• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparison of Droplet Size, Coverage, and Drift Potential from UAV Application Methods and Ground Application Methods on Row Crops.无人机应用方法与地面应用方法在条播作物上的雾滴大小、覆盖范围和漂移潜力比较
Trans ASABE. 2021;64(3):819-828. doi: 10.13031/trans.14121.
2
Effect of flight velocity on droplet deposition and drift of combined pesticides sprayed using an unmanned aerial vehicle sprayer in a peach orchard.飞行速度对桃园中使用无人机喷雾器喷施的混合农药液滴沉积和漂移的影响
Front Plant Sci. 2022 Sep 29;13:981494. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.981494. eCollection 2022.
3
Risk assessment of environmental and bystander exposure from agricultural unmanned aerial vehicle sprayers in golden coconut plantations: Effects of droplet size and spray volume.农业无人飞行器喷雾器在金椰子种植园中对环境和旁观者暴露的风险评估:液滴大小和喷雾量的影响。
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2024 Sep 1;282:116675. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.116675. Epub 2024 Jul 5.
4
UAV spraying on citrus crop: impact of tank-mix adjuvant on the contact angle and droplet distribution.无人飞行器(UAV)对柑橘作物的喷雾:混配助剂对接触角和液滴分布的影响。
PeerJ. 2022 Mar 11;10:e13064. doi: 10.7717/peerj.13064. eCollection 2022.
5
Spray performance evaluation of a six-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle sprayer for pesticide application using an orchard operation mode in apple orchards.六旋翼无人飞行器喷雾机在果园作业模式下施药的喷雾性能评估。
Pest Manag Sci. 2022 Jun;78(6):2449-2466. doi: 10.1002/ps.6875. Epub 2022 Apr 6.
6
Field evaluation of spray drift and environmental impact using an agricultural unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) sprayer.使用农用无人机喷雾器进行喷雾漂移和环境影响的田间评估。
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Oct 1;737:139793. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139793. Epub 2020 May 29.
7
Comparison of UAV and fixed-wing aerial application for alfalfa insect pest control: evaluating efficacy, residues, and spray quality.无人机与固定翼飞机在苜蓿虫害防治中的应用比较:评估效果、残留和喷雾质量。
Pest Manag Sci. 2021 Nov;77(11):4980-4992. doi: 10.1002/ps.6540. Epub 2021 Jul 19.
8
Research on a UAV spray system combined with grid atomized droplets.一种结合网格雾化液滴的无人机喷雾系统的研究
Front Plant Sci. 2024 Jan 3;14:1286332. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1286332. eCollection 2023.
9
Assessment of spray deposition, drift and mass balance from unmanned aerial vehicle sprayer using an artificial vineyard.利用人工葡萄园评估无人机喷雾器的喷雾沉积、漂移和质量平衡。
Sci Total Environ. 2021 Jul 10;777:146181. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146181. Epub 2021 Mar 3.
10
Spray performance and control efficacy against pests in paddy rice by UAV-based pesticide application: effects of atomization, UAV configuration and flight velocity.基于无人机施药的喷雾性能和对稻田害虫的防治效果:雾化效果、无人机配置和飞行速度的影响。
Pest Manag Sci. 2024 Apr;80(4):2072-2084. doi: 10.1002/ps.7942. Epub 2024 Jan 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Control of Using Glyphosate Applied by Remotely Piloted Aircraft and Ground Sprayer with Different Spray Nozzles.使用配备不同喷头的遥控飞机和地面喷雾器施用草甘膦的控制
Plants (Basel). 2024 Mar 7;13(6):757. doi: 10.3390/plants13060757.

本文引用的文献

1
Real-Time Monitoring of Spray Drift from Three Different Orchard Sprayers.三种不同果园喷雾机雾滴飘移的实时监测。
Chemosphere. 2019 May;222:46-55. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.01.092. Epub 2019 Jan 21.
2
Spray Drift from a Conventional Axial Fan Airblast Sprayer in a Modern Orchard Work Environment.常规轴流风机风送喷雾在现代果园工作环境中的飘移。
Ann Work Expo Health. 2018 Nov 12;62(9):1134-1146. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxy082.
3
Spray droplet size and carrier volume effect on dicamba and glufosinate efficacy.喷雾液滴大小和载液量对麦草畏和草铵膦药效的影响。
Pest Manag Sci. 2018 Mar 13. doi: 10.1002/ps.4913.
4
Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards.农业中农药使用的影响:其益处与危害。
Interdiscip Toxicol. 2009 Mar;2(1):1-12. doi: 10.2478/v10102-009-0001-7.

无人机应用方法与地面应用方法在条播作物上的雾滴大小、覆盖范围和漂移潜力比较

Comparison of Droplet Size, Coverage, and Drift Potential from UAV Application Methods and Ground Application Methods on Row Crops.

作者信息

Gibbs J, Peters T M, Heck L P

机构信息

Industrial Hygienist, Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Iowa, and Owner, Gibbs Ventures and Consulting, Iowa City, Iowa.

Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

出版信息

Trans ASABE. 2021;64(3):819-828. doi: 10.13031/trans.14121.

DOI:10.13031/trans.14121
PMID:37667776
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10476208/
Abstract

Worldwide, the use of uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) for pesticide application has grown tremendously in the past decade. Their adoption has been slower for Midwestern row crops. This study compared droplet size, coverage, and drift potential of sprays from UAV application methods to those from ground (implement) sprayer methods on corn in the Midwest. Droplet sizes measured during UAV spray trials [geometric mean diameters of 179 and 112 μm for UAV (boom) and UAV (no boom), respectively] were substantially smaller than those deposited during implement spray trials [mean diameters of 303 and 423 μm for implement (regular) and implement (pulse)]. Droplet coverage was high and localized in the middle swath of the field for the UAV with boom (10 to 30 droplets cm) and with no boom (60 droplets cm). Droplet coverage was broader, covering the entire field width for the implement methods (10 to 40 droplets cm). Vertical coverage of droplets was more uniform for UAV methods than implement methods. Although the UAVs produced smaller droplets than the implement methods, we still observed greater potential for downwind pesticide drift during the implement spray trials. Because localized application may be beneficial for pest control and drift reduction, the findings indicate a strong potential for "spot" or "band" spray coverage using UAV methods. This is likely due to the smaller size, reduced spray volumes, and increased agility of UAVs as compared to more conventional methods.

摘要

在全球范围内,过去十年中使用无人机(UAV)进行农药喷洒的情况有了巨大增长。对于美国中西部的行播作物而言,无人机的采用速度较为缓慢。本研究比较了无人机喷洒方法与地面(机具)喷雾器方法在中西部玉米田上的喷雾液滴大小、覆盖范围和漂移潜力。无人机喷雾试验期间测得的液滴大小[无人机(喷杆)和无人机(无喷杆)的几何平均直径分别为179和112μm]明显小于机具喷雾试验期间沉积的液滴大小[机具(常规)和机具(脉冲)的平均直径为303和423μm]。对于有喷杆的无人机(10至30个液滴/平方厘米)和无喷杆的无人机(60个液滴/平方厘米),液滴覆盖范围在田地中间条带较高且局部化。机具方法的液滴覆盖范围更广,覆盖了整个田地宽度(10至40个液滴/平方厘米)。无人机方法的液滴垂直覆盖比机具方法更均匀。尽管无人机产生的液滴比机具方法小,但我们在机具喷雾试验期间仍观察到农药顺风漂移的可能性更大。由于局部施药可能有利于害虫防治和减少漂移,研究结果表明使用无人机方法进行“点”喷或“条”喷覆盖具有很大潜力。这可能是因为与更传统的方法相比,无人机尺寸更小、喷雾量减少且灵活性更高。