Fertilize~r, ~ apsm' and ~1 P Lime Experiments with Peanuts in Alabanma BULLETIN 448 JUNE 1973 AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT R. DENNIS ROUSE, Director STATION AUBURN UNIVERSITY AUBURN, ALABAMA CONTENTS Page EARLY FERTILIZER AND LIME EXPERIMENTS-5 A NEW SOIL FERTILITY PROJECT------6 Nature of Experiments ---------- -7 Soil Testin g -- - --- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 When are Yields Really Different?-8 FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS ---------------------- -9 -10 -12 P and K Experiments ---------------K E xp erim ents ------CALCIUM ------- ------- (Ca) AS A NUTRIENT ----- -- -12 -14 15 Gypsum Experiments -------------------Slag Experim ents .---------------------------------Lim e Experim ents ----------------------------------- 20 Spray-on C alcium ---------------------------------- 21 BORON (B) EXPERIMENTS ------------------------------ 28 25 26 26 28 29 MAGNESIUM ZINC (Mg) EXPERIMENTS ----------------------- (Zn) EXPERIM ENTS .----------------------------- W INTER COVER CROP ---------------------------------. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ----------------------------CITED .----------------------------------. LITERATURE FIRST PRINTING 16M, JUNE 1978 Fertilizer, Gypsum, and Lime Experiments with Peanuts in Alabama, 1967-1972 DALLAS HARTZOG and FRED ADAMS' PEANUT CROP is the major source of agricultural income in southeastern Alabama and a major income producer for the State. In 1972, for example, income from peanuts in Alabama was $53 million, which ranked peanuts third in total farm income from all field crops in the State. Peanuts were grown on 187,000 acres in Alabama in 1971, with 13 counties having more than 1,000 acres, Figure 1. On this acreage, 85 per cent were planted to runner type, 14 per cent to Virginia type, and 1 per cent to Spanish type, Table 1. Runners have always been popular in Alabama. They were grown on 99 per cent of the acreage as late as 1962. Introduction of the Florigiant variety in the mid-1960's progressively reduced runners to a low of 69 per cent of the total acreage by 1970. This trend was reversed in 1971 with increased availability of planting seed of the newer Florunner variety. The dominant runner variety during the early 1960's was Dixie Runner; in the mid and late 1960's, it was Early Runner; in 1971, it became Florunner. Florigiant became the dominant Virginiatype variety in the mid 1960's. The Spanish varieties are Argentine and Starr but occupy only a small acreage. Peanut yields have almost doubled during the 10-year period, 1968-1972. This increase is due primarily to better varieties, better leafspot control, better cultural practices, more effective herbicides, improved harvesting practices such as inverters and dryers, greater use of lime, and a more balanced soil fertility program. The discovery of these yield-increasing practices was no accident. Each practice was the product of careful agricultural research, primarily by state agricultural experiment stations such 1 Research THE Associate and Professor, Department of Agronomy and Soils. ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION FIG. 1. Alabama counties with more than 1,000 acres of peanuts in 1971. The number in each county is the planted peanut acreage for that county. Each dot represents the location of a fertilizer, gypsum, or lime experiment during 19671972. FIG. 2. Effect of soil-test calcium level upon the maximum yield of peanuts. FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME TABLE 1. TOTAL ACRES AND YIELD PER ACRE FOR PEANUT TYPES IN ALABAMA DURING 1963-721 5 Acres No. 177,118 1963 ......... 175,472 1964 ._________ 1965._________. 175,042 1966_________. 161,381 1967__________. 149,069 142,823 1968 .......... 1969 .......... 129,062 1970...... 125,511 158,918 1971 1972 .......... 175,556 Year Runner-type Yield/acre Lb. 1,173 1,271 1,318 1,195 1,323 1,337 1,472 1,640 2,116 1,887 Virginia-type Acres No. 1,126 3,089 6,144 11,258 14,649 23,810 44,196 52,265 25,654 14,000 Yield/acre Lb. 1,377 1,603 1,991 1,717 1,796 1,737 1,841 1,848 2,025 1,962 Spanish-type Acres No. 3,326 4,173 5,702 5,593 4,744 4,778 6,254 5,272 2,686 940 Yield/acre Lb. 990 1,161 1,293 992 1,046 1,129 1,214 1,269 1,381 1,405 -....... 1Data obtained from Statistical Reporting Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Montgomery, Alabama. as the one at Auburn University. The value of agricultural research to peanut farmers cannot be pinpointed, but an approximate value can be made by using some simple arithmetic on the yields in Table 1. If yield increases from 1963 to 1972 are the result of research findings, then research increased yields by 297,000 tons during the last 10 years. At $250 per ton, this added $74 million to the gross income of Alabama's peanut farmers. That averages out to be a $7.4-million dollar dividend each year. EARLY FERTILIZER AND LIME EXPERIMENTS Research with peanuts has many goals, one of which is to determine soil fertility requirements for maximum yield and high quality. Auburn University has demonstrated an active interest in this area since the early 1900's when Duggar and coworkers (3,4) began experimenting with lime and fertilizer needs on farmers' fields. The need for more sophisticated experiments caused Alabama's Agricultural Experiment Station to buy a large farm near Headland, Alabama in 1928. It was named the Wiregrass Substation. Its main purpose was to do extensive experimentation with peanuts, especially with fertilizer and lime. Many valuable experiments have been conducted on the Station during its 45-year history (1,2,6,7). To supplement the research at the Wiregrass Substation, Auburn University also conducted many fertilizer and lime experi- 6 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION ments on farmers' fields in the Wiregrass area during 19381954 (1,6,7). Results of this research consistently showed only small or insignificant yield increases from fertilizers. In contrast, highly profitable yield increases were found where lime was used on low pH soils and where gypsum was used on low calcium soils. This early work showed that supplemental calcium, as gypsum or lime, would sometimes increase both yield and grade of peanuts. It also showed that "poppy" peanuts were good indicators of the need for calcium. To make soil fertility findings available and useful to all farmers and applicable to all their fields, the Auburn University Soil Testing Laboratory was established in 1952. The results obtained in these early field experiments served as the backbone and foundation of the fertilizer and lime recommendations made to farmers for peanuts by Auburn's Soil Testing Lab. Without a field testing program, such as the one Auburn conducts, soil testing is not reliable and does not serve the interest of the farmer. Commercial soil testing, for example, does not serve the best interest of Alabama's farmers unless it uses Auburn's soil testing procedures and recommendation guides. A NEW SOIL FERTILITY PROJECT Very few soil fertility experiments were conducted with peanuts in Alabama during the period of 1955-1966. During this time, however, new varieties and new practices had greatly increased yields. At the same time, neighboring states had greatly increased their recommended fertilizer rates for peanuts without publishing supporting research data. Thus, an obvious need for updating field research data had developed by the mid-1960's for this major income-producing crop in Alabama. To answer this challenge, Auburn University began a new soil research program for peanuts in 1967. Its goal was to determine the fertilizer and lime requirements of peanuts being grown on a variety of soil types in the Wiregrass area. Further, these requirements were to be incorporated into Auburn's soil testing program to keep its recommendations up-to-date. In order to realize these objectives, it was decided that the experiments would be located on farmers' fields in the major peanut-producing counties. Experiments on the Wiregrass Substation had consistently shown little or no response to applied fertilizer. FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 7 Nature of Experiments The field experiments described are the result of the cooperative efforts of farmers, the Alabama Peanut Producers Association, and Auburn University. Farmers permit the experiments to be located within their regular peanut fields. They do all the plowing, planting, and other cultural practices needed for growing and harvesting peanuts. By locating experiments on farmers' fields and using their practices, a wide range of soil and climatic conditions are encountered and tested. Farmers also contribute to 'the project through their Alabama Peanut Producers Association. The Association makes a significant financial contribution to the project each year. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station agronomists select experimental sites, apply experimental fertilizers and lime, help with harvest, measure yields, grade peanuts, and soil test. They also make observations during the growing season and record the condition and progress of each experiment. Experiments are dropped when rigorous experimental conditions are not maintained for any reason. This has resulted in about one-third of the experiments being discontinued each year before yield records are taken. During the period of 1967-1972, 120 experiments on farmers' fields were harvested. Soil Testing Soil testing is the means by which fertilizer needs on one farmer's field can be applied to other farmers' fields. General fertilizer recommendations are not reliable because soils have been greatly changed by past fertilizer and liming practices. Several field and laboratory experiments are required to make fertilizer recommendations based on soil testing. Field experiments are required that compare yields on fertilized or limed soil against yields on the same soil without fertilizer or lime. Soil-test values are required for each experiment. Then, yields are related to soil-test values in the following manner: 1. If the yield without fertilizer is less than 50 per cent of that with fertilizer, then the Soil Test Rating is VL (very low). 2. If the yield without fertilizer is 50-75 per cent of that with fertilizer, then the Soil Test Rating is L (low). 3 If the yield without fertilizer is 75-99 per cent of that with fertilizer, then the Soil Test Rating is M (medium). 8 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 4. If the yield without fertilizer is equal to that with fertilizer, then the Soil Test Rating is H (high), VH (very high), or EH (extra high). One of the above ratings appears on each soil test report that farmers receive from Auburn's Soil Testing Laboratory. The Soil Test Rating is shown by the letters, VL, L, M, H, VH,or EH for phosphorus (P), potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), and calcium (Ca). A number follows each Soil Fertility Rating on Auburn's soil test report. That number is the Soil Fertility Index. It shows the soil's fertility status in that particular nutrient without regard to what crop might be grown. A low number means the soil is depleted and should be built up. A high number means a high state of fertility, and fertilizer containing that nutrient is not needed. When are Yields Really Different? Peanut farmers can count on at least three things: death, taxes, and a soil that is everything but uniform. Some spots in the field are more sandy than others, surface soil is deeper in some places, nematodes or diseases are worse in some spots. This raises serious questions about experiments on such fields. Question 1. If your peanut field were divided into nothing but 100-foot rows, would each row make exactly the same amount of peanuts? If your answer to that question is "yes," you are not a bona fide peanut farmer. A real farmer would know better. Question 2. If two, side-by-side, 100-foot rows are picked separately, would you get exactly the same amount of peanuts from each? Not very likely! Why? Because of the natural variations in all the things that go into making a peanut yield. If yields from two rows differed by only 1 pound, this would be equal to a 150-pound difference when expanded to an acre basis. Question 3. If fertilizer is added to one of the side-by-side rows and it makes more peanuts, was it because of the fertilizer? Some would be tempted to say "yes" because they would expect fertilizer to increase yield. But this may be wrong. The fertilized row could have been just naturally more productive and the fertilizer had nothing to do with the yield. Question 4. If the fertilized row makes fewer peanuts, was it because of the fertilizer? Again the temptation is to say "no" because one does not expect fertilizer to lower yield This may be FERTILIZER, GYPSUM,: and LIME 9 right. The fertilized row may have been just naturally less productive because of different soil conditions. Question 5. How can you tell if the difference in peanuts from the two rows is due to fertilizer or to some unknown cause? It is done by comparing yields from more than one pair of rows. If most or all of several pairs favor fertilizer, then it is a good bet that the yield difference is caused by the fertilizer. In the experiments reported here, four pairs are compared in each test (each pair is called a "replication"). Question 6. Why are four pairs (or replications) needed? For the same reason that you must flip a coin more than once to know that it will not come up heads every time. If fertilizer is needed, some unknown factor may keep fertilizer from giving the highest yield in one pair of rows, but it will not do that in all pairs. With comparisons between four such pairs available, the mathematical "law of probability" can be applied to the yields. It tells whether the difference in average yields is due to chance (as in coin flipping) or is due to fertilizer. These mathematical calculations are called "statistics." Question 7. How is this principle used to interpret yields? If mathematics (statistics) shows that the difference in yield between fertilized and unfertilized rows was due to chance, then it may be concluded that fertilizer had no effect. If, on the other hand, the difference was not likely due to chance and it would be expected to happen 9 out of 10 times, the fertilizer is credited with increasing (or decreasing) yield. The interpretation of all yields (and grades) in the tables is based upon "statistics," as described. If a yield difference is large enough to be more than just due to chance, the yield will appear in bold-face type with a footnote symbol by it. FERTILIZER EXPERIMENTS Adding fertilizer is a general practice for all crops in the peanut area. Unlike most other crops, however, peanut yields are usually not increased by direct application of fertilizer. Nevertheless, farmers continue to fertilize peanuts with a "just-in-case" philosophy. Peanuts do not respond to fertilizers like other crops because the peanut plant is exceptionally efficient at getting its needed 10 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION nutrients from the soil. It is much more efficient than cotton, for example, and its fertilizer needs are much less. Consequently, soil-test levels for P and K must be quite low before peanut yields are increased by fertilizer. Varieties and practices have changed considerably since the 1950's, when Auburn stopped conducting those earlier fertilizer experiments, and yields have more than doubled. Because of this, new fertilizer experiments were started in 1967. These experiments have used fertilizer in two ways: (a) a combination of phosphorus and potassium (P and K); and (b) potassium only. P and K Experiments The experiments have been located on farms showing a wide range of soil-test levels. Each experimental area was divided into eight plots, with each plot consisting of four 100-foot rows. Four of the plots received fertilizer; the other four did not. Results from 21 of these experiments are given in Table 2. The correct interpretation of the yields in Table 2 is essential. As explained previously, mathematics, or "statistics," tells whether fertilizer probably caused higher yields or not. If fertilizer was not the cause of a higher yield, then the fertilizer was of no value. An example of how it works follows: The first experiment listed in Table 2 (G. Croft's farm) shows that fertilized plots averaged a 110-pound higher yield than the unfertilized plots. Was the 110 pounds due to fertilizer? Actually, not every fertilized plot yielded more than its unfertilized companion plot, and yield differences were not very much in any case. Finally, "statistics" showed that the difference in yield was only by "chance." Therefore, fertilizer did not affect yield. A look at the yields in Table 2 shows that "no fertilizer" yields were sometimes higher than "fertilizer" yields and sometimes lower. In no case, was the difference very much. Even more important, however, is the fact that no yield difference was due to fertilizer. It was due to chance in every case. The average yield of all experiments was 2,770 pounds per acre without fertilizer and 2,780 pounds with fertilizer. The only possible conclusion to be reached from these yields is that fertilizer was not needed. Neither did fertilizer affect grade in any case. TABLE 2. EFFECT OF PHOSPHORUS (P) AND POTASSIUM (K) FERTILIZERS ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1969-1972 Variety and Site No. farmer County Soil type Soil-test rating and P index' Yield per acre' No fert. Lb. Fert. Lb. Grade' No fert. Pct. Fert. M" 'Ii K Pct. 64 9392_ Florigiant _G. Croft N m 9572_ 38 . _F. C. Martin _P. L. Baker _B. Deloney, Jr. 49 39 . 67_ 51 _ _R. Griffin _R. Harris _M. Hatton J. Bostick C. Croft G. Walker R. Logan _H. Thompson _E. Grace Florunner L. & J. Johnson _B. Deloney, Jr. F. Sanders D.Morgan l C. Croft Early Runner 3635. 37 _ 17_ 71_ 96 Dale Barbour Dale Dale Barbour Dale Henry Henry Dale Henry Dale Dale Geneva Fuquay loamy sand Blanton loamy sand L 60 VL 30 VL 0 L50 2,350 Lucy loamy sand Lucy loamy sand M 90 VH290 L 70 M 90 H110 Dothan loamy sand mloo H110 M 80 H1l0 M100 M 80 L 60 M 80 L 60 H120 H190 L60 L60 M70 M70 M70 M70 M80 M80 M80 M80 M80 L60 M70 M70 M80 2,150 1,550 4,590 3,270 2,440 2,460 2,210 1,640 4,600 2,880 2,630 2,190 2,860 3,930 2,080 3,480 2,630 2,270 2,320 2,060 3,080 3,560 67 69 63 73 73 74 68 66 63 68 67 62 74 72 71 C I-I a. 67 67 63 66 74 66 68 75 67 66 69 2,130 2,560 94 _ 52. 73_ 48_ 70_ 50 _ 18 _ 19_ 40_ -W. -T. -L. -H. -H. Henry Houston Buie Dale Henry Fuquay loamy sand Unclassified Lucy loamy sand Fuquay loamy sand 2,700 1,590 3,240 4,330 3,990 3,150 1,770 3,220 4,540 4,060, 3,430 Henry Dale Barbour Dale Geneva Geneva Barbour M80 H90 M70 M80 M80 H1010 H90 73 62 77 73 74 71 77 71 69 65 76 72 73, 71 75 71 oa D. Fuqua Cotton Baxley Hartzog _B. Deloney, Jr. Dothan loamy sand VH260 H120, M 80 M 80 H11G 2,650 2,780 2,230 1,370 2,470 2,890 68 59, 67 69 2,470 1,370 600 67 Virginia Bunch 67 Av. 2,770 2,780 69 1 See Appendix Table A for soil analysis. 2 Yields were not increased by fertilizer, according to "statistics." Grade means sound mature kernels. 12 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION K Experiments A tendency has developed for farmers to add higher rates of K fertilizer to peanuts than is needed. This is potentially detrimental because high rates of K may interfere with the nuts' ability to get enough calcium. The purpose of the "K only" experiments was to see if this potential danger was of practical importance to the farmer. The results of 11 such experiments are given in Table 3. The extra fertilizer had no effect on yield or grade in any experiment. Any difference was due to chance only. The average yield per acre was 2,190 pounds without the extra K and 2,160 pounds with it. In other words, the extra K fertilizer was neither beneficial nor harmful to the peanuts in any experiment. According to the soil-test rating system, all of the soils in the "P-K" and "K only" experiments should be rated H because fertilizer failed to increase yield in any of them. However, a look at Tables 2 and 3 shows that the majority of soils were not rated H in both P and K. Several soils are rated L, which means that fertilizer should have increased yield. But it did not. Then why do we rate soils L when our definition says it ought to be H? The answer to that question is based on reasoning, not scientific proof. Actually, the P and K ratings shown in Tables 2 and 3 are the Soil Test Ratings for corn and grasses. Since peanuts should be grown in rotation with other crops, it is not believed that peanuts should be allowed to deplete the soil to the point that the other crops suffer. At the present time, it is not known how low soil K must be before its rating would be L for peanuts, according to our definition. These are the reasons that Auburn's Soil Testing Laboratory does not recommend that fertilizer be applied to peanuts but that it be applied to the crop in rotation with peanuts. Soils should be sampled for the crop preceding peanuts and then fertilized according to recommendations for that crop. CALCIUM (Ca) AS A NUTRIENT Calcium is the one soil nutrient that has affected peanut yields and quality in a highly consistent manner. This is because of the unique way in which peanuts must get calcium for pod development. on N TABLE 3. EFFECT OF EXTRA POTASSIUM AT RATE OF 60 POUNDS PER ACRE OF POTASH OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1967-1968 (KO) ON YIELD AND GRADE H Site No. Vaiety and County Soil-test rating and index for Ks Fertilizer K 0 nsed by farmer 2 Yield per acre' Farmer's K Farmer's K only + extra K Grade' Farmer's K only Farmer's K + extra K C a Cr Lb./A. Florigiant 6___________________ W. F. Morton Early Runner 9_________________ W. L. Piland 23_______________ 7 E. A. Stewart T. Seay A. Barnes G. Crowley G. Outlaw Lb. 1,110 Lb. 1,140 1,660 Pct. 74 74 Pct. 74 75 Dale M 80 M 75 Covington Geneva Geneva 70 0 50 50 1,930 2,320 1,550 25__________ 8 24 22----_----- ----------------_------ J. D. Donaldson G. B. Register Barnes T. Seay H 90 H100 Geneva Geneva Houston Geneva H100 H110 50 45 60 60 2,530 1,640 3,680 3,510 2,160 2,750 69 74 68 75 1,570 1,730 61 74 59 74 H1lO H11O 3,600 3,400 66 71 68 72 21__________ 26._A. 20--- - Geneva Geneva Geneva H11O VH220 VH200 105 55 95 1,770 1,510 2,520 1,720 1,490 2,500 69 69 69 67 70 67 Av. Table A for soil 2 Yields were not increased or decreased by fertilizer, according to "statistics." 1 See Appendix 2,190 2,160 70 70 analysis. 3Grade means sound mature kernels. r 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Like other plants, the root system of peanut plants absorb all the calcium needed for vegetative growth. Calcium absorbed in this manner moves freely through the stems into the leaves and flowers. Probably all soils in the Wiregrass area have enough calcium to meet this need, unless they are unusually acid. However, a special need for calcium develops after the peg from the pollinated flower enters the soil. Immediately after the peg enters the soil, calcium stops moving from the main stem of the plant to the peg. Yet, the peg must get calcium if it is to develop into a filled pod. Consequently, the developing pod must get whatever calcium it needs from the surrounding soil. Because of this unusual way in which calcium is obtained by peanut pods, soil surrounding the nuts is frequently deficient in calcium unless some has been added. The key to this problem is the amount of calcium in the pegging zone. Having excess calcium in roots, stems, or leaves will make no difference to the pods. The pods must find their own calcium in the soil. Gypsum Experiments Gypsum, commonly called "land plaster," has long been used as a source of calcium for peanuts. The practice is to dust it on the peanut plants at early bloom. This is timed so that rains will wash the gypsum into the pegging zone when it is most needed by the growing pods. Gypsum furnishes both calcium and sulfur but does not raise soil pH. Contrary to a widespread misunderstanding, gypsum is not a liming material. The results of 52 experiments with gypsum are given in Table 4. Soil calcium (Ca) ranged from a low of L30 to a high of H180. These farms are a cross-section of the soils, weather, varieties, yields, and practices of peanut farmers during the period of 19671972 in southeastern Alabama. The results are clear and consistent: (1) no soil with soil-test Ca above M80 needed gypsum; (2) all soils with soil-test Ca below L70 needed gypsum (except W. R. Zorn's with a pH of 4.9); (3) the variety had no influence on whether gypsum was needed or not. Claims are generally made that large-seeded varieties, such as the Florigiant, require a higher soil calcium level than smallerseeded varieties, such as the Florunner. The data from these ex- FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 15 periments refute that claim and show that seed size had nothing to do with it. The basis of Soil-Test Ratings for Ca is shown by the graph in Figure 2 (see page 4). "Per Cent of Maximum Yield" is plotted against soil-test Ca for each gypsum experiment. A "Per Cent of Maximum Yield" of 100 per cent means that the "no gypsum" plots yielded the same as those receiving gypsum. A "Per Cent of Maximum Yield" of 75 per cent means that "no gypsum" plots yielded 75 per cent as much as those receiving gypsum. The graph also shows that 300 pounds per acre of soil-test Ca has been assigned a rating and fertility index of H100, which means that no additional calcium is needed. Soil-test Ca of 200 pounds per acre has been assigned the value M80, which means that calcium should be added because yields will probably be increased by it. Soil-test Ca below 175 pounds per acre is rated L and yield increases from gypsum or lime would be expected in all cases. Unlike the P and K ratings, the Ca ratings are intended only for peanuts and are based on experimental proof, as described above and shown in Figure 2 and Table 4. Slag Experiments Basic slag has been used for several years as a liming material and sometimes as a calcium source for peanuts. It is primarily an impure lime containing phosphorus and is almost insoluble in water. It is much less soluble than gypsum, for example. Nevertheless, it has been used to some extent as a topdressing material at blooming time. The results of 16 experiments in which basic slag or Fairfield slag was compared to gypsum as a dusting-on material are given in Table 5. Most of the soils had plenty of calcium so that neither gypsum nor slag affected yields. However, two soils were low enough for gypsum to increase yield, whereas slag did not (H. Hartzog in Barbour County and D. Averett in Coffee County). Another soil was low enough in Ca for both gypsum and slag to increase peanut grade, even though yields were not "statistically" different (F. Thrash in Pike County). The conclusion to be drawn from these experiments is that gypsum is a better source of calcium than slag if they are going to be dusted-on at blooming time. TABLE 4. EFFECT OF TOPDRESSING GYPSUM ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1967-1972 3 A.A 0 01% Site No. Variety and farmer County Soil type _I 78 109 106 111 102 113 100 114 97112 Florunner _I. Hartzog _H. Baxley (B) 0 . and B. Deal _R. Ward F. Thrash P. Blankenship L. Long J. Hartzog C . Holmes T. Kirkland E. Strickland J. Bagents D. and M. Bolin E. Strickland Barbour Geneva Dale Henry Pike Dale Pike Barbour Crenshaw Dale Crenshaw Crenshaw Geneva Crenshaw Dale Henry Houston Henry Geneva Barbour Barbour Henry Honuton Houston Henry Dale Barbour Barbour Tifton loamy sand Dothan loamy sand Blanton sand Varina sandy loam Dothan loamy sand Lucy loamy sand Norfolk loamy sand Sunsweet sandy loam Norfolk loamy sand Faceville sandy loam Brogdon loamy sand Brogdon loamy sand Dothan loamy sand Wagram loamy sand Darco sand Dothan sandy loam Dothan sandy loam Tifton sandy loam Dothan loamy sand Dothan loamy sand Yield per acre Grade No Gypsum No Gypsum index for Cap gypsum gypsum Soil test rating and Lb. L L L L L L M M M M 30 60 70 70) 70, 70 80 80 90 90 1,230' 7302 Lb. 1,770' 2,3502 1,8402 1,500 4,080 1,980 3,680 1,070 3,700 Pct. 65, 59' 58' 63 67' 61' 68 68 73 67 75 70 70 76 70 Pct. 6867'2 70r 68 6402 1,070 3,490 1,2502 73' 69' 70, 72. 76 69 0 1-I 3,600. 770 3,700 77101107 7981. 83 80 82 10884 57 53. 1,360 4,850 1,650 3,220 4,230 3,320 3,980 3,780 3,840 2,500 2,0602 1,5262 1,0502 1,7102 2,330' 2,910~ 670' 1,690 0. and B. Deal j. L. Falkner jack Kelly. J. L. Falkner H. Baxley (A) Florigiant _H. Hartzog M100 11 HilO HilO H140, H150, H170 H180 L L L L L L M M 40 50 60) 60, 70 70 80 80 4,810 1,770 3,100 4,5201 3,200 3,950 3,670 4,050 2,260 2,8102 2,000'~ 2,360' 2,75,09 2,840' 3,500' 1,530' 2,040' 76 72 70 77 73, 76. 75 76 68 70' 71' 59' 68' 71' 62' 70, 60' C I 77 73 76, 68 512 63' 26' 40' C 1-4 F- 85 8z _1. Childers _R. C. Armstrong Y. Willoughby C. Hughes F. Martin -58 86- z CA 0I Troup loamy sand 552 61_ 115_ _B. Deloney, Jr. R. Griffin F. Martin McLaurin loamy sand Blanton loamy sand M 80 2,690 1,0502 642 43' 68. 462 TABLE 4. i(Cont'd.) Yield per acre Soil-test rating and No index for Ca 1 gypsum Gypsum Lb. Lb. 2,450 2,250 3,30Ow 2,980 1,910 1,770 2,780 1,980 2,240, 2,300 2,710 3,3502 1,950, 1,850, 2,530 3,090 2,060 1,570 3,020 990 2,290, 2,510 Grade 3 N Nosu Pct. 69, 482 67 73 67 71 64 74 72 62 68 70 66, 65 68 70 69 71 62 69 74 71 59? Gypsum Pet. 69 60" 70, 74 67 73 66 73' 74 66 69 70 65 65 66 68 70, 72 63 68 73 74 659 -o C 8I l--El Site No. Variety and farmer County Soil type N m Florigiant (cont'd.) Barbour Dale Coffee Dale Covington Coffee Dale Houston Coffee Fuquay loamy sand Red Bay fine sandy loam M 80 M 80 M 80, M 90, M 90 M 90) H120 H120 H1301 H140 H150 M 80 M 90 M1I00) HilO HilO HuGO H140 H150 HLSO Hi150 H160 54. 988537. 2. 55 42. 764356- 1 _ F. Martin C. Croft D. Averett H. Thompson R. E.-Bryant E. C. Brooks D. H. Holland J. F. Blankenship D. McCart C. R. Andrews H. Etheridge 2,560 1,840 2,6902 and L. Dothan sandy loam Houston Henry Norfolk sandy loam 2,850 1,700 1,600 2,880 2,010 2,370 2,310 s a- 2,690 2,9302 27 3_ 602930. 412654521. 4- Early Runner ._L. Davis C. Hataway -_D. T. Williams H. Anderson T. Davis B. Deloney, Jr. A. Barnes Coolsby C. Collins G. B. Register G. Shields J. Geneva Coffee Henry Covington Geneva Dale Geneva Covington Geneva Geneva Geneva 2.230 1,970 2,570 2,930 2,250 1,510. 3,060 1,020 2,410 2,560 Virginia Bunch 67 44W. R. Zomn L 60 1,730 1,820 Barbour 59J. Hartzog v M 80 1,770 2.150~ Henry n ~ vv~ 1 See Appendix Table A for soil analysis. Yields or grades in bold face type mean that gypsum increased yield or grade, according to "statistics." 'Grade means sound mature kemnels. M.A CO TABLE 5. EFFECT OF TOPDRESSING GYPSUM, BASIC SLAG, OR FAIRFIELD SLAG ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1969-1972 Soil-test Site Varean No amrindex County Soil type rating and Yield per acre N or slag No Grade' Slag gypsum for gypsum Gypsum Gypsum Pct. 734 Slag Ca 3 Florunner F. L. Long' or slag Lb. 102 100 97 101 79 81 83 80. 82. 8461. Lb. 4,080 Lb. 8,800 3,650 3,910 1,410 Pct. 674 Pct. 71' Thrash' G. Holmes' Bagents' J. J. Jack Pike Pike Crenshaw Crenshaw Dothan loamy sand Norfolk loamy sand Norfolk loamy sand Brogdon loamy sand L 70 M 80 M 90 M100 3,490 3,600 3,700 1,650 3,680 3,700 1,770 68 73 70 70 76 72 70 74 68 a- E. Strickland' 0. and B. Deal' L. Falkner' L. Falkner' Florigiant H. Hartzog' R. Griffin' D. Averett' C. R. Andrews' Early Runner D. T. Williams' C. Collins' Virginia Bunch 67 W. R. Zomn' J.Kelly' Crenshaw Dale Henry Houston Wagram loamy sand Darco sand Dothan sandy loam Dothan sandy loam H11O HilO H140 H150 4,230 3,320 3,980 3,780 4,520 3,200 3,950 3,670, 4,330 3,530 4,020 3,740 76 70 77 73 77 73 76 75 75 74 76 73 a W >a a- Henry Barbour Barbour Coffee Houston Henry Geneva Barbour Tifton sandy loam Dothan loamy sand Red Bay fine sandy loam _H140 H170 L 40 M 80 3,840 2,060˘ 2,990' 2,310 1,970 4,050 2,8104 2,970 3,890 1,590 2,880 76 514 68 76 704 70 76 43 68 85 43. 60. 4544- M 80 2,690 1,020 3,3004 2,300 1,850 990 2,770 2520 67 67 66 70 66 65 63 65 66 65 59 C I- m100 H15.0 L 60 2,020 1,000 m x z -a 62 -m m 1,730 1,820 1,770 71 74 71 ' Basic slag. 2Fairfield slag. 3See Appendix Table A for soil analysis. Yields or grades in bold face type means that gypsum or slag increased yield or grade, according to "statistics." Grade means sound mature kernels. 0 z "u1 -C TABLE 6. EFFECT OF LIE I OR GYPSUM ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1971-1972 Soil Soil-test Yield per acre rating pH and No lime Gyp. fordCa' o gyp.' Grade No lieLm or gyp. 3 Site No.e No. v Variety Florunner and farmer County Soil type Gyp. C r Pct. 77 72 69' 67 68 Lb. 88----Fomen and Deal Lb. 3,7402 1,3502 1,7302 1,770 1,580 3,520 ND 4 Lb. 1,419' 1,070 1,9802 1,690 1,500 Pct. 68 61' 67 63 Pct. 74 72 662 68 68 74 622 70 7(1 P. 113 ----- W.Blakenship 112----- 114_____ 111------ J. Hartzog~ T. Kirkland R. Ward 110 -86 G. Paramore Dale Barbour Dale Dale Henry Houston Henry Barbour Henry Lakeland loamy sand Sunsweet sandy loam Lucy loamy sand 4.9 5.0 5.3 Faceville sandy loam 5.3 5.4 5.6 5.3 5.4 L 30 M 80 L 70 M 90 L 70 M100 M 80 L 40 L 70 Varina sandy loam Dothan loamy sand 770 1,2502 1,360 1,070 3,450 ND 2,910 4 74 3,510 3,5002 ----57' Florigiant E. W. Washington 89.____ 87----1 See R. Griffin F. Wickshurg loamy sand Martin Fuquay loamy sand Troup loamy sand 3,560 3,4802 5.7 642 69 712 Appendix A for soil analysis. Yields or grades in bold face type means that lime or gypsum increased yield or grade, according to "statistics." 3 Grade means sound mature kemnels. 4Yields were not determined. 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Lime Experiments The use of lime on certain agricultural lands is about as old as civilized man. Yet, it is the most neglected aspect of soil management in Alabama today. Because lime is not needed on all fields, many farmers apparently believe that lime can be safely ignored. In contrast to the negligent attitude toward lime, farmers use unneeded tons of fertilizer on peanuts each year. Only a better understanding of soil pH and lime by both peanut farmers and fertilizer dealers is going to reverse the dangerous decline in soil pH. As surely as day follows night, a lower soil pH is going to follow the use of nitrogen fertilizers such as ammonium nitrate, urea, anhydrous ammonia, and ammonium phosphate on the sandy soils of southeastern Alabama. Farmers are using these nitrogen fertilizers, so they are decreasing their soil's pH. At some point, the pH will be too low for good yields. It is just a question of "when." The questions of when to lime and how much to use are accurately and easily answered by a soil test. Auburn's Soil Testing Laboratory has excellent procedures for determining the amount of lime a soil needs for various crops. The peanut farmer makes a serious mistake when he fails to heed Auburn's lime recommendation. Lime serves two roles for peanuts: (1) it raises soil pH and eliminates toxic effects of aluminum; and (2) it supplies calcium to the pegging zone. Properly used, it maintains a highly favorable pH and soil Ca, making gypsum applications unnecessary on most soils. The results of nine recent lime experiments are given in Table 6. Lime was applied in each case on top of turned land in the spring and disked-in before planting, except on the Fomen and Deal farm in Dale County. In all cases, the lime remained in the pegging zone where it would be most beneficial. The yields in Table 6 are for the first year following springapplied lime. The increases in yields and grades show that lime was highly beneficial on some soils. Some of the experiments suffered from a severe drought in 1972, and yields on these were low and erratic. The value of lime on such fields was at a minimum. Nevertheless, the data clearly show the reward for liming a low pH, low Ca soil, even where yields are greatly restricted by FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 21 TABLE 7. FIRST YEAR RETURNS FROM 1 TON OF LIME PER ACRE TO PEANUTS, YIELDS AND GRADES REPEATED FROM TABLE 6 Soil pH Yield per acre Lime No lime Lb. Lb. 1,410 770 1,360' 1,250 3,740 1,350 1,770 1,730 Grade1 Lime No lime Pct. 77 68 67 61 Pct. 74 72 68 66 Return 2 for lime $347 83 97 78 4.9 5.0 5.3 .. 5.3 ................. ........... 5.4 5.7 1 1,0702 2,910 1,580' 3,480 63 64 68 70 82 117 Grade means sound mature kernels. Based on 1972 prices. 3Yield differences were not statistically different. 2 drought. The most spectacular effect of lime was on the FomenDeal farm where yield was increased by 2,330 pounds per acre the first year. Such first-year responses are especially important for rented lands. Probably half or more of the peanuts grown in Alabama are on rented land. Most farmers believe that they cannot afford to lime these lands because lime is a long-term investment. True, lime is a long-term investment. That is one of its fringe benefits. But even more important, lime is also an excellent short-term investment. The return figures in Table 7 show what lime can do for peanut income the first year of its use. These returns are based on 1972 prices. Even though yields were severely restricted on four of these fields in 1972 because of drought, $9.00 worth of lime still returned $78-97 in peanuts the first year. Where drought was not a problem, the additional peanuts were worth $347 per acre in one field. These data show that it does, indeed, pay to lime rented peanut lands of this kind even if the land is to be available only one year. Farmers are robbing themselves when they fail to lime fields whether they are rented for just one year or not. Spray-on Calcium Recent claims have been made by certain manufacturers that liquid spray-on calcium materials are effective sources of calcium for peanuts. Such claims are contrary to the scientifically estab- TABLE 8. EFFECT OF GYPSUM OR MAGI-CAL( ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, Soil-test Site No. Variety and farmer County Soil typeSi Soil raing No Yield per acre y. - 1972 Grade 3 ogy.r for Ca Florunner G. Holmes 97___________ 99_______ 98._____ 1See index a 1 and Mag-Gyp. orgyp.iNorgyp. Magi- aor-Gyp. Cal Cal Cal Lb. Crenshaw Dale Dale Norfolk sandy loam McLaurin loamy sand Fuquav loamy sand 5.4 5.5 5.8 M90 M80 M80 3,700 Lb. 3,700 Lb. 3,640 Pet. 73 432 Pet. 76 622 602 Pet. 74 41 41 m m Florigiant B. Deloney, Jr. G. Croft 1,840 2,250 1,390 48' 2 Yields 'Grade Appendix Table A for soil analysis.F or grades in bold face type means that gypsum increased yield or grade, according to "statistics." means sound mature kernels. z z FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 23 lished fact that calcium does not move from leaves to the underground pod in sufficient quantity to be of any value. It has been demonstrated time and again that peanut pods must absorb calcium from the surrounding soil. In spite of this scientific proof, farmers use such material because of its "pie-in-the-sky" claims. One such material is Magi2 CalŽ , and its use by farmers prompted three experiments with it in 1972 to demonstrate its value to farmers in the area. The results are given in Table 8. In no case was Magi-CalŽ of any value. It failed to increase yield in one experiment where gypsum greatly increased it. It also failed to increase grade in the two experiments where gypsum greatly increased grade. Whether the soil was low in calcium or not, the spray-on material was without merit. BORON (B) EXPERIMENTS "Hollow-heart" is an internal defect of peanuts that was first recognized as boron (B) deficiency in 1957 (5). It is seen as a hollow, tan or brown area on the inside of the two seed halves (cotyledons). A grower is severely penalized in the price his peanuts bring if they show 1 per cent "hollow-heart" or more. "Hollow-heart" has not been a major problem for peanut growers in Alabama. Its appearance has usually been restricted to the sandier soils. Of the recent 23 experiments conducted with boron, only four showed symptoms of boron deficiency. In no case was the deficiency severe. Boron fertilizer did not affect yield or grade, regardless of whether "hollow-heart" was present or not, Table 9. In addition to the specific boron experiments listed in Table 9, all other experiments were examined for "hollow-heart." A few showed minor boron deficiency, but these were only on soils that had less than 0.1 pound of soil-test B per acre and where no boron had been added. Three of the experiments in Table 9 (sites no. 103, 104, 105) used boron in a Balan-Vernam herbicide mixture, which was applied preplant. Boron was also applied in two experiments by mixing it with the fungicide Benlate (sites no. 104, 105). The peanuts were sprayed twice with the Benlate-boron material at 2 Registered Trademark. TABLE 9. EFFECT OF BORON (B) ON YIELD, GRADE, AND HOLLOW-HEART OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1967-1972 SieN. Varietyand farmer Florunner M. Flowers H. E. McDaniel E. Sanders County Soil type Soil-test B1 Yield per acre No B Added B Grade' No B Added B Pct. Pct. Hollow-heart .No B Added B Pct. Pct. Lb./A. 68. 66 _ 67_ 91_ 62 . 103 . 104. 64. 27105.. 14 65. Pike Pike Henry Pike Pike Pike Henry Henry Pike Dale Geneva Barbour Pike Geneva Geneva Pike Geneva Geneva Geneva Pike Pike Pike Pike Lb. 1,210 1,390 2,650 1,470 2,610 3,110 3,350 2,930 Lb. 1,200 1,399 2,760 1,570 2,620 3,430 3,3401 3,200 1,9010 1,670 1,760 1,980 2,600 2,910 3,190! - -2,3901 1,670 0.07 Ruston sandy loam Dothan loamy sand Fuquay loamy sand Dothan sandy loam 0.07 61 72 65 71 7269 68 L. Windham H. E. McDaniel M. Flowers J. 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.29 0.06 E. Mobley 13 . 6330 . 12. 31 - Wiregrass Sub. Florigiant L. Shipman A. H. Thompson L. Davis F. C. Martin M. Thrash Early Runner L. Davis M. Austin B. Drinkard T. Davis T. Davis M. L. Burch Virginia Bunch 67 T.Harden 69 70 71 68 66 68 65 64 77 65 71 72 a65 64 64 60 67 75 64 73, 73 69, 70, 71 71 67 67 67 72 65 71 64 71 70 62 64 62 483 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 3 1 1a I- 0.07 Blanton loamy sand 0.10 0.11 2r 0.22 0.07 0. 10, 0.14 0.16 2,080 1,760 0 C -i IIC 1a 0.18 0.20 Dothan loamy sand 1,680 2,100 2,520 2,930 3,340 -----2,470 1,560 -463 2,300 7 m x z -I 15----- 90________ L. Windham D. M. Dansby 47__________ 0.11 0.12 0.17 0.07 Av. I- m Dixie Runner 16_____ M. Barron 1See 2,330, ]A 67, Appendix Table A for complete soil analysis. 2 Grade means sound mature kermels. Peanuts exposed to inclement weather for long period between digging and harvesting, resulting in unusually low quality nuts and much intemnal damage. z FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 25 2-week intervals, with 0.15 pound of B being applied per acre at each spraying. A routine soil test for boron is not practicable. However, a special test for B was made on all these soils. The recommended practice is to add boron each year at a rate of 0.3 to 1.0 pound of B per acre. Higher rates may be toxic, especially if sprayed on the foliage or applied in the row. Boron may be added in the fertilizer, in gypsum topdressing, in preplant herbicide, or in fungicide spray. MAGNESIUM (Mg) EXPERIMENTS Soils of the Wiregrass area are generally low in magnesium. Some crops, such as cotton, need supplemental magnesium on some of these soils. The most practicable and economic way to add magnesium is as dolomitic limestone, although more expensive, soluble sources are available. It has not been shown that peanuts growing in the soils of southeastern Alabama need supplemental magnesium. Nevertheless, dolomitic limestone (which contains Mg) is recommended on low pH soils that are low in Mg. The dolomitic limestone recommendation is intended to prevent peanuts from mining soil Mg to very low levels, levels that would be inadequate for some other crops in the rotation. Four recent experiments with magnesium showed no benefit from the added Mg, Table 10, even where soil Mg was low. It is not known just how low soil Mg must be before it affects peanuts. TABLE 10. THE EFFECT OF Mg ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1967-1968 Site No. Variety and farmer Soil-test Yield Countyratingfor No Mg Added & index Lb./A. Lb./A. 2,740 2,850 1,660 1,8902 Grade3 No Mg Added No Mg Pct. 75 73 67 55 Pct. 74 74 65 502 Early Runner R. Mitchell 10_.... 11_..... B. East Florigiant j. Hardwick 32 C. Hughes 28_...._ J. Bullock Bullock Henry Houston L 80 H170 H220 L 60 2,860 2,750 1,590 2.330' SSee Appendix Table A for complete soil analysis. 2 Yield in bold face type means that magnesium decreased yield or grade, according to "statistics." SGrade means sound mature kernels. 26 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION The present recommendation is intended to prevent problems with other crops in the rotation. It is known, however, that using higher rates of K fertilizer than are recommended will aggravate Mg deficiency on crops that are sensitive to Mg deficiency. ZINC (Zn) EXPERIMENTS Beneficial effects from zinc have been claimed for peanuts by various workers, but such a need has not been shown for Alabama's peanut area. However, corn and pecans in southeastern Alabama frequently suffer from zinc deficiency and zinc is usually recommended for them. The results of two peanut experiments with fertilizer Zn are given in Table 11. They show no need for adding zinc. As long as corn in the rotation receives Zn fertilizer so that it does not suffer from Zn deficiency, it is safe to believe that peanuts will not be Zn deficient, either. TABLE 11. THE EFFECT OF ZINC ON YIELD AND GRADE OF PEANUTS, ALABAMA, 1968 Site No. Variety and farmer C Yield per acre' Soil-test Zn NoZn Zn Grade' Zn County Lb./A. Early Runner 33__________ H. Baxley 34 .......... Cotton L. 1See Lb. 2,510 2,650 Lb. 2,570 2,710 Pct. 60 67 Pct. 59 69 Geneva Geneva 2.5 5.0 2Yields ' Appendix Table A for complete soil analysis. were not affected by zinc fertilizer, according to "statistics." Grade means sound mature kernels. WINTER COVER CROP Planting small grain, especially rye, as a winter cover crop has become a fairly common practice in southeastern Alabama. It serves two very useful purposes: (1) it holds the soil against erosion; and (2) it provides much needed winter grazing for cattle. Whether this practice is beneficial to peanuts or not is not known. Two experiments were conducted during 1970-71 to determine if winter rye had any effect upon the succeeding peanut crop. The results are given in Table 12. They show two significant findings: (1) peanuts behind turned-under rye were no better than those behind winter fallow; (2) fertilizer applied to peanuts in the spring in addition to that in the fall had no effect on yield or grade. m N TABLE 12. EFFECT OF RYE AND SPRING-APPLIED FERITILIZER' ON YTFELD AND GRADE OF PEANUITS, 3 ALABAMvA, 1971 4 Ma AC- Soil-test Sit Nofrme ad Vaiey Cunt Sol tperating& PK PK Yield per acre No fertilizer ReFal Relow Grade No fertilizer ReFal yelo;w 'Fertilizer yeFal yelo;w Fertilizer yeFalyelow P' Lb. Lb. Lb. Lb. "4,830 Pet. 77 Pet. 78 69 Pet. 76 71 Pet. 77 70 75------74 1All Florunner W. M. Marshall and Henry Faceville sandy loam H130 M70 4,550 4,790 4.520 Florigiant F. Martin Barbour Alaca fine sand H130 M80 3,060 2,770 3,010 2,930 71 2 See plots received a fall application of fertilizer. Appendix Table A for soil analysis. 3Yields were not affected by fertilizer, according to "statistics." 'Grade means sound mature kernes. 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION A new soil fertility project with peanuts was started in 1967 with the main goal of keeping fertilizer and lime recommendations up-to-date. Experiments are located on farmers' fields and represent a wide range in soil and climatic conditions. Phosphorus and potassium fertilizers failed to increase peanut yields in any of the 34 fertilizer experiments. Adding fertilizer directly to peanuts is an uneconomical practice. Fertilizer should be added only to the crops in rotation with peanuts. Peanut pegs and pods must absorb whatever calcium they need from surrounding soil. This makes calcium deficiency a special problem with peanuts. If soil-test calcium is M80 or less, gypsum or lime should be added to raise soil calcium level. Otherwise, lower yields and lower grades of peanuts can be expected. Gypsum, frequently called "land plaster," is an excellent calcium source on all soils low in calcium. Agricultural limestone is an excellent source of calcium on low pH soils. The first year that a field is limed, however, a supplemental application of gypsum is recommended on low calcium soils because the lime may not get thoroughly mixed into the pegging zone. Agricultural limestone serves two important roles: (1) it raises soil pH; and (2) it supplies calcium. Dolomitic limestone also supplies magnesium. Low pH land should be limed for peanuts regardless of whether it is owned, rented, or borrowed. Basic slag and Fairfield slag are not satisfactory calcium materials for topdressing at blooming time. Magi-CalŽ and other spray-on calcium materials are not suitable sources of calcium for peanuts. Boron deficiency appears as concealed damage in the kernel. It is known as "hollow-heart." It is not widespread in Alabama. Soil testing for boron is not practicable. Boron deficiency is best prevented by adding 0.3 to 1.0 pound of B per acre mixed with fertilizer, gypsum, herbicide, or leafspot fungicide. Fertilizer, gypsum, and lime should be used according to Auburn University's Soil Testing Laboratory. It is the best guide available to the peanut farmers of Alabama because it is based on results from their own fields. FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME 29 LITERATURE CITED (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) DAVIS, FRANKLIN L. 1951. Nutritional Problems of Peanuts in Southeastern Alabama. Better Crops with Plant Food. XXXV No. 4, 6-10. DAVIs, F. L., AND C. A. BROGDEN. 1951. Results of Lime and Gypsum Experiments with Runner Peanuts. Auburn Univ. (Ala.) Agr. Exp. Sta. Prog. Rept. 48. DUGGAR, J. F., E. F. COUTHEN, J. T. WILLIAMSON, AND O. H. SELLERS. 1917. Peanuts - Tests of Varieties and Fertilizers. Auburn Univ. (Ala.) Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 193. DUGGAR, J. F., AND M. J. FUNCHESS. 1911. Lime for Alabama Soils. Auburn Univ. (Ala.) Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 161. HARRIS, HENRY C., AND R. L. GILMAN. 1957. Effect of Boron on Peanuts. Soil Sci. 84:233-242. (7) ROGERS, H. T. 1948. Liming for Peanuts in Relation to Exchangeable Soil Calcium and Effect on Yield, Quality and Uptake of Calcium and Potassium. Journal of the Amer. Soc. of Agron. 40:15-31. SCARSBROOK, C. E., AND J. T. COPE, JR. 1956. Fertility Requirements of Runner Peanuts in Southeastern Alabama. Auburn Univ. (Ala.) Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 302. APPENDIX TABLE A. SOIL-TEST VALUES OF CHECK PLOTS IN EXPERIMENTS ON FARMERS' FIELDS ) Location number Bryant 1__________ 2.___________ Brooks 3._________ Hataway 4 .......... Shields 5. Coolsby 6 _.... Morton 7 _.....Seay Barnes 8 ..... 9 _.... Piland Mitchell 10 ..... 11 East 12 ..... T. Davis 183._._ Austin 14_..... L. Davis 15 -..... Harden 16_..... Barron 17___.. Grace 18 ..... Cotton 19_..... Baxley 20 ..... Seay 21 . Register 22 ..... Outlaw 23 ..... Stewart 24...... Crowley 25 ..... Donaldson 26 -.. Barnes 27_..... L. Davis 28.__-. Hughes Soil pH 5.5 5.4 5.0 5.3 6.4 5.9 5.8 5.8 6.4 5.7 5.9 5.5 5.7 5.5 5.7 6.4 5.7 5.8 5.1 5.6 5.9 5.5 6.0 5.5 5.7 6.0 5.2 5.0 Ca 240 243 254 484 448 381 461 502 400 286 267 307 201 240 224 240 430 452 403 736 464 300 470 546 528 400 195 160 Soil-test values (lb./A. Mg P K 36 28 35 81 48 65 76 26 24 18 42 26 51 24 18 36 27 81 75 33 66 44 30 54 27 74 33 15 35 68 43 86 125 105 57 87 75 84 86 24 42 104 70 68 27 34 32 59 90 52 67 69 92 45 34 75 108 116 140 127 104 71 102 129 45 67 111 95 52 95 52 32 67 76 110 162 136 186 84 130 102 172 52 87 B 0.13 0.14 0.24 0.09 0.20 0.08 0.18 0.10 0.07 0.11 0.07 0.16 0.14 0.42 0.22 0.21 0.18 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.11 0.10 0.14 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1967 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 30 30 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION APPENDIX TABLE A. (Contd.) Location number 29- Farmer Anderson Soil pH Ca 315 318 351 464 600 1 Soil-test values (lb./A.) 'ea K B Mg P T. Davis 30-31------ -- Burch -- Hardwick 32--33 ---- - Cotton Baxley 34-_---35------ -- Logan 36----Walker 37-- Thompson 38--- Griffin 39----- Hatton 40-- H. Hartzog -- Deloney 41---42 --Blankenship 43--- Andrews 44 Zorn - Collins 45--Thrash 46 ----47----- Dansby 48 ----49-----Harris 50 Deloney 51------ -52 Sanders 53 -Armstrong 54 ------- - Martin 55------ - Holland 56 Etheridge 57-- Childers 58 -Willoughby 59 -----Hartzog 60 -Williams Griffin 61-----Flowers 62-----Drinkard 63-----64------- Thompson 65------- Shipmani 66 ------- McDaniel 67------- Windham -- 5.6 5.6 5.4 5.8 5.4 6.0 5.9 5.2 6.0 5.4 5.4 5.2 5.6 5.2 4.9 5.9 5.6 5.1 6.0 5.1 5.3 6.3 6.1 5.2 4.6 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.9 5.1 4.7 5.2 5.6 5.8 72 48 93 54 89 44 104 39 33 21 41 32 34 44 6 30 23 13 63 22 28 82 78 16 22 40 60 7 7 21 34 28 40 Croft Croft 470 284 450 224 281 219 284 320 357 420 144 452 347 188 398 360 256 475 268 138 203 348 450 108 142 189 263 187 78 50 80 57 94 34 .70 57 34 44 20 51 57 34 72 57 61 121 77 123 76 37 58 56 62 64 38 73 -41 50 38 28 119 68 ------69------70-----71-----72----- Flowers 73-----74------75-----76-----77------78-----79-----81-----82------83.------ - Bostick Fuqua Johnson Deloney 80 ------- Morgan Martin Marshall McCart Strickland J. Hartzog Strickland Kelly 84 ------ Deal Falkner Falkner H. Hartzog 5.8 5.0 5.5 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.5 6.2 5.7 6.4 6.2 5.9 5.6 5.6 6.0 4.9 5.8 6.3 6.0 6.3 6.1 4.8 28 417 31 15 147 30 52 248 53 120 10 105 10 53 67 124 16 47 14 157 466 41 130 319 14 28 145 648 59 409 42 94 272 65 27 190 51 63 392 19 65 294 55 47 64 10 19 319 27 88 453 81 87 337 57 57 512 102 172 402 75 131 87 Il~r ~II 70 9 ~ 236 95 54 76 73 103 104 83 97 136 73 70, 80 46 55 92 79 93 83 49 94 66 80 91 52 64 61 70 100 113 86 110 52 58 108 160 76 105 78 42 65 43 44 72 56 55 37 39 79 53 72 76 69 68 60 85 59 169 90 58 0.14 0.16 0.20 0.12 0.18 0.42 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.21 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.23, 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1968 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 0.22 1969 0.17 1969 1970 0.12 0.10 1970 1970 0.12 0.12 1970 0.07 1970 1970 0.11 ___ 1970 0.20 1970 0.14 1970 0.05 1970 1970 0.11 1970 0.13 1970 0.31 ____ 1970 0.10 1970 0.13 1970 1970 0.07 0.06 1970 0.07 1970 0.26 1969 1969 0.08 0.07 1970 0.07 1970 ____ 1971 1971 ____1971 ____ 1971 ____1971 ____ 1971 ____1971 ____ 1971 1971 ____1971 ____1971 ____1971 -- _____ 1971 ____ 1971 1971 1971 FERTILIZER, GYPSUM, and LIME APPENDIX TABLE 31 A. (Cont'd.) Soil-test values (l. IA.)1'ea Location Famr number 85_ 86_ 87_ 88 _ 89_ 9091_ 92 . 93 94 95_ 96 _ soil pH Averett Martin Griffin Fomen & Deal Washington Windham McDaniel Martin Croft Deloney Baker Buie Holmes Croft Deloney Long 5.6 5.7 5.4 4.9 5.3 5.9 5.8 6.3 5.4 5.8 6.1 6.2 5.4 5.8 5.5 5.1 5.2 Ca 214 167 90 75 186 261 314 274 206 350 368 536 240 205 179 Mg P K B ____ 1971 97_ 99 . 100_ 101_ 102 _ 103_ 104105_ 106107. 108 _ 109 . 110111112_ 113114_ 115_ 98 . 40 17 10 3 22 45 33 58 16 74 34 95 35 34 25 32 5.0 174 14 5.7 362 25 5.9 616 70 6.3 274 58 5.8 152 26 5.7 310 69 58 528 38 5.4 140 17 5.6 292 27 5.4 160 27 5.3 254 33 5.3 174 24 5.0 213 27 6.3 194 71 'See Appendix Table B for methods of analysis. APPENDIX TABLE B. SOIL-TEST B agents 210 296 13, 69 64 74 61 43 54 53 7 15 14 40 32 25 16 27 16 20 Thrash Mobley Substation Martin Deal Bolin Baxley (A) Baxley (B) Paramore Ward Kirkland Blankenship Hartzog Martin 63 24 27 7 5 60 71 66 45 35 48 37 52 19 66 57 43 35 35 57 67 29 17 47 32 43 63 19 40 57 78 40 31 95 29 30 49 100 41 43 60 71 44 109 41 0.12 0.09 ---1971 ---1971 ---1971 ---1971 1971 1971 1972 ____ 1972 ____ 1972 0.11 0.29 0.11 ---1972 ____ 1972 ---1972 ---1972 ____ 1972 ---1972 ____ 1972 ---1972 1972 1972 1972 ____ 1972 ____ 1972 ____ 1972 ____ 1972 --- 1972 ____ 1972 ---1972 ---1972 ---1972 ---1972 METHODS FOR DATA Element E Etracting solution 5N Soil solution rati Shain tie SAnaltica eto colormetrically 5 min. IN APPENDIX TABLE A PK .. HC1 + 0.025N H2 5 4 1:4 (5g soil) (molybdate) 0.05N UCi + 0.025N H2 50 4 1:4 (5g soil) 5mn. 5 m. Ca___ N NH 4 OAc, pH 7.0 1:4 HS 4 2 (g soil) atomic absorption flame atomic absorption photometry Mg B .___5N HC1 + 0.025N Hot water 1:4 (5g soil) 5 mn. 5 mmn reflux 1:2 colormetrically (20g soil) (curcumin) Zn.___ 0.05N HC1 + 0.025N H,50 4 pH -- Water suspension atomic 1:4 (5g soil) 5 mmn. absorption 1:1 (20g soil) stand for 1 hr. pH meter OF ALABAMA'S LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITY With an agricultural research unit in every major soil area, Auburn ..- University serves the needs of field crop, livestock, forestry, and horticultural producers in each region in Ala- bama. Everv citizen of the State has a stake in this research program, f rI since any advantage from new and more economical ways of producing and handling farm products directly benefits the consuming public. 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 Farm, Thorsby. Chilton Area Horticulture Substation, Clanton. Forestry Unit, Coosa County. Piedmont Substation, Camp Hill. Plant Breeding Unit, Tallassee. Forestry Unit, Autauga County. Prattville Experiment Field, Prattville. Black Belt Substation, Marion Junction. Tuskegee Experiment Field, Tuskegee. Lower Coastal Plain Substation, Camden. Forestry Unit, Barbaur County. Monroeville Experiment Field, Monroeville. Wiregrass Substation, Headland. Brewton Experiment Field, Brewton. Ornamental Horticulture Field Station, Spring Hill. Gulf Coast Substation, Fairhope.