MODELING OF SPRAY PENETRATION AND DEPOSITION ON CITRUS TREE CANOPIES

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 619-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Farooq ◽  
M. Salyani
Keyword(s):  
Citrus Tree ◽  
Spray Penetration ◽  
Tree Canopies

scholarly journals Stem Flow, Throughfall, and Canopy Interception of Rainfall by Citrus Tree Canopies

HortScience ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 1059-1160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.C. Li ◽  
A.K. Alva ◽  
D.V. Calvert ◽  
M. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Tree Canopy ◽  
Storm Event ◽  
Citrus Paradisi ◽  
Citrus Tree ◽  
Canopy Interception ◽  
Canopy Effect ◽  
Tree Canopies ◽  
Stem Flow ◽  
Citrus Cultivar ◽  
Rain Events

It is generally believed that the interception of rain by the citrus tree canopy can substantially decrease the throughfall under the canopy as compared to that along the dripline or outside the canopy (incident rainfall). Therefore, the position of placement of soil-applied agrichemicals in relation to the tree canopy may be an important consideration to minimize their leaching during rain events. In this study, the distributions of rainfall under the tree canopies of three citrus cultivars, `Marsh' grapefruit (Citrus paradisi Macf.), `Hamlin' orange (Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck), and `Temple' orange (Citrus hybrid), were evaluated at four directions (north, south, east, west), two positions (dripline and under the canopy), and stem flow. There was not a significant canopy effect on rainfall amounts from stem flow or dripline, compared with outside canopy, for any citrus cultivar or storm event. However, throughfall varied significantly among the four cardinal directions under the canopy of all three citrus cultivars and was highly related to the wind direction. Among the three citrus cultivars evaluated in this study, throughfall, stem flow, and canopy interception accounted for 89.5% to 92.7%, 0.5% to 4.7%, and 5.8% to 9.3% of the incident rainfall, respectively.

scholarly journals Vibration Monitoring of the Mechanical Harvesting of Citrus to Improve Fruit Detachment Efficiency

Sensors ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 1760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Castro-Garcia ◽  
Aragon-Rodriguez ◽  
Sola-Guirado ◽  
Serrano ◽  
Soria-Olivas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Field Tests ◽  
Fruit Production ◽  
Vibration Monitoring ◽  
Citrus Tree ◽  
Triaxial Accelerometer ◽  
Tree Canopies ◽  
Vibration Process ◽  
Harvesting Process ◽  
Vibration Time ◽  
Complete Process

The introduction of a mechanical harvesting process for oranges can contribute to enhancing farm profitability and reducing labour dependency. The objective of this work is to determine the spread of the vibration in citrus tree canopies to establish recommendations to reach high values of fruit detachment efficiency and eliminate the need for subsequent hand-harvesting processes. Field tests were carried out with a lateral tractor-drawn canopy shaker on four commercial plots of sweet oranges. Canopy vibration during the harvesting process was measured with a set of triaxial accelerometer sensors with a datalogger placed on 90 bearing branches. Monitoring of the vibration process, fruit production, and branch properties were analysed. The improvement of fruit detachment efficiency was possible if both the hedge tree and the machinery were mutually adjusted. The hedge should be trained to facilitate access of the rods and to encourage external fructification since the internal canopy branches showed 43% of the acceleration vibration level of the external branches. The machine should be adjusted to vibrate the branches at a vibration time of at least 5.8 s, after the interaction of the rod with the branch, together with a root mean square acceleration value of 23.9 m/s2 to a complete process of fruit detachment.

scholarly journals Management of Citrus Tree Canopies for Fresh-Fruit Production

EDIS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Krajewski ◽  
Arnold Schumann ◽  
Tim Ebert ◽  
Chris Oswalt ◽  
Rhuanito Ferrarezi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fruit Production ◽  
Fruit Yield ◽  
Fresh Fruit ◽  
Citrus Tree ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Tree Canopies ◽  
Yield Quality ◽  
High Production ◽  
Soil And Water ◽  
Canopy Management

Canopy management is a useful tool to induce precocity and maintain high production of optimum-sized, high-quality fruit. The aim of this new 8-page publication of the UF/IFAS Department of Soil and Water Sciences is to provide growers with practical tools with which to manage their trees for maximum fresh-fruit yield, quality, and profitability. Written by Andrew Krajewski, Arnold Schumann, Tim Ebert, Chris Oswalt, Rhuanito S. Ferrarezi, and Laura Waldo.https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss698

Air-tower sprayers increase spray application efficiency in mature citrus trees

1998 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 871 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. P. Cunningham ◽  
J. Harden
Keyword(s):  
Urban Areas ◽  
Tree Canopy ◽  
Citrus Tree ◽  
Air Contamination ◽  
Run Off ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
Tree Canopies ◽  
Citrus Leaves ◽  
Full Height ◽  
Citrus Trees

Summary. Conventional pesticide spraying in citrus crops with low-profile sprayers results in pest management problems because of the poor distribution of pesticide throughout the tree. Pesticide losses, particularly drift, are a concern with this type of sprayer especially in orchards situated in or near urban areas. The spray deposit on citrus leaves and fruit and off-target losses (canopy run-off and drift) were determined for air-assisted low-profile sprayers and air-assisted sprayers fitted with tower air conveyors (air-towers). The air-tower sprayers produced even distribution of leaf spray deposits through the full height of the tree canopy while the low-profile sprayers produced decreasing leaf spray deposits with increasing height in the trees. The Metters tower sprayer and Cropliner low-profile sprayer resulted in increasing deposits from the 0˚ axis through to the 90˚ axis to sprayer travel while the Barlow tower sprayer and the Hardi low-profile sprayer produced a more even distribution of deposits through the axes to sprayer travel. Fruit deposits were not significantly different between sprayers. The Barlow tower sprayer produced significantly less canopy spray run-off compared with the low-profile sprayers. The Barlow tower sprayer resulted in a significant reduction in spray drift in the above tree zone compared with the Hardi low-profile sprayer. Better distribution of pesticides in citrus tree canopies will improve pest control especially in the top sections of the tree as this is where the greatest increase in pesticide deposit is achieved with air-tower sprayers. Both ground and air contamination from pesticides can also be reduced by using sprayers fitted with air-tower conveyors designed to produce even airflows for the full height of the citrus trees being sprayed.

Spiders (Aranei) of tree canopies in Polish pine forests

1994 ◽  
Vol 36 (19-25) ◽  
pp. 487-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Sterzyńska ◽  
A. Ślepowroński
Keyword(s):  
Pine Forests ◽  
Tree Canopies

Effects of Multiple Photon Scattering in Deciduous Tree Canopies

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Greiner ◽  
Bradley D. Duncan ◽  
Matthew P. Dierking
Keyword(s):  
Deciduous Tree ◽  
Photon Scattering ◽  
Tree Canopies

Spray Volume, Canopy Density, and Other Factors Involved in Thinner Efficacy

HortScience ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 553d-553
Author(s):  
C.R. Unrath
Keyword(s):  
Tree Height ◽  
Tree Canopy ◽  
Tree Size ◽  
Water Volume ◽  
Canopy Density ◽  
The North ◽  
Run Off ◽  
Tree Canopies ◽  
Average Water ◽  
Water Volumes

Historically, most airblast chemical applications to apple orchards used a single “average” water volume, resulting in variability of coverage with tree size and also the greatest variable in chemical thinning. This coverage variability can be eliminated by properly quantifying the tree canopy, as tree row volume (TRV), and relating that volume to airblast water rate for adequate coverge. Maximum typical tree height, cross-row limb spread, and between-row spacing are used to quantify the TRV. Further refinement is achieved by adjusting the water volume for tree canopy density. The North Carolina TRV model allows a density adjustment from 0.7 gal/1000 ft3 of TRV for young, very open tree canopies to 1.0 gal/1000 ft3 of TRV for large, thick tree canopies to deliver a full dilute application for maximum water application (to the point of run-off). Most dilute pesticide applications use 70% of full dilute to approach the point of drip (pesticide dilute) to not waste chemicals and reduce non-target environmental exposure. From the “chemical load” (i.e., lb/acre) calculated for the pesticide dilute application, the proper chemical load for lower (concentrate) water volumes can be accurately determined. Another significant source of variability is thinner application response is spray distribution to various areas of the tree. This variability is related to tree configuration, light, levels, fruit set, and natural thinning vs. the need for chemical thinning. Required water delivery patterns are a function of tree size, form, spacing, and density, as well as sprayer design (no. of nozzles and fan size). The TRV model, density adjustments, and nozzle patterns to effectively hit the target for uniform crop load will be addressed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document