CIRCULAR 166 MARCH 1969 EFFECTS of ROW and DRILL SPACING on YIELD and MARKET GRADE FACTORS of PEANUTS Agricultural AUBURN Experiment Station ALAB[AMA UNIVERSITY AUERN, FIRST PRINTING 3M, MARCH 1969 EFFECTS of ROW and DRILL SPACING on YIELD and MARKET GRADE FACTORS of PEANUTS AUBREY C. MIXON, Research Agronomist USDA-ARS, CRD AND DRILL spacings that provide optimum plant populations help produce maximum yields of peanuts, Arachis hypogaea L. ROW In recent years, many farmers have adopted closer row and drill spacings for peanuts. The improved land preparation, cultivation, and weed control practices often associated with closerow patterns have proved to be beneficial in weed and disease control (2,6). Recently published information on the effect of spacing of peanuts in the Southeast is meager. Peanut row and drill spacings have been studied in production areas where varieties with different plant growth characteristics have been grown under various management procedures. Although Spanish peanuts were not included in this study, their erect growing habit is thought to be responsible for the more favorable yield response to closer row and drill spacings than those of the Virginia type. Several early workers (5,8,10,12) in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, and Georgia reported increased yields of Spanish peanuts in rows less than 36 inches apart. In recent tests in Florida, Lipscomb et al. (9) obtained higher pod yield from 'Dixie Spanish' peanuts when grown in 12-, 18-, and 24-inch rows than when grown in 36-inch rows. Row width had no significant effect on yield or market grade of the largeseeded, Virginia-type or the small-seeded, runner market-type. Average yields in these tests were between 3,450 and 4,080 pounds per acre. In early tests in North Carolina (15), the large-seeded 'Jumbo Runner' variety with prostrate growing habit produced the highest yield in 36-inch rows with an average plant drill spacing of 8 inches. Both Virginia Bunch and 'Improved Spanish 2B,' with erect habit of growth, yielded more with a 4-inch drill spacing in rows as close as 18 or 24 inches than wider spacings. Later studies in North Carolina (1,13) showed higher yields for the largeseeded, erect-growing 'NC2' variety in 24-inch rows than in 36inch rows. More recent results in North Carolina (3) with the NC2 variety with an erect growth habit indicated that an increase in yield was obtained by decreasing the drill spacing from 24 to 3 inches and by decreasing row widths from 36 to 12 inches. Greater and more consistent increases in yield were obtained by reducing row width than by increasing the number of plants within the row. Response to row width varied with yield level. At lower yield levels, increases from closer rows were appreciable, but when the yield level reached about 3,600 pounds per acre, no yield advantage from rows closer than 36 inches was apparent. In Virginia, Duke and Alexander (4) compared 'Virginia Bunch 46-2' and 'Virginia 56R' in 12-, 18-, and 36-inch rows on plots of equal size. Row width had no effect on yield of the runner variety. In 2 out of 3 years the bunch variety yielded more in closer rows, but the average for the 3 years showed no advantage for this variety for rows closer than 36 inches. Using irrigation and chemical weed control without cultivation in Florida, Harris et al. (7) reported increased yields of both large-seeded Virginia Runner G26 and small-seeded Early Runner varieties grown in narrow rows. However, plot arrangements in this study gave a border effect advantage for close rows. In recent years, Sheppard (14) in Georgia has advocated production procedures using close rows for peanuts, but he emphasized closer row spacing from a cultural standpoint only. A recent report by Norden and Lipscomb (11) gave evidence that peanuts of similar growth habit but of different genetic background may respond differently in various row spacings. MATERIALS AND METHODS Peanut spacing studies were conducted from 1960 through 1964 at the Wiregrass Substation, Headland, Alabama. Two peanut varieties, Early Runner and Virginia Bunch 67, marketed as [41 southeastern runner market-type, were used in the study. A largeseeded Virginia market type, Virginia Runner G26, was included in the last 3 years. Row spacings were 4 rows, 12 inches; 3 rows, 18 or 24 inches; and 2 rows, 36 inches apart, centered between tractor wheels on plots 72 inches wide. Plots were either 30 or 35 feet long. In 1960 and 1961, 3-row plots were spaced 24 inches apart, but this was changed to 18 inches in subsequent years, so that the space between outside rows of continguous plots was a uniform 36 inches. Row spacing patterns are given in Figures 1 and 2. Any bias that might have resulted from 3-row arrangement in 1960 and 1961 would have favored the 3-row treatment. Future references to the 3-row treatment in the text and in tables identifies this treatment as 18-inch row width. In 1960, 1961 and 1964, plots were seeded to obtain a plant approximately every 4 inches in the row. In 1962 and 1963 drill spacings of 3.0, 4.5 and 6.0 inches were obtained by planting thick and thinning to desired drill spacing within 1 week following seedling emergence. Plant populations in the different row and drill spacings are given in Table 1. A factorial design was used with each variable completely randomized in each of six replications. Land preparation included turning the soil 9 inches deep with a moldboard plow equipped with a coulter-jointer adjusted to cover surface litter to a depth of 5 to 9 inches. Plowing was immediately prior to fertilization and planting. Fertilizer was applied broadcast in amounts recommended by the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station's Soil Testing Laboratory, Auburn, Alabama, and was disked into the upper few inches of the soil. Gypsum was applied at the early blossom stage in a 12-inch band over the row area at the rate of 500 pounds per acre. Peanut seed were planted on a level surface with conventional planters mounted on a three-point hitch tractor frame. To ensure complete weed control, two weed control applications were made. TABLE 1. PLANT POPULATIONS FOR THREE Row AND THREE DRILL SPACING COMBINATIONS, 1962-1963 Row spacing and number of rows between 72-inch tractor wheel spacing Row spacing In. 12 --------------- ---18 36...... Number of rows Approximate plant populations per acre for three drill spacings 3 inches (1,000) 116 87 58 41/2 inches (1,000) 79 58 39 6 inches (1,000) 58 43 29 No. 4 3 2 [51 In the first application 4,6 dinitro-o-secondary butyl-phenol (DNBP) was applied as recommended for sprayed pre-emergence treatment. To further aid in controlling weeds, a 3-pound-peracre post-emergence application of sodium 2,4-dichlorophenoxyethyl sulfate (sesone) was sprayed on the plots in a broadcast spray application 10 days after the plants emerged. Except for the tractor wheel area, the 4-, 3-, and 2-row plots, Figure 1, were cultivated 0, 1, and 2 times, respectively. The tractor wheel area between plots was given a shallow cultivation when necessary to control weeds. Plots were dusted with DDT-sulfur mixture or sprayed with DDT-Dithane for insect and Cercospora sp. leafspot control. Each variety was dug with conventional harvesting r 18" - T-T 1811 111 N 2 *j2 J 2 ~J hi 18 m 1 1j 8 18 1. 8 . 18 j 1.8 -Tn I, )II 12 4 -- 1- r 36'11 1814~ -O M' F b // / / / / / / / / / / / / / -/ / / / / / / / / / / / / -/ / / I\.. 4 Rows 3 Rows 2 Rows FIG. 1. Row spacing pattern between 72-inch tractor. wheel middles.. ['6] §v FIG. 36 2. Virginia Runner G26 planted in 4 rows 12 inches apart, left, and 2 rows inches apart, right. i luii i t ,it th ill ii I)' o w 1 tI 11 n1) (0)I n ial n- it \. Pm il \i II'11 111(1 d RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ill '' Niollo >. i Whe N 1111 h \a ii ict xii liiie (lit. norI wNi iiN fa N 4! Il mI th am ~ (d in et periii . 1( 1 NNihet I ild m I rktIN II1( tr th .. thrIN p Iinu usN t~ \ il! a iI (1 )ic \N 111infnc IIIt I'ill it cc I ,( 111ilrliccs~[( d sc m ~i il t Is s Ih tI'111sts II) N>Iiik r il \ (iet(1I1 II iI V NN iini Bill th iNN h i \J t tei tended i Ii h1)11 tolJI I pII icl i ld illhe (a tch ofNII thi ruii NJ)I in f,1ill l~ II i riet Ni.a the l ruI TABLE 2. YIELD AND MARKET GRADE DATA FOR EARLY RUNNER, VIRGINIA BUNCH 67, AND VIRGINIA 026 PEANUT VARIETIES GROWN IN THREE ROW AND THREE DRILL SPACINGS, 1962-1963 RUNNER Spacing Early Runner Pounds of pods/acre Va. Bunch Va. Runner 67 G26 Av. EarlyRunner Shelling percentages Va. Bunch Va. Runner G26A. 67 Av Lb. Row width (inches) 4-12*- - 2-36 - Drill spacing (inches) 3 - - - - - - - - - Lb. 2,157a 2,150a 2,088a 2,212a 2,053a 2,129a Lb. 2,444a 2,513a 2,510a 2,500a 2,517a 2,451a Lb. 2,225 a 2,225a 2,2 7 2a 2,29 3 a 2 ,208a 2,221a Pct. 73a 73a 73a 73a 73a 73a Pct. 72a 72a 71a 72a 72a 72a Pct. 71a 71a 70a 71a 71a 71a Pct. 72a 72a 71a 7 2 3-18 - - -- ,O7 5at 2,012a 2,219a 2,168a 2,0 5 3a 2,084a Pct. 00 4'/2 ------- ---- - 2a 72a 72a Seed riding 15/64-inch slotted screen Seed/I100 g. Pct. 91a 91a 91a Pct. 93a 93a 93a Pct. 91a 91a 91a 91a 91a 91a No. 182a 184a 187a 183a 187 a 183a No. 164a 166a 164a 166a 165a 163a No. 139a 137a 141a 136a 141a 140a No. 162a 162a 164a 162a 164a 162a Row width (inches) 4 -12 .- - -- - - - - - - - .3-18 --- - - - - - - - - - 2 -36 ------------ -Drill spacing (inches) 3 . -- - - - - - - - - - - - 4 /2 - - - - - -- - - - - - - 90a 90a 90a 90a 91a 93a 91a 89a 93a 6 - --- -- --- - --- 91a 90a 93a * 4-12 equals 4 rows spaced 12 inches on a plot 72 inches wide. t-Means in vertical columns with same letter for variahles not different at 0.05 level. 30 Early Runner 1960-63 2,381 2301 Va. Bunch 67 1960-63 2,338 2,353 1-35 t Va. Runner G26 1962-63 2,4442513 2 ,2i 2 510 20 IOF . I · I I I · a I . . . i I I 4 3 2 4 3 Number of 2 Rows 4 3 2 FIG. 3. Yield of peanut varieties grown in 3-row spacings; 4, 3, 2 rows were spaced 12, 18, and 36 inches apart, respectively on area 72 inches wide. A significant year-by-drill-spacing interaction for yield resulted from a low yield for the 4.5-inch spacing in 1962, and for the 6-inch spacing in 1963, Table 4. No explanation can be offered for this differential response. No other significant interactions were found for yield, shelling percentage, proportion of seed riding 15/64-inch slotted screen, or seed per 100 g. that rode the screen. Lowest average yield was 2,060 pounds per acre for the 6-inch plant spacings in 18-inch rows. Highest average yield was 2,344 pounds per acre for 3-inch plant spacing in 18-inch rows. Highest and lowest yields were in 18-inch rows with approximately 14 per cent increase for 3-inch plant spacing over 6-inch spacings. This pattern of yield response for the 3- and 6-inch plant spacings was not evident in the 12- or 36-inch row width. TABLE 3. YIELD FOR THREE PEANUT VARIETIES GROWN AND THREE DRILL SPACINGS, 1962-1963 IN THREE ROW Drill spacings (inches) Row spacing 3 Pod yield per acre 41/2 6 In 12 18 36 * Lb. Lb. Lb. 2,271a* 2,126a 2,277a 2,271a 2,060b 2,344a 2,226a 2,327a 2,264a Means for row or drill spacings with same letter not significantly different at 0.05 level. [9] TABLE 4. YIELD FOR THREE PEANUT VARIETIES GROWN IN THREE DRILL SPACINGS, 1962-1963 Drill spacing 1962 1962 Pod yield per acre 1963 1963 In. 3 41/2 -----------------------------------. 6 * Means for spacing or years Lb. 2,240a' 2,111b 2,261ac Lb. 2,346a 2,305a 2,183bc with same letter not different at 0.05 level. Yield level in these tests varied from year to year, but varieties responded in a similar manner to the different spacing treatments. Average pod yield for the different treatments ranged from 3,170 pounds per acre in 1961 to 1,874 pounds per acre in 1962 for Early Runner; from 2,977 pounds per acre in 1961 to 1,767 pounds per acre in 1960 for Virginia Bunch 67; and from 2,572 pounds per acre in 1962 to 2,178 pounds per acre in 1964 for Virginia Runner G26. Average yield in all tests was 2,340 pounds per acre for Early Runner, 2,275 for Virginia Bunch 67, and 2,465 for Virginia Runner G26. Average pod yield for all varieties in the study was 2,360 pounds per acre. Under the conditions of these tests, no average advantages or disadvantages in yield, shelling percentage, proportion of seed that rode a 15/64-inch screen, or seed size based on seed per 100 g. resulted from growing Early Runner, Virginia Bunch 67, or Virginia Runner G26 peanuts in rows closer than 36 inches apart, or in uniform drill spacings closer than 6 inches. These results for row spacing are similar to results of recent tests with prostrateand erect-growing varieties of peanuts of similar botanical type in Virginia and Florida (4,9), and in North Carolina (3) when yield levels were high. Although close-row arrangements did not produce yield advantages in these tests, the close-row procedure may be beneficial as a cultural method. A close-row arrangement often offers better weed and disease control, and may require less cultivation, which is often necessary to control weeds. [ 10 ] LITERATURE CITED (1) L. W. 1956. Fundamental Concepts in the Development of Control Measures for Southern Blight and Root Rot of Peanuts. Plant Dis. Reporter 40:661-665. (2) CANNON, B. M. 1955. Engineering Aspects of Close-Row Peanut Production. North Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 11. (3) Cox, F. R., AND P. H. REID. 1965. Interactions of Plant Population Factors and Level of Production on the Yield and Grade of Peanuts. Agron. J. 57:455-457. BOYLE, (4) DUKE, GEORGE G., AND M. ALEXANDER. 1964. Effects of Close-Row Spacings on Peanut Yield and on Production Equipment Requirements. U.S. Dep. Agr. Production Res. Rep. 77. (5) FUNCHESS, M. J., AND H. B. TISDALE. 1924. Thirty-fifth Annual Report. Auburn Univ. (Ala.) Agr. Exp. Sta. Annual Rep. p. 6. (6) GARREN, K. H. 1959. The Stem Rot of Peanuts and its Control. Virginia Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 144. (7) HARRIS, H. C., J. M. MYERS AND F. CLARK. 1961. Increase Peanut Yields and Use Less Labor. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Agron. Rep. 61-64. (8) KILLINGER, C. B., W. F. STOKES, F. CLARK, AND J. D. WARNER. 1948. Peanuts in Florida. Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 432. (9) LIPSCOMB, R. W., W. K. ROBERTSON, AND W. H. CHAPMAN. 1964. The Effect of Spacing and Fertility on Yield and Quality of Dixie Spanish and Early Runner Peanuts Grown on Ruston Fine Sandy Loam. Proc. Third. Nat. Peanut Res. Conf. p. 61-65. (10) MCCLELAND, C. K. 1931. The Peanut Crop in Arkansas. Arkansas Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 263. (11) NORDEN, A. J. AND R. W. LIPSCOMB. 1968. Relationship Between Growth Habit and Genetic Background in Peanuts at Different Row Spacings (Unpublished). Paper presented at 1968 American Society of Agronomy Meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana. (12) PARKAM, S. A. 1942. Peanut Production in the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Georgia Coastal Plain Exp. Sta. Bull. 24. (13) PERRY, A., H. E. SCOTT, J. C. WELLS, AND F. nut Production Guide. North Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 257. p. 10-12. (14) SHEPPARD, J. L. 1962. New Development in Peanut Production Equipment and Procedures. Proc. Second Nat. Peanut Res. Conf. p. 63-71. (15) STURKIE, D. G. AND J. T. WILLIAMSON. 1951. Cultural Practices p. 173-209. In Peanut - the Unpredictable Legume. William Byrd Press, Inc., Richmond, Virginia. S. COATES. 1959. Pea- [ 11 ] AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION SYSTEM OF ALABAMA'S LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITY \With an agr icuitural iesearch unit in everv major soil aiea, Auburn University serves the needs ot field crop, livestock, forestr v, and horticijltni al prloducers in each region in Alalama. Everv citizen of the State has a stake in tis research program, 1 0D_ since any advantage from Incw and more o 0' Li cal xxays of and handling sproducing far in 1 protducts directly leitts the consuming public. economi Research Unit Identification 1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Tennessee Volley Substation, Belle Mina. Sand Mountain Substation, Crossville. North Alabama Horticulture Substation, Cullman. Upper Coastal Plain Substation, Winfield. Forestry Unit, Fayette County Thorsby Foundation Seed Stocks Form, Thorsby. Chilton Area Horticulture Substation, Clonton. Forestry Unit, Coosa County. Piedmont Substation, Camp Hill Plant Breeding Unit, Tallossee. Forestry Unit, Autaugo County. Prattville Experiment Field, Prattville. Black Belt Substation, Marion Junction Tuskegee Experiment Field, Tuskegee Lower Coastal Plain Substation, Camden. Forestry Unit, Barbour County. Monroeville Experiment Field, Monroeville. Wiregross Substation, Headland. Brewton Experiment Field, Brewton. Ornamental Horticulture Field Station, Spring Hill. Gulf Coast Substation, Fairhope.