Comparing dryland cotton upland fibre quality from on-board spindle and stripper harvesting systems

References

• Abernathy, G. H., & Williams, J. M. (1961). Baling seed cotton for storage and handling. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 4(2), 182–184.
   Google Scholar
• Anon. (2001). Report of an expert panel on ginning methods. 60th Plenary Meeting of the ICAC (p. 27), Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe.
   Google Scholar
• Anon. (2004). Picking of cotton. The ICAC Recorder, 24(1), 4–9.
   Google Scholar
• Anon. (2016). Cost of production of raw cotton (p. 106). Washington, D.C.: International Cotton Advisory Committee.
   Google Scholar
• ASTM. (2012a). D1684 standard practice for lighting cotton classing rooms for color grading (p. 4). West Conshohocken, PA.
   Google Scholar
• ASTM. (2012b). D5866 standard test method for Neps in cotton fibers (p. 3). West Conshohocken, PA.
   Google Scholar
• ASTM. (2012c). D5867 standard test methods for measurement of physical properties of raw cotton by cotton classification instruments (p. 5). West Conshohocken, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, R. V., & Brashears, A. D. (2000). Combined effects of field cleaning and lint cleaning on stripper harvested cotton (pp. 1616–1621). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Memphis, TN.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, J., Woodhouse, N. P., Keller, T., Jensen, T. A., & Antille, D. L. (2015). Advances in cotton harvesting technology: A review and implications for the John Deere Round Baler cotton picker. The Journal of Cotton Science, 19(2), 225–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocke, J. B., Kirk, I. W., & Wesley, R. A. (1977). Spinning performance and yarn quality as influenced by harvesting, ginning and mill-processing. USDA - ARS, Marketing Research Report (1066), 28.
   Google Scholar
• Doraiswamy, I., Chellamani, P., & Pavendhan, A. (1993). Cotton ginning. Textile Progress, 24(2), 1–28. doi:10.1080/00405169308688859
   Google Scholar
• Faircloth, J. C., Hutchinson, R., Paxson, K., Coco, A., & Price, P. (2004). An evaluation of alternative cotton harvesting methods in Northeast Louisiana- A comparison of the brush stripper and spindle harvester. Journal of Cotton Science, 8(2), 55–61.
   Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., & Shaw, B. W. (2008). Picker vesrus stripper harvesters on the high plains of Texas (pp. 454–458). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Tennessee.
   Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Shaw, B. W., & Hequet, E. F. (2008). Effects of harvesting method on foreign matter content, fiber quality, and yarn quality from irrigated cotton on the high plains (pp. 612–619). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Nashville, TN.
   Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Wanjura, J. D., Boman, R. K., Shaw, B. W., & Parnell, C. B. (2011). Evaluation of modern cotton harvest systems on irrigated cotton: Harvester performance. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 27(4), 497–506. doi:10.13031/2013.38196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Wanjura, J. D., Hequet, E. F., Boman, R. K., Shaw, B. W., & Parnell, C. B. (2011). Evaluation of modern cotton harvesting systems on irrigated cotton: Yarn quality. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 27(4), 523–532. doi:10.13031/2013.38199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Wanjura, J. D., Hequet, E. F., Shaw, B. W., & Parnell, C. B. (2011). Evaluation of modern cotton harvest systems on irrigated cotton: Fiber quality. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 27(4), 507–513. doi:10.13031/2013.38197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Wanjura, J. D., Shaw, B. W., & Hequet, E. F. (2007). Effects of harvesting methods on foreign matter content, fiber quality, and yarn quality from irrigated cotton on the high plains (Paper 071113: 1–10). ASABE Annual International Meeting, Minneapolis, MN.
   Google Scholar
• Faulkner, W. B., Wanjura, J. D., Shaw, B. W., & Hequet, E. F. (2009). Effect of harvesting method on fiber and yarn quality from irrigated cotton on the high plains (pp. 449–461). Beltwide Cotton Conference, San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Garner, W. H., Shanklin, E. H., & LaFerney, P. E. (1970). Fiber Quality and Ginning Performance of Machine Picked and Stripped Cotton, Southeastern Area, 1964-66. USDA Marketing Research Report (852), p. 30.
   Google Scholar
• Holley, D. (2000). The second great emancipation - The Mechanical Picker, Black Migration, and how they shaped the Modern South. Fayetteville, AR: The University of Arkansas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hughs, S. E., Valco, T. D., & Williford, J. R. (2008). 100 years of cotton production, harvesting, and ginning systems engineering: 1907-2007. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 51(4), 1187–1198. doi:10.13031/2013.25234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerby, T. A., Carter, L. M., Hughs, S. E., & Bragg, C. K. (1986). Alternate harvesting systems and cotton quality. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 29(2), 407–412.
   Google Scholar
• Kerby, T. A., Carter, L., Brittan, K., & Hughs, S. E. (1983). Spinning quality of San Joaquin Valley cotton as influenced by stripper harvesting compared to spindle picking (p. 143). Beltwide Cotton Conference, San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Kretzschmar, S. D., & Furter, R. (2008). A new single fiber testing system for the process control in spinning mills (p. 24). Application Report, Uster Technologies.
   Google Scholar
• Majumdar, G., Singh, S. B., & Shukla, S. K. (2019). Seed cotton, harvesting and ginning of cotton. In K. Jabran & B. S. Chauhan (Eds.), Cotton production (pp. 145–174). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S. W., & Valco, T. D. (2008). Economic comparison of on-board module builder harvest methods (802–804). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Nashville, TN.
   Google Scholar
• Mygdakos, E. (2009). Factors affecting picker capacity, area harvested and harvesting cost of cotton. International Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7(3-4), 214–223.
   Google Scholar
• Naarding, W. J. (1992). New concepts of cotton growing, harvesting and ginning and their importance to yarn spinners. International Textile Bulletin, 38(2), 187–200 & 215.
   Google Scholar
• Salassi, M. E., Deliberto, M. S., & Falconer, L. L. (2015). Comparative costs of onboard module building cotton harvest systems in The Mid-South. Journal of ASFMRA.
   Google Scholar
• Sanderson, K. W. (1986). The Fibre Properties, Processing Performance and Yarn Properties of Stripper and Spindle-picked cotton. SAWTRI Technical Report (586): 12.
   Google Scholar
• Schleth, A. C., Mcalister, D., Thibodeaux, D. P., & Riley, R. (2007). Current use of instrument technology in the cotton industry (p. 25). World Cotton Research Conference - 4, Lubbock, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Stiller, W. (2017). Sicot 748B3F. Plant Varieties Journal, 29(4), 123–127.
   Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J. (2018). At a glance - spindle versus stripper harvesting. Australian Cotton Grower, 39(7), 28–30.
   Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J., & Delhom, C. (2017). The effect of seed cotton moisture during harvesting on – Part 2 – yarn and fabric quality. Textile Research Journal, 87(15), 1841–1847. doi:10.1177/0040517516659381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J., & Holt, G. A. (2017). Survey results of the research needs and requirements of the ginning industries in Australia and the United States. The Journal of Cotton Science, 21(1), 40–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J., & Long, R. L. (2016). The effect of seed cotton moisture during harvesting on – Part 1 – Fiber quality. Textile Research Journal, 86(18), 1925–1934. doi:10.1177/0040517515617426
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J., Long, R. L., & Bange, M. P. (2015). Comparing cotton fiber quality from conventional and round module harvesting methods. Textile Research Journal, 85(9), 987–997. doi:10.1177/0040517514540770
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Sluijs, M. H. J. & M. Jenson. (2019, Autumn). Keeping an Eye on Module Wraps (pp. 16–17). Spotlight Magazine.
   Google Scholar
• Wanjura, J. D., Baker, K. V., & Barnes, E. M. (2017). Harvesting. The Journal of Cotton Science, 21, 70–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanjura, J. D., Faulkner, W. B., & Holt, G. A. (2010). Ginning picker and stripper harvested high plains cotton (pp. 628–638). Beltwide Cotton Conference, New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• Wanjura, J. D., Faulkner, W. B., Holt, G. A., & Pelletier, M. G. (2011). Ginning picker and stripper harvested high plains cotton-update (pp. 491–506). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Wanjura, J. D., Kelley, M. S., Boman, R. K., & Holt, G. A. (2010). Harvesting to optimize fiber quality (p. 29). American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Meeting Presentation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Willcutt, M. H., Buschermohle, M. J., Barnes, E. M., To, F., Field, J., & Allen, P. (2009). In field time in motion comparisons of conventional, John Deere 7760 and Case 625 module express cotton pickers (pp. 462–476). Beltwide Cotton Conference, San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Willcutt, M. H., To, F. S. D., Columbus, E., & Valco, T. D. (2001). Spindle picker and stripper harvesting systems cost using COTSIM (pp. 324–328). Beltwide Cotton Conference, Memphis, TN.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, E. B., & Riley, J. A. (1961). Interrelated effects of defoliation, weather and mechanical picking on cotton quality. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 4(2), 164–165 & 169.
   Google Scholar
• Williford, J. R., Brashears, A. D., & Barker, G. L. (1994). Harvesting. In W. S. Anthony & W. D. Mayfield (Eds.), Cotton ginners handbook (pp. 11–16). Washington, D.C.: USDA.
   Google Scholar
• Young, R. A., & Martin, W. E. (1966). Economic comparisons between stripper and spindle-type harvesting machines. Cotton: A College of Agriculture Report, 370004(4), 95–99.
   Google Scholar