of refraction, the iodine number, and the saponification number, of the oil from the different varieties of seed. 4. Varieties of cotton with lint § to 1-1/16 inches i11 length had slightly higher content of oil in the seed than did those with either shorter or longer staple. 5. On an average, seed with the highest percentage of meats con- tain the highest percentage of oil. 6. The average oil content in the seed of 9 different groups of vari- eties consisting of '73 samples is tabulated. Half and Half was the ' highest, Delfos the lowest. 7. The work covered only one season, and the conclusions are con- sidered as tentative pending further investigation. The results are being published because of their emphatic suggestions. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1) Brown, H. B. Cotton, Chapter I. 2) Scherer, James. Cotton as a World Power. 3) Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume VII, page 7256. 1) Fraps, Dr. G. S. The Composition of Cottonseed Meal and Cot- ton Seed, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 189, , June, 1916. (5) Oakley, B. A. Distribution of Cotton Seed in 1915, United ' States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, Circular 1163 (1915). (6) Tyler, F. J. Varieties of American Upland Cotton, United ' States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, Bulletin 163. (7) Brown, H. B. Cotton, page 56. , (8) Circular of Cotton Seed Distribution, United States Department ' of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry, 1919: Harper, J. N. Experiments with Varieties of Cotton, South Caro- lina Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 162 (1912).