Weed interference is a major factor that reduces peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) yield in the United States. Peanut growers rely heavily on herbicides for weed control. Although effective, herbicides are not a complete solution to the complex challenge that weeds present. Therefore, the use of nonchemical weed management options is essential. The literature on weed research in peanut in the past 53 yr in the United States was reviewed to assess the achievements and identify current research gaps and prospects for nonchemical weed management for future research. More than half (79%) of the published studies were from the southeastern United States. Most studies (88%) focused on weed management, while fewer studies (12%) addressed weed distribution, ecology, and competitive mechanisms. Broadleaf weeds were the most frequently studied weed species (60%), whereas only 23% and 19% of the published studies were relevant to grasses and Cyperus spp., respectively. Seventy-two percent of the published studies focused on curative measures using herbicides. Nonchemical methods using mechanical (5%) and preventive (13%) measures that influence crop competition and reduce the buildup of the weed seedbank, seedling recruitment, and weed seed production have received less attention. In most studies, the preventive weed management measures provided weed suppression and reduced weed competition but were not effective enough to reduce the need for herbicides to protect peanut yield. Therefore, future research should focus on developing integrated weed management strategies based on multiple preventive measures rather than one preventive measure combined with one or more curative measures. We recommend that research on mechanical weed management should focus on the role of cultivation when integrated with currently available herbicides. For successful weed management with lasting outcomes, the dominant weed communities of specific target locations should be addressed within the context of climate change and emerging constraints rather than focusing on single problematic species.

Agricultural equipment can disperse weed seeds over large distances. Efforts to minimize or prevent equipment-mediated dispersal should be a key component in any integrated weed management plan. Several experiments were initiated in commercial wild blueberry fields to examine the potential impact of harvesting equipment on weed seed dispersal within and between blueberry fields. Seed loads were examined on harvesting equipment between fields and results suggest that harvesting equipment is a major vector of seed dispersal. Seed loads were 397,000 in 2006 and 194,000 in 2007. Of all seeds located on the harvester, 66 to 79% were located on the belts or affiliated components. In 2006, a second experiment was established to examine within-field seed dispersal. A sampling grid was established over multiple distinct poverty oatgrass patches with seed heads at 44% of all sampling points. Following harvest, seeds were located at 67% of all sampling points. In 2006 and 2007, short-distance secondary dispersal of poverty oatgrass by harvesting equipment was measured. The relationship between distance from patch perimeter and seeds per unit area on the side approached by harvesting equipment and the far side of the patch was adequately modeled with an exponential decay model. Secondary dispersal within blueberry fields by harvesting equipment is inevitable. Dispersal may be reduced by avoiding dense weed patches, or altering harvest timing. Periodic cleaning of harvesting equipment between fields will help prevent the spread of weed seed.