Response of Florunner and Southern Runner Peanut Cultivars to Chemical Management of Late Leaf Spot, Southern Stem Rot, and Nematodes

Plant Disease ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 76 (12) ◽  
pp. 1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Culbreath
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Chemical Management ◽  
Peanut Cultivars

2012–2016 On-Farm Evaluation of Fungicide Programs for Peanut Disease Control in Hamilton County, Florida

EDIS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith W. Wynn ◽  
Nicholas S. Dufault ◽  
Rebecca L. Barocco
Keyword(s):  
Plant Pathology ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Fungal Disease ◽  
White Mold ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Fact Sheet ◽  
On Farm ◽  
Hamilton County

This ten-page fact sheet includes a summary of various fungicide spray programs for fungal disease control of early leaf spot, late leaf spot, and white mold/stem rot of peanut in 2012-2016 on-farm trials in Hamilton County. Written by K.W. Wynn, N.S. Dufault, and R.L. Barocco and published by the Plant Pathology Department.http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pp334

Photosynthetic Consequences of Late Leaf Spot Differ between Two Peanut Cultivars with Variable Levels of Resistance

Crop Science ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 2741-2748 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maninder P. Singh ◽  
John E. Erickson ◽  
Kenneth J. Boote ◽  
Barry L. Tillman ◽  
Ariena H.C. van Bruggen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Peanut Cultivars

Late Leaf Spot Effects on Growth, Photosynthesis, and Yield in Peanut Cultivars of Differing Resistance

2011 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maninder P. Singh ◽  
John E. Erickson ◽  
Kenneth J. Boote ◽  
Barry L. Tillman ◽  
James W. Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Peanut Cultivars

Using the CSM‐CROPGRO‐Peanut Model to Simulate Late Leaf Spot Effects on Peanut Cultivars of Differing Resistance

2013 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 1307-1316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maninder P. Singh ◽  
John E. Erickson ◽  
Kenneth J. Boote ◽  
James W. Jones ◽  
Barry L. Tillman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Peanut Cultivars

Seeding Rate and Planting Date Impacts Stand Density, Diseases, and Yield of Irrigated Peanuts

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Hagan ◽  
H. L. Campbell ◽  
K. L. Bowen ◽  
L. Wells
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Disease Incidence ◽  
Stand Density ◽  
Planting Date ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Spot Intensity ◽  
Seeding Rate ◽  
Tomato Spotted Wilt ◽  
Peanut Cultivars

Release of peanut cultivars with enhanced tomato spotted wilt (TSW) resistance along with the decline in the incidence of this disease gives Alabama producers the option of earlier planting of irrigated peanuts to optimize farm operations and lower seeding rates to reduce input costs. Mid-April and mid-May plantings of the cvs. Florida-07, Georgia-06G, and Georgia Green at 6.6, 9.8, 13.1, and 19.7 seed/m were monitored over three years for TSW, stem rot, and leaf spot diseases as well as yield. Despite low TSW pressure and lack of a seeding rate response, disease incidence was higher in Georgia Green than Florida-07 and Georgia-06G with higher TSW indices noted for the April than May plantings of the former but not latter two cultivars. While not impacted by planting date, stem rot incidence, which was higher at 13.1 and 19.7 than 6.6 seed/m, was lower on Florida-07 than Georgia-06G and Georgia Green with the latter proving most susceptible. Although leaf spot intensity was not impacted by seeding rate, disease ratings were higher for May than April plantings, with Florida-07 and Georgia-06G having lower leaf spot ratings than Georgia Green in two of three study years. While planting date did not impact yield in two of three years, higher yields were recorded at 13.1 and 19.7 than 6.6 seed/m, with Florida-07 and Georgia-06G having higher yields than Georgia Green. Accepted for publication 16 February 2015. Published 20 April 2015.

Managing early leaf spot and stem rot with reduced fungicide inputs on disease-resistant peanut cultivars

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Hagan ◽  
H. L. Campbell ◽  
K. L. Bowen ◽  
L. Wells ◽  
R. Goodman
Keyword(s):  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Production Costs ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Fungicide Application ◽  
Net Returns ◽  
Disease Resistant ◽  
Peanut Production ◽  
Peanut Cultivars ◽  
Study Application

Abstract Fungicide inputs are a costly but critical component of peanut production systems in the southeast U.S. Current strategies for reducing fungicide application numbers that are needed to control diseases on peanut include extending application intervals beyond a 2-wk schedule or implementation of a fungicide advisory, such as AU-Pnuts. In this study, fungicide programs with azoxystrobin, chlorothalonil, and tebuconazole, using different application schedules, were compared for the control of early leaf spot and stem rot. Application schedules were the standard 2-wk calendar interval, extended 3- and 4-wk intervals, and applications were made according to the AU-Pnuts leaf spot advisory. Studies were conducted on the disease resistant cultivars DP-1 in 2003 and C-99R in 2004 and 2005. The numbers of fungicide applications for the 2, 3, and 4-wk schedules were 7, 5, and 4, respectively, in 2003 and 2004, and were 6, 5, and 4, respectively, in 2005. One less fungicide application was scheduled according to AU-Pnuts than with the 2-wk calendar schedule in all three years, yet final early leaf spot levels with these schedules were similar in 2 of 3 years. With one fewer fungicide application, the 3-wk schedule had higher leaf spot levels than the AU-Pnuts advisory in 2003 and 2004. Further, when application intervals were extended from 2 wk to 3 or 4-wk intervals, a significant increase in early leaf spot was noted in two of three years. Despite these differences in early leaf spot severity, application schedule had limited impact on yield in this study. Application interval also had little impact on stem rot incidence, but incidence of this disease was lower with the azoxystrobin than chlorothalonil programs in 2 of 3 years. The azoxystrobin program significantly increased yield in 2 of 3 years compared with the chlorothalonil or tebuconazole programs. Yield was also higher for the tebuconazole compared with chlorothalonil programs in 2 of 3 years. When fungicide product and application costs were calculated, and those and other typical peanut production costs were deducted from estimated returns based on actual yields, the resulting net returns did not significantly differ among fungicide programs or application schedules.

Use of Azoxystrobin for Disease Control in Texas Peanut

2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Grichar ◽  
B. A. Besler ◽  
A. J. Jaks
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Rhizoctonia Solani ◽  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Sclerotium Rolfsii ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
South Texas ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Cercospora Arachidicola ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Untreated Check

Abstract Field studies were conducted at 11 locations across south Texas from 1994 to 1997 to determine the activity of azoxystrobin against southern stem rot (Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc.), Rhizoctonia pod rot (Rhizoctonia solani Kuhn), early leaf spot (Cercospora arachidicola Hori) and late leaf spot [Cercosporidium personatum (Berk. & Curt.) Deighton]. Azoxystrobin at 0.22 to 0.45 kg/ha applied twice provided control of stem rot, Rhizoctonia pod rot, and leaf spot comparable to tebuconazole at 0.2 kg/ha applied four times. Peanut yield increases were evident with all fungicide treatments over the untreated check.

scholarly journals Field Evaluation of Virginia-Type Peanut Cultivars for Resistance to Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus, Late Leaf Spot, and Stem Rot

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay W. Chapin ◽  
James S. Thomas ◽  
Thomas G. Isleib ◽  
Frederick M. Shokes ◽  
William D. Branch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Disease Resistance ◽  
Leaf Spot ◽  
Sclerotium Rolfsii ◽  
Field Tests ◽  
Field Resistance ◽  
Stem Rot ◽  
Late Leaf Spot ◽  
Tomato Spotted Wilt ◽  
Multiple Disease Resistance

Abstract Susceptibility to viral and fungal diseases is a major factor limiting profit in the production of virginia-type peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) in the South Carolina coastal plain. Field tests were conducted over a three-year period (2006–08) to evaluate the disease resistance of 47 experimental virginia-type breeding lines and eight cultivars. Relative to commercially available standards, cultivar Bailey (recently released by N. C. State Univ.), three sister lines (N03088T, N03089T, and N03090T), and N03091T were found to have consistently less susceptibility to tomato spotted wilt tospovirus; late leaf spot, Cercosporidium personatum (Berk. and Curt.) Deighton; and stem rot, Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. The level of field resistance measured for these three diseases was comparable to that of a resistant runner-type cultivar, Georgia-03L. Yield was highly correlated with multiple disease resistance, and yield performance of some resistant lines exceeded the best commercial standard cultivars under reduced fungicide programs. Potential negative attributes of Bailey, its sister lines, and N03091T were a greater susceptibility to leafhopper injury, Empoasca fabae (Harris), and a relatively larger plant size at maturity, without well defined rows to facilitate digging. Other lines that demonstrated reduced susceptibility to both tomato spotted wilt and stem rot were N03005J and N02009. Although only evaluated in the last test year, five Univ. of Florida lines (FLMR7, FLMR9, FLMR12, FLMR14, and FLMR15) and Georgia-08V (recently released by the Univ. of Georgia) also showed some reduction in stem rot susceptibility relative to the standard (cultivar NC-V 11). Equally important, many experimental lines were identified with significantly greater disease susceptibility than current commercial cultivars. Under South Carolina production conditions, these lines would be poor candidates for advancement. Deployment of the multiple disease resistance found in these experimental cultivars offers several potential benefits beyond direct yield improvement: reduction of fungicide input costs for both foliar and soil disease control, prolonging the utility of currently available fungicides, and reduction of weather related harvest risk by allowing earlier initial planting dates.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document