Sticky Cotton Measurements and Fiber Processing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sticky Cotton Measurements and Fiber Processing Eric F. Hequet and Noureddine Abidi Texas Tech University Press R 19347_00_p00i-xxii_1-178_r10ss.iiii iii 9/29/06 4:26:08 PM Copyright © 2006 Eric F. Hequet and Noureddine Abidi All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, including elec- tronic storage and retrieval systems, except by explicit prior written permission of the publisher except for brief passages excerpted for review and critical purposes. This book is typeset in Adobe Garamond. The paper used in this book meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997). Designed by Michele Newkirk Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hequet, Eric F. Sticky cotton : measurements and fiber processing / Eric F. Hequet and Noureddine Abidi. p. cm. Summary: “Study of stickiness on cotton fibers caused by sugar deposits produced by the plant itself or by honeydew from insects (usually aphids and whiteflies) feeding on cotton. Examines contamination impact on fiber processing, yarn quality, and textile production and discusses various technologies and methods for detection and measurement”—Provided by publisher. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-89672-590-4 (hardback : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 0-89672-590-1 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Cotton stickiness. I. Abidi, Noureddine. II. Title. TS1580.H46 2006 677’.21—dc22 2006013880 Printed in the United States of America 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 / 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 SB Texas Tech University Press Box 41037 Lubbock, Texas 79409-1037 USA 800.832.4042 [email protected] www.ttup.ttu.edu 19347_00_p00i-xxii_1-178_r10ss.iiv iv 9/29/06 4:26:08 PM chapter 2 Detection Methods Abstract In this chapter we review the cotton stickiness detection methods in use worldwide. The reducing sugar tests to evaluate cotton stickiness are not satisfactory since it has been reported that there is no direct correlation between the percentage of sugar in cotton fibers and the severity of the stickiness phenomena in the mill. The HPLC test appears to be the only chemical method that is recognized by the re- search community. The HPLC provides important information about the source of sticki- ness (aphids, whiteflies or physiological sugars). Nevertheless, this method is not feasible for mass testing because it is time consuming and costly. Among the mechanical tests, the minicard test appears to relate quite well to spinning efficiency. Yet, this instrument is not manufactured anymore and has serious limitations. This is a slow test and it is very difficult to clean off the honeydew spots from the flats and the cylinder teeth. The cleaning process may contaminate subsequent samples. Other tests such as the Shenkar Tester, Quickspin, and Stickiness Tester are still under evaluation and not enough independent information is available to give an authoritative opinion. Gutknecht et al. (1988) reported that the SCT relates very well to the minicard. Nev- ertheless, Gutknecht did not document the origin of the contamination (whiteflies or aphids) for the samples tested. Therefore, we do not know if this finding is valid for all types of insect honeydew contaminations. The SCT instrument is widely used around the world, especially in the developing countries. Contamination of the instrument with honeydew has never been reported; however, this is a slow and somewhat operator influenced technol- ogy. The SCT is not suitable for mass testing. The FCT and H2SD correlate very well with each other and are able to provide reli- able results at a speed close to HVI testing. The maintenance of the systems, though, is a critical factor for the long-term stability of the results. 14 19347_00_p00i-xxii_1-178_r10ss.i14 14 9/29/06 4:26:18 PM Detection Methods 15 This chapter is based on E. Hequet, N. Abidi, G. Gamble, M. Watson. Measurement of stickiness In Sticky cotton–causes, impacts, and prevention. Edited by E. Hequet, T. J. Henneberry, and R. L. Nichols. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Washington, D.C. (in press). 2.1. Introduction Because of the variation in the sources of stickiness, testing for it is technically difficult. Currently there is no general testing method that is sufficiently accurate, rapid, or mechanically reliable to enable quantification of sugars in commercial-scale volumes of lint. Since defin- itive test information is not available for marketing purposes, cotton buyers discount the price of cotton from specific producing areas by a risk factor associated with each area’s production history. The result is a system wherein clean cotton sells below its value, and textile mills still occasionally purchase bales of sticky cotton that they cannot economically process. In the late 1970s, stickiness testing of cotton, Gossypium spp., was essentially based on the common belief that cotton stickiness corresponds to the content of reducing sugars. The most common sugars found on cotton fibers are glucose, fructose, and sucrose. Glucose and fructose are both monosaccharides and they are classified as reducing sugars. All monosac- charides are reducing sugars in that they have a free reactive carbonyl group. Some disac- charides have exposed carbonyl groups and are also reducing sugars. Sucrose is a disaccharide that is classified as non-reducing sugar. The other source of sugar on the lint derives from insects. This is by far the most common source of contamination. The sugar composition of insect honeydew is quite complex, as shown earlier. Among those sugars, melezitose and trehalulose are specific to insects and are not found in the plant. Melezitose is a non-reducing trisaccharide. Trehalulose, a disaccharide, is an isomer of sucrose, and behaves as a reducing sugar under specific conditions of oxidation. 2.2. Chemical tests 2.2.1. Oxidation-reduction methods These methods are performed on a water extract of the cotton fibers, generally with an added surfactant. These methods evaluate the water-soluble reducing substances and not only the reducing sugars. The choice of the oxidizing agent has a large effect on the end result. A strong oxidizing agent will react with more reducing substances in the water extract under test than a weak oxidizing agent. This is especially important for trehalulose, because this sugar will remain undetected when using a weak oxidizing agent. 2.2.1.1. Potassium Ferricyanide method or Perkins method The potassium ferricyanide method (Perkins 1971-a and 1971-b), sometimes identified in the literature as the USDA test or the Perkins test, is one of several methods based on the oxidation of reducing sugars that are currently utilized to screen cotton for potential sticki- ness. It is perhaps the most widely accepted method for the quantitative determination of R 19347_00_p00i-xxii_1-178_r10ss.i15 15 9/29/06 4:26:18 PM 16 STICKY COTTON reducing sugars on cotton because it is simple, reproducible, and fast. Historically, the ferricyanide reducing sugar test was developed in order to screen for stickiness caused by plant physiological sugars (glucose, fructose and sucrose). The test procedure consists of reacting the water extract of cotton with excess potassium ferricyanide in the presence of sodium carbonate. The ferricyanide anion oxidizes reducing substances in the extract, principally sugars, and is thereby reduced to ferrocyanide. The amount of ferrocyanide thus formed is quantified by titration with ceric sulfate dissolved in sulfuric acid solution. The titration end-point is indicated by tris(1,10-phenanthroline)-iron(II) sulfate, which turns from red to faint blue upon oxidation. Though the reduction of ferricyanide by the reducing substances present is not stoichiometric, the method can be calibrated against known quantities of glucose. The quantity of sugar thus determined has been correlated with stickiness problems arising in the processing of contaminated cotton (Brushwood and Perkins 1993). The test was initially used for screening cotton for plant sugars, primarily comprised of glucose, fructose, and sucrose. Sucrose is not a reducing sugar, but glucose and fructose are, and together they account for most of the extractable physiological sugar present on cotton lint. The ferricyanide test thus gives a good correlation between reducing sugars and total identified sugars when these sugars are of plant origin. Insect honeydews are comprised of the same sugars, but also present are a number of oligosaccharides including trehalulose and melezitose. With the exception of trehalulose, most of these oligosaccharides are non-reducing. As a result, the ferricyanide test does not provide a reliable correlation between reducing sugars and total insect sugars. This is especially so in the case of aphid honeydew, which contains little or no trehalulose (Hendrix 1999). As a consequence, the results of the ferricyanide test must be interpreted with some discretion and in conjunction with other known variables, such as region of growth where specific honeydew producing insect pests may predominate. Other reducing sugar tests have been used to evaluate honeydew contamination of cot- ton lint (Merkulova and Bashmakova 1986; Hector and Hodkinson 1989) even though it has long been realized that reducing sugar content and lint stickiness are sometimes not well correlated. In spite of the lack of a strong correlation, some authors consider reducing sugar tests to have value in screening for heavily-contaminated cottons (Hector and Hodkinson 1989) and, in fact, for some sticky cotton