Redução da taxa de aplicação, assistência de ar e eletrostática no tratamento fitossanitário da cultura do pimentão em ambiente protegido
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2022-03-04
Autores
Dario, Gustavo [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Há poucas informações sobre tecnologia de aplicação de produtos fitossanitários para as hortaliças cultivadas em ambiente protegido no Brasil. Nesse sentido, alguns experimentos foram realizados objetivando avaliar os efeitos da redução da taxa de aplicação e do uso da pulverização pneumática, com e sem eletrostática, em aplicações de produtos fitossanitários na cultura do pimentão, sob ambiente protegido. Quatro técnicas de aplicação constituíram os tratamentos: HPA (Hidráulica Padrão Agricultor) – Pulverização hidráulica, com pontas de pulverização JA-2 (700 kPa) e taxa de aplicação variável de acordo com a altura das plantas; HVR (Hidráulica Volume Reduzido) – Pulverização hidráulica, com pontas de pulverização JA -1 (700 kPa) e 50% da taxa de aplicação do padrão agricultor; PAAE (Pneumática: assistência de ar e eletrostática) – Pulverização pneumática com eletrostática e 25% da taxa de aplicação do padrão agricultor; PAA (Pneumática: assistência de ar e eletrostática desligada) – Pulverização pneumática com eletrostática e 25% da taxa de aplicação do padrão agricultor. O trabalho foi dividido em três capítulos. No capítulo 1, foram avaliados os efeitos da redução da taxa de aplicação e do uso da pulverização pneumática, com e sem eletrostática, no depósito e na cobertura da aplicação, e nas perdas de produtos fitossanitários para o solo, em três fases de crescimento das plantas de pimentão (0,7; 1,4 e 2,1 m de altura). No capítulo 2, foram avaliados os efeitos da redução da taxa de aplicação e do uso da pulverização pneumática, com e sem eletrostática, na exposição dérmica de operadores aos produtos fitossanitários, nas mesmas alturas de plantas. No capítulo 3, avaliou-se o impacto da redução da taxa de aplicação e do uso da pulverização pneumática, com e sem eletrostática, no controle do oídio em plantas de pimentão com 0,7 m de altura, utilizando-se o fungicida piraclostrobina mais fluxapiroxade (Orkestra®). A redução de 50% na taxa de aplicação do pulverizador hidráulico (HVR), reduz o depósito na superfície abaxial das folhas e a cobertura em ambas as superfícies das folhas do pimentão, em comparação ao padrão produtor (HPA). O uso da pulverização pneumática com eletrostática aumenta a cobertura da pulverização na superfície abaxial da parte externa das plantas de pimentão, em relação as demais técnicas em estudo. As técnicas pneumáticas com ou sem eletrostática proporcionam menor perda para o solo em relação as técnicas hidráulicas. Com relação a exposição dérmica do operador, o efeito das técnicas de aplicação durante a pulverização é variável entre as partes do corpo do operador e alturas da cultura do pimentão. Na menor altura avaliada (0,7 m) a contaminação é mais acentuada nos membros inferiores do corpo do operador, no entanto, em maiores alturas (1,4 e 2,1 m), a exposição passa a ser acentuada também em outras partes do corpo. A técnica de aplicação pneumática com eletrostática (PAAE) aumenta a exposição do operador durante a pulverização, principalmente nas partes do corpo localizadas acima da parte inferior das pernas, em comparação as demais técnicas em estudo. A técnica hidráulica com redução de 50% da taxa de aplicação (HVR) aumenta os níveis de contaminação do operador em comparação ao padrão do agricultor (HPAP). Todas as técnicas de aplicação proporcionaram redução na severidade do oídio e da área abaixo da curva de progresso da doença (AACPD). Não há diferença para entre as técnicas de aplicação para a área abaixo da curva de progresso da doença (AACPD). Novas pesquisas devem ser realizadas considerando um maior período de avaliação da severidade do oídio, a fim de determinar o efeito das técnicas de pulverização em tratamento continuo com fungicida na cultura do pimentão.
There is little information on pesticides application technology for vegetables grown in a greenhouse in Brazil. Therefore, some experiments were carried out with the aim of evaluating the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatic, in applications of pesticides in the pepper crop, under a greenhouse. Four application techniques constituted the treatments: HPA (Farmer Standard Hydraulics) – Hydraulic spraying, with JA-2 spray tips (700 kPa) and variable application rate according to the height of the plants; HVR (Reduced Volume Hydraulics) – Hydraulic spraying, with JA -1 spray tips (700 kPa) and 50% of the farmer standard application rate; PAAE (Pneumatics: air and electrostatic assistance) – Pneumatic spraying with electrostatics and 25% of the farmer standard application rate; PAA (Pneumatics: air and electrostatic assistance off) – Pneumatic spraying with electrostatic and 25% farmer standard application rate. The work was divided into three chapters. In chapter 1, the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics were evaluated on the deposit and coverage of the application, and on the losses of phytosanitary products to the soil, in three stages of growth of the plants of bell pepper (0.7, 1.4 and 2.1 m high). In chapter 2, the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics on the dermal exposure of operators to phytosanitary products at the same plant heights were evaluated. In chapter 3, the impact of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics was evaluated on the control of powdery mildew in sweet pepper plants with 0.7 m in height, using the fungicide pyraclostrobin plus fluxapyroxad (Orkestra®). The 50% reduction in the application rate of the hydraulic sprayer, reduces the deposition on the abaxial surface of the leaves and the coverage on both surfaces of the bell pepper leaves, compared to the producer standard. The use of pneumatic electrostatic spraying increases the spraying coverage on the abaxial surface of the external part of the pepper plants, in relation to the other techniques under study. The pneumatic techniques with or without electrostatics provide less loss to the soil than hydraulic techniques. With respect to operator dermal exposure, the effect of application techniques during spraying is variable between operator body parts and pepper crop heights. At the lowest evaluated height (0.7 m) the contamination is more accentuated in the lower limbs of the operator's body, however, at greater heights (1.4 and 2.1 m), the exposure is also accentuated in other parts of the body. The electrostatic pneumatic application technique (PAAE) increases operator exposure during spraying, especially on the operator's body parts located above the lower legs, compared to the other techniques under study. Hydraulic technique with 50% application rate reduction (HVR) increases operator contamination levels compared to farmer standard. All application techniques provided a reduction in powdery mildew severity and in the area under the disease progress curve (AACPD). There is no difference between the application techniques for the area under the disease progress curve (AACPD). Further research should be carried out considering a longer period of evaluation of powdery mildew severity, in order to determine the effect of spraying techniques in continuous treatment with fungicide on the pepper crop.
There is little information on pesticides application technology for vegetables grown in a greenhouse in Brazil. Therefore, some experiments were carried out with the aim of evaluating the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatic, in applications of pesticides in the pepper crop, under a greenhouse. Four application techniques constituted the treatments: HPA (Farmer Standard Hydraulics) – Hydraulic spraying, with JA-2 spray tips (700 kPa) and variable application rate according to the height of the plants; HVR (Reduced Volume Hydraulics) – Hydraulic spraying, with JA -1 spray tips (700 kPa) and 50% of the farmer standard application rate; PAAE (Pneumatics: air and electrostatic assistance) – Pneumatic spraying with electrostatics and 25% of the farmer standard application rate; PAA (Pneumatics: air and electrostatic assistance off) – Pneumatic spraying with electrostatic and 25% farmer standard application rate. The work was divided into three chapters. In chapter 1, the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics were evaluated on the deposit and coverage of the application, and on the losses of phytosanitary products to the soil, in three stages of growth of the plants of bell pepper (0.7, 1.4 and 2.1 m high). In chapter 2, the effects of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics on the dermal exposure of operators to phytosanitary products at the same plant heights were evaluated. In chapter 3, the impact of reducing the application rate and the inclusion of pneumatic spraying with and without electrostatics was evaluated on the control of powdery mildew in sweet pepper plants with 0.7 m in height, using the fungicide pyraclostrobin plus fluxapyroxad (Orkestra®). The 50% reduction in the application rate of the hydraulic sprayer, reduces the deposition on the abaxial surface of the leaves and the coverage on both surfaces of the bell pepper leaves, compared to the producer standard. The use of pneumatic electrostatic spraying increases the spraying coverage on the abaxial surface of the external part of the pepper plants, in relation to the other techniques under study. The pneumatic techniques with or without electrostatics provide less loss to the soil than hydraulic techniques. With respect to operator dermal exposure, the effect of application techniques during spraying is variable between operator body parts and pepper crop heights. At the lowest evaluated height (0.7 m) the contamination is more accentuated in the lower limbs of the operator's body, however, at greater heights (1.4 and 2.1 m), the exposure is also accentuated in other parts of the body. The electrostatic pneumatic application technique (PAAE) increases operator exposure during spraying, especially on the operator's body parts located above the lower legs, compared to the other techniques under study. Hydraulic technique with 50% application rate reduction (HVR) increases operator contamination levels compared to farmer standard. All application techniques provided a reduction in powdery mildew severity and in the area under the disease progress curve (AACPD). There is no difference between the application techniques for the area under the disease progress curve (AACPD). Further research should be carried out considering a longer period of evaluation of powdery mildew severity, in order to determine the effect of spraying techniques in continuous treatment with fungicide on the pepper crop.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
produto fitossanitário, casa de vegetação, exposição dérmica, pulverização, pesticides, greenhouse, dermal exposure, spray, Leveillula taurica