Harvest-aid application strategy in different cotton planting densities by unmanned aerial vehicle
Abstract
Harvest aids are widely used for defoliating leaves and accelerating the opening of green bolls to facilitate machine harvesting in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) production areas. Cotton harvest aids applied by ground-based mechanical sprayers are inefficient due to mechanical damage to cotton crops and soil and low flexibility. For the last few years, small plant protection unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used for applying pesticides across the world due to their high efficiency, high pesticide utilization, low volume and no harmful damage to crops and soil. This study mainly focuses on developing the technology of harvest aid application by UAVs with respect to the dosage and application frequency. Compared with previous studies, this work performs miscellaneous field trials for two years in three experimental sites located in high-density planting areas and two sites in sparse-density planting areas, wherein both cotton cultivation modes and weather conditions are different. In the study, single-round, dual-round and reduced dosage applications are tested, where the defoliation rate, boll opening rate, fiber quality and lint cotton yield are assessed based on the collected data. It is concluded from the experimental results that the achieved defoliation rate and boll opening rate of treatments with a single-round application using the recommended dosage fail to meet the harvest requirements in the case of high planting density (180,000-195,000 plants/hm2). However, with the dual-round application of the exact recommended dosage or 20% lower than the recommended dosage, the achieved defoliation rate, and boll opening rate meet the machine harvest requirements. In sparse-density planting areas (≤90,000 plants/ha), the results of treatment with the recommended dosage and single-round application by UAV spraying meet the requirements. In all the experimental sites, the harvest-aid dosage and application frequency do not affect fiber quality and lint cotton yield. In summary, considering the cost and environmental protection, harvest aid application by UAVs with a dual-round application at 80% of the recommended dosage at a 7-day interval is encouraged in high-density planting areas, while in sparse-density planting areas, single-round application of harvest aids at the recommended dosage by UAVs is encouraged. The results provide paramount guidance for cotton farmers and scholars in this field. Possible future studies are also discussed in this paper.
Keywords: cotton, unmanned aerial vehicle, harvest aid application strategy, dosage, application frequency
DOI:Â 10.33440/j.ijpaa.20190201.0027
Â
Citation: Meng Y H, Han Y X, Liang Z J, Su J Y, Lan Y B.  Harvest-aid application strategy in different cotton planting densities by unmanned aerial vehicle: Effects of dosage and application frequency on defoliation efficacy, boll opening rate, fiber quality, and lint cotton yield. Int J Precis Agric Aviat, 2019; 2(1): 30–40.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Deguine J P, Ferron P, Russell D. Sustainable pest management for cotton production. A review. Agron Sustain Dev, 2008; 28: 113–137. https://doi.org/ 10.1051/agro:2007042.
Feng L, Dai J L, Tian L W, Zhang H J, Li, W J, Dong H Z. Review of the technology for high-yielding and efficient cotton cultivation in the northwest inland cotton-growing region of china. Field Crops Res, 2017; 208:18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.03.008.
Tian, X., Li, X., Lv, X., Li, B., Chen, G., 2016. Principles and Modern Technologies of Cotton Farming in Xinjiang. Science Press, Beijing, 182–381, 1–44.
Duan J, Zhang X, Fan G, Liu G, Zhou G, Chu X, Chen X. Research on cotton defoliant spraying machinery and its application. China Cotton, 2013; 40:10–11. (in Chinese)
Williamson J, Neilsen W. The influence of forest site on rate and extent of soil compaction and profile disturbance of skid trails during ground-based-based harvesting. Can. J. Forest Res, 2000; 30: 1196–1205. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-30-8-1196.
Xu R, Kuang R, Pay E, Dou H, De Snoo G R. Factors contributing to overuse of pesticides in western china. Environ Sci, 2008; 5: 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/15693430802346543.
Wang X, Song Y. Comparative test of defoliant sprayed by aerial spraying and ground machine spraying. Xinjiang Agricultural Mechanization, 2003; 3: 20–22. (in Chinese)
Bae Y, Koo Y M. Flight attitudes and spray patterns of a roll-balanced agricultural unmanned helicopter. Appl Eng Agric, 2013; 29: 675–682. https://doi.org/10.13031/aea.29.10059.
Chen T, Lu S. Autonomous navigation control system of agricultural mini-unmanned aerial vehicles based on DSP. Transactions of the CSAE, 2012; 28:164–169. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2012.21.023. (in Chinese)
He X K, Bonds J, Herbst A. Langenakens, J. Recent development of unmanned aerial vehicle for plant protection in East Asia. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2017; 10: 18–30. https://doi.org/10.3965/j.ijabe.20171003.3248.
Krik I W, Hoffmann W C, Fritz B K. Aerial application methods for increasing spray deposition on wheat heads. Appl. Eng. Agric, 2006; 23: 357–364. https://doi.org/ 0.13031/2013.24052.
Lan Y B, Chen S D, Fritz B K. Current status and future trends of precision agricultural aviation technologies. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2017; 10: 1–17. https://doi.org/ 10.3965/j.ijabe.20171003.3088.
Meng Y H, Lan Y B, Mei G Y, Guo Y W, Song J L, Wang Z G. Effect of aerial spray adjuvant applying on the efficiency of small unmanned aerial vehicle on wheat aphids control. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2018, 11(5): 46–53. https://doi.org/10.25165/j.ijabe.20181105.4298
Meng Y H, Song J L, Lan Y B, Mei G Y, Liang Z J, Han Y X. Harvest aids efficacy applied by unmanned aerial vehicles on cotton crop. Ind Crops Prod, 2019; 140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.111645.
Wang G, Lan Y, Yuan H, Qi H, Chen P, Fan Q, Han Y. Comparison of spray deposition, control efficacy on wheat aphids and working efficiency in the wheat field of the unmanned aerial vehicle with boom sprayer and two conventional knapsack sprayers. Appl Sci, 2019; 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9020218.
Xue X, Lan Y. Agricultural aviation applications in USA. Transactions of the CSAE, 2013; 44: 194–199. https://doi.org/10.6041/j.issn.1000- 1298.2013.05.034. (in Chinese)
Zhou Z, Zang Y, Luo X, Lan Y, Xue X. Technology innovation development strategy on agricultural aviation industry for plant protection in China. Transactions of the CSAE, 2013; 29: 1–10. https://doi.org/ 10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2013.24.001. (in Chinese)
Qin W, Qiu B, Xue X, Chen C, Xu Z, Zhou Q. Droplet deposition and control effect of insecticides sprayed with an unmanned aerial vehicle against plant hoppers. Crop Prot, 2016; 85: 79–88. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cropro.2016.03.018. (in Chinese)
Zhang P, Deng L, Lyu Q, He S, Yi S, Liu Y, Yu Y, Pan H. Effects of citrus tree-shape and spraying height of small unmanned aerial vehicle on droplet distribution. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2016; 9: 45–52. https://doi.org/10.3965/j.ijabe.20160904.2178.
Zhang P, Wang K, Lyu Q, He S, Yi S, Xie R, Zheng Y, Ma Y, Deng L. Droplet distribution and control against citrus leafminer with UAV spraying. Int J Robot Autom, 2017; 32: 299–307. https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal. 206.2017.3.206-4980.
Wang Z, Feng H Z, Wang L, Ma X Y, Gou C Q, Xiao H B, Huang Q. Effects comparison of different defoliants applied by MG-1S unmanned Aerial Vehicle in cotton field. China cotton, 2018; 45: 27-–28, 46. (in Chinese)
Ma Y, Ren X, Meng Y, Song J, Ma D, Liu Z, Fu W, Jiang W, Hu H, Wang D, Wang Z, Lan Y. Review on Result of Spraying Defoliant by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Cotton Field of Xinjiang. China Cotton, 2016; 43: 16–20. (in Chinese)
Xin F, Zhao J, Zhou Y, Wang G, Han X, Fu W, Deng J, Lan Y. Effects of Dosage and Spraying Volume on Cotton Defoliants Efficacy: A Case Study Based on Application of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Agronomy, 2018; 8: 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8060085.
Monaco T J, Weller S C, Ashton F M. Weed Science: Principles and Practices. 4th ed. 2002; New York, NY. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Zhu, H., Salyani, M., Fox, R.D. A portable scanning system for evaluation of spray deposit distribution. Comput Electron Agr, 2011; 76, 38–43. https://doi.org/10.3969/10.1016/j.compag.2011.01.003.
Cunha M, Carvalho C, Marcal A R S. Assessing the ability of image processing software to analyse spray quality on water-sensitive papers used as artificial targets. Biosyst Eng, 2012; 111: 11–23. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.10.002.
GFET[Guidelines for the field efficacy trials (II)--Part 134: Plant growth regulator trials on cotton]. GB/T 17980.134-2004, Beijing: Standards Press of China. (in Chinese)
Siebert J D. Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) response to plant density, insect pest management, and harvest-aid application strategies. LSU Doctoral Dissertations, 2005. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/ gradschool_dissertations/2505.
Fan Q, Chen Y, Chen G. Matching technology of defoliation and ripening for machine harvesting cotton. Xinjiang Farmland Res Sci & Tech, 2009; 32: 6–7. (in Chinese)
Liu X, Zhu X, You J, Zhao Z. Optimization of defoliant spraying method for machine harvesting cotton. Xinjiang Farmland Res Sci Tech, 2016; 39: 55–58. (in Chinese)
Stewart A, Edmisten K, Wells R. Boll openers in cotton: Effectiveness and environmental influences. Field Crops Res, 2000; 67: 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-4290(00)00093-9.
Sun Y, Li W, Hu X, Feng Y. Effect of defoliant on defoliation and boll opening in Upland cotton cultivars. China Cotton, 2011; 38: 28–29. (in Chinese)
Robertson W C, Rodery S, Ballantyne P. Evaluation of harvest aids on dryland and irrigated cotton. Special Report Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, 1998; 188: 161–164.
Holman E M, Crawford S H, Coco A B. Harvest-aid chemical in cotton: their influence on yield and fiber quality. Louisiana Agriculture, 1998; 41, 26–27.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.