Institution:Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia on behalf of the University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service and University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc.
Region:Southeast (GA, FL, AL)
Project Fiscal Year:2018
Report Received Date:
Project NPB Budget:$27,000
Even though research has been conducted in the past to show that peanut, under normal conditions, should not need any nitrogen, phosphorous or potassium fertilizer, peanut growers in Georgia and the Southeast continue to apply preplant fertilizers containing these nutrients. Results from this one-year study show that adding N, P or K fertilizer when not called for by a UGA soil test does not increase yield or quality of the peanut.
The use of a growth regulator on peanuts to control vine growth and increase yields has been renewed in recent years. How the growth regulator affects yield when peanuts are fertilized or not is an important question. Preliminary results from a first-year study here indicate that the effect of growth regulator on peanut yield can vary by location and also by fertility level. More research is needed on this topic with the effect of fertilizer x growth regulator on tissue sampling results and vine production.
Boron nutrition on peanut continues to be a hot topic as far as how is the best way to supply the boron to the plant and at what rate of different products. A new way of delivering boron to row crops like peanut is to incorporate it into muriate of potash (0-0-60) fertilizer, a product called "Aspire" made by the Mosaic fertilizer company. Based on tissue sampling results (not yield or grade where there were no differences from three location in this study, Aspire appears to be an adequate way of providing boron to peanuts compared to the tradition way of foliar feeding ... but it is not superior to foliar feeding. Ironically, since peanuts are good scavengers of soil potassium, potassium fertilizer should rarely be recommended. Therefore, foliar feeding peanut with boron should remain a standard practice.
There are always new fertilizer formulations coming out and in this case a new formulation of a new product was already released for sale. The question becomes is the new formulation "better", i.e. more effective at providing nutrients to crops. And if it is more expensive, is it worth the cost compared to the old formulation or an alternative. The "new" and 'old" formulations of Aspire were tested and at least under the growing condition in Camilla, GA in 2018 there was not difference in terms of yield, grade or tissue boron. Interestingly, the foliar boron treatment outperformed both Aspire formulations in this test based on tissue B levels, again confirming that foliar applications of boron on peanut are an excellent delivery technique.
File is currently unavailable.