Effect of spraying time defoliator and speed of cotton harvesting machine on quality of cotton fiber

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Mechanical Bio-system Engineering

2 Tabriz University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources,

3 Assistant Prof., Cotton Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Gorgan, Iran

Abstract

The development of mechanized harvesting as a way to reduce 30% the cost of production could raise the competitiveness of cotton production and maintain in the country. Using defoliator before machine harvesting is necessary to cleaning harvesting and high quality. To evaluate the effect of spraying time of defoliator and speed of cotton harvesting machine on machine performance and quality of cotton fiber, an experiment was carried out in Cotton Research Station of Hashemabad, Gorgan in 2014. The studied factors in this research were included two levels of spraying time of defoliator, two levels of cotton varieties suitable for mechanical harvesting and three levels of forward speed. The experimental design was split split plot in randomized complete block design with three replications and three factors. Results showed that harvesting time and speed did not affect the quality of the fiber. The effect of variety was significant on fiber quality, the importance of choosing the most suitable for mechanized harvesting of leads. Sepid variety in terms of quality index fibers had priority compared to the Golestan, and was suitable for machine harvesting.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Aal, H.A., Hosny, A.A., and Mohamad, H.M.H. 1990. Effect of Hill Spacing and Defoliation on Yield and Yield Components of Giza 75 Cotton Variety. Field Crop Abstracts, 43: 8.
  2. Alishah, A. 2012. Genetic and agronomic aspects of cotton seed. Publish Agricultural Training. 1-18.
  3. Bednarz, C.W., Shurley, W.D., and Anthony, W.S. 2002. Losses in yield, quality, and profitability of cotton from improper harvest timing. Agron. J. 94:1004-1011.
  4. Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics (FAOSTAT), Accessed in Nov 2012. http://faostat.fao.org/site
  5. Godoy, A.S., Moreno, A.L.E., and Carcia, C.E.A. 1995. Date of Chemical Defoliation of Cotton Plants and Its Effect on Yield, Earliness and Fibre Quality. Agricultura-Tecnica En Mexico. 2(21): 171-182.
  6. Guzel, G. 2010. An investigation for importance of the cotton standardization. University of Cukurova, Institute of Natural and Applied Science, Department of Textile Engineering. M.Sc Thesis.
  7. Haeri, A.A., and Sayesh, A. 2009. The situation of cotton in Iran and the world. According to statistics of the office of strategic textile industry (Iran Textile Industries Association).
  8. Konduru, S. 2013.A Study of mechanization of cotton harvesting in India: Implications for International Markets. Department of Agricultural Business.
  9. Karademir, E. 2007.  Determination the effect of deflation timing on cotton yield and quality. Journal of Central European Agriculture. 8 (3): 357-362.

10. Khajepour, M. 2012. Industrial plants. Volume 5. Jihad Esfahan University.215-276.

11. Khanjani, M. 2008. Crop pests of Iran. Bu-Ali Sina University Publications. Section 3. 49-55.

12. Kaynak, M.A., Unay, A., Basal, H., and Serter, E. 1999. Determination of Effects of the Defoliant Applications Times on Important Properties of Agronomical and Fiber Quality in Cotton (Gossypium Hirsutum L.). 3rd Field Crops Congress of Turkey, 15-18 November, Cukurova University Faculty of Agriculture. (2), 50-154.

13. Kerby, T.A., Supak, J., Banks, J.C., and Snipes, C.E. 1992. Timing defoliations using nodes above cracked boll. p.155-156In Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., Nashville, TN. 6-10 Jan. 1992. Natl. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.

14. Lale, E. 2012.effects of harvesting methods on fiber quality in some cotton varieties under conditions of Cukurova region of Turkey. Papers Presented at 6th Meeting of the Asian Cotton Research and Development Network. Bangladesh. June 18-20.                                  

15. Logan, J., and Gwathmey, C.O. 2002. Effects of Weather on Cotton Responses to Harvest Aid Chemicals, Journal of Cotton Sci. (6) 1-12.

16. Larson, J.A., Gwathmey, C.Q., and Hayes, R.M. 2002. Cotton Defoliation and Harvest Timing Effects on Yields, Quality and Net Revenues, The Journal of Cotton Science, (6): 13-27.

17. Larson, J.A., Gwathmey, C.Q., and Hayes, R.M. 2005. Effects of Defoliation Timing and Desiccation on Net Revenues from Ultra-Narrow-Row Cotton. The Journal of Cotton Science, (9) 204-224.

18. Malik, M.N., Shabab, Ud-Dın., and Makhdum, M.I. 1991. Accelerated Cotton Boll Dehiscence with Thidiazuron. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 29(6): 554-557.

19. Mansouri rad, M. 2009. Tractors and agricultural machinery. Volume II. The eleventh edition. Bu-Ali Sina University Publications. 429-454.

20. Naseri, F.1995.Cotton. Astan Quds Razavi Publications. 22-49.

21. Nowrouzieh, S., Mobli, H., Ghanadha, M., and Oghabi, H. 1999. Mechanized cotton harvesting problems in Iran. Master's thesis. College of Agriculture, Tehran University.

22. Nowrouzieh, S., Mobli, H., Ghanadha, M., and Oghabi, H. 2003. Effect parameters for speed and height of the nose on the amount and quality of cotton picked by cotton picker on the varity of Varamin. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge, No.1; Vol.13. 63-71.

23. Nowrouzieh, S. 2012. Study and Comparison of mechanical and manual Harvesting Performance in two cotton varieties Varamin and Sahel cultivar. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge. No.1; Vol. 1. 27-37.

24. Oz, E., and Evcim, U. 2002. Determination of the effects of mechanical harvesting on cotton fiber technological properties. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Aegean University, Turkey, 39(2): 119-126.

25. Parvin, D.W., Martin, S.W., Cooke, F., Jr., and Freeland, B.B. Jr. 2005. Effect of harvest season rainfall on cotton yield. J. Cotton Sci. 9:115-120 [Online]. Available at http://www.cotton.org/journal/2005-09/3/115.cfm (verified 10 Mar. 2006).

26. Shurley, W.D., and Bednarz, C.W., 2000. Evidence of defoliation and harvest timeliness effects on yield, grade, and profit: The case of cotton in Georgia. p. 285-287. In Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., San Antonio, TX. 4-8 Jan. 2000. Nat. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.

27. Shurley, D., Bednarz, C., Anthony, S., and Brown, S.M. 2004. Increasing cotton yield, fiber quality and profit through improved defoliation and harvest timeliness. InD. Shurley (ed.) Increasing cotton yield, fiber quality, and profit through improved defoliation and harvest timeliness. Publ. AGECON-04-94. University of Georgia, Dep. of Agric. and Applied Econ., Tifton, GA.

28. Shurley, W.D., and Bednarz, C.W. 2000. Evidence of defoliation and harvest timeliness effects on yield, grade, and profit: The case of cotton in Georgia. p. 285-287. In Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf., San Antonio, TX. 4-8 Jan. 2000. Nat. Cotton Counc. Am., Memphis, TN.

29. Snipes, C.E. and Baskin, C.C. 1994. Influence of Early Defoliation on Cotton Yield, Seed Quality and Fiber Properties. Field Crops Research, 2 (37): 137-143.

30. Sımsek, K., and Ozkan, İ. 2005.Determination of machine harvest appropriateness of fiber quality characteristics of some cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) varieties in Aegean region. VI th. Field Crops Congress of Turkey. 05-09 September 2005, Antalya, Turkey, Proceedings, 1: 297-302.

31. Tabatabaie, M. 1998. Cotton fiber technology handbook. Office of cotton and oil seeds. Gorgan.

32. Willcutt, M.H., Columbus, E., and Valco, T.D. 2002. Cotton lint qualities as affected by harvester type in 10 and 30 inch production systems. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences. Memphis, Tenn.: National Cotton Council. 1599-1606.

33. Yazdani, S., and Shahbazi, H. 2010. Indirect Production Function Evaluation of budget constraints in the production of cotton in Khorasan Razavi province. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development. 2-41 (4): 433-425.

Iranian Journal of Cotton Researches
Volume 4, Issue 2 - Serial Number 8
February 2017
Pages 115-130

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics