ARTICLES

Effect of Plowing Date and Certain Crop Rotations on Peanut Productivity¹

Author: D. L. Hallock

  • Effect of Plowing Date and Certain Crop Rotations on Peanut Productivity¹

    ARTICLES

    Effect of Plowing Date and Certain Crop Rotations on Peanut Productivity¹

    Author:

Abstract

The relationship of certain land management systems to productivity and pod breakdown disease incidence in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) was studied in Virginia during 197174. Main treatments were three dates of moldboard plowing prior to planting peanuts in the rotations. Splitplot treatments were 2-year rotations: (I) peanuts followed by rye (Secale cereale) winter cover crop then corn (Zea mays) followed by rye winter cover crop; (II) peanuts followed by rye winter cover crop then soybeans (Glycine max) followed by no winter cover crop (except weeds); (III) peanuts followed by rye winter cover crop then no summer crop (residue of unharvested rye) nor cover crop planted; (IV) peanuts followed by rye winter cover crop then corn followed by fallow in winter, weeds prevented.

Dates of plowing treatments affected peanut productivity most. Gross crop values and yields in plots plowed in December were 7%, and 18-to-20%, respectively, higher than when plots were plowed in March or May. Sound mature kernel contents also were lower for the later plowing dates.

Differences among rotation treatment means occurred only when plots were plowed in May. Gross crop values were higher for rotation I than for rotation III and IV. In 1974, gross crop values obtained from plots plowed in March in rotation IV were equivalent to those from plots plowed in December.

None of the treatments differentially affected pod breakdown disease significantly. However, the percentage of rotted pods averaged somewhat lower in plots plowed in December.

Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: Pod breakdown, corn, rye, soybeans, cover crops

How to Cite:

Hallock, D., (1975) “Effect of Plowing Date and Certain Crop Rotations on Peanut Productivity¹”, Peanut Science 2(2), p.81-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-2-2-11

10 Views

0 Downloads

Published on
01 Jul 1975
Peer Reviewed

Author Notes

1Contribution from the Tidewater Research and Continuing Education Center, Research Division, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Holland Station, Suffolk, Va. 23437.