Abstract
BACKGROUND: The improvement of surface coverage and plant protection products deposition can be obtained by electrifying droplets, which are strongly attracted by plants, including the abaxial part of the leaves. Moreover, air assistance improves droplet penetration into the crop canopy, especially in the lower third of the plants. These technologies can help control soybean (Glycine max) whitefly, which preferentially lodges on the abaxial surface of the leaves. Thus, this study aimed to assess the effect of air-assisted spraying and electrically charged droplets to control whitefly in soybean, besides assessing surface coverage, plant protection product deposition, droplet size, and crop yield. RESULTS: Droplet electrification and air assistance did not change droplet size and uniformity classified as Fine. Surface coverage was not enhanced using air assistance and electrically charged droplets, where maximum coverage in the middle third of the plants was 4.55%. The results were not significant for spray plant protection products deposition. The number of nymphs per leaflet in the 2019/20 growing season was reduced with the used technologies, reducing from 10.9 to 3.0 nymphs per leaflet in the application with air-assisted and charged droplets, but not enough to differ from the untreated. On the other hand, the reduction was significant from the first assessment in the 2020/21 growing season. CONCLUSION: Air-assisted spraying plus electrically charged droplets, under the conditions of this experiment which corresponds to the application carried out in production areas, were not effective to affect whitefly control and soybean yield in comparison to the conventional application method. © 2022 Society of Chemical Industry.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Droplet electrification and air assistance did not change droplet size and uniformity.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- Droplet electrification and air assistancee0
- Outcome
- droplet size and uniformitye0
- Direction
- did not changee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Droplet electrification and air assistance did not change droplet size and uniformity classified as Fine”
t0“soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Air assistance and charged droplets did not enhance surface coverage; maximum middle-third coverage was 4.55%.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxt0
- Organ / stage
- middle third of the plantse0
- Treatment
- air assistance and electrically charged dropletse0
- Outcome
- Surface coveragee0
- Direction
- not enhancede0
- Value
- 4.55%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Surface coverage was not enhanced using air assistance and electrically charged droplets, where maximum coverage in the middle third of the plants was 4.55%”
t0“soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Spray product deposition differences were not statistically significant.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- spray plant protection products depositione0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results were not significant for spray plant protection products deposition”
t0“soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
The technologies reduced whitefly nymphs per leaflet from 10.9 to 3.0 in 2019/20, without a difference from untreated plants.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- air-assisted and charged dropletse0
- Interactor
- Bemisia tabaci
Bemisia tabacit0pest - Outcome
- number of nymphs per leaflete0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 3.0 nymphs per leaflete0
- Qualifier
- 2019/20 growing seasone0
- Comparator
- untreatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of nymphs per leaflet in the 2019/20 growing season was reduced with the used technologies, reducing from 10.9 to 3.0 nymphs per leaflet in the application with air-assisted and charged droplets, but not enough to differ from the untreated”
t0“Bemisia tabaci control in soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Whitefly nymph reduction was significant from the first assessment in 2020/21.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxt0
- Interactor
- Bemisia tabaciBemisia tabacit0pest
- Outcome
- reductione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Qualifier
- 2020/21 growing seasone0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the reduction was significant from the first assessment in the 2020/21 growing season”
t0“Bemisia tabaci control in soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined air-assisted and charged-droplet spraying did not effectively affect whitefly control versus conventional application.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Air-assisted spraying plus electrically charged dropletse0
- Interactor
- Bemisia tabaciBemisia tabacit0pest
- Outcome
- whitefly controle0
- Direction
- not effectivee0
- Comparator
- conventional application methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Air-assisted spraying plus electrically charged droplets, under the conditions of this experiment which corresponds to the application carried out in production areas, were not effective to affect whitefly control and soybean yield in comparison to the conventional application method”
t0“Bemisia tabaci control in soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined air-assisted and charged-droplet spraying did not effectively affect soybean yield versus conventional application.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Air-assisted spraying plus electrically charged dropletse0
- Outcome
- soybean yielde0
- Direction
- not effectivee0
- Comparator
- conventional application methode0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Air-assisted spraying plus electrically charged droplets, under the conditions of this experiment which corresponds to the application carried out in production areas, were not effective to affect whitefly control and soybean yield in comparison to the conventional application method”
The same questions in other papers
application · Bemisia tabaci · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
application · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
71 papers in the same direction as this paper · 332 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
400 papers more in this group
See all 404 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.