W. L. KOTTUR 



2fy^ 



These results indicate that " Dharwai No. 2" cannot compare with 

 ordinary Jcumpta and even less with " Dharwar No. 1 " in point of yield, but 

 that the ginniug percentage is high, equal in lact to that of "' JJharwar No. 1." 

 So far as yield is concerned, the kapas produced per acre is almost equal to 

 that of kumpta in two years out of four, and it was suggested to me that the 

 reason for its failure in the other years was the absence of the most favourable 

 conditions of plant focd and moisture. Tliat this was not the case was proved 

 by growing it undei exceedingly favourable conditi )ns at Gokak, when it 

 showed, the following yield and ginning percentage in comparison with 

 "Dharwar No. 1." 



Name of cotton 



" Dharwar No. 1 

 " Dharwar No. 2 



Yield of 

 kapas per acre 



lb. 



1,210 

 1,165 



Ginning percentage 



Per cent. 

 28-4 

 27-0 



The staple of " Dharwar No. "2, " w^as also inferior, even to ordinary kumpta. 

 Valuations by Messrs. Tata Sons & Co. of the lint, per Bombay rY/,?f/// 

 (784 lb.) in 1915 and 1916 were p,s follows :— 



Kumpta 

 Value per mn4y 



Rs. 

 335 

 515 



This selection from kumpta cottcn appears, theiefore, to have jio future. 

 It may posf^ibly form the basis of a future crossing, and so the pure line stock 

 is being maintained. Beyond that, its description is only xahuible as showing 

 the character of one of the inferior types included in the ordinal y niixture 

 known on the market as kumpta cotton. ... 



" Dhanvar No. 3." 



This selection frf)m kumpta cotton has a long history dating back to year 

 1901. In that year ii, cioss botwp(Mi two straijis of knnrptU: neither of them in 



