Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1
Table grape vines: A) view along the outer row; B) view from the edge of the row before the experiment; and C) view from the edge during the experiment, showing a removed strip of canopy.
- Figure 2
Mean vine canopy profile (not including the trunk), determined from a random sample of 10 vines using a telescopic pole, a measuring tape, and a plant canopy analyzer (LAI-2200C, LI-COR, Inc.).
- Figure 3
Oblique aerial view showing the application area (vineyard), the nearby sampling area (light colored area in open field), and the meteorological stations (Met 1 and Met 2). The white broken line indicates sprayer travel path, and the red flags represent spray start/end points in both directions. Transect sampler locations: C, flat card (11 per transect); AF, artificial foliage (10 per transect); HS, horizontal string (5 per transect); VS, vertical string (2 per transect). Met 1 was located inside the vineyard at 21.9 m (72 ft) upwind; Met 2 was located outside the vineyard at 186.9 m (610 ft) downwind.
- Figure 4
Spray drift deposit representing airborne drift collected at downwind distances of ~8.0 m (25 ft) and ~23.0 m (75 ft) on vertical strings, at string midpoints of 1H = 0 to 2.4 m, 1.5H = 2.4 to 3.6 m, and 2H = 3.6 to 4.8 m (where H is vine height).
- Figure 5
Spray dye deposit collected on plastic card samplers versus downwind distance (0 m = edge of vineyard) inside and outside of the vineyard. A) Linear plot of mean deposition, and log-linear plots of B) mean deposition; C) transect comparison; and D) wind direction comparison. Plots A and B are complementary plots of the same data for visual enhancement.
- Figure 6
Spray drift deposit collected on artificial foliage samplers with downwind distance. A) Linear plot of mean deposition, and log-linear plots of B) mean deposition; C) transect comparison; and D) wind direction comparison. Plots A and B are complementary plots of the same data for visual enhancement.
- Figure 7
Spray drift deposit collected on horizontal string samplers with downwind distance. A) Linear plot of mean deposition, and log-linear plots of B) mean deposition; C) transect comparison; and D) wind direction comparison. Plots A and B are complementary plots of the same data for visual enhancement.
- Figure 8
Spray drift deposition at common downwind distances, collected from artificial samplers (flat plastic cards [C], artificial foliage [AF], and horizontal string [HS]). Lowercase letters are mean separation letters. Multiple one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were run; subscripted numbers correspond to the particular instance of the ANOVA that was run. SEM, standard error of the mean with reference to sampling transects.
- Figure 9
Effect of initial spray airborne drift on downwind drift deposition at common downwind distances.
- Figure 10
Sensitivity of spray drift deposition to increasing values of meteorological variables.
Tables
- Table 1
Attributes of the table grape vineyard used in the study.
- Table 2
Instrumentation used to collect meteorological parameters. Sensors were installed at two meteorological stations (Met 1 and Met 2), at different heights. Met 1 was located inside the vineyard at 21.9 m (72 ft) upwind; Met 2 was located outside the vineyard at 186.9 m (610 ft) downwind. Wind direction was monitored at Met 2 and used to trigger the start of spraying for each test run. AGL, above ground level.
- Table 3
Spray application parameters used in the study. Wrt, with respect to; gpm, gallons per minute; gpa, gallons per acre.
- Table 4
Nozzle configuration of the sprayer used in the study. A dash (-) indicates that the nozzle was nonexistent by design; an “X” indicates that the nozzle was closed (i.e., not used). Wrt, with respect to; gpm, gallons per minute.
- Table 5
Summary meteorological data for the treatment test runs based on ATMOS 41 all-in-one meteorological sensors. Sensors were installed at two meteorological stations (Met 1 and Met 2), at different heights: 2.4 m (8 ft) at Met 1 and 1.8 m (6 ft) at Met 2. Met 1 was located inside the vineyard at 21.9 m (72 ft) upwind; Met 2 was located outside the vineyard at 186.9 m (610 ft) downwind.
- Table 6
Output from a three-way analysis of variance on spray drift data that were collected from artificial sampling structures (flat plastic cards [C], artificial foliage [AF], and horizontal string [HS]), used to evaluate the effects of a spray test run, sampling transect, and downwind distance. DF, degrees of freedom; SS, sum of squares; MS, mean sum of squares; F, F-statistic.
- Table 7
Summary of estimated drift termination distance and final drift amount, collected from artificial sampling structure data (artificial foliage [AF] and horizontal string [HS]) and based on logarithmic curve fitting.
- Table 8
Output of multiple linear regression based on ATMOS 41 all-in-one meteorological sensor installed at a height of 1.8 m (6ft) at the Met 2 meteorological station, to evaluate the effect of meteorological conditions on overall mean drift deposition. VIF, variance inflation factor.
Supplemental Figure 1 Views of the field set-up, showing installed horizontal sampling structures and vertical string sampling structures.
Supplemental Figure 2 Built sampling structures for different sampler combinations. A) Holds flat card, artificial foliage, and horizontal string; B) holds flat card and artificial foliage; C) holds flat card or artificial foliage.
Supplemental Figure 3 Temporal variation of meteorological variables during spray experiments.
Supplemental Figure 4 Compass roses of all wind speeds and directions at various sensor heights above ground level (AGL) at the Met 2 meteorological station measured during the spray experiment.
Supplemental Figure 5 Compass roses of all wind speeds and directions during treatment test runs at the Met 1 (A; 2 m sensor height above ground level [AGL]) and Met 2 (B; 1.8 m sensor height AGL) meteorological stations.
Vol 76 Issue 2
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
More from this TOC section
Similar Articles
