Research finds targeted herbicide applications impact savings in crops, highlighting economic viability challenges.
Adopting targeted herbicide applications creates a dynamic problem for producers when considering the economic viability of See & Spray. Research was conducted to estimate how weed area, area sprayed, nozzle selection, sensitivity settings, crops, and regions influence potential herbicide savings with the John Deere See & Spray technology. From 2023 through 2024, producers covered over 510,000 ha and sprayed 212,000 ha with See & Spray technology in the United States. Ways to improve herbicide savings via See & Spray included using narrow nozzle angles rather than wider fan angles and adjusting the sensitivity setting to detect less weed area. Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) had a higher weed area than soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.; 16.6% vs. 5.1%]. Lower sensitivity settings tended to detect less weed area than higher settings (5.1% at the lowest setting, 9% at the medium setting, and 15.8% at the highest setting). On average, producers needed to spend >$27 ha −1 on herbicides in a single application with See & Spray Premium and >$39 ha −1 with See & Spray Ultimate to economically justify using the technology over a broadcast sprayer. Results indicate that differences in targeted herbicide cost requirements to break even were within $1–$2 ha −1 across regions and within a crop and technology. Ways to improve areas sprayed with targeted applications, factors to consider before application, and insights on ensuring producers’ profitability when adopting this technology are highlighted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Avent et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: