Tag: rain

  • Airblast Spraying in Poor Conditions

    Airblast Spraying in Poor Conditions

    Some springs are tougher than others. This article was originally written in 2019, which was particularly challenging. The frequency and duration of rain events left limited opportunity for orchard sprays. Even then, the periods between rains were transitions between warm and moist conditions and cold fronts, which makes wind gusty and changeable. These same periods leave wet alleys prone to rutting and compaction, and conditions that favour spraying may also favour pollinator activity.

    In response, applicators get frustrated. Some may be tempted to spray in sub-optimal conditions and risk drift thinking even a little coverage is better than none. But the adage that “there is no wasted fungicide spray” does not apply here. Some may disagree, but spraying in wet and high-wind situations:

    • greatly reduces coverage and subsequently, crop protection.
    • may result in repeated sub-lethal doses that can encourage resistance.
    • greatly increases the degree of surface run-off and off-target drift, risking environmental, commercial and residential
      contamination.

    The argument itself may be moot because the decision to spray is not strictly a consideration of economics, productivity, and risk tolerance. When environmental restrictions exist on a pesticide label they are inviolate. That is, they are not suggestions but legal requirements. Statements might include:

    • Not spraying when rain is forecast within 12 hours following application. This is, in part, to prevent water-soluble products from moving in surface or channel run-off.
    • Not spraying in calm conditions (generally <3 km/h, as measured at the top or outside of the orchard). This is to prevent airborne spray from moving in unpredictable directions during a thermal inversion, or downhill with stratified air.
    • Not spraying in gusting or windy conditions (generally >10 km/h, but there is no Canadian standard). This is to prevent airborne spray from moving with the wind. This is of particular import when there are sensitive downwind areas that can bring buffer zones into play

    Technologies exist that extend the spray window, but they require long-term planning and may not be economical (or even completely proven). They are generally a combination of orchard architecture and sprayer design. Examples include:

    • Tented orchards (more common in Australia) designed to exclude pests and insulate against hail, wind and inversions.
    • Shrouded vertical booms (e.g. Lipco) designed for trellised orchards.
    • Solid-set emitters (more common in Europe and still experimental in parts of the northern US) that reduce drift and can spray large areas quickly.
    • Vertical towers with downward-oriented fans (e.g. Curtec Proptec or Sardi sprayers) that rely on the orchard itself to filter
      lateral/downward-directed spray.

    Assuming the pesticide label does not prohibit application, there are adjustments that can improve coverage and reduce drift in sub-optimal conditions, but only marginally. These are compromises that sacrifice time, money, effort and/or the level of crop protection. Further, they are only intended for sprayers with towers (i.e. not low-profile axial sprayers):

    • Convert to air induction nozzles (at least in the top two nozzle positions, and likely at one rate higher than you usually use).
    • Be certain to turn off any nozzles spraying excessively over the top of the canopy. A little can’t be helped and is actually a best practice to ensure spray reaches the treetop. Be reasonable.
    • Reduce fan speed to only reach just past the middle of the canopy on the upwind side.
    • Turn off the boom on the downwind side of the sprayer and adjust airspeed and nozzle rates for upwind alternate row spraying only. Especially on the last three downwind rows, which you may have to leave unsprayed entirely.

    The best advice is unpopular: Park the sprayer until conditions improve. Like hail, there are environmental factors that are out of the farmer’s control. They are inconvenient and highly frustrating, but do not be tempted to takes risks on what might ultimately result in poor coverage and accusations of pesticide drift.

  • Rainfastness of Insecticides and Fungicides on Fruit

    Rainfastness of Insecticides and Fungicides on Fruit

    This article was co-authored by Kristy Grigg-McGuffin, OMAFA Horticulture IPM Specialist

    In view of the frequent heavy rains in many regions this season, understanding rainfastness, or the ability of a pesticide to withstand rainfall, is important to ensure proper efficacy. All pesticides require a certain amount of drying time between application and a rain event. Typically, residue loss by wash-off is greatest when rain occurs within 24 hours of spraying. After this point, the rainfastness of a product will depend on formulation, adjuvants and length of time since application.

    Rainfastness of Insecticides

    John Wise, Michigan State University has studied rainfastness of common tree fruit insecticide groups and his findings are summarized below. For the complete article, refer here. Note that some products listed in this article may not be registered for use in Canada. Check with your local supplier or in Ontario, refer to OMAFA Publication 360 for a complete list of registered products.

    According to Wise, the impact of rain on an insecticide’s performance can be influenced by the following:

    1- Penetration

    Penetration into plant tissue is generally expected to enhance rainfastness.

    • Organophosphates have limited penetrative
      potential, and thus considered primarily surface materials.
    • Carbamates and pyrethroids penetrate the cuticle,
      providing some resistance to wash-off.
    • Spinosyns, diamides, avermectins and some insect
      growth regulators (IGR) readily penetrate the cuticle and move translaminar (top
      to bottom) in the leaf tissue.
    • Neonicotinoids are considered systemic or
      locally systemic, moving translaminar as
      well as through the vascular system to the growing tips of leaves (acropetal
      movement).
    • For products that are systemic or translaminar,
      portions of the active ingredient move into and within the plant tissue, but
      there is always a portion remaining on the surface or bound to the waxy cuticle
      that is susceptible to wash-off.

    2- Environmental persistence and inherent toxicity

    Environmental persistence and inherent toxicity to the target pest can compensate for wash-off and delay the need for immediate re-application.

    • Organophosphates are highly susceptible to
      wash-off, but are highly toxic to most target pests, which means re-application
      can be delayed.
    • Carbamates and IGRs are moderately susceptible
      to wash-off, and vary widely in toxicity to target pests.
    • Neonicotinoids are moderately susceptible to
      wash-off, with residues that have moved systemically into tissue being highly
      rainfast, and surface residues less so.
    • Spinosyns, diamides, avermectins and pyrethroids
      are moderate to highly rainfast.

    3- Drying time

    Drying time can significantly influence rainfastness, especially when plant penetration is important. For instance, while 2 to 6 hours is sufficient drying time for many insecticides, neonicotinoids require up to 24 hours for optimal penetration prior to a rain event.

    4- Adjuvants

    Spray adjuvants that aid in the retention, penetration or spread will enhance the performance of an insecticide.

    The following tables can serve as a guide for general rainfastness to compliment a comprehensive pest management decision-making process. They are adapted from “Rainfast characteristics of insecticides on fruit” by John Wise, Michigan State University Extension.

    Based on simulated rainfall studies to combine rainfastness with residual performance after field-aging of various insecticides, including carbamates (Lannate), organophosphates (Imidan, Malathion), pyrethroids (Capture), neonicotinoids (Assail, Actara, Admire), IGRs (Rimon, Intrepid), spinosyns (Delegate) and diamides (Altacor), Wise recommends the following re-application decisions for apples. Additional work was done on grapes and blueberries; see Wise’s article for this information. Among the crops, variation in rainfastness of a specific insecticide occurs since the fruit and leaves of each crop have unique attributes that influence the binding affinity and penetrative potential.

    • ½ inch (1.25
      cm) rainfall:       All products with 1-day old residues could withstand ½ inch
      of rain. However, if the residues have aged 7 days, immediate re-application
      would be needed for all products but Assail, Rimon, Delegate or Altacor on
      apples.
    • 1-inch (2.5
      cm) rainfall:       In general, most products would need re-application following
      a 1-inch rainfall with 7-day old residues, whereas Delegate and Altacor could
      withstand this amount of rain on apples and would not need to be immediately
      re-applied. Some products such as Imidan on apples could withstand 1 inch of
      rain with 1-day old residues.
    • 2-inch (5
      cm) rainfall      : For all products, 2 inches of rain will remove enough
      insecticide to make immediate re-application necessary.

    It is important to note, not all products registered for the selected pests were included in this study. Refer to Publication 360 for a complete list of management options.

    Rainfastness of Fungicides

    There is no comparable research on rainfastness of fungicides and few labels provide this kind of information. A general rule of thumb often used is that 1 inch (2.5 cm) of rain removes approximately 50% of protectant fungicide residue and over 2 inches (5 cm) of rain will remove most of the residue. However, many newer formulations or with the addition of spreader-stickers, some products may be more resistant to wash-off. Avoid putting on fungicides within several hours before a rainstorm as much can be lost to wash-off regardless of formulation. As well, there are exceptions to the general rule in regard to truly systemic fungicides such as Aliette and Phostrol.

    The effectiveness of sticker-spreaders with fungicides is variable and product/crop specific. Penetrating agents don’t help strobilurins; in fact, some fungicide/crop combinations have been associated with minor phytotoxicity due to excessive uptake. Captan, which is intended to stay on the surface, is notorious for causing injury when mixed with oils or some penetrating surfactants that cause them to penetrate the waxy cuticle.  Consult labels for minimum drying times for individual products and recommendations for using surfactants. 

    Annemiek Schilder, Michigan State University suggests the following to improve fungicide efficacy during wet weather:

    • During rainy periods, systemic fungicides tend
      to perform better than protectant (or contact) fungicides since they are less prone
      to wash-off.
    • Applying a higher labelled rate can extend the
      residual period.
    • Apply protectant fungicides such as captan
      (Supra Captan, Maestro), mancozeb (Manzate, Dithane, Penncozeb) and metiram
      (Polyram) during sunny, dry conditions to allow for quick drying on the leaves.
      These types of fungicides are better absorbed and become rainfast over several
      days after application.
    • Apply systemic fungicides such as sterol
      inhibitors (Nova, Fullback, Inspire Super), SDHI (Fontelis, Sercadis, Kenja, Aprovia
      Top, Luna Tranquility) and strobilurins (Flint, Sovran, Pristine) under humid,
      cloudy conditions. The leaf cuticle will be swollen, allowing quicker
      absorption. In dry, hot conditions, the cuticle can become flattened and less
      permeable, so product can breakdown in sunlight, heat or microbial activity or
      be washed off by rain.

    Click here to refer to the complete article.