ARTICLES

Influence of Digging Date on Yield and Gross Return of Virginia-type Peanut Cultivars in North Carolina

Authors: D. L. Jordan , J. F. Spears , G. A. Sullivan

  • Influence of Digging Date on Yield and Gross Return of Virginia-type Peanut Cultivars in North Carolina

    ARTICLES

    Influence of Digging Date on Yield and Gross Return of Virginia-type Peanut Cultivars in North Carolina

    Authors: , ,

Abstract

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) growers must balance complex interactions among cultivars, planting dates, environmental and physiological stresses during the growing season, and weather conditions at harvest when determining when to dig peanut. Ten field experiments were conducted in North Carolina from 1994 through 1996 to determine the influence of digging date on pod yield and gross return of virginia-type peanut. Beginning in mid- to late September, the cultivars NC 9, NC 10C, NCV-11, VA-C 92R, AgraTech (AT) VC-1, and NC 12C were dug on four dates approximately 7 d apart. Considerable variation in pod yield and gross return was noted among cultivars and experiments. Delaying digging increased pod yield and gross return in some but not all experiments. Greater variation in pod yield and gross return was observed for NC 10C than for AT VC-1 when compared across digging dates. Pod yield and gross return for NC9, NC V-11, VA-C 92R, and NC 12C were intermediate between NC 10C and AT VC-1. Of the cultivars evaluated, yield and gross return of AT VC-1 were the most stable over digging dates. These data suggest that growers should evaluate maturity of peanut in individual fields for each cultivar when determining when to dig. These data also suggest that factors other than maturity impact pod yield and gross return.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Arachis hypogaea L, cultivar response, market quality

How to Cite:

Jordan, D. & Spears, J. & Sullivan, G., (1998) “Influence of Digging Date on Yield and Gross Return of Virginia-type Peanut Cultivars in North Carolina”, Peanut Science 25(1), p.45-50. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-25-1-12

4 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1998
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes