Lisa M. Renzi Hammond Institute of Gerontology | College of Public Health University of Georgia

Why nutrition advice—like crop decisions—should be based
on long-term research, not social media trends.

Are eggs good or bad? What about alcohol, dark chocolate or red meat? How much protein do you really need? When it comes to nutrition, how do you know what to believe?

As a nutritional neuroscientist, I study how what we eat shapes brain health. In my work, people ask me oddly specific questions: “Should I eat coconut oil?” “Is ‘fibermaxxing’ (whatever that is) a good idea?” I get far fewer questions about overall dietary patterns—the fruit, vegetables, nuts, whole grains and other foods someone should eat. When I ask about the sudden interest in coconut oil, the answer is usually the same: someone on social media “swears by it.”

Science has a lot to say about why we turn to non-expert influencers for nutrition help. Influencers are always available—no appointment needed—and a few curious clicks can lead to a feed full of advice. Influencers feel relatable and trustworthy, speaking in plain language from their kitchens rather than in technical terms from laboratories. Compared to that, scientific communication can feel out of touch and not “for us.”

As trust in influencers has grown, trust in science and medicine has declined. Instead of reading dense research papers, we rely on influencers and reporters to interpret findings. At the same time, scientists are sharing results more openly than ever—posting full datasets and “preprints,” or studies released before other scientists have scrutinized them—making it easier for early findings to become headline news.

This transparency is valuable—science only works if it is shared—but it also allows unverified results to spread quickly through social and mainstream media. Claims that chocolate is “good” or “bad” for you may be based on a single study in a single group of people who are different from you. One paper is just one data point; scientific truth emerges only when findings are repeatedly tested, scrutinized and confirmed over time.

Think about it this way: you wouldn’t choose a cultivar based on an influencer’s insistence that planting it would change your life. Instead, you would examine years of data across different conditions—soil pH, weather patterns, yield consistency—before deciding what works best. Nutrition science works the same way.

We feel frustrated when “science” tells us that something that was good for us one day is suddenly bad for us on another day, but it helps to remember that “science” isn’t telling us that. An influencer is. Social and mainstream media are powerful tools, but when it comes to what you put in your body, they shouldn’t be your main source.

And the eggs and dark chocolate? It turns out they are healthy foods for most people, especially when we don’t overdo them. Now, though, you know where to look to see if you agree.

By Lisa M. Renzi Hammond Institute of Gerontology | College of Public Health University of Georgia

Peanut Leadership Academy Class XIV held their second session in Tifton, Ga. While in the area, participants learned more about the peanut industry through tours of the University of Georgia Tifton Campus, Premium Peanut, MANA Nutrition and others.

Participants of Class XIV of the Peanut Leadership Academy met March 9–11, in Tifton, Georgia, for the second session of the 18-month program. During this session, peanut growers and sheller representatives had the opportunity to learn more about the industry through speakers and tours, as well as discuss key issues the United States peanut industry faces.

On day one, Ryan Jenkins, PLA Class X graduate from Pace, Florida, spoke to the group about the importance of agricultural advocacy. Jenkins emphasized why telling the farm story in and outside of rural communities is critical and gave examples from his own life of how sharing his story has made a difference.

The group then heard from Miriam Crosby about the work The Peanut Institute is carrying out and the powerful nutrition message the peanut industry has to share. Finally, Courtney Dorsett with Premium Peanut gave the group an overview of food safety in the peanut supply chain and the role all segments play in providing the highest quality product for market.

Day two of the session was made up of area tours. The group began with a tour of Kelley Manufacturing Co.’s facility, where they received the most up-to-date information from KMC and learned about the equipment fabrication process. Upon leaving KMC, the group traveled to the University of Georgia Tifton Campus and heard from Nino Brown about the work being done in peanut breeding and the process it takes to bring a new variety to market.

The group then visited Premium Peanut in Douglas for a tour of its shelling facility, followed by a visit to MANA Nutrition. Here, PLA participants learned about MANA’s mission, expansion and how their product is saving lives worldwide.

The group’s final day together began with a tour of Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College’s 4-D Farm. The PLA class learned about the latest precision agriculture technology being used to improve management practices on the farm. The class then traveled to Albany for a tour of Amadas Industries’ facility and Thrush Aircraft. Both Albany stops provided a behind the scenes look at how allied sectors of the industry are working to help farmers be as efficient as possible on the farm with eagerness to learn more about the challenges farmers face.

The Peanut Leadership Academy is coordinated by the Southern Peanut Farmers Federation and sponsored by Syngenta Crop Protection and the American Peanut Shellers Association. For more information on the Peanut Leadership Academy, visit
www.southernpeanutfarmers.org.

By Jessie Bland

University of Georgia Extension peanut entomologist Mark Abney discusses peanut pod damage from rootworm at a field day. Reducing rootworm injury can significantly improve both yield and grade.

After Loss of Chlorpyrifos, Vertento Offers New Path for Rootworm Control

Peanut growers across the Southeast have a new tool to help manage some of the most challenging insect pests in the crop. A new insecticide from Syngenta — marketed under the brand name Vertento — is showing strong potential, particularly for managing peanut rootworms.

The product contains the active ingredient isocycloseram, part of a new mode of action classified in IRAC Group 30, and will be marketed under Plinazolin technology. The insecticide works by both contact and ingestion, causing rapid feeding cessation in target pests.

Vertento is labeled as a foliar insecticide for several crops, including cotton, onions and peanuts. In peanuts, the foliar label targets pests such as thrips and spider mites. But the biggest development for Southeastern peanut producers centers on rootworm management.

Special Label Expands Options for Growers
While the original federal label allows Vertento to be applied through chemigation or as a foliar spray, researchers and industry groups worked to secure a Section 24(c) Special Local Needs (SLN) label that allows the product to be applied in-furrow at planting.

Both Georgia and Alabama have approved the SLN label, allowing growers to apply 2.6 fluid ounces per acre in-furrow for the 2026 peanut growing season. Growers can also use Vertento as a foliar spray even when used in-furrow.

University researchers and peanut organizations played a key role in making the label possible. Contributors included Mark Abney with the University of Georgia and Scott Graham with Auburn University, along with industry partners such as the Georgia Peanut Commission, Alabama Peanut Producers Association and American Peanut Shellers Association.

Other states across the Southeast, including Mississippi, Florida, South Carolina and North Carolina, have also expressed interest in similar registrations.

For growers, the in-furrow option is significant. Although chemigation treatments have proven effective in research trials, many farms lack irrigation systems set up for pesticide injection. Even among irrigated fields, many pivots are not equipped with the required backflow preventers, relief valves or other equipment needed for chemigation.

In-furrow application provides a simpler and more familiar option.

“It allows growers to apply the product at planting regardless of irrigation status,” says Mark Abney, University of Georgia Extension entromologist. “That makes it much more practical across the peanut belt.”

A Critical Tool After Loss of Chlorpyrifos
The introduction of Vertento comes at an important time for peanut growers. For decades, producers relied on chlorpyrifos products such as Lorsban to manage rootworms. With that option no longer available, growers have had limited tools to protect pods from damage.

Rootworm larvae feed directly on peanut pods, chewing through the shell and reducing both yield and grade. When infestations are severe, yield losses can reach 1,000 pounds per acre.

Researchers say reducing rootworm injury can significantly improve both yield and grade.

“Whenever we reduce rootworm damage, we see increases in yield and grade,” Abney says. “So, it’s a very tangible benefit.”

Strong Performance in Trials
University trials have shown promising results from in-furrow applications of Vertento.

Researchers report the treatment has been very consistent at reducing rootworm injury at harvest, even though the insecticide is applied at planting in-furrow. The product’s long residual activity appears to protect developing pods through much of the season.

“In many trials we’re still seeing significant control even into August and September,” Abney says.

Some late-season pod feeding may still occur, but researchers say it may not significantly impact yield if pods are already mature.

Other Pests on the Label
Vertento will have a broader insect management role in other crops, including cotton and vegetables. In peanuts, the label includes pests such as thrips, spider mites and potato leafhopper.

However, researchers note the product’s primary value in peanuts will likely be rootworm management.

One important detail for growers is that in-furrow applications will not control thrips, because the product is not systemic. If used at planting for rootworms, growers will still need to apply a separate thrips management program.

More Research Ahead
Although the product shows strong potential, researchers emphasize that there is still much to learn about how to use Vertento most effectively.

Questions remain about optimal chemigation timing, potential benefits of combining application methods and possible activity against other pests such as peanut burrower bug.

Because burrower bugs spend most of their time underground, they are difficult to control and difficult to scout. Researchers hope future testing may determine whether Vertento’s long residual activity could provide some suppression.

For now, researchers advise growers to use the product strategically.
“If you have a history of rootworm problems, this could be a game changer,” Abney says. “But if you don’t have the pest, there’s no reason to use it.”

With a new mode of action and strong early results in field trials, Vertento may soon become an important addition to the insect management toolbox for Southeastern peanut growers.

By Joy Crosby

An adult two-spot cotton leafhopper or commonly referred to as an cotton jassid. Photo by Justin Odom, University of Georgia.

New leafhopper pest raises questions for peanut growers

A new insect pest spreading across the Southeast has caught the attention of growers and researchers alike. The two-spot cotton leafhopper, commonly referred to as the cotton jassid, is not native to the United States but has quickly become a topic of discussion due to its rapid spread and its impact on cotton.

The pest was first detected in South Florida in 2024. In July 2025, the pest was detected on cotton in the Suwanee Valley area of Florida and quickly spread to Georgia where it was confirmed on okra. From there, populations increased rapidly, and by the end of the 2025 growing season, many cotton acres in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina required treatment to control infestations.

Because published host lists from overseas research include crops such as cotton, okra, sunflower, hibiscus, eggplant, and peanuts, the insect has raised concerns among peanut growers. Much of the available information comes from research conducted in India, where the pest is well established and known to be a major cotton pest.

Cotton jassid nymphs are less than 1 mm in length and have oblong light-green bodies. Photo by Justin Odom, University of Georgia.

During the past season, researchers and county agents across the Southeast closely monitored peanut fields for signs of damage. Although two-spot cotton leafhoppers were occasionally found in peanuts, they were typically present only in small numbers. In some cases, large populations temporarily moved into peanut fields after neighboring cotton fields were defoliated late in the season. These migrations generally lasted about a week before the insects moved on.

Despite those temporary increases in numbers, researchers observed no clear signs of feeding injury or yield loss in peanuts. University of Georgia Extension entomologist Mark Abney conducted field studies to determine whether the insects could reproduce on peanut plants. Adult leafhoppers were confined on peanut plants in field cages for two weeks—the time required for eggs to develop into adults. While some insects survived during that period, Abney did not find evidence of egg-laying or developing nymphs.

Isaac Esquivel, University of Florida entomologist, had a peanut trial surrounded by cotton at the North Florida Research and Education Center in Quincy, Florida, and he didn’t observe damage from the cotton jassid either.

“After jassids were detected, they mostly stayed on the cotton until late season once the cotton leaves began to show late-stage hopper burn or defoliation,” Esquivel says. “We did see adult jassids in the peanut field but did not see any reproduction.”

While literature suggests that peanuts are a host for the cotton jassid, those that report damage could also be referring to a different jassid species. While certain leafhoppers can damage peanuts, they are different species than the cotton jassid currently spreading in the Southeast.

For now, Abney remains cautiously optimistic that the pest will not become a significant problem for peanut production. However, growers are encouraged to stay alert.

“If unusual leafhopper populations are observed in peanut fields, growers should contact their county Extension agent before making a treatment decision,” Abney says. “Proper identification and evaluation are important to determine whether management is truly needed.”

While the cotton jassid has already proven to be a serious pest in cotton, current observations suggest it may pose little risk to peanuts. Continued monitoring and communication between growers, agents, and researchers will help ensure any emerging issues are quickly identified and addressed.

By Joy Crosby