Pen Academic Publishing   |  e-ISSN: 2602-4772

Original article | International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 2020, Vol. 4(2) 242-250

Evaluation of Residue Distribution of Spraying Nozzles Produced for the Prevention of Spray Drift

Eray Onler, Ilker Huseyin Celen & Gurkan Guvenc Avci

pp. 242 - 250   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijiaar.2020.254.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1911-21-0002.R1

Published online: June 29, 2020  |   Number of Views: 8  |  Number of Download: 79


Abstract

The widespread use of pesticides has negative impacts on human health and the environment. This situation increases the severity day by day. Especially spray drift is one of the factors that should be controlled. In addition, pesticide costs have led to new solutions. Conventional spraying nozzles and anti-drift spraying nozzles are discussed in this study. The study carried out in viticulture areas. Pesticide residual amounts were determined by sampling surfaces placed in different parts of the plant. The sampling surfaces were placed on the top and bottom surfaces of the leaves. Pesticide residue rates were determined in different regions of the plant. The average pesticide residual amounts on the leaves with the anti-drift spray nozzles AITX 8002 VK and ITR 8002 were found to 63.5% and 49.9% higher than the conventional TX VK12 spray nozzle, respectively, also 44.2% and 32.2% higher than the other conventional spray nozzle TR 8002, respectively. The lowest value of top to bottom pesticide residue ratio for leaves was 2.22 at anti-drift ITR 8002 spray nozzle and the highest value of top to bottom pesticide residue ratio for leaves was 2.95 with the conventional spray nozzle TR 8002. All the type of spray nozzles except anti-drift AITX 8002, produced less residue in the inner parts compared to outer parts. The highest penetration rate was 90% with the AITX 8002 VK spray nozzle and the lowest penetration was 55% with the conventional TX VK12 spray nozzle type.

Keywords: Pesticide, Pesticide Drift, Residue, Spray Nozzle, Penetration, Viticulture


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Onler, E., Celen, I.H. & Avci, G.G. (2020). Evaluation of Residue Distribution of Spraying Nozzles Produced for the Prevention of Spray Drift . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research, 4(2), 242-250. doi: 10.29329/ijiaar.2020.254.8

Harvard
Onler, E., Celen, I. and Avci, G. (2020). Evaluation of Residue Distribution of Spraying Nozzles Produced for the Prevention of Spray Drift . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research, 4(2), pp. 242-250.

Chicago 16th edition
Onler, Eray, Ilker Huseyin Celen and Gurkan Guvenc Avci (2020). "Evaluation of Residue Distribution of Spraying Nozzles Produced for the Prevention of Spray Drift ". International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 4 (2):242-250. doi:10.29329/ijiaar.2020.254.8.

References
  1. Celen I.H., (2008). Effect of angle of sprayer deflector on the spray distribution in dwarf apple trees. J. Agron., 7 (2), 206-208. [Google Scholar]
  2. Derksen, R.C., H. Zhu, R. D. Fox, R. D. Brazee and C. R. Krause (2007). Coverage and drift produced by air induction and contentionalhydraulic nozzles used for orchard. American Society of Agricultural Biological Engineers, 50(5), 1493-1501.  [Google Scholar]
  3. FAO, 2018. http://www.fao.org/faostat [Google Scholar]
  4. Nazlı, C. (2007). Üzüm. GTHB, TEAE – Bakış, Sayı:9, Nüsha:11. S.1. Ankara. http://www.tgdf.org.tr/turkce/tgdfrapor lari/11uzum.pdf  [Google Scholar]
  5. Kısmalı, İ. (1995). Bağ Yetiştirme Tekniği. Ders Notları I. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi, İzmir, Türkiye. [Google Scholar]
  6. Manktelowi, D.W. and J. P. Praat (2000). Spray deposit variability in New Zealand winegrape canopies and implications for agrichemical application practices. N. Z. Plant Prot., 53, 235-240. [Google Scholar]
  7. Panneton, B., M. Piche, V. Phillion and G. Chouinard (2011). Leaf deposition with fixed sprinklers low drift and conventional nozzles in apple orchard. American Society of Agricultural and Bilogical Engineers, 3, 2563-2573. [Google Scholar]
  8. Silva, J.E.R., G. S. Alves and J.P.A.R. Cunha (2013). Spray deposition on coffe crop (Coffea arabia L.): Influence of Nozzle Type, 12th Workshop on Spray Application Techniques in Fruit Growing (SuproFruit 2013) 26-28 June, Valencia, Spain. [Google Scholar]
  9. Teejet Catalog, 2018. TeeJet VisiFlo Flat Spray Tips_Metric (112 kb). Metric Catalog 50, page 45.http://teejet.it/english/home/products/spray-products/specialty-nozzles/teejet--visiflo--flat-spray-tips.aspx [Google Scholar]
  10. Toy, M. (2014). Bağlarda Konvansiyonel ve Düşük Sürüklenmeli Memelerin İlaç Uygulama Etkinliklerinin Karşılaştırılması. Doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  11. Wenneker, M. and J.C. van de Zande (2008). Drift reduction in orchard spraying using a cross flow sprayer equipped with reflection shields (Wanner) and air injection nozzles. Agricultural Engineering International: The CIGR Ejournal. Manuscript ALNAP 08014, vol. X. [Google Scholar]