Backpack magnetic sprayer: off-target drift and on-target deposition uniformity in a sugarcane plantation
Keywords:
magnetic sprayer, nozzle, drift, deposition, drift curve, sugarcaneAbstract
There is an increasing requirement for new application methods that are capable of minimizing agricultural spray drift and maximizing on-target deposition. Magnetic charge spraying techniques improve the adhesion characteristics of the spray solution to agricultural crops which in turn can reduce the amount of solution to be sprayed in comparison with the conventional spraying method that uses non-charged spray droplets. In this research, experimental field studies were conducted to evaluate the effects of magnetic spraying technology taking into account the effect of meteorological parameters on spray drift and on-target deposition in a sugarcane plantation. The results showed a significant benefit from magnetic spraying on drift reduction, in comparison with conventional knapsack and backpack boom sprayers. The lowest drift values were achieved with magnetic sprayer with TeeJetXR110015 nozzle; it was significantly lower than conventional backpack boom sprayer with both TeeJetXR110015 and TeeJetXR11001 nozzles and knapsack sprayer. Significant differences between treatments were also observed for on-target spray deposits at both top and middle canopies. The highest deposition was obtained by magnetic sprayer with TeeJetXR110015 nozzle at both upper and middle canopies. However, the deposition for the magnetic sprayer coupled with TeeJetXR11001 nozzle was statistically at par with knapsack at upper canopy and with both knapsack and backpack boom sprayers with TeeJetXR110015 nozzle in middle canopy. None of the application methods except magnetic sprayer with TeeJetXR110015 gave acceptable spray deposition uniformity. In conclusion, the result clearly showed that the potential of magnetic spraying technology in reducing pesticide drift and improving on-target deposition in crop spraying. Keywords: magnetic sprayer, nozzle, drift, deposition, drift curve, sugarcane DOI: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20211406.6282 Citation: Moges G, McDonnell K, Delele M A. Backpack magnetic sprayer: off-target drift and on-target deposition uniformity in a sugarcane plantation. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2021; 14(6): 27–36.References
[1] Esayas T, Mekbib F, Shimelis H, Mwadzingeni L. Sugarcane production under smallholder farming systems: farmers preferred traits , constraints and genetic resources. Cogent Food Agric, 2016; 2: 1–15.
[2] Firehun Y, Tamado T, Abera T, Yohannes Z. Competitive ability of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) cultivars to weed interference in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Crop Prot, 2012; 32: 138–143.
[3] Ethiopian Sugar Corporation (ESC). Sugar corporation and Ethiopian sugar industry profile. ESC; 2017. Available: http://www.etsugar.gov.et/index.php/en/ Acceesed on [2017-06-29]
[4] Taye E. Survey of weed flora and evaluation of some foliage applied herbicides in the sugarcane plantation of Wonji-Shoa and Metahara. Msc dissertation. Alemaya: Alemaya University of Agriculture, 1991.
[5] Firehun Y. Evaluation of aterbutex 50 SC against weeds at Tendaho Sugar project: pre-verification trial. In: Firehun Y, Dametie A, Negi T, Hundito K, Esayas T, Fantaye A, editors. Proc Ethiop Sugar Ind Bienn Conf. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2009; pp.171–176.
[6] Ayalkebet T, Firehun Y, Zewdu A. Increasing the efficiency of knapsack sprayers by modifying a single nozzle sprayer into a low cost multi–nozzle sprayer. Eth J Weed Mgt, 2012; 5: 28–42.
[7] García-Santos G, Feola G, Nuyttens D, Diaz J. Drift from the use of hand-held knapsack pesticide sprayers in Boyacá (Colombian Andes). J Agric Food Chem, 2016; 64(20): 3990–3998.
[8] Franke A, Kempenaar C, Holterman H J, van der Zande J C. Spray drift from Knapsack sprayers: a study conducted within the framework of the Sino-Dutch Pesticide Environmental Risk Assessment Project PERAP. Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2010; Report No. 658.
[9] Miller A, Bellinder R. Herbicide application using a knapsack sprayer. In: Rice-Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic plains, New Delhi-110 012. New Delhi, India; 2001.
[10] Nuyttens D. Drift from field crop sprayers: the influence of spray application technology determined using indirect and direct drift assessment means. PhD disseratation. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit, 2007; 293p.
[11] Spray Drift Task Force. A summary of ground application studies. Macon, Mo.: Stewart Agricultural Research Services, Inc.; 1997. Report No. 63552.
[12] Moon J, Lee D, Kang T, Yon K-S. A capacitive type of electrostatic spraying nozzle. J Electrostat, 2003; 57: 363–379.
[13] Law S E. Agricultural electrostatic spray application: a review of significant research and development during the 20th century. J Electrostat, 2001; 51–52: 25–42.
[14] Lenhardt T F. Agricultural liquid application nozzle, system and method. USA: United States Patent; US 6,276,617 B1, 2001.
[15] Zande J C van der, Butler Ellis C, Douzals J P, Stallinga H, Velde P Van, Michielsen JMGP. Spray drift reduction of the MagGrow spray system: Effect of magnetism, nozzle type, end nozzle and spray boom height. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University and Research; 2017. Report No. 680.
[16] Maffei M E. Magnetic field effects on plant growth, development, and evolution. Front Plant Sci, 2014; 5: 1–15.
[17] Maheshwari B L, Grewal H S. Magnetic treatment of irrigation water: Its effects on vegetable crop yield and water productivity. Agric Water Manag, 2009; 96: 1229–1236.
[18] Coey J M D, Cass S. Magnetic water treatment. J Magn Magn Mater, 2000; 209: 71–74.
[19] MagGrow. Website MagGrow [Internet]. 2019. Available from: http://www.maggrow.com Accessed on [2019-09-12]
[20] ASAE Standards. S572 AUG99: Spray nozzle classification by droplet spectra. 47th ed. St. Joseph, Mich. ASAE, 2000.
[21] ISO 22866. Equipment for crop protection — Methods for field measurement of spray drift. 1st ed. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland; 2005. Report No. ISO 22866: 2005.
[22] Derksen R C, Paul P A, Zhu H. Field evaluations of application techniques for fungicide spray deposition on wheat and artificial targets. Appl Eng Agric, 2012; 28(3): 325–331.
[23] Hoffmann W C, Hewitt A J. Comparison of three imaging systems for water-sensitive papers. Appl Eng Agric, 2005; 21(6): 961–964.
[24] Huang Y, Thomson S J, Ortiz B V, Reddy K N, Ding W, Zablotowicz RM, et al. Airborne remote sensing assessment of the damage to cotton caused by spray drift from aerially applied glyphosate through spray deposition measurements. Biosyst Eng, 2010; 107: 212–220.
[25] Jamar L, Mostade O, Huyghebaert B, Pigeon O, Lateur M. Comparative performance of recycling tunnel and conventional sprayers using standard and drift-mitigating nozzles in dwarf apple orchards. Crop Prot, 2010; 29: 561–566.
[26] Zhu H, Salyani M, Fox R D. A portable scanning system for evaluation of spray deposit distribution. Comput Electron Agric, 2011; 76: 38–43.
[27] R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020.
[28] Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B M, Walker S C. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using LME4. J Stat Softw, 2015; 67(1): 1–48.
[29] Gromping U. Relative importance for linear regression in R: The Package relaimpo. J Stat Softw, 2006; 17(1): 1–27.
[30] Mendiburu F D. agricolae: Statistical procedures for agricultural research. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2017; 80(390): 486. doi: 10.2307/2287932.
[31] Wickham H, Chang W, RStudio. ggplot2: Create elegant data visualisations using the grammar of graphics. Springer-Verlag New York, 2016.
[32] Rimmer D A, Johnson P D, Kelsey A, Warren N D. Field experiments to assess approaches for spray drift incident investigation. Pest Manag Sci. 2009; 65: 665–671.
[33] Alves G S, Cunha da J P A R. Field data and prediction models of pesticide spray drift on coffee crop. Pesq agropec bras., 2014; 49(8): 622–629.
[34] Combellack J H, Western N, Richardson R. A comparison of the drift potential of a novel twin fluid nozzle with conventional low volume flat fan nozzles when using a range of adjuvants. Crop Prot., 1996; 15(2): 147–52.
[35] Ellis M C B, Alanis R, Lane A, Tuck C R, Nuyttens D, Gansberghelaan B Van. Spray drift : An investigation of the relationship between field , wind tunnel measurements and model predictions for determining drift reduction. Asp Appl Biol, 2016; 132: 207–216.
[36] Schampheleire M De, Baetens K, Nuyttens D, Spanoghe P. Spray drift measurements to evaluate the Belgian drift mitigation measures in field crops. Crop Prot, 2008; 27: 577–589.
[37] Piche M, Panneton B, Theriault R. Reduced drift from air-assisted spraying. Can Agric Eng, 2000; 42(3): 117–122.
[38] Wolf T M, Grover R, Wallace K, Shewchuk SR, Maybanks J. Effect of protective shields on drift and deposition characteristics of field sprayers. Can J Plant Sci, 1993; 73: 1261–1273.
[39] Phillips J C, Miller P C H. Field and wind tunnel measurements of the airborne spray volume downwind of single flat-fan nozzles. J agric Engng Res, 1999; 72: 161–170.
[40] Bayat A, Bozdogan N Y. An air-assisted spinning disc nozzle and its performance on spray deposition and reduction of drift potential. Crop Prot, 2005; 24: 951–960.
[41] Arvidsson T, Bergstrom L, Kreuger J. Spray drift as influenced by meteorological and technical factors. Pest Manag Sci, 2011; 67: 586–598.
[42] Baio F H R, Antuniassi U R, Castilho B R, Teodoro P E, Silva E E da. Factors affecting aerial spray drift in the Brazilian Cerrado. PLoS One, 2019; 14(2): 1–16.
[43] Ganzelmeier H, Rautmann D, Spangenberg R, Streloke M, Herrmann M, Wenzelburger HJ, et al. Studies on the spray drift of plant protection products. Berlin, Germany: Mitteilungen ausder Biologischen Bundesanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft; 1995. 110p.
[44] Rockwell A D, Ayers P D. A variable rate, direct nozzle injection field sprayer. Appl Eng Agric, 1996; 12(5): 531–538.
[2] Firehun Y, Tamado T, Abera T, Yohannes Z. Competitive ability of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) cultivars to weed interference in sugarcane plantations of Ethiopia. Crop Prot, 2012; 32: 138–143.
[3] Ethiopian Sugar Corporation (ESC). Sugar corporation and Ethiopian sugar industry profile. ESC; 2017. Available: http://www.etsugar.gov.et/index.php/en/ Acceesed on [2017-06-29]
[4] Taye E. Survey of weed flora and evaluation of some foliage applied herbicides in the sugarcane plantation of Wonji-Shoa and Metahara. Msc dissertation. Alemaya: Alemaya University of Agriculture, 1991.
[5] Firehun Y. Evaluation of aterbutex 50 SC against weeds at Tendaho Sugar project: pre-verification trial. In: Firehun Y, Dametie A, Negi T, Hundito K, Esayas T, Fantaye A, editors. Proc Ethiop Sugar Ind Bienn Conf. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2009; pp.171–176.
[6] Ayalkebet T, Firehun Y, Zewdu A. Increasing the efficiency of knapsack sprayers by modifying a single nozzle sprayer into a low cost multi–nozzle sprayer. Eth J Weed Mgt, 2012; 5: 28–42.
[7] García-Santos G, Feola G, Nuyttens D, Diaz J. Drift from the use of hand-held knapsack pesticide sprayers in Boyacá (Colombian Andes). J Agric Food Chem, 2016; 64(20): 3990–3998.
[8] Franke A, Kempenaar C, Holterman H J, van der Zande J C. Spray drift from Knapsack sprayers: a study conducted within the framework of the Sino-Dutch Pesticide Environmental Risk Assessment Project PERAP. Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2010; Report No. 658.
[9] Miller A, Bellinder R. Herbicide application using a knapsack sprayer. In: Rice-Wheat Consortium for the Indo-Gangetic plains, New Delhi-110 012. New Delhi, India; 2001.
[10] Nuyttens D. Drift from field crop sprayers: the influence of spray application technology determined using indirect and direct drift assessment means. PhD disseratation. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit, 2007; 293p.
[11] Spray Drift Task Force. A summary of ground application studies. Macon, Mo.: Stewart Agricultural Research Services, Inc.; 1997. Report No. 63552.
[12] Moon J, Lee D, Kang T, Yon K-S. A capacitive type of electrostatic spraying nozzle. J Electrostat, 2003; 57: 363–379.
[13] Law S E. Agricultural electrostatic spray application: a review of significant research and development during the 20th century. J Electrostat, 2001; 51–52: 25–42.
[14] Lenhardt T F. Agricultural liquid application nozzle, system and method. USA: United States Patent; US 6,276,617 B1, 2001.
[15] Zande J C van der, Butler Ellis C, Douzals J P, Stallinga H, Velde P Van, Michielsen JMGP. Spray drift reduction of the MagGrow spray system: Effect of magnetism, nozzle type, end nozzle and spray boom height. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University and Research; 2017. Report No. 680.
[16] Maffei M E. Magnetic field effects on plant growth, development, and evolution. Front Plant Sci, 2014; 5: 1–15.
[17] Maheshwari B L, Grewal H S. Magnetic treatment of irrigation water: Its effects on vegetable crop yield and water productivity. Agric Water Manag, 2009; 96: 1229–1236.
[18] Coey J M D, Cass S. Magnetic water treatment. J Magn Magn Mater, 2000; 209: 71–74.
[19] MagGrow. Website MagGrow [Internet]. 2019. Available from: http://www.maggrow.com Accessed on [2019-09-12]
[20] ASAE Standards. S572 AUG99: Spray nozzle classification by droplet spectra. 47th ed. St. Joseph, Mich. ASAE, 2000.
[21] ISO 22866. Equipment for crop protection — Methods for field measurement of spray drift. 1st ed. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland; 2005. Report No. ISO 22866: 2005.
[22] Derksen R C, Paul P A, Zhu H. Field evaluations of application techniques for fungicide spray deposition on wheat and artificial targets. Appl Eng Agric, 2012; 28(3): 325–331.
[23] Hoffmann W C, Hewitt A J. Comparison of three imaging systems for water-sensitive papers. Appl Eng Agric, 2005; 21(6): 961–964.
[24] Huang Y, Thomson S J, Ortiz B V, Reddy K N, Ding W, Zablotowicz RM, et al. Airborne remote sensing assessment of the damage to cotton caused by spray drift from aerially applied glyphosate through spray deposition measurements. Biosyst Eng, 2010; 107: 212–220.
[25] Jamar L, Mostade O, Huyghebaert B, Pigeon O, Lateur M. Comparative performance of recycling tunnel and conventional sprayers using standard and drift-mitigating nozzles in dwarf apple orchards. Crop Prot, 2010; 29: 561–566.
[26] Zhu H, Salyani M, Fox R D. A portable scanning system for evaluation of spray deposit distribution. Comput Electron Agric, 2011; 76: 38–43.
[27] R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020.
[28] Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B M, Walker S C. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using LME4. J Stat Softw, 2015; 67(1): 1–48.
[29] Gromping U. Relative importance for linear regression in R: The Package relaimpo. J Stat Softw, 2006; 17(1): 1–27.
[30] Mendiburu F D. agricolae: Statistical procedures for agricultural research. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2017; 80(390): 486. doi: 10.2307/2287932.
[31] Wickham H, Chang W, RStudio. ggplot2: Create elegant data visualisations using the grammar of graphics. Springer-Verlag New York, 2016.
[32] Rimmer D A, Johnson P D, Kelsey A, Warren N D. Field experiments to assess approaches for spray drift incident investigation. Pest Manag Sci. 2009; 65: 665–671.
[33] Alves G S, Cunha da J P A R. Field data and prediction models of pesticide spray drift on coffee crop. Pesq agropec bras., 2014; 49(8): 622–629.
[34] Combellack J H, Western N, Richardson R. A comparison of the drift potential of a novel twin fluid nozzle with conventional low volume flat fan nozzles when using a range of adjuvants. Crop Prot., 1996; 15(2): 147–52.
[35] Ellis M C B, Alanis R, Lane A, Tuck C R, Nuyttens D, Gansberghelaan B Van. Spray drift : An investigation of the relationship between field , wind tunnel measurements and model predictions for determining drift reduction. Asp Appl Biol, 2016; 132: 207–216.
[36] Schampheleire M De, Baetens K, Nuyttens D, Spanoghe P. Spray drift measurements to evaluate the Belgian drift mitigation measures in field crops. Crop Prot, 2008; 27: 577–589.
[37] Piche M, Panneton B, Theriault R. Reduced drift from air-assisted spraying. Can Agric Eng, 2000; 42(3): 117–122.
[38] Wolf T M, Grover R, Wallace K, Shewchuk SR, Maybanks J. Effect of protective shields on drift and deposition characteristics of field sprayers. Can J Plant Sci, 1993; 73: 1261–1273.
[39] Phillips J C, Miller P C H. Field and wind tunnel measurements of the airborne spray volume downwind of single flat-fan nozzles. J agric Engng Res, 1999; 72: 161–170.
[40] Bayat A, Bozdogan N Y. An air-assisted spinning disc nozzle and its performance on spray deposition and reduction of drift potential. Crop Prot, 2005; 24: 951–960.
[41] Arvidsson T, Bergstrom L, Kreuger J. Spray drift as influenced by meteorological and technical factors. Pest Manag Sci, 2011; 67: 586–598.
[42] Baio F H R, Antuniassi U R, Castilho B R, Teodoro P E, Silva E E da. Factors affecting aerial spray drift in the Brazilian Cerrado. PLoS One, 2019; 14(2): 1–16.
[43] Ganzelmeier H, Rautmann D, Spangenberg R, Streloke M, Herrmann M, Wenzelburger HJ, et al. Studies on the spray drift of plant protection products. Berlin, Germany: Mitteilungen ausder Biologischen Bundesanstalt für Land- und Forstwirtschaft; 1995. 110p.
[44] Rockwell A D, Ayers P D. A variable rate, direct nozzle injection field sprayer. Appl Eng Agric, 1996; 12(5): 531–538.
Downloads
Published
2021-12-16
How to Cite
Moges, G., Mcdonnell, K., & Delele, M. A. (2021). Backpack magnetic sprayer: off-target drift and on-target deposition uniformity in a sugarcane plantation. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 14(6), 27–36. Retrieved from https://ijabe.migration.pkpps03.publicknowledgeproject.org/index.php/ijabe/article/view/6282
Issue
Section
Applied Science, Engineering and Technology
License
IJABE is an international peer reviewed open access journal, adopting Creative Commons Copyright Notices as follows.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
