Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:33:22.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Measurement of the Total Mass of Spray and Irrigation Mixtures Intercepted by Small Whole Plants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

R. D. Wauchope
Affiliation:
Nematodes, Weeds and Crops Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Tifton, GA 31794
H. R. Sumner
Affiliation:
Insect Biology and Population Management Research Laboratory, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Tifton, GA 31794
C. C. Dowler
Affiliation:
Nematodes, Weeds and Crops Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Tifton, GA 31794

Abstract

A plant-weighing procedure was used to measure the total mass of spray mixture intercepted by small whole corn and cotton plants. Mixtures of water and water plus crop oil concentrate or spreader–sticker were applied at spray volumes of 280 to 28,000 L/ha. The plants were weighed before and after passing under the spray and leaf areas, and shoot fresh and dry weights for each plant were measured. Spray deposition increased with spray volumes but not proportionally. Corn plants were larger than cotton plants and retained more spray per plant; however, cotton retained more spray per unit leaf area. The two adjuvants had similar effects on deposition, tending to increase it in corn and decrease it in cotton.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Barker, G. L., Thompson, J. F., and Threadgill, E. D. Jr. 1978. Spray droplet deposition on a three-dimensional object. Trans. ASAE 21:806812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bode, L. E., Butler, B. J., and Goering, C. E. 1976. Spray drift and recovery as affected by spray thickener, nozzle type and nozzle pressure. Trans ASAE 19:213218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouse, L. F., Carlton, J. B., and Merkle, M. G. 1976. Spray recovery from nozzles designed to reduce drift. Weed Sci. 24:361365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boydston, R. A. and Al-Khatib, K. 1993. Efficacy, site of uptake, and retention of bromoxynil in common lambsquarters with conventional and sprinkler application. Weed Sci. 41:166171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grover, R., Shewchuck, S. R., Cessna, A. J., Smith, P. E., and Hunter, J. H. 1985. Fate of 2,4-D iso-octyl ester after application to a wheat field. J. Environ. Qual. 14:203210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, C. B., Talbert, R. E., Ferguson, J. A., Johnson, D. H., and McClelland, M. R. 1989. Application of fluazofop-P, haloxyfop, and quizalofop by sprinkler irrigation. Weed Sci. 37:585590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, F. H., Kirchner, L. M., and Dower, R. A. 1994. Measurement of evaporation from adjuvant solutions using a volumetric method. Pestic. Sci. 40:1724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himel, C. M., Loats, H., and Bailey, G. W. 1990. Pesticide sources to the soil and principles of spray physics. In Cheng, H. H., ed. Pesticides in the Soil Environment: Processes, Impacts, and Modelling. Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of America, pp. 750.Google Scholar
Johnson, A. W., Young, J. R., Threadgill, E. D., Dowler, C. C., and Sumner, D. R. 1986. Chemigation for crop production management. Plant Dis. 70:9981004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, D. R. 1977. A technique for estimating the total insecticide spray collection by individual cotton plants and a comparison of recovery of sprays of dyed water and two ULV formulations of triazophos. Cotton Fib. Trop. 32:6771.Google Scholar
McDaniel, S. G., McKay, B. M., Houston, R. K., and Hatfield, L. D. 1983. Aerial drift profile of oil and water sprays. Agric. Aviation pp. 2529.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. and Dowler, C. C. 1987. Applying herbicides through irrigation systems. In McWhorter, C. G. and Gebhardt, M. R., eds. Methods of Applying Herbicides. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America Monograph No. 4. pp. 145164.Google Scholar
Racke, K. D. 1993. Environmental fate of chlorpyrifos. Res. Rev. 131:1154.Google ScholarPubMed
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6, 4th ed., Volume 2. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 846 p.Google Scholar
Smith, C. N. and Carsel, R. F. 1984. Foliar washoff of pesticides (FWOP) model: development and evaluation. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 19:323342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spillman, J. J. 1984. Spray impaction, retention and adhesion: an introduction to its characteristics. Pestic. Sci. 15:97106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, G. W., Cahill, W. P., Estesen, B. J., Kronland, W. C., and Buck, N. A. 1975. Pesticide drift: deposit efficiency from ground sprays on cotton. J. Econ. Entomol. 68:549550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wauchope, R. D. and Street, J. E. 1987. Fate of a water-soluble herbicide spray on foliage. Part I. Spray efficiency: measurement of initial deposition and absorption. Pestic. Sci. 19:243252.Google Scholar
Wauchope, R. D., Young, J. R., Chalfant, R. B., Marti, L. R., and Sumner, H. R. 1991. Deposition, mobility and persistence of sprinkler-irrigation-applied chlorpyrifos on corn foliage and in soil. Pestic. Sci. 32:235243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, G. H., Spencer, W. F., and McDowell, L. L. 1980. The interception of applied pesticides by foliage and their persistence and runoff potential. In Knisel, W. G., ed. CREAMS—A Field Scale Model for Chemicals, Runoff and Erosion from Agricultural Management Systems. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Conservation Research Report No. 26. pp. 595606.Google Scholar
Wirth, W., Storp, S., and Jacobsen, W. 1991. Mechanisms controlling leaf retention of agricultural sprays. Pestic. Sci. 33:411429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, W. E., Akesson, N. B., and Cowden, R. E. 1982. Effect of nozzle design on uniformity of droplet size from agricultural aircraft. World Agric. Aviation pp. 1822.Google Scholar