Impact of Row Planters and Different Planting Arrangements on Peanut Yield and Yield Components

Year 2025, Volume: 22 Issue: 2, 308 - 318, 26.05.2025

Jabraeil Taghinezhad , Hossein Zeinalzadeh Tabrizi

https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1403775

Abstract

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is one of the most important and economical oilseeds in the tropics and subtropics, playing a crucial role in both human nutrition and soil reclamation. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of various row planters and planting arrangements for mechanized peanut cultivation in the Moghan region of Iran using a randomized complete block design with six treatments and four replications over 2020 and 2021. The main objective was to identify the optimal planter configuration to enhance peanut yield. The treatments included different planting setups: T1 and T2 used a pneumatic single-row planter with 75 cm row spacing and 12 and 17 cm between plants, respectively. T3 and T4 applied a pneumatic twin-row planter (Tarashkadeh) with 75 cm between rows and 22 and 28 cm between plants, respectively, while T5 and T6 utilized a single-row planter with reduced row spacing of 50 cm and plant spacing of 25 and 30 cm. The results indicated that T4 and T3 provided the best horizontal uniformity of seed distribution (78.93% and 78.62%, respectively) and high emergence rates (94.23% and 93.08%). The twin-row configuration (T4) increased pod yield by 12.21% and 17.70% compared to the single-row patterns (T2 and T1). The twin-row planting system significantly improved plant density and pod yield, demonstrating its effectiveness over traditional single-row planting. Based on these findings, the use of a pneumatic twin-row planter (Tarashkadeh) with 75 cm row spacing and 28 cm plant spacing is recommended for farmers in the Moghan region to optimize peanut production.

Keywords

Peanuts, Pneumatic planter, Pod yield, Twin-row cultivation

Ethical Statement

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Supporting Institution

Ardabil Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, IRAN

Project Number

2-37-14-012-990183

Thanks

This work supported by the Ardabil Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO Research Project (Project No: 2-37-14-012-990183), Iran.

References

• Abdzad Ghohari, A., Amiri, E., Babazadeh, H. and Sedghi, H. (2018). Effect of salinity and irrigation on yield and water use efficiency of peanut varieties. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 49(2): 329-340 (in Persian). https://doi.org/10.22059/ijswr.2017.230766.667656
• Aninbon, C., Jogloy, S., Vorasoot, N., Patanothai, A., Nuchadomrong, S. and Senawong, T. (2016). Effect of end of season water deficit on phenolic compounds in peanut genotypes with different levels of resistance to drought. Food Chemistry, 196: 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.09.022
• Awal, M. and Aktar, L. (2015). Effect of row spacing on the growth and yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) stands. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 3(1): 7-11.
• Baldwin, J., McGriff, E., Tankersley, B., McDaniel, R., Brothers, C., Heard, G. and Mallard, E. (2000). Yield and grade of several peanut cultivars when planted by single or twin-row patterns during 2000. In E. Prostko (Ed.), Georgia Peanut Research Extension Report (pp. 38-40). Georgia Agric. Exp. Sta. Tifton, GA.
• Baldwin, J. and Williams, J. (2002). Effects of twin rows on yield and grade. Peanut Grower, 14: 28-29.
• Beasley, J., Baldwin, J., Williams, E. and Paulk, J. (2000). Comparison of peanut cultivars planted on single, twin, and six rows per bed spacings. In E. Prostko (Ed.), Georgia Peanut Research Extension Report. (pp. 54-57). Georgia Agric. Exp. Sta. Tifton, GA.
• Çalişkan, S., Çalişkan, M. E. and Arslan, M. (2008). Genotypic differences for reproductive growth, yield, and yield components in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 32(5): 415-424.
• Celik, A., Ozturk, I. and Way, T. (2007). Effects of various planters on emergence and seed distribution uniformity of sunflower. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 23(1): 57-61. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.22331
• Dapaah, H. K., Mohammed, I. and Awuah, R. T. (2014). Growth yield performance of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) in response to plant density. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science, 3(9): 1069-1082. https://doi.org/10.9734/IJPSS/2014/9445
• FAOSTAT. (2022). Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistics Division (2017). Available online at: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (Accessed Date: 08.2019)
• Ferahoğlu, E., Çalişkan, T. and Kirici, S. (2023). The effects of different planting densitiy and harvesting time on the yield and quality of Dracocephalum moldavica L. (Moldavian dragonhead). Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 20(3): 528-541. https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1114621
• Gardner, F. and Auma, E. (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
• Haro, R. J., Carrega, W. C. and Otegui, M. E. (2022). Row spacing and growth habit in peanut crops: Effects on seed yield determination across environments. Field Crops Research, 275: 108363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108363
• Hurt, C., Brandenburg, R., Jordan, D., Shew, B., Isleib, T., Linker, M., . . . Mozingo, W. (2003). Managing tomato spotted wilt virus in peanuts in North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. AG-638.
• IRIMO (2021). Iranian Meteorological Office Data Processing Center. Islamic Republic of Iran Meteorological Office.
• IRRI (2013). Statistical Tool for Agricultural Research (STAR) Version: 2.0.1. In: International Rice Research Institute Los Baños, Philippines.
• Jabir, E. and Alfadilb, A. D. (2022). An evaluation of a vacuum distribution device for seed pick-up regularity of a multiple-rows pneumatic plate. International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Technovation, 4(6): 14-25. https://doi.org/10.54392/irjmt2262
• Jun, Z., Xiu-wang, Z., Xi, H., Juan, L., Ya-nan, C., Feng-shou, T. and Wen-zhao, D. (2021). Effects of different dense planting methods on leaf function and yield of summer-sowing peanut. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 43(4): 656. https://doi.org/10.19802/j.issn.1007-9084.2020069
• Karayel, D. and Ozmerzi, A. (2002). Effect of tillage methods on sowing uniformity of maize. Canadian Biosystems Engineering, 44: 2-23.
• Kirk, K. R., Massey, H. F., Monfort, W. S., Thomas, J. S., Jordan, B. M. and Schmidt, W. B. (2013). Single Row vs. Twin Row Digging Losses for Two Virginia Type Peanut Varieties. 2013 ASABE Annual International Meeting, 21-24 July, Kansas City, Missouri, U.S.A. https://doi.org/10.13031/aim.20131620957
• Konlan, S., Sarkodie-Addo, J., Asare, E. and Kombiok, M. (2013). Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) varietal response to spacing the Guinea Savanna agro-ecological zone of Ghana: growth and yield. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 8(22): 2769-2777. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR12.1313
• Kurt, C., Bakal, H., Gulluoglu, L. and Arioglu, H. (2017). The effect of twin row planting pattern and plant population on yield and yield components of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) at main crop planting in Cukurova region of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 22(1): 24-31. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.301768
• Lanier, J. E., Jordan, D. L., Spears, J. F., Wells, R., Johnson, P. D., Barnes, J. S., . . . Bailey, J. E. (2004). Peanut response to planting pattern, row spacing, and irrigation. Agronomy Journal, 96(4): 1066-1072. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2004.1066
• Lassiter, B., Jordan, D., Wilkerson, G., Shew, B. and Brandenburg, R. (2016). Influence of planting pattern on pest management in Virginia market type peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Science, 43(1): 59-66. https://doi.org/10.3146/0095-3679-43.1.59
• Maas, A. L., Dashiell, K. E. and Melouk, H. A. (2006). Planting density influences disease incidence and severity of Sclerotinia blight in peanut. Crop Science, 46(3): 1341-1345. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.10-0335
• Mkandawire, L., Mhango, W., Saka, V., Kabambe, V., Juma, S., Goodman, J., . . . Jordan, D. (2021). Influence of plant population and harvest date on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) yield and aflatoxin contamination. Peanut Science, 48(1): 33-39. https://doi.org/10.3146/PS20-30.1
• Nuti, R., Faircloth, W., Lamb, M., Sorensen, R., Davidson, J. and Brenneman, T. (2008). Disease management and variable planting patterns in peanut. Peanut Science, 35(1): 11-17. https://doi.org/10.3146/PS06-051.1
• Önemli, F. (2005). The correlation analyses of some climate values with flowering and earliness index in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Tekirdag Agircultural Faculty, 2(3): 273-281.
• Ottoni Filho, T. B., Ottoni, M. V., Oliveira, M. B. D., Macedo, J. R. D. and Reichardt, K. (2014). Revisiting Field Capacity (FC): variation of definition of FC and its estimation from pedotransfer functions. Soil Processes and Properties, 38 (6): 1750-1764 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-06832014000600010
• Patil, A., Dave, A. and Yadav, R. (2004). Evaluation of sugarcane cutter planter. Sugar Tech, 6(3): 121-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02942713
• Place, G., Reberg-Horton, S., and Jordan, D. (2010). Interaction of cultivar, planting pattern, and weed management tactics in peanut. Weed Science, 58(4): 442-448. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-10-00012.1
• Rasekh, H., Asghari, J., Massoumi, S. and Zakerinejad, R. (2010). Effect of planting pattern and plant density on physiological characteristics and yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in Iran. Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 5(8), 542-547. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjbsci.2010.542.547
• Senapati, P., Mohapatra, P. and Dikshit, U. (1992). Field evaluation of seeding devices for finger-millet. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa, and Latin. America, 23(3): 21-24.
• Singh, A. and Singh, P. (2017). Development of a tractor operated sugarcane cutter planter for mechanisation of sugarcane planting in deep furrows. Sugar Tech, 19(4): 416-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-016-0471-9
• Singh, U. V. and Moses, S. C. (2021). Development and testing of manually operated single row planter for groundnut seeds. International Journal of Farm Sciences, 11(1and2): 93-101. https://doi.org/10.5958/2250-0499.2021.00018.5
• Sorensen, R., Sconyers, L., Lamb, M. and Sternitzke, D. (2004). Row orientation and seeding rate on yield, grade, and stem rot incidence of peanut with subsurface drip irrigation. Peanut Science, 31(1): 54-58. https://doi.org/10.3146/pnut.31.1.0012
• Taghinazhad, J. (2017). Comparison of technical and economical effect of different planters using varied seed rates on canola yield in Moghan region. Journal of Agricultural Machinery, 7(2), 527-535. https://doi.org/10.22067/jam.v7i2.42060
• Taghinazhad, J. (2019). Mechanization of peanuts in Moghan plain. Agricultural Engineering Research Institute, AREEO, Iran: Handbook.
• Taki, O. and Asadi, A. (2009). Direct drill with active openers for no-tillage systems. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research (Iran), 10(1): 69-80.
• Tillman, B., Gorbet, D., Culbreath, A. and Todd, J. (2006). Response of peanut cultivars to seeding density and row patterns. Crop Management, 5(1): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1094/CM-2006-0711-01-RS
• Wehtje, G., Weeks, R., West, M., Wells, L. and Pace, P. (1994). Influence of planter type and seeding rate on yield and disease incidence in peanut. Peanut Science, 21(1): 16-19. https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-21-1-5
• Yang, F., Liao, D., Fan, Y., Gao, R., Wu, X., Rahman, T., . . . Du, J. (2017). Effect of narrow-row planting patterns on crop competitive and economic advantage in maize–soybean relay strip intercropping system. Plant Production Science, 20(1): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/1343943X.2016.1224553
• Yaşlı, Ş., İşler, N. and Şahin, C. B. (2020). The effect of single and twin planting patterns on yield and important agricultural characteristics of main cropped peanut under Diyarbakir conditions. Journal of Agriculture and Nature, 23(1): 91-98. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.552168
• Yasir, S. H., Liao, Q., Yu, J. and He, D. (2012). Design and test of a pneumatic precision metering device for wheat. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal, 14(1): 16-25.
• Yilmaz, M. and Jordan, D. L. (2022). Effect of plant density on yield and quality of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) cultivars. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 27(2), 217-223. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.1148572
• Zhang, G., Leclerc, M. Y., Singh, N., Tubbs, R. S. and Montfort, W. S. (2023). Influence of planting pattern on peanut ecosystem daytime net carbon uptake, evapotranspiration, and water-use efficiency using the eddy-covariance method. Frontiers in Agronomy, 5: 1204887. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2023.1204887