Use of tartrazine dye as a tracer to measure foliar spray retention on turfgrass

turfgrass;spray retention;spray volume;adjuvant;nozzle type;dew

Zhang, Pingyuan ; Voigt, Thomas B., ; ,Kling, Gary ; Branham ; Bruce E.

关键词: turfgrass;    spray retention;    spray volume;    adjuvant;    nozzle type;    dew;   

Others  :  https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/101163/ZHANG-THESIS-2018.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

美国|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

A well-managed turf is functional, recreational and ornamental. Professional management is commonly required to maintain the quality of turfgrass, among which, golf courses require the most complicated and intensive management practices to maintain the playability and performance of the turf. Foliar spray applications are widely used on athletic fields due to their precise application and efficiency. However, it is often necessary to modify spray methods to meet different needs and situations. Adjustments in spray volume, nozzle type and adjuvant can have significant influence on the distribution and retention of active ingredients on plant surface. Experiments were conducted in Urbana, IL to determine the influence of spray volume, nozzle type, adjuvant, surface wetness and their interactions on foliar spray retention on a bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) golf fairway. For water-based spray mixtures, the results indicated that increasing spray volume decreased foliar recovery to a plateau at around 85%. Compared to flat fan nozzles, air induction nozzles delivered the same level of foliar retention under typical spray volumes used on golf courses. However, flat fan nozzles provided higher spray uniformity and coverage. Adding nonionic surfactants (NIS), organosilicone adjuvants (OSA) and methylated seed oils (MSO) at the median recommended concentration maintained foliar recovery rates at approximately 93% to 90% under both low and high spray volumes.Without adjuvants, increasing spray volume reduced recovery rates from 96% to 87%. However, no differences were observed between adjuvants. When dew was present, increasing spray volume noticeably reduced recovery rates at high spray volumes, 750L/Ha and 1125L/Ha, compared to low spray volume. Adding adjuvants had limited influence on spray retention with the presence of dew.