Trunk-boring pests are a significant threat to nursery crops. Despite the prominence of air-assisted sprayers, little research has been published about their coverage of tree trunks. We assessed spray characteristics of a Jacto A400/850 sprayer with the objective of determining the lowest spray rate that provided at or near 100% trunk coverage. Water sensitive paper (WSP) was wrapped around the trunks at two heights in an external row and the middle row of a 3-row block of red maples (Acer rubrum) to assess coverage. Assessments included 15 trials with application rates from 65 to 244 GPA at 1.5 and 2.5 mph tractor speeds. Travel Speed: Spraying at 108 GPA and 112 GPA achieved ≥95% coverage when traveling 1.5 mph with windspeeds less than 1.5 mph. Spraying 112 GPA at 1.5 mph provided 96% coverage on wraps at both heights despite a maximum (unsustained) windspeed of 3.9 mph. Increasing the travel speed to 2.5 mph reduced the spray rate to 68 GPA and coverage to 79%. Spraying 244 GPA when traveling 1.5 mph provided 95% coverage. Increasing the travel speed to 2.5 mph decreased the rate to 146 GPA, and yielded coverage of 97%. Spraying 146-224 GPA with 1.0 mph average windspeed or less yielded ≥95% coverage in all four trials. Wind Speed: When traveling 1.5 mph and spraying 108 GPA with an average windspeed of 1.3 mph, 96% coverage was achieved. Coverage was reduced to 88% when the average windspeed increased to 2.5 mph. Stakes: Trees were secured using 1-inch stakes installed 3 inches from the western face of each trunk. The western face of wraps at 9 of 12 locations had coverage equal to or greater than that of the total wrap in three trials with less than 1.3 mph average windspeed. Row: In 10 trials, there was ≤2.5% difference in coverage between external and middle rows. However, in 5 trials the middle row had greater coverage by at least 6%. Spraying 109-112 GPA can provide near complete trunk coverage under low wind speeds. Higher spray rates can overcome high wind and travel speed, but are undesirable given the potential for drift and waste. Neither presence of a stake nor middle row position equates to worse coverage. Trees in the middle row may benefit from being equidistant from the sprayer as it travels down both driveways. These results provide a framework for future trunk coverage tests utilizing variable-rate technology.
