ARTICLES

Peanut Yield, Market Quality and Value Reductions Due to Cylindrocladium Black Rot1,2

Authors: J. K. Pataky , M. K. Beute , J. C. Wynne , G. A. Carlson

  • Peanut Yield, Market Quality and Value Reductions Due to Cylindrocladium Black Rot1,2

    ARTICLES

    Peanut Yield, Market Quality and Value Reductions Due to Cylindrocladium Black Rot1,2

    Authors: , , ,

Abstract

The effects of Cylindrocladium black rot (CBR) of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) on yield, market quality and monetary value of the peanut crop were determined for Florigiant, NC 8C and two advanced generation CBR-resistant breeding lines. Percentage extra large kernels (ELK) and fancy size pods (FS) were decreased by CBR. The reduction of ELK has a minor effect on value. The reduction of FS had no effect on value. Reduction of value due to CBR was primarily the result of lower peanut yields. A highly significant proportion of the variation in yield and value was explained by regressions of yield and value on CBR incidence measured approximately 1 wk before digging. Yield losses ranged from 250 to 450 kgha and value reductions for Florigiant and NC 8C were from 170 to 190ha in 1980 and 1981 and from 270 to 290ha in 1982 for each 10 CBR incidence. The relationships among CBR and yield, quality and value were similar for NC 8C and Florigiant. Therefore, NC 8C should sustain lower losses due to CBR than Florigiant because NC 8C is moderatley CBR-resistant.

Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Cylindrocladium Crotalariae, disease loss assessment, epidemiology

How to Cite:

Pataky, J. & Beute, M. & Wynne, J. & Carlson, G., (1983) “Peanut Yield, Market Quality and Value Reductions Due to Cylindrocladium Black Rot1,2”, Peanut Science 10(2), p.62-66. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-10-2-5

9 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1983

Author Notes

1Paper No. 8794 of the Journal Series of the North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, Raleigh, NC 27650.

2Use of Trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement by the N. C. Agricultural Research Service of the products named, nor criticism of similar ones not mentioned.