Abstract
ABSTRACT During previous organic peanut weed management trials, maintenance pesticides were not applied and it was observed that insect infestations and disease epidemics were not problematic. This was surprising considering that conventional peanut are routinely treated with insecticides and fungicides to control common pests. It was hypothesized that components of the organic peanut production system could be integrated into conventional peanut production to reduce inputs. Structured research trials were conducted from 2012 through 2014 to determine interactions among three levels of weed control, two levels of insect control, and three levels of fungal disease control in organic peanut production using a factorial arrangement of treatments. Weed control treatments were weed-free using handweeding, cultivation with a tine weeder repeated weekly for six weeks, and a non-cultivated (weedy) control. Insect control treatments were two early-season applications of spinosad (Organic Materials Review Institute approved) and a nontreated control. Fungal disease control treatments were applications of cupric oxide plus sulfur (Cu+S) at three-week intervals, the conventional fungicide azoxystrobin at three-week intervals, and a nontreated control. The peanut cultivar Georgia-04S was planted each year of the study. The crop rotation at the research sites was corn grown in alternating years between peanut experiments. There were no interactions among the main effects. Compared to the non-cultivated control, cultivation with a tine weeder consistently reduced weed densities, and yields were equivalent to handweeded peanut two years of three. Intensive cultivation with a tine weeder did not increase disease epidemics or reduce peanut yield, which is contradictory to long-standing peanut production recommendations. Spinosad applications did not affect any of the parameters measured, including incidence of thrips-vectored spotted wilt and peanut yield. Cupric oxide plus sulfur controlled peanut diseases equal to azoxystrobin two years out of three, but peanut yields did not consistently respond to improved disease control from the conventional fungicide. We speculate that ideal crop rotations to reduce disease inoculum and modern peanut cultivars with improved disease tolerance are also factors that allow the use of reduced pest control inputs.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
The three treatment factors showed no interactions.
- Taxon
- Peanut
Arachis hypogaeat0 - Outcome
- interactions among the main effectse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were no interactions among the main effects.”
t0“Organic Peanut Production”
Claim · model-written summary
Tine weeder cultivation reduced weed density relative to the uncultivated control.
- Taxon
- PeanutArachis hypogaeat0
- Treatment
- cultivation with a tine weedere0
- Outcome
- weed densitiese0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- non-cultivated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to the non-cultivated control, cultivation with a tine weeder consistently reduced weed densities”
t0“Peanut”
Claim · model-written summary
Tine weeder yield matched handweeding in two of three years.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- equivalente0
- Qualifier
- two years of threee0
- Comparator
- handweeded peanute0
Not reportedTreatment
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yields were equivalent to handweeded peanut two years of three”
Claim · model-written summary
Intensive tine weeder cultivation did not increase disease epidemics or reduce yield.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- Intensive cultivation with a tine weedere0
- Outcome
- disease epidemics or reduce peanut yielde0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intensive cultivation with a tine weeder did not increase disease epidemics or reduce peanut yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad did not affect spotted wilt incidence or peanut yield.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- Spinosad applicationse0
- Outcome
- incidence of thrips-vectored spotted wilt and peanut yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spinosad applications did not affect any of the parameters measured, including incidence of thrips-vectored spotted wilt and peanut yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cupric oxide plus sulfur controlled peanut disease as well as azoxystrobin in two of three years.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- Cupric oxide plus sulfure0
- Outcome
- peanut diseasese0
- Direction
- equale0
- Qualifier
- two years out of threee0
- Comparator
- azoxystrobine0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cupric oxide plus sulfur controlled peanut diseases equal to azoxystrobin two years out of three”
Claim · model-written summary
Peanut yields did not respond consistently to improved disease control by azoxystrobin.
- Taxon
- peanutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- conventional fungicidee0
- Outcome
- peanut yieldse0
- Direction
- did not consistently responde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“peanut yields did not consistently respond to improved disease control from the conventional fungicide”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · organism · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
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.