Abstract
Abstract Strip tillage with various crop covers in peanut (Arachis hypogaea, L.) production has not shown a clear yield advantage over conventional tillage, but has been found to reduce yield losses from some diseases. This study was conducted to determine pod yield and disease incidence between two tillage practices, five winter cover crops, three peanut cultivars, and three fungicide programs. Conventional and strip tillage treatments were implemented on a Greenville sandy loam (fine, kaolinitic, thermic Rhodic Kandiudults) near Shellman, GA. Five winter cereal grain cover crops (strip tillage) and a no-cover crop treatment were sprayed at recommended (1R), half recommended (0.5R) or untreated (0R) fungicide programs. Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased; however, stem rot (Sclerotium rolfsii) incidence was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide programs but increased 0R program. Conventional tilled peanuts developed more leaf spot compared with strip tillage. There was no difference in leaf spot ratings among winter crop covers. There was no difference in stem rot incidence with tillage or winter cover crop. There was no yield difference with peanut cultivar. Pod yield was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide program (3867 kg/ha) but decreased at the 0R fungicide program (2740 kg/ha). Pod yield was greater with conventional tillage and strip tillage with black oats (Avena sativa L.) (3706 kg/ha) compared with strip tillage of other winter crop cover treatments (3358 kg/ha). Conventional tillage had more leaf spot, equal incidence of stem rot, and higher yield compared with strip tillage. The 0.5R fungicide program had the same yield compared with the 1R fungicide program implying a possible 50% savings on fungicide applications on well rotated fields with lower disease risk.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf spot intensity in peanut decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased.
- Taxon
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeae0 - Treatment
- number of fungicide applicationse0
- Interactor
- Cercospora arachidicolaMycosphaerella arachidise0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf spote0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Stem rot incidence was the same under the 0.5R and 1R fungicide programs.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 0.5R fungicide programse1
- Interactor
- Sclerotium rolfsii
Agroathelia rolfsiie1pathogen - Outcome
- stem rote1
- Direction
- the samee1
- Comparator
- 1Re1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e1“stem rot (Sclerotium rolfsii) incidence was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide programs but increased 0R program”
Claim · model-written summary
Stem rot incidence increased without fungicide (0R program) compared with the 1R and 0.5R programs.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 0R programe1
- Interactor
- Sclerotium rolfsiiAgroathelia rolfsiie1pathogen
- Outcome
- stem rote1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- 1R and 0.5R fungicide programse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e1“stem rot (Sclerotium rolfsii) incidence was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide programs but increased 0R program”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tilled peanuts developed more leaf spot than under strip tillage.
- Taxon
- peanutsArachis hypogaeae2
- Treatment
- Conventional tillede2
- Outcome
- leaf spote2
- Direction
- moree2
- Comparator
- strip tillagee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Conventional tilled peanuts developed more leaf spot compared with strip tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
There was no difference in leaf spot ratings among winter crop covers in peanut.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- winter crop coverse3
- Outcome
- leaf spot ratingse3
- Direction
- no differencee3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e3“There was no difference in leaf spot ratings among winter crop covers”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage made no difference to stem rot incidence in peanut.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- tillagee4
- Outcome
- stem rot incidencee4
- Direction
- no differencee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e4“There was no difference in stem rot incidence with tillage or winter cover crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Winter cover crop made no difference to stem rot incidence in peanut.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- winter cover crope4
- Outcome
- stem rot incidencee4
- Direction
- no differencee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e4“There was no difference in stem rot incidence with tillage or winter cover crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut cultivar made no difference to yield.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- peanut cultivare5
- Outcome
- yielde5
- Direction
- no yield differencee5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“There was no yield difference with peanut cultivar”
Claim · model-written summary
Pod yield was the same under the 0.5R and 1R fungicide programs, at 3867 kg/ha.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 0.5R fungicide programe6
- Outcome
- Pod yielde6
- Direction
- the samee6
- Value
- 3867 kg/hae6
- Comparator
- 1Re6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e6“Pod yield was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide program (3867 kg/ha) but decreased at the 0R fungicide program (2740 kg/ha)”
Claim · model-written summary
Pod yield decreased without fungicide (0R program), at 2740 kg/ha.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- 0R fungicide programe6
- Outcome
- Pod yielde6
- Direction
- decreasede6
- Value
- 2740 kg/hae6
- Comparator
- 1R and 0.5R fungicide programe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e6“Pod yield was the same for the 1R and 0.5R fungicide program (3867 kg/ha) but decreased at the 0R fungicide program (2740 kg/ha)”
Claim · model-written summary
A 0.5R fungicide program might save about 50% of fungicide applications on well-rotated fields with lower disease risk.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Outcome
- savings on fungicide applicationse7
- Value
- 50%e7
- Qualifier
- well rotated fields with lower disease riske7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Within peanut cultivars, leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) intensity decreased as the number of fungicide applications increased”
e7“implying a possible 50% savings on fungicide applications on well rotated fields with lower disease risk”
The same questions in other papers
fungicide · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results differ
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
49 papers more in this group
See all 53 papers →fungicide · Agroathelia rolfsii · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →tillage · disease · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →cover crop · disease · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- no effect
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.