Dan Anco Clemson Early Season Questions on Inoculant and Insecticides Peanut Notes No. 50 2025
Find this article at: go.ncsu.edu/readext?1069585
— Written By David Jordanen Español / em Português
Español
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 ▲
Two Insecticides In Furrow?
Would it be worth applying both imidacloprid/generic Admire Pro and Thimet in furrow to improve early season protection against thrips? While multiple different approaches often are helpful in improving our overall management of different pests and are at the heart of IPM, the specific combinations are also important. We have looked at this specific combination a few years back in 2018 and did not see a benefit of adding imidacloprid in the furrow with Thimet. Numerically, the combined imid + Thimet treatment had a little greater TSW than Thimet alone, and the combined treatment had significantly less yield, about 220 lb/A, compared to Thimet alone. If a granular insecticide is on the table for going out in furrow, either Thimet or AgLogic have provided consistent protection in managing early season thrips injury, with AgLogic having an edge on thrips and Thimet an edge on TSW management. Many of our modern cultivars have good TSW resistance, so we have good flexibility in choice of individual products.
Twin Row Inoculant Rate
The question came up what rate of inoculant is recommended when planting twin rows, since there are twice the number of furrows out there but often a lower rate of seed per foot (per furrow) compared to the same population planted in single rows. The labels for Exceed, Vault, and Optimize all list as equivalents for linear row feet, with the Exceed label also specifically stating to double the rate for twin rows. That would be the best positioning for maximum inoculation, though farmers have had experience that it can be fine with a single-row equivalent. New ground still needs the full amount, and it is good to add at least a half rate of a different product and formulation there to buffer against the heartburn of potential inoculant failure, which is costly on yield potential and expensive to try to correct.
In single row tests, in a field with recent history if we did not have an inoculant treatment our yields have been good where we would not readily notice a difference if we didn’t have a with and without to compare against. Last year we ran a single row inoculant test where the field had been out of peanut for 2 years before coming back in. The no-inoculant check yielded 5065 lb/A, which was good. The inoculant treatment yielded 5233 lb/A, which was significantly better and represented a little more than $40/A increase at a $485/ton price. Part of the twin row spreading is like a seeding rate effect, where if the same as a single row seed rate would have the seed more/twice spread out, but the stream of inoculant for liquid is steady and constant, so ideally getting a full (double) rate would be a best case and the standard recommendation. We are planning to look at this further in a test this year.
A liquid inoculant is typically the most convenient, but another option to get around the single versus double bladder rate is to do a peat seed treatment, that way the inoculant stays with the seed, but that method is more work and potentially opens consistency issues.
Dan Anco
Extension Peanut Specialist and Associate Professor
Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences
Clemson University – Edisto Research and Education Center
