Comparative Evaluation of Electrostatic Sprayer for Cotton Crop

Abstract

Effect of electrostatic spraying on droplet density, area coverage, spray deposition, uniformity coefficient, droplet size and bio-efficacy were observed and comparison was made between different types of sprayer i.e. electrostatic sprayer, lever operated knapsack sprayer, power operated knapsack sprayer and tractor operated gun type sprayer. It was found that on an average droplet density by electrostatic sprayer was significantly (p=0.0000017) 47.19, 68.07 and 78.26% higher than that of TOG, POK and LOK sprayers respectively. It was found that maximum number of droplets, for electrostatic sprayer was 42 at 48.61 μ, for POK sprayer 10 at 98.68 μ, for LOK sprayer 11 at 98.68 μ and TOG sprayer 12 at 125.00 μ. Percentage area covered by droplets on average over the plant (top, middle and bottom leaves of plant) was significantly (p=0.012) 34.69, 24.42 and 69.25% higher than of POK sprayer, LOK sprayer and TOG sprayer respectively. The volume of spray deposition on leaves was significantly (p=0.022) 50.20, 44.42 and 62.63% lesser than TOG, POK and LOK respectively. On an average bio-efficacy of electrostatic sprayer was more (47.75, 59.47 and 26.57%) than other three sprayers viz. POK, LOK and TOG sprayers respectively.

Evaluation of Electrostatic Spraying Equipment in a Greenhouse Pepper Crop

“…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].…”

“…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. Joseph and Bolda [26] studied the effect of electrostatic spraying on the control of Lygus hesperus in strawberries, finding that electrostatic spraying achieved a level of control similar to conventional spraying but using less water and at lower cost.…”

Bio-mediated detoxification of heavy metal contaminated soil and phytotoxicity reduction using novel strain of Brevundimonas vancanneytii SMA3

“…However, it displayed sensitivity to streptomycin and cephadroxil ( Table 2 ). Notably, several researchers have reported similar findings, highlighting that bacterial isolates with multiple metal resistance tend to exhibit robust resistance to specific classes of antibiotics [ 46 ]. Rasheed et al [ 47 ] identified a correlation between the ability of bacterial species to withstand elevated concentrations of heavy metals and their resistance to antibiotics.…”

“…A comparison with other studies indicated that SMA3 showed a greater potential for heavy metal bioaccumulation compared to other bacteria. In a study by Nath et al [ 46 ], different bacterial strains exhibited MIC values ranging from 50 to 600 ppm against Cu, Cd, Pb, and Zn. Similarly, Marzan et al [ 31 ] observed that Gemella sp.…”

Performance evaluation of tractor operated boom: Type sprayer

“…They deliver a low to moderate volume of spray and work at pressures ranging from 6.9 to 551.6KPa. The problem of over dosage of pesticide is common in many countries and its application leads to wastage of costly chemical and environmental pollution from spray drift (Jensen et al, 2001;Patel B. et al, 2016;Patel M. K. et al, 2017) [4,13,14] , which severely affects human and animal health. Majorly in India, small and marginal farmers grow guar crop.…”