GiESCO 2019 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 GiESCO 9 GiESCO 2019 9 Survey reveals training needs for airblast sprayer operators

Survey reveals training needs for airblast sprayer operators

Abstract

Context and purpose of the study – In California, little training in sprayer calibration or pesticide drift management is required to apply pesticides. Yet, there is a need to maximize pesticide efficacy and minimize drift. Therefore, our team is developing a training course on airblast application best practices. We distributed a survey to identify current practices and used importance-performance analysis to interpret responses to the importance of spray related topics and satisfaction with previous training.

Material and methods – In 2018 we solicited survey replies, receiving 219 responses from winegrape and orchard industry members. Respondents rated 18 spray topics using a Likert-type scale. Topic categories included sprayer calibration, weather, techniques to reduce drift, and applicator attitude. Respondents rated 1) how important each topic is to them and 2) how satisfied they are with the quality of training they had previously received; or “no training received”. Results were calculated by topic as the mean importance (y) and satisfaction with training (x), and graphed using (x,y) as coordinates. The overall importance and performance means were used to define graph quadrants; the resulting topic placement in the quadrants prioritized training needs. We also asked: “Do you change your sprayer set up?”, “What steps do you take to calibrate?” and “Have you experienced a pest control failure that could have been related to a poor spray application?”

Results – Checking spray coverage ranked the most important topic while improving safety ranked highest for satisfaction. Topics fell into quadrants: 1.-high priority: checking coverage, selecting nozzles, reducing costs, and measuring flow; 2.-less emphasis: measuring application rate, measuring speed, improving safety, checking wind speed, reducing drift, and checking pressure; 3.-low interest: reducing spray loss to the ground, adjusting air flow, determining droplet size, checking temperature, determining if an inversion exists, using the low-drift technique “Gear up, Throttle down”, and checking relative humidity; 4.-low priority: checking wind direction. Responses to “What steps do you take to calibrate?” included measuring speed (44.9%), spraying out the tank to a known area (35.6%) and checking nozzles (34.7%). Only 8.1% of respondents check coverage and 5.9% admitted not calibrating or not often. 38% do not change their sprayer set-up once the season begins. Over half experienced a pest control failure they suspect was due to poor application; grape powdery mildew had the highest perceived failure. Respondents understand drift is undesirable but assign less importance to practices to reduce drift incidence, possibly due to lack of training received by 6-23%. Our course will focus on high priority topics; and checking weather and equipment to minimize drift.

DOI:

Publication date: June 18, 2020

Issue: GiESCO 2019

Type: Poster

Authors

Lynn WUNDERLICH1, Franz NIEDERHOLZER2, Lisa BLECKER3, Rhonda J. SMITH4, Stephanie BOLTON5

1 UCCE, 311 Fair Lane, Placerville, California, 95667 USA
2 UCCE, P.O. Box 180, 100 Sunrise Blvd., Colusa, California, 95932 USA
3 UCIPM, 2801 Second St., Davis, California, 95618 USA
4 UCCE, 133 Aviation Blvd. Santa Rosa, California, 95403 USA
5 Lodi Winegrape Commission, 2545 Turner Rd., Lodi, California, 95242 USA

Contact the author

Keywords

Airblast sprayer, calibration, training, survey 

Tags

GiESCO 2019 | IVES Conference Series

Citation

Related articles…

Phenology, thermal requirements and maturation of the SR 0.501-17 wine grape hybrid cultivated in contrasting climate

The use of hybrids in viticulture is one of the alternatives for sustainable production in hot and rainy regions during grapevine maturation. This sustainable production concerns the reduction of pesticide use, adaptation to climate and control of vine decline. The SR 0.501-17 wine grape hybrid, developed in the grapevine program of the Agronomic Institute of Campinas (IAC), is characterized by producing white grapes with small spherical berries with seeds. The agronomic characterization of this hybrid, especially in different climatic conditions, as well as the evaluation of its performance in winemaking are necessary. The objective of this work was to characterize the duration and thermal requirements of the different phenological stages and the influence of rainfall on the physicochemical characteristics of the must in two contrasting climate regions of the State of São Paulo.

Piloting grape ripening in a global warming scenario: feasible techniques are available

Under the pressure of global warming, several wine grape growing regions around the world are increasingly suffering from advanced and compressed phenology; endangering wine character while also creating serious logistic problems. From a physiological standpoint, the issue of delaying ripening is not simple as, in several instances, only a few processes must be delayed (i.e. sugar accumulation into the berries) while other events such as pigmentation and accumulation of other important phenolic compounds should proceed at a normal rate. Thus, the issue of decoupling technological maturity from phenolic maturity is another important consideration. Over the last decades, several research groups have endeavored to establish alternate cultural practices aimed at addressing this decoupling. In some cases, special applications of quite robust and well known practices regarding physiological principles have been utilized, however some completely new techniques are also being studied. In figure 1 of the review, we offer a panorama of the available tools and in the text we elaborate on those having provided most reliable and consistent results under an array of genotypes and environmental conditions. Among these, primary focus is given to post‐veraison—apical to the cluster—leaf removal (that can also be suitably replaced by applications of anti‐transpirants); the use of kaolin against multiple summers’ stresses; and a drastic version of late winter pruning having the potential to postpone ripening into a cooler period with improved grape composition and a limited negative impact on yield and storage reserves replenishment. 

Late leaf removal does not consistently delay ripeningin semillon in Australia

Context and purpose of the study ‐ An advancement of grapevine phenological development has been observed worldwide in the last two decades. In South Australia this phenomenon is even more accentuated since grapevine is often grown in a hot climate. The main consequences are earlier harvests at higher sugar levels which also result in more alcoholic wines. These are deemed undesirable for the Australian wine industry with consumer preferences shifting towards lower alcohol wines. Vineyard practices can be implemented to control and delay ripening. Amongst them, apical late leaf removal has been successfully applied in Europe to delay ripening by up to two weeks in Sangiovese, Aglianico and Riesling. In those studies, no negative effects were observed on grape colour, phenolics and on the carbohydrate storage capacity of the vines. To date, this technique has not been studied in Australia. In this study late leaf removal, apical to the bunch zone was applied to the variety Semillon for four seasons and compared to an untreated control.

Soil preparation practices to eliminate soil restrictions to grapevine root distribution for the establishment of sustainable vineyards

Grapevine yield and wine quality are dependent on good quality vegetative growth and root development. Soils that restrict proper grapevine root development, together with the high cost of establishing a new vineyard, require effective soil preparation to sustain productive vineyards for 25 years. This study reviews soil preparation research conducted over the past 50 years and identifies best practices to remove soil physical and chemical impediments to create optimum conditions for root growth.

A comprehensive ecological study of grapevine sensitivity to temperature; how terroir will shift under climate change

Fossil fuel combustion continues to drive increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide, consequently elevating the global annual mean temperature and specifically increasing the growing season temperatures in many of the world’s most important wine growing regions (IPCC 2014; Jones et al 2005). Grapes are sensitive to changes in growing season temperatures, and past models have shown a direct link between warming temperatures and earlier harvest dates (Cook and Wolkovich 2016). Globally, there have been shifts of 1-2 weeks for wine growing regions (Wolkovich et al 2017 and references within). The phenological shifts resulting from growing season temperature increases are documented internationally, and models predicting phenology using temperature are becoming more precise (Parker et al 2011).