Peanut Variety Performance in Florida 2003-2006
Click here to view a PDF version of this document.
Home Search What's New Products Survey Help
Peanut Variety Performance in Florida 2003-2006

   

Peanut Variety Performance in Florida 2003-2006 1

B. L. Tillman, D. W. Gorbet, M. W. Gomillion, J. McKinney, W.D. Thomas 2

Variety choice is a critical management decision. There are several good peanut varieties to choose from today. We strongly recommend planting more than one variety on your farm, especially if you plant more than 100 acres of peanuts. Planting more than one variety can help to spread risk of losses from diseases and weather. For example, if you have fields with a history of white mold, there are varieties that have good resistance to that disease compared to some others. We recommend using the University of Georgia Disease Risk Index, or the University of Florida Plant Protection Pointers to evaluate variety resistance to diseases. Your county agent can help you find these resources. For convenience, we have included a summary table from the University of Georgia Disease Risk Index in this article (Table 5).

The first time you try a new variety we recommend planting a relatively small "test" plot (20-50 acres) to make sure you see the differences first-hand. When choosing which varieties to plant, it is important to consider pod yields and grades first, but disease resistance, maturity, seed supply, and anticipated planting dates should also be considered.

The potentially devastating effects of tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) in the southeast makes variety choice very important. The severity of TSWV varies from year to year and we are unable to predict disease levels for a coming crop season. Compared to the 2005 season, TSWV was very mild during the 2006 season. Since TSWV is unpredictable, planting a variety with good resistance can significantly reduce your risk of loses from TSWV. Among the tests grown in Florida, TSWV is usually most severe in Marianna, so variety performance in that location will give a good indication of the TSWV resistance of a given variety. Results often are very different between Marianna, Gainesville, and Jay, depending on TSWV and other disease pressure. Variety resistance to TSWV is summarized in Table 5 which is from the 2007 University of Georgia Disease Risk Index.

This report provides data from University of Florida trials conducted at Gainesville (Citra), Marianna, and Jay research centers from 2003-2006. Tests in Marianna and Gainesville were grown with irrigation and the tests at Jay are not irrigated. All tests are managed for optimum production, including the use of pesticides to control various pests. In furrow insecticides (Temik or Thimet) were used in Gainesville and Jay, but not in Marianna.

Peanut Varieties in the Southeast

Peanut acreage in the southeastern US has been historically dominated by one variety during a given time period. For about 20 years, beginning in the early 1970s and continuing through the early 1990s, Florunner was the dominant peanut variety grown in the southeast. In the mid 1990s, TSWV began to cause severe losses in Florunner and other varieties used at the time that did not have TSWV resistance. Since the late 1990s, Georgia Green has been the dominant cultivar. The primary reason for the popularity of Georgia Green was its moderate resistance to TSWV. At the time of its release, Georgia Green was the only medium maturity runner variety with resistance to TSWV.

As the TSWV epidemic of the 1990s showed, it is dangerous for the peanut industry to rely so heavily on one cultivar at a time. Like Florunner before it, Georgia Green occupied about 75% of the certified seed acreage in Alabama, Florida and Georgia in 2005 (Figure 1) and at least that amount for the previous 10 years or so. In 2006 the certified seed acreage of other varieties displaced Georgia Green (Figure 2). In particular, Georgia-02C, C-99R, AP-3, Georgia-03L, and AT3081R increased in acreage by about 20 percentage points from 2005 to 2006. To help spread the risk of losses from disease it seems preferable that no one variety occupy more than 50% of the acreage. Because the seed increase ratio of peanuts is so low, having several varieties in seed production at significant levels would allow a much quicker shift to different varieties if needed.

Figure 1. Certified seed acreage in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia in 2005.

Figure 2. Certified seed acreage in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia in 2006.

2006 Results

Pod yields, TSMK (total sound mature kernels) percentage, maturity and TSWV ratings for tests at three locations in Florida in 2006 are reported in Table 1. Each entry was harvested (dug) at their apparent optimum maturity stage (i.e., E = 125-130 days after planting (DAP); M = 133-139 DAP; L = 145-155 DAP). TSWV ratings were on a 1-10 scale, where 1 = no disease and 10 = all plants with severe damage or dying.

Spotted wilt was mild in 2006 compared to 2005 and yields were generally good (Table 1). Only two early maturing varieties are available, Virugard and Andru II. Virugard was the higher yielding in 2006. Among the medium maturity varieties, all but AT3081R had higher yield than Georgia Green. Notably, Florida-07 had higher yield than all other medium maturity varieties tested. Among the late maturing varieties, Georgia-01R had the highest yield. All other late maturing varieties had similar yield. The virginia varieties had good yields in 2006 because of reduced TSWV and yields were similar among these varieties.

Four-year results

Averaging over years and locations is a powerful method of determining how a variety will perform over a wide array of environments. The performance of runner market-type varieties in Florida over the past four years (2003-2006) is shown in Table 2.

Among the medium maturity cultivars tested over the past 4 years, AP-3 has demonstrated excellent pod yields, good TSMK percentage, and the best resistance to TSWV. In 3 years of testing, Georgia-03L has had very good pod yields, TSMK and good TSWV resistance. Both AP-3 and Georgia-03L appear to have higher yield and better resistance to TSWV than Georgia Green. Among varieties tested for 2 years, Florida-07 had the highest yield.

Among the late maturing varieties tested for 4 years, Georgia-01R had the highest yield followed by C-99R. Over the 3 year period from 2004-2006, Georgia-01R and C-99R had similar yield followed by Georgia-02C. High TSMK percentage of both Georgia-01R and Georgia-02C is a strength of those varieties. Acreage of Georgia-01R has been limited because of poor seed quality, a problem shared by several late maturing varieties.

The performance of virginia market-type varieties in Florida over the past four years (2003-2006) is shown in Table 3. Most all of these varieties are more susceptible to TSWV than the popular runner varieties and, if they contract the disease, yield losses could be substantial. Even though TSWV was not severe in 2006, a new variety from Georgia, Georgia-05E was tested for the first time in Florida and appears to have good TSWV resistance. Another experimental line from Florida, UF03618 also has good resistance to TSWV.

Location Results

The pod yield of peanut cultivars grown in three locations in Florida is shown in Table 4. In general, the highest yielding entries in one location also did well in the other locations. Yields are generally lower in Jay, Florida because the peanuts are not irrigated. Pod yields in Gainesville are generally higher because tomato spotted wilt virus is very mild. In Marianna, yields can be severely limited by tomato spotted wilt virus so the most resistant varieties usually have the highest yield. TSWV pressure in Marianna was much lower in 2006 compared to 2005.

What varieties have the best resistance to TSWV and other diseases?

Disease resistance is a very important factor in choosing a variety. The reaction of several peanut varieties to some diseases that are present in Florida is presented in Table 5. In order to optimize the benefits of these varieties, it is important to chose them based on their disease resistance. From this table, it is relatively easy to find a variety with the right disease package for your situation. If white mold is a problem in some of your fields, AP-3, C-99R, or Georgia-02C would be good choices. Similarly, if you are interested in a late maturing variety, C-99R, Georgia 01R , and Tifrunner have good leafspot resistance and could allow a reduction in the frequency of fungicide sprays needed for leafspot compared to susceptible varieties.

On-Farm Tests

During the past two years, we have conducted farm-scale variety tests in Columbia County, Florida with a limited number of varieties. These tests have consisted of one to two acre replicated plots within a peanut field managed under conditions normal for the farmers who cooperated in the tests. Management included a full season fungicide program. The typical rotation on this farm is two years of peanuts and 4-5 years of bahiagrass, which usually has low disease pressure. These tests are a very good way to verify results from research trials, under low disease pressure.

Over the two years of the test, medium maturing varieties AP-3 and Georgia Green had similar yield and, in 2005, all three varieties had similar yield (Figure 2). Similar results were obtained with the late-maturing varieties on the same farm (Figure 3). Two ton per acre yields are well above the state average of 2,500 to 2,800 pounds even though in some cases the tests were planted the season after a previous peanut crop. These results show that the yield potential of these varieties is similar under near ideal conditions with little or no TSWV but they especially show the value of long-term bahiagrass rotation with peanuts.

Figure 3. Performance of three medium maturity varieties in 1-2 acre replicated plots in Columbia County, Florida in 2005 and 2006. The fields were not irrigated, and, in 2005, one year of peanuts followed 4-5 years of bahiagrass. In 2006, the peanuts were the first crop planted after 4-5 years of bahiagrass.

Figure 4. Performance of three late maturity varieties in 1-2 acre replicated plots in Columbia, County, Florida in 2005 and 2006. The fields were not irrigated and, in 2005, the peanuts were the first crop planted after 4-5 years of bahiagrass. In 2006, they followed one year of peanuts which were after 4-5 years of bahiagrass.

Summary

Variety choice is a critical management decision for peanut production. There are many choices among varieties suitable for production in the Southeastern US with good to excellent resistance to TSWV. Several of these varieties also have resistance to other diseases. Growing these varieties can reduce your risk and production cost. The varieties C-99R, DP-1, Hull, and Georgia 01R all have considerable resistance to leafspot which, with good crop rotation, might allow you to reduce fungicide sprays and, therefore, production costs. Some of the cultivars have good resistance to soil-borne diseases such as white mold (S. rolfsii) (C-99R, DP-1, CityplaceHull, & AP-3) and CBR (Georgia 01R, Georgia 02C, and Carver). Further information on these traits is available from the University of Florida Plant Protection Pointers web page (http://plantpath.ifas.ufl.edu/takextpub/ExtPubs/ppp1205.pdf) and the University of Georgia Disease Index (University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, 2005 Peanut Update, CSS-05-0118, pp. 41-57 or on the web at: http://www.ugapeanuts.com/ ).

We advise you to evaluate your production and marketing situation when choosing a variety and making arrangements for seeds of the varieties that best fit your needs. Seed supplies of some of the new cultivars (Florida-07, McCloud, York and Georgia-05E) will be very limited in 2007.

Tables

Table 1. Table 1. Performance of peanut varieties in three locations**** in Florida in 2006. Entries are sorted by market type, maturity and average yield (in descending order).


MarketType



Pod Yield (lbs./A)


TSWV (1-10)***

TSMK (%)

Maturity*

MR

GV

JY

AVG.

MR

GV

JY

AVG.

MR

GV

AVG.

Virugard

R

E

4856

4630

3940

4475

3.2

3.3

2.3

2.9

75.4

77.9

76.6

Andru II**

R

ME

4369

4420

3311

4033

2.8

3.0

2.3

2.7

75.3

77.4

76.3

Florida-07**

R

M

5915

5440

4424

5259

1.5

2.3

2.0

1.9

77.6

79.2

78.4

AT3085A**

R

M

5660

4934

3340

4644

2.5

2.3

3.0

2.6

75.9

76.7

76.3

Georgia-03L

R

M

4860

4675

3985

4507

4.3

2.7

2.3

3.1

76.5

79.4

78.0

UF03325

R

M

5308

4762

3175

4415

2.5

2.3

2.3

2.4

78.6

78.8

78.7

AP-3

R

M

5595

4221

3333

4383

1.5

2.3

2.3

2.1

75.6

71.2

73.4

Carver

R

M

5544

4392

3088

4341

2.0

2.0

2.7

2.2

77.7

77.4

77.5

21685McCloud**

R

M

5027

4188

3372

4196

2.5

3.7

2.3

2.8

79.2

68.5

73.8

AT3081R

R

M

4901

4191

2817

3970

3.8

4.0

2.7

3.5

76.3

72.4

74.4

Georgia Green

R

M

4107

4540

2578

3742

4.5

4.0

4.3

4.3

79.5

74.6

77.0

Georgia-01R

R

L

4937

5446

4566

4983

2.2

1.3

2.0

1.8

78.1

81.3

79.7

Georgia-02C**

R

L

4882

5240

3491

4538

1.8

1.7

2.3

1.9

81.5

81.2

81.4

Tifrunner

R

L

5276

4601

3701

4526

1.8

2.0

2.0

1.9

79.0

71.2

75.1

York**

R

L

5037

4598

3930

4522

2.0

1.3

2.0

1.8

74.7

75.3

75.0

C-99R

R

L

4747

4818

3633

4399

2.2

2.0

2.7

2.3

77.1

71.4

74.3

VC2

V

E

4643

4834

3449

4309

3.2

2.0

2.3

2.5

75.7

74.0

74.8

Gregory

V

ME

4869

3878

3627

4125

2.5

1.7

2.7

2.3

72.4

69.6

71.0

NCV11

V

E

4824

4226

2791

3947

4.2

3.0

3.3

3.5

73.9

74.2

74.1

VAC92R

V

E

4320

4095

2578

3664

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.9

73.9

64.1

69.0

NC12C

V

E

3788

4459

2552

3600

3.5

3.0

3.7

3.4

75.6

73.3

74.5

UF03618**

V

M

4533

5272

3078

4295

3.2

2.0

3.0

2.7

73.1

69.5

71.3

Georgia-05E

V

L

5085

4098

3020

4068

2.2

2.7

3.3

2.7

81.1

75.3

78.2

C.V.


12

12

14

13

29

23

27

--

1

--

--

LSD


794

756

612

612

2.8

2.5

2.8

--

2

--

--

*E = early, M = medium, L = late; **High oleic oil chemistry; ***Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus ratings

(1-10, 1 = no disease); ****Locations: MR=Marianna, JY=Jay, GV=Gainesville. Planting Dates: MR=5/10, JY=5/18,

GV=4/4


Table 2. Table 2. Performance of runner market-type peanut varieties in two or three Florida locations over the past four years (2003-2006). Entries are sorted by maturity and the four year average yield (in descending order).




YIELD (lbs./acre)

TSMK (%)

TSWV (1-10)***

Variety


Maturity*


2006


2-YR

3-YR††

4-YR†††

2006

2-YR

3-YR

4-YR

2006

2-YR

3-YR

4-YR

Andru II**


ME

4033

3231

3809

3778

75.7

73.2

72.9

72.7

2.7

3.3

2.9

2.8

Virugard


ME

4475

3301

3627

3519

75.9

73.8

74.8

75.6

2.9

3.6

3.2

3.2

AP-3


M

4383

3780

4472

4485

73.8

72.7

72.9

73.2

2.1

2.7

2.3

2.1

Carver


M

4341

3331

3983

4052

77.3

74.3

74.8

74.5

2.2

3.3

2.9

2.9

Georgia Green


M

3742

3066

3797

3808

77.6

75.7

76.1

76.7

4.3

4.5

3.9

3.6

Georgia-03L


M

4507

4216

4614


77.2

75.9

75.6


3.1

3.4

3.1


Florida-07**


M

5259

4706



77.8

76.1



1.9

2.6



AT3085A**


M

4644

3960



75.9

74.4



2.6

2.8



McCloud**


M

4196

3698



75.3

75.2



2.8

3.4



AT3081R


M

3970

3434



74.7

72.2



3.5

4.0



UF03325


M

4415




78.4




2.4




Georgia-01R


L

4983

4475

4880

4940

78.9

77.9

78.5

78.8

1.8

2.5

2.2

2.0

C-99R


L

4399

4253

4675

4606

74.9

75.1

75.7

76.1

2.3

2.6

2.2

2.2

Georgia-02C**


L

4538

3813

4237

4080

81.1

78.6

78.6

78.3

1.9

3.0

2.6

2.4

York**


L

4522

4265



74.6

74.0



1.8

2.1



Tifrunner


L

4526




76.1




1.9




C.V.



13

13

12

12

3.3

2.9

2.5

2.3

26.7

25.5

25.3

24.8

LSD



415

271

234

209

3.4

1.9

1.3

1.0

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

*E = early, M = medium, L = late; **High oleic oil chemistry. 2 YR= average of 2004 and 2005, ††3 YR= average of 2004, 2005 and 2006; †††4 YR= average of 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. ***Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus ratings (1-10, 1 = no disease);


Table 3. Table 3. Performance of virginia market-type peanut varieties in two or three Florida locations over the past four years (2003-2006). Entries are sorted by the four year average yield (in descending order).


YIELD (lbs./A)

TSMK (%)

TSWV*** (1-10)

Variety


Maturity*

2006

2-YR

3-YR††

4-YR†††

2006

2-YR

3-YR

4-YR

2006

2-YR

3-YR

4-YR

VC2**


E

4309

3490

3987

3920

74.8

73.4

73.2

73.5

2.5

3.5

3.3

3.2

VAC92R


E

3664

3121

3939

3916

70.4

69.8

71.4

72.1

3.9

4.4

3.8

3.7

Gregory


ME

4124

3281

3831

3880

71.2

70.5

70.9

71.4

2.3

3.3

3.2

3.2

NCV11


E

3948

3276

3772

3831

73.7

71.2

71.8

72.0

3.5

4.3

4.1

4.0

NC12C


E

3600

2881

3359

3310

74.6

73.1

73.9

74.3

3.4

4.5

4.1

4.0

UF03618**


M

4295




71.6




2.7




Georgia-05E


M

4068




78.9




2.7




C.V.



12.8

13.3

11.9

11.9

3.3

2.9

2.5

2.3

26.7

25.5

25.3

24.8

LSD



415

271

234

209

3.4

1.9

1.3

1.0

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

*E = early, M = medium, L = late; **High oleic oil chemistry. 2 YR= average of 2005 and 2006, ††3 YR= average of 2004, 2005 and 2006; †††4 YR= average of 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. ***Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus ratings (1-10, 1 = no disease);


Table 4. Table 4. Pod yield of peanut varieties in three Florida locations over 3 or 4 years. Entries are sorted by market type, maturity and the average yield in Marianna in descending order.


------------------------------------------ Pod Yield (lbs./acre) ---------------------------------------------------

Marianna (MR)

Jay (JY)

Gainesville (GV)

Name


Maturity*

Market-

type

2003

2004

2005

2006

MR Average

2004

2005

2006

JY Average

2003

2004

2005

2006

GV Average

Andru II**


ME

R

2869

4569

2239

4369

3511

1529

1765

3311

2202

4501

5356

3285

4420

4391

Virugard


ME

R

2103

3863

2052

4856

3219

1462

1236

3940

2212

4284

4695

3094

4630

4176

AP-3


M

R

3957

5953

3417

5595

4730

2455

2639

3333

2809

5094

5760

3475

4221

4637

Carver


M

R

3201

4863

1997

5544

3901

2097

1471

3088

2219

5276

5711

3491

4392

4717

Georgia Green


M

R

2525

4904

1736

4107

3318

1888

2100

2578

2189

5154

5614

3333

4540

4660

Georgia-03L


M

R


5576

3198

4860

4544

2936

2943

3985

3288


5243

5637

4675

5185

Florida-07


M

R



4311

5915

5113


3204

4424

3814



4940

5440

5190

AT3085A


M

R



3298

5660

4479


2510

3340

2925



4020

4934

4477

McCloud


M

R



2878

5027

3953


2533

3372

2952



4188

4188

4188

AT3081R


M

R



2807

4901

3854


2388

2817

2602



3501

4191

3846

UF03325


M

R




5308

5308



3175

3175




4762

4762

Georgia-01R


L

R

4400

5766

3636

4937

4685

3275

3162

4566

3668

5651

5615

5105

5446

5454

C99-R


L

R

3620

5679

4046

4747

4523

3507

3875

3633

3672

5143

5356

4401

4818

4929

Georgia-02C**


L

R

2983

5105

2581

4882

3888

2520

3078

3491

3030

3666

5066

3607

5240

4395

York


L

R



4598

5037

4817


3795

3930

3863



4062

4598

4330

Tifrunner


L

R




5276

5276



3701

3701




4601

4601

VAC92R


E

V

2982

4904

2249

4320

3614

1558

1707

2578

1948

4586

6244

3775

4095

4675

VC2**


E

V

2962

4459

2285

4643

3587

1930

1868

3449

2416

4477

5502

3859

4834

4668

Gregory


ME

V

3084

4214

2055

4869

3556

1959

1568

3627

2385

4888

5647

3688

3878

4525

NCV11


E

V

2888

3769

2114

4824

3399

1817

1717

2791

2108

5046

5760

3985

4226

4754

NC12C


E

V

2431

3721

1739

3788

2920

1752

1497

2552

1934

3896

4904

3252

4459

4128

Georgia-05E


M

V




5085

5085



3020

3020




4098

4098

UF03618**


M

V




4533

4533



3078

3078




5272

5272

*E = early, M = medium, L = late; **High oleic oil chemistry;


Table 5. Disease resistance of major peanut varieties in the southeastern US. Adapted from the University of Georgia Disease Risk Index-2007. Fewer points mean better resistance.

Variety1

Spotted Wilt

Leaf Spot

White mold

Limb rot

SunOleic 97R2

50

unknown

unknown

unknown

Flavorunner 4582

50

unknown

unknown

unknown

NC-V 11

35

30

25

25

Georgia Green

30

20

20

15

Virugard

30

20

20

unknown

Gregory

30

30

20

25

Andru II2

25

30

20

25

AT 3081R

25

unknown

unknown

unknown

Attaboy*

20

15

15

unknown

McCloud2*

20

unknown

20

unknown

C-99R4

20

15

15

25

Carver3

20

30

20

25

AT 3085A*

20

unknown

unknown

unknown

Georgia-05E*

15

20

25

unknown

Georgia-03L5

15

15

10

20

Georgia-02C2,3,5

15

20

10

20

Georgia-01R3

10

10

15

15

York2*

10

10

10

unknown

Florida-072*

10

20

15

unknown

AP-34

10

25

10

25

Tifrunner

10

15

25

25

Georganic

5

10

10

unknown

*Data for these new varieties is limited and risk ratings will undergo changes as needed in the future.

1Adequate research data is not available for all varieties with regards to all diseases. Additional varieties will be included as data to support the assignment of an index value are available.

2High oleic variety.

3Varieties Carver, GA-02C, and GA-01R have increased resistance to Cylindrocladium black rot (CBR) than do other varieties commonly planted in country-regionplaceGeorgia.

4Varieties AP3, DP1, and C-99R are less resistant to CBR and are not recommended for fields where this disease is a problem.



Footnotes

1. This document is SS-AGR-109, one of a series of the Agronomy Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Originally published as Marianna NFREC Research Report 07-1. Publication date March 2007. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2. B. L. Tillman, assistant professor, Agronomy Department, North Florida Research and Education Center--Marianna, FL; D. W. Gorbet, professor, Agronomy Department, North Florida Research and Education Center--Marianna, FL; M. W. Gomillion, biological scientist, North Florida Research and Education Center--Marianna, FL; J. McKinney, senior biological scientist; Plant Science Research and Education Unit--Citra, FL; W.D. Thomas, Columbia county extension director, Lake City, FL.


The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information. UF/IFAS does not guarantee or warranty the products named, and references to them in this publication does not signify our approval to the exclusion of other products of suitable composition.


The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other extension publications, contact your county Cooperative Extension service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry Arrington, Dean.



Copyright Information

This document is copyrighted by the University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) for the people of the State of Florida. UF/IFAS retains all rights under all conventions, but permits free reproduction by all agents and offices of the Cooperative Extension Service and the people of the State of Florida. Permission is granted to others to use these materials in part or in full for educational purposes, provided that full credit is given to the UF/IFAS, citing the publication, its source, and date of publication.