Performance Evaluation of the UAV Sprayer in the Control of Brevicoryne Brassicae L. Pest in Canola

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• N. Bagheri ¹
• M. Safari ¹
• A. Sheikhi Garjan ²

¹ Agricultural Engineering Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran

² Iranian Institute of Plant Protection, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22067/jam.2022.79329.1129

Abstract

Introduction
About 30% of the annual losses of agricultural products are caused by pests, diseases, and weeds. Spraying is currently the most common method of their control. At present, various manual and tractor-mounted sprayers are used for spraying. Manual spraying has very low work efficiency and is damaging as the spray might be applied irregularly and consumed by the labor or the product at poisonous levels. Tractor-mounted sprayers are more efficient than manual sprayers and require less labor. However, their use is associated with issues such as compacting the soil or crushing the product. In recent years, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) sprayers have been used to spray farms and orchards. UAV spraying can increase the spraying efficiency by more than 60% and reduce the volume of spray used by 20-30%. Based on the capabilities of the UAV sprayer and the limitations of other current spraying methods, the purpose of this research is to evaluate the performance of the UAV sprayer in controlling Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) and compare the results with a turbo liner sprayer.
Materials and Methods
In the present research, the UAV sprayer is studied as a new method of spraying to fight Brevicoryne brassicae (L.). The results were technically and economically evaluated and compared with the control group and that of the turbo liner sprayer (the conventional method of spraying canola in Iran). The experiment was triplicated with a completely randomized design and three treatments of UAV sprayer, turbo liner sprayer, and control (no spraying). Field tests were conducted on the canola crop at the stemming stage where at least 20% of the plants were infected. The measured parameters included drift, spraying quality, field capacity, field efficiency, energy consumption, and spraying efficiency.
Results and Discussion
Based on the results, the spray volume consumed by UAV and turbo liner sprayers was equal to 11.1 and 187.6 liters per hectare, respectively. The particle drift in spraying with UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer were 53.3% and 80%, respectively. Moreover, the quality coefficient of UAV and turbo liner sprayers were 1.15 and 1.21, respectively. Therefore, the farm efficiency of the UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer was equal to 51.4% and 32.3%, respectively. Based on the results of the analysis of variance, immediately after spraying, there was no statistically significant difference between the average density of pests of the three treatments. However, three, seven, and 14 days after spraying, there was a significant difference between the control treatment and the spraying treatments. The density of pests in the plots sprayed with UAV and turbo liner sprayers was lowered to less than 100 pests per stem, whereas in the control treatment, the density varied between 250-700 pests per stem. A comparison of the average efficiency of the UAV sprayer and turbo liner sprayer with the t-test showed that both sprayers had managed to control the population of pests and 14 days after the spraying, the efficiency of the UAV sprayer was higher than that of the turbo liner sprayer.
Conclusion
- The spray volume consumed by the turbo liner sprayer was 17 times the UAV sprayer.
- The spray drift was about 34% more in spraying with the turbo liner sprayer than the UAV sprayer.
- The field efficiency of the UAV sprayer was 59.1% more than the turbo liner sprayer.
- The energy consumption per hectare of the turbo liner sprayer was 7 times the energy consumption of the UAV sprayer.
- UAV sprayer’s efficiency reached 92.7 % 14 days after spraying.
- UAV sprayer is recommended for controlling Brevicoryne brassicae (L.) due to its high efficiency, low drift, low spray volume and energy consumption, and superior spraying quality.
- To improve the performance of the UAV sprayer for controlling Brevicoryne brassicae (L.), a flight height of 1-1.5 meters from the top of the crop, a flight speed of less than 7 m s^-1, and a maximum spraying speed of 4 m s^-1 are recommended. Additionally, it is possible to prevent the spread of the pest in the stemming stage by spraying the field in an earlier stage.

Keywords

• Canola
• Efficiency evaluation
• Intelligent agriculture
• Unmanned aerial sprayer

Main Subjects

• Precision Farming

References

1. Bagheri, N., & Safari, M. (2020). Knowledge of UAV sprayer. Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. Technical Issue.
2. Behrouzi Lar, M. (1999). Engineering Principles of Agricultural Machines (Translated). Azad Islamic University Press. 1^st Edition, 355-357.
3. Cheema, M. J. M., Mahmood, H. S., Latif, M. A., & Nasir, A. K. (2018). Precision Agriculture and ICT: Future Farming, Chap. 8. In: I.A. Khan and M.S. Khan (eds.), Developing Sustainable Agriculture in Pakistan. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Broken Sound Parkway NW USA.
4. Chen, P., Lan, Y., Huang, X., Qi, H., Wang, G., Wang, J., Wang, L., & Xiao, H. (2020). Droplet Deposition and Control of Planthoppers of Different Nozzles in Two-Stage Rice with a Quadrotor Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Agronomy, 10(303), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10020303
5. Gong, J., Fan, W., & Peng, J. (2019). Application analysis of hydraulic nozzle and rotary atomization sprayer on plant protection UAV. International Journal of Precision Agricultural Aviation, 2(1).
6. Guo, S., Li, J., Yao, W., Zhan, Y., Li, Y., & Shi, Y. (2019). Distribution characteristics on droplet deposition of wind field vortex formed by multi-rotor uav. PloS One, 14(7), e0220024. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220024
7. Huang, Y., Hoffmann, W. C., Lan, Y., Wu, W., & Fritz, B. K. (2009). Development of a spray system for an unmanned aerial vehicle platform. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 25(6), 803-809. https://doi.org/13031/2013.29229
8. Keyhanian, A. R., Sheikhi Gorjan, A., Amini Khalaf, M. A. (2008). Investigating the effectiveness of several insecticides in controlling cabbage aphid in canola fields. Agricultural Applied Research, 163-167.
9. Kharim, M. N. A., Wayayok, A., Sharif, A. R. M., Abdullah, A. F., & Husin, E. M. (2019). Droplet deposition density of organic liquid fertilizer at low altitude UAV aerial spraying in rice cultivation. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 167, 105045. https://doi.org/1016/j.compag.2019.105045
10. Lan, Y., & Chen, S. (2018). Current status and trends of plant protection UAV and its spraying technology in China. International Journal of Precision Agricultural Aviation, 1(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/33440/j.ijpaa.20180101.0002
11. Lan, Y. B., Chen, S. D., & Fritz, B. K. (2017). Current status and future trends of precision agricultural aviation technologies. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 10(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/3965/j.ijabe.20171003.3088
12. Martin, D. E., Woldt, W. E., & Latheef, M. A. (2019). Effect of Application Height and Ground Speed on Spray Pattern and Droplet Spectra from Remotely Piloted Aerial Application Systems. Drones, 3(83), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones3040083
13. Meng. Y., Su, J., Song, J., Chen, W. H., & Lan, Y. (2020). Experimental evaluation of UAV spraying for peach trees of different shapes: Effects of operational parameters on droplet distribution. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 170, 105282.
14. Nowrouzieh, S. (2020). Evaluation the effectiveness of a sprayer UAV in controlling bollworm. Cotton Research Institute of Iran. The final report of the research project. No, 60875.
15. Peshin, R., Bandral, R. S., Zhang, W., Wilson, L., & Dhawan, A. K. (2009). Integrated pest management: A global overview of history, programs and adoption. In: R. Peshin and A.K. Dhawan (eds.), Integrated Pest Management: Innovation-Development Process. Springer, Dordrecht. Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8992-3_1
16. Qin, W., Xue, X., Zhang, S., Gu, W., & Wang, B. (2018). Droplet deposition and efficiency of fungicides sprayed with small UAV against wheat powdery mildew. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 11, 27-32.
17. Qin, W., Qiu, B., Xue, X., Chen, C., Xu, Z., & Zhou, Q. (2016). Droplet deposition and control effect of insecticides sprayed with an unmanned aerial vehicle against plant hoppers. Crop Protection, 85, 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2016.03.018
18. Safari, M., & Sheikhi Gorjan, A. (2018). Comparison between unmanned aerial vehicle and tractor lance sprayer against Dubas bug Ommatissus lybicus (Hemiptera: Tropiduchidae). Iranian Journal of Plant Protection Science, 51(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/22059/ijpps.2020.281898.1006894
19. Safari, M., & Bagheri, N. (2021). Technical parameters for the evaluation of UAV sprayers. Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. Technical Issue.
20. Sheikhi Gorjan, A. (2018). Evaluation of UAV sprayer in chemical control of wheat Sunn pest nymphs.The final report of the research project. Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection, No, 55872.
21. Shengde, Ch., Yubin, L., Bradley, K. F., Jiyu, L., Aimin, L., & Yuedong, M. (2017). The effect of wind field under the rotor of multi-rotor UAV on the deposition of aviation spray droplets. Transactions of the CSAM, 48(08), 105-113. (In Chinese). https://doi.org/10.6041/j.issn.1000-1298.2017.08.011
22. Shilin, W., Jianli, S., Xiongkui, H., Le, S., Xiaonan, W., Changling, W., Zhichong, W., & Yun, L. (2017). Performances evaluation of four typical unmanned aerial vehicles used for pesticide application in China. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 10(4), 22-31.
23. Teske, A. L., Chen, G., Nansen, C., & Kong, Z. (2019). Optimised dispensing of predatory mites by multirotor UAVs in wind: A distribution pattern modelling approach for precision pest management. Biosystems Engineering, 187, 226-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2019.09.009
24. Wang, C., Zeng, A., He, X., Song, J., Herbst, A., & Gao, W. (2020). Spray drift characteristics test of unmanned aerial vehicle spray unit under wind tunnel conditions. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 13(3), 13-21.
25. Wang, G., Lan, Y., Yuan, H., Qi. H., Chen, P., Ouyang, F., & Han, Y. (2019). 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. Applied Sciences, 9(218), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9020218.
26. Xinyu, X., Kang, T., Weicai, Q., Lan, Y., & Zhang, H. (2014). Drift and deposition of ultra-low altitude and low volume application in paddy field. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 7(4), 23-28.
27. Yanliang, Z., Qi, L., & Wei, Z. (2017). Design and test of a six-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) electrostatic spraying system for crop protection. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 10, 68-76.
28. Yongjun, Z., Shenghui, Y., Chunjiang, Z., Liping, C., Lan, Y., & Yu, T. (2017). Modeling operation parameters of uav on spray e_ects at different growth stages of corns. International Journal of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 10, 57-66.
29. Zarif Neshat, S. (2021). Technical and economic evaluation of sprayer drone for control of wheat weeds to compare with conventional methods. Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. The final report of the research project, No, 59903.
30. Zhou, Q., Xue, X., Qin, W., Chen, C., & Cai, C. (2020). Analysis of pesticide use efficiency of a UAV sprayer at different growth stages of rice. International Journal of Precision Agricultural Aviation, 3(1), 38-42. https://doi.org/10.33440/j.ijpaa.20200301.64
31. Zhua, H., Salyanib, M., & Fox, R. (2011). A portable scanning system for evaluation of spray deposit distribution. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 76, 38-43. https://doi.org/1016/j.compag.2011.01.003