New Zealand Plant Protection 67 (2014): 284-291
This study demonstrated that natural foliage and artificial collectors range in surface wettability, affecting spray adhesion, retention, spreading and coverage. Therefore the choice of artificial collector or natural foliage depends on the scientific question. If the volume of spray available to the canopy, or spray accountancy, is to be determined then an artificial collector that will intercept and retain all of the spray is required. Careful consideration of collector is required to meet stated objectives. For example, water sensitive paper is an excellent aid to sprayer set-up, but does not distinguish differences between formulations. It also provides no indication of retention or coverage on the crop surface. All artificial collectors tested were poor indicators of adhesion and retention by, and spreading and coverage on, natural plant surfaces and should not be substituted for natural plant surfaces in field trials attempting to quantify spray retention and coverage on the crop surfaces.
Keywords: artificial collectors, spray deposits, foliar retention, wettability.
|Comparison of spray dose measured on leaf surfaces with spray coverage estimated from KromekoteŽ paper|
R.L. Roten, R.J. Connell, A.J. Hewitt and S.J.R. Woodward (2015)
New Zealand Plant Protection 68: 38-43
|Influence of spray formulation surface tension on spray droplet adhesion and shatter on hairy leaves|
J.J. Nairn, W.A. Forster and R.M. van Leeuwen (2014)
New Zealand Plant Protection 67: 278-283
|Characterising plant surfaces for spray adhesion and retention|
R.E. Gaskin, K.D. Steele and W.A. Forster (2005)
New Zealand Plant Protection 58: 179-183
|Evaluation of techniques to measure aerial spray deposition|
B. Richardson, J. Ray and A. Vanner (1989)
Proceedings of the NZ Weed and Pest Control Conference 42: 132-136
Copyright © 2014 New Zealand Plant Protection Society (Inc.).