ARTICLES

Effect of Continuous Seed Size Selection Among Two Runner-Type Peanut Cultivars¹

Authors: W. D. Branch , A. K. Culbreath

  • Effect of Continuous Seed Size Selection Among Two Runner-Type Peanut Cultivars¹

    ARTICLES

    Effect of Continuous Seed Size Selection Among Two Runner-Type Peanut Cultivars¹

    Authors: ,

Abstract

The major peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) producing regions in the U.S. are currently faced with an increasing tomato spotted wilt tospovirus (TSWV) problem, and the most effective control is the use of resistant cultivars. This study was conducted to compare the field performance and TSWV disease intensity among different seed sizes of two runner-type cultivars. For three consecutive years, 1995-97, the effect of continuous seed size selection on yield, grade, and TSWV intensity among the two runner cultivars Georgia Green and Florunner was evaluated at the Univ. of Georgia Coastal Plain Exp. Sta. Sound mature kernels from both cultivars were divided into four seed sizes (jumbo, medium, No. 1, and the combined mill run check). Seed size selection pressure was applied to both cultivars each year. Seed stock for planting each year was obtained from the corresponding seed size produced the previous year. The results showed that the Georgia Green cultivar significantly out-performed the Florunner cultivar in yield, grade, dollar value, and had significantly less TSWV. Georgia Green had a similar percentage of jumbo seed, more medium seed, and fewer No. 1 seed than Florunner. Both runner-type cultivars responded similarly to continuous selection pressure with small but significant changes in seed size distribution over a relatively short 3-yr period.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Arachis hypogaea L, Groundnut, tomato spotted wilt virus, pod yield, grade quality, dollar value

How to Cite:

Branch, W. & Culbreath, A., (1999) “Effect of Continuous Seed Size Selection Among Two Runner-Type Peanut Cultivars¹”, Peanut Science 26(1), p.53-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-26-1-11

9 Views

4 Downloads

Published on
01 Jan 1999
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1Contribution from the Univ. of Georgia, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.