Abstract
Abstract Tomato spotted wilt virus has been the cause of an important peanut disease in southwestern Texas since the mid-1980s. Following observations of elevated disease incidence associated with poor stands, high seeding rates were recommended to reduce risks of spotted wilt. The primary objective of this study was to determine the relationship of spotted wilt incidence to seeding rate and irrigation. Whether the management of rust (Puccinia arachidis Speg.) and southern blight (Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc.) would be affected by seeding rate and irrigation was a secondary objective. Two runner peanut cultivars, GK-7 and Southern Runner, were planted in 1992 and 1993 in single rows with a precision planter at 8, 12, and 22 seeds m−2 and irrigated with amounts ranging from a season total of 0 to 760 mm. Spotted wilt (30.5-cm-loci with symptoms) at digging differed significantly for GK-7 and Southern Runner in 1992 (29 vs. 20%) and 1993 (23 vs. 16%). The seeding rate of either cultivar did not significantly affect spotted wilt in either year. Spotted wilt increased as irrigation increased to a peak of 535 mm total water in 1992 and 587 mm in 1993, and decreased slightly at higher irrigation levels. Rust was significantly affected by seeding rate only in 1992, with lowest rust ratings at 8 seeds m−2. GK-7 had significantly higher rust ratings than Southern Runner in 1992 and 1993. Southern blight in 1993 was lowest with below-optimum irrigation. Reduced seeding rate in irrigated peanut production did not increase risk of spotted wilt under conditions of this study and may have potential to enhance management efforts for rust and southern blight.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
In 1992, spotted wilt at digging was higher in peanut cultivar GK-7 (29%) than in Southern Runner (20%).
- Taxon
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeae0 - Material
- GK-7e1
- Interactor
- Tomato spotted wilt virus
Orthotospovirus tomatomaculaee2pathogen - Outcome
- Spotted wilte1
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 29 vs. 20%e1
- Comparator
- Southern Runnere1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Spotted wilt (30.5-cm-loci with symptoms) at digging differed significantly for GK-7 and Southern Runner in 1992 (29 vs. 20%)”
e2“Tomato spotted wilt virus”
Claim · model-written summary
In 1993, spotted wilt at digging was higher in peanut cultivar GK-7 (23%) than in Southern Runner (16%).
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Material
- GK-7e1
- Interactor
- Tomato spotted wilt virusOrthotospovirus tomatomaculaee2pathogen
- Outcome
- Spotted wilte1
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 23 vs. 16%e1
- Comparator
- Southern Runnere1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Spotted wilt (30.5-cm-loci with symptoms) at digging differed significantly for GK-7 and Southern Runner in 1992 (29 vs. 20%) and 1993 (23 vs. 16%)”
e2“Tomato spotted wilt virus”
Claim · model-written summary
Seeding rate of either peanut cultivar did not significantly affect spotted wilt in either year.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- seeding ratee1
- Interactor
- Tomato spotted wilt virusOrthotospovirus tomatomaculaee2pathogen
- Outcome
- spotted wilte1
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“The seeding rate of either cultivar did not significantly affect spotted wilt in either year”
e2“Tomato spotted wilt virus”
Claim · model-written summary
Spotted wilt in peanut increased with increasing irrigation up to a peak at 535 mm total water in 1992 and 587 mm in 1993.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- irrigatione1
- Interactor
- Tomato spotted wilt virusOrthotospovirus tomatomaculaee2pathogen
- Outcome
- Spotted wilte1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 535 mm total water in 1992 and 587 mm in 1993e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Spotted wilt increased as irrigation increased to a peak of 535 mm total water in 1992 and 587 mm in 1993, and decreased slightly at higher irrigation levels”
e2“Tomato spotted wilt virus”
Claim · model-written summary
Spotted wilt in peanut decreased slightly at irrigation levels above the peak.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- irrigatione1
- Interactor
- Tomato spotted wilt virusOrthotospovirus tomatomaculaee2pathogen
- Outcome
- Spotted wilte1
- Direction
- decreased slightlye1
- Qualifier
- higher irrigation levelse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Spotted wilt increased as irrigation increased to a peak of 535 mm total water in 1992 and 587 mm in 1993, and decreased slightly at higher irrigation levels”
e2“Tomato spotted wilt virus”
Claim · model-written summary
Rust in peanut was significantly affected by seeding rate only in 1992, with the lowest rust ratings at 8 seeds m-2.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- seeding ratee1
- Interactor
- Puccinia arachidis
Puccinia arachidise2pathogen - Outcome
- rust ratingse1
- Direction
- loweste1
- Qualifier
- 8 seeds m−2e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Rust was significantly affected by seeding rate only in 1992, with lowest rust ratings at 8 seeds m−2”
e2“Puccinia arachidis Speg.”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut cultivar GK-7 had significantly higher rust ratings than Southern Runner in 1992 and 1993.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Material
- GK-7e1
- Interactor
- Puccinia arachidisPuccinia arachidise2pathogen
- Outcome
- rust ratingse1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- Southern Runnere1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“GK-7 had significantly higher rust ratings than Southern Runner in 1992 and 1993”
e2“Puccinia arachidis Speg.”
Claim · model-written summary
Southern blight in peanut in 1993 was lowest with below-optimum irrigation.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- below-optimum irrigatione1
- Interactor
- Sclerotium rolfsii
Agroathelia rolfsiie2pathogen - Outcome
- Southern blighte1
- Direction
- loweste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“runner peanut cultivars”
e1“Southern blight in 1993 was lowest with below-optimum irrigation”
e2“Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that reduced seeding rate in irrigated peanut production did not increase risk of spotted wilt and may help manage rust and southern blight.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae1
- Outcome
- risk of spotted wilte1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Reduced seeding rate in irrigated peanut production did not increase risk of spotted wilt under conditions of this study and may have potential to enhance management efforts for rust and southern blight”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · Agroathelia rolfsii · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
density · Orthotospovirus tomatomaculae · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.