ArticlePloS one2025
Reducing energy and environmental footprint in agriculture: A study on drone spraying vs. conventional methods.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Agricultural practices significantly contribute to resource depletion and greenhouse gas emissions, underscoring the urgent need for environmental sustainability in this sector. This research assesses the energy efficiency and environmental impacts of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) technology compared to traditional spraying methods for wheat farms in Lorestan province, Iran. Experiments were conducted randomly with three repetitions, and data were analyzed using Simapro Impact 2002 + software, evaluating four primary categories and 15 midpoint indicators. The findings reveal that conventional spraying consumes 2.43 times more energy than drone spraying, with values of 365.26 MJ/ha and 146.84 MJ/ha, respectively. Additionally, the Global Warming Potential (GWP) for pesticide application is 41.284 kg CO2ha-1 for conventional methods and 14.485 kg CO2ha-1 for drones. Diesel emissions from tractors in traditional spraying represent the most significant environmental burden, while battery production and charging for drones contribute the largest share among various impacts. These results highlight the potential of UAV technology to enhance energy efficiency and reduce environmental harm, promoting sustainable agricultural practices. Nonetheless, battery limitations and the need for training remain challenges, and further studies are required to assess long-term impacts and scalability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.