Dataset Information

Effect of insecticide formulation and adjuvant combination on agricultural spray drift.

ABSTRACT: Loss of crop protection products when agricultural spray applications drift has economic and ecological consequences. Modification of the spray solution through tank additives and product formulation is an important drift reduction strategy that could mitigate these effects, but has been studied less than most other strategies. Therefore, an experimental field study was conducted to evaluate spray drift resulting from agricultural ground applications of an insecticide formulated as a suspension concentrate (SC) and as a wettable powder (WP), with and without two adjuvants. Droplet sizes were also measured in a wind tunnel to determine if indirect methods could be substituted for field experimentation to quantify spray drift from these technologies. Results suggest that spray drift was reduced by 37% when comparing the SC to the WP formulation. As much as 63% drift reduction was achieved by incorporating certain spray adjuvants, but this depended on the formulation/adjuvant combination. The wind tunnel data for droplet spectra showed strong agreement with field deposition trends, suggesting that droplet statistics could be used to estimate drift reduction of spray solutions. These findings can be used to develop a classification scheme for formulated products and tank additives based on their potential for reducing spray drift.

SUBMITTER: Preftakes CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6589081 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of insecticide formulation and adjuvant combination on agricultural spray drift.

Preftakes Collin J CJ Schleier Jerome J JJ Kruger Greg R GR Weaver David K DK Peterson Robert K D RKD

PeerJ 20190619

Loss of crop protection products when agricultural spray applications drift has economic and ecological consequences. Modification of the spray solution through tank additives and product formulation is an important drift reduction strategy that could mitigate these effects, but has been studied less than most other strategies. Therefore, an experimental field study was conducted to evaluate spray drift resulting from agricultural ground applications of an insecticide formulated as a suspension ...[more]

PMID: 31249737

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpray adjuvants are often applied to crops in conjunction with agricultural pesticides in order to boost the efficacy of the active ingredient(s). The adjuvants themselves are largely assumed to be biologically inert and are therefore subject to minimal scrutiny and toxicological testing by regulatory agencies. Honey bees are exposed to a wide array of pesticides as they conduct normal foraging operations, meaning that they are likely exposed to spray adjuvants as well. It was previously unknown whether these agrochemicals have any deleterious effects on honey bee behavior.Methodology/principal findingsAn improved, automated version of the proboscis extension reflex (PER) assay with a high degree of trial-to-trial reproducibility was used to measure the olfactory learning ability of honey bees treated orally with sublethal doses of the most widely used spray adjuvants on almonds in the Central Valley of California. Three different adjuvant classes (nonionic surfactants, crop oil concentrates, and organosilicone surfactants) were investigated in this study. Learning was impaired after ingestion of 20 µg organosilicone surfactant, indicating harmful effects on honey bees caused by agrochemicals previously believed to be innocuous. Organosilicones were more active than the nonionic adjuvants, while the crop oil concentrates were inactive. Ingestion was required for the tested adjuvant to have an effect on learning, as exposure via antennal contact only induced no level of impairment.Conclusions/significanceA decrease in percent conditioned response after ingestion of organosilicone surfactants has been demonstrated here for the first time. Olfactory learning is important for foraging honey bees because it allows them to exploit the most productive floral resources in an area at any given time. Impairment of this learning ability may have serious implications for foraging efficiency at the colony level, as well as potentially many social interactions. Organosilicone spray adjuvants may therefore contribute to the ongoing global decline in honey bee health.

Project description:Pesticide spray drift represents an important exposure pathway that may cause illness among orchard workers. To strike a balance between improving spray coverage and reducing drift, new sprayer technologies are being marketed for use in modern tree canopies to replace conventional axial fan airblast (AFA) sprayers that have been used widely since the 1950s. We designed a series of spray trials that used mixed-effects modeling to compare tracer-based drift volume levels for old and new sprayer technologies in an orchard work environment. Building on a smaller study of 6 trials (168 tree rows) that collected polyester line drift samples (n = 270 measurements) suspended on 15 vertical masts downwind of an AFA sprayer application, this study included 9 additional comparison trials (252 tree rows; n = 405 measurements) for 2 airblast tower sprayers: the directed air tower (DAT) and the multi-headed fan tower (MFT). Field-based measurements at mid (26 m) and far (52 m) distances showed that the DAT and MFT sprayers had 4-15 and 35-37% less drift than the AFA. After controlling for downwind distance, sampling height, and wind speed, model results indicated that the MFT [-35%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -22 and -49%; P < 0.001] significantly reduced drift levels compared to the AFA, but the DAT did not (-7%; 95% CI: -19 and 6%; P = 0.29). Tower sprayers appear to be a promising means by which to decrease drift levels through shorter nozzle-to-tree canopy distances and more horizontally directed aerosols that escape the tree canopy to a lesser extent. Substitution of these new technologies for AFA sprayers is likely to reduce the frequency and magnitude of pesticide drift exposures and associated illnesses. These findings, especially for the MFT, may fit United States Environmental Protection Agency's Drift Reduction Technology (DRT) one-star rating of 25-50% reduction. An 'AFA buyback' incentive program could be developed to stimulate wider adoption of new drift-reducing spray technologies. However, improved sprayer technologies alone do not eliminate drift. Applicator training, including proper sprayer calibration and maintenance, and application exclusion zones (AEZs) can also contribute to minimizing the risks of drift exposure. With regard to testing DRTs and establishing AEZs, our study findings demonstrate the need to define the impact of airblast sprayer type, orchard architecture, sampling height, and wind speed.

Dataset Information

Effect of insecticide formulation and adjuvant combination on agricultural spray drift.

Publications

Effect of insecticide formulation and adjuvant combination on agricultural spray drift.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets