Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of agronomic and economic benefits of using RTK-GPS-based auto-steer guidance systems for peanut digging operations

  • Published:
Precision Agriculture Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Increasing the peanut (Arachis hypogea L.) digger efficiency by accurate placement over the target rows could minimize damaged pods and yield losses. Producers have traditionally relied solely on tractor operator skills to harvest peanuts. However, as peanut production has shifted to new growing regions in the Southeast US, producers face difficulties digging peanuts under conventional and new management schemes. The present study aimed to: (i) determine the effect of row deviations (RD) of the digger from the target row on peanut yield and quality, and (ii) determine the economic value of using RTK auto-steer guidance systems to avoid tractor deviations during peanut harvest. The study consisted of a randomized complete block design of tillage [conventional (CT) and strip tillage (ST)], row patterns [single (SR) and twin (TWR)] and row deviation (RD0 mm, RD90 mm, and RD180 mm). The RD90 mm and RD180 mm treatments exemplify manual driving deviations compared to using an RTK auto-steer guidance system (RD0 mm). Higher yields and higher net returns resulted from using the RTK auto-steer guidance system. Data showed that for every 20 mm row deviation, an average of 186 kg ha−1 yield loss can be expected. Overall, yield was higher for the conventional tillage and twin row pattern treatments compared to the other treatments. Yield losses for the SR-CT treatment were higher as the row deviation increased compared with the TWR-CT treatment. In contrast, higher yield losses for TWR-ST compared to SR-ST were observed when deviations of 180 mm occurred instead of digging using the RTK auto-steer guidance system. While a farmer using an RTK auto-steer guidance system with an accuracy within 25 mm (RD0 mm treatment) could potentially expect additional net returns of between 94 and 404 $ ha−1 compared to those from row deviations of 90 mm, higher net returns of between 323 and 695 $ ha−1 could be perceived if the guidance system is used instead of having row deviations of 180 mm. Therefore, the use of RTK auto-steer guidance system will allow growers to capitalize on the increases in yield potential by implementing changes in tillage and row patterns as those evaluated in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adamchuk, V. I., Hoy, R. M., Meyer, G. E., & Kocher, M. F. (2007). GPS-based autoguidance test program development. In J. V. Stafford (Ed.), Precision agriculture, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on precision agriculture, Wageningen (pp. 425–432). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J., & Williams, J. (2002). Effects of twin rows on yield and grade. Peanut Grower, 14, 28–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkcom, K. S., Arriaga, F. J., Balkcom, K., & Boykin, D. L. (2010). Single and twin-row peanut production within narrow and wide strip tillage systems. Agronomy Journal, 102(2), 507–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergtold, J. S., Raper, R. L., & Schwab, E. B. (2009). The economic benefit of improving the proximity of tillage and planting operations in cotton production with automatic steering. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 25(2), 133–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantonwine, E. G., Culbreath, A. K., & Stevenson, K. L. (2007). Characterization of early leaf spot suppression by strip tillage in peanut. Phytopathology, 97(2), 187–194.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cantonwine, E. G., Culbreath, A. K., Stevenson, K. L., Kemerait, R. C., Jr., Brenneman, T. B., Smith, N. B., et al. (2006). Integrated disease management of leaf spot and spotted wilt of peanut. Plant Disease, 90, 493–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colvin, D. L., Brecke, B. J., & Whitty, E. B. (1988). Tillage variables for peanut production. Peanut Science, 15(2), 94–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culbreath, A. K., Tillman, B. L., Gorbet, D. W., Holbrook, C. C., & Nischwitz, C. (2008). Response of new field-resistant peanut cultivars to twin-row pattern or in-furrow applications of phorate for management of spotted wilt. Plant Disease, 92, 1307–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culbreath, A. K., Todd, J. W., Brown, S. L., Baldwin, J. A., & Pappu, H. R. (1999). A genetic and cultural package for management of Tomato spotted wilt virus in peanut. Biological and Cultural Tests, 14, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grichar, W. J. (1998). Long-term effects of three tillage systems on peanut grade, yield, and stem rot development. Peanut Science, 25, 59–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grichar, W. J. (2006). Peanut response to conservation tillage systems. Crop Management. doi:10.1094/CM-2006-0228-01-RS. Retrieved November 7, 2012 from http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/research/2006/peanut/.

  • Griffin, T. (2009). Whole-farm benefits of GPS-enabled navigation technologies. Paper no. 095983. St. Joseph, MI: ASABE.

  • Griffin, T., Lambert, D. M., & Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. (2005). Economics of lightbar and auto-guidance GPS navigation technologies. In J. V. Stafford (Ed.), Precision agriculture, proceedings of the 5th European conference on precision agriculture (pp. 581–587). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, T., Lambert, D. M., & Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. (2008). Economics of GPS enabled navigation technologies. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of Precision Agriculture. Denver, Colorado: CDROM.

  • Henning, R. J., Allison, A. H., & Tripp, L. D. (1982). Culture practices. In H. E. Pattee & C. T. Young (Eds.), Peanut science and technology (pp. 123–138). Yoakum, TX: American Peanut Research and Education Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, D. L., Barnes, J. S., Bogle, C. R., Naderman, G. C., Roberson, G. T., & Johnson, P. D. (2001). Peanut response to tillage and fertilization. Agronomy Journal, 93, 1125–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, M. C., Davidson, J. I., Jr., Childre, J. W., & Martin, N. R., Jr. (1997). Comparison of peanut yield, quality, and net returns between nonirrigated and irrigated production. Peanut Science, 24, 97–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, M. C., Sorensen, R. B., Nuti, R. C., Rowland, D. L., Faircloth, W. H., Butts, C. L., et al. (2010). Impact of sprinkler irrigation amount on peanut quality parameters. Peanut Science, 37, 100–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanier, J. E., Jordan, D. L., Spears, J. F., Wells, R., Johnson, P. D., Barnes, J. S., et al. (2004). Peanut response to planting pattern, row spacing, and irrigation. Agronomy Journal, 96, 1066–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. (1999). GPS based guidance systems for farmers. Purdue Agricultural Economics Report (pp. 8–9). West Lafayette: Purdue University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, K. W., Mishra, A. K., Chintawar, S., Larson, J. A.; Roberts, R. K., English, B. C., Lambert, D. M., Marra, M. C.; Larkin, S. L., Reeves, J. M., & Martin, S. W. (2010). Precision agriculture technology adoption for cotton production. In Proceedings of the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting. Orlando, Florida. Retrieved March 27, 2012 from http://purl.umn.edu/56486.

  • Radcliffe, D. E., Tollner, E. W., Hargrove, W. L., Clark, R. L., & Golabi, M. H. (1988). Effect of tillage practices on infiltration and soil strength of a typic hapludult soil after ten years. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 52, 798–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raper, R. L., Bergtold, J. S., & Schwab, E. B. (2008). Effect of row proximity to in-row subsoiled zones on cotton productivity. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 24(5), 573–579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, D. L., Faircloth, W. H., & Butt, C. L. (2007). Effects of irrigation and tillage regime on peanut (Arachis hypogea L.) reproductive processes. Peanut Science, 34, 85–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelpfennig, D., & Ebel R. (2011). On the doorstep of the information age: Recent adoption of precision. USDA. Economic Research Service. Economic Information Bulletin No. 80. p. 31. Last accessed March 27, 2012 http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB80/.

  • Sconyers, L. E., Brenneman, T. B., Stevenson, K. L., & Mullinix, B. G. (2007). Effects of row pattern, seeding rate, and inoculation date on fungicide efficacy and development of peanut stem rot. Plant Disease, 91, 273–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, R. B., Brenneman, T. B., & Lamb, M. C. (2010). Peanut yield response to conservation tillage, winter cover crop, peanut cultivar, and fungicide application. Peanut Science, 37, 44–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stombaugh, T. S., Koostra, B. K., Dillon, C. R., Mueller, T. G., & Pike, A. C. (2007). Implications of topography on field coverage when using GPS-based guidance. In J. V. Stafford (Ed.), Precision agriculture ‘07 (pp. 425–432). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stombaugh, T. S. & Shearer, S. A. (2001). DGPS-based guidance of high-speed application equipment. Paper No. 01-1190. St Joseph, MI: ASABE.

  • Taylor, R. K., Kochenower, R., Arnall, D. B., Godsey, C., & Solie, J. (2008). Driving accuracy for strip tillage in Oklahoma. Paper No. 083546. St Joseph, MI: ASABE.

  • Tubbs, R. S., Beasley, J. P., Culbreath, A. K., Kemerait, R. C., Smith, N. B., & Smith, A. R. (2011). Row pattern and seeding rate effects on agronomic, disease, and economic factors in large-seeded runner peanut. Peanut Science, 38(2), 93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • University of Georgia—Extension Agricultural and Applied Economics. (2012). Budgets in Microsoft excel. Retrieved March 1, 2012 from http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/budgets/budgetsexcel.htm.

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture—Farm Service Agency. (2011). Processing 2011 crop year (CY) peanut MAL and LDP using APSS county release no. 715. Notice PS-689. Retrieved March 1, 2011 from http://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_Notice/ps_689.pdf.

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture—National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2000). Alabama Agricultural Statistics—2000 Bulletin No. 42. Retrieved January 16, 2013 from http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Alabama/Publications/Annual_Statistical_Bulletin/2000/2000AlabamaAgricultureStatistics.pdf.

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture—National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2010). Alabama Agricultural Statistics—2010 Bulletin No. 42. Retrieved March 27, 2012 from http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Alabama/Publications/Annual_Statistical_Bulletin/2010/2010AlabamaAgricultureStatistics.pdf.

  • Varnell, R. J., Mwandemere, H., Robertson, W. K., & Boote, K. J. (1976). Peanut yield affected by soil water, no-till, and gypsum. Proceedings of Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida Annual Meeting, 35, 56–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, M. & Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. (2003). Who will benefit from GPS auto guidance in the Corn Belt? Site Specific Management Center Newsletter, November 2003. Retrieved March 27, 2012 from http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/ssmc/Frames/WhoGPSAutoGuidanceCornBelt.htm.

  • Whipker, L. D., & Akridge, J. T. (2009). Precision agricultural services: Dealership survey results. Working Paper Number 09-16. Purdue University. Department of Agricultural Economics. Retrieved March 27, 2012 from http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/ssmc/.

  • Winstead, A. T., Norwood, S. H., Griffin, T. W., Runge, M., Adrian, A. M., Fulton, J., & Kelton, J. (2010). Adoption and use of precision agriculture technologies by practitioners. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of Precision Agriculture. Denver, Colorado: CDROM.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grant funds from the National Peanut Board (NPB).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agronomy and Soils, Auburn University, 257 Funches Hall, Auburn, AL, 36849, USA

    B. V. Ortiz & E. van Santen

  2. Wiregrass Research and Extension Center, P.O. Box 217, Headland, AL, 36845, USA

    K. B. Balkcom & D. L. Hartzog

  3. National Soil Dynamics Laboratory, USDA-ARS, 411 S. Donahue Dr., Auburn, AL, 36832, USA

    L. Duzy

Authors
  1. B. V. Ortiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. B. Balkcom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. Duzy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. van Santen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. L. Hartzog
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. V. Ortiz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ortiz, B.V., Balkcom, K.B., Duzy, L. et al. Evaluation of agronomic and economic benefits of using RTK-GPS-based auto-steer guidance systems for peanut digging operations. Precision Agric 14, 357–375 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-012-9297-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-012-9297-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation