Evaluation of Scouting Methods in Peanut (Arachis hypogaea) Using Theoretical Net Returns from HADSS

A perceived limitation to incorporating herbicide application decision support system (HADSS™) into routine peanut weed management decisions is efficient scouting of fields. A total of 52 peanut fields were scouted from 1997 through 2001 in North Carolina to determine the weed density in a $9.3\text{-}{\rm m}^{2}$ section for each 0.4-ha grid of the field. These weed populations and their spatial distributions were used to compare theoretical net return (TNR) over herbicide investment for various scouting methods and weed management approaches. HADSS was used to determine the expected net return for each treatment in each 0.4-ha section of every field under differing assumptions of weed size, soil moisture conditions, and pricing structures. The treatment with the highest net return averaged across all 0.4-ha grids was considered to be the optimal whole-field treatment. For all 52 fields, TNR for the best whole-field treatment and for site-specific weed management (applying the most economical recommendation on each 0.4-ha grid) averaged $414 and $435/ha, respectively. Estimated return from the commercial postemergence herbicide program of aciflurofen plus bentazon plus 2,4-DB followed by clethodim (where grass was present) averaged $316/ha across all 52 fields. For fields of 5 ha or more (17 fields) in which 12 or more samples were taken, TNR was $500, $510, and $516/ha for three-sample (one pass through the middle of the field with samples taken on both ends and the center of the field), six-sample (two passes through the field with three stops per pass), and full-sample (one stop for each 0.4 ha) approaches, respectively.