Spray deposition on coffee leaves from airblast sprayers with and without electrostatic charge

Neto, Jefferson Gitirana; Cunha, João Paulo Arantes Rodrigues da; Almeida, Vitor Veloso; Alves, Guilherme Sousa

doi:10.14393/bj-v31n5a2015-26876

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result indicates that electrostatic spraying could achieve depositions similar to conventional spraying, but with 48% less volume, thus reducing the use of plant protection products and the risk of environmental contamination. These results are in line with studies carried out with electrostatic spraying in other crops, where deposition increases of the order of 0.5 to 2.5 times were quantified, compared to conventional spraying systems [23][24][25][26]33].…”

Section: Plant Canopy Depositionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…In grapevines, different studies have been carried out in which an increase in the average deposition in the plant canopy was obtained [22,23], resulting in a potential reduction in the application volume of around 68% compared to conventional spraying, and more homogenous distribution of the plant protection product in the plant canopy [23]. Neto et al [24] studied spray deposition on coffee leaves and losses to the ground from hydropneumatic spraying at different spray volumes, both with and without an electrostatic charge; they found that electrostatic spraying resulted in greater deposition on the lower part of the crop and fewer losses to the ground. Patel et al [25] compared an electrostatic sprayer to different spraying equipment in a cotton crop, finding that the leaf coverage, droplet density, and biological effectiveness were better with the electrostatic spraying treatments than those carried out with the other equipment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of Electrostatic Spraying Equipment in a Greenhouse Pepper Crop

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greenhouse vegetable production is of great importance in southern Europe. It is a cultivation system characterised by a high planting density and environmental conditions that favour the development of pests and diseases. Although alternatives to chemical pest and disease control have been used over recent years in greenhouse crops, it is still mostly plant protection products that are used to protect crops and prevent crop losses. Hand-held spraying equipment is mainly used to apply plant protection products to this type of crop. This equipment is technologically basic, offering low deposition efficiency in the plant canopy, high losses to the ground, and a high risk of worker exposure. In this context, it is important to utilise technologies that reduce the problems associated with using the conventional hand-held sprayers in greenhouses. This study evaluated the deposition and uniformity in the plant canopy and the losses to the ground when applying plant protection products with an electrostatic hand-held sprayer; the results were then compared with applications carried out using a conventional hand-held sprayer. For this purpose, a colorimetric method has been used based on the application of a tartrazine solution. The tests showed that the electrostatic spraying equipment increased the plant canopy deposition by 1.48 times that of the hand-held spray gun, resulting in a 48% reduction in the application rate. There was also a 1.78-times increase in deposition on the underside of the leaves and a 36.36% reduction in losses to the ground. In general, the electrostatic hand-held sprayer improves the effectiveness of the plant canopy deposition and reduces losses to the ground compared to the hand-held spray gun commonly used in pest and disease control.

show abstract

Section: Plant Canopy Depositionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Electrostatic Spraying Equipment in a Greenhouse Pepper Crop

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, because an electrostatic sprayer is usually adjusted to spray a lower volume rate than a mist-blower, the resulting treatment losses are reduced; moreover, it improves the homogeneity of distribution and product penetration in the vegetation (Laryea and No, 2003;Jahannama et al, 2005, Maski andDurairaj, 2010;Yang et al, 2015;Mermer et al, 2016, Patel et al, 2017. In addition, this technology is very versatile and has been previously applied to different types of crops (Arnold et al, 1984;Cayley et al, 1984;Abdelbagi and Adams, 1987;Western et al, 1994;Kabashima et al, 1995;Derksen et al, 2007;Gitirana Neto et al, 2015;Tourino et al, 2017;Tavares et al, 2017;Joseph and Bolda, 2018). Pascuzzi and Cerruto (2015) conducted field tests with an electrostatic sprayer in vineyards, finding that this could deliver greater deposits on leaves than a traditional air-assisted sprayer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of leaf deposit quality between electrostatic and conventional multi-row sprayers in a trellised vineyard

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

show abstract

“…Airblast sprayers are typically used with an application rate of about 200-5000 l.ha -1 (Neto et al, 2015). Application rate throughout the application procedure is correlated with many factors.…”

Section: Agricultural Sprayer Design and Application Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spraying Technology and Foliar Application Result in a Smooth Layer of the Spray: a Literature Review

Alheidary

2023

Basrah J. Agric. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using of foliar fertilizer application is an important issue in many crops plantation in different countries. Various studies have been conducted on this method, especially with fruits and horticulture. Few studies were performed on essential crops such as maize compared to the orchards. Concerning crops, most of these studies were performed using foliar spraying with phosphorus, and potassium, and a few attempts were carried out with foliar fertilizer during the season at different concentrations starting from the first stage of the plant. The foliar application may be sprayed with a suitable concentrate depending on the type of crop planted, growth stage, leaves age, and physicochemical properties of the sprayed liquid. As reported in the current literature, there are previous studies on this application with insufficient knowledge of mechanisms and factors governing the nutrient uptake by leaves that still need to be improved. The insufficient information about the effect of foliar fertilizer at different application rates is one of the reasons that the study focused on it, which was probably the leading cause of sometimes controversial effects with foliar fertilizers being reported. Most previous studies revealed that is necessary to apply foliar fertilizer on the plant leaves at a proper concentration and application rate compatible with the age of the crop applied. The results also indicated that a suitable concentration of foliar fertilizer no doubt leads to improved fertilizer effectiveness and can even increase plant growth activity, especially when spraying with modern technology. For an optimum both of the crop vegetative growth and yield response to foliar fertilization, it is possible to diagnose the optimum growth stage of the plant and leaf age for the starting of foliar fertilizer application related to metrological conditions such as the air temperature, and relative humidity at the time of spraying. It is necessary to recommend the crop growth stage before foliar application at a known application rate and concentration to a crop to achieve maximum efficiency at low cost as possible.

show abstract

Spray deposition on coffee leaves from airblast sprayers with and without electrostatic charge

Cited by 9 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluation of Electrostatic Spraying Equipment in a Greenhouse Pepper Crop

Evaluation of Electrostatic Spraying Equipment in a Greenhouse Pepper Crop

Evaluation of leaf deposit quality between electrostatic and conventional multi-row sprayers in a trellised vineyard

Spraying Technology and Foliar Application Result in a Smooth Layer of the Spray: a Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About