INTRODUCTION

In 2023, cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) were harvested on approximately 2.86 and 0.64 million hectares in the U.S. (USDA-NASS, 2024). These two uniquely different crops share common ground, as cotton is considered to be an acceptable crop to include in rotation with peanut to reduce soil pathogens and nematodes (Johnson et al., 1998). But, the differing weed management strategies for these two crops make management implications inherently difficult when they are produced within very close proximity (Johnson III et al., 2001; Johnson et al., 2012).

The rapid adoption of herbicide-tolerant technology in crops such as cotton and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] has made neighbouring crops such as peanut, more likely to be subjected to off-target movement (physical drift and/or volatility) and/or spray tank contamination of non-registered herbicides (Lassiter et al., 2007; Leon et al., 2014; Prostko et al., 2011). In the U.S., it has been reported that 86% of the cotton hectares are planted using stacked gene cultivars (insect and herbicide-resistant) and 95% of soybean hectares are planted using herbicide-resistant cultivars (USDA-NASS, 2023).

This expansion of herbicide-resistant crops has led to an increase in the use of both glyphosate and dicamba for weed control. Glyphosate is a broad spectrum, systemic herbicide that provides postemergence (POST) control of numerous annual and perennial broadleaf and grass weeds (Shaner, 2014). Dicamba is a systemic synthetic auxin herbicide that is used for the control of annual and perennial broadleaf weeds (Shaner, 2014).

Numerous studies have evaluated peanut response to glyphosate or dicamba applied separately (Blanchett et al., 2015; Grey and Prostko, 2010; Johnson et al., 2012; Lassiter et al., 2007; Leon et al., 2014; Prostko et al., 2011). Single exposure events of glyphosate plus dicamba at rates ranging between 1/512X and 1X have also been evaluated (Daramola et al. 2023; Grichar et al., 2021). Collectively, the above research suggests that, although peanut injury symptoms from either dicamba or glyphosate are vastly different, yield response to these herbicides is similar. Generally, peanut yield loss from accidental exposure to either glyphosate or dicamba is a function of rate and peanut stage of growth.

Depending upon the herbicide label, two to four applications of dicamba are permitted on tolerant cotton and soybean cultivars including preplant, preemergence (PRE), and POST applications with POST application cut-off dates of 30-Jun. (soybean) and 30-Jul. (cotton) (Anonymous, 2022a; 2022b; 2023). In the dicamba-tolerant cotton and soybean production systems, dicamba is typically applied in a tank-mixture with glyphosate to increase the spectrum of weed control (Cahoon et al., 2015; Striegel et al., 2021). Thus, ample opportunities exist for unintentional multiple off-target exposure events of glyphosate plus dicamba to occur on near-by planted peanut. Since 2017, off-target events of glyphosate plus dicamba have been observed in commercial peanut fields across the peanut belt. However, no research has described the potential negative effects of multiple exposure events of low rates of glyphosate plus dicamba on peanut.

Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the impact of multiple exposure events and low rates of glyphosate plus dicamba on peanut yield and grade across multiple locations in the southeast and southwest production regions of the U.S.

Materials and Methods

During 2019 and 2020, seven land-grant universities conducted field trials, for a total of 15 site-years, investigating peanut yield/grade response to low-use rates and multiple exposures of glyphosate plus dicamba (Table 1). Six treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with a two (timing) by three (rate) factorial with three to four replications. Timings occurred at 30 + 60 days after planting (DAP) or 30 + 60 + 90 DAP. Research has shown that off-target movement of herbicides can range somewhere between 1/10X and 1/100X (Al-Khatib and Peterson 1999; Bailey and Kapusta, 1993; Snipes et al., 1991; Snipes et al., 1992). It has also been reported that spray particle drift from ground sprayers is equivalent to 1% to 8% of the total spray volume (Maybank et al., 1978). Thus, if dicamba is applied at 560 g ae/ha (1X), 1% drift would be equivalent to a 1/100X rate. Therefore, glyphosate plus dicamba rates were 25.2 g ae/ha + 11.2 g ae/ha (1/50X) and 12.6 g ae/ha + 5.6 g ae/ha (1/100X), respectively. A non-treated control (NTC) was also included. Growth stage of peanut at 30, 60, and 90 DAP were beginning bloom (R1), beginning peg to beginning pod (R2 - R3), and full pod to full seed (R4 - R6), respectively (Boote 1982).

Table 1

Year, state, cultivar, location, soil type, planting dates, and application dates for multi-state glyphosate plus dicamba peanut trials, 2019-2020.

Peanut were planted in freshly prepared seedbeds with four-row plots for each treatment. The inner two rows of each plot were treated which left a two-row border on each side of the plot to minimize any off-target movement to adjacent plots. All herbicide treatments were applied using a CO₂-pressurized backpack sprayer to deliver 140 L/ha or 187 L/ha in TX (South). Herbicide application techniques varied by location but were consistent with local practices and implemented to minimize off-target movement.

Data collected included pod yield (all locations), market grade (AL, GA, OK, and TX), and pod malformations (GA and NC). Peanut yield data were obtained using commercial harvesting equipment with moistures adjusted to 10%. Peanut grades (total sound mature kernels) were obtained from local Federal/State Inspection Services using a 500 g pod sample collected from each harvested plot (USDA-AMS, 2019). Additionally, peanut pod malformation data were collected in GA and NC and were obtained by visually inspecting 100 random pods from each replication/treatment. Malformed pod shapes included any pods that were abnormal in size and/or had a “parrot-beak” shape (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Peanut pod malformations caused by glyphosate plus dicamba applied at low rates.

Data were subjected to ANOVA using PROC GLIMMIX in SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Peanut yield, grade, and pod abnormalities were set as the response variables with year and replication within year included in the model as random factors. Yield data was grouped by region and pooled across years. All P-values for tests of differences between least-square means were compared and separated using the Tukey-Kramer method (P<0.10).

Results and Discussion

Peanut Yield

In both regions, there were no interactions between rate and timing. In the southeast region, peanut yield was reduced 9%, regardless of application timing, when glyphosate plus dicamba was applied at the 1/50X rate (Table 2). No yield reductions with either rate or timing were observed in the southwest region. It is possible that the environmental conditions typical to the southeast region (i.e. higher rainfall and humidity) resulted in a greater yield loss in comparison to the southwest region. Herbicide absorption, translocation, and efficacy are increased under higher moisture conditions (Friesen and Dew, 1966; Sharma and Singh, 2001; Peerzada et al., 2021). Single applications of glyphosate plus dicamba at 1/16X rates resulted in 0% to 28% yield reductions in previous research (Grichar et al., 2021). Other research has reported yield reductions of 5% to 14% with single exposure events of 1/128X and 1/32X rates of glyphosate plus dicamba (Daramola et al., 2023).

Table 2

Peanut yield as influenced by glyphosate plus dicamba at low rates by region, 2019-2020.

It is interesting to note that when applied alone, peanut has exhibited some tolerance to glyphosate. Single applications of glyphosate applied at 1/16X or 1/8X from 75 DAP to 105 DAP had no effect on peanut yield (Grey and Prostko, 2010). For a short time in the late 1980’s, glyphosate (34 g ae/ha) was sold by Monsanto (now Bayer Crop Science) under the commercial trade name of Quotamaker™ as a peanut yield enhancer/growth regulator (Hawf et al., 1989). However, this particular use for glyphosate was not readily adopted by peanut growers and was discontinued.

Peanut Grade

In AL, GA, and TX (West), peanut grade (total sound mature kernels) was not influenced by either rate or timing (Table 3). In 2019 in OK and TX (South), peanut grade was reduced 3% to 4% with the 1/50X rate of glyphosate plus dicamba. In 2020 in TX (South), peanut grade was reduced 1% when glyphosate plus dicamba was applied 30 + 60 + 90 DAP compared to the 30 + 60 DAP application. In previous research, peanut grade was reduced 6% to 8% when glyphosate plus dicamba, at 1/16X rate, was applied either 60 or 90 DAP (Grichar et al., 2021).

Table 3

Peanut grade (total sound mature kernels) as influenced by glyphosate plus dicamba applied at low rates and multiple exposures in Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Texas, 2019-2020.^a

In contrast, glyphosate applied alone at 1/23X from 100 DAP to 110 DAP increased total sound mature kernels in non-irrigated peanut but had no effect on the grade of irrigated peanut (Lamb et al., 2017). This effect was attributed to glyphosate’s efficacy on flower termination. It is important to note that one percentage point of total sound mature kernels has an estimated value of $5.51/1000 kg (W.S. Monfort, pers. communication, 2025).

Peanut Pod Malformations

In GA, time of application had no effect on peanut pod malformations (Table 4). In 2019, peanut pod malformations were increased by 4% to 5% by 1/50X and 1/100X rates of glyphosate plus dicamba but not in 2020.

Table 4

Peanut pod malformations as influenced by glyphosate plus dicamba applied at low rates and multiple exposures in Georgia and North Carolina, 2019-2020.

In NC, peanut pod malformations were greater (7% to 8%) when glyphosate plus dicamba was applied 30 + 60 + 90 DAP. Additionally, the 1/50X rate increased peanut pod malformations (9% to 11%) in both years while the 1/100X rate only increased pod malformations in 2020 (9%). Pod malformations in NC are a potential concern for Virginia-market types that are sold in-shell.

In soybean, pod malformations were 10% greater in treatments containing glyphosate plus dicamba when compared to dicamba alone when applied after the R3 stage of growth (Jones et al., 2019). It is likely that the combination of glyphosate plus dicamba at low rates and multiple exposures can have an hormesis effect on peanut pods in certain situations (Brito et al., 2018; Jalal et al., 2021).

Summary and Conclusions

Based upon these results, off-target movement of glyphosate plus dicamba at rates ≤1/100X is unlikely to result in significant peanut yield and grade losses. However, glyphosate plus dicamba drift may result in abnormal pod development which could be a major concern for peanut producers in the Virginia-Carolina region where peanut is grown primarily for the in-shell market. Off-target movement of glyphosate plus dicamba, and all other pesticides, is undesirable and multiple mitigation practices need to be implemented to minimize this potential problem.

This research could not have been conducted without the technical support of Charlie Hilton, Tim Richards, and Dewayne Dales. The contributions of A.S. Culpepper, W.S. Monfort, M.A. Abney, and C.J. Bryant were also greatly appreciated. Partial funding of this research was provided by Bayer Crop Science, the North Carolina Peanut Growers Association, and the Texas Peanut Producers.

Literature Cited

Al-Khatib K. and Peterson D.. 1999. Soybean (Glycine max) response to simulated drift from selected sulfonylurea herbicides, dicamba, glyphosate, and glufosinate. Weed Technol. 13:264-270.

Anonymous. Engenia® herbicide label. Research Triangle Park, NC, BASF Corporation. 2022a.

Anonymous. Xtendimax® herbicide label. St. Louis, MO. Bayer Crop Science LP. 2022b.

Anonymous. Tavium® herbicide label. Greensboro, NC. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC. 2023.

Bailey J.A. and Kapusta G.. 1993. Soybean (Glycine max) tolerance to simulated drift of nicosulfuron and primisulfuron. Weed Technol. 7:740-745.

Blanchett B.H., Grey T.L., Prostko E.P., and Webster T.M.. 2015. The effect of dicamba on peanut when applied during vegetative growth stages. Peanut Sci. 42:109-120.

Boote K.J. 1982. Growth stages of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Peanut Sci. 9:35-40.

Brito I., Tropaldi L., Carbonari C.A., and Velini E.D.. 2018. Hormetic effects of glyphosate on plants. Pest Manag. Sci. 74:1064-1070.

Cahoon C.W., York A.C., Jordan D.L., Everman W.J., Seagroves R.W., Culpepper A.S., and Eure P.M.. 2015. Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) management in dicamba-resistant cotton. Weed Technol. 29:758-770.

Daramola O.S, Kharel P., Iboyi J.E., and Devkota P.. 2023. Response of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) to sublethal rates of dicamba plus glyphosate at different growth stages. Agron. J. 115:1694-1704.

Friesen H.A. and Dew D.A . 1966. The influence of temperature and soil moisture on the phytotoxicity of dicamba, picloram, bromoxynil, and 2,4-D ester. Can. J. Plant Sci. 46:653-660.

Grey T.L. and Prostko E.P.. 2010. Physiological effects of late season glyphosate applications on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) seed development and germination. Peanut Sci. 37:124-128.

Grichar W.J., Dotray P.A., and Baughman T.A.. 2021. Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) response to glyphosate plus dicamba combinations. J. Adv. in Agri. 12:22–30.

Hawf L.R., Dixon G.A., Mason J.F., Rushing D.W., and Sherrick S.L.. 1989. MON-20004, a plant growth regulator for peanuts. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 42:331.

Jalal A., Carlos de Oliveira Junior J., Riberio J.S., Fernandes G.C., Mariano G.G., Rezende Trindade V.D., and Rodrigues doe Reis A. 2021. Hormesis in plants: Physiological and biochemical responses. Ecotox. and Environ. Safety 207:111225.

Johnson A.W., Minton N.A., Brenneman T.B., Todd J.W., Herzog G.A , Gascho G.J., Baker S.H., and Bondari K.. 1998. Peanut-cotton-rye rotations and soil chemical treatments for managing nematodes and thrips. J. of Nematol. 30(2):211-225.

Johnson V.A., Fisher L.R., Jordan D.L., Edmisten K.E., Stewart A.M., and York A.C.. 2012. Cotton, peanut, and soybean response to sublethal rates of dicamba, glufosinate, and 2,4-D. Weed Technol. 26:195-206.

Johnson III W.C., Brenneman T.B., Baker S.H., Johnson A.W., Sumner D.R., and Mullinix Jr. B.G. 2001. Tillage and pest management considerations in peanut-cotton rotation in the southeastern Coastal Plain. Agron. J. 93:570-576.

Jones G.T., Norsworthy J.K., Barber T., Gbur E., and Kruger G.R.. 2019. Effect of low doses of dicamba alone and in combination with glyphosate on parent soybean and offspring. Weed Technol. 33:17-23.

Lamb M.C, Sorenson R.B., Butts C.L., Dang P.M., Chen C.Y., and Arias R.S.. 2017. Chemical interruption of late season flowering to improve harvest peanut maturity. Peanut Sci. 44:60-65.

Lassiter B.R., Burke I.C., Thomas W.E., Pline-Srnic W.A., Jordan D.L., Wilcut J.W., and Wilkerson G.W.. 2007. Yield and physiological response of peanut to glyphosate drift. Weed Technol. 21:954-960.

Leon R.G., Ferrell J.A., and Brecke B.J.. 2014. Impact of exposure to 2,4-D and dicamba on peanut injury and yield. Weed Technol. 28:465-470.

Maybank J., Yoshida K., and Grover R.. 1978. Spray drift from agricultural pesticide applications. Air Pollut. Control. Assoc. J. 28:1009-1014.

Peerzada A.M., Williams A., O’Donnell C., and Adkins S.. 2021. Effect of soil moisture regimes on the glyphosate sensitivity and morpho-physiological traits of windmill grass (Chloris truncata R.Br.), common sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceus L.), and flax fleabane [Conyza bonariensis (L.) Cronq.]. Plants 10(11):2345.

Prostko E.P., Grey T.L., Marshall M.W., Ferrell J.A., Dotray P.A., Grichar W.J., Brecke B.J., and Davis J.W.. 2011. Peanut yield response to dicamba. Peanut Sci. 38:61-65.

Shaner D.L., 2014. Herbicide Handbook. 10th EditionWeed Science Society of AmericaChampaign, IL. 513 p.

Sharma S.D. and Singh M.. 2001. Environmental factors affecting absorption and bio-efficacy of glyphosate in Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum). Crop Prot. 20:511-516.

Snipes C.E, Street J.E., and Mueller T.C.. 1991. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) response to simulated triclopyr drift. Weed Technol. 5:493-498.

Snipes C.E, Street J.E., and Mueller T.C.. 1992. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) injury from simulated quinclorac drift. Weed Sci. 40:106-109.

Striegel S, Oliveira M.C., DeWerff R.P., Stoltenberg D.E., Conley S.P., and Werle R.. 2021. Influence of postemergence dicamba/glyphosate timing and inclusion of acetochlor as a layered residual on weed control and soybean yield. Front. Agron. 3:788251.

USDA-AMS [United States Dept. of Agriculture-Agricultural Marketing Service]. 2019. Farmer Stock Peanuts-Inspection Instructions. On-line at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/ default/files/media/FarmersStockPeanutsInspectionInstructions.pdf.

USDA-NASS [United States Dept. of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service]. 2023. Acreage. On-line at: https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/j098zb09z/hh63v8465/zg64w269x/acrg0623.pdf.

USDA-NASS [United States Dept. of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service]. 2024. Crop Production - 2023 Summary. On-line at: https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/k3569432s/ns065v292/ 8910md644/cropan24.pdf.