Gypsum Substitute Peanut Notes No. 74 2024
go.ncsu.edu/readext?1004159
en Español / em Português
El inglés es el idioma de control de esta página. En la medida en que haya algún conflicto entre la traducción al inglés y la traducción, el inglés prevalece.
Al hacer clic en el enlace de traducción se activa un servicio de traducción gratuito para convertir la página al español. Al igual que con cualquier traducción por Internet, la conversión no es sensible al contexto y puede que no traduzca el texto en su significado original. NC State Extension no garantiza la exactitud del texto traducido. Por favor, tenga en cuenta que algunas aplicaciones y/o servicios pueden no funcionar como se espera cuando se traducen.
Português
Inglês é o idioma de controle desta página. Na medida que haja algum conflito entre o texto original em Inglês e a tradução, o Inglês prevalece.
Ao clicar no link de tradução, um serviço gratuito de tradução será ativado para converter a página para o Português. Como em qualquer tradução pela internet, a conversão não é sensivel ao contexto e pode não ocorrer a tradução para o significado orginal. O serviço de Extensão da Carolina do Norte (NC State Extension) não garante a exatidão do texto traduzido. Por favor, observe que algumas funções ou serviços podem não funcionar como esperado após a tradução.
English
English is the controlling language of this page. To the extent there is any conflict between the English text and the translation, English controls.
Clicking on the translation link activates a free translation service to convert the page to Spanish. As with any Internet translation, the conversion is not context-sensitive and may not translate the text to its original meaning. NC State Extension does not guarantee the accuracy of the translated text. Please note that some applications and/or services may not function as expected when translated.
Collapse ▲I was recently asked if a product applied at 100 or 200 pounds per acre that includes calcium (12.2%) is as effective as gypsum. Data are presented in the technical bulletin from yield trials but with limited information. The trials either did not have a non-treated control or data from the non-treated control are not presented.
Based on my experiences, and I have discussed this with other research/extension folks working with peanuts, the amount of calcium in this product at the rates applied would not adequately approach what gypsum delivers at suggested use rates in the pegging zone. One question is the yield data. Without a non-treated control, it is impossible to know if one can make a conclusion on whether or not environment conditions or other aspects of the trial were appropriate to compare the products. My point is that with peanut response to gypsum, the amount of native calcium in soil, soil pH, rainfall patterns and variety can make a difference in response. Without the non-treated control data included, one does not know if a similar response of this product and gypsum was because the products perform the same or the native fertility or environmental conditions were such that neither product actually made a difference in yield. Appropriate controls in experiments that are repeated and replicated are essential for discerning if a product has a positive, neutral or negative effect on peanut yield and quality.
Theoretically, a product applied at these rates with this percent of calcium would not provide adequate calcium for pegs and pods, especially Virginia market types.