H. Stallinga

Spray distribution when spraying potatoes with a conventional or an air-assisted field boom sprayer

In a newly introduced policy programme for the period 2001 to 2010 the Dutch government has formulated new goals on the reduction of chemical pesticide use and emissions to the environment. To realise these goals the development of integrated crop protection on certified farms is to be introduced. Within this concept it is suggested to develop a classification system for application techniques based on the assessment of spray deposition and biological efficacy at the target crop and the soil underneath and spray drift losses to surface water and the air. This paper presents data for potato spraying, comparing a conventional boom sprayer with an air-assisted boom sprayer. Spray distribution in potato canopy is quantified on three leaf levels and top- and bottom side of the leaves. Underneath the canopy on the soil surface a difference is found in spray deposition between on top of the ridges and between. On the edge of the field spray drift to the air and deposition on soil surface is evaluated. It can be concluded that spray techniques can be evaluated and ranked according to spray deposit, ground deposit due to spray drift and airborne drift. Spray mass balance could be an entry for spray technique classification.

Precision Disease Control in Bed-Grown Crops

Matching spray volume to crop canopy sizes and shapes can reduce the use of plant protection products , thus reducing operational costs and environmental pollution. Developments on crop adapted spraying for fungal control are highlighted in arable crop spraying. A plant-specific variable volume precision sprayer, guided by foliage shape and volume (canopy density sprayer ; CDS ) was developed for bed-grown crops to apply fungicides . Sensor selection to quantify crop canopy and spray techniques to apply variable dose rates are evaluated based on laboratory measurements. Based on the laboratory experience a prototype CDS sprayer was built using either a Weed-IT ® or a GreenSeeker ® sensor to detect plant place (fluorescence) or size (reflectance). Variable rate application was either done with a pulse width modulation nozzle or a switchable four-nozzle body. Spray volume could be changed from 50 to 550 l ha−1 in 16 steps. Spray deposition , biological efficacy and agrochemical use reduction were evaluated in a flower bulb and a potato crop during field measurements using a prototype CDS sprayer. Spray volume savings of a prototype plant-specific sprayer are shown to be more than 75% in early late blight ( Phytophthora infestans ) control spraying in potatoes . In flower bulbs (lily ) it was shown that in Botrytis blight control on average spray volume could be reduced by 45%. In a potato crop biological efficacy was maintained at the same good level as of a conventional spraying. In a flower bulb crop biological efficacy of the CDS was lower than of conventional spraying, which means that spray strategy and dose algorithms need further research.

Effect of air distribution and spray liquid distribution of a cross-flow fan orchard sprayer on spray deposition in fruit trees

The long period of 5 years between the purchase of plant protection equipment and the first mandatory inspection, and then 3 or 5 years between the follow-up inspections, as practiced in Poland, may result in considerable deterioration of technical condition of the machines, and in consequence in the increased risk for the operators and the environment. This risk may be mitigated by regular selfinspections of such equipment performed by the users themselves. In order to promote such good practice and help the operators to carry out their own inspections of sprayers and seed treatment machines two dedicated manuals were developed and approved by relevant authorities. In these manuals the procedures of self-inspection are outlined in form of check-list of control points followed by relevant illustrations and comments on evaluation criteria. Only basic tools and a calibration kit are needed to carry out the self-inspection. The manuals also include a lot of additional information making them valuable training materials.Closed transfer systems (CTS) are devices for the contactless transfer of plant protection products (PPP) into pesticide application equipment (PAE). They are intended to protect the operator against contamination with undiluted PPP during filling of the sprayer. CTS are universal and can be mounted on a wide range of different types and sizes of PAE. They are able to transfer the PPP from container of diverse sizes, enable also partial draining and containers can be easily rinsed after complete emptying.All types of machines used for the application of pesticides must be inspected because of the EU SUD directive. Also machines used for applying solid shaped pesticides. This can be machines what apply the product in bands or machines designed to distribute the product in a broadcast way. This machines are yet not covered by the present EN or ISO standards, therefore SPISE has produced a SPISE Advice about the inspection of this type of machines. This SPISE Advice covers all relevant inspection point for this type of machines.The new SPISE Advice for the inspection of seed treatment equipment (STE) which deals with requirements for mobile and stationary equipment will be presented. As there are no European or international standards for these types of devices available up to now, the requirements had to be developed first. For mobile seed treatment equipment such as equipment on potato planters the requirements are strongly based on comparable requirements for sprayers in use, EN ISO 16122-series. For stationary systems special requirements apply. Seed treatment equipment is relative to field spraying used in minor scale. According to Directive 128/2009/EU Article 8, 3.a, it could be possible for Member States to apply a different timetables and inspection intervals for such equipment. E.g. equipment for laboratory use or industrial use already engaged in quality assurance systems could be situations where such exemptions could be regarded. For Germany it is planned, to exempt STE with a batch weight of less than 5 kg from the inspection.The EU Directive 2009/128/EC on the sustainable use of pesticides requires that Member States (MS) shall ensure that all Pesticide Application Equipment (PAE) in professional use shall be subject to inspection at regular intervals. Article 8.3 of the Directive allows the MS to derogate from the mandatory inspection at regular intervals or to apply different timetables and inspection intervals for certain types of PAE based on a Risk Assessment (RA) for human health, food safety and environment and an assessment of the scale of use. In order to fulfill Article 8.3, a risk assessment protocol was developed in Belgium within the framework of the SIRA-APESTICON project. Risk is now evaluated for the human health and the environment on all Belgian equipment. It will offer guidelines about the necessity to carry out an inspection of every PAE in use. The protocol is based on technical parameters subject to inspections, their occurrences and severities, but also on national scale of use of the PAE types. Results are expressed at different scale levels: the defect, the machine and the country.Since the publication of EN ISO 16122 part 1 to 4 series in 2015, the framework for the inspection of sprayers is getting harmonized among EU member states. The standard series specifies mandatory requirements in terms of pre inspection (EN ISO 16122-1) and all the inspected items and functionalities of the sprayers (EN ISO 16122-2, 16122-3, 16122-4). The aim of this SPISE manual is to explain the reason for the requirements, to highlight some practical situations and to identify major defaults that can sometimes be observed. The SPISE Advice does not substitute existing standards but completes the EN ISO 16122 series standards in a practical way.In Belgium, the mandatory inspection of sprayers was already started up in 1996 and the 8 inspection cycle (2017-2018-2019) is currently running. The inspection of sprayers is performed by official and mobile teams ruled by two inspection authorities and the management is done by the Federal Ministry for Consumer Protection, Public Health and the Environment (FAVV). In the Flemish region the inspection is delegated to the Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO).The European directive (127/2009 /CE) sets the standards for the sustainable use of pesticides, reducing risks to human health and the environment. It promotes integrated pest management and the use of different techniques related to the use of phytosanitary products products, whose consequences converge directly in a reduction of costs in general, thanks to an increase in the efficiency and effectiveness of the processes.

Driftreductie Munckhof MAS 3 rijen boomgaardspuit : effect van VARIMAS variabele luchtondersteuning en Randrijen instelling

Results of spray drift experiments are presented of the Munckhof MAS 3-row orchard sprayer in comparison with a reference spray technique for fruit crop spraying in The Netherlands. The Munckhof MAS 3-row orchard sprayer was equipped with a 90% drift reducing nozzle (Albuz TVI8001; 7 bar spray pressure), low level of air assistance (400 rpm PTO) and the VARIMAS variable air system and an Edge-Row setting. During the spray drift experiments the downwind outside 24 m of an apple orchard was sprayed at the full leaf stage (BBCH 91/92) using the fluorescent tracer Acid Yellow 250. Spray drift deposition was collected downwind of the sprayed orchard on a mowed grass area up to 25 m distance from the last tree row. Airborne spray drift was measured at 7.5 m distance from the last tree row on a pole at which two lines with collectors were attached at 1 m spacing up to 10 m height. The spray drift experiments showed that spraying an apple orchard at the full leaf stage (BBCH 91/92) with a Munckhof MAS 3-row orchard sprayer equipped with 90% drift reducing Albuz TVI8001 nozzles (7 bar), low level of air assistance (400 rpm PTO) and VARIMAS-system (last tree row sprayed from both sides) spray drift reduction at 4.5-5.5 m distance from the last tree row was 98.9% in comparison with the reference spray application. Using the VARIMAS-system with EdgeRow-setting the spray drift reduction was 99.5%. Airborne spray drift reduction at 7.5 m distance from the last tree row averaged over 10 m height was for the Munckhof MAS 3-row orchard sprayer equipped with 90% drift reducing Albuz TVI8001 nozzles (7 bar), low level of air assistance (400 rpm PTO) and VARIMAS-system 98.8% and for the VARIMAS-system with EdgeRow -setting 98.6%.

Spray drift exposure of bystanders and residents when spraying field crops

Spray drift can be limited using drift-reducing nozzles and spray techniques and is obligatory when applying Plant Protection Products (PPP) alongside waterways in the Netherlands. The spray drift reducing measures implemented to protect the surface water also protect spray drift exposure of bystanders and residents in the neighbourhood of sprayed field crops using boom sprayers. Spray drift is estimated at different distances from a sprayed field crop based on earlier performed spray drift field experiments. A differentiation is made to measured spray drift deposition at ground level and estimated airborne spray drift up to 50 m distance from the treated field. Airborne spray drift curves are based on measured airborne spray drift at 5.5 m distance from the last nozzle. Airborne spray drift is further divided in exposure in the 0-3 m and 3-6 m high air layers. Results show that spray drift reducing technology (DRT) is important in reducing the exposure risk of bystanders and residents.