Agroeconomic differences among alternative cotton row spacings and row patterns

Crop growth and development is affected by intraspecies competition. This study was conducted to determine whether cotton productivity and profitability could be manipulated through planting geometry. The effects of row spacing, planting pattern, and variety on cotton fruit distribution, yield, and net returns were investigated near Bella Mina, AL, on a Decatur silt loam (fine, kaolinitic, thermic Rhodic Paleudults); Jackson, TN, on a Calhoun silt loam (fine-silty, mixed, active, thermic Typic Glossaqualfs); Starkville, MS, on a Leeper silty clay loam (fine, smectitic, nonacid, thermic Vertic Epiaquepts); and Stoneville, MS, on a Bosket very fine sandy loam (fine-loamy, mixed, active, thermic Mollic Hapludalfs). For both the 76- and 97-cm row spacing, transitioning from a solid to a 2 x 1 skip row pattern reduced cotton lint yield by 19%. Reduced lint yield in the 2 x 1 skip row pattern was attributed primarily to a 7% decrease in the number of Zone 1 and first-position bolls. Consequently, planting on a solid rather than skip row pattern increased net returns by 21%. Planting cotton in either 76- or 97-cm rows using a solid rather than skip row pattern likely increases crop productivity and profitability across the US cotton belt. Alternative cotton row spacings and patterns may improve net returns due to reduced input costs or greater yield.Regardless of row spacing, transitioning from a solid to 2 x 1 skip row pattern decreased cotton lint yield by 19%.Planting on a solid pattern rather than 2 x 1 skip row increased net returns by 21%.