4.7 Article

Real Time Monitoring of Spray Drift from Three Different Orchard Sprayers

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 222, Issue -, Pages 46-55

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.01.092

Keywords

Pesticide application; Drift; Orchard sprayers; Application exclusion zone; Environmental exposure; Particulate matter

Funding

  1. University of Washington School of Public Health (Department of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences), United States
  2. University of Washington School of Public Health (Russel L. Castner Endowed Student Research Fund), United States
  3. University of Washington School of Public Health (Graduate Opportunities Minority Achievement Program), United States
  4. University of Washington School of Public Health (Biostatistics, Epidemiologic, and Bioinformatic Training in Environmental Health Training Program), United States
  5. PNASH Center (CDC/NIOSH Cooperative Agreement), United States [5 U54 OH007544]
  6. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, United States [5P30 ES007033-23]
  7. US Environmental Protection Agency, United States [83618501-0]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In Washington State, half of all pesticide-related illnesses in agriculture result from drift, the off-target movement of pesticides. Of these, a significant proportion involve workers on another farm and orchard airblast applications. We compared the spray drift exposure reduction potential of two modern tower sprayers - directed air tower (DAT) and multi-headed fan tower (MFT), in relation to a traditional axial fan airblast (AFA) sprayer. We employed real-time particle monitors (Dylos DC1100) during a randomized control trial of orchard spray applications. Sections of a field were randomly sprayed by three alternating spray technologies - AFA, DAT and MFT - while monitors sampled particulate matter above and below the canopy at various downwind locations in a neighboring field. Geometric mean particle mass concentrations (PMC) outside the intended spray area were elevated during all applications at all of our sampling distances (16-74m, 51-244 ft). After adjusting for wind speed and sampling height, the 75th percentile (95% confidence interval) PMC level was significantly greater during spray events than background levels by 105 (93, 120) mu g/m(3), 49 (45, 54) mu g/m(3) and 26 (22, 31)14/m(3) during AFA, DAT and MFT applications, respectively. Adjusted PMC levels were significantly different between all three sprayers. In this study, tower sprayers significantly reduced spray drift exposures in a neighboring orchard field when compared to the AFA sprayer, with the MFT sprayer producing the least drift; however these tower sprayers did do not fully eliminate drift. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available