Deposition, off-target movement, and efficacy of capture™ and thiodan™ applied to cantaloupes using five sprayers

W. Coates, John C Palumbo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Five sprayers were tested to assess deposition efficiency, whitefly control, cantaloupe yield, and off-target movement. These were: an Electrostatic Spraying Systems sprayer (with the charging circuit on and off), a Micromax CDA without air assist, a DeGanya (FMC) with air assist, and a conventional twin nozzle system. The ESS-on and FMC had the highest deposition efficiency on the leaf undersides, and the conventional the lowest. Deposition on the leaf undersides decreased as the canopy closed, with the FMC showing lesser decreases than the ESS systems. For the first two application dates, the ESS-on and ESS-off were associated with greater insect control than the CDA or conventional systems. Later in the season no differences were detected. Overall, cantaloupe yields were not significantly different than for the untreated control. The ESS systems, however, were associated with significantly greater yield of no. 12 cantaloupes than the untreated control. Off-target movement was significantly greater for the FMC than any other system, except the conventional.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)181-188
Number of pages8
JournalApplied Engineering in Agriculture
Volume13
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 1997

Fingerprint

Cucumis melo
Endosulfan
cantaloupes
sprayers
Insect control
Air
Insect Control
air
Hemiptera
application timing
insect control
nozzles
Spraying
Aleyrodidae
Static Electricity
spraying
leaves
Electrostatics
Nozzles
canopy

Keywords

  • Cantaloupes
  • Insecticide deposition
  • Off-target movement
  • Spraying
  • Whiteflies
  • Yield

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)

Cite this

@article{0e95525b11ef4b63a52d0e7c5a64d1d9,
title = "Deposition, off-target movement, and efficacy of capture™ and thiodan™ applied to cantaloupes using five sprayers",
abstract = "Five sprayers were tested to assess deposition efficiency, whitefly control, cantaloupe yield, and off-target movement. These were: an Electrostatic Spraying Systems sprayer (with the charging circuit on and off), a Micromax CDA without air assist, a DeGanya (FMC) with air assist, and a conventional twin nozzle system. The ESS-on and FMC had the highest deposition efficiency on the leaf undersides, and the conventional the lowest. Deposition on the leaf undersides decreased as the canopy closed, with the FMC showing lesser decreases than the ESS systems. For the first two application dates, the ESS-on and ESS-off were associated with greater insect control than the CDA or conventional systems. Later in the season no differences were detected. Overall, cantaloupe yields were not significantly different than for the untreated control. The ESS systems, however, were associated with significantly greater yield of no. 12 cantaloupes than the untreated control. Off-target movement was significantly greater for the FMC than any other system, except the conventional.",
keywords = "Cantaloupes, Insecticide deposition, Off-target movement, Spraying, Whiteflies, Yield",
author = "W. Coates and Palumbo, {John C}",
year = "1997",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "181--188",
journal = "Applied Engineering in Agriculture",
issn = "0883-8542",
publisher = "American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Deposition, off-target movement, and efficacy of capture™ and thiodan™ applied to cantaloupes using five sprayers

AU - Coates, W.

AU - Palumbo, John C

PY - 1997/3

Y1 - 1997/3

N2 - Five sprayers were tested to assess deposition efficiency, whitefly control, cantaloupe yield, and off-target movement. These were: an Electrostatic Spraying Systems sprayer (with the charging circuit on and off), a Micromax CDA without air assist, a DeGanya (FMC) with air assist, and a conventional twin nozzle system. The ESS-on and FMC had the highest deposition efficiency on the leaf undersides, and the conventional the lowest. Deposition on the leaf undersides decreased as the canopy closed, with the FMC showing lesser decreases than the ESS systems. For the first two application dates, the ESS-on and ESS-off were associated with greater insect control than the CDA or conventional systems. Later in the season no differences were detected. Overall, cantaloupe yields were not significantly different than for the untreated control. The ESS systems, however, were associated with significantly greater yield of no. 12 cantaloupes than the untreated control. Off-target movement was significantly greater for the FMC than any other system, except the conventional.

AB - Five sprayers were tested to assess deposition efficiency, whitefly control, cantaloupe yield, and off-target movement. These were: an Electrostatic Spraying Systems sprayer (with the charging circuit on and off), a Micromax CDA without air assist, a DeGanya (FMC) with air assist, and a conventional twin nozzle system. The ESS-on and FMC had the highest deposition efficiency on the leaf undersides, and the conventional the lowest. Deposition on the leaf undersides decreased as the canopy closed, with the FMC showing lesser decreases than the ESS systems. For the first two application dates, the ESS-on and ESS-off were associated with greater insect control than the CDA or conventional systems. Later in the season no differences were detected. Overall, cantaloupe yields were not significantly different than for the untreated control. The ESS systems, however, were associated with significantly greater yield of no. 12 cantaloupes than the untreated control. Off-target movement was significantly greater for the FMC than any other system, except the conventional.

KW - Cantaloupes

KW - Insecticide deposition

KW - Off-target movement

KW - Spraying

KW - Whiteflies

KW - Yield

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031095127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031095127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 181

EP - 188

JO - Applied Engineering in Agriculture

JF - Applied Engineering in Agriculture

SN - 0883-8542

IS - 2

ER -