Abstract
A field experiment was conducted in 2000 to evaluate narrow (30") and ultra narrow (10") row spacing cotton production systems. The study was conducted at a commercial farm located near Buckeye, AZ. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. The treatments included 10" row spacings that were harvested with a finger stripper, 30" row spacings harvested with a brush stripper, and 30" row spacings harvested with a spindle picker. Plant growth and development was not affected by row spacing throughout the growing season. No significant difference was observed for lint yield however, gin turnout was slightly lower for stripper harvested treatments. Fiber quality measurements were similar for both row spacing with the exception of fiber micronaire which was lower in stripper harvested treatments. Bark was a major problem with stripper harvested treatments with at least 92% of bales receiving a discount compared with 36% of spindle harvested bales.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton growth and development were unaffected by row spacing.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- row spacinge0
- Outcome
- Plant growth and developmente0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Qualifier
- throughout the growing seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant growth and development was not affected by row spacing throughout the growing season.”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Lint yield showed no significant difference among production systems.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- lint yielde0
- Direction
- No significant differencee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant difference was observed for lint yield”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Stripper harvested cotton had slightly lower gin turnout.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- stripper harvested treatmentse0
- Outcome
- gin turnoute0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gin turnout was slightly lower for stripper harvested treatments”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Fiber quality measurements were similar at both row spacings.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- Fiber quality measurementse0
- Direction
- similare0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fiber quality measurements were similar for both row spacing”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Fiber micronaire was lower with stripper harvesting.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- stripper harvested treatmentse0
- Outcome
- fiber micronairee0
- Direction
- lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fiber micronaire which was lower in stripper harvested treatments”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
At least 92% of stripper harvested bales received a bark discount.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- stripper harvested treatmentse1
- Outcome
- bales receiving a discounte0
- Value
- at least 92%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at least 92% of bales receiving a discount”
e1“Bark was a major problem with stripper harvested treatments”
t0“Cotton”
Claim · model-written summary
Thirty-six percent of spindle harvested bales received a bark discount.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- spindle harvested balese0
- Outcome
- bales receiving a discounte1
- Value
- 36%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“36% of spindle harvested bales”
e1“bales receiving a discount compared with 36% of spindle harvested bales”
t0“Cotton”
The same questions in other papers
density · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.