_ _ . _ ,_ .. . _ ,. I - ._ _ - .- v , . _, I» ~ ‘ »- ' -"-;=- “z ' » v - '-. - .. . - .- 4 » ..1~.- w.- » . w~ ,- -..5.. I, .- . - m. ¢ -vr~' < - ‘ _ , ,_ . _ . 4 .. . ,. .. .._~ _. < _; w I y, ., —~ < <. .- -~.;_ .' w.,='~. I (‘t-l". -_ - A- .' " N ,- ' 4 m» t;- n~ } I a, -v w I w‘ _ w‘ w ‘ _. -_ .¢\ ~_._ >~ <- . __ _, .. I _ < ; .' ‘p, .' . ._' * twf". _ ' “fir”. U‘ _ a _‘ p,‘ _ __v v._:_~ "L. I “hi... . 2.,“ l§\f_~“:v\_ ';_ A “F, U‘ W jxrlyxgjxq L‘; __.A___y H __ ~ A_ - ‘J1, . » , < ‘ w; t’ . ‘ ‘ E?‘ ,v.. _. m“. ._ _~,.jt_‘_l‘ :>..- r._ i . b Y . _. .. .1); 4‘_\’_‘f_,__s.‘_ » i‘, ._ _ _\V \ _ < \ , . v V_ . I, 4,._ .. w _ fig.“ f 877 Pet/formant? 0/ flatten Varieties in 2761415, 795466 TEXAS ACRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIUN - - - TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXTEIISIUN SERVICE College Station, Texas in cooperation with the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE CONTENTS Preface ............................................................................. -- 2 Introduction ..................................................................... _- 3 Testing Regions and Locations .................................... .- 5 Locations and Types of Tests ....................................... -- 5 Test Design and Analysis ______________________________________________ __ 5 Climatic Conditions ........................................................ -- 5 Test Results ............................................................... 6 Region 1—Lower Rio Grande Valley, Winter Garden and Trans-Pecos _____________________ __ 6 Region 2—High and Rolling Plains ______________________ __ 7 Region 3—Central, Coastal and Eastern Areas .... _- 7 American-Egyptian Cotton _____________________________________ __ 7 Varieties Recommended _________________________________________________ __ 8 Acknowledgments ________________________________________________________ 9 Appendix __________________________________________________________________________ __ 9 Explanation of Table Headings ______________________________ __ 9 PREFACE rieties for 25 testing locations in Texas during 1954-56. and are summarized by testing regions on pages 6-8. A summarization given on pages 8-9. This bulletin presents data on the performance of cotton varieties tested during the third 3-year testing cycle of the cotton variety testing, program in Texas. Information on yield and other agronomic characters . is given for performance of both regional-standard and supplemental va- Performance data for individual locations are given in the Appendix f by varieties of lint percentage, boll size and staple length is given in Table a 31 of the Appendix. Varietal recommendations for the various areas are g i- every soil type in Texas. per/ormance 0/ 60H0n Uariefied in jexad, 1954-56 g J. 3 12 /a.l....../ ..../ 3. c. ea...» OTTON CONTINUES TO BE the major agricultural crop of Texas, both in acreage and monetary i value. It is grown in nearly every major area of the State and is adapted to a wide range 0f grow- ing conditions — dryland and irrigated areas, coastal and high plains regions and practically The importance of cot- ton to the economy of the State is a reflection of = its versatility—wide environmental adaptation, adaptation to varied production practices and the . multitude of uses for cotton fiber and cottonseed i products. The farmer has a wide range of cotton varie- d. ties and types from which to choose, and his suc- ; cess may be influenced greatly by his choice. The A choice of variety, in turn, depends on many fac- y tors—yield and other agronomic properties, fiber quality, disease and insect tolerance, suitability l to particular growing conditions and adaptation f to prevailing production practices. The principal purpose of the cotton variety testing program of the Texas Agricultural Exper- ; iment Station is to supply information which will 3 serve as a guide to farmers in the selection of the lRespectively, instructor, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station; agronomist, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture; and cotton work specialist, Texas Agricultural Extension Service. varieties best suited to his growing conditions and production practices. Information obtained from the tests also is valuable to breeders, spinners, ginners, buyers and other segments of the cotton industry. Testing for cotton yield performance was in- itiated by the Texas Station on a small scale in 1898. Cotton variety tests are now conducted at some 25 locations, and, in addition to yield, in- formation is obtained on such factors as boll size, grade and staple, lint percentage, earliness and, in some cases, on disease ratings and fiber and spin- ning properties. By conducting tests throughout the State, the performance of varieties under different environ- mental conditions can be measured. Each test provides local information on the response of va- rieties, data applicable to the adjacent areas and to a more limited extent, the whole State. Cotton varieties differ in their performance when tested at different locations in a given year, and they also perform differently from year to year. There- fore, when reliable estimates of performance are desired, it is better to use averages calculated from data taken over a period of years or from several locations, or both, than to place confi- dence in the results of a single test. Practical, as well as statistical, considerations should be TABLE 1. RAINFALL DATA AT TEST LOCATIONS, 1954-56 Rainfall, inches Total for Average Average for Total annual growing season Location annual growing season 1954 1955 1956 1954 1955 1956 : Weslaco 23.04 11.92 26.23 21.49 7.83 14.69 7.61 4.21 Winter Haven 20.92 14.09 16.83 16.17 8.70 11.25 12.23 ‘5.44 Robstown 28.00 16.47 18.38 22.85 16.48 13.28 18.76 8.92 Beeville 29.41 13.70 15.27 19.52 19.34 9.32 7.40 8.73 '5 Victoria 35.66 16.49 19.85 24.86 16.49 7.54 Port Lavaca 30.00 12.00 30.00 31.00 28.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 .9 Angleton 47.54 25.73 21.76 40.03 29.73 11.57 25.45 9.37 Sugarland 43.23 22.82 25.76 39.00 26.33 14.30 21.84 13.76 p Prairie View 23.13 32.56 24.17 11.84 18.48 8.61 A&M>Plantation 38.39 21.27 27.45 23.44 22.66 15.61 12.30 10.63 Temple 34.10 18.61 13.78 37.13 18.05 8.10 29.60‘ 5.36 1 Greenville 39.99 21.41 34.19 26.87 25.76 15.01 15.59 9.67 ‘Denton 31.95 17.57 22.52 23.34 17.48 13.96 17.32 7.57 -_Iowa Park 29.24 17.75 20.51 29.69 17.79 15.68 21.22 8.85 iChillicothe 24.49 16.31 18.77 35.06 14.27 16.11 22.84 7.93 Spur 20.35.. 14.24 14.08 24.55 6.87 10.20 17.95 4.22 Lubbock 18{12 12.77 13.67 15.39 9.50 9.77 10.91 6.80 Plainview 10.83 28.92 10.16 9.92 24.17 6.29 @ ig Spring 18.01 12.30 18.42 16.39 8.06 16.20 13.76 4.60 Balmorhea 13.19 8.85 8.02 14.43 2.78 6.77 10.62 1.64 Ysleta 6.24 6.47 2.74 4.96 4.68 2.22 1.13.47 inches received during August. mun snznlnm HANSFORO LTREE LIPSCONB '5- .~ *" I‘, HARTLEY moons nurcum- noszms nonuu. sou MOMMA POTTER CARSON GRAY WHEELER our same amonu. ‘m DONLEY °°'-L"‘°5' smonc wom PARMER cmno suasnzn am mu .°"'L°' LRESS ‘ O Q ‘ _ ‘ i’ wuev <3 n FLOYD uonzv c0111.: \"'\- VIILBAR- “mm l i roam can 4 | fix‘ In" g l l m HUWLEY LUBBQW CROSBY DICKEN$ KING KNOX BAYLDR KRCNER ' é ' CUOKE GIAYSQN . FLNNIN a LII“ D RNE" so"; DI T‘ T ‘ a 3 2 - ' *' r: CASS vonxuu "ream LYNN can near n-usxsu Snag; vouue JACK ms: neuron mun-film“ uowxms c“? g. ‘- now l ' ‘j ACIJEL PALO DALLAS f‘? I ‘ms “w” -w9'°“' 915% wuss DAWSON aoaoen scunnv FISHER JONES “H,” swans‘ PM‘) a nmm “up V“ _ _ _ "use" . ‘ Ill“ ZANDT _ H000 _ J0“ nus -i' Auonzws vunrm ‘kn ncnzu. noun 1mm mun-um Asruvgi “n” gig,‘ l - euoeasou ' ' \»< NAVARRO Z‘ , . _< HILL - , 2|. use I Lqvme vmqxgz1 scroa lmouup (was fizz- coue “mm-s ma.“ aosuuz ./\_ >-._.(\F:ETE°_"E oznson ' . mmmrou LIME- - . IMLENNAN ' stone‘ ‘Que OULBERSON I 0 wmo _ CRANE "no" “us” ' To "M5 Xconvuu. LEON nousrou u — ’ X nzsves mo" snssn GONG“, McOULLOG sm Lmnss\ .\ “us - ___ m" \ ' ' 5"“ ' _ noesnr- /' - I / . * ' sou , m“ ' n:'° " scnwcusn “mo aunu:r)~-\_ “w. / 0 “m”. m“ \_m£' a T1’ . ' A105 ‘I M; OMS _ PEOOS CROIZKE mson. Lune vtukuso" '/ a A; \_'__\“,:L" ‘ v _ _ . . _ l-o. _ mmzsc o ' - . "HIM! . $_ suflou KIIIBLE amusing-ELMO , “m5 L“ ' “Emmy ' "renazu. l . _ {armor ‘Tm -' um" m” l ' _ _ KERR - xkms _ / ms“ i’ HARRIS __ , "£51010 I snzwsrsn "L "We ‘Wm - “o”? com‘ mMQLy-nvenz/ . 1i» ‘ - "E"- . swarm v DAM ' kownoo ronr\‘ é‘; _ . BEN ‘ I , LUPE / j \. 3 . - - \ KmuEv WALDE i MEDIM LBEXAR/ GONZ;T>\?AV‘CA vmAR XQZORIA ‘ _ _ _ WILSON. . \ \ - / oewm . \__\ 1mm“ mo ATEfl-“IRNE n KSONY""‘°°"”‘I a: . ' v a Jk CQTTQN VARIETY TESTING AREAS g 9 -——/ “u” ' . . _ i m A u“: '“ * _ nzruclo Area " Name _ Test Locations L "LI-E" / ‘ 1 Lower Rio Grande Val- Weslaco. Batesvllle. Carnzo _ jsfilmo ley 6. Winter Garden Springs. Rangerville 0 " 2 South Texas (S Lower Beeville. Victoria, Port La- ‘mu w,“ 5 ' ‘as ' ‘ Guli Coast vaca. Robstown ZJLEBERG- ‘K STANDARD TEST LOCATIONS i 3 Upper Gulf Coast Angleton. Su_gar Land m m , OTHER TEST LOCATIONS 4 East Texas No test locations 5 Blackland Prairie and Prairie View, A1S=M Planta- mu $30 ws-Krvwvv _ Central Texas tion. Temple, Greenville _ 6 Cross Timbers Denton, Stephenv1lle 3n" _ 7 Rolling Plains Iowa Park. Chillicothe, Spur /monmo mlicv 8 High Plains Lubbock. . Plamview, Big _ Spnng cmsaon 9 Trans-Pecos Balmorhea, Pecos l0 Upper Rio Grande Valley Ysleta i ken into account in determining the length of - the test period. At the Texas Station, 3 years a s been designated as the normal test period for ftton varieties, and the data are summarized ,nd published at the end of each 3-year period. v This bulletin is the third in the series of 3- summaries. It presents data from cotton ariety tests conducted during 1954-56 at 25 lo- tions in Texas. Similar bulletins were pub- ‘shed for the 3-year periods of 1948-50 and 1951- , , bulletins 739 and 788, respectively. This pulletin differs from the two previous publica- 'ons in two major respects: data are presented ‘or outfield tests in addition to the regional ndard tests and data are presented for all va- pieties tested rather than for only the regional ndards. a l TESTING REGIONS AND LOCATIONS I Because of the great diversity in climate, soils I d production practices, the State has been di- “ded into three regions for cotton variety test- ,4 purposes. Region 1 includes the predomi- antly irrigated areas of the Lower Rio Grande alley, Winter Garden and Trans-Pecos areas; egion 2 includes the High and Rolling Plains; egion 3 includes the coastal, central and eastern eas, or the remainder of the State. To further define areas similar in growing nditions and production practices, these broad gions have been subdivided into 10 areas, each j which is more or less distinct from the others _“ soils, climate and production practices. These I s, together withtest designations and loca- ns, are shown on page 4. The three regions i; the test locations within them are as follows: REGION 1 I LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY, WINTER GARDEN AND TRANS-PECOS Substation No. 15, Weslaco, (irrigated) Rangerville, Hidalgo county (irrigated) v Batesville, Zavala county (irrigated) Carrizo Springs, Dimmit county (irrigated) ' Substation No. 9, Balmorhea (irrigated) i Pecos, Reeves county (irrigated) Substation No. 17, Ysleta (irrigated) REGION 2 HIGH AND ROLLING PLAINS Substation No. 16, Iowa Park (irrigated) Substation No. 12, Chillicothe (dryland) Substation Ne, 7, Spur (dryland) , Substation N6. 8, Lubbock (dryland) l= Substation No. 8, Lubbock (irrigated) “Paymaster Farm, Plainview, Hale county ._ (irrigated) jfU. S. Field Station, Big Spring (dryland) REGION 3 CENTRAL, COASTAL AND EASTERN Substation No. 1, Beeville (dryland) Robstown, Nueces county (dryland) Victoria, Victoria county (dryland) Port Lavaca, Calhoun county (dryland) Substation No. 3, Angleton (dryland) Sugarland, Fort Bend county (dryland) Substation No. 18, Prairie View (dryland) A&M Plantation, College Station (dryland) Substation No. 5, Temple (dryland) U. S. Cotton Field Station, Greenville (dryland) Substation No. 6, Denton (dryland) Substation No. 20, Stephenville (dryland) LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF TESTS The tests conducted each yea-r were of two types—standard or on-station tests and outfield tests. The standard test locatio-ns were generally located at various substations and other units of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and at certain U. S. field stations and were supervised by station personnel. Outfield tests were located on farms of cooperating farmers and were super-W vised by personnel of the substation serving the area, 1n cooperation with agricultural agents in counties in which the tests were located. The standard tests include the regional-stand- ard varieties, a group of 16 varieties designated as appropriate for the region and held constant 1n the tests over the 3-year period. In addition, some of the standard tests included supplemental varieties and strains which were not always test- ed in each of the 3 years. Outfield tests did not necessarily include the regional standard varie- ties, but rather a group of varieties of more local interest. » Generally, all varieties and strains, whether standard or supplemental, tested at a location were arranged in the same experimental design which permitted both inter- and intra-group com- parisons. TEST DESIGN AND ANALYSIS Tests were of randomized block or triple lat- tice design, depending on the number of entries. Where possible and appropriate, both random- ized block and triple lattice analyses were made. The lattice analyses were of no advantage in most cases and all statistics reported in this bulletin were taken from the randomized block analyses. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS The period, 1954-56, had deficient moisture throughout most of the State. This extended drouth caused the low yields for many of the tests conducted, and in some cases the tests were abandoned. ‘ Meteorological data were not available for all testing locations during the 3-year period. Table 1 gives information on the annual and seasonal rainfall for those locations for which such data are available. These data should be valuable in the interpretation of varietal performance during the testing period reported. TEST RESULTS Data reported in this bulletin include yield of lint per acre, lint percentage, boll size and staple length. Statistical analyses of yield were made to determine the significance of differences among average yields. These least significant differ- ences (L.S.D.) , calculated on the basis of odds of 19 to 1, are shown for the yearly and the 3-year averages. The L.S.D. value is the amount by which average yields must differ before differ- ences between any two averages can be assumed to be real and not due to chance. In some cases, the differences were not significant (n/s) , mean- ing that under the conditions of the test none of the varieties had average yields which could be considered different from those of other varieties in the test. Non-significant differences in aver- . age yields were noted particularly in some of the combined analyses; a considerable variety-year , interaction, or failure of varieties to perform the same in different years, was a contributing fac- 5 tor. To make this bulletin more useful, the. varie- i. ties included in the tables were-fnot limited to the I regional standards. Data were reported for other commercially available varieties which were test- ' ed during the period, generally for a minimum of i 2 years. In a few cases, data were available for only a single year and some of these were includ; ; ed. Where all varieties shown in the tables were { not grown in all years, a comparable average is i given. Such averages eliminate yield differences _ due to seasonal effects. Region l—Lower Rio Grande Valley. Winter Garden and Trans-Pecos Cotton in this region is produced largely un- The varieties of main interest. consist mostly of open-boll Upland types with‘ medium to long staples. A type of cotton known der irrigation. TABLE 2. REGION 2—HIGH AND ROLLING PLAINS—SUMMARY OF AVERAGE YIELDS OF REGIONAL COTTON f~ VARIETY TESTS, 1954-56 " ' Dryland locations Variety Chillicothe Spur‘ Lubbock Big Spring’ Average) Blightmaster 194 (5)3 468 (1) 217 (7) 313 (11) 259 Western Stormproof 206 (2) 362 (7) 234 (1) 322 (1) 258 _ Lockett Stormproof N0. 1 219 (1) 339 (11) 215 (8) 326 (9) 255 I Deltapine TPSA 188 (9) 354 (9) 224 (4) 34'8 (2) 254 l Stormmaster 183 (10) 386 (2) 220 (6) 340 (5) 253 P Northern Star 11 193 (6) 375 (6) 225 (3) 319 (10) 252 Lockett 140 192 (8) 378 (5) 209 (11) 342 (4) 252 Paymaster 54B 198 (4) 378 (4) 198 (13) 345 (3) 251 _ Watson’s Empire 179 (13) 358 (8) 226 (2) 333 (6) 248 ‘ Lankart Sel. 57-5 204 (3) 348 (10) 214 (9) 301 (13) 245 wFloyd 8G 182 (11) 315 (12) 203 (12) 331 (8) 237 ‘ “Paymaster 101 193 (7) 383 (3) 191 (15) 300 (14) 237 _ Bagley’s B17 Rowden 171 (14) 230 (15) 211 (10) 332 (7) 226 C. A. 119 162 (15) 303 (13) 221 (5) 294 (15) 226 ' Rogers’ Texacala 5455 - 180 (12) 273 (14) 197 (14) 308 (12) 224 ‘ L.S.D. n/s 88 n/s n/s n/s ' Irrigated locations Variety Iowa Park Lubbock Plainview‘ Average Paymaster 54B 602 (1) 700 (5) 766 (1) 680 . Lankart Sel. 57-5 596 (2) 688 (6) 642 (4) 642 i Paymaster 101 495 (6) 701 (4) 673 (2) 617 i Watson’s Empire , 462 (11) 739 (1) 604 (8) i 601 . Western Stormproof a - 480 (9) 722 (2) 575 (12) 594 5 Deltapine TPSA 494 (7) _ 703 (3) 570 (13) 592 f Stormmaster 463 (10) 682 (8) 630 (6) 587 a Rogers’ Texacala 5455 514' (3) 659 (11) 583 (10) 586 Lockett 140 504 (5) 645 (13) 618 (7) 585 T. Northern Star 11 509 (4) 651 (12) 590 (9) 582 C. A. 119 458 (12) 666 (10) 632 (5) 579 Blightmaster 427 (15) 675 (9) - 644 (3) 574' ‘ \ Lockett Stormproof No. 1 454 (13) 688 (7) 578 (11) 573 Floyd 8G 488 (8) 644 (14) 570 (14) 554 ' Bagley’s B17 Rowden 441 (14) 601 (15) 472 (15) 509 L.S.D. 88 89 116 57 ‘I955 only. 21954 and 1955. “Ranks at the location are shown in parentheses. ‘I954 and 1956. 6 -.» Pima is grown on limited acreages in the ns-Pecos area. See American-Egyptian Cotton page 7. jThe areas included in this region are charac- i.- ed by. the predominant types of cottons grown these may differ markedly from one area to ther. For this reason, no standards were "gnated for this region and only a few varieties ‘I tested at all locations. Consequently, it was ractical to make a regional summary. Performance data for the individual test loca- i: in Region 1 are presented in Tables 4 gugh 10 of the Appendix. 'on 2—High and Rolling Plains lCotton is grown in this region under both irri- ;-~ and dryland conditions. Data for the yield A ormance of regional standard varieties tested er both conditions are given in Table 2. j he 3-year yields for the dryland tests aver- 1 about one-half bale‘ per acre and showed only ll and non-significant differences among aver- _; yields. Yields for the irrigated tests were iderably higher; experimental errors were filler‘ and more reliable differences in perform- '- were obtained. n this region, harvesting is done by hand ing and machine stripping. Cotton may ,d in the field for a considerable time during fall. For this reason, varieties with storm ‘tant characters (closed boll) often are pre- V: A number of storm-resistant or “storm- j ” varieties are available which are satisfac- _~ from the standpoint of yield and suitability A al harvesting practices. erformance data for the individual test lo- ’ ns in Region 2 are presented in Tables 11 t gh 17 of the Appendix. ONAL COTTON VARIETY TEST, 1954-56 Region 3—Central. Coastal and Eastern Areas Yield performance of the 16 regional-standard varieties is summarized in Table 3. All of the tests in this region were conducted under rain- fall (dryland) conditions and yields generally averaged about 300 pounds of lint per acre. This broad region presents a wide range in growing conditions and no one variety predominates throughout the entire region. In the southern and coastal areas, such types as the Deltapines, Empires, Stonevilles and similar stocks are Widely grown, while in the central Blackland areas, Lan- kart, Rowden and Mebane types are most exten- sively grown. Storm-resistant varieties are in- creasing in popularity in these areas. Deltapine, Empire and Stoneville types also predominate in the bottomlands and river valleys. Tables 18 through 30 of the Appendix pre- sent performance data for the individual test lo- cations in Region 3. 7 American-Egyptian Cotton American-Egyptian cotton, commonly known as Pima cotton, is grown to a limited extent in all - » cotton producing areas in the State west of the Pecos River. Approximately 70 percent of the American-Egyptian cotton produced in Texas is grown in El Paso county where it occupies about 40 percent of the acreage planted to cotton. American-Egyptian cotton is a specialized type of cotton adapted primarily to the arid irrigated areas of far West Texas, New Mexico and Ari- zona. When grown where adapted, the cotton produces a high quality fiber 1 % to 1 1/2 inches in length. The cotton must be ginned on roller gins to preserve the fiber quality. 1E a. REGION 3—CENTRAL, -COASTAL AND EASTERN AREAS—SUMMARY OF AVERAGE YIELDS OF 1 at the location are shown in parentheses. . Angle- Prairie A&M Green- Stephen- Aver- 1 Variety Beeville‘ ton‘ View Plantation Temple ville Denton ville age L-Fox 256 <8)” 594 (7) 419 (2) 434 (4) s01 (1) 377 (1) 226 (1) 194 (4) 343 'iter 54B 272 (3) 552 (14) 424 (1) 441 (2) 257 (8) 355 (5) 192 (10) 190 (5) 328 ine TPSA 228 (11) 608 (4) 356 (7) 478 (1) 260 (6) 347 (9) 201 (7) 181 (6) 325 - Sel. 57-5 220 (12) 569 (10) 382 (4) 438 (3) 277 (2) 362 (4) 202 (6) 194 (3) 325 ine 15 206 (15) 614 (3) 360 (5) 399 (12) 254 (9) 377 (2) 161 (13) 198 (1) 318 ’s Empire 240 (9) 578 (8) 386 (3) 426 (6) 260 (7) 322 (11) 193 (9) 164 (13) 318 at 140 266 (6) 624 (1) 335 (11) 413 (9) 244 (11) 349 (8) 215 (2) 178 (9) 317 ’ 9169 274 (2) 600 (5) 347 (9) 426 (7) 230 (14) 354 (6) 203 (5) 197 (2) 314 ‘,'lle 2B 269 (5) 598 (6) 354 (8) 417 (8) 264 (3) 321 (12) 149 (14) 181 (7) 313 o. t Stormproof _ f» 269 (4) 568 (11) 358 (6) 404 (10) 263 (4) 310 (14) 209 (3) 178 (8) 311 Star 11 284 (1) 566 (12) 343 (10) 395 (14) 242 (12) 352 (7) 204 (4) 173 (10) 310 100 Wilt 262 (7) 617 (2) 321 (12) 432 (5) 236 (13) 321 (13) 139 (16) ~ 159 (14) 305 *8’G 229 (10) 576 (9) 309 (14) 376 (15) 229 (15) 363 (3) 200 (8) 151 (15) 295 ‘cala 5455 212114) 538 (15) 319 (13) 398 (13) 261 (5) 297 (15) 187 (11) 171 (11) 291 .‘1517C 215 (13) 516 (16) 291 (15) 402 (11) 250 (10) 280 (16) 141 (15) 167 (12) 275 ’sB17 Rowden 204 (16) 566 (13) 285 (16) 335 (16) 221 (16) 327 (10) 169 (12) 121 (16) 269 1 .D n/s 82 n/s n/s n/s 58 43 33 25 . d 1956. Pima S-1 is the only variety 0f American- Egyptian cotton grown commercially at this time. This cotton matures considerably later than Up- land cotton and requires a long growing season. Bolls are considerably smaller than those of Up- land cotton and higher picking rates must be paid. The lint percentage is low and the seed are slick. When grown out of its adapted environment, the plant often grows extremely rank, does not flow- er until late in the season and produces very few bolls. Under such conditions, insects may become severe on the cotton. Yields of American-Egyptian cotton vary con- siderably depending on seasonal conditions, but yields usually are two-thirds to three-fourths of Upland cotton. Varieties are tolerant to Verti- cillium wilt and the cotton often is grown on .wilt-infested soils. The cotton, however, is quite susceptible to bacterial blight. At the present time, American-Egyptian cot- ton is grown under a government acreage-allot- ment program. Allotments are separate from those for Upland cotton. VARIETIES RECOMMENDED No single and thoroughly determinant criter- ion exists for making varietal recommendations. The present 3-year period was particularly diffi- cult because of drouth and other conditions which caused more than usual variability within and be- tween tests. Even though yield is in most cases the most important character to be considered in choosing a variety, a number of other agronomic characters also should be considered. The most common are lint percentage, boll size and fiber length. These characters deserve consideration for their individual worth and because they are “associated with or have an affect on yield. Being fruit characters, or measurement of the boll or parts of its contents, they are less subject to en- vironmental influences than is a character, such as yield, which is expressed by the weight of the fiber of the total number of bolls harvested from a given area of land—an acre. Table 31 gives average values for lint percentage, boll size and staple length for those varieties which appeared in at least six tests during the 1954-56 testing period. The high and low ranges for each char- acter also are given. These ranges show that the characters may vary considerably from place to place and from season to season, and that there was more variability in boll size than in the other two characters. Nevertheless, the average val- ues for the characters shown form a reliable basis for rough comparisons. Adaptation to local harvesting methods, ob- servation by professional cotton workers, farmer preference, availability of seed and special factors all help to determine the varieties best suited to a given area. The varieties recommended for the various areas do not necessarily include all of the high-yield group in a given test since it was be- 8 lieved more important to select varieties which‘ perform-more consistently over a period of years rather than those which fluctuated greatly in yield from year to year. - The individual producer should recognize that é his particular conditions may not be represented - by any of the test locations, and he should con- Y» sider all of the available information in the light of his individual production ‘problems in making j a decision as to which variety he should grow. Detailed data in the tables in the Appendix should A be studied before a final decision is reached on the variety or varieties to be grown. a i Following are the 10 production areas as i. shown on page 4, and the varieties recommended for each area: AREA 1 Deltapine 15, Deltapine TPSA and similar types Empire WR and Watson’s Empire Delfos 9169 Stoneville 2B and similar types Texacala 5455 . For dryland and limited irrigation; Northern. Star, Texacala, Lankart and Mebane. AREA 2 Deltapine 15, Deltapine TPSA and similar types Empire WR and Watson’s Empire Stoneville 2B and similar types Northern Star 11 Lankart AREA 3 Deltapine 15, Deltapine TPSA and similar types Empire WR and Watson’s Empire Stoneville 2B and similar types Delfos 9169 AREA 4 D & PL-Fox Empire WR and Watson’s Empire Stoneville 2B and similar types AREA 5 . Bottomland or with supplemental irrigation Deltapine 15, Deltapine TPSA and simil types . i Empire WR, and Watson’s Empire Stoneville 2B and similar types Uplands: a Paymaster 54B Lankart Mebane Rowden' D & PL-Fox a For mechanical stripping; Western Sto ‘ proof, Blightmaster, and Lockett 88. - AREA 6 Deltapine 15, Deltapine TPSA or similar i types f ~ Empire WR, and Watson’s Empire " Northern Star - Lankart Mebane For mechanical stripping: Lockett 88, Blight- “aster, and Lankart. . Western Stormproof Lockett 88 j; Blightmaster .‘ Lankart Paymaster 54B Northern Star Deltapine types EA 8 STORM-RESISTANT TYPES: Blightmaster Lockett 88 Paymaster 101 Western Stormproof Lankart v Northern ‘Star NORMAL-BOLL TYPES: l Deltapine types Paymaster 54B Empire types REA 9 a Acala 1517C p Acala 1517BR Deltapine types i: Stoneville types q Empire types = Pima S1 '~EA 10 f Acala 1517C , Acala 1517BR a Mesilla Valley Acala Pima s1 7R é ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .The success of the cotton variety testing pro- am is due to the continued cooperation and in- est of many workers concerned directly with e organization and conduct of these tests. We . knowledge the participation of the following co- rkers who conducted the tests and gathered data reported in this bulletin: "R. A. Hall and Lucas Reyes, Substation No. 1, i, ‘ville; J. C. Smith, E. R. Cozart and Ercell Jet- iSubstation No. 3, Angleton; W. R. Cowley and ; . Hubbard, Substation No. 15, Weslaco; J. C. illiams and O. E. ‘Smith, Substation No. 18, iirie View; R. M. Smith and E. D. Cook, Sub- ‘tion No. 5, Temple; D. D. Porter, U. S. Cotton _ld Station, Greeiiville; D. I. Dudley and N. V. urmond, Substation No. 6, Denton; J. R. Quin- ? Substation No. 12, Chillicothe; L. E. Brooks, station No. 16, Iowa Park; C. E. Fisher and I l Burnett, Substation No. 7, Spur; D. L. Jones » L. L. Ray, Substation No. 8, Lubbock; F. E. Keating, U. S. Field Station, Big Spring; A. A. Melton and J. J. Bayles, Substation No. 9, Balmor- hea, P. J. Lyerly, M. D. Bryant and L. S. Stith, Substation No. 17, Ysleta; B. A. Perry, C. S. Hove- land, R. A. Schwartzbeck and J. A. Tynan, Sub- station No. 19, Crystal City; and B. C. Langley and W. E. McCullough, Substation No. 20, Steph- enville. We acknowledge the assistance of the follow- ing county agricultural agents and cooperators for their help in conducting the outfield tests: R. E. Nolan, Nueces County Agent, Robstown; R. I. Worthington, Fort Bend County Agent, Rich- mond; C. L. Cook, Calhoun County Agent, Port Lavaca; D. B. McCombs, Victoria County Agent, Victoria; F. C. Brunnemann, Cameron County Agent, San Benito; H. D. Loden, Paymaster Farm, Plainview; and B. W. Frierson, Texas Prison Sys- tem, Sugarland. Statistical analyses of the data were made by R. L. Smith, Jr. and Brad Lisenbee of the Sta- tistical Laboratory of the Texas Agricultural Ex- periment Station. Classing of samples from the tests was done by J. M. Ward, Department of Agricultural Eco-u ' nomics and Sociology. To all of those listed, we extend our grateful appreciation. APPENDIX The tables presented here give performance summaries for the varieties tested during the 3- year period, 1954-56. Only those varieties which have been released officially and for which seed are available commercially are included. Where all varieties listed were grown in all years, an arithmetic average of yield was com- puted and L.S.D. values were calculated from a combined statistical analysis. In some cases, all of the varieties listed were not grown in all years and an overall statistical analysis was not pos- sible. In these instances, statistical analysis was made only on the yields of the varieties grown in all years to provide L.S.D. values which might serve as guides to judge the differences among average yields. Comparable averages are report- ‘ ed for such tests to eliminate seasonal differences. Explanation oi Table Headings Lint %—percentage of lint in seed cotton. Staple length—-classer’s length in 32’s of an inch. Boll size-number of bolls required to produce one pound of seed cotton. L.S.D.-—-the amount by which average yields must differ before the differences can be assumed, at odds of 19 to 1, to be real differences and not due to chance. Non-significance (n/s) de- notes that the observed differences among average yields were not statistically signifi- cant. ‘ TABLE 6. BATESVILLE—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, 1954-551 Pounds of lint per acre Compar- able Lint Staple Boll Variety 1954 1955 average % length size Deltapine TPSA 919 1605 1262 38 32 74 Stoneville 2B 880 1593 1236 35 33 64 __Lockett Stormproof No. 1 912 1232 37 30 72 ' Arkot 2-1 823 1595 1209 34 34 70 D & PL — Fox 912 1484 1198 36 32 86 Delfos 9169 946 1426 1186 34 34 72 Coke!‘ 100 Staple 773 1093 33 33 79 Watson’s Empire 769 1089 34 33 61 Watson’s Stoneville 62 743 1063 35 34 96 Northern Star 11 686 1006 36 32 69 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 694 1309 1002 38 33 74 Half & Half 952 972 37 28 73 Qualla 60-6 617 937 36 31 56 Acala 1517C 618 938 33 35 71 Mesilla Valley Acala 498 818 34 40 70 L.S.D. 181 243 n/s 1Test discontinued in 1955. r TABLE 7. CARRIZO SPRINGS—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, 1955-561 Pounds of lint per acre Lint Staple Boll Variety 1955 1956 Average % length size D 8x PL-—Fox 1111 1065 1088 36 34 70 Stoneville 3202 1094 932 1013 36 33 74 Stoneville 2B 1.048 870 959 34 33 69 Deltapine 15 969 895 932 38 34 74 Deltapine TPSA 966 837 902 37 34 70 Lankart Sel. 57-5 859 944 902 38 32 54 Bobshaw 1A 1004 703 854 36 32 76 Delfos 9169 958 719 838 34 35 72 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 803 868 835 36 34 70 Arkot 2-1 782 792 787 32 34 71 Floyd 8G 767 798 782 35 32 58 L.S.D. 214 108 n/s 1N0 test before 1955. 10 TABLE 4. WESLACO—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, TABLE 8. BALMORHEA—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, . 1954-56 1954-56 Pounds of lint per acre Pounds of lint per acre Comparable Lint Staple Boll Comparable Lint Staple Boll Variety 1954 1955 1956 average % length size Variety 1954 1955 1956 average o length size Stoneville 3202 1095 1320 1394 1270 36 34 76 Acala 1517C 1164 949 1063 1058 38 35 72 Delfos 9169 1016 1311 1357 1228 34 36 69 Stoneville 7 852 1076 1035 38 32 70 ‘ Coker 100 Wilt 1187 1443 1224 35 35 73 Deltapine 15 897 1028 1034 37 33 80 Deltapine TPSA 1043 1223 1379 1215 36 34 79 Arizona 44 1120 859 1069 1016 37 33 66 . Bobshaw 1A 1104 1231 1314 1213 36 33 77 Stoneville 2B 707 1163 1006 37 32 74 Deltapine 15 1133 1143 1360 1212 37 34 77 Acala 1517BR 752 1041 3 968 36 34 70 ~ Rogers’ Texacala 5455 1269 1304 1196 37 34 68 Watson’s Empire 1085 844 963. ~ 964 37 33 70 l Watson’s Empire 1064 1259 1250 1191 35 34 60 Deltapine TPSA 1172 825 886 f“ 961 36 33 78 Acala 1517C 1013 1269 1281 1188 35 37 65 Hi-Bred 1090 799 948 39 29 69 ' Northern Star 11 1030 1237 1286 1184 35 34 61 Delfos 9169 1090 675 1032 932 34 33 76 A. Deltapine STPSA 943 1238 1357 1179 36 33 75 Watson’s Stoneville 62 1088 837 854 926 36 32 74 = Plains 932 1196 ‘I393 1174 35 34 69 Bobshaw 1A 997 867 910 925 37 32 74 ' D & PL — Fox 997 1207 1286 1163 36 34 79 Acala 4-42 1163 669 930 921 37 33 61 . Acala 4-42 773 1230 1278 1094 36 34 56 Earlistaple (EH-808) 743 945 915 36 34 76. Rogers’ Texacala 883 1191 1172 1082 35 34 68 Mesilla Valley Acala 966 767 956 896 35 36 ‘I i . . . 146 120 79 n/s Rogers’ Acala 111 1079 679 882 36 32 I71 Arkot 2-1 869 838 857 34 32 72 . Original Texacala 1016 699 858 858 36 33 74 Lankart Sel. 57-5 820 736 850 38 32 64_ Bagley’s B17 Rowden 1000 665 836 36 32 72 i. Rogers’ Texacala 5455 1018 661 736 805 36 32 72 . TABLE 5. RANGERVILLE—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY Floyd 3G 549 369 730 35 32 7g f TESTS, 1954-561 Pima S-1 702 441 682 608 34 41 134 ' L.S.D. 218 161 116 " Pounds of lint per acre Lint Staple Boll Variety 1954 1955 Average % length size D & PL—-Fox 726 1002 864 36 34 83 Deltapine 15 665 1055 860 39 34 83 Deltapine TPSA 752 969 860 38 34 86 » plains 563 1033 343 36 34 76 TABLE 9. PECOS-SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS’; Stoneville 3202 670 996 833 37 34 83 1954-56 Deltapine STPSA 634 1007 820 37 34 87 _ Watson’s Empire 604 984 794 37 33 64 Pounds of lint per a0!!! . Northern Star 11 573 995 784 36 33 68 4 Acala 1517C 515 1011 763 36~ 35 70 Comparable Lint Staple I» Delfos 9169 619 887 753 34 34 78 Variety 1954 1955 1956 average % length si , Roger's Texacala 540 874 707 36 34 76 > Acala 4-42 511 379 595 37 34 63 Acala 1517C 1555 1197 1277 1343 37.8 35 65 L_s_])_ 112 104 n/s Acala 504 1385 1213 1330 37.8 32 g Deltapine TPSA 1483 1200 1240 40.7 33 lTest 10st in 195a Acala 1517BR 134s 1000 124s 1130 38.7 34 Mesilla Valley Acala 1106 853 1112 1024 34.8 37 Earlistaple (EH-808) 1158 614 965 912 34.6 34 TABLE 10. YSLETA-SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TES ' 1954-56 < Pounds of lint per acre _ Comparable Lint Staple i’ Variety 1954 1955 1956 average % length :. Acala 504 1236 708 1038 37.8 32 Deltapine TPSA 1084 1182 1003 39.2 34 Acala 1517C 1132 809 1019 987 38.2 36 Acala 1517BR 641 1195 981 38.4 35 Acala 4-42 1147 491 886 37.5 33 Mesilla Valley Acala 947 484 1021 818 34.8 38 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 938 538 804 39.4 32 Earlistaple (EH-808) 896 528 956 793 34.6 36 TABLE 11. IOWA PARK—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TES A 1954-56 Pounds of lint per acre "' A Lint Staple 1' Variety 1954 1955 1956 Average % length Paymaster 54B 618 516 672 602 37 30 Lankart Sel. 57-5 451 640 697 596 39 30 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 448 514 581 514 37 32 Northern Star 11 . 497 457 573 509 35 31 Lockett 140 474 472 565 504 37 28 Paymaster 101 430 502 554 495 36 30 Deltapine TPSA 496 468 519 494 37 31 Floyd 8G 552 436 475 488 35 31 Western Stormproof 536 423 482 480 37 30 Stormmaster 437 409 542 463 35 30 Watson’s Empire 447 448 491 462 34 31 C. A. 119 478 392 503 458 35 30 Lockett Stormproof No. 1 474 400 487 454 36 29 Bagley’s B17 Rowden 450 441 432 441 34 31 Blightmaster 490 377 414 427 35 30 L.S.D. 85 70 42 88 2 ABLE 12. CHILLICOTHE—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY ESTS, 1954-56 TABLE 15. RIETY TESTS, 1954-56 LUBBOCK-SUMMARY OF IRRIGATED COTTON VA- Pound of lint per acre Comparable Lint Staple Boll Pounds of lint per acre Lint Staple Boll Variety 1954 1955 1956 average % 19118111 size Variety 1954 1955 1956 Average % length size ‘Lockett Stormproof N0. 1 86 336 235 219 36 29 95 Watson’s Empire 611 856 751 739 39 32 58 0 305 216 212 36 31 78 Dunn 7 605 767 799 724 41 29 67 123 202 209 35 27 90 Western Stormproof 683 724 758 722 40 31 71 114 305 205 208 38 30 101 Deltapine TPSA 567 770 773 703 38 32 76 _ 309 203 203 37 31 70 Paymaster 101 559 802 741 701 41 31 66 510m Swrmliroof 104 302 211 205 38 30 91 Paymaster 54B 506 784 810 700 42 31 67 118111 Sel- 611W 313 133 205 33 31 79 Lankart Sel. 57-5 585 705 775 688 42 31 54 ' 8ft 361- 57-5 90 303 215 204 39 31 75 Lockett Stormproof No. 1 599 743 724 688 40 ~ 30 77 126 277 202‘ 202 35 31 33 Stormmaster 577 707 764 682 38 31 72 296 199 200- s6 s2 92 Blightmaster 526 789 711 675 ss s1 67 101 272 195 199 33 31 89 c. A. 119 505 746 746 666 s7 s1 72 90 324 130 193 37 31 95 Acala 1517C ' 532 733 728 664 39 34 64 86 212 195 34 31 94 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 523 631 824 659 38 33 67 93 292 195 34 32 106 Northern Star 11 585 749 619 651 39 31 63 120 284 180 195 36 29 97 Hl-Bred 540 639 766 648 42 29 67 81 317 2 188 195 35 31 77 Lockett 140 . 549 670 716 645 38 30 68 90 289 204 194 36 29 112 Floyd 8G 509 587 736 644 38 31 61 1(7): 1g? Balslglgfs B17 Rowden 45g 673 680 601 34 31 60 . . . ‘ 7 76 56 89 93 275 210 193 36 31 101 ‘ 86» 301 189 192 37 29 94 86 203 191 35 30 85 -' 113 264 188 188 39 28 91 i twine TPSA 92 254 219 188 36 32 104 e 305 165 187 38 30 101 ~ ant Stripper Strain 106 258 184 36 30 82 v rmmaster 85 296 169 183 33 30 105 Yll 8G 113 215 219 182 35 30 87 'gers’ Texacala 5455 76 282 182 180 36 32 103 TABLE 16. PLAINVIEW—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, Moon's Empire 70 286 180 179 33 31 84 1954-561 ' ley’s B17 Rowden 76 295 141 171 33 31 78 81 240 166 162 35 31 110 Pounds of lint per acre 61 2211 187 1/56 32 31 87 1 L S I B 27 7 49 n s int tap e oll Variety 1954 1956 Average % length size Paymaster 54B 769 764 766 40 30 66 Paymaster 101 698 648 673 38 30 65 __ _ gllgllgtmaséttir 690 599 644 36 32‘ 70 LE 1s. SPUR—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TEST, 19551 Cflafu, ° ' 57 5 g3; ggfg i3 2‘; " Pounds 5r lint Lint Staple Boll 3311331213’ Vamiy P" M" % lmgth Si" Watson’s Empire 696 511 604 s6 s1 60 468 40 30 71 Northern Star 11 644 536 590 36 32 66 428 41 26 63 Lockett Stormproof N0. 1 613 543 578 39 30 68 22 2» 2» 2222-" 222221262" 222 22 22 22 e apme 2 g2 g3 g Floyd sc. 617 522 570 s6 ss 62 - 7 m“ 54B 378 36 28 64 Baileys B17 Rowden 402' 43g s6 s2: 64 m 14o ; s78 s7 26 72 ' ' ' 7 365 38 28 66 ' .» tern Stormproof Z362 41 3g 70 ' l. - 62 37 2 60 ‘ _ 11's Empire 358 40 31 57 fhpine TPSA 354 39 30 82 art Sel. 57-5 348 40 30 56 _ ett Stormproof No. 1 339 39 28 72 _ 11 sc s15 s7 s0 60 _ YA. 119 303 36 29 63 . ‘a Texacala 5455 273 36 30 75 TABLE 17. BIG SPRING—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, ' ey’s B17 Rowden 230 33 31 62 1954-561 " S-D. 88 _ Pounds of lint per acre 2 lost in 1954 and 1956 because of drouth. L_ t Sta l B n 1n p e o Variety 1954 1955 Average % length size q Plains 545 223 384 36 31 82 ‘I ‘ D & PL g- Fox 534 222 278 i8 32 82 9 _ BB _ MAR DR L N '11 _ Western tormproof 448 195 22 0 29 80 8"“ Y °F Y A " °N VA 2492M ., 42 222 222 222 22 2:: 22 4 ative e ane ‘ Pmmds °f lint p" “re 12112122992: “T2114 545 194 s70 s9 s0 77 7R Lint sta 1e B011 Early Fluff 490 231 360 36 31 84 V; vuiet, 1954 1955 1956 Average % length Si“ Bagley’s 79s Master Strain 509 192 s50 s6 s1 6s ‘ Deltapine TPSA 504 192 348 38 31 86 Stormproof 235 17g 240 234 43 29 9g Paymaster 54B 450 241 345 40 30 76 t; g3 232 170 247 233 39 23 93 Lockett 140 508 176 342 40 30 79 257 135 237 230 42 g7 7g Stormmyaster _ 503 176 340 36 30 86 9 20 4 22202 d 222 222 22 22 22 268 182 225 225 42 29 77 a3 e3’ s “w en 2 251 170 252 224 41 31 97 Stufflebeme Stormproof 478 185 332 37 32 73 270 165 227 221 40 29 90 Floyd 8G ' V 490 172 331 37 30 70 213 19g 252 221 41 32 79 Dunn 7 481 180 330 39 30 80 24g 184 212g 220 39 29 90 Kasch LL No. 7 478 179 328 37 30 71 . 255 179 217 217 41 29 94 Lockett Stormproof No. 1 478 174 326 38 29 85 tStormproof No. 1 227 16s 250 215 41 29 79 Lankart Sel- W 437 2°5 321 38 32 72 ,1 seL 57-5 2037; 21778 260 214 43 30 60 Nqrthern Star 11 467 170 319 38 31 82 4 B17 Rowden 1992, 190 24s 211 s7 29 so 311611419481" 452 174 313 36 3° 8° ,_ 140 234 131 263 209 40 27 80 R0gers’ Texacala 5455 430 186 308 38 30 75 jPL__Fox 232 134 256 207 40 30 92 Bryant Stripper Strain 432 182 307 38 31 70 5 . 8G 230 150 229 203 40 29 72 Lankart Sel. 57-5 417 186 301 40 30 74 2 _, 219 131 258 203 42 27 80 Paymaster 101 383 216 300 38 29 86 a m» 54B 22s 1ss 234 19s 41 27 91 C- - 9 437 15° 294 36 3° 92 i ' Texacala 5455 201 12s 26s 197 s5 29 ss Qua!“ 60-7 421 164 292 38 3° 64 ’ ter101 205 159 209 1/91 41 2s s4 L-S-D- 31 48 "/4 . 43 43 42 n s lTest lost in 1956 becahse of drouth. TABLE 18. NUECES COUNTY—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TABLE 22. ANGLETON—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS l TESTS, 1954-561 1954561 Pmmds °f lint P" 3°" Pounds of lint per acre Lint Staple Boll - Variety 1954 1956 Average % length size Variety 1954 1956 Average L2,‘; 81:11:11; Egg Bobshaw 1A 711 464 588 36 32 97 Lockett 140 5 Stonevillfl 2B 71° 441 575 34 32 96 Coker 100 Wilt Deltapine TPSA 659 455 557 37 33 103 Deltapine 15 779 449 514 4o 33 84 Acala 1511c s11 41s 542 s5 s5 s1 Deltapine TPSA 11s 443 603 40 32 83 Northern Star 11 608 460 534 36 32 86 Bobshaw 1A 73s 423 607 3g 32 32 Lockett Stormproof No. 1 654 401 528 37 30 101 Delfos 9169 754 445 5 0 33 34 76 Delfos 9109 s02 45s 52s so s2 ss Stoneville 2B 14o 455 5§ s1 ss 12 1) a PL—-Fox ss2 40s 519 e ss ss 111 D & PL _ Fox 772 416 44494 38 44 84 Stoneville 3202 534 482 508 86 32 94 Watson’s Stoneville s2 149 42s 5ss ss s2 s2 Lockett 14o 5s0 409 50o ss 29 9o Floyd 8G 756 396 576 38 32 62 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 5s4 4so 491 ss s2 90 Lankart 84L 57_5 74o 398 549 44 44 54 Paymaster 54B 5s4 411 48s ss so s4 Locke“ 8404444444004 No 4 7n 425 568 38 40 74 Deltapine 15 5s9 s91 4ss ss s2 102 Northern S4444 n ' 700 432 54 Floyd 8G 4so 4s5 45s s1 s1 ss Paymaster 54B 679 424 55g g3 L-S-D- 95 6° "/8 Rogers’ Texacala 5455 s99 s19 5ss ss s4 1o ,9.- lTest lost in 1955 because of drouth. Acala 1517C 670 363 516 38 34 68 41:, i L.S.D 59 n/s 82 ‘ » TABLE 19. BEEVILLE—SUMMARY OF COTTON VARIETY TESTS, 1954-561 Pounds of lint per acre .__.i______ ‘Test lost in 1956 because of poor stands. l2 1Test lost in 1955 because of poor stands. Lint Staple Boll Variety 1954 1956 Average % length size Northern Star 11 s11 19s 294 so s1 1s Delfos 9169 s00 242 214 ss s2 92 Paymaster 54B sso 21s 212 ss 29 s2 Lockett Stormproof No. 1 227 21;; st ev'll 2B 0 1 1 Lgget; f“ 332 201 m 38 28 85 $ills4hlgz4rgs4 FORT BEND COUNTY-SUMMARY 0r cowron Coker 100 Wilt s40 1s5 2s2 s4 so 94 ESTS- 1954-56 9 D & PL— Fox s20 19s 25s s4 s1 10o _ Watson’s Empire ss4 14s 240 ss s1 1s Pounds of lmt per acre New Mebane 294 175 234 36 30 78 _ ~ Floyd 8G 286 172 229 36 30 76 v , t C0mparable Lint Staple Boll‘ 7 lpieltfipinesgpiAs 13g 811B Y 1954 1955 1956 average % length s an art . 7- é Acala 1511c 204 1ss 215 s5 s4 ss Ilifjkjfilli") 3 623 31° 423 62° 4° 3° 78; Rogers’ Texacala. 5455 234 191 212 ss s1 ss D 4f . 3 69° 76° 616 42 s1 84 Deltapine 15 228 185 206 37 30 100 0 81314118 TPSA 671 778 381 610 40 32 Bagley’s B17 Rowden 2s2 11s 204 s4 so 11 4S)t