Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: 42nd Volume, Building the Future of Agrochemicals for 2030 and Beyond
Editor
Krista Turpin
Krista Turpin
Symposium Chair and STP Editor
1
Stepan Company
,
Winder, GA,
US
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN:
978-0-8031-7749-9
No. of Pages:
140
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
2024

The increased use of soybean cultivars genetically modified to be tolerant to dicamba is encouraging the development of new adjuvants for drift reduction. In this context, the objective of this work was to develop a test protocol for the approval of tank-mix drift-reduction adjuvants for dicamba in Brazil. A candidate adjuvant undergoes a set of droplet-spectrum tests in a paired manner with a standard adjuvant (Xtend Protect at 1.0% v/v). The protocol is based on comparing the new adjuvant with the standard, spraying them in a tank mixture with dicamba and glyphosate using a Teejet TTI 11003 spray nozzle at 5 bar. This solution contains XtendCam (480 g/L dicamba diglycolamine salt at 1.0 L/ha mixed with Roundup Transorb R [588 g/L glyphosate potassium salt at 2.0 L/ha]) at 100 L/ha. Because some of these adjuvants contain components sensitive to the pumping process, reducing its effectiveness, a sprayer equipped with a piston pump was used to simulate the pumping recirculation process, providing 5 bar to a nozzle inside a spray chamber, in which the droplet spectra generated over time was evaluated by a Sympatec Helos laser-diffraction particle analyzer. Four recirculation levels were considered: not pumped and 4, 10, and 16 cycles (one cycle means that the solution passed through the pump once). The volume median diameter (VMD) and the percentage by volume composed of droplets smaller than 150 μm (V150) data were used as parameters to compare the adjuvants through a statistical analysis. To be approved, an adjuvant must offer an VMD equal to or greater and V150 equal to or less than that generated by the standard adjuvant. Ten candidate adjuvants were evaluated, and only one was approved. The most frequent reason for failure was the generation of V150 higher than that generated by the Bayer adjuvant (Xtend Protect).

1.
Katzman
D.
,
Bohbot-Raviv
Y.
, and
Dubowski
Y.
, “
Does Polyacrylamide-Based Adjuvant Actually Reduce Primary Drift of Airborne Pesticides?
Science of the Total Environment
775
(
2021
): 145816,
2.
Miller
P. C.
H.
and
Butler Ellis
M.C.
, “
Effects of Formulation on Spray Nozzle Performance for Applications from Ground-Based Boom Sprayers
,”
Crop Protection
19
(
2000
): 609–615.
3.
Stainier
C.
,
Destain
B.S.
, and
Lebeau
F.
, “
Droplet Size Spectra and Drift Effect of Two Phenmedipham Formulation and Four Adjuvants Mixtures
,”
Crop Protection
25
(
2006
): 1238–1243.
4.
Alves
G.S.
,
Kruger
G.R.
, and
da Cunha
J. P. A.
R.
, “
Spray Drift and Droplet Spectrum from Dicamba Sprayed Alone or Mixed with Adjuvants Using Air-Induction Nozzles
,”
Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira
53
, no.
6
(
2018
): 693–702,
5.
Ferguson
J.C.
,
O'Donnell
C.C.
,
Chauhan
B.S.
,
Adkins
S.W.
,
Kruger
G.R.
,
Wang
R.
,
Ferreira
P. H.
U.
, and
Hewitt
A.J.
, “
Determining the Uniformity and Consistency of Droplet Size across Spray Drift Reducing Nozzles in a Wind Tunnel
,”
Crop Protection
76
(
2015
): 1–6.
6.
de Oliveira
R.B.
,
Antuniassi
U.R.
,
Mota
A. A.
B.
, and
Chechetto
R.G.
, “
Potential of Adjuvants to Reduce Drift in Agricultural Spraying
,”
Engenharia Agrícola
34
, no.
5
(
2013
): 986–992,
7.
McMullan
P.M.
, “
Utility Adjuvants
,”
Weed Technology
14
, no.
4
(
2000
): 792–797.
8.
Madureira
R.P.
,
Raetano
C.G.
, and
Cavalieri
J.D.
, “
Interação Pontas-Adjuvantes na Estimativa do Risco Potencial de Deriva de Pulverizações [Interaction Spray Nozzle-Adjuvant to Estimate Potential Risk of Spray Drift]
,”
Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental
19
, no.
2
(
2015
): 180–185,
9.
Carvalho
F.K.
,
Chechetto
R.G.
,
Mota
A. A.
B.
, and
Antuniassi
U.R.
, “
Characteristics and Challenges of Pesticide Spray Applications in Mato Grosso, Brazil
,”
Outlooks on Pest Management
28
, no.
1
(
2017
): 4–6.
10.
Antuniassi
U.R.
,
Mota
A. A.
B.
,
Chechetto
R.G.
,
Carvalho
F.K.
,
Ovejero
R. F.
L.
,
Barbosa
H.N.
,
Morris
M.M.
, and
de Araujo
V. C.
R.
, “
Droplet Spectrum Generated by Air Induction Nozzles Spraying Solutions Containing Adjuvants and a Tank Mixture of Glyphosate and Dicamba
,” in
Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: 40th Volume, Formulation, Application, and Adjuvant Innovation
, ed.
Elsik
C.
(
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
,
2020
), 36–45,
11.
Popescu
C.V.
,
Paraschivu
M.
,
Matei
G.
,
Sălceanu
C.
, and
Roşculete
E.
, “
Anti-Drift Technology: Market, Formulation, Applying Methods
,”
Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development
22
, no.
3
(
2022
): 581–588.
12.
Spanoghe
P.
,
De Schampheleire
M.
,
Van der Meeren
P.
, and
Steurbaut
W.
, “
Influence of Agricultural Adjuvants on Droplet Spectra
,”
Pest Management Science
63
(
2007
): 4–16.
13.
Lewis
R.W.
,
Evans
R.A.
,
Malic
N.
,
Saito
K.
, and
Cameron
N.R.
, “
Polymeric Drift Control Adjuvants for Agricultural Spraying
,”
Macromolecular Chemistry and Physics
217
(
2016
): 2223–2242,
14.
Gaillard
A.
,
Sijs
R.
, and
Bonn
D.
, “
What Determines the Drop Size in Sprays of Polymer Solutions?
Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics
305
(
2022
): 104813,
15.
Downer
R.A.
,
Wolf
T.M.
,
Chapple
A.C.
,
Hall
F.R.
, and
Hazen
J.L.
. “
Characterizing the Impact of Drift Management Adjuvants on the Dose Transfer Process
,” in
Proceedings of Fourth International Symposium on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals
, ed.
Gaskin
R.E.
(
Rotorua, New Zealand
:
New Zealand Forest Research Institute
,
1995
), 138–143.
16.
Antuniassi
U.R.
,
Mota
A. A.
B.
,
Chechetto
R.G.
,
Carvalho
F.K.
,
Ovejero
R. F.
L.
,
Barbosa
H.N.
,
Palhano
M.G.
, and
de Araujo
V. C.
R.
, “
Effect of Spray Solution Recirculation on the Sprayer, Caused by Pumping, on the Droplet Spectra Generated When Spraying Different Solutions
,” in
Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: 41st Volume, Formulation and Application Challenges of Diverse Agricultural Agrochemicals
, ed.
McMullan
P.
(
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
,
2022
), 11–23,
17.
Mohseni-Moghadam
M.
and
Doohan
D.
, “
Response of Bell Pepper and Broccoli to Simulated Drift Rates of 2,4-D and Dicamba
,”
Weed Technology
29
, no.
2
(
2015
): 226–232,
18.
Egan
J.F.
,
Barlow
K.M.
, and
Mortensen
D.A.
, “
A Meta-Analysis on the Effects of 2,4-D and Dicamba Drift on Soybean and Cotton
,”
Weed Science
62
, no.
1
(
2014
): 193–206,
19.
Rodrigues
A.O.
,
Campos
L.G.
,
Creech
C.F.
,
Fritz
B.K.
,
Antuniassi
U.R.
, and
Kruger
G.R.
, “
Influence of Nozzle Type, Speed, and Pressure on Droplet Size and Weed Control from Glyphosate, Dicamba, and Glyphosate Plus Dicamba
,” in
Pesticide Formulation and Delivery Systems: 38th Volume, Innovative Application, Formulation, and Adjuvant Technologies
, ed.
Fritz
B.K.
and
Butts
T.R.
(
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
,
2018
), 61–75,
20.
Egan
J.F.
,
Barlow
K.M.
, and
Mortensen
D.A.
, “
A Meta-Analysis on the Effects of 2,4-D and Dicamba Drift on Soybean and Cotton
,”
Weed Science
62
, no.
1
(
2014
): 193–206,
21.
McGinty
J.A.
,
Baumann
P.A.
,
Hoffmann
W.C.
, and
Fritz
B.K.
, “
Evaluation of the Spray Droplet Size Spectra of Drift-Reducing Agricultural Spray Nozzle Designs
,”
American Journal of Experimental Agriculture
11
, no.
3
(
2016
): 1–5.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal