Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-hw7sx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T10:20:11.801Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in yield, protein, oil and maturity of groundnut cultivars with the application of sulphur fertilizers and fungicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. C. N. Laurence ,
R. W. Gibbons  and
C. T. Young
R. C. N. Laurence
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council of Malawi, P.O. Box 215, Lilongwe, Malawi
R. W. Gibbons
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council of Malawi, P.O. Box 215, Lilongwe, Malawi
C. T. Young
Affiliation:
University of Georgia, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station, Experiment, Georgia 30212, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Fungicide applications in Malawi have shown improvements in groundnut kernel yield. Improved fertility of sulphur-deficient soils contributes to such gains when sulphur dust is used as the fungicidal agent. Application of sulphur alone to deficient soils lowered the oil/protein ratio of kernels, whereas a singular fungicidal effect raised the oil content, probably through delayed plant maturity.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 86 , Issue 2 , April 1976 , pp. 245 - 250
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

American Oil Chemists Society (1951). Method no. A6. Official and Tentative Methods, pp. 4–50.Google Scholar
Blaza, A. J. (1971). Investigations on the Sulphur Status of Malawi Soils. Bothamsted Experimental Station.Google Scholar
Chopra, A. K. & Kanwar, J. S. (1966). Effects of sulphur fertilisation on the chemical composition and nutrient uptake by legumes. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 14, 69–76.Google Scholar
Eppendorfer, W. H. (1971). Effects of S, N and P on amino acid composition of field beans and responses of the biological value of the seed protein to S amino acid content. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 22, 501–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, R. W., Bunting, A. H. & Smartt, J. (1972). The classification of varieties of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Euphytica 21, 78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartzook, A., Birk, Y. & Hurwitz, S. (1969). Electrophoretic investigations of proteins from three groundnut types. Israel Journal of Agricultural Besearch 16, 135–6.Google Scholar
Heinis, J. L. (1972). Methionine content of 25 peanut selections and the effect of molybdenum on methionine and nitrogen in peanut plants. Oleagineaux 27, 147.Google Scholar
Holley, K. T. & Hammons, R. D. (1968). Strain and seasonal effects on peanut characteristics. Georgia Experimental Station Besearch Bulletin, no. 32.Google Scholar
Jones, D. B. (1931). Factors for converting percentages of nitrogen in food and feeds into percentages of proteins. United States Department of Agriculture Circular, no. 183.Google Scholar
Larsen, I. & Dissing Nielsen, J. (1966). The effect of varying nitrogen supplies on the content of amino acids in wheat grain. Plant and Soil 24, 299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schofield, R. K. & Taylor, A. W. (1955). The measurement of soil pH. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 19, 164–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worthington, R. E. & Hammons, R. O. (1971). Genotypic variation in fatty acid composition and stability of Arachis hypogaea L. oil. Oleagineaux 26, 695–700.Google Scholar
Yandav, R. & Singh, D. (1970). Effect of gypsum on the chemical composition, nutrient uptake and yield of groundnut. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 18, 183–6.Google Scholar
Young, C. T. (1970). Biochemical studies of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) quality. Ph.D. thesis, Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
Young, C. T. (1972). Improved peanut quality – A new test for maturity. Southeastern Peanut Farmer 10, 14.Google Scholar