Weed control effect of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) application in wheat field

Yin Chen, Haoliang Qi, Guangze Li, Yubin Lan

Abstract


Abstract: Wheat is a major food source throughout the world.  However, biological factors like pests and weeds can lead to lower crop yield.  Most crop protection nowadays involves pesticide and herbicides application.  This is commonly conducted with knapsack in China, which is inefficient and high labor intensive.  Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) are an aerial spraying technology recently-developed.  Using UAV application is more flexible and standardized, the spraying efficiency is 60 times more than knapsack sprayer.  However, weed management using UAV is still a challenge.  Low spray volume and droplet density with less penetration may affect weed control efficacy.  High droplet concentration may induce crop injury.  This study focused on discovering crop safety and weed control efficacy of UAV in wheat fields.  Different herbicides, rates and spray volume were tested for pre-emergence (PRE) and post-emergence (POST).  The results show that no crop injury was induced for PRE.  While 10%-20% injury on wheat was found for POST.  All herbicides treatments showed significant effects on weed management compared to untreated control.  However, the efficacy was not stable between years and fields.  Weed management for PRE can reach 98%-100% when the soil is humid, smooth and with no straw coverage when using diflufenican + isoproturon (120 + 1200 g ai ha-1).  For POST application via UAV, weed injury ranged from 10% injury to 70%, in which isoproturon + clodinafop-propargyl + mesosulfuron (120 + 7.5 + 0.9 g ai ha-1) injured weed the most in 2018 (reached 70%).  Knapsack sprayer showed relatively better weed control efficacy in many cases for POST applications.  Weeds showed certain degree of resistance.  In general, PRE application with UAV showed better potential, but herbicide spraying needs to be combined with field management to achieve better weed management efficacy.

Keywords: unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), herbicide application, weed management, wheat

DOI: 10.33440/j.ijpaa.20190202.45.

 

Citation: Chen Y, Qi H L, Li G Z, Lan Y B.  Weed control effect of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) application in wheat field.  Int J Precis Agric Aviat, 2019; 2(2): 25–31.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Zohary D, Hopf M. Domestication of plants in the old world. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.

Gustafson P, Raskina O, Ma X, et al. Wheat evolution, domestication, and improvement. In: Carver B F (Ed.), Wheat: science and trade. Wiley, Danvers, 2009. pp. 5–30.

Peng J, Sun D, Nevo E. Domestication evolution, genetics and genomics in wheat. Molecular Breeding, 2011; 28(3): 281–301. doi: 10.1007/s11032-011-9608-4.

Lutz W, Kc S. Dimensions of global population projections: what do we know about future population trends and structures?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2010; 365(1554): 2779–2791. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0133.

Glass C, Walters K, Gaskell P, et al. Recent advances in computational fluid dynamics relevant to the modelling of pesticide flow on leaf surfaces. Pest Management Science, 2010; 66(1): 2–9. doi: 10.1002/ps.1824.

Oerke E C. Crop losses to pests. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2006; 144: 31–43.

Li Y, Li Y, Pan X, et al. Comparison of a new airâ€assisted sprayer and two conventional sprayers in terms of deposition, loss to the soil and residue of azoxystrobin and tebuconazole applied to sunlit greenhouse tomato and field cucumber. Pest Management Science, 2017; 74(2): 448–455. doi: 10.1002/ps.4728.

Rincón V J, Sánchez-Hermosilla J, Páez F, et al. Assessment of the influence of working pressure and application rate on pesticide spray application with a hand-held spray gun on greenhouse pepper crops. Crop Protection, 2017; 96: 7–13.

Lan Y, Chen S, Fritz B. Current status and future trends of precision agricultural aviation technologies. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 2017; 10(3): 1–17. doi: 10.3965/ j.ijabe.20171003.3088.

Wang G, Lan Y, Qi H, et al. Field evaluation of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) sprayer: effect of spray volume on deposition and the control of pests and disease in wheat. Pest Management Science, 2019; 75(6): 1546–1555. doi: 10.1002/ps.5321.

Lan Y, Thomson S J, Huang Y, et al. Current status and future directions of precision aerial application for site-specific crop management in the USA. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 2010; 74(1): 34–38. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2010.07.001.

Xue X, Liang J, Fu X. Prospect of aviation plant protection in China. Chinese Agricultural Mechanization, 2008; 5: 72–74.

Xue X, Lan Y. Agricultural aviation applications in USA. Nongye Jixie Xuebao= Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2013; 44(5): 194–201. doi: 10.6041/j.issn.1000-1298.2013.05.034.

Bae Y, Koo Y M. Flight attitudes and spray patterns of a roll-balanced agricultural unmanned helicopter. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2013; 29(5): 675–682. doi: 10.13031/aea.29.10059.

Wang M, Jin H. Spray-Induced Gene Silencing: a Powerful Innovative Strategy for Crop Protection. Trends in Microbiology, 2017; 25(1): 4–6. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2016.11.011.

Qin W C, Qiu B J, Xue X Y, et al. Droplet deposition and control effect of insecticides sprayed with an unmanned aerial vehicle against plant hoppers. Crop Protection, 2016; 85: 79–88. doi: 10.1016/ j.cropro.2016.03.018.

Xue X, Qin W, Sun Z, et al. Effects of N-3 UAV spraying methods on the efficiency of insecticides against planthoppers and Cnaphalocrocis medinalis. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica, 2013; 40(3): 273–278.

Menechini W, Maggi M F, Jadoski S O, et al. Aerial and ground application of fungicide in corn second crop on diseases control. Engenharia Agrícola, 2017; 37(1): 116–127. doi: 10.1590/ 1809-4430-eng.agric.v37n1p116-127/2017.

Kieloch R, Domaradzki K. The influence of selected spraying parameters on two formulation of sulfonylurea herbicides effect. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 2013; 14(1): 42–51. doi: 10.5513/ JCEA01/14.1.1153.

Meyer C J, Norsworthy J K, Kruger G R, et al. Effect of nozzle selection and spray volume on droplet size and efficacy of Engenia tank-mix combinations. Weed Technology, 2016; 30(2): 377–390. doi: 10.1614/ WT-D-15-00141.1.

[21] Ramsdale B K, Messersmith C G, Nalewaja J D. Spray volume, formulation, ammonium sulfate, and nozzle effects on glyphosate efficacy. Weed Technology, 2003; 17(3): 589–598. doi: 10.2307/3989196.

Gauvrit C, Lamrani-Lucotte T, Gaudry C. Influence of application volume on herbicide efficacy. Communications in Agricultural and Applied Biological Sciences, 2003; 68(4 Pt A): 353–359.

Singh S, Singh M, Dean S W. Suitable adjuvant to maximize trifloxysulfuron efficacy and early assessment of herbicide efficacy using chlorophyll fluorescence. Journal of Astm International, 2006; 1(1470): 103.

Mcmullan P M. Grass herbicide efficacy as influenced by adjuvant, spray solution pH, and ultraviolet light. Weed Technology, 1996; 10(1): 72–77.

Lundkvist, A. Influence of weather on the efficacy of dichlorpropã„/mcpa and trihenuron-ethyl. Weed Research, 2008; 37(5): 361–371. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3180.1997.d01-58.x.

Somerville G J, Powles S B, Walsh M J, et al. Why was resistance to shorter-acting pre-mergence herbicides slower to evolve?. Pest Management Science, 2017; 73(5): 844–851.

Antuniassi U R, Baio F H. Tecnologia de aplicação de defensivos. Boletim de Pesquisa de Soja, 2004; 8: 165–177.

Wang C J, Liu Z Q. Foliar uptake of pesticides—Present status and future challenge. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology, 2007; 87(1): 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2006.04.004.

Liu Z Q. Characterisation of glyphosate uptake into grass species. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 2003; 54(9): 877–884. doi: 10.1071/AR03063.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.