2005 Annual Report 1.What major problem or issue is being resolved and how are you resolving it (summarize project aims and objectives)? How serious is the problem? What does it matter? The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 replaced a supply management policy that had been in place for over 60 years. The new marketing loan program for peanuts is designed to stabilize farm incomes in periods of low and high market prices and improve the domestic and international competitiveness of U. S. peanuts. Producers must approach decision making in the context of the new farm policy which operates differently from previous legislation. Farm managers in U.S. peanut producing regions are also facing changes related to conservation. Next to land, abundant water for irrigation is arguably the most important natural resource in production agriculture. However, persistent drought, urban expansion, and interstate litigation are collectively threatening irrigation water supplies in U.S. peanut-producing regions. Unless new strategies are developed for production management, producer income and rural economic stability will face increased risk Irrigation of peanut can increase pod yield and grade and may decrease the risk of preharvest aflatoxin contamination compared with nonirrigated production. Conservation tillage can decrease input costs but does not always increase yield and subsequent revenue. Current knowledge is lacking on surface and subsurface drip irrigation scheduling techniques and management practices in peanut. Yield response of peanut to strip tillage, peanut variety, and fungicide application/timing is unknown with subsurface drip irrigation systems. In addition, little is known about the use of surface drip irrigation on peanut including drip tube lateral installation, lateral retrieval, lateral spacing, and variations in land topography. This project is within Component 1 (Integrated production systems) of NP305 with major focus on sustainable cropping systems (Component 1C). The project also includes items associated with NP-201 Component II (Irrigation and Drainage) concerning economical crop production, water conservation management, and irrigation and drainage in humid areas. Projects have been initiated to accomplish the following objectives: (1)Determine the yield and quality of peanut following the double cropping system of vegetable and cotton crops in an alternate year rotation when irrigated with SDI; (2)Determine crop management strategies for strip tillage of peanut and cotton under SDI; (3)Develop surface drip irrigation system technologies for peanut production cropping systems; and (4)Develop tillage systems implementing furrow dikes for peanut, cotton, and corn production systems. 2.List the milestones (indicators of progress) from your Project Plan. CY2004 1. Plant and harvest vegetables and cotton (completed). 2. Plant and harvest first year peanut crop (completed). 3. Plant and harvest field crops (completed). 4. New objective initiated in 2005. CY2005 1. Will plant and harvest peanut crop. Will collect and analyze yield data. (in process). Planted and tried to harvest vegetable crop. Sweet corn was successful but green bean was a crop failure due to excess rainfall. Cotton was planed late due to excessive rainfall. 2. Cotton and peanut was planted using conventional, strip and no-tillage techniques. Will harvest crops and begin to analyze yield data. 3. Planted corn, cotton and peanut in spring. Installed surface drip tubing. Harvested corn, and will harvest cotton and peanut crops (in process). 4. Sites were selected and after planting crops, furrow dikes were implemented (in process). CY2006 1. Vegetable crops will be planted. Following peanut harvest, cotton will be planted for the double crop. Peanut will be planted in areas where vegetables/cotton was planted last year. 2. Cotton and peanut will planted using conventional, strip, and no-tillage techniques. Peanut will follow a corn crop while cotton will follow peanut. 3. Crops will be rotated and corn, cotton and peanut will be planted in the spring. Surface drip will be installed. Crops will be harvested in the fall. 4. Furrow dikes will be implemented in corn, cotton and peanut. CY2007 1. Vegetable crops will be planted. Following harvest cotton will be planted for the double crop. Peanut will be planted in areas where vegetables/cotton was planted last year. 2. Cotton and peanut will planted using conventional, strip, and no-tillage techniques. Peanut will follow a corn crop while cotton will follow peanut. 3. Crops will be rotated and corn, cotton and peanut will be planted in the spring. Surface drip will be installed. Crops will be harvested in the fall. 4. Furrow dikes will be implemented in corn, cotton and peanut Plant and harvest peanut crop. CY2008 1. All vegetable, cotton, and peanut data will be analyzed and manuscripts prepared. 2. Yield data collected from the conventional, strip, and no-tillage area will be analyzed. 3. Data collected from the surface drip projects will be analyzed. 4. Furrow dike project will continue. 4a.What was the single most significant accomplishment this past year? A project was completed that determined yield, grade, and stem rot disease incidence of three peanut cultivars planted in 6 cover crops using strip and conventional tillage, and had full, half, and no fungicide applied. This research showed no pod yield difference (3446 lbs/ac) for any cultivar between the full and half fungicide applications. Pod yield decrease when fungicide was not applied (2198 lbs/ac). Stem rot and leaf spot increased as fungicide amount decreased. Leaf spot and stem rot incidence doubled in plots when no fungicide was applied compared with full fungicide application. Peanut cultivar, Georgia Green, had less disease (stem rot and leaf spot) compared with the other cultivars (DP1 and GA-O2C). Georgia Green is an earlier maturing cultivar compared with DP1 and aGAO2C, and was not in the field as long. The cultivar DP1 had less disease than GAO2C. Overall, cover crop type did not affect yield or disease on these three cultivars. Growers may be able to use about half the fungicide as recommended with only slight increase in disease without loss of pod yield. The variety Georgia Green still seems to have the best disease resistance and pod yield of the three cultivars tested. 4b.List other significant accomplishments, if any. A project was conducted at two locations in 2002, 2003, and 2004 to determine the effect of three plant orientations and three disease management schedules on disease incidence (leaf spot, stem rot, peg, pod, and limb rot, and tomato spotted wilt virus), yield, and grade of peanuts. Plant orientations included single row, twin row, and diamond patterns. Plant population was held constant at 6 seed/ft. The diamond orientation consisted of four evenly spaced rows of peanuts planted on a 36” bed. Disease management schedules consisted of:. 1)standard block calendar schedule for fungicide applications;. 2)an advisory based decision model using precipitation events and stage of crop growth to trigger fungicide application (AU-Pnut), and AU-Pnut with a minimum soil temperature. There were no interactions between plant orientation and disease management, thus disease incidence was not affected by planting orientation. The fungicide program using the “block calendar schedule” provided the most consistent control of leaf spot and stem rot. None of the disease management schedules allowed high disease infestation. Tomato spotted wilt virus was not affected by disease management or plant orientation. Over three years, Location 1 showed that peanut planted in twin or diamond orientations produced an average of 650 lb/ac more than peanuts planted in single rows. At Location 2 the following occurred:. 1)in 2004, twin row and diamond orientations produced 450 lb/ac more peanuts than single row patterns;. 2)in 2003, twin row orientations produced 260 lb/ac more than diamond and single row patterns; and. 3)in 2002, all plant orientations had similar yields. These results were presented at the 2005 APRES meetings in Portsmouth, VA. 4c.List any significant activities that support special target populations. None. 4d.Progress report. None. 5.Describe the major accomplishments over the life of the project, including their predicted or actual impact. Analyzed yield data show that subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) can significantly increase pod yield and kernel size when compared with nonirrigated control. The increase in pod yield and kernel distribution will result in a higher grade rating for land owners. Higher grade rating directly relates to a higher economic return allowing the land owner to be more profitable. Long term yield data (>5 years) show that continuous peanut has yields of about 3000 lbs/ac. Alternate year cropping patterns with cotton and corn show a 900 to 1200 lbs/ac increase of peanuts compared with continuous peanut. Longer rotations (greater than two years between peanut) show an increase of pod yield over 2000 lbs/ac compared with continuous peanut. Surface drip irrigation showed peanut yield in excess of 4500 lbs/ac and corn grain yields over 130 bu/ac. Strip tillage in cotton and peanut has the advantage of less economic input but yields have not always been consistent. Strip tillage projects have been initiated on peanut and cotton using SDI to determine the yield potential and possible management practices for this tillage system. Drip irrigation and strip tillage could decrease input cost without reducing crop yields and could therefore be a viable management solution for irrigated crop land. 6.What science and/or technologies have been transferred and to whom? When is the science and/or technology likely to become available to the end-user (industry, farmer, other scientists)? What are the constraints, if known, to the adoption and durability of the technology products? Georgia SDI systems have been visited by various university officials, state agency personnel, manufacturers' from irrigation companies, local manufacturer's/processors, and local farmers. Visitors have been from Georgia, Alabama, Texas, and foreign countries. Field tours are held annually at the NM and Texas research farms. Interest in surface drip systems has been high with visits from farmer groups and manufacturers’. Adoption of SDI and surface by end users is dependent on yield and quality of peanut (and rotational crops) and associated economics to install and maintain the system compared to overhead sprinkler systems. Economic, tillage practices, and management techniques are the major constraints for adapting drip irrigation. 7.List your most important publications in the popular press and presentations to organizations and articles written about your work. (NOTE: List your peer reviewed publications below). Sorensen, R. B. and C. L. Butts. 2005. Cotton, Corn and Peanut Yield under Subsurface Drip Irrigation. EWRI-(World Water & Environmental Resources Congress) Anchorage, AK. (Abstract) Haman, Dorota Z., Ronald B. Sorensen, David S. Ross, Robert O. Evans, and Phil Tacker. 2005. Critical management issues when using DSI in humid areas. EWRI- Anchorage, AK. (Abstract) Sorensen, R. B., T. B. Brenneman, and M. C. Lamb. 2005. Conservation Tillage, Winter Cover Crop, Peanut Variety, and Fungicide Rate on Peanut Yield. Am. Peanut. Res. Ed. Soc. (Abstract). Lamb, M.C., D.L. Rowland, R.B. Sorensen, C.L. Butts, W. Faircloth, R. Nuti. 2005. Yield and Economic Responses of Peanut to Crop Rotation Sequences. Am. Peanut. Res. Ed. Soc. (Abstract). Nuti, R.C., W.H. Faircloth, C.T. Bennett, J. I. Davidson, and T.B. Brenneman. 2005. The Effect of Planting Pattern and Disease Management on Peanut Yield and Grade. Am. Peanut. Res. Ed. Soc. (Abstract). Faircloth, W.H., M.C. Lamb, D.L. Rowland, and R.C. Nuti. 2005. Peanut Yield Response to Reduced Supplemental Irrigation Cappacity on Three Tillage Systems in the Southeastern Coastal Plain. Am. Peanut. Res. Ed. Soc. (Abstract). Review Publications UGA/CPES Research and Extension Bulletin No. 2004. Viator, R.P., Nuti, R.C., Edmisten, K.L., Wells, R. 2005. Influence of Temperature and Other Climatic Factors on Boll Maturation Period. Agronomy Journal. 97:494-499.