ارزیابی عمکلرد پهپاد‌سمپاش در کنترل شته کلزا

در پژوهش حاضر پهپادسمپاش به‌عنوان یک روش نوین سمپاشی برای کنترل جمعیت آفت شتۀ کلزا ارزیابی و نتایج آن با سمپاش توربولاینر مقایسه شد. آزمون در قالب طرح کاملاً تصادفی در سه تکرار اجرا شد. آزمون‌ها در زمان آلودگی حداقل 20درصد از بوته‌ها اجرا شد. پارامترهای اندازه‌گیری‌شده شامل مقدار ضریب کیفیت پاشش، ظرفیت مزرعه‌ای تئوری و موثر، بازدۀ مزرعه‌ای، انرژی مصرفی و کارایی (اثربخشی) سمپاشی بودند. براساس نتایج برای پهپادسمپاش و سمپاش توربولاینر، به‌ترتیب میانگین مقدار محلول سم مصرفی برابر با 11.1 و 187.6 لیتر در هکتار، ضریب کیفیت پاشش 1.15 و 1.21، بازدۀ مزرعه‌ای 51.4 و 32.3درصد و انرژی مصرفی 3.4 و 100.5 کیلووات-ساعت به‌دست آمد. براساس نتایج تجزیۀ واریانس در سه، هفت و 14 روز پس از سمپاشی، بین تیمار شاهد و تیمارهای پهپادسمپاش و سمپاش توربولاینر از نظر تعداد شته اختلاف معنی‌دار بود؛ به‌طوری‌که تعداد شته در کرت‌های سمپاشی‌شده با هر دو نوع سمپاش در سه بار نمونه‌برداری پس از سمپاشی کمتر از 100شته در ساقه بود. اما در تیمار شاهد تعداد شته در ساقه 700-250 بود. مقایسۀ میانگین کارایی پهپادسمپاش و سمپاش‌ توربولاینر با آزمون t نشان داد که هر دو سمپاش نتایج قابل‌قبولی در کنترل جمعیت شتۀ کلزا داشتند. در سه و هفت روز پس از سمپاشی، سمپاش توربولاینر کارایی بیشتری نسبت به پهپادسمپاش داشت. اما در 14 روز بعد از سمپاشی، کارایی پهپادسمپاش و سمپاش توربولاینر به‌ترتیب 92.7 و 85.2درصد بود. استفاده از پهپادسمپاش با توجه به کاهش مقدار محلول مصرفی و انرژی مصرفی و افزایش بازدۀ مزرعه‌ای، کیفیت پاشش و کارایی سمپاشی برای کنترل جمعیت شتۀ کلزا توصیه می‌شود.

performance evaluation of the uav sprayer in controlling brevicoryne brassicae l. pest in canola

introductionabout 30% of the annual losses of agricultural products are caused by pests, diseases, and weeds. spraying is currently the most common method of their control. at present, various manual and tractor-mounted sprayers are used for spraying. manual spraying has very low work efficiency and is damaging as the spray might be applied irregularly and consumed by the labor or the product at poisonous levels. tractor-mounted sprayers are more efficient than manual sprayers and require less labor. however, their use is associated with issues such as compacting the soil or crushing the product. in recent years, unmanned aerial vehicle (uav) sprayers have been used to spray farms and orchards. uav spraying can increase the spraying efficiency by more than 60% and reduce the volume of spray used by 20-30%. based on the capabilities of the uav sprayer and the limitations of other current spraying methods, the purpose of this research is to evaluate the performance of the uav sprayer in controlling brevicoryne brassicae (l.) and compare the results with a turbo liner sprayer.materials and methodsin the present research, the uav sprayer is studied as a new method of spraying to fight brevicoryne brassicae (l.). the results were technically and economically evaluated and compared with the control group and that of the turbo liner sprayer (the conventional method of spraying canola in iran). the experiment was triplicated with a completely randomized design and three treatments of uav sprayer, turbo liner sprayer, and control (no spraying). field tests were conducted on the canola crop at the stemming stage where at least 20% of the plants were infected. the measured parameters included drift, spraying quality, field capacity, field efficiency, energy consumption, and spraying efficiency.results and discussionbased on the results, the spray volume consumed by uav and turbo liner sprayers was equal to 11.1 and 187.6 liters per hectare, respectively. the particle drift in spraying with uav sprayer and turbo liner sprayer were 53.3% and 80%, respectively. moreover, the quality coefficient of uav and turbo liner sprayers were 1.15 and 1.21, respectively. therefore, the farm efficiency of the uav sprayer and turbo liner sprayer was equal to 51.4% and 32.3%, respectively. based on the results of the analysis of variance, immediately after spraying, there was no statistically significant difference between the average density of pests of the three treatments. however, three, seven, and 14 days after spraying, there was a significant difference between the control treatment and the spraying treatments. the density of pests in the plots sprayed with uav and turbo liner sprayers was lowered to less than 100 pests per stem, whereas in the control treatment, the density varied between 250-700 pests per stem. a comparison of the average efficiency of the uav sprayer and turbo liner sprayer with the t-test showed that both sprayers had managed to control the population of pests and 14 days after the spraying, the efficiency of the uav sprayer was higher than that of the turbo liner sprayer.conclusion- the spray volume consumed by the turbo liner sprayer was 17 times the uav sprayer.- the spray drift was about 34% more in spraying with the turbo liner sprayer than the uav sprayer.- the field efficiency of the uav sprayer was 59.1% more than the turbo liner sprayer.- the energy consumption per hectare of the turbo liner sprayer was 7 times the energy consumption of the uav sprayer.- uav sprayer’s efficiency reached 92.7 % 14 days after spraying.- uav sprayer is recommended for controlling brevicoryne brassicae (l.) due to its high efficiency, low drift, low spray volume and energy consumption, and superior spraying quality.- to improve the performance of the uav sprayer for controlling brevicoryne brassicae (l.), a flight height of 1-1.5 meters from the top of the crop, a flight speed of less than 7 m s-1, and a maximum spraying speed of 4 m s-1 are recommended. additionally, it is possible to prevent the spread of the pest in the stemming stage by spraying the field in an earlier stage.