c3518cb17d976b8

مقایسه پهپاد با سم‌پاش تراکتوری لانس دار در کنترل زنجرک خرما

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیئت علمی،موسسه تحقیقات فنی و مهندسی کشاورزی، سازمان تحقیقات ،آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی

2 موسسه تحقیقات گیاهپزشکی ایران، دکتری حشره شناسی کشاورزی

چکیده

آفت زنجرک خرما با تغذیه از شیره برگ و ترشح عسلک، موجب ضعف نخل‌های خرما و کاهش شدید کیفیت میوه و بازارپسندی آن می‌شود. برای کنترل شیمیایی این آفت در نخلستان‌های کشور، غالباً از سم‌پاش‌های لانس دار پشت تراکتوری استفاده می‌شود. این روش، به دلیل فشار بالای پاشش، موجب باد بردگی محلول سم و افزایش میزان مصرف آن در هکتار و آلودگی محیط‌زیست می‌شود. استفاده از پهپاد سم‌پاش، می‌تواند راهکاری برای کاهش معایب ذکرشده باشد. این پژوهش با سه تیمار شامل: سم‌پاشی با پهپاد، سم‌پاشی با سم‌پاش لانس دار تراکتوری و شاهد (بدون سم‌پاشی) علیه زنجرک خرما در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی و در چهار تکرار دریکی از نخلستان‌های منطقه فراشبند استان فارس انجام شد. نتایج نشان داد که در سم‌پاش لانس دار و پهپاد به ترتیب مقدار محلول مصرفی ۷/437 و 64/14 لیتر در هکتار، باد بردگی محلول سم 6/42 و 02/11 درصد، ظرفیت مزرعه‌ای 8/0 و 55/5 هکتار بر ساعت است. در 7 روز پس از سم‌پاشی، درصدکارآئی سم‌پاش‌های پهپاد و لانس دار به ترتیب 8/40 و 4/48 درصد بود که اختلاف معنی‌داری را نشان داد ضریب کیفیت پاشش در پهپاد سم‌پاش ۳۵/۱ و انرژی مصرفی سم‌پاش لانس دار ۴/۴۴ برابر پهپاد سم‌پاش بود. ازنظر اقتصادی، مقدار نسبت سود به هزینه درروش های پهپاد سم‌پاش و سم‌پاش لانس دار به ترتیب ۹۶/2 و 2/4 بود که روش لانس دار نسبت به پهپاد دارای برتری نسبی بود اما هر دو روش می‌توانند در مدت یک ماه فعالیت پیوسته، دارای بازگشت سرمایه باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison between unmanned aerial vehicle and tractor lance sprayer against Dubas bug Ommatissus lybicus (Hemiptera: Tropiduchidae)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahmood Safari 1
  • Aziz Sheikhi Garjan 2
1 Assistant Professor of Agricultural Engineering Research Institute, Agricultural Research and Education Organization
2 Iranian Institute of Plant Protection, Ph.D. Agricultural Entomology
چکیده [English]

Date cicala pest with, feeding of leaf or fruit juice, reduces the fruit's quality and marketability. The conventional method of spraying dates palm trees to control this pest is using of tractor lance sprayers. In this method, high pressure is increased drift, solution consumption and environment contaminates. Utilizing the new drone technology in spraying against date palm cicala can be a way to reduce the disadvantages mentioned. In this research, three different treatments were used to control the date cicala during a block completely randomized design with four replications in Farashband area (Fars province).Results showed the tractor lance sprayer and sprayer drone, the highest and lowest consumption of poisonous solution was 437.7 and 14.46 liter/ha respectively, the drift was 42.6 and 11.02%, the field capacity was 5.55 and 0.8 ha per hour respectively. There wasn't any significant difference between sprayer drone and tractor lance sprayer treatment in 3 days after spraying in terms of effectiveness, but this difference was significant in 7 days after spraying and the sprayer drone method was preferable. The spray quality coefficient in the drone sprayer was 1.35. The energy consumption of the tractor lance sprayer was 44.4 times higher than that of the sprayer drone. In terms of economically, the cost benefit ratio was 2.96 and 4.2 in sprayer drone and tractor lance sprayer respectively, that the tractor lance sprayer was superior than the drone sprayer, however, these methods were able to return capital over a period of one month.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cost
  • Date palm spraying
  • Farashband
  • Fars province
  • Spraying quality
  1. Ahmadi, K., Gholizadeh, H., Ebadzadeh, H., Hatami, F., Hoseinpoor, R., Abdshah, H., Rezaee, M.M., & Estabragh, M.F. (2017). Agricultural Statistics, Third edition, Gardening Products, Ministry of Jihad Agriculture, Deputy Director of Planning and Economics, Center for Information and Communication Technologies.
  2. Amirshaghaghi, F & Safari, M. (2016). Comparison and technical evaluation of electrostatic micronair and tractor mounted lance sprayers in order to control (Carpocasa pomonellaL.) in apple orchards. Journal of Agricultural Machinery, 6(2): 376-383(In Farsi).
  3. Anonymous. (2015). Review of the Export Advantages of Dates in the Agricultural Area. Mizan news Agency, News Code: 230837, from http://www.mizanonline.com/fa/news/230837/70 (In Farsi).
  4. Anonymous. (2017). Guidelines for care and warning networks and control of Cicala pest. Hormozgan Agricultural Jihad Organization. From http://hormozgan-agri-jahad.ir/pdf/azmoon96/6.pdf (In Farsi).
  5. Arbabtafti, R., Sheikhi-garjan, A., Gharalari, A.H. & Damghani, R. (2014). Effects of adjuvants on the efficacy of certain insecticides against Ommatissus lybicus Bergevin (Hem. Tropiduchidae) in Iran. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 10: 526-533.
  6. Eata, M. (1990). Investigating the effects of palm date cluster coverage from inoculation stage to fruit arrival in preventing atmospheric agents and birds on the quantitative and qualitative properties of the product. Journal of Seed and Plant Improvement Research Institute: 46-32 (In Farsi).
  7. Fallah-Jeddi, R. (2000). Building and application of conventional sprayers in Iran. Educational services and technology.Pages:80 (In Farsi).
  8. Gharib, A.R. (1991). Important pests of palm trees. Agricultural Extension Organization Publications (In Farsi).
  9. Ghasemi-Nejad, R.M., Almasi, M. & Sheikh Davoodi, M.J. (2008). Survey of Specific Fuel Consumption and Energy Efficiency for Two MF285 and ITM750 Tractors. Fifth National Congress of Agricultural Machinery Engineering and Mechanization. 6-7 September, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (In Farsi).
10. Giles, D.K. & Billing.R.C. (2015). Deployment and Performance of a UAV for Crop Spraying. Chemical engineering transactions: 44.
11. Heidari, A. & Asari, M.J. (2016). Evaluation of air pollution efficiency in control of date spread. Twenty-second of Iranian Plant Protection Congress, September 9 (In Farsi).
12. Hoffmann, H., Jensen, R., Thomsen, A., Nieto, H. & Friborg, T. (2016). Crop water stress maps for an entire growing season from visible and thermal UAV imagery. Bio geosciences, 13(65):45-63.
13. Kaj-Baf, GH.R &. Afshari, M. (1998). Effects of air sprayer on Date worm control. Report of Agricultural Research Center of Khuzestan Province. Page 13 (In Farsi).
14. Miller, J. W. (2005). Report on the development and operation of a UAV for an experiment on the unmanned application of pesticides. Youngstown, Ohio: AFRL, USAF.
15. Pimentel, D &. Levitan, L. (1986). Pesticides: amounts applied and amounts reaching pests. Bioscience: 86-91.
16. Safari, M., Chaji, H., Lovaimi, N & Amirshaghghi,F. (2006). Evaluation of Common sprays used in wheat fields, Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 1(4): 1-12 (In Farsi).
17. Shamabadi, Z &. Tabatabaee-Kloor, R. (2008). Identification and application of sprayers. Publishing Makhtoom Gholi Faraghi, 220 pages, First print. (In Farsi).
18. Sheikhigarjan, A, &. Zand, E. (2005). Use of pesticides in agricultural products. Institute of Plant Pests and Diseases Research. 362 pages. (In Farsi).
19. Srivastava, A.K., Goering, C.E. & Rohrbach, R.P. (1993). Engineering Principles of Agricultural Machines. ASAE, text book, NO.6, ASAE, 2950, Nils Road, St Joseph. Michigan, USA.
20. Thacker, J.R.M. Mahmoudi, A.l. &. Deadman, M.L. (2003). Population dynamics and control of the Dubas bug Ommatissus lybicus in the Sultanate of Oman. In: "The BCPC International Congress- Crop Science and Technology, pp: 987-992.
21. Yallappa,D. (2017). Development and evaluation of drone mounted sprayer for pesticide applications to crops. IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 19-22 Oct San Jose, CA, USA.
22. Yang,F., Xue,X., Cai,C., Sun, Z &. Zhou, Q. (2018). Numerical Simulation and Analysis on Spray Drift Movement of Multi rotor Plant Protection Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Energies, 11, 2399; doi: 10.3390/en11092399.