Author: Jason Deveau

  • When is Fungicide Coverage Critical? Always!

    When is Fungicide Coverage Critical? Always!

    Introduction

    A local strawberry producer was just beginning his harvest when the entire field was suddenly stricken with anthracnose. He would have done almost anything to save it, but he could only watch in frustration as the disease quickly devastated his crop. While he was telling me this story, he was wringing his hands; I’m sure he didn’t realize he was doing it. It had been more than a month since the crop was lost and he was obviously still very upset. Let’s put on our deerstalker hats and consider what might have caused the trouble.

    Strawberry anthracnose. Photo by Pam Fisher, OMAFRA.
    Strawberry anthracnose. Photo by Pam Fisher, former berry specialist with OMAFRA.

    Most of the fungicides we apply in horticulture are protectants, not curatives. What that means is that the fungicide has to be in place before disease has a chance to take hold. Once it establishes a beachhead, you can typically only hold it at bay, not eradicate it. So, if you’re guilty of waiting too long between fungicide applications, the problems may have already begun. This is exacerbated when you don’t achieve the necessary spray coverage. Put the two together and mix in rainy and warm conditions and diseases like anthracnose can spread at alarming speed.

    Method

    I focus on the sprayer part of disease management, so I have to assume that inoculum is being controlled as much as possible (e.g. culling infected plants, drip irrigation, etc.). I asked the grower about his sprayer and his spraying schedule. He admitted to pushing the limits between fungicide applications, and being uncertain about the spray coverage he was achieving with his conventional flat fan nozzles.

    Strawberry Sprayer
    Strawberry Sprayer

    In cases like this I try to find gentle ways of introducing the idea of using more water, increasing the frequency of applications, or buying new nozzles, because there is time and expense involved and many growers don’t want to hear that. However, when I started my soft sell routine, he looked me straight in the eye and said he’d lost tens of thousands of dollars in revenue so a few nozzles or a couple more applications were not a pressing concern. There’s a point in any endeavour when you’ve committed so much time and money that you’ll do pretty much anything to see it come to fruition (pun intended). He was willing to do whatever it took. This was my kind of guy.

    So, in preparation for next year, we diagnosed spray coverage from five different sprayer set ups. Let me point out, as I always do, that spray coverage analysis does not necessarily extend to control. They correlate well, but if you aren’t using the right product or your timing is off, even the best coverage won’t help you. Caveats aside, here’s what we tested:

    Setup1:

    Broadcast application using a horizontal boom with TeeJet Twinjet 8006’s at 8.3 bar (120 psi) on 50 cm (20 in) centres. We calculated a nozzle rate of 3.9 L/min (1.03 gpm), so at 5.0 km/h (3.1 mph) that’s 923 L/ha (98.7 g/ac).

    Setup 2:

    Banded application on a horizontal boom equipped with a row kits suspending three TeeJet XR 8002’s at 8.3 bar (120 psi). We angled the two side nozzles so the fans were not perpendicular or parallel with ground. This kept more spray on the raised row and out of the alleys. The swath covered 50 cm (18 in) and we calculated a nozzle rate of 1.29 L/min (0.34 gpm), so at 5.0 km/h (3.1 mph) that’s 1,016 L/ha (108.6 g/ac).

    Setup 3:

    Banded application on a horizontal boom equipped with a row kits suspending three TeeJet XR 8002’s at 6.2 bar (90 psi). We angled the two side nozzles so the fans were not perpendicular or parallel with ground. This kept more spray on the raised row and out of the alleys. The swath covered 50 cm (18 in) and we calculated a nozzle rate of 1.14 L/min (0.3 gpm), so at 5.0 km/h (3.1 mph) that’s 896 L/ha (95.8 g/ac).

    Setup 4:

    Broadcast application using a horizontal boom with TeeJet Twinjet 8004’s at 6.2 bar (90 psi) on 38 cm (15 in) centres. We calculated a nozzle rate of 2.27 L/min (0.6 gpm) so at 5.0 km/h (3.1 mph) that’s 717 L/ha (76.5 g/ac).

    Set up 5:

    Broadcast application using a horizontal boom with TeeJet Twinjet 8006’s at 6.2 bar (90 psi) on 38 cm (15 in) centres. We calculated a nozzle rate of 3.4 L/min (0.9 gpm) so at 5.0 km/h (3.1 mph) that’s 1,076 L/ha (115 g/ac).

    Protocol and Conditions

    It was late September, so the weather was a cool 8 °C, humidity was low and winds averaged 5 to 15 km/h. We timed our passes to correspond with lighter wind wherever possible. Three sets of water-sensitive paper were placed in a single row, but only one pass was made per sprayer setup. One paper was placed at the top of the canopy which is always very easy to hit, so we oriented it sensitive-face-down. The second paper was placed midway down the canopy, oriented facing up. The final paper was also oriented facing up, but placed at the very bottom of the canopy, more or less on the ground. Collectively, we spanned the depth of the canopy.

    Following each application, papers were collected for digital analysis using “DepositScan” which determines the percent of the paper covered with spray, and the droplet density. Both of these factors contribute to overall coverage. This wasn’t intended to be a rigorous experiment, so the means are presented here with standard error for the sake of comparison. There was no statistical analysis. In the case of papers located face-down, when only trace amounts of spray were discernible they were assigned a percent coverage of 1% and droplet density of 25 droplets/cm2.

    Results

    A few observations before we get to the results. Research has demonstrated that row kits and higher volumes improve spray coverage, and that’s why we tried banding the applications using row kits in Setups 2 and 3. However, this grower didn’t use GPS to plant his rows, and while they weren’t too crooked, they made it challenging to apply in a band. Further, there is some concern that a banded application would miss any inoculum in the alleys. These are important points to factor in when considering methods to control disease.

    The keen reader might notice we sprayed using pressures that exceed the manufacturer’s recommendations. In fact, none of these tips were rated over 60 psi and I used a formula to calculate their output at our high pressures. I have been heard to say (many times) never to exceed the manufacturer’s rates because it makes a mess out of the spray quality: droplets get much finer and pressure does not cause finer drops to penetrate a dense canopy. Better to switch to larger nozzles and stay within the pressures indicated on the manufacturer’s rate tables. I maintain that assertion. However, the grower was assured by fellow growers and custom applicators that this was the way to go and he wanted to try it. So, that’s where Setups 1, 4 and 5 came from.

    Be aware that a small sprayer like the one in this study needs considerable pump capacity to support such high pressure and flow to the boom and maintain effective agitation. For more information on pumps, check out this article.

    The following table expresses the coverage obtained by setup:

    Set upPaper PositionMean % Coverage (±SE)Mean Deposits/cm2 (±SE)
    Setup 1 – Broadcast XR 8006’s on 20” centres at 120 psi for 98.7 gpaTop1.0 ± 025.0 ± 0
    Middle23.6 ± 4.5253.5 ± 72.9
    Bottom15.2 ± 2.1423.2 ± 35.3
    Setup 2 – Three banded XR 8002’s at 120 psi for 108.6 gpaTop2.1 ± 1.178.9 ± 53.9
    Middle54.8 ± 12.1275.2 ± 145.3
    Bottom29.1 ± 2.7544.5 ± 70.4
    Setup 3 – Three banded XR 8002’s at 90 psi for 95.8 gpaTop7.4 ± 5.9134.4 ± 52.2
    Middle31.6 ± 15.9203.6 ± 108.5
    Bottom8.1 ± 3.9224.4 ± 102.3
    Setup 4 – Broadcast Twinjet 8004’s on 15” centres at 90 psi for 76.5 gpaTop1.0 ± 025.0 ± 0
    Middle33.3 ± 5.0240.7 ± 70.9
    Bottom12.9 ± 6.0263.9 ± 95.2
    Setup 5 – Broadcast Twinjet 8006’s on 15” centres at 90 psi for 115 gpaTop2.3 ± 1.3105.6 ± 80.6
    Middle48.9 ± 5.5194.3 ± 25.6
    Bottom19.5 ± 10.3246.8 ± 40.4

    The results may be easier to compare and contrast in the following graph.

    Strawberry coverage results for all five setups.
    Strawberry coverage results for all five setups.

    Observations

    According to the results, Setup 2 appeared to provide the best overall coverage. This is no surprise given that it was the second highest volume and employed a row kit. This corresponds with findings that have been published elsewhere. However, the excessively high pressure did create a lot of drift and the row kit didn’t always line up with the planted row. Further still, there’s the potential for missing anything that might harbour inoculum in the alleys, like runners. This setup wasn’t appropriate for this particular situation.

    The second-best overall coverage was obtained from Setup 5. This represented the highest volume, and a preferably lower pressure on twinjets, which may have allowed the spray to penetrate the canopy from multiple angles. This broadcast application is more reliable for hitting meandering rows and covers the alleys as well. So, the grower plans to employ this setup for the 2016 season, spraying at shorter intervals and confirming his coverage with water-sensitive paper. Let’s hope it works out.

    End-of-Season Update

    The grower that volunteered his time to this study has reported that his strawberries at the end of the 2016 season were absolutely beautiful. Granted, it is always difficult to draw a direct correlation between sprayer calibration and control. For example, 2016 was a very dry growing season and disease pressure was lower than in 2015. Nevertheless, spray coverage plays an important role in crop protection and our work to improve sprayer performance definitely played it’s part. His success is great news!

  • Experimental Hops Sprayer

    Experimental Hops Sprayer

    First, a warning…

    In 2013, when this sprayer was constructed, Ontario’s hops acreage was expanding for the first time in many years. While there were a few large operations, most were small acreage hobbyists and part-time hops growers that did not have any experience spraying the crop. The latter operations recognized a need to spray, but couldn’t justify investing in an expensive (and complicated) airblast sprayer.

    In response, we set out to design a budget-conscious, low-capacity, tower-style sprayer that small-acreage growers could build for their own operations. Our hope was that hydraulic pressure would give droplets sufficient momentum to cover all foliar surfaces, thereby eliminating the expense of an air-assist fan. Additionally, the telescoping tower would allow the operator to match the height of the crop canopy as the season progressed, reducing the amount of wasted spray mix.

    Unfortunately, the results of our spray coverage trials indicated that while the upper-face of leaves received excellent coverage, the under-side received only sparse coverage. We were unable to move the trials beyond spray coverage and into the efficacy stage, and because of this, we do not know if the under-leaf coverage would be sufficient to control sucking insects or diseases with contact products.

    So why publish this article? The principles behind the design, construction, and testing of this sprayer are still valuable. It led, in part, to growers attempting to modify older and inefficient airblast sprayers to duct air through homemade towers (see here). But, be advised that without efficacy data, we must recommend that budget-conscious and/or small acreage hop growers explore the use of gently used, conventional airblast sprayers.

    Introduction

    Hop bines are trained around twine lines and grown an average 5.5m (~18ft) high. Each line supports two or more bines and, when mature, the line becomes a dense column of foliage as much as 0.5m (~2ft) in diameter. Hopyards, both organic and conventional, use radial airblast sprayers to apply products to the foliage. However, the profile of the radial airblast boom does not match the profile of the target crop. The nozzles at the top of the sprayer have to spray a target 5.5m (~18ft) away, while those at the side spray a target 0.5m (~2ft) away. Additionally, the air from the fan must be calibrated to carry the spray to the highest point on the hop bine, which means it is excessive for the length of bine directly adjacent. With this in mind, it was theorized that a more efficient sprayer design would feature a vertical boom to position each nozzle as close to the target as possible.

    We would build “the Hopsprayer”.

    Rears airblast sprayer tackling 16-20 foot bines. Photo credit - D. Groenendale, Washington
    Rears airblast sprayer tackling 16-20 foot bines. Photo credit – D. Groenendale, Washington

    Beyond the obvious requirements of operator safety and being mechanically sound, the design and construction of the Hopsprayer was guided by four principles:

    1. The Hopsprayer should be less expensive than a conventional 3-point hitch airblast sprayer or small trailed airblast sprayer, making it cost-effective for Ontario’s small-acreage operations (~$4,000.00 CAD).
    2. The Hopsprayer should be constructed of over-the-counter parts that require minimal modification and no special machining or tools to assemble.
    3. The Hopsprayer should have the capacity to operate in the same conditions as an airblast sprayer (i.e. moderately uneven terrain, reasonable ground speeds, and through any configuration of hopyard trellising).
    4. The Hopsprayer should achieve comparable or better spray coverage along the entire length of the hop bine, both on the upper and lower surfaces of the leaves.

    Key Structural Components

    In order to make construction as simple as possible, it was decided to build the sprayer from a commercially-available three-point hitch horizontal boom sprayer. After removing the horizontal boom, several concepts were examined for mounting nozzles on a dynamic vertical boom. The key requirement was that the vertical boom could be raised incrementally, and nozzles activated sequentially, to match the height of the hop bine as it grew taller over the growing season.

    The boom itself went through several redesigns, each dismissed for reasons of excessive weight, lack of structural stability, or concerns about operator safety when raising and lowering (or even folding and unfolding) the boom. Finally, it was decided to use a commercially-available 6m (~20ft) sliding aluminium ladder. This had the advantage of being strong, light, easy to mount, and the hollow rungs were ideal for running spray lines from one side of the boom to the other. Plus, with the addition of a marine hand winch, the ladder could easily be extended to any height.

    Regarding the nozzles, several nozzle bodies and tips were considered, but the Arag Microjet had several advantages over conventional nozzle-body-and-tip configurations. The Microjet has a mixing valve built into the nozzle body which allows the operator to turn individual nozzles off, as well make minor changes to the spray quality emitted from each unit. Further, the brass nozzle body bends 90° before terminating in a threaded male connection, ideal for fixing to the ladder and attaching spray lines.

    From this point, it was a matter of positioning the key components and finding appropriate mounting hardware.

    Construction

    1 – Removing horizontal boom from three-point hitch sprayer

    (~$2,000.00 CAD for new sprayer)

    Costs vary depending on the sprayer, but the sprayer should feature a pump capable of 200 psi, a minimum capacity of 100 US gallons and a chassis that wraps around the tank to provide a sound surface in the rear for mounting he ladder. Removing the existing boom is a simple matter of disconnecting the feed line and using a set of wrenches to unbolt the boom itself.

    Horizontal boom sprayer
    Horizontal boom sprayer

    2 – Fitting the vertical boom (ladder)

    (~$200.00 CAD for ladder, pipe and fasteners)

    A 6m (20ft) ladder will not actually extend 6m because an overlap is required between the two lengths for stability. However, when mounted to the sprayer it will achieve a final height of 5.5m (~18ft) off the ground. Cut two lengths of black pipe with a diameter that just fits in the hollow rung (~½”) to a length that spans the chassis at the rear of the sprayer. Centre the ladder, punch, pilot and drill holes through the pipe and the sprayer chassis (take care not to hit the poly tank) to mount the ladder using bolts, lock washers and nuts.

    Dry-fit the vertical boom
    Dry-fit the vertical boom

    3 – Preparing to mount the nozzles

    (~$1,000.00 CAD for 12 Arag Microjet nozzle assemblies)

    Remove the ladder and separate the two lengths. Remove the two latches that lock the ladder when it slides. We mounted nozzles every 45cm (at each rung) but that was too many. Consider mounting nozzles every second rung (~90cm). We mounted the nozzles with 9/32” U-bolts but hose-hangers only require one hole and can be swiveled to position the nozzle. This is how the bottom four nozzles were attached to the chassis (see inset), not the ladder. The ladders must be able to slide past one another and the valve handle must be unobstructed.

    Dry-mount a nozzle (hose-hanger in inset)
    Dry-mount a nozzle (hose-hanger in inset)

    4 – Grinding and mounting the nozzles

    (~$100.00 CAD for mounting hardware and grinder disc)

    Remove the dry-fitted nozzle. Centre-punch and drill all the holes for the U-bolts (or preferably, the hose hangers). Remove the threaded swivel from each Microjet. Use a hand drill set to low with a Robertson bit, and an angle grinder to carefully remove the thread and taper the tip to accommodate a ½” hose. Be aware: eye protection is imperative and the brass will get hot. Replace the cool swivels and mount all the nozzles on the ladder. Use washers and set them so the hex-nut on the nozzle body is flush against the aluminium ladder.

    Removing thread from brass swivel
    Removing thread from brass swivel

    5 – Plumbing the sprayer

    (~$75.00 for hose, $20.00 CAD for Tee’s, $75.00 CAD for hose clamps)

    The plumbing on the sprayer is not complicated, but takes thought. It will require 11 ½” TeeJet T-junctions and roughly 60ft of ½” braided, clear spray line rated to 200 psi. You will also need 8 hose clamps for each set of nozzles for a total of ~50 (get extras). Using hose cutters, cut appropriate lengths for a single set of nozzles and use them as a template for the rest. Pass the line through the rungs and do not make loops too tight. Use a drill with a ratcheting chuck to ensure each hose clamp is tight.

    Plumbing the nozzles
    Plumbing the nozzles

    6 – Mounting the winch

    (~$125.00 CAD for winch, cable, clamp, angle iron and plate)

    This step is sprayer-specific. Find a spot on the chassis that you can mount a length (or two lengths) of angle iron to house the winch. On the prototype we included a sheet of plate iron to make the mount as stable as possible. Be aware that the handle (and user’s knuckles) must not hit any part of the sprayer when turning. Never let go of the handle without setting the lock, or the boom will drop and the handle will spin out of control.

    Mount the winch
    Mount the winch

    7 – Raising and securing the boom

    This will take two people. Slide the two lengths back together and raise the boom into position. Bolt the boom into place (see Step 1). Take a ½”, 8ft length of galvanized conduit and crush 2” of one end in a vice. Punch a divot and drill a hole in the crushed end. Repeat with a ¾” length of conduit. Attach the ½” inch length to the chassis and the ¾” length to the top of the bottom boom, telescoping the two lengths together. Now you have a support that is the right length, you can screw the two lengths together and repeat on the other side. Remember not to tighten one side completely before the other is in place.

    Strut attached to boom and chassis
    Strut + boom & chassis

    8 – Tie in plumbing and winch cable

    Attach the cable to the winch, pass it through the pulley on the top boom and clamp it to the lowest rung. Pass the cable between the booms. This is also how the two lengths of boom are plumbed together: A long length of hose hangs from the bottom-most nozzle on the top boom, tied to the top-most nozzle on the lower boom. All the excess hose (needed when the ladder is fully extended) hangs between the two ladders. Trust me – this makes more sense once you do it.

    Nozzles suspended on drop arms
    Nozzles on drop arms

    9 – Test the plumbing

    (~$150.00 CAD for PTO shaft)

    Finally, the sprayer must be attached to a tractor via the 3-pt hitch and PTO shaft. Ensure the sprayer is plumb and level or the boom will bounce and sway excessively as you drive. Raise and lower the boom via the winch to ensure it moves smoothly. Bring up the rpms on the tractor and engage the boom at 100 psi. Look for any leaks. Bring it up to 200 psi and drive the sprayer around with boom fully extended. Repair any blown lines. You are now ready to calibrate your new sprayer.

    Test the sprayer plumbing and stability
    Test the sprayer plumbing and stability

    Calibration

    Classic Arag Microjets will emit approximately 1 US gallon per minute at 200 psi. However, the position of the mixing valve will affect both the spray quality and rate of the nozzle. As such, a timed output test should be performed on each nozzle. Bring down the boom, fill the sprayer with water, bring it up to operating pressure and begin spraying. Adjust one nozzle until you achieve the desired pattern. Then, using a telescoping paint roller handle to reach the highest nozzles, place all valves in similar positions. Using a collection vessel, determine how much volume is emitted at a given pressure and valve position in one minute – this is a timed output test. You can find rates and valve settings for these nozzles in this ginseng article.

    Evaluating Spray Coverage

    There are two ways to evaluate spray coverage:

    1. The amount of the surface area covered (e.g. 25%)
    2. The droplet density (i.e.. the number of drops per square centimetre)

    They are not the same thing. For example, one massive droplet covering ½ the target would leave a lot of space uncovered, and therefore lots of room for an insect to walk past and never touch it. However, an even smattering of small droplets, still covering ½ the target are better because they are distributed evenly and odds are, will hit a pest.

    The Hopsprayer was trialed at Clear Valley Farms, Nottawa, Ontario. Water sensitive paper (which turns from yellow to blue when contacted by spray) was clipped every three feet up to 18 feet on the upper and under sides of leaves. The grower cooperators used their own airblast sprayer operated at their standard 2,340 L/ha and 2.75 km/hr. The Hopsprayer was tested at 1,220 L/ha and 7.5 km/hr – half the volume and three times as fast, even while fully-extended to its 18 foot height. The four histrograms show the coverage on top of the leaves and on the underside of the leaves.

    Total percent surface covered on upper side of leaves (n=3)
    Total % coverage on upper side of leaves (n=3)
    Total percent surface covered on underside of leaves (n=3)
    Total percent surface covered on underside of leaves (n=3)
    Droplet density on underside of leaves (n=3)
    Droplet density on underside of leaves (n=3)
    Droplet density on underside of leaves (n=3)
    Droplet density on underside of leaves (n=3)

    Conclusion

    The airblast achieved minimally-acceptable coverage on all leaf surfaces at all heights. The prototype did not cover as much of the under leaf surface (not surprising as the sprayer did not utilize air assist to lift the leaves), but it did deposit almost three times as many droplets.

    The airblast did well on the tops and undersides, both for total % coverage and for droplet density. The Hopsprayer didn’t cover as much under leaf surface, but did have a higher droplet density. That means there were more drops, but they were very small.

    The big question is: Did higher droplet density, but smaller droplet size, contain enough active ingredient to control insects and disease? That can only be verified through efficacy testing where the Hopsprayer is actually used for a season to evaluate its performance. For now, we just don’t know, and cannot recommend the sprayer design.

    Acknowledgements

    Thanks to TeeJet technologies for providing water sensitive paper and nozzles, McPhee Enterprises of Oakville, Ontario, for providing the Microjets at cost, Mr. Evan Elford (OMAFRA), Mr. Paul Splinter (University of Guelph), Ms. Megan Leedham (OMAFRA summer student), Mr. Herman Kunkel (Allparts Ltd., Simcoe, Ontario) and Clear Valley Farms for hosting the trials. This project was made possible through funding by OMAFRA and the University of Guelph.

  • Spraywise – Broadacre Application Handbook

    Spraywise – Broadacre Application Handbook

    I haven’t written a book-report since high school, but I was recently sent a copy of Dr. Jorg Kitt’s “Spraywise – Broadacre Application Handbook” and I was compelled to share. It’s published by Nufarm and is based out of Australia. What a fantastic, easy-to-read book full of excellent spraying know-how.

    Am I overselling this?
    I am not.

    Spraywise - Broadacre Application Handbook by Dr. Jorg Kitt (published by Nufarm, Australia)
    Spraywise – Broadacre Application Handbook by Dr. Jorg Kitt (published by Nufarm, Australia)

    The chapters include:

    • Droplet Size
    • Chemical Target Interaction
    • Nozzle Types
    • Nozzle Selection
    • Nozzle Spacing & Boom Height
    • Drift
    • Weather
    • Adjuvants
    • Formulation & Mixing Order
    • Cleaning Procedure
    • Calibration
    • Record Keeping

    At risk of copyright infringement, let me share a little of Dr. Kitt’s advice on chemical and target interaction.

    “Many chemicals used in agriculture show only limited movement in or on the plant. For surface active fungicides such as mancozeb coverage is critical because the active does not move – it settles where the droplet dries with only limited redistribution properties.”

    This is why we suggest coverage is king when applying products that don’t translocate. You can slow down, raise water volume, or as a last resort reduce spray quality (minding the drift and evaporation issues that arise from this choice). But he goes on:

    “Many cereal fungicides such as DMIs move only in the xylem (water transport bundles) and therefore can only travel in one direction – upwards towards the tip of the leaf (acropetal).”

    So, I admit that as I continue to transition from horticultural spray applications to broadacre work, I have a lot to learn. Something that bothered me when I started looking at fungicide applications in corn was the appalling coverage on water sensitive paper. If any of my vegetable or orchard applicators had such poor coverage, their crops would be riddled with disease… so why was such poor coverage working so well in field crops?

    According to this new-to-me information, perhaps the >Coarse droplets were penetrating the canopy, reaching down to impinge on the base of the plant (or splatter up from the soil) where they could re-distribute by moving up through the xylem. It certainly makes more sense to me why such coarse droplets and relatively low volumes can still be efficacious for certain fungicides in field crops. I’ll reiterate – this may be old hat to some readers, but I still have a lot to learn on this topic.

    Dr. Kitt shares many digestible, easily-implemented little factoids that make this handbook a must-have for your spray library. Applied herbicide advice, for example:

    “…if 50% of the ground is covered with stubble only half the spray volume will hit the soil directly; the other half will strike stubble. To optimise applications in this situation it is important to produce droplets with sufficient velocity to increase bounce and splatter. The applicator should use higher water volumes (70-100 L/ha) and a coarse to very coarse spray quality. In a clean bed spray quality and water volume have little effect. A coarse spray quality and water volumes above 50 L should be sufficient to achieve efficacy.

    These volumes are low for North America (Australia uses nerve-rackingly low volumes) but otherwise this is solid gold.

    I was fortunate to have someone send me a copy of this handbook. I’ve poked around on-line to try to find a Nufarm-based website where anyone could order a copy, but I was unsuccessful. However, if you Google “Spraywise Broadacre Application Handbook 2nd ed.” you will find a number of dealers that will happily sell and mail you a copy. I won’t share those links here to avoid a bias, but they’re easily found.

    So, to summarize, I wanted to make the sprayers101 readership aware of this Handbook. Given the affiliation with an agrichemical company, it’s a bit adjuvant-rich, but it’s chock full of great information and well worth the cost and effort to have a copy mailed to you.

    Now I’m going to go back to reading mine.

  • A.I. Pressure – Parody

    A.I. Pressure – Parody

    Sung to the tune of “Under Pressure” by Queen

    Pressure!
    Pushing down on spray
    Heading down the boom
    (movin’ so far)

    Under pressure
    It brings the droplets down
    Splits a canopy in two
    Puts product on leaves

    More P S I
    More P S I
    Or bar works
    Or bar works
    That’s okay!

    It’s a terror not knowing
    what pressure’s about
    Watchin’ the product
    come dribblin’ out

    Rate controllers:
    set them higher
    Pressure-up nozzles,
    it’s what A.I needs

    Set A.I. high
    >fifty P S I
    OK!

    Drivin’ around
    got my pedal to the floor
    But when I slow
    it doesn’t spray, but it pours

    Pressure makes spray
    from Air Induction OK!

  • OMAFA Spray Drift Videos

    OMAFA Spray Drift Videos

    CropLife Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs partnered in 2012 to develop two educational videos on pesticide application best management practices in an effort to educate, and hopefully to reduce the incidents of spray drift.

    The first video, ‘What is Spray Drift?’, highlights the various causes of spray drift. The second video, ‘Equipment and Methods to Reduce Spray Drift’, focuses on how applicators can modify equipment to reduce spray drift. We have them in English and en Français.

    Watch drift happening during night spraying under high powered lights, see air induction nozzles prevent drift on a boom sprayer and learn about how spray particles behave from unique computer-animated segments. Also, enjoy the “rock-and-roll” soundtrack. You can’t image how difficult it was to get permission to use rock music in a gov’t-produced video!