Relative efficiencies of experimental and conventional foliar sprayers and assessment of optimal LWA spray volumes in trellised wine grapes.

BACKGROUND: Leaf wall area (LWA) has been proposed as an appropriate dose expression for field testing of plant protection products (PPPs) applied via foliar spray in trellised grapes. However, its efficiency could change depending on the characteristics of the crop or the pesticide application equipment (PAE). Herein, three spray technologies were evaluated. A traditional air-assisted tractor-mounted sprayer was compared with two portable knapsack sprayers: a backpack mistblower and a backpack hydraulic sprayer. Trials were conducted in trellised wine grapes at three selected crop stages (BBCH 55, 65, 75) covering the main period of canopy development. In each canopy stage, leaf deposition and coverage were sampled for each technology. The tractor-mounted sprayer was working at 200 L ha-1 of LWA spray volume for the earliest stage and 370 L ha-1 for the other two. Three higher volume rates were used for backpack sprayers up to 800 and 1250 L ha-1 for the mistblower and the hydraulic system, respectively. RESULTS: Optimal LWA spray volumes differed among application devices in terms of efficiency and uniformity of deposition on the canopy. The efficiency of each spray application also was conditioned by the spray volume. CONCLUSION: LWA is useful for defining optimal spray volumes in trellised grapes. However, both canopy density and spray technology should be considered to assist this process. Field testing of PPPs and subsequent label recommendations should consider the relative efficiencies of corresponding experimental and conventional spray technologies. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.

Development and validation of an instrument to assess adherence to occupational health protocols in dentistry.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was the creation and validation of an instrument to evaluate adherence to occupational health protocols used in dentistry that arise from official regulations and international recommendations on infection control, biosafety, and occupational health in dentistry. Additionally, in May 2017 the effectiveness of the instrument was documented within the dental care clinics in the postgraduate area. METHODS: The instrument was developed based on constructs of occupational health, infection control, and biosafety in dentistry, made up of 21 indicators of 5 dimensions called protocols. Using direct observation through 35 measurements during 1 week, adherence to occupational health protocols was evaluated in postgraduate residents within the clinical sections of endodontics/pediatric dentistry, periodontics, prosthodontics, and orthodontics. RESULTS: The instrument presents an index of 0.88 in Cronbach's alpha analysis. There is a 34.4% adherence within the postgraduate dental clinic to the proposed occupational health protocols. The protocol with the highest adherence at 41.1% was the personal protection protocol. The periodontics section had a 52.9% observance of the proposed protocols and had the highest adherence to occupational health protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed instrument is valid and reliable to evaluate adherence to the proposed occupational health protocols within dental care clinics. Dental clinics must be inspected and evaluated to ensure adherence to infection control, biosafety, and occupational health protocols within routine dental practice.