First attempts to obtain a reference drift curve for traditional olive grove's plantations following ISO 22866

Abstract

The current standard for the field measurements of spray drift (ISO 22866) is the only official standard for drift measurements in field conditions for all type of crops, including bushes and trees. A series of field trials following all the requirements established in the standard were arranged in a traditional olive grove in Córdoba (south of Spain). The aims of the study were to evaluate the applicability of the current standard procedure to the particular conditions of traditional olive trees plantations, to evaluate the critical requirements for performing the tests and to obtain a specific drift curve for such as important and specific crop as olive trees in traditional plantations, considering the enormous area covered by this type of crop all around the world. Results showed that the field trials incur a very complex process due to the particular conditions of the crop and the very precise environmental requirements. Furthermore, the trials offered a very low level of repeatability as the drift values varied significantly from one spray application to the next, with the obtained results being closely related to the wind speed, even when considering the standard minimum value of 1 m·s. The collector's placement with respect to the position of the isolated trees was determined as being critical since this substantially modifies the ground deposit in the first 5 m. Even though, a new drift curve for olive trees in traditional plantation has been defined, giving an interesting tool for regulatory aspects. Conclusions indicated that a deep review of the official standard is needed to allow its application to the most relevant orchard/fruit crops.

Toward a new method to classify the airblast sprayers according to their potential drift reduction: comparison of direct and new indirect measurement methods

“…Overall, the results derived from the two different indirect methods confirmed that assessment outcomes vary greatly due to measurement differences in the protocols, but when relative measurements of DRP are required, dedicated reference values based on the adopted layout result in the same final classification (Table ). Furthermore, the results proved that when the objective is the evaluation of technical factors that affect pesticide air emissions during bush/tree crop application, the trials conducted in the absence of target allow variability to be avoided in spray drift results stemming from many sources: target crop/canopy type, complex architecture and cultivation geometry, training systems, and growth stage, validating the method as originally proposed by Grella et al …”

Assessment of spray drift potential reduction for hollow-cone nozzles: Part 2. LiDAR technique

“…Field spray drift studies are generally carried out using in situ collectors and tracers (Garcerá et al, 2017). These are complex, time-consuming and labor intensive experiments and the results are affected by meteorological factors (Gil et al, 2018;Otto et al, 2015;Torrent et al, 2017).…”

Spray Drift Generated in Vineyard during Under-Row Weed Control and Suckering: Evaluation of Direct and Indirect Drift-Reducing Techniques

“…Therefore, a similar wind speed and directions among the trials are of prime importance due to their high influence on spray drift deposit processes [82][83][84], especially for spray drift in the neighboring field [85]. However, it is well known that ISO22866:2005 field experiments using different spray systems cannot be performed under identical and perfectly repeatable conditions [30,32,57,59,60,65]. So, it is reasonable to obtain reliable information on the spray drift potential of a specific sprayer configuration for the under-row band herbicide application in vineyards, based on the analysis of weather conditions at the time of trials.…”

“…Combination of different SDRTs could possibly provide better results in terms of drift reduction. A lot of research has been focused on spray drift generated during PPP canopy application in 3D crops using air-assisted sprayers [56][57][58][59][60][61] and PPP applications in arable field crops using boom sprayers [56,[62][63][64][65]. However, to date, few experimental data are available for the spray drift generated during herbicide spray application in vineyards.…”