Elsevier

Crop Protection

Volume 60, June 2014, Pages 78-82
Crop Protection

Effects of sprayers and nozzles on spray drift and terminal residues of imidacloprid on wheat

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2014.02.009Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Imidacloprid residues on wheat were compared with different application methods.

  • Spray drift were compared applying LU120-02, IDK120-02 and AD120-02 nozzles.

  • Spray drift were compared with guided baffle shield and conventional sprayer.

Abstract

In pesticide application, it can be obtained by using appropriate nozzles and sprayers to reduce spray drift and pesticide residues. In this study, a field trail was conducted to determine the spray drift and pesticide residue of imidacloprid on wheat, using three types of flat fan nozzles from the LECHLER Company (LU120-02, AD120-02, IDK120-02) and two types of sprayers (guided-baffle shield sprayer (GBSS) and conventional sprayer (CS)). The spray drift (measured with both airborne and sediment samplers) and terminal residues on wheat were analyzed by liquid chromatography triple-quadrupole mass spectrometry. The results show that both the sediment drift and airborne spray profile were greatest for the LU120-02 nozzle, intermediate for the IDK120-02 nozzle, and lowest for the AD120-02 nozzle. The shielded sprayer gave one third of the drift recorded by airborne samplers and one half of the drift recorded by sediment samplers, compared with results from the CS. Airborne spray drift decreased with increasing height. The imidacloprid residues on wheat grain from different application methods were all below the maximum residue limit (MRL) suggested by EU (0.1 mg/kg) or China (0.05 mg/kg) and no imidacloprid residue was detected on wheat straw. Considering the factors on environment protection, food safety, and biological efficacy, the AD120-02 nozzle and GBSS performed better compared with other nozzles and sprayers. The combination of AD120-02 nozzle with a GBSS is likely to be the optimum application method on wheat.

Introduction

Pesticide spray drift is a significant environmental problem caused by pesticide application. Reducing pesticide spray drift and improving application efficiency are amongst the most important aspects for plant protection currently. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) ranks the third leading crop in China after rice (Oryza sativa L.) and maize (Zea mays L.) and is cultivated throughout the country (Wang et al., 2009). Pesticide spray drift can be greatly reduced by improving the application technique. Spray drift may be influenced by various factors (Carlsen et al., 2006), as follows: (1) meteorological factors: wind speed, atmospheric stability, turbulence, temperature, and humidity; (2) application factors: sprayer type, nozzle type, orifice size, spraying pressure, spraying height, angle at which pesticides are spread, and driving speed; and (3) formulation: additives, density, surface tension and viscosity. The present study is mainly focused on the influence of sprayers and nozzles on spray drift.

Applicators should consider the nozzle types that provide adequate coverage and sufficient drift reduction properties. Different types of nozzles, such as flat fan, hollow cone, and spinning disc/cage (with/without air assistance), are used for broadcast spraying (Yarpuz-Bozdogan et al., 2011). Most field crop sprayers use flat-fan nozzles to apply a uniform coverage across the top of the target. Aiming to enhance efficacy and to minimize spray drift, some manufacturers have designed new nozzles with emphasis on improved droplet size control. Chamber and venturi style tips have been the most successful applications (Wolf, 2004). LECHLER nozzles, including LU multi-range universal flat-spray nozzles, AD anti-drift flat-spray nozzles, and IDK venturi air-induction nozzles, are the commonly used flat-fan nozzles that can effectively reduce spatial drift (Lechler Inc., 2012).

Several recent developments have been aimed at modifying existing equipment to increase deposition efficiency. Air-assist technology or some kind of shield or shroud is generally used to overcome the drift-producing air currents and turbulence that occur around the nozzle during spraying. Although air-assist technology has already been proved to be an effective way to increase deposition and to reduce spray drift, commercially available equipment has not yet been widely adopted because of its relatively high cost (Ozkan et al., 1997). A sprayer with a mechanical shield has a good capacity to reduce spray drift, and can be easily employed by farmers, especially in developing countries due to its low cost and simple structure. The guided-baffle shield sprayer (GBSS) changes the flow field around the nozzle, which could reduce the horizontal velocity and produce the down-vertical airflow. In this way, the drift potential of droplets can be reduced and the droplets are directed to be deposited on the target. Many studies (Cenkowski et al., 1994, Furness, 1991, Smith et al., 1982, Fehringer and Cavaletto, 1990, Maybank et al., 1990) have been conducted to investigate the effects of a mechanical shield on drift deposits. Fehringer and Cavaletto (1990) revealed that the use of shrouded hoods over boom sprayers could greatly reduce the spray drift under various conditions. Smith et al. (1982) conducted both laboratory and field tests to quantify the effects of a mechanical and a pneumatic shield on drift deposits. The laboratory test results indicated that a mechanical shield could reduce spray drift deposits by 70%.

High pesticide utilization efficiency will cause more pesticide deposition on the crop. Pesticide residues on crops pose a potential risk for human health. Pesticide application methods influence the amount of pesticide residue on fruits (Yarpuz-Bozdogan et al., 2011) and vegetables (Qin et al., 2010, Wei et al., 2009). However, there is limited information about the effects of different nozzle type combinations applied with GBSS on spray drift and on the terminal residues in the field crop, which is related to food safety.

Imidacloprid, which is one of the most widely used insecticides for controlling aphids for wheat, was applied as the target pesticide in this work (Nayak and Daglish, 2006). A field study was conducted to investigate the effects of three types of LECHLER nozzles (LU120-02, AD120-02, and IDK120-02) and two kinds of sprayers (conventional sprayer (CS) and GBSS, as shown in Fig. 1A and 1B, respectively) on spray drift. Sediment drift, airborne drift profile and pesticide residues on the harvested wheat were analyzed. This study can provide guidance on the proper and safe application of pesticides for developing countries.

Section snippets

Site and application

The trial was conducted on the 1 and 2 of June 2011 at Machikou Town, Beijing, China (geographical longitude 116.19° E, latitude 40.17° N). Each plot grown with wheat at grain-filling stage had a size of 40 m × 24 m. The crop height was 60 cm. The row spacing of the wheat was 20 cm. Spraying was conducted in the morning (8:30–10:00) and afternoon (15:00–17:00) using LECHLER nozzles (LU120-02/AD120-02/IDK120-02) mounted on a 6 m spraying boom. Two field sprayers (GBSS and CS) were employed. The

Analytical method validation

The external standard method was used for quantitative analysis. Drift amount recovery tests were conducted by fortifying a certain amount of standard solutions of imidacloprid into the sampling collectors (e.g., five brushes for airborne spray drift and six dishes for sediment drift), followed by the extraction procedure described in Section 2.5.1. The recoveries of airborne spray drift and sediment drift ranged from 72.5% to 78.5% and 96.8%–98.5% respectively with acceptable relative standard

Effects of nozzles and sprayers on spray drift

The study indicates that the spray drift (airborne spray profile and sediment drift) amount induced by the application method from high to low were LU120-02 > IDK120-02 > AD120-02. The amount of airborne spray profile decreased with the increase of height. Spray drift is caused by a number of equipment specific and meteorological factors, such as droplet size, sprayer velocity, spray height, wind velocity, relative temperature, and ambient humidity. The velocity of droplets exiting from a

Acknowledgements

For the assistance in the field study, the authors would like to thank all the members of the Chemicals Application Technology Group (College of Science, China Agricultural University) and the Pesticide Residue and Environmental Toxicology Group (College of Science, China Agricultural University). The authors are greatful to Antony Anderson from University of Waterloo for English modification. The authors also thank the anonymous reviewer for the valuable comments and suggestions on the paper.

References (18)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (26)

  • Rapid velocity reduction and drift potential assessment of off-nozzle pesticide droplets

    2022, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering
    Citation Excerpt :

    Studies have shown that the nozzle configuration will determine the breakup pattern of the liquid sheet and then the formation mode of droplets during the primary atomization [17]. Compared with common hydraulic nozzles, such as flat fan nozzle, hollow cone, and solid cone nozzle, air induction nozzle can produce larger droplets under the same pressure and then have the strong ability of anti-drift, which is attributed to the air inhalation that causes the bubbles to be enclosed inside the droplets [18,19]. Wang et al. [17] found that the hollow cone nozzle showed the strongest potential to drift, followed by the fan nozzle, and the air induction nozzle has excellent anti-drift potential in the wind tunnel test.

  • Longitudinal drift behaviors and spatial transport efficiency for spraying pesticide droplets

    2021, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer
    Citation Excerpt :

    Therefore, it is necessary to supplement and further explore the effect of initial distribution on droplet behaviors and pesticide transport efficiency for guiding nozzle design and optimization. The field experiments have offered some insights into the pesticide transport and deposition efficiency on various canopy surfaces [18–20]. The pesticide transport and utilization efficiency can be evaluated by image processing technology and chemical quantitative analysis, e.g., the water sensitive papers (WSPs), Mylar cards and filter papers [21–24].

  • Gray water footprint assessment for pesticide mixtures applied to a sugarcane crop in Brazil: A comparison between two models

    2020, Journal of Cleaner Production
    Citation Excerpt :

    Almost 98% of spray-applied pesticides do not reach their target. Instead, they penetrate groundwater, pollute rivers, and injure other non-target organisms (Zhao et al., 2014; Sarwar, 2015). When directly applied to plants, they are washed from the plants to the soil due to the precipitation and irrigation of the crop (Mateo-Sagasta et al., 2017).

  • A review of sampling approaches to off-target pesticide deposition

    2020, Trends in Environmental Analytical Chemistry
    Citation Excerpt :

    Extraction recovery tests have also been done for different pesticides on glass microscope slides, with high recoveries of between 74 and 121% being obtained [40]. Zhao et.al (2014) carried out extraction recovery tests of imidacloprid on glass petri dishes, and recovery rates were between 96.8–98.5% [28]. Extraction recoveries of atrazine and alachlor from petri dishes have also been found to be high (>84%) [27].

View all citing articles on Scopus
1

Huiyu Zhao and Chen Xie contributed equally to this work.

View full text