Establishment was slightly improved for Sicala 320B3XF over the Sicot 606B3F. Overall, Sicala 320B3XF was less vigorous across the season than the Sicot 606B3F, however it did grow slightly taller, with less nodes. This field was well watered so the crop remained stress free for the most part. The boll counts end of season were both very similar, with Sicala 320B3XF having a slight edge over the Sicot 606B3F. It was evident through the season that the Sicot 606B3F retained a higher percentage of fruit, as its boll load at flowering/boll fill was higher and the 606 came in quicker than Sicala 320B3XF. Sicala 320B3XF retained vegetative biomass and was the latest part of the field to come in.

There were no significant management differences between the two varieties. Maybe, to reduce overall plant height, we could have increased RX rate or number of applications to even up with the remainder of the field. Quality for this variety seems very premium and the number of age of the bolls retained I think reflect this. The very low seed density would indicate this variety may cause trouble emerging in poorly prepped/harder soil types, so ideally we’d limit this variety to the premium country. Yields stood very similar to Sicot 606B3F in the end (slightly less than the field average), and the premium nature of the fibre is a big plus for full irrigated cotton. It would appear this variety may not be best suited for dryland paddocks, harder country or limited irrigation scenarios. The disease package for verticillium on recent CSD ratings also doesn’t appear as promising as other varieties