Agroclimatic interactions influencing maturity of Virginia-type peanuts in humid subtropical environments: Toward sustainable peanut production

Abstract

Understanding peanut maturity dynamics is critical for optimizing harvest timing, maximizing yield and kernel quality, and improving production sustainability. However, quantitative evaluations of maturity progression in Virginia (VA)-type cultivars remain limited in humid subtropical environments. This limitation is further complicated by the belowground and indeterminate nature of peanut pod development, which makes direct field assessment of maturity difficult and labor-intensive. This study presents a comprehensive multi-environment evaluation of peanut maturity dynamics of five VA-type cultivars (Bailey-II, Emery, Walton, NC-20, and Sullivan) using datasets from agronomic research trials, breeder seed trials, and commercial grower fields across VA and North Carolina in 2022–2024. 1162 field samples were collected through systematic pod sampling, and their maturity was determined using the pod blasting followed by mesocarp color classification (white to black). A Peanut Maturity Index ( PMI), calculated as the proportion of orange, brown, and black pods relative to total pods, was used to quantify maturity. Days after planting ( DAP) was the dominant driver of maturity development ( p < 0.001), with steady increases through 120 DAP and accelerated maturation between 140 and 160 DAP. Optimal maturity ( PMI = 0.65–0.75) occurred at 140–150 DAP for Bailey-II, Emery, Sullivan, and NC-20, whereas Walton matured latest (145–155 DAP). Significant genotype × environment interactions were detected, while the growth regulator effect was inconsistent. Comprehensive growing degree day ( GDD) computations provided more evidence with Bailey-II showing the strongest correlations ( r = 0.43–0.93), followed by NC-20, Emery, and Sullivan, while Walton exhibited the weakest and most variable relationships, reflecting its greater environmental sensitivity. These results provide one of the most extensive multiyear, multi-location quantifications of VA-type peanut maturity under subtropical production, offering data-driven insights to refine cultivar selection, improve harvest scheduling, and support sustainable peanut production.

Keywords

Peanut maturity / Virginia-type cultivars / Subtropical conditions / Genotype × environment interaction / Optimal harvest

References

[1] P. Janila, S.N. Nigam, M.K. Pandey, P. Nagesh, R.K. Varshney, Groundnut improvement: use of genetic and genomic tools, Front. Plant Sci. 4 (2013) 23, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00023.

[2] M.K. Pandey, E. Monyo, P. Ozias-Akins, X. Liang, P. Guimarães, S.N. Nigam, H.D. Upadhyaya, P. Janila, X. Zhang, B. Guo, D.R. Cook, D.J. Bertioli, R. Michelmore, R.K. Varshney, Advances in Arachis genomics for peanut improvement, Biotechnol. Adv. 30 (2012) 639-651, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.11.001.

[3] P.G. Fincher, C.T. Young, J.C. Wynne, A. Perry, Adaptability of the arginine maturity index method to Virginia type peanuts in North Carolina, Peanut Sci. 7 (1980) 83-87, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-7-2-6.

[4] E.T. Carter, D.L. Rowland, B.L. Tillman, J.E. Erickson, T.L. Grey, J.L. Gillett-Kaufman, M.W. Clark, Y. Tseng, An analysis of the physiological impacts on life history traits of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) related to seed maturity , Peanut Sci. 46 (2019) 148-161, https://doi.org/10.3146/PS18-20.1.

[5] D. Campaniello, A. d'Amelio, A. Guerrieri, A. Accettulli, A. De Santis, A. Bevilacqua, A preliminary investigation into Penicillium spp. growth on peanuts during drying and storage , Life 15 (2025) 140, https://doi.org/10.3390/life15020140.

[6] G.C. Yen, P.D. Duh, C.L. Tsai, Relationship between antioxidant activity and maturity of peanut hulls, J. Agric. Food Chem. 41 (1993) 67-70, https://doi.org/10.1021/jf00025a015.

[7] T.H. Sanders, Maturity distribution in commercially sized Florunner peanuts, Peanut Sci. 16 (1989) 91-95, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-16-2-8.

[8] T.H. Sanders, J.R. Vercellotti, P.D. Blankenship, K.L. Crippen, G.V. Civille, Interaction of maturity and curing temperature on descriptive flavor of peanuts, J. Food Sci. 54 (1989) 1066-1069, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb07944.x.

[9] T.H. Sanders, J.R. Vercellotti, K.L. Crippen, G.V. Civille, Effect of maturity on roast color and descriptive flavor of peanuts, J. Food Sci. 54 (1989) 475-477, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb03110.x.

[10] T.H. Sanders, P.D. Blankenship, J.R. Vercellotti, K.L. Crippen, Interaction of curing temperature and inherent maturity distributions on descriptive flavor of commercial grade sizes of Florunner peanuts, Peanut Sci. 17 (1990) 85-89, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-17-2-10.

[11] B.M. Pollock, E.E. Roos, Seed and seedling vigor, in: T.T. Kozlowski (Ed.), Seed Biology, 1, Academic Press, New York, 1972, pp. 314-318.

[12] K.J. Boote, Growth stages of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) , Peanut Sci. 9 (1982) 35-40, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-9-1-11.

[13] E.J. Williams, J.S. Drexler, A non-destructive method for determining peanut pod maturity, Peanut Sci. 8 (1981) 134-141, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-8-2-15.

[14] E.T. Carter, D.L. Rowland, B.L. Tillman, J.E. Erickson, T.L. Grey, J.L. Gillett-Kaufman, M.W. Clark, Pod maturity in the shelling process, Peanut Sci. 44 (2017) 26-34, https://doi.org/10.3146/PS16-17.1.

[15] O.C. Maloy, Plant disease control: Principles and practice, Wiley, New York, 1993.

[16] R.B. Sorensen, M.C. Lamb, C.L. Butts, Can peg strength be used as a predictor for pod maturity and peanut yield? Peanut Sci. 42 (2015) 92-99, https://doi.org/10.3146/PS15-3.1.

[17] W.E. Mitchem, A.C. York, R.B. Batts, Peanut response to prohexadione calcium, a new plant growth regulator, Peanut Sci. 23 (1996) 1-9, https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-23-1-1.

[18] J.B. Beam, D.L. Jordan, A.C. York, T.G. Isleib, J.E. Bailey, T.E. McKemie, J.F. Spears, P.D. Johnson, Influence of prohexadione calcium on pod yield and pod loss of peanut, Agron. J. 94 (2002) 331-336, https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2002.3310.

[19] S.P. Studstill, W.S. Monfort, R.S. Tubbs, D.L. Jordan, A.T. Hare, D.J. Anco, J.M. Sarver, J.C. Ferguson, T.R. Faske, B.L. Creswell, W.G. Tyson, Influence of prohexadione calcium rate on growth and yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) , Peanut Sci. 47 (2020) 163-172, https://doi.org/10.3146/PS20-11.1.

[20] Z.R. Treadway, Determining the Effect of Prohexadione Calcium Growth Regulator on Growth and Yield of Peanut [ Arachis hypogaea (L.)] in Mississippi , Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, 2020. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td/1360/.

[21] K. Singh, H. Singh, L. Johnson, E. Carter, L. Sharma, R. Singh, Plant growth regulators as a management tool in cotton production, Environ. Data Inf. Serv. 2023 (2023), https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-AG471-2023.

[22] C. Jeffrey, L. Ziems, B. Kaiser, R. Trethowan, A growing degree day model determines the effect of temperature stress on diverse chickpea genotypes, Front. Plant Sci. 15 (2025) 1496629, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1496629.

[23] W.R. Raun, J.B. Solie, G.V. Johnson, M.L. Stone, E.V. Lukina, W.E. Thomason, J.S. Schepers, In-season prediction of potential grain yield in winter wheat using canopy reflectance, Agron. J. 93 (2001) 131-138, https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2001.931131x.

[24] V. Bondade, S.K. Deshpande, Studies on determination of critical growing degree days, base temperature (Tb) and response of temperature variations on flowering and yield per se in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] , Legume Res. 44 (2021) 1430-1436, https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-4262.

[25] F.A. Akyuz, H. Kandel, D. Morlock, Developing a growing degree day model for North Dakota and Northern Minnesota soybean, Agric. For. Meteorol. 239 (2017) 134-140, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2017.02.027.

[26] J.R. Angel, M. Widhalm, D. Todey, R. Massey, L. Biehl, The U2U corn growing degree day tool: tracking corn growth across the US corn belt, Clim. Risk Manag. 15 (2017) 73-81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2016.10.002.

[27] T.B. Pathak, C.S. Stoddard, Climate change effects on the processing tomato growing season in California using growing degree day model, Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 4 (2018) 765-775, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-018-0460-y.

[28] R. Deepa Sharma, S. Sankar, M. Pryor, B. Stewart, E. Johnson, A. Anandhi, Use of growing degree indicator for developing adaptive responses: a case study of cotton in Florida, Ecol. Indic. 124 (2021) 107383, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107383.

[29] D.L. Rowland, R.B. Sorensen, C.L. Butts, W.H. Faircloth, Determination of maturity and degree day indices and their success in predicting peanut maturity, Peanut Sci. 33 (2006) 125-136. https://doi.org/10.3146/0095-3679(2006)33[125:DOMADD]2.0.CO;2.

[30] Z. Xu, D. An, L. Xu, X. Zhang, Q. Li, B. Zhao, Effect of drought and pluvial climates on the production and stability of different types of peanut cultivars in Guangdong, China, Agriculture 13 (2023) 1965, https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13101965.

[31] M. Balota, Effects of drought and heat on peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) production , Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2012. Publication No. AREC-27NP, https://www.pubs.ext.vt.edu/content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/AREC/AREC-27/AREC-27NP-pdf.pdf.

[32] W.T. Mills, Heat unit system for predicting optimum peanut-harvesting time, Trans. ASAE 7 (1964) 307-309. https://elibrary.asabe.org/abstract.asp?aid=40765.

[33] D.A. Emery, J.C. Wynne, O. Hexem, A heat unit index for Virginia type peanuts. 1. Germination to flowering, Oleagineux 24 (1969) 405-409.

[34] M.J. Bell, G.C. Wright, Groundnut growth and development in contrasting environments 2. Heat unit accumulation and photo-thermal effects on harvest index, Exp. Agric. 34 (1998) 113-124, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479798001082.

[35] D.G. Mortley, C.K. Bonsi, P.A. Loretan, W.A. Hill, C.E. Morris, High relative humidity increases yield, harvest index, flowering, and gynophore growth of hydroponically grown peanut plants, Hortscience 35 (2000) 46-48, https://doi.org/10.21273/hortsci.35.1.46.

[36] T.A. Lee Jr., D.L. Ketring, R.D. Powell, Flowering and growth response of peanut plants (Arachis hypogaea L. var. Starr) at two levels of relative humidity , Plant Physiol. 49 (1972) 190-193, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.49.2.190.

[37] K.A. Gomez, A.A. Gomez, Statistical procedures for agricultural research, second ed., Wiley, New York, 1984.

[38] R.G. Petersen, Agricultural field experiments: Design and analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1994.

[39] R.A. Armstrong, When to use the Bonferroni correction, Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 34 (2014) 502-508, https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131.

[40] M. Mukaka, A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research, Malawi Med. J. 24 (2012) 69-71.

[41] D. Anco, K. Kirk, J. Hiers, Revised thresholds for runner peanut harvest maturity pertaining to recent cultivars in South Carolina, Peanut Sci. 51 (2024) 8-17, https://doi.org/10.3146/0095-3679-51-PS23-9.

[42] D.J. Bagnall, R.W. King, Response of peanut (Arachis hypogaea) to temperature, photoperiod and irradiance. 1. Effect on flowering , Field Crops Res. 26 (1991) 263-277, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(91)90004-F.

[43] S.N. Nigam, R.C. Nageswara Rao, J.C. Wynne, Effects of temperature and photoperiod on vegetative and reproductive growth of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) , J. Agron. Crop Sci. 181 (1998) 117-124, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.1998.tb00406.x.

[44] D.L. Ketring, Temperature effects on vegetative and reproductive development of peanut, Crop Sci. 24 (1984) 877-882, https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1984.0011183X002400050012x.

[45] D.L. Jordan, Emery compared with Bailey II and Sullivan: Peanut notes No. 64, NC State Extension, 2021. https://peanut.ces.ncsu.edu/2021/05/emery-compared-with-bailey-ii-and-sullivan-peanut-notes-no-64-2021/. (Accessed 5 March 2025).

[46] R.S. Bennett, M.D. Burow, M. Balota, J. Chagoya, S. Sarkar, C.J. Sung, M.E. Payton, N. Wang, P. Payton, K.D. Chamberlin, D.W. Mornhinweg, Response to drought stress in a subset of the US peanut mini-core evaluated in Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia, Peanut Sci. 49 (2022) 71-87, https://doi.org/10.3146/0095-3679-491-PS21-14.

[47] North Carolina State University Plant Breeding Consortium, NC 20. https://plantbreeding.ncsu.edu/cultivars/peanuts/nc-20/(Accessed 5 March 2026).

[48] Clemson Cooperative Extension, Peanut money-maker 2024 production guide (Circular 588), Clemson University, Clemson, 2024. https://blogs.clemson.edu/sccrops/files/2024/08/Production-Guide-2024-web_.pdf. (Accessed 5 March 2026).

[49] Virginia Tech Extension, 2025 Virginia peanut production guide (SPES-652), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 2025. https://sites.ext.vt.edu/newsletter-archive/peanut-production/2025-peanut.pdf. (Accessed 5 March 2026).

[50] Virginia Tech Extension, Peanut variety and quality evaluation results 2024: Agronomic and grade data (SPES-681NP), Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 2025. https://www.pubs.ext.vt.edu/SPES/SPES-681/SPES-681.html. (Accessed 5 March 2026).

[51] J.C. Oakes, M. Balota, D.L. Jordan, A.T. Hare, A. Sadeghpour, Peanut response to seeding density and digging date in the Virginia-Carolina region, Peanut Sci. (2022) 180-188. https://peanutscience.com/article/id/1408/.

[52] E.T. Carter, P. Troy, D. Rowland, B. Tillman, K. Wynne, K. Pierre, M. Mulvaney, Methods to evaluate peanut maturity for optimal seed quality and yield, Environ. Data Inf. Serv. (9) (2016) 9, https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-ag411-2016.

[53] D.L. Jordan, Peanut production practices, in: 2024 Peanut Information, North Carolina State University Cooperative Extension, 2024. https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/peanut-information/peanut-production-practices.

[54] F. Casanoves, J. Baldessari, M. Balzarini, Evaluation of multienvironment trials of peanut cultivars, Crop Sci. 45 (2005) 18-26, https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.0018.

[55] J. Anothai, A. Patanothai, K. Pannangpetch, S. Jogloy, K.J. Boote, G. Hoogenboom, Multi-environment evaluation of peanut lines by model simulation with the cultivar coefficients derived from a reduced set of observed field data, Field Crops Res. 110 (2009) 111-122, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2008.07.009.

[56] C.X. Zhao, L.H. Jia, Y.F. Wang, M.L. Wang, M.E. McGiffen, Effects of different soil texture on peanut growth and development, Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 46 (2015) 2249-2257, https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2015.1059845.

[57] S.R.E. Sahayaraj, A.K. Chandel, M. Balota, M. Chappell, V. Sridhar, Leveraging stacked generalization for peanut maturity mapping using aerial multispectral imagery and growing degree days, in: Autonomous Air and Ground Sensing Systems for Agricultural Optimization and Phenotyping X, 13475, 2025, pp. 202-212, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3054125. SPIE.

[58] S.R.E. Sahayaraj, A.K. Chandel, P. Jjagwe, R.R. Vennam, M. Balota, A. Manimozhian, Toward advanced sensing and data-driven approaches for maturity assessment of indeterminate peanut cropping systems: review of current state and prospects, Sensors 26 (7) (2026) 2208, https://doi.org/10.3390/s26072208.