Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Evaluation of equipment and methods for herbicide application in coffee cultivation Evaluación de equipos y métodos de aplicación de herbicidas en el cultivo del café

How to Cite
Salazar-Gutiérrez, L., Cañón, M., Franco, D. A., & Trejos Pinzón, J. F. (2024). Evaluation of equipment and methods for herbicide application in coffee cultivation. Cenicafe Journal, 75(1), e75106. https://doi.org/10.38141/10778/75106

Dimensions
PlumX

Keywords
Boquillas

fitotoxicidad

equipos de aspersión

manejo integrado de arvenses

tecnologías de aplicación

café

Cenicafé

Nozzles

phytotoxicity

spraying equipment

integrated weed management

application technologies

coffee

Cenicafé

Bicos

fitotoxicidade

equipamento de pulverização

manejo integrado de ervas daninhas

tecnologias de aplicação

café

Sectión
Articles
Luis Salazar-Gutiérrez
Myriam Cañón
Daniel Antonio Franco
Jhon Félix Trejos Pinzón

Summary

To evaluate herbicide application techniques on coffee, a study was carried out in two phases: 1. Weed control efficacy was evaluated by weed coverage 21, 35 and 60 days after application; 2. Application efficiency, expressed in time and volume applied, was evaluated. Glyphosate was used in one-year-old coffee crops. Stage 1 was conducted at the Naranjal-Caldas and Paraguaicito-Quindío Experiment Stations, evaluating different equipment: Electric Centrifugal Sprayer (EPC), Electric Pump Sprayer (EBE), and Manual Pump Sprayer (EBM), the latter with pressure regulator (CFV) of 0.145 and 0.099 MPa, AI nozzle, and without regulator (control), under a randomized complete block design with 12 repetitions. Stage 2 was conducted at the Naranjal and La Trinidad- Tolima Stations, evaluating: 1=EPC, 2=EBE, 3=EBM with CFV of 0.145 MPa, 4=weed selector equipment (ESA) with wheels, 5=ESA, and 6=EBM without regulator (control), with 12 repetitions in 0.2 ha plots. In stage 1, there were no differences in weed coverage. The application volume was higher with AI nozzle (389 and 280 L ha-1) compared to the control that used between 300 and 200 L ha-1. In stage 2, the application time was similar; the use of CFV at 0.145 MPa was consistent with calibration, while both ESA presented application volumes of 15 to 20 L ha-1 and better weed coverage.

Luis Salazar-Gutiérrez, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

Investigador Científico II. Disciplina de Suelos, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café, Cenicafé


Myriam Cañón, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

Asistente de Investigación. Disciplina de Experimentación, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café, Cenicafé. 


Daniel Antonio Franco, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

Asistente de Investigación. Disciplina de Experimentación, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café, Cenicafé. 


Jhon Félix Trejos Pinzón, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café

Asistente de Investigación. Disciplina de Experimentación, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café, Cenicafé


References (See)

  1. Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café. (2022). Informe Anual Cenicafé 2022. https://doi.org/10.38141/10783/2022
  2. Castanheira, D. T., Alecrim, A. de O., Voltolini, G. B., Rezende, T. T., Netto, P. M., & Guimarães, R. J. (2019). Growth, anatomy and physiology of coffee plants intoxicated by the herbicide glyphosate. Coffee Science, 14(1), 76–82. https://coffeescience.ufla.br/index.php/Coffeescience/article/view/1530
  3. Combellack, J. H., Westen, N. M., & Richardson, R. G. (1996). A comparison of the drift potential of a novel twin fluid nozzle with conventional low volume flat fan nozzles when using a range of adjuvants. Crop Protection, 15(2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-2194(95)00089-5
  4. Dale, J. E. (1979). A Non-Mechanical System of Herbicide Application with a Rope Wick. PANS, 25(4), 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670877909414367
  5. De Cauwer, B., De Meuter, I., De Ryck, S., Dekeyser, D., Zwertvaegher, I., & Nuyttens, D. (2023). Performance of Drift-Reducing Nozzles in Controlling Small Weed Seedlings with Contact Herbicides. Agronomy, 13(5), 1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13051342
  6. Doll, J., & Fuentes, C. (1981). Factores que condicionan la eficacia de los herbicidas. (2a ed.). CIAT. https://repository.agrosavia.co/handle/20.500.12324/28803
  7. Fee, C.G., Siang, C.S., & Ramalingam, B. (1999). Evaluation of 3 types of knapsack equipment for spraying cypermethrin to control Adoretus compressus and Oryctes rhinoceros in immature palms. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Plant Protection in the Tropics. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
  8. Gómez, A., & Rivera, H. (1994). Aplicación segura de los herbicidas en el manejo integrado de malezas. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 205, 1–4. http://hdl.handle.net/10778/1064
  9. Guamán Ilvis, G. V., Andrade Yarpas, M. D., Carrera Oscullo, P. D., & Taco Ugsha, M. Á. (2022). Aplicación integral de herbicidas mediante selector en cultivos de cacao en Sucumbíos—Ecuador. Green World Journal, 5(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.53313/gwj520018
  10. Johnstone, D. R., Johnstone, K. A., & Andrews, M. (1977). Performance Characteristics of a Hand-carried Battery-operated Herbicide Sprayer. PANS, 23(3), 286–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670877709412453
  11. Matthews, G. A., Bateman, R., & Miller, P. (2014). Pesticide application methods (4a ed.). Wiley Blackwell.
  12. McAuliffe, D., & Gray, V. P. (2002, febrero 13-16). Application Technology Problems and Opportunities with Knapsack Sprayers including the CFValve or Constant flow Valve. En Fernández-Northcote E. N. (Ed.), Memorias del taller internacional Complementando la resistencia al tizón (Phytophthora infestans) (pp. 81–91). Centro Internacional de la Papa.
  13. Mohan, S. S., Ajay, A., & Kishore, A. (2021). Plant Protection Equipments. En S. V. S. Raju & K. R. Sharma (Eds.), Recent Trends in Insect Pest Management (pp. 101–122). AkiNik Publications. https://doi.org/10.22271/ed.book.1234
  14. Moreno Mena, J. M. (2011). Manual Mantenimiento y calibración de aspersoras manuales en pequeños cultivos de banano y plátano. Asociación de Bananeros de Colombia.
  15. Patrignani, A., & Ochsner, T. E. (2015). Canopeo: A Powerful New Tool for Measuring Fractional Green Canopy Cover. Agronomy Journal, 107(6), 2312–2320. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj15.0150
  16. Pfalzer, H. (2004). Spraying Equipment for Coffee. En Coffee: Growing, Processing, Sustainable Production (pp. 565–589). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527619627.ch21
  17. Pitty, A., Barrios, E. E., & Reconco, R. (2010). Boquillas de Abanico Plano de Amplio Espectro y por Aire Inducido en la Eficacia de Glifosato y Paraquat. Ceiba, 51(2), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.5377/ceiba.v51i2.1107
  18. Rivera, H. (2000). El selector de arvenses modificado. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 271, 1–4. http://hdl.handle.net/10778/4188
  19. Spraying Systems. (2004). Guía del Usuario de Boquillas de Pulverización [Manual]. TeeJet. http://www.aerocampo.com/pdf/guia-del-pulverizador.pdf
  20. Salazar-Gutiérrez, L. F. (2015). Uso del selector de arvenses en cultivos de café: Recomendaciones prácticas. Avances Técnicos Cenicafé, 462, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.38141/10779/0462
  21. Salazar-Gutiérrez, L., Hincapié, É., Menza, H. D., & Torres, F. A. (2020). Manejo de arvenses en los sistemas de producción de café. En Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café (Ed.), Manejo Agronómico de los Sistemas de Producción de Café (pp. 150–196). Cenicafé. https://doi.org/10.38141/10791/0002_5
  22. Salazar-Gutiérrez, L. (2021). Arvenses frecuentes en el cultivo del café en Colombia. Cenicafé. https://doi.org/10.38141/cenbook-0015
  23. Schrübbers, L. C., Valverde, B. E., Sørensen, J. C., & Cedergreen, N. (2014). Glyphosate spray drift in Coffea arabica – Sensitivity of coffee plants and possible use of shikimic acid as a biomarker for glyphosate exposure. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology, 115, 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2014.08.003
  24. Sinha, J. P., Singh, J. K., Kumar, A., & Agarwal, K. N. (2018). Development of solar powered knapsack sprayer. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 88(4), 590–595. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v88i4.79122
  25. Sinha, Y., Chauhan, J., Tandan, J., Patel, K., & Kaushik, S. P. (2019). Development of Multipurpose Battery Operated Wheel Sprayer. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(11), 1766–1772. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.811.207
  26. Westwood, J. H., Charudattan, R., Duke, S. O., Fennimore, S. A., Marrone, P., Slaughter, D. C., Swanton, C., & Zollinger, R. (2018). Weed Management in 2050: Perspectives on the Future of Weed Science. Weed Science, 66(3), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1017/wsc.2017.78

Most read articles by the same author(s)