Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Advances in Agriculture
Volume 2016, Article ID 5839090, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/5839090
Research Article

Response of the Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Cultivar Gregory to Interactions of Digging Date and Disease Management

1Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620, USA
2Department of Plant Pathology and Entomology, North Carolina State University, Box 7903, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA

Received 11 April 2016; Accepted 28 July 2016

Academic Editor: Ayman Suleiman

Copyright © 2016 David L. Jordan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. R. W. Mozingo, T. A. Coffelt, and F. S. Wright, “The influence of planting and digging dates on yield, value, and grade of four virginia-type peanut cultivars,” Peanut Science, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 55–62, 1991. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. W. A. Court, R. C. Roy, and J. G. Hendel, “Effect of harvest date on agronomic and chemical characteristics of ontario peanuts,” Canadian Journal of Plant Science, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 521–528, 1984. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. C. T. Young, R. S. Matlock, M. E. Mason, and G. R. Waller, “Effect of harvest date and maturity upon free amino acid levels in three varieties of peanuts,” Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 269–273, 1974. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. M. A. Awal and L. Aktan, “Effect of row spacing on growth and yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) stands,” International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, vol. 3, pp. 7–11, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  5. M. J. Hinds, B. Singh, and J. C. Anderson, “Determination of pod and crop maturity for peanuts using percent pod-fill,” Canadian Journal of Plant Science, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 1057–1065, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  6. K. J. Boote, “Growth stages of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.),” Peanut Science, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 35–40, 1982. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  7. A. C. Mixon and W. D. Branch, “Agronomic performance of a Spanish and runner cultivar harvested at six different digging intervals,” Peanut Science, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 50–54, 1985. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. T. H. Sanders, A. M. Schubert, and H. E. Pattee, “Maturity methodology and postharvest physiology,” in Peanut Science and Technology, pp. 624–654, American Peanut Research and Education Society, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  9. E. J. Williams and J. S. Drexler, “A non-destructive method for determining peanut pod maturity,” Peanut Science, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 134–141, 1981. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. C. E. Holiday, E. J. Williams, and V. Chew, “A method for estimating peanut maturity,” Journal of Food Science, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 254–256, 1979. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  11. D. L. Rowland, R. B. Sorensen, C. L. Butts, and W. H. Faircloth, “Determination of maturity and degree day indices and their success in predicting peanut maturity,” Peanut Science, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 125–136, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  12. D. A. Knauft, D. W. Gorbet, and A. J. Norden, “Yield and market quality of seven peanut genotypes as affected by leafspot disease and harvest date,” Peanut Science, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 9–13, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  13. D. S. Carley, D. L. Jordan, B. B. Shew, T. B. Sutton, L. C. Dharmasri, and R. L. Brandenburg, “Influence of digging date and fungicide program on canopy defoliation and pod yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.),” Peanut Science, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 77–84, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  14. J. W. Chapin and J. S. Thomas, “Effect of fungicide treatments, pod maturity, and pod health on peanut peg strength,” Peanut Science, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 119–125, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  15. B. Shew, Peanut Disease Management, Peanut Information, 2014.
  16. A. K. Culbreath, R. C. Kemerait Jr., and T. B. Brenneman, Management of Early Leaf Spot of Peanut as Affected by Fungicide and Date of Spray Program Initiation, Plant Health Progress, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. T. G. Isleib, P. W. Rice, R. W. Mozingo, R. W. Mozingo, and H. E. Pattee, “Registration of ‘Gregory’ peanut,” Crop Science, vol. 39, no. 5, p. 1526, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. USDA, Peanut Inspection Program, US Government Print Office, 2005.
  19. S. G. Bullen and D. Jordan, “Peanut production budgets,” in 2016 Peanut Information, pp. 7–18, NC State University, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  20. SAS, “Proc GLM procedure,” Version 9.4, SAS Institute, 2002–2012.
  21. SAS, “Proc Reg procedure,” Version 9.4, SAS Institute, 2002–2012.
  22. SAS, “Proc Corr procedure,” Version 9.4, SAS Institute, 2002–2012.
  23. D. M. Porter, “Increased severity of sclerotinia blight in peanuts treated with captafol and chlorothalonil,” Plant Disease, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 394–395, 1980. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  24. F. C. Hau and M. K. Beute, “Effects of chlorothalonil on the virulence and physiology of a nonargeted pathogen, Sclerotinia minor,” Phytopathology, vol. 73, pp. 475–479, 1983. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar