Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of aerial electrostatic-charged sprays was evaluated for spray deposit characteristics and season-long control of sweet potato whitefly (SWF), Bemisia tabaci Genn. biotype B (aka B. argentifolii Bellows & Perring), in an irrigated 24 ha cotton field. Treatments included electrostatic-charged sprays at full and half active ingredient (AI) label rate, uncharged sprays and conventional sprays applied with CP nozzles at full label rate with several different insecticides. RESULTS: Spray droplet size was significantly smaller for electrostatic-charged sprays than for conventional sprays in top- and mid-canopy locations. The seasonal mean numbers of viable eggs and live large nymphs on cotton treated with electrostatic-charged sprays were comparable with those on cotton treated with conventional applications. Lethal concentration (LC(50)) for adults for electrostatic-charged sprays was comparable with that for conventional sprays. CONCLUSION: The amenability of electrostatic-charged sprays to a wide array of pesticides with different chemistries should be a useful tool in combating insect resistance. Results reported here suggest that the potential exists for obtaining increased efficacy against whiteflies using an electrostatic spray charging system, and that additional research will be required to improve charge-to-mass (Q/M) ratio in order to increase deposition of pest control materials to the lower surfaces of cotton leaves where the whiteflies reside.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 3
Claim · model-written summary
Spray droplet size was significantly smaller for electrostatic-charged sprays than for conventional sprays in top- and mid-canopy locations.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- electrostatic-charged sprayse0
- Outcome
- Spray droplet sizee0
- Direction
- smallere0
- Comparator
- conventional sprayse0
- Setting
- top- and mid-canopy locationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“against sweet potato whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) on cotton”
e0“Spray droplet size was significantly smaller for electrostatic-charged sprays than for conventional sprays in top- and mid-canopy locations”
Claim · model-written summary
Electrostatic-charged sprays gave seasonal mean numbers of viable eggs and live large nymphs comparable to conventional applications on cotton.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- electrostatic-charged sprayse1
- Interactor
- Bemisia tabaci
Bemisia tabacit0pest - Outcome
- numbers of viable eggs and live large nymphse1
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede1
- Comparator
- conventional applicationse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“against sweet potato whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) on cotton”
e1“The seasonal mean numbers of viable eggs and live large nymphs on cotton treated with electrostatic-charged sprays were comparable with those on cotton treated with conventional applications”
Claim · model-written summary
Lethal concentration (LC(50)) for adults with electrostatic-charged sprays was comparable with that for conventional sprays.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- electrostatic-charged sprayse2
- Interactor
- Bemisia tabaciBemisia tabacit0pest
- Outcome
- Lethal concentration (LC(50)) for adultse2
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede2
- Comparator
- conventional sprayse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“against sweet potato whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) on cotton”
e2“Lethal concentration (LC(50)) for adults for electrostatic-charged sprays was comparable with that for conventional sprays”
The same questions in other papers
application · Bemisia tabaci · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.