Economic analysis for smart sprayer application in wild blueberry fields

Esau, Travis; Zaman, Qamar; Groulx, Dominic; Corscadden, Kenneth; Chang, Young K.; Schumann, Arnold W.; Havard, Peter

doi:10.1007/s11119-016-9447-8

Cited by 25 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This new fertilization plan is expected to correct the deficiency in growth in those sectors where the NDVI presented lower values, thus increasing the productivity of the total parcel. In this way, the use of fertilizers is adapted to real needs, promoting a better management of agrochemicals, resulting in economic and environmental savings and corroborating previous findings [33,38].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms

Loures

Chamizo²,

Ferreira

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the world population continues to grow, increasing the need to produce more and better-quality food, climate change, urban growth and unsustainable agricultural practices accelerate the loss of available arable land, compromising the sustainability of agricultural lands both in terms of productivity and environmental resilience, and causing serious problems for the production-consumption balance. This scenario highlights the urgent need for agricultural modernization as a crucial step to face forthcoming difficulties. Precision agriculture techniques appear as a feasible option to help solve these problems. However, their use needs to be reinvented and tested according to different parameters, in order to define both the environmental and the economic impact of these new technologies not only on agricultural production, but also on agricultural sustainability. This paper intends, therefore, to contribute to a better understanding of the impact of precision agriculture through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)/remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) techniques in small Mediterranean farms. We present specific data obtained through the application of the aforementioned techniques in three farms located along the Portuguese-Spanish border, considering three parameters (seeding failure, differentiated irrigation and differentiated fertilization) in order to determine not only the ecological benefits of these methods, but also their economic and productivity aspects. The obtained results, based on these methods, highlight the fact that an efficient combination of UAV/RPAS and NDVI techniques allows for important economic savings in productivity factors, thus promoting a sustainable agriculture both in ecological and economic terms. Additionally, contrary to what is generally defended, even in small farms, as the ones assessed in this study (less than 50 ha), the costs associated with the application of the aforementioned precision agriculture processes are largely surpassed by the economic gains achieved with their application, regardless of the notorious environmental benefits introduced by the reduction of crucial production inputs as water and fertilizers.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms

Loures

Chamizo²,

Ferreira

et al. 2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…spraying' of herbicides (e.g. Esau et al, 2016), where the product is applied only on the weeds 36 spots rather than to the entire field; or the variable rate application of plant protection products 37 based on crop biomass or crop volume (Berk et al, 2016), where higher spraying volumes are 38 needed to cover a crop with higher biomass or volume. Conversely, the site-specific 39 recommendations of other important inputs such as fertilizers, can be much more complex 40 because it often involves the local estimation of the crop yield potential and crop response to 41 the applied fertilizer (Colaço and Bramley, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variability in commercial orange groves. Part 2: relating canopy geometry to soil attributes and historical yield

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They estimated that, for a typical size of cotton farm among those considered, investing in automated boom-control was not profitable for fields with P/A = 0.01, but was generally profitable for fields with P/A C 0.02. Esau et al (2016) analysed the economics of precision spraying technologies on boomsprayers used for wild blueberry farming. The authors compared the cases of a 13.7-m tractor-mounted boom sprayer equipped with conventional manual control and foam marker guidance assistance, with one equipped with a high-accuracy guidance system and individual nozzle control actuated by vegetation sensing.…”

Section: Literature Review On Economic Analysis Of Precision Sprayingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The profitability of precision spraying on specialty crops: a technical–economic analysis of protection equipment at increasing technological levels

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A technical-economic analysis was conducted on three different technological levels of spraying equipment for specialty crops, based on the results on precision spraying technologies reported in scientific literature. The application scenarios referred to general protection protocols against fungal diseases adopted in vineyards and apple orchards in Central-Southern Europe. The analysis evaluated the total costs of protection treatments (equipment ? pesticide costs), comparing the use of conventional air-blast sprayers (referred to as L0), of on-off switching sprayers (L1), and of canopy-optimised distribution sprayers (L2). Pesticide savings from 10 to 35% were associated with equipment L1 and L2, as compared to L0. Within the assumptions made, on grapevines, the conventional sprayer L0 resulted in the most profitable option for vineyard areas smaller than 10 ha; from 10 ha to approximately 100 ha, L1 was the best option, while above 100 ha, the more advanced equipment L2 resulted in the best choice. On apple orchards, L0 was the best option for areas smaller than 17 ha. Above this value, L1 was more profitable, while L2 never proved advantageous. Finally, in a speculation on possible prospectives of precision spraying on specialty crops, the introduction of an autonomous robotic platform able to selectively target the pesticide on diseased areas was hypothesised. The analysis indicated that the purchase price that would make the robotic platform profitable, thanks to the assumed pesticide and labour savings over conventional sprayers, was unrealistically lower than current industrial cost. This study showed that, in current conditions, profitability cannot be the only driver for possible adoption of intelligent robotic platforms for precision spraying on specialty crops, while on-off and canopy-optimised technologies can be profitable over conventional spraying in specific conditions.

show abstract

Economic analysis for smart sprayer application in wild blueberry fields

Cited by 25 publications

References 17 publications

Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms

Assessing the Effectiveness of Precision Agriculture Management Systems in Mediterranean Small Farms

Spatial variability in commercial orange groves. Part 2: relating canopy geometry to soil attributes and historical yield

The profitability of precision spraying on specialty crops: a technical–economic analysis of protection equipment at increasing technological levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About