ARTICLES

Peanut Yield Potential as Influenced by Cropping System and Plant Density

Authors: P. E. Igbokwe , N. V. K. Nkongolo

  • Peanut Yield Potential as Influenced by Cropping System and Plant Density

    ARTICLES

    Peanut Yield Potential as Influenced by Cropping System and Plant Density

    Authors: ,

Abstract

This study was conducted on a Memphis silt loam at Alcorn State University in 1992 and 1993 and investigated row-intercropping as a low-input alternative to the conventional cropping system for peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) production in southwestern Mississippi. Extractable P and exchangeable cations were significantly (P 0.05) higher for vetiver-peanut row-intercropping in 1992. Extractable S and P were significantly (P 0.05) higher for vetiver-peanut row-intercropping and conventional peanut monocropping, respectively, in 1993. Plant height, shoot dry weight, the number of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) per row, insect lesions per leaflet, and rodent diggings per row were significantly (P 0.05) higher for conventional peanut monocropping than when peanut was intercropped with vetiver grass Vetiveria zizanioides (L.) Nash. Peanut pod number, pod weight, seed number, and seed weight also were higher for conventional peanut monocropping. The seed mineral composition generally was not affected by cropping system and plant spacing. Peanut yield was higher for 15.2 cm within-row plant spacing compared to 10.2- and 20.3-cm spacings investigated in this study. Interaction between cropping system and plant spacing was significant for pod number, pod weight, seed number, seed weight, and seed Ca and Fe compositions in 1992, but only significant for seed number, seed weight, and seed Fe and Zn compositions in 1993.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Arachis hypogaea, vetiver grass, Vetiveria zizanioides, row intercropping

How to Cite:

Igbokwe, P. & Nkongolo, N., (1996) “Peanut Yield Potential as Influenced by Cropping System and Plant Density”, Peanut Science 23(2), p.129-133. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-23-2-12

8 Views

1 Downloads

Published on
01 Jul 1996
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes