ARTICLES

Effects of Applied Plant Nutrients on Sclerotinia Blight Incidence in Peanuts1¹

Authors: D. L. Hallock , D. M. Porter

  • Effects of Applied Plant Nutrients on Sclerotinia Blight Incidence in Peanuts1¹

    ARTICLES

    Effects of Applied Plant Nutrients on Sclerotinia Blight Incidence in Peanuts1¹

    Authors: ,

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in Southampton County, Virginia in 1978 and 1979 on Altavista loamy fine sand (Aquic Hapludult) to determine whether applied nutrients affect the severity of Sclerotinia blight in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) caused by Sclerotinia minor. Soil or foliar applications of N, K, Ca, Mg, P, Mn, Zn, Fe, B, S, and Cl were evaluated alone and/or in various combinations and formulations. Multiple Zn or Cu sprays applied on the foliage suppressed Sclerotinia blight symptoms most during fruit development. Yields in plots sprayed with four 1.12-kg/ha applications of Zn were 1,965 kg/ha greater than in untreated plots in 1978. Four 2.24 kg/ha sprays of Zn increased yields 810 kg/ha in 1979. In 1978, CuSO4 sprayed in a manner similar to ZnSO4 was the second most effective treatment among the simple nutrient materials. Zinc and Cu (sulfates) applied in a multi-nutrient commercial material which also contains Mn, Ca, and P suppressed Sclerotinia blight symptoms nearly as effectively as ZnSO4 sprays. Soil applied Zn or Cu (sulfates) at rates of 22.4 and 11.2 kg/ha, respectively, were relatively ineffective. Sequestrene Cu applied in four 0.56 kg/ha sprays of Cu suppressed Sclerotinia blight as effectively as four 2.24 kg/ha Zn sprays in 1979. Also, Sequestrene Zn and THIS Cu applied similarly to Sequestrene Cu decreased the disease symptoms in 1979.

Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Groundnuts, Sclerotinia minor, Macronutrients, Micronutrients, Foliar Fertilization

How to Cite:

Hallock, D. & Porter, D., (1981) “Effects of Applied Plant Nutrients on Sclerotinia Blight Incidence in Peanuts1¹”, Peanut Science 8(1), p.48-52. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-8-1-13

12 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1981
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1Cooperative investigations of Research Division, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and U. S. Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration, Agricultural Research. This research was supported in part by the Virginia Agricultural Foundaiton.

4Mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute a guarantee or warranty of the product by Va. Polytechnic institute & State University or the U.S. Department of Agriculture and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may also be suitable.