UF/IFAS Nutrient Management Recommendation Series: Cotton
Hardeep Singh, Eajaz A. Dar, Ethan Carter, Michael Dukes, Lakesh Sharma
General Information
- UF/IFAS fertilization and liming recommendations are advisory in nature and emphasize efficient fertilizer use and environmentally sound nutrient management without losses of yield or crop quality.
- Recommendations assume that nutrients will be supplied from commercial fertilizer, and expected crop yields and quality will be typical of economically viable production.
- Recommendations assume straight fertilizers (i.e., single nutrient sources) will be used to apply nutrients. If multi-nutrient fertilizers will be used, the fertilizer analysis should align with recommended nutrient rate ratios.
- Consider UF/IFAS recommendations in the context of the overall nutrient management strategy. Evaluate fertilizer rates, timing, placement, and source for efficiency and consider return on fertilizer investment.
- If organic soil amendments are applied, understand and account for nutrient contributions and other benefits of adding organic matter.
- For best results, follow these recommendations in their entirety. The UF/IFAS recommendation is a holistic combination of fertilizer rates plus nutrient management aspects including irrigation.
- UF/IFAS fertilizer guidelines are suggestions that help growers use fertilizer efficiently and protect the environment, without reducing crop yield or quality.
- These guidelines usually assume that growers will use commercial fertilizers and aim for normal, profitable crop yields.
- Growers should use IFAS recommendations as part of their overall farm plan, considering things such as fertilizer costs and the value of adding organic materials to the soil.
Fertilizer Rates
- Soil test-based fertilizer rates for cotton
| lb/acre/year | ||||||||
| N | P2O5* | K2O** | ||||||
| Crop | Target pH | Low | Medium | High | Low | Medium | High | |
| Cotton | 6.5 | see table below | 120 | 60 | 0 | 125 | 70 | 0 |
* Low, medium and high P2O5 indicates ≤25, 26-45 and >45 mg P/kg soil, respectively (SL 129 Mylavarapu et al. 2021)
** Low, medium and high K2O indicates ≤35, 35-60 and >60 mg K/kg soil, respectively (SL129 Mylavarapu et al. 2021)
Table 1. Yield goal-based nitrogen recommendations for cotton production in Florida.
| Yield Goal (lb lint/acre) | N Rate (lb/acre)*** |
|---|---|
| 500 | 45 |
| 750 | 68 |
| 1000 | 90 |
| 1200 | 108 |
| 1500 | 135 |
- ***Indicates nitrogen rates will satisfy the crop nitrogen requirement for the cropping season. Excessive nitrogen applications do not increase yield.
- Other nutrients should be applied on soil test-basis for balanced fertilization.
Fertilizer Timing and Placement
- Apply all of the P2O5 and 30% of the K2O in a preplant or at-planting application. Apply the remaining 70% of the K2O in one sidedressing.
- Apply nitrogen in 2-4 splits, starting at first true leaf stage and ending before full bloom. Nitrogen can be applied as surface broadcast and incorporated in the early stages and as a topdress in the later stages.
Water Management
Fertilizer and water management are linked. Maximum fertilizer efficiency is achieved only with close attention to water management. Supply only enough irrigation water to satisfy crop requirements. Excess irrigation may result in leaching of N and K, creating possible plant deficiencies.
Provisional Recommendation: Nitrogen (N)
05/20/25: The following provisional N fertilizer management recommendation for commercial cotton production is effective immediately. It will remain in effect throughout the 2025 commercial cotton growing season.
- The N fertilizer application rate to cotton may be determined independent of a preplant soil test for N. Therefore, N fertilizer may be applied according to yield goal-based approach provided in table above regardless of the soil test N value.
- Footnotes 107 and 124 in UF/IFAS Standardized Fertilization Recommendations for Agronomic Crops still apply.
References
SL129 UF/IFAS Standardized Fertilization Recommendations for Agronomic Crops.
https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-ss163-2021