Progress 06/15/23 to 06/14/24
Outputs
Target Audience:fellow students, scientists, consultants, producers, government officials, regulatory agencies Changes/Problems:Insect control: Based on the shift of field work from being Nebraska-based to Mississippi-based, and the availability of UAV deposition data being the strongest in a corn cropping system rather than in soybeans, we have shifted our focus for this objective to the western bean cutworm pest in corn as the targeted crop-pest system to test. Deposition data is fully available to be able to simulate the applications of insecticides to VT corn from UAV, aerial, and chemigation techniques. Ground applications in full height tasseling corn are not relevant, therefore chemigation (application through a center pivot irrigation system, a common practice in Nebraska irrigated corn) will replace the ground sprayer treatments. A colony of western bean cutworm will be established in July 2024 at J Peterson's lab and the following treatments will be tested on 1st and 3rd instar larvae: 1) aerial application: control; 2) aerial application: Vantacor insecticide; 3) aerial application: Brigade insecticide; 4) aerial application: Elevest insecticide; 5) UAV application: control; 6) UAV application: Vantacor insecticide; 7) UAV application: Brigade insecticide; 8) UAV application: Elevest insecticide; 9) chemigation: control; 10) chemigation: Vantacor insecticide; 11) chemigation: Brigade insecticide; 12) chemigation: Elevest insecticide. The treatments will be applied in a research spray chamber in late July-early August, 2024, and mortality of pest larvae assessed. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Weed control: With the data found in the study, we were able to teach US and international citizens on how to properly conduct spray application using UAV and its challenges. Also, data was presented to researchers and stakeholders at Mississippi farm bureau as a basis for future UAV research to be conducted at Mississippi State University. Aquatic weed control: Results and experiences from the outlined objectives has provided 7 individual speaking opportunities to deliver relevant guidance of UAV use for water resource management in FY23. The project has also provided direction to extension personnel through UAS training events and stakeholder inquires. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results were show into various presentations format in national and international meetings with goals of extensions and research in the Weed Science Society of America and Aquatic Plant Management Society. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Weed control: For the next reporting period it is expected to wrap up all the data collected and possible start a new research objective using remote sensors to improve UAV site-specific applications. Peer-review publication is also expected. Aquatic weed control: All objectives and goals were achieved. We plan to compile the results of this work into peer-reviewed manuscripts for research and weed management guidance of UAS application techniques for floating and submersed plant control.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
The investigation of the droplet size distribution of different pesticide with candidate nozzles for UAV applications was completed in 2022, summarized in 2023 annual report. Weed control: Herbicide control was reported in 2023 Annual report. Analysis of flight height, speed, and droplet size were conducted in corn and soybean and the swath analysis was measured. A field drift trial was conducted and data still being process. Insect control: Summarized in February 2023 report. Aquatic weed control: Objective 1 was trialed to identify the optimal carrier volume and spray coverage of multiple herbicides to control waterhyacinth. Results from NC indicated applications of diquat provided significantly greater (α =0.05) waterhyacinth control at carrier volumes ≤ 5 GPA compared to the other herbicides tested, whereas in Florida, 2,4-D and glyphosate were most effective. Therefore, diquat, glyphosate, and 2,4-D would likely make good candidates for further field UAS evaluations to confirm mesocosm results. Objective 2 was initiated in September 2022 to compare spray nozzles and carrier volumes to operational waterhyacinth control standards. Results showed no difference (α = 0.05) between nozzle type (XR or TTI) nor herbicide (diquat or glyphosate) at the lowest carrier volume evaluated (2.5 GPA) which, provided >95% waterhyacinth control. However, nozzle selection (spray droplet quality) appears to be more critical as carrier volumes increase from 5 to 20 GPA for both diquat and glyphosate. Objective 3 was initiated summer 2023 to evaluate the effect of in-water herbicide activity components on UAS-applied herbicides for waterhyacinth control. Results indicated applications of diquat provided the greatest control (87 to 100%) of waterhyacinth regardless of the carrier volume applied (UAS or operational standard), application method (foliar or injection of foliar rate), or the exposure time tested (1 hr, 48 hr, or static). Florpyrauxifen-benzyl and penoxsulam were less efficacious at the lower carrier volumes (<75%) and at in-water foliar rate injections (mimicking poor spray retention or overspray). The exposure time did not appear to influence the lessened efficacy of in-water foliar rate injections for florpyrauxifen-benzyl or penoxsulam, which provided <50% plant control for both herbicides. Objective 4 was initiated September 2023 to provide a comparison of UAS treatments and operational standard equipment (airboat) for giant salvinia (Salvinia molesta) control in field settings. Results indicate that regardless of plant density tested, the UAS applications were approx. 2.5x more efficient overall than the operational-standard airboat applications. Application efficiency estimates found UAS could spray approx. 7 more acres of floating plant material per hour compared to airboat operations. Similarly, collected dye data showed a significant (p = 0.003) difference between the amount of plant overspray between application methods, which suggests the lower application volumes sprayed from UAS contribute to a higher overall spray retention on the giant salvinia plant canopy and minimized loss to the environment. The spray quality (deposition) was greater with the airboat, but likely led to more overspray of material in less dense giant salvinia populations in comparison to the UAS applications. For the dense giant salvinia stands evaluated at approx. 4 WAT, all UAS sprayed areas showed giant salvinia dropout (canopy collapse), and by 10 WAT giant salvinia was near complete control in the plot center. Similar results were achieved using the airboat, which suggests UAS likely provides managers with an alternative application option when standard application equipment cannot be deployed due to limited site access. Objective 5 was initiated September 2023 to assess the comparative differences between UAS and operational standard equipment for in-water herbicide (florpyrauxifen-benzyl at 9.6 ppb) treatments to control variable-leaf watermilfoil (Myriophyllum heterophyllum). Results suggest the lower application volumes deployed from UAS, along with the reduced time needed for mixing, loading, and deploying the application strategy was approx. 3 to 3.75X more efficient than operational standard equipment (injection from boat). Efficacy evaluations from the standard boat-based method provided a 95% visual decline in submersed plant density at 6 WAT. The UAS grid-pattern treatment provided similar control levels as the boat-based method at 6 WAT, with a 97.5% visual decline in submersed plant density. However, the serpentine application pattern, which is commonly deployed when spraying agronomic weeds, provided only a 31% visual decline in the submersed plant canopy at 6 WAT. With the serpentine UAS application strategy, aerial imagery showed evidence of a distinct serpentine outline of the necrotic canopy by 4 WAT, with more limited control between the treatment lines. This visual appraisal suggests the herbicide did not mix properly in the water column following the serpentine UAS application. Therefore, the grid-point UAS application method may be most appropriate and effective to target topped-out submersed vegetation when deploying ultra-low volumes from UAS. Because the spray solution is released at a single points for a calibrated period of time, the grid methods likely allows the spray solution to fully penetrate surface-level vegetation and promote mixing. Managers have already begun to implement UAS control strategies for floating and submersed plant targets-- these data provide evidence of the appropriate herbicide(s), GPA, and nozzles for field applications.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2024
Citation:
Tavares, A.A., J.A. Patterson, M. Althman, S.C. Baker, L.A. Avila, and D.M. Dodds. 2024. Proc. Southern Weed Science Society.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2024
Citation:
Tavares, A.A., J.A. Patterson, S.C. Baker, L. Jacobsen, L.A. Avila, and D.M. Dodds. 2024. Proc. Southern Weed Science Society.
|
Progress 06/15/22 to 06/14/23
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audiences for this project includes the following: graduate students, University faculty, private industry stakeholders including equipment manufacturers, general use practitioners, consultants, producers, and policy decision makers. Target audiences have been reached through the following efforts: scientific conferences, planned events to showcase the project, short courses in which project personnel attended and interacted, and specially called meetings with regulatory agencies. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Training and professional development activites consisten of visits to the Pesticide Applicaiton Technology Lab in North Platte, NE by graduate students from Mississippi State University. In addition, pesticide applicator training has been provided to these students. Professional development in the form of scientific presentations and conference attendance have been provided to numerous project personnel. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Preliminary results have been disseminated via stakeholder meetings and participation in scientific conferences. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Additional data will be collected to meet project objectives in 2023. Furthermore, once a more robust dataset is in hand, proper application parametes will be defined. It is anticipated that meetings will occur with regulatory agencies including the Mississippi Department of Agriculture and Commerce to discuss proper application parameters. Increased dissemination of results will occur once additional data are collected and analyzed.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Goal 1: All data collected and initial analysis complete. Additional statisitcal methodology being investigated. Goal 2: The study investigated herbicide applications using a UAV platform to control troublesome weed species such as waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus), Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri), kochia (Bassia scoparia), horseweed (Conyza canadensis), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), and barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli). All data have been collected and awaiting statistical analysis. Three field trials were conducted at the Mississippi State University Experiment Stations in Starkville, MS and Brooksville, MS to evaluate spray deposition and weed control following herbicide application using the UAV platform on soybean and corn. Two trials evaluating control tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth, one trial evaluating control of Prickly sida (Sida spinosa) were conducted. Weed control following UAV application were compared to conventional platform (backpack sprayer) with typical nozzle selection and carrier volumes as recommended by each herbicide label. Each field trial done include soybean and corn field. Five field trials were conducted at the Mississippi State University Experiment Stations in MS to evaluate pest control following insecticide applications using the UAV platform on different crops. Trials were randomized in complete block experimental design with a 3 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments with four replications. Treatment factors included two application methods (ground sprayer and UAV platform) and three concentrations: non-sprayed, 3 GPA and 10 GPA.Five field trials were conducted at the Mississippi State University Experiment Stations in MS to evaluate pest control following insecticide applications using the UAV platform on different crops. Trials were randomized in complete block experimental design with a 3 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments with four replications. Treatment factors included two application methods (ground sprayer and UAV platform) and three concentrations: non-sprayed, 3 GPA and 10 GPA. Aquatic weed control -Preliminary results indicated applications of 2,4-D provided significantly greater (α =0.05) water hyacinth control of any herbicide tested at carrier volumes ≤ 5 GPA which, suggests 2,4-D would make a good candidate for further field UAS evaluation.Preliminary results indicated that all treatments provided >80% water hyacinth control, with XR nozzles (finer droplets) generally providing improved control over TTI nozzles (larger droplets). Likewise, nozzle selection (spray droplet size) appears to be more critical with glyphosate than with diquat when carrier volumes increase ≥ 10 GPA. These results suggest applications made with glyphosate or diquat should provide excellent control of waterhyacinth at UAS appropriate carrier volumes (≤ 5 GPA). Goal 3: Spray distribution at canopy height was quantified using two different methods: Method 1: Spray distribution was collected placing 4 lines of 13 mylar cards across the plot. Mylar cards were used as collector for a solution of PTSA 1 g L-1. Cards were washed with alcohol 10% and read using spectrofluorometer. Method 2: To determine the22 distribution it was placed across the plot and the buffer zone a cotton string as a collector of the same solution used in the method one. Distribution was measured using USDA string fluorimeter. Data have been processed and anlayzed.The average spray distribution was determined and use to predict variance of deposition when overlapping multiple swaths using python. Spray drift potential studies were conducted at the Mississippi State University Black Belt Branch Experiment Station near Brooksville, MS. Field applications with a UAV platform will be performed using different nozzle designs, carrier volumes, flight height, and flight speed. This trial utilized randomized complete block design with a 3 x 3 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments with at least 8 replications. Treatment factors included three flight heights (1, 2, and 3 m from the ground), three nozzle types: XR 110015, AIXR 110015, and TTI 110015, and two carrier volumes (28 and 94 L ha-1). Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) applications were conducted perpendicular to the wind directions with drift collectors placed every 0.5 m in a 20-m line downwind parallel to the wind direction at different distances from the treated area. In this trial, the same methodology was applied to read cards at the weed control trial. Part of the cards data will be used to determine the swath and swath movement. Goal 4: This goal will be addressed once data from 2023 are collected. Once data are collected, data from 2022 and 2023 will be analyzed and used to determine proper application parameters. Goal 5: Presentations were given to a stakeholder group that included equipment manufacturers in 2022. In addition, prject personnel attended teh 2022 Row Crop Short Course at Mississippi State University that was attended by over 760 people. Numerous one on one conversations were held at this event with interested stakeholders. Numerous presentations were given at scientific conferences in 2023 and are documented in the products section.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Aquatic weed control using unmanned aerial systems. APMS Annual Meeting. 2023.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Tavares, AA; Dodds, DM; Golus, J; Vukoja, B; Kruger, GR. (2023). Evaluation of spray droplet size for UAV applications. Proc. SWSS.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Tavares, AA; Dodds, DM; Patterson, JA; Baker, SC; Stephens, GA; Meyer, CK; Fritz, BK. (2023). Using UAVs to apply pesticides: determining uniformity of application. Proc. SWSS.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Blalock, D; Crow, WD; Catchot, AL; Dodds, D; Whittenton, B. (2023). Insecticide application efficacy of sUAS as compared to traditional delivery systems. ESA Southeastern Branch Annual Meeting.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Blalock, HJ; Crow, WD; Catchot, AL; Dodds, D; Whittenton, B. (2023). Insecticide application efficacy of sUAS as compared to traditional delivery systems. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conferences.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Awaiting Publication
Year Published:
2023
Citation:
Blalock, HJ; Crow, WD; Catchot, AL. (2023). Insecticide application efficacy of sUAS as compared to traditional delivery systems. Entomological Society of Canada Annual Meeting.
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2022
Citation:
Blalock, HJ; Crow, WD; Catchot, AL; Dodds, D; Whittenton, B. (2023). Insecticide application efficacy of sUAS as compared to traditional delivery systems. MS Association of Entomology, Nematology, and Plant Pathology.
|
Progress 06/15/21 to 06/14/22
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audience for the current reporting period is limited to those in the scientific community. More specifically, our target audience has been personnel associated with the project including graduate students, industry professionals, univeristy faculty, and staff. Additional contacts have been made at Universities outside of the proposed scope of work as we have solicited input from those with previous experience. Contacts within the United States Department of Agriculture have also been made as we have sought input on proper execution of the project. It is anticipated that our target audience will expand greatly over the next two years. As data are generated and analyzed, presentations will be given at local, regional, and national meetings. Audiences at these events are likely to include end users of the technology, industry professionals, scientists, and other personnel. Changes/Problems:Major change/problems were encountered before the project began. Dr. Greg Kruger was the initial PI; however, he departed the University of Nebraska for private industry. Substantial effort was put forth to change the PI/Institution to Darrin Dodds at Mississippi State University. Dr. Kelly Bruns at the University of Nebraska has been extremely cooperative with respect to use of UAV systems purchased by the University of Nebraska and allowing them to be housed and used at Mississippi State University. Dr. Ben Sperry accepted a position with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and efforts are underway to change the PI to Dr. Jason Ferrell at the University of Florida. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Two graduate students at Mississippi State University have become certified UAV pilots and have become proficient in making pesticide applications with UAS. Additional training in determination of spray droplet size was gained by one Ph.D. student at Mississippi State Univeristy. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?During the next reporting period, data will have been generated which will allow for dissementation of data and training opportunities. Additionally, more data will be generated which will allow for development of guidelines for pesticide application with UAV as indiciated in objective 4.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
1.The "UAV herbicide applications for weed control" research is currently being conducted by a graduate student (Trenton Houston) formerly under the coordination of Dr. Greg Kruger at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Preliminary data on herbicide solution and candidate nozzles for UAV herbicide applications were generated in the first year of the project. 2. The appropriate USDA-APHIS permits to receive interstate shipments of the insect species listed in the statement of work have been obtained. My facility was also inspected (and passed) by USDA-APHIS in May 2022 enabling establishment of laboratorycolonies. Insect colonies will beinitiatedaround February of 2023. Treatments for the aerial (aircraft), ground, and UAV insecticide application simulations will be finalized by February of 2023. This would mean pulling from existing data from other aspects of this project and others to obtain the GPA, droplet size distributions, and other spray coverage characteristics.Simulations in the spray chamber will likely be conducted by June 2023 if possible, or if the insect colonies are not ready yet, run these in September-December of 2023 (avoiding the busiest time of the field season). Greenhouse efficacy evaluations for kochia, waterhemp, marestail, and green foxtail have been completed. Additional greenhouse efficacy experiments on Palmer amaranth and Italian ryegrass will be conducted during fall 2022/spring 2023. Field experiments evaluating herbicide and insecticide efficacy were conducted at Mississippi State Univeristy during summer 2022. Experiments evaluating the optimal carrier volume and spray coverage of multiple herbicides to control water hyacinth have been conducted.Herbicide applications (glyphosate, 2,4-D, diquat, and florpyrauxifen-benzyl) were made using a CDA sprayer or a CO2 backpack sprayer to achieve the desired range of carrier volumes (1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 100 GPA). At application, spray cards were placed around each treatment vessel to gauge the deposition of each respective herbicide by carrier volume tested. A surfactant (MSO or NIS) and RWT dye were also included in each herbicide treatment to evaluate the percentage of retained solution, and the overspray entering the water column of each experimental unit. Visual control evaluations ensued 1 day, 3 days, 1, 2, 4, 8 weeks after treatment (WAT), with a destructive harvest of the experiment occurring 8 WAT. Handheld and aerial imagery were captured at each evaluation time point to document plant symptomology to each treatment evaluated. Additional experiments evaluating aquatic weed control and depositionare scheduled for the 2022 field season at NC State. These objectives aim to evaluate application strategies using varying nozzle types, exposure periods, and include a comparison of ground and aerial applications in field based scenarios. 3. Experiments evaluating droplet deposition into plant canopies were also conducted during summer 2022. Comparisions of spray droplet deposition from ground and aerial application were conducted. Additional evaluations will take place in fall 2022. 4. This objective will be addressed once adequate data is generated from all partners. 5. This objective will be addressed during fall 2022 and spring 2023 as well as in 2024.
Publications
|
|