ta M connzcs. E CAMPUS.v R54-936-6m AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION A. B. CONNER, DIRECTOR COLLEGE STATION, BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS l LETIN NO. 531 \ OCTOBER, 1936 DIVISION OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING '31s “w z ‘WHY; O W@$Iaa;n arena?!” I hemical Dust Treatment of Cottonseed for Planting Purposes N_ r s; AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE OF TEXAS T. 0. WALTON, President Studies were begun in 1930 by the Texas Agricultural Experi- ment Station to determine the efiect on stands and yields 0f cotton of difierent methods of delinting and treating the seed. In these studies ‘tests were made to determine the influence 0f date and rate of planting and the best depth of listed furrow in which to plant cotton. The field work in these experiments was done at the U. S. Cotton Breeding Field Station at Greenville, at College Station, Angleton, Lubbock, and Temple, and in the Brazos River Bottoms near College Station. This bulletin reports the results of the work up to the present time. Treating fuzzy cottonseed with Ceresan increased the number of seedlings that emerged from 11 to 65 per cent and the yields from 4 to 25 per cent when the cottonseed were planted at the optimum rates and dates. In the early planting of fuzzy cotton- seed treated with Ceresan for a three-year period at Lubbock a smaller number of seedlings emerged and a smaller percentage of seed germinated, with no significant difference in yields. Ceresan treatment of mechanically delinted cottonseed planted at the optimum rate and date gave a larger number of seedlings emerg- ing at College Station, Temple, Lubbock, and in the Brazos -River Bottoms, than did untreated seed. At Greenville seedlings from cottonseed treated with Ceresan and Bayer Dust 502 and delinted with hydrochloric acid gas and sulphuric acid had a smaller num- ber of plants infected with angular leaf spot disease in the early seedling stage than did those from untreated seed. Ceresan treated seed planted at Temple had a smaller percentage of seed- lings affected with angular leaf spot.» Bayer Dust treatment of fuzzy seed planted at the optimum date and depth of furrow gave fewer seedlings, but slightly higher yields than untreated seed. Mechanically delinted seed treated with Bayer dust gave more seedlings but slightly lower yields than untreated seed. Copper carbonate treatment of both fuzzy and mechanically delinted seed did not prove beneficial. When cotton was planted at Lubbock on April 25, May 5, May 15, and May 25, the total number of plants obtained generally increased with the lateness of planting. There was a general tendency for the stand of plants to in- crease as the rate of planting increased. Cottonseed planted in a four-inch furrow at Lubbock gave a larger number of seedlings than either the surface planting or the seven-inch listed furrow. At Lubbock cotton thinned to a 12-inch spacing gave higher yields than unthinned cotton. Introduction CONTENTS Review of literature Experimental methods Seasonal planting conditions under which the tests were made __________ __ Efiect of treating cottonseed with chemical dust preparations ____________ _- Results with Ceresan Results with Bayer Dust ____ _. Results with copper carbonate Results with lime Effect of mechanically delinting cottonseed Effect of cultural methods in relation to cottonseed treatment __________ __ Efiect of treating cottonseed on mortality of seedlings and percentage of angular leaf spot on cotton seedlings Summary and conclusions Bibliography 12 14 14 16 16 18 22 23 s CHEMICAL DUST TREATMENT OF COTTONSEED FOR PLANTING PURPOSES H. P. Smith, Chief, Division of Agricultural Engineering D. L. Jones, Superintendent, Substation N0. 8, Lubbock D. T. Killough, Agronomist, Division of Agronomy H. C. McNamara, Superintendent, U.S.D.A. Cotton Field Station, Greenville, Texas.* --,\ fyfwvwv 1-wa- N . a Every spring the cotton grower wonders while he is carefully planting his cottonseed whether he will get a good stand of plants or have to “replant. No doubt he has carefully prepared the seed bed and hopes to secure a good stand of plants by putting down large quantities of seed. Even so, he may have to plant his crop a second, and sometimes even a third time, before a satisfactory stand of plants is secured. Since *5the ‘advent of the boll weevil, it is very important to plant early. Planting S E if zgbefore the soil has become warm enough to enhance quick germina- étion increases the risk of a poor stand, however, and, as a consequence, Epéfqreplanting is often necessary. Young seedlings from early plantings érare often killed by fungus diseases, the most common of which are the i5 ‘fianthracnose fungus (Golletotrichum Gossypit) and the sore shin fungus {Rhizoctonia Salami). The anthracnose fungus is often present on the gsurface of cottonseed in the form of spores and attacks the cotton seed- ;ling at the time of germination. If weather conditions become un- ffavorable for the rapid growth of cotton seedlings, many of them are ifkilled by the fungus. Sore shin fungi under certain conditions of temper- éi-ature and moisture that may exist at the time of planting, kill large numbers of the seeds before germination is hardly begun. Other seed- iilings are killed between the beginning of germination and emergence, psand many may die after they have emerged and attained a height of two Eur three -inches. A high percentage of the fungi spores are destroyed Zéwhen the seed are delinted or treated with chemical dusts, and this makes iit possible for more of the seeds to germinate and for the seedlings to ‘Y emerge and survive. a, The literature on this subject indicates that better stands were se- cured in the eastern part of the Cotton Belt by the delinting and treating ‘of cottonseed. As the soil and climatic conditions in Texas are quite “different from those in the cotton growing states east of the Mississippi iRiver, it was considered advisable to conduct experiments on this phase of cotton culture under conditions prevailing in Texas. Investigations, therefore, were begun in different parts of the state to study the effects of the delinting and treating of cottonseed on germination and stand. The objects of the investigation were to determine the effects of various methods of treating fuzzy and delinted cottonseed with chemical dust preparations on germination, rate of emergence, and control of seedling w? “Credit is due Messrs. C. H. McDowell, R. H. Stansel, Henry Dunlavy and " G. T. McNess, superintendents of substations at Iowa Park, Angleton, Temple and the Main Station Farm at College Station, respectively, for their assistance in conducting the field experiments and in supplying data reported in this bulletin. 6 BULLETIN NO. 531, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION diseases when the seed were planted at different dates and in listed fur- rows of different depths. The cottonseed used in these experiments was delinted by three methods—cottonseed oil mill delinting machinery, con- centrated sulphuric acid, and hydrochloric acid gas. Care should be used in selecting planting seed to see that they have a high percentage of germination. Dropping the seed, opening the seed furrow, and covering the seed are factors that may have a material influence on the stand of plants even when good seed are used. One of the biggest factors, therefore, in getting a stand of cotton plants with- out replanting is the ability of the individual to prepare a good seed bed and to select a time when soil moisture and temperature conditions are suitable for good germination. Treating the cottonseed before plant- ing helps to meet adverse conditions that may occur. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Llyman (14) in his book on Cotton Culture, published in 1868, mentions the desirability of rolling cottonseed in a fertilizer to hasten germina- tion. He recommended a compound “of two parts of ashes to one of common salt. He also stated that some farmers practiced soaking cottonseed in a solution of salt dissolved in liquid manure and then rolling in a plaster. Watkins (21) of Australianfound that rolling cottonseed in super- phosphate paste delayed germination. Experiments by Hall and Arm- strong (8) of South C'aroli11a showed that rolling cottonseed in nitrate of soda delayed germination. Similar results were secured by Briggs (2) of Arizona with sodium nitrate, lime, and flour paste. Results of investigations with chemical dusts to secure better stands- of cotton indicate that certain chemical dusts increase stands. Wallace (19) of the Raymond Branch Station _in Mississippi secured increased germination and yield by giving the planting seed dust treatments. Brown (3) and Neal (15) of Louisiana secured better stands but no significant increase in yield. Treatment of cottonseed with certain chemi- cal dusts gave increased stands in Georgia (22). Lehman (11, 12) of North Carolina has found from experiments be- ginning in 1928 that when cotton is planted under cold soil conditions, treatment with chemical dusts is beneficial in securing better stands. Experiments by Hall (9) of South Carolina show similar results. Ludwig (13) states that the minimum temperature for the germina- tion of cottonseed is approximately 12° C or 53.6° F. Camp and Walker (5) found that the optimum soil temperature for the germina- tion of cottonseed was 33° to 34° C or 91° to 93° F and that no germi- nation was secured at 40° C or 104° F. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS T The results on yield reported in this bulletin were computed to the cre basis from experimental plats. The plats varied in size and con- isted of rows 25, 50, and 132 feet in length spaced 36 inches apart. - The preparation of the land-and the cultivation were always in keep- ng with good farm practices. g At most locations three plant counts were made. The first was made hen a few plants had begun to emerge, the second two to three days er, and the third just before thinning. The percentage stand is the ratio of the actual number of plants ob- ned to the desired number of plants, expressed in percentages. The vrcentage of germination is the actual number of plants‘ obtained cal- ylated from the number of seed planted. i At Lubbock plantings were made on four different dates and in listed rrows of three different depths, designated as surface, four-inch, and en-inch. Data from all other locations were for the optimum date planting. SEASONAL PLANTING CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE TESTS WERE MADE gThe amount of moisture in the soil, the temperature of the soil, and T rainfall occurring at planting time influence the germination of tonseed. Naturally, these conditions vary from year to year and following is a summary of conditions for each spring at the loca- 'ns where the cottonseed treatment tests were conducted. At Lubbock: The Lubbock Station is located in the High Plains glon of Texas/and nearthe center of what is known as the South ._ ins. The average rainfall over a period of 25 years is 18.60 inches, i’ per cent of which falls during the months from April to October, in- A ve. The average date of the last killing frost in the spring is il 9. The soil is of the Amarillo and Richfield fine sandy loam types, ich are typical of a considerable portion of this area. xcellent planting conditions existed in the spring of 1930, but 'sture became deficient by July. Heavly rains, ffalling the last of 5'1 1931, caused the April 25 planting to be abandoned, although soil iture became deficient in May. Favorable moisture conditions ted throughout the year of 1932, but cold rains during the latter of April prevented good germination. Good planting conditions ‘ted in the early spring of 1933, but soil moisture became low the part of May. Hot winds in June retarded the growth of cotton. Aiipitation was far below normal in the fall of 1933 and early spring 4 934, and conditions for good germination of cottonseed did not exist CHEMICAL DUST TREATMENT OF CdTTONSEED 7 8 BULLETIN NO. 531, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION until late May and early June of 1934, after which there was not sufii- cient moisture for good plant growth. The spring of 1935 was dry and rains during May and June interfered with seed germination. Moisture was poor throughout the growing season. At College Station: This station is located on Lufkin fine sandy loam soil, which crusts easily. The average annual rainfall is 38.5 inches.* The average date of the last killing frost is March 12. Weather conditions in the spring of 1930 were very unfavorable for the germination of cottonseed. The excessive and continuous rainfall after planting caused a poor and uneven germination, particularly of seed not treated with Ceresan. Conditions in 1931 were generally favorable for germination and relatively good stands of plants were obtained. In 1932 moisture conditions were excellent at planting time. A heavy rain fell just as the cottonseed were germinating and caused rapid emergence. Soil moisture was favorable in 1933, but rains falling before the seeds germinated and emerged packed the soil and interfered with‘ the emergence of seedlings. This accounts for the low plant counts in 1933. Excellent conditions existed for germination in the spring of 1934 and of 1935. The average planting date for these tests for the six years was April 24. On the Brazos River Soils: The seed treatment test conducted in the Brazos River Bottoms was on the George Chance Farm, which is about eight miles west of College Station. The soil is alluvial and classed as Yahola clay. It is quite sticky when wet, and crust forms easily on the surface after rains. When the soil is stirred by seed furrow openers and covering shovels, it dries rapidly to a depth of approximately one inch. The average annual rainfall and date of last killing frost are the same as for College Station. The tests were planted each year on April 18 under favorable moisture conditions. Every year sufficient rain fell between the time of planting and emergence of the seedlings to form a crust on the surface of the soil. This interfered somewhat with the emergence of the seedlings. Many seed that germinated were unable to break through the thick hard soil crust. At Temple: The tests at Temple were planted on houston black clay soil. This soil is sticky when wet and crumbly when dry. When dis- turbed, it dries rapidly, so that cottonseed must be covered with one and one-half to two inches of soil. The average annual rainfall at Temple is 35.28 inches. The date of the last killing frost is March 22. Tests at Temple were conducted one year and favorable conditions existed for the germination of\ the cottonseed. ‘Texas Station Bulletin, No. 484. CHEMICAL DUST TREATMENT OF COTTONSEED 7 9 ' EFFECT OF TREATING COTTONSEED WITH CHEMICAL DUST PREPARATIONS In these tests four kinds of chemical dust preparations were used- Ceresan, Bayer Dust, copper carbonate, and commercial hydrated lime. Results with Ceresan Ceresan was tested with cottonseed planted at College Station, Lubbock, Temple, and in the Brazos River Bottoms. At College Station and in the Brazos River Bottoms Ceresan was used on fuzzy seed,* sulphuric acid de- linted seed, and mechanically delinted cottonseed. Mechanically delinted and fuzzy seed were used at Lubbock, and fuzzy seed only were used at Temple. All seeds were treated With Ceresan at the rate of three ounces of Ceresan per bushel. The seed are most effectively covered with Ceresan when they are rolled or agitatediin a barrel or drum, mounted so that it may be easily turned with a crank. Effect of Ceresan on Fuzzy (gin-run) Cottonseed: A study of Table 1 shows that treating fuzzy cottonseed with Ceresan increased both the number of seedlings emerging and the yield at all locations when the cottonseed were planted at optimum dates. The average increase in seedlings ranged from 11 per cent at Lubbock to 65 per cent at Temple. The seedlings of each treatment were examined at Temple in 1932 to determine the percentage showing infection, such as anthracnose and black arm diseases. The untreated [fuzzy seed showed an infection of 28.7 per cent, but the Ceresan treated fuzzy seed showed infection of only 1.2 per cent. Average increases in yield ranged from 4 per cent at Lubbock, over a three-year period, to 25 per cent at College Station (Table 1). Planting early for a period of three years at Lubbock resulted in the emergence of fewer seedlings and in a smaller percentage of germina- tion for the Ceresan treated cottonseed (Table 2). There was no signifi- cant difference in the yields from the treated and untreated seed. l ' The late planted cotton at the heavy rate at Lubbock for the same period gave a slightly increased emergence of seedlings, a slightly larger percentage of seed germinating, and slightly larger yields for the Ceresan treatment (Table 2) . It is estimated that fuzzy cottonseed can be treated with Ceresan at ten cents per bushel, including materials and labor. For College Sta- tion the average increase in yield for Ceresan treated seed was 64 pounds of lint per acre over the untreated seed. Figuring ten cents a pound as ‘Fuzzy seed used_ in these discussions means cottonseed as they come from the gin, or gin-run seed. 10 BULLETIN NO. 531, TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 8N o3 :3 3 $3 035v? 25A at? “Evcbwokm. .. . . vow cow cmu m3 .>< . . . . . . . . . . . .. m2 Qa ZN o2 3.3 . . . . . . . . . . N2 >3 N3 m: Q3 . . . . . . . . . 8m m?» 3N i: 89 0350B o2 o2 >3 mi . . . wwfl MMH mmN QON .>< 8 S o2 o3 . . 8 ow mo». o8 £2 Hm 3m o: o2 . . 2 mu com $~ $3 fiom m3 ow 3. 2a Nwm Q m3 mm3 Mzcpfiq . . . 3h . . . o2. . . . 3N wfi 8» 3N i? mm» .>< av N3. 8w 3w w? own . 3m ofi mwm m3 w? mm3 mEofiom . .. 2: .. . m3 . m3 . m? :3 N3 3N 3a 3.3 \ mSSm .. . 8N i? o3 om. 3m m3 2% mo». .>.< 3m wwm is m3 QM. Sm mwm w? $8 hm». own +3 3A3 ... 33 ... i». . . i.» H3 mm: w? o2 g3 . .. mmw a0». $3 . .. .. QWN fifi 2: 3 $2 nosfiw $260 wfimofi. wwfimwbcD “$33k wwfiwwbmD wfiwwfi. wfimwbnD wwamwfiw E3333 ufimwfiw wwfiwwbsD wmzmvfw wwamwbsD *1 “c: 3o» Lo ,3 “WI: “m: 3o» Lo 3 $7» QGI 3o» Lo d3 59> 33F we 32> w.8< om E 352a dZ Mo 32> 96¢ cm E 352a .02 Lo 32> P64 om E £52m .02 . we noflwuoq wwww wwaszofi asmumcmsuoz 3.8m wfiimfl v64 wwom >NN5..W hiao-i-Z-ovufi ti: J-owifio-H “J04 évomiiwoO wufi-floi oizsai-m cmssirm we n20; E5 mwiswm i.» wioiwuof! 530.50 wovwfl H Q1795 CHEMICAL DUST TREATMENT OF COTTONSEED 11 Table 2. Effect 0f Ceresan Treatment on Heavy and Light Rates of Planting of Fuzzy and Mechanically Delinted Cottonseed Planted Early and Late—Lubbock, 1933-1935 (3 years). Plants Emerging and Yield Average Early planting Late planting number Seed of seed Plant Treatment planted counts Plants in 25 ft. Plants in 25 ft. in 25 ft. Acre ______._ Acre row yield yield Per cent of lint- Per cent of lint- Number of germi- lbs. Number of germi- lbs. nation nation Heavy Planting Rate——'l‘hinned (12” apart in row) Fuzzy, 223 1st 73 32 . 7 . I . SO 22.4 none " 2nd 116 52.0 90 40.4 " 3rd 126 56.5 109 125 56.1 133 Fuzzy, 223 1st 63 28.3 ... 41 18.4 Ceresan ” 2nd 105 47.1 . . . 94 42.2 . . . " 3rd 111 49.8 111 131 58.7 138 Delinted, 147 1st 61 41 .5 . 30 20. 4 None " 2nd 97 66.0 ... 56 38.1 " 3rd 102 69.4 105 76 51. 7 130 Delinted. 147 1st 62 42.3 . . . 29 19 . 7 Ceresan " 2nd 92 62 .6 . . . 59 40. 1 . . . " 3rd 97 66.0 107 83 56.5 130 Light Planting Rate——Not Thinned (5" apart in row) Fuzzy, 118 1st 48 40.7 . .. 31 26.3 None " 2nd 70 59.3 . .. 65 55.1 ... " 3rd 75 63.6 91 9O 76.3 117 ' Fuzzy, 118 1st 36 30.5 . . . 31 26.3 Ceresan ” 2nd 63 53.4 . . . 48 40. 7 . . . " 3rd 67 56. 8 9O 60 50.8 96 Delinted. 86 1st 28 32.6 . . . 18 l 20.9 . . . None ” 2nd 45 52.3 ... 36 41.9 " 3rd 49 57.0 85 47 54.7 113 l Delinted, s6 1st g 2s 32.6 9 10.5 Ceresan " 2nd 46 53.5 ... 20 23.3 . .. " 3rd 51 59.3 - 97 29 33. 7 103 --.~