Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | ISSN 1981-3163 1 Luiz Cláudio GARCIA1 , Anderson FARIAS1 , Mariana Pankio DUTRA1 , Rodrigo Pereira CARNEIRO1 , Jaime Alberti GOMES1 , Henrique MENARIM2 1 Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Engineering, Postgraduate in Agronomy, State University of Ponta Grossa, Campus U varanas, Ponta Grossa, Paraná, Brazil. 2 Seeds Menarim, Castro, Paraná, Brazil. Corresponding author: Luiz Cláudio Garcia lcgarcia@uepg.br How to cite: GARCIA, L.C., et al. Spray volumes for agrochemicals applied to soybean and wheat crops. Bioscience Journal. 2022, 38, e38076. https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 Abstract The question of the spray volume for applying agrochemicals to plants has and still demands studies to continuously search for guiding parameters for technicians due to the several variables involving application technology. This experiment aimed to determine the best spray volume for applying pesticides with a boom sprayer to soybean (Glycine max) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) crops. The experiment had a completely randomized blocks design with five treatments and five replications. In soybean (crop year 2011/12), the treatments were the control (no pesticide application) and spray volume applications of 50, 100, 150, and 200 L ha-1. For wheat (crop year 2012), the treatments were the control and spray volumes of 75, 100, 125, and 150 L ha-1. The variables analyzed were the yield components. The study concluded the need for applying foliar fertilizers and performing the chemical control of diseases and pests in soybean and wheat crops. The spray volumes of 50 L ha-1 for soybeans and 75 L ha-1 for wheat were satisfactory for spraying agrochemicals with a ground bar sprayer on plants. Keywords: Boom sprayer. Glycine max. Pesticide application technology. Triticum aestivum. Yield. 1. Introduction Application technology is defined as using all scientific knowledge to provide the correct placement of the biologically active product on the target, in the required quantity, economically, and with minimum environmental contamination (Matuo 1990). Thus, the spray volume used will always be a consequence of effective application and never a pre-established condition (Ramos et al. 2007), as it depends on factors such as the desired target, the type of spray nozzles, climatic conditions, plant characteristics, and the type of product, according to the mode of action of the products, translocation of agrochemicals in plants, climate, and the application method (Garcia et al. 2002; Matthews 2008; Swoboda and Pedersen 2009; Antuniassi and Boller 2011; Garcia et al. 2020). In soybean, Cunha et al. (2006) did not find significant differences in the control of Asian rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi) and crop productivity with spray volumes of 115 and 160 L ha-1. When assessing spray solution deposition according to flow, Boschini et al. (2008) concluded that, for higher depositions, agrochemicals with spray volumes of 200 or 300 L ha-1 should be applied. When determining the spray SPRAY VOLUMES FOR AGROCHEMICALS APPLIED TO SOYBEAN AND WHEAT CROPS https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6378-2829 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1401-2611 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2200-2942 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6924-8421 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5973-5659 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0001-9372 Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 2 Spray volumes for agrochemicals applied to soybean and wheat crops volume for controlling Piezodorus guildinii, Maziero et al. (2009) showed increased efficiency of pest control with the increase in spray volume up to 150 L ha-1. In the wheat crop, Cooke et al. (1989) did not find significant differences in the redistribution of leaf surface deposits of pesticides and disease control caused by Pseudocercosporella herpotrichoides with spray volumes from 15 to 200 L ha-1. When controlling wheat diseases by applying fungicides to the plants, Oliveira et al. (2015) sprayed syrup volumes from 143 to 429 L ha-1, not verifying differences in productivity between the treatments. However, when testing techniques for applying fungicide to control gibberella (Gibberella zeae), Panisson et al. (2003) recommend a spray volume of 200 L ha-1. Panisson et al. (2004) concluded that increasing the spray volume from 200 to 400 L ha-1 is an effective measure to increase solution deposition in wheat anthers. The question of the spray volume for applying agrochemicals to plants has and still demands studies to continuously search for guiding parameters for technicians due to the several variables involving application technology. Thus, this study aimed to determine the best spray volume for applying agrochemicals (foliar fertilizers, fungicides, and insecticides) with a ground bar sprayer to soybean and wheat plants. 2. Material and Methods The experiment had a randomized blocks design with five replications. The analyses were performed in plots of 10 m2 (1.0-m long by 10.0-m wide) of useful area for evaluation. In soybean, the treatments consisted of control (without applying agrochemicals, foliar fertilizers, fungicides, and insecticides) and spray volumes of 50, 100, 150, and 200 L ha-1. The wheat crop received the control treatment and spray volumes of 75, 100, 125, and 150 L ha-1. Spray volumes were based on the average of the upper limit recommended by technicians from the region of Campos Gerais, PR, Brazil. The sprayer used was the Jacto™ BK-3024 drag model, a 24-m long boom sprayer equipped with air assistance and ADI™ 110-02 spray tips spaced 0.5 meters apart. Spraying has always been performed with relative humidity above 50%, a temperature below 30 degrees Celsius, and wind speed between 3.0 and 10.0 km h-1. Climatic conditions were monitored with the Kestrel 3000™ thermo-hygrometer. The recorded values were used in the Hartley tests to verify the homoscedasticity of variations, and the Shapiro-Wilk test was used to examine data normality. These measured variables were analyzed with Fisher-Snedecor and Dunnett tests to verify differences, with a confidence level higher than 95% probability. Polynomial regression was used to determine the best spray volume for soybean and wheat plants, suppressing statistical analysis or the control treatment to define the curve only with tests using agrochemical applications. Soybean crop The experiment was performed at the Lagoa Grande Farm located in Carambeí, PR, Brazil, 2011/12 harvest, temperate climate, and average annual precipitation between 1,600 and 1,800 mm (Iapar 2014). The property is 980 m above sea level, cultivated with no-till, and the soil of the experimental area is classified as dystrophic Red Latosol (Embrapa 2006). The volumes of 50, 100, 150, and 200 L ha-1 were obtained with variations in pressure (170, 260, 390, and 320 kPa) and working speed (14.6, 8.9, 7.3, and 5.0 km h-1). The Nidera™ 5909 RR cultivar was sown on November 3, 2011, with spacings of 0.45 meters between rows, obtaining 250 thousand plants by ha-1 (evaluation performed 20 days after emergence). Fertilization and crop treatments followed the technical planning of the agronomist responsible for the area. The diseases that stood out were leaf blight (Cercospora kikuchii), soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi), downy mildew (Peronospora manshurica), and powdery mildew (Microsphaera diffusa). The pests evidenced in crop management were soybean caterpillar (Anticarsia gemmatalis), soybean looper (Chrysodeixis includens), brown stinkbug (Euschistus heros), and small green bug (Piezodorus guildinii). The foliar nutritional deficiencies identified were Manganese (Mn), Cobalt (Co), and Molybdenum (Mo). Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 3 GARCIA, L.C., et al. Three applications of agrochemicals were made to plants (adjuvants, foliar fertilizers, fungicides, and insecticides). The applications started on January 17, 2012 (phenological stage of soybean V6 - Ritchie et al. 1982) with 20-day intervals (phenological stages R1 and R3). The analyzed variables were final population, pods per plant, grains per pod, thousand-grain mass, and productivity. The evaluations were performed manually. To determine the thousand-grain mass and productivity, 1.0% impurities were considered, and humidity was corrected to 14.0%, according to the standardization (Codapar 2014). Moisture was obtained with a Gehaka™ 6,600 moisture meter. The thousand-grain mass was defined with a Gehaka™ BK 6,000 digital scale. Wheat crop The experiment was performed at the Vó Anna Farm, 2012 harvest, located in Ventania, PR, Brazil, with coordinates of 24°18'50.4s south latitude and 50°14'2.1s west longitude, 960 meters of altitude, in a no-tillage system under straw, on a dystrophic Red-Red Latosol (Embrapa, 2006). The volumes of 75, 100, 125, and 150 L ha-1 deviated with variations in pressure (170, 260, 390, and 310 kPa) and working speed (9.5, 8.9, 8.7, and 6.5 km h-1). The Biotrigo Tbio Tibagi™ crop was sown on July 5, 2012, with spacings of 0.17 meters between rows, resulting in 2.4 million plants per ha-1 (evaluation performed 20 days after emergence). Fertilization and crop treatments followed the technical planning of the agronomist responsible for the area. The diseases that occurred were leaf rust (Puccinia triticina), leaf spots (Bipolaris sorokiniana and Drechslera tritici-repentis), and powdery mildew (Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici). The pests that occurred in crop management were aphids (Metopolophium dirhodum and Schizaphis graminum), wheat armyworm (Pseudaletia sequax), and green-bellied bug (Dichelops furcatus). Three agrochemical sprayings were performed on the plants (adjuvants, foliar fertilizers, fungicides, and insecticides) on August 20 and September 4 and 24, 2012 (phenological stages 08, 10.2, and 10.4 - Large 1954). The recommended foliar fertilizers aim to supply the deficiencies of Calcium (Ca) and Magnesium (Mg). The analyzed variables were ears per ha-1, grains per ear, thousand-grain mass, and productivity. All assessments were performed manually. To determine the thousand-grain mass and productivity, 1.0% of impurities and the corrected moisture to 13.0% were considered according to the standardization (Codapar 2014). Moisture was obtained with a Gehaka™ 6,600 moisture meter. The thousand-grain mass was defined with a Gehaka™ BK 6,000 digital scale. 3. Results There was no need to transform the data to apply the Fisher and Snedecor test because the Hartley tests to verify homoscedasticity of variances and the Shapiro-Wilk test to examine data normality had not been proven. There was no significant difference for blocks (Tables 1 and 2, and Figures 1 and 2), highlighting the homogeneity of the area in which the experiment was installed. Table 1. Soybean yield components (Glycine max), NIDEIRA 5909 RR™ cultivar, related to increasing spray volumes with agrochemicals reported in the plants, using a ground bar sprayer, Lagoa Grande Farm, 2011/12 harvest, Carambeí (Paraná) Brazil. Spray volumes (L ha-1) Final population (plants ha-1) Pods per plant Grains per pod Thousand-grain mass (g) Productivity (kg ha-1) zero 206,500 43 2.3 151 3,077 50 235,250 *1 43 ns2 2.2 ns 174 * 3,918 * 100 235,500 * 45 ns 2.2 ns 176 * 4,137 * 150 235,750 * 44 ns 2.3 ns 176 * 4,141 * 200 234,250 * 45 ns 2.3 ns 177 * 4,307 * Blocks ns3 ns ns ns ns Coefficient of variation (%) 1.5 7.3 9.7 4.2 11.2 1 - Significant compared to the control treatment (zero L ha-1) by the Dunnett test (P < 0.05); 2 - Not significant compared to the control treatment (zero L ha-1) by the Dunnett test (P > 0.05); 3 - Not significant by the Fisher-Snedecor F-test (P > 0.05). Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 4 Spray volumes for agrochemicals applied to soybean and wheat crops Figure 1. Soybean yield components (Glycine max), NIDEIRA 5909 RR™ cultivar, related to increasing spray volumes with agrochemicals reported in the plants, using a ground bar sprayer, Lagoa Grande Farm, 2011/12 harvest, (Paraná) Brazil (not significant for blocks and polynomial regression, P > 0.05). Table 2. Wheat yield components (Triticum aestivum), BIOTRIGO TBIO Tibagi™ cultivar, related to increasing spray volumes with agrochemicals reported in the plants, using a ground bar sprayer, Vó Anna Farm, 2012 harvest, Ventania (Paraná) Brazil. Spray volumes (L ha-1) Final population (ear ha-1) Grains per ear Thousand-grain mass (g) Productivity (kg ha-1) zero 3,027,175 28 25 2,111 75 3,396,425 *1 30 ns2 38 * 3,842 * 100 3,490,826 * 29 ns 37 * 3,762 * 125 3,423,169 * 30 ns 38 * 3,917 * 150 3,546,691 * 29 ns 37 * 3,866 * Blocks ns3 ns ns ns Coefficient of variation (%) 5.4 9.5 5.5 12.1 1 - Significant compared to the control treatment (zero L ha-1) by the Dunnett test (P < 0.05); 2 - Not significant compared to the control treatment (zero L ha-1) by the Dunnett test (P > 0.05); 3 - Not significant by the Fisher-Snedecor F-test (P > 0.05). 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 50 100 150 200 gr ã o s p o r va ge m volume de calda (L ha-1) 200000 210000 220000 230000 240000 250000 50 100 150 200 p o p u la çã o fi n a l (p la n ta s h a -1 ) volume de calda (L ha-1) 35 40 45 50 55 50 100 150 200 va ge n s p o r p la n ta volume de calda (L ha-1) 50 100 150 200 250 50 100 150 200m a ss sa d e m il gr ã o s (g ) volume de calda (L ha-1) 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 50 100 150 200 p ro d u ti vi d a d e (k g h a- 1 ) volume de calda (L ha-1) F in a l p o p u la ti o n s (p la n ts h a -1 ) Spray volumes (L ha-1) Spray volumes (L ha-1) Spray volumes (L ha-1) Spray volumes (L ha-1) P o d s p e r p la n t G ra in p e r p o d T h o u sa n d -g ra in m a ss ( g ) Spray volumes (L ha-1) P ro d u ct iv it y ( k g h a -1 ) Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 5 GARCIA, L.C., et al. Figure 2. Wheat yield components (Triticum aestivum), BIOTRIGO TBIO Tibagi™ cultivar, related to increasing spray volumes with agrochemicals reported in the plants, by a terrestrial bar sprayer, Vó Anna Farm, 2012 harvest, Ventania (Paraná) Brazil (not significant for blocks and polynomial regression, P > 0.05). When comparing the averages of yield components of soybean and wheat crops, there was a significant difference between the control and the other treatments for the final population, thousand-grain mass, and productivity of the variables. This shows the significance of agrochemicals sprayed on plants. 2.000.000 2.500.000 3.000.000 3.500.000 4.000.000 75 100 125 150 e sp ig a s h a -1 volume de calda (L ha-1) 20 25 30 35 40 75 100 125 150 gr ã o s p o r e sp ig a volume de calda (L ha-1) 30 35 40 45 50 75 100 125 150 m a ss a d e m il gr ã o s (g ) volume de calda (L ha-1) 30 35 40 45 50 75 100 125 150 p ro d u ti vi d a d e (k g h a -1 ) volume de calda (L ha-1) Spray volumes (L ha-1) Spray volumes (L ha-1) P ro d u ct iv it y ( k g h a -1 ) Spray volumes (L ha-1) T h o u sa n d -g ra in m a ss ( g ) G ra in s p e r e a r F in a l p o p u la ti o n s (t h o u sa n d e a rs h a -1 ) Spray volumes (L ha-1) Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 6 Spray volumes for agrochemicals applied to soybean and wheat crops The polynomial regressions with yield components of the soybean crop in the treatments that received agrochemicals were not relevant for all the variables analyzed. Thus, the spray volume of 50 L ha-1 was sufficient for foliar fertilization and disease and pest control. In wheat, the polynomial regressions with yield components of the treatments that received agrochemicals were also not relevant for all the variables analyzed. The spray volume of 75 L ha-1 was sufficient for foliar fertilization and disease and pest control. 4. Discussion The result of the experiment highlighted lower values than those tested by Cunha et al. (2006) and emphasized by Boschini et al. (2008) and Maziero et al. (2009). The data analysis confirms the statements by Cooke et al. (1989) and Oliveira et al. (2015) and contradicts the recommendations of Panisson et al. (2003) and Panisson et al. (2004). As the regressions were not significant, it was impossible to determine the adequate volume of agrochemical application to soybean and wheat crops. This corroborated the allegation by Ramos et al. (2007) that spray volume will always be a consequence of effective application and never a pre-established condition, as the function of the solvent is to contribute to the dilution and facilitate the distribution of the active ingredient. Considering the claims by Antuniassi and Boller 2011; Garcia et al. 2002; Garcia et al. 2020; Matthews 2008; Matuo 1990; Ramos et al. 2007; and Swoboda and Pedersen 2009, experiments should be performed with agrochemical applications using ground bar sprayers, below 50 L ha-1 for soybeans and 75 L ha-1 for wheat. Therefore, there were significant differences between treatments for the variables analyzed, which were not discerned with the volumes investigated in this experiment. 5. Conclusions Foliar fertilization and disease and pest control are recommended for soybean and wheat crops. The spray volumes of 50 L ha-1 for soybeans and 75 L ha-1 for wheat were satisfactory for spraying agrochemicals with a ground bar sprayer on plants. Authors' Contributions: GARCIA, L.C.: conception and design; FARIAS, A.: drafting the article; DUTRA, M.P.: acquisition of data; CARNEIRO, R.P.: conducted experiments; GOMES, J.A.: analysis and interpretation of data; MENARIM, H.: data collect. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Ethics Approval: Not applicable. Acknowledgments: Not applicable. References ANTUNIASSI, U.R. and BOLLER, W. Tecnologia de aplicação para culturas anuais. Botucatu: FEPAF, 2011. BOSCHINI, L., et al. Avaliação da deposição da calda de pulverização em função da vazão e do tipo de bico hidráulico na cultu ra da soja. Acta Scientiarum, 2008, 30(2), 171-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v30i2.1789 CODAPAR - Companhia de Desenvolvimento Agropecuário do Paraná. Principais produtos vegetais padronizados, classificados pela Codapar, 2014. Available in: http://www.codapar.pr.gov.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=78 COOKE, B.K., et al. Redistribution of foliar surface deposits of prochloraz by simulated rainfall and the control of eyespot disease of winter wheat. Crop Protection, 1989, 8(5), 372-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-2194(89)90058-6 CUNHA, J.P.A.R., REIS, E.F. and SANTOS, R.O. Controle químico da ferrugem asiática da soja em função de ponta de pulverização e de volume de calda. Ciência Rural, 2006, 36(5), 1360-1366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782006000500003 EMBRAPA - EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE PESQUISA AGROPECUÁRIA. Sistema brasileiro de classificação de solos. 2.ed. Rio de Janeiro: EMBRAPA, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v30i2.1789 http://www.codapar.pr.gov.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=78 https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-2194(89)90058-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782006000500003 Bioscience Journal | 2022 | vol. 38, e38076 | https://doi.org/10.14393/BJ-v38n0a2022-61217 7 GARCIA, L.C., et al. GARCIA, L.C., JUSTINO, A. and RAMOS, H.H. Análise da pulverização de um fungicida na cultura do feijão, em função do tipo de ponta e do volume aplicado. Bragantia, 2002, 61(3), 291-295. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0006-87052002000300011 GARCIA, L.C. et al. Efficiency of soybean crop fungicide spray applications at timed intervals based on a calendar schedule versus agrometeorological data. Crop Protection, 2020, 132(1), 105128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105128 IAPAR - Instituto Agronômico do Paraná. Classificação climática, 2014. Available in: http://www.iapar.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=863 LARGE, E.C. Growth stages in cereals. Illustration of the feekes scale. Plant Pathology, 1954, 3(4), 128-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 3059.1954.tb00716.x MATTHEWS, G.A. Developments in application technology. Environmentalist, 2008, 28, 19-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-007-9039-2 MATUO, T. Técnicas de aplicação de defensivos agrícolas. Jaboticabal: FUNEP, 1990. MAZIERO, H., et al. Volume de calda e inseticidas no controle de Piezodorus guildinii (Westwood) na cultura da soja. Ciencia Rural. 2009, 39(5), 1307-1312. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782009000500001 OLIVEIRA, G.M., et al. Dose e taxa de aplicação de fungicida no controle da ferrugem da folha (Puccinia triticina) e da mancha amarela (Pyrenophora tritici repentis) do trigo. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, 2015, 36(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2015v36n1p17 PANISSON, E. et al. Técnicas de aplicação de fungicida em trigo para o controle de giberela (Gibberella zeae). Ciência Rural. 2003, 33(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782003000100003 PANISSON, E., BOLLER, W. and REIS, E.M. Avaliação da deposição de calda em anteras de trigo, para o estudo do controle químico de giberela (Gibberella zeae). Engenharia Agrícola, 2004, 24(1), 111-120,. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162004000100013 RAMOS, H.H., et al. Características da pulverização em citros em função do volume de calda aplicado com turbopulverizador. Engenharia Agrícola, 2007, 27, 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162007000200009 RITCHIE, S., HANWAY, J. J. and THOMPSON, H. E. How a soybean plant develops. Ames, Yowa: Yowa State University of Science and Technology, Cooperative Extension, 1982. SWOBODA, C. and PEDERSEN, P. Effect of fungicide on soybean growth and yield. Agronomy Journal, 2009, 101(2), 352-356. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2008.0150 Received: 21 May 2021 | Accepted: 21 December 2021 | Published: 9 September 2022 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0006-87052002000300011 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105128 http://www.iapar.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=863%20 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.1954.tb00716.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.1954.tb00716.x https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-007-9039-2 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782009000500001 https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2015v36n1p17 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782003000100003 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162004000100013 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162007000200009 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2008.0150