- Posted by: Gale Perez
3rd Annual AgTech Field Day: Automation and Robotics
Tuesday, October 25, 2022
7:00 AM-11:30 AM
Yuma Agricultural Center
6425 W. 8th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364
==================================
CEUs approved: 3.0 CCA Precision Ag, 3.0 AZDA
CEUs pending approval: CA DPR
==================================
The University of Arizona will host an event at the Yuma Agricultural Center to showcase new agricultural technologies from over 15 companies. Special emphasis will be placed on demonstrating automated weeding technology and robotics with live weeding and thinning exhibitions in the field.
No need to pre-register. Just show up, learn and enjoy!
Click attachment link below for agenda.
2022 AgTech Field Demo Agenda 2022 10 12
- Author: Trina Kleist
- Posted by: Gale Perez
AI-trained machines slash labor costs
Experimental robots are reducing the costs of hand-weeding by learning the difference between weeds and lettuce. In addition, steam can clear the soil of fungi and spores that cause lettuce and spinach to wilt, reducing the need for chemical herbicides in the bargain, according to the latest research by Steve Fennimore and his lab at the UC Davis Department of Plant Sciences.
Fennimore, a professor of Cooperative Extension, presented his findings at a recent meeting of the California Leafy Greens Research Board, a body of the state Department of Food and Agriculture, which is helping to fund the work. It was attended by growers, association representatives and educators. This research would help them solve three big problems:
“What everyone is facing is higher costs, fewer personnel and greater difficulty using pesticides due to regulations,” said Fennimore, who also is a specialist with UC Cooperative Extension.
He and team members Richard Smith (UCCE Farm Advisor) and Nelly Guerra (UC Davis Fennimore Lab graduate student) evaluated automated weeders that were trained using artificial intelligence for use in lettuce fields. In tests last year near Salinas, Calif., smart weeders built by FarmWise Labs Inc. and Stout Industrial Technology, Inc., removed between 32 percent and nearly 100 percent of purslane and other weeds, Fennimore said. That reduced the need for hand-weeding between 13 and 62 percent. The weeders proved more cost-effective in fields where there were more weeds, Fennimore added.
The team also tested steam to clear soil of diseases that cause leafy greens to wilt and turn brown at the edges. During trials last summer in the Salinas Valley and in Yuma, Ariz., team members measured soil pathogens before and after steaming the rows where seed is planted. They found significant reduction in the fungus fusarium; in the tiny balls, or microsclerotia, that allow fungus to survive in the soil; and in pythium, a water-born mold. Steam treatments also boosted lettuce yield and reduced weeds. The team collaborated with Mark Siemens, of the University of Arizona.
Building on those successes, Fennimore and team this year are combining steam with standard cultivation to see if they can control weeds 100 percent and reduce hand-weeding to zero.
Media resource: TrinaKleist, tkleist@ucdavis.edu, (530) 754-6148 or (530) 601-6846
Original source: UC Davis Plant Sciences Dept. website
- Author: Kristin Burns
- Posted by: Gale Perez
The research represents a breakthrough in differentiating weeds from crops using machine vision systems. The technology could help California growers address challenges in managing weeds in in dozens of crops with limited herbicide options, and significant hand-weeding costs due to a growing labor shortage.
“California growers would benefit from improved weeding technology,” said Fennimore. “This technology certainly has commercialization potential by improving the accuracy, speed and reliability of weed/crop differentiation by weeding machines.”
Awarded by the European Society of Agricultural Engineers, the EurAgEng Outstanding Paper Award is only awarded once every two years and is selected out of all the papers published in Biosystems Engineering.
Contacts:
Steve Fennimore, Department of Plant Sciences, UC Davis, safennimore@ucdavis.edu
Related news:
- Automated weeders are attracting more interest
- ‘Dino,' a driverless weed-removing cultivator — Steve Fennimore testing it at UC Davis [VIDEO]
- Posted by: Gale Perez
The Western IPM Center's May 2017 newsletter just came out.
The IPM VIDEO OF THE MONTH is on a robotic herbicide sprayer that targets weeds.
- Author: Steven Fennimore
There are few new herbicide active ingredients in the pipeline now. In the 1970s and 1980s several new active ingredients were introduced every year. There were lots of jobs in industry and weed science was the place to be. I myself was with ICI/Zeneca from 1983 to 1994 in their R&D group. However, we are now in the middle of the second decade of the 21st century and new herbicide active ingredients might cost $300 million from discovery to launch. Needless to say there are not many new active ingredients in the pipeline. We have a few agricultural chemical companies that are screening for new active ingredients and perhaps the large scale of glyphosate resistant weed problems will stimulate some of the agricultural chemical companies to reinvigorate their screening process. I think it is easy to predict that because of the much higher R&D costs now, and the fact that there are fewer major Ag chem companies today looking for new chemistry, we will not see as much new herbicide chemistry in the future as in the past.
I urge the reader to take a good look at the agricultural chemical industry – most of the companies are large concerns with large product portfolios as the result of industry consolidation. They are dealing with complex regulatory systems, and are constantly concerned with product liability claims and maintaining profitability amid fierce competition. The agricultural chemical industry spends much of its time in a defensive stance, to protect market share and maintain profitability. The agricultural chemical industry is conservative and defensive by necessity today. I do not intend this as criticism of the agricultural chemical industry, but rather as an honest apparisal of the present state of affairs. In my opinion I do not look to the agricultural chemical industry as a source of breakthrough technology in the future, but rather a source of small incremental changes. Weed science needs to develop new technologies to deal with today's pressing weed problems, therefore it needs to look beyond the agricultural chemical industry towards more innovative sectors.
A notable exception in the agricultural chemical industry is Monsanto's CP4 gene and glyphosate tolerant crops. This was clearly innovative and disruptive technology that changed the industry forever. However, these crops are established now and much public and private effort is focused on defending this technology eg. descriptions of the biology and physiology of resistant weeds, the RNAi strategy to overcome glyphosate resistance. Should so much public sector funding and effort be spent on defending technology that is so troublesome? Are there better places to spend the people's money on research? I would argue that we should instead be employing RNAi strategies to develop novel weed control technologies such as stimulating or down regulating bud dormancy genes in perennial weeds. Many more opportunities for novel weed control technologies are probably waiting to be discovered in the realm of gene regulation. Why isn't there more research in this area?
I am very excited about the prospects for weed science, because there is a lot happening outside the agricultural chemical industry in the realm of engineering. Lettuce has traditionally been seeded and thinned to desired stands by a hand weeding crew with hoes. However, decreasing labor availability and increasing costs for lettuce hand thinning has resulted in need for labor saving technologies. Recently, commercial machines capable of robotic lettuce thinning have been developed to machine-thin lettuce to the desired final crop density, helping growers reduce the ~$40 million/year spent to hand thin the crop. These systems typically utilize machine vision technology to detect plant location and accurately direct herbicidal sprays, such as carfentrazone to thin crops to desired stands. The lettuce thinners typically treat 13% of the surface area of a lettuce field spraying an intermittent band 4 in wide with two plant lines per 40 inch bed wide raised bed. Within the length of the plant line, about 30% is left unsprayed to preserve the “saved” lettuce plants. The machine vision system has been tested for selective application of fungicides or insecticides to the saved plants with a second applicator system mounted on the lettuce thinner. In selective fungicide/insecticide application to the saved plants about 7% of the field is treated, compared to 100% for a broadcast application. The potential for machine-vision guidance systems to reduce pesticide dose applied to a field is just beginning to be appreciated.
All of weed science, public sector scientists, university administrators, agricultural chemical companies, major equipment manufacturers and interested entrepreneurs need to find a way to encourage, collaborate and finance startup companies. I would argue that there is a considerable amount of work that would be better done by startup companies. Examples of technology in development or recently developed by small companies are automatic lettuce thinners, robotic intra row cultivators, and mobile steam applicators. There are other small companies focused on biopesticides. If weed science is to balance offense (new weed control tools) with defense (preservation of existing weed control tools) then it must look beyond the traditional agricultural chemical industry for innovation and inspiration.