The Influence of Planting and Digging Dates on Yield, Value, and Grade of Four Virginia-type Peanut Cultivars1

Abstract

Obtainingmaximum yield,value, and grade of peanut (Arachishypogaea L.) by deciding the correct planting and digging date of various cultivars is a complex management decision. The influence of planting and digging dates on four large-seeded virginia-type cultivars was determined in a nonirrigated field study at the Tidewater Agricultural Experiment Station in Suffolk,Virginia, from 1983 through 1986. Florigiant, NC 7, NC 9, and VA 81B cultivars were planted at four 10-day intervals beginning about 23 April and harvested at five lO-dayintervals beginning about 12 September. Significant differences occurred among cultivars and digging dates each year. NC 7 produced the highest yield, value, extra large kernels, and total kernels. Later digging dates produced higher yield, value, total kernels, and extra large kernels in 1983. The same was true in 1984 through digging date four when the yield and value declined for the fifth digging, while grade characteristics remained the same as digging date four. No significant changes in yield or value occurred after the second digging date in 1986 (22 September); however, total kernels and extra large kernels increased through the fourth digging date. Planting date affected yield only in 1983 (under moisture stress conditions) when each 10-day delay in planting after 29 April resulted in reduced yield and value, while in 1984 the earliest planting date of20 April (under adverse weather conditions) was the lowest in yield and value. Significant digging date x planting date, digging date x cultivar, and planting date x cultivar interactions were obtained. These results indicate that cultivar selection and digging dates are more important than planting dates in normal years. However, since environmental stress conditions cannot be anticipated, early planting dates would seem to be an advantage when soil temperatures and moisture levels are conducive to good germination and seedling growth.

Peanut Cultivar Response to S-metolachlor and Paraquat Alone and in Combination

“…With respect to Virginia market type, although peanut stunting was noted, no negative yield or grade response were noted. Under growing conditions at Lamesa where the growing season can be shortened by cold weather, the use of paraquat did not delay peanut maturity as has been noted in other peanut growing regions (Carley et al, 2008;Mozingo et al, 1991). a Abbreviation: DAC, days after peanut cracking; NS, not significant at the 5% level of probability.…”

“…No response with respect to yield was noted with application timing in either year (Table 6). The indeterminate growth habit of peanut often allows compensation from early season stress (such as herbicide injury), and if given sufficient recovery time and good growing conditions, peanut yields and grade may not be compromised (Carley et al, 2009;Mozingo et al, 1991). Peanut grade.…”

Peanut Cultivar Response to Preemergence Applications of Pyroxasulfone

“…Pods with brown or black mesocarps are mature while pod mesocarps that are white, yellow, or orange in color are immature. The distribution of immature and mature peanut pods can serve as an indicator of delayed maturity caused by cultivar, irrigation, fertility, or herbicide injury (Johnson et al 1987;Sholar et al 1995;Mixon and Branch 1985;Mozingo et al 1991). Once pod mesocarps were removed from each sample, pods were grouped by color: black, brown, and other (white, yellow, orange).…”

Effect of Salicylic acid, Biofertilization and Sowing Dates on Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Yield under Semi-arid Conditions

“…A Significant increases in peanut yield can be achieved by early or late of planting (Baldwin, 2005), with a previous study indicating that early planting produced 20% to 50% greater pod yields than late planting (Naab et al, 2004;Laurence, 1983: Mozingo et al, 1991and Bala et al, 2011. The yields of plant components (pod and seeds) and their respective rates, as well as flower, peg and pod numbers were significantly affected by planting date (Kasai et al, 1999).…”