Effect of Planting Pattern and Weed Management on the Yield and Yield Components of Two Peanuts Cultivars in the Climatic Conditions of Kermanshah

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• A Bagheri
• Y Norouzi
• H. R Chaghazardi

Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

10.22067/jcesc.2024.86423.1298

Abstract

Introduction
Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) possess significant commercial and nutritional value (Gulluoglu, Bakal, Bihter, Cemal, & Arioglu, 2016). However, this plant is highly susceptible to weed competition due to its slow canopy extension, dormant growth habit, and lengthy critical weed control period (Everman, Burke, Clewis, Thomas, & Wilcut, 2008). Consequently, effective weed control measures are crucial for successful peanut production. Furthermore, implementing appropriate planting patterns can reduce competition among peanut plants, enhance solar radiation absorption and other growth resources, and ultimately lead to increased crop yield (Bihter, Bakal, Gulluoglu, & Aroglu, 2017). Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the impact of planting pattern and the integration of pre- and post-emergence herbicides with hand weeding on the yield and yield components of two peanut cultivars, specifically in the climate of Kermanshah, for the first time.
Materials and Methods
To investigate the impact of weed management and planting patterns on the yield and yield components of different peanut cultivars in the weather conditions of Kermanshah, a factorial experiment based on a randomized complete block design was conducted. The study took place in 2022 at the research field and physiology laboratory of the agricultural campus and natural resources of Razi University. The experiment consisted of three factors: Peanut cultivars (NC2 and NC7), Planting patterns (P1: row and plant spacing of 50 cm × 25 cm, and P2: 75 cm × 18 cm), Weed control treatments (M1: Two rounds of weeding combined with the application of Trifluralin 48% EC (796 g a.i.ha^-1), Bentazon 48% SL (960 g a.i.ha^-1), and Haloxyfop-r-methyl 10.8% EC (75 g a.i.ha^-1), M2: Two rounds of weeding along with the use of Trifluralin (1233 g a.i.ha^-1), M3: Two rounds of weeding combined with the use of Haloxyfop-r-methyl and Bentazon, M4: Complete weeding, and M5: Weed-infested treatment) Measurements of plant dry weight, seed dry weight, and pod dry weight per square meter were conducted using a precision scale. Additionally, the number of seeds and pods per square meter were counted. To assess seed size, photography and image processing using JMicrovision software were employed. The analysis of variance was performed using the GLM procedure in SAS ver. 9.4.
Results and Discussion
The results of the experiment revealed several significant findings. The NC7 cultivar exhibited the highest plant dry weight per square meter (620.83 g), showing a 37.37 percent increase compared to the NC2 cultivar (452.11 g). Similarly, the NC7 cultivar also demonstrated the highest pod dry weight per square meter (412.80 g). Among the weed control treatments, the M4 treatment resulted in the highest plant dry weight per square meter (678.79 g), which was about 416 percent higher than the M5 treatment (13.163 g). The M4 × P1 treatment combination produced the highest seed dry weight per square meter (291 g), while the P1 planting pattern yielded the highest pod dry weight per square meter (427.67 g). Notably, weed control treatments and the P1 planting pattern promoted larger seed size. Overall, effective weed control enhanced the studied traits of peanut. Although no significant differences were found among the weed control treatments, the combination of Trifluralin 48% EC (796 g a.i.ha^-1) with a row and plant spacing of 50 cm × 25 cm is recommended for Kermanshah due to its lower herbicide consumption and comparable efficacy to other weed control treatments.
Conclusion
The results of the study indicate that optimizing row distances can play a crucial role in improving the yield and yield components of peanuts. Furthermore, the implementation of effective weed control measures, including both hand weeding and herbicide application, resulted in a significant increase in peanut yield. These findings highlight the importance of considering row distances and weed management strategies in peanut cultivation. Based on the favorable yield production of peanuts in the Kermanshah climate, it can be considered as a promising and viable crop for inclusion in summer rotations in the region. Further research and investigations should be undertaken to provide more comprehensive recommendations and promote the cultivation of peanuts in Kermanshah. This crop has the potential to contribute to agricultural diversification and enhance the profitability of farmers in the area.

Keywords

• Basagran®
• Integrated Weed Control
• Row spacing
• Super Gallant®
• Treflan®

Main Subjects

• Crop yield

---

©2024 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source.

References

1. Abbas, T., Zahir, Z. A., Naveed, M., & Kremer, R. J. (2018). Limitations of existing weed control practices necessitate development of alternative techniques based on biological approaches. Advances in Agronomy, 147, 239-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2017.10.005
2. Agostinho, F., Gravena, R., Alves, P., Salgado, T., & Mattos, E. (2006). The effect of cultivar on critical periods of weed control in peanuts. Peanut Science, 33, 29-35. https://doi.org/10.3146/0095-3679(2006)33[29:TEOCOC]2.0.CO;2
3. Auma, E. O. (1986). Growth and yield performance of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) with special reference to spatial arrangement, date of seeding, and cultivar (light interception, plant density, growth analysis).
4. Bado, B. V., Sedogo, M., Lompo, F., Maman Laminou, S. M. (2018). Biological nitrogen fixation by local and improved genotypes of cowpea in burkina faso (West Africa): total nitrogen accumulated can be used for quick estimation. Advances in Agriculture, 2018, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9641923
5. Bagheri, A., Eghbali, L., & Sadrabadi Haghighi, R. (2019). Seed classification of three species of amaranth (Amaranthus) using artificial neural network and canonical discriminant analysis. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 157, 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859619000649
6. Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1960). Studies on plant competition, pp. 133-142. In J.L. Harper (ed.). The Biology of Weeds. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
7. Brar, L. S., & Mehra, S. P. (1989). Weed control in groundnut with pre and post-emergence herbicides. Indian Journal of Weed Science, 21(1and2), 16-21.‏
8. Burke, I. C., Schroeder, M., Thomas, W. E., Wilcut, J. W. (2007). Palmer amaranth interference and seed production in peanut. Weed Technology, 21, 367-371.
9. Everman, W. J., Burke, I. C., Clewis, S. B., Thomas, W. E., Wilcut, J. W. (2008). Critical period of grass vs. broadleaf weed interference in peanut. Weed Technology, 22, 68-73. https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-07-037.1
10. Feakin, S. D. (1973). Pest Control in Groundnuts. 3th Ed. Center for Overseas Pest Research, London. p. 197.
11. Gardner, F. P., & Auma, E. O. (1989). Canopy structure, light interception, and yield and market quality of peanut genotypes as influenced by planting pattern and planting date. Field Crops Research, 20(1), 13-29.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(89)90020-8
12. Ghosh, D. C. (1995). Weed management in rainfed groundnut. VI Biennial conference Annamalai Univ., P. 63.
13. Güllüoğlu, L. (2011). Effects of growth regulator applications on pod yield and some agronomic characters of peanut in Mediterranean region. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 16(2), 210-214.‏
14. Gulluoglu, L., Bakal, H., Bihter, O. N. A. T., Cemal, K. U. R. T., & Arioglu, H. (2016). The effect of harvesting date on some agronomic and quality characteristics of peanut grown in the Mediterranean region of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 21(2), 224-232. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.20186
15. Ibrahim, A. M., Sanusi, J., & Adesoji, A. (2021a). Influence of variety, intra-row spacing and irrigation interval on growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea ) at sudan savannah zone of nigeria. Fudma Journal of Sciences, 5(1), 395-403. https://doi.org/10.33003/fjs-2021-0501-583
16. Ibrahim, I. I., Umar, U. M., Adeniyi, T. O., Adegoke, I., Nabage, O. H. A. (2021b). Efficacy of intra-row spacing on the growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogea) cultivars on the Jos Plateau Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science and Practice 6(3), 105-110. https://doi.org/10.31248/JASP2021.284
17. Jat, R. S., Meena, H. N., Singh, A. L., Surya, J. N., & Misra, J. B. (2011). Weed management in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in India-a review. Agricultural Reviews, 32(3), 155-171.‏
18. Koochaki, A.,& Khalghani, J. (1997). Understanding crop production. Fersowsi University of Mashhad Press. 260p.
19. Lawal, A., Olayinka, B., Ayinla, A., Bulala, F. A., Muktar, S., & Abdulra'uf, L. (2023). Effects of Expired and Non-Expired Pendimethalin and Hand Weeding on the Bio-Productivity and Seed Quality of Groundnut (Arachis Hypogaea). Science Journal of University of Zakho, 11(1), 104-111.‏ https://doi.org/10.25271/sjuoz.2022.11.1.1100
20. Mathew, S., Adarsh, S., & Bitto, T. (2021). Weed Management in Peanut. 2 nd International Web-Conference on Smart Agriculture for Resource Conservation and Ecological Stability. P 77.
21. Minh, T. X., Thanh, N. C., Thin, T. H., Tieng, N. T., & Giang, N. T. H. (2021). Effects of plant density and row spacing on yield and yield components of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) on the coastal sandy land area in nghe an province, vietnam. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 55(4), 468-472.‏ https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARE.A-614
22. Nigam, S. N. (2015). Groundnut at a glance (p. 100). Telangana, India: ICRISAT.
23. Oerke, E. C. (2006). Crop losses to pests. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 144, 31-43.
24. Bihter, O. N. A. T., Bakal, H., Gulluoglu, L., & Arioglu, H. (2016). The effects of row spacing and plant density on yield and yield components of peanut grown as a double crop in Mediterranean environment in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 22(1), 71-80.‏ https://doi.org/10.17557/TJFC.303885
25. Pannu, R. K., Singh, P. K., & Malik, D. S. (1991). Influence of weeds on the growth and partitioning of biomass in groundnut. Crop Research, 4(2), 181-187.‏
26. Ravi, S., Rangasami, S. R., Vadivel, N., Ajaykumar, R., & Harishankar, K. (2023). Growth and yield attributes of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) as influenced by tank-mix application of early post emergence herbicides. Legume Research, 46(8), 1080-1086.‏ https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-5147
27. Rasekh, H., Safarzadeh, N., & Asghari, J. (2006). Response of yield and qualitative characteristics of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) to planting pattern and plant density in Guilan province.‏ Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 12(2), 387-396. (in Persian with English abstract).
28. Sarin, S., Bindhu, J. S., Girijadevi, L., Jacob, D., & Mini, V. (2021). Weed management in summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea). Journal of Crop and Weed, 17, 272-277.‏ https://doi.org/10.22271/09746315.2021.v17.i1.1436
29. Saudy, H. S., El-Metwally, I. M., & Abd El-Samad, G. A. (2020). Physio-biochemical and nutrient constituents of peanut plants under bentazone herbicide for broad-leaved weed control and water regimes in dry land areas. Journal of Arid Land, 12, 630-639.‏ https://doi.org/10.1007/s40333-020-0020-y
30. Suseendran, K., Kalaiselvi, D., Kalaiyarasan, C., Jawahar, S., & Ramesh, S. (2019). Impact of weed flora in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in clay loam soils in Dharmapuri district, Tamil nadu, India. Plant Archives, 19(1), 679-682.‏
31. Swetha, S., Chinnamuthu, C. R., Arthanari, P. M., Marimuthu, S., & Senthil, A. (2022). Novel method to manage weeds in the rainfed groundnut (var. VRI 8 and TMV 14) using nano encapsulated herbicide formulations. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 14(4), 1341-1350.‏ https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v14i4.3920
32. Tarekegn, G., Sakhuja, P. K., Swart, W. J., & Tamado, T. (2007). Integrated management of groundnut root rot using seed quality and fungicide seed treatment. International Journal of Pest Management, 53(1), 53-57.‏ https://doi.org/10.1080/09670870601058940