2010
Waikerie Field Day
“Farming
flexibility – taking
opportunities”
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Mallee Sustainable Farming would like to thank the following sponsors for supporting the
Waikerie Field Day
MSF Corporate Sponsors
Gold Sponsor
Silver Sponsor
Bronze Sponsor
Waikerie Field Day sponsors
www.msfp.org.au
2
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Contents
Site plan
4
Program
5
Variable rate in the Mallee
6
Durum wheat varieties
8
Management of Rhizoctonia
10
Pasture and no-kill cropping
12
Enrich – better shrub based
grazing systems
15
Defining yield potential and
managing soil and season
17
Grain marketing and risk
management
21
Lice update and control
25
Alternative fertilizers – is it
muck, mystery or the new
horizon?
27
OUR VISION
Dynamic, profitable and sustainable farming
OUR MISSION
Provide excellence in research, development
and extension initiatives for the dryland
Mallee of South Eastern Australia
This publication has been prepared by Mallee Sustainable Farming (MSF) Inc. on the basis of information available at the date of
publication without any independent verification. Neither MSF Inc. or its editors, nor any contributor to this publication represents that
the contents of this publication are true or accurate or complete; nor does MSF Inc. accept any responsibility for errors or omissions in the
contents, however they may arise. Readers who act on this information do so at their own risk as soils and environment across the Mallee
can vary significantly and information presented in this publication should be viewed in consideration of local conditions.
www.msfp.org.au
3
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Site map
www.msfp.org.au
4
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Program
Time
8.45
9.30
10.00 – 10.50
11.00 – 11.50
12.00 – 1.00
1.00 – 1.50
2.00 – 2.50
Main tent
Tent 1
Tent 2
Tent 3
REGISTRATION
Welcome – Mike Mooney (Mallee Sustainable Farming)
Opening speaker – Tim Whetstone, MP, Member for Chaffey
Project report, SA MSF Committee update, Project awards
Locusts and
Alternate Fertilisers Water Use
Grain
other insects
and Soil Moisture
Efficiency and
Marketing
Ken Henry,
Meters
Rhizoctonia
Darren Arney,
SARDI
Greg Butler, SANTFA Management
Arney
Anthony
Consulting
Whitbread,
Gupta, CSIRO
Barry Mudge,
RSSA
Locusts and
Alternate Fertilisers Water Use
Grain
Marketing
other insects
and Soil Moisture
Efficiency and
Darren Arney,
Ken Henry,
Meters
Rhizoctonia
Arney
SARDI
Greg Butler, SANTFA Management
Consulting
Anthony
Whitbread,
Gupta, CSIRO
Barry Mudge,
RSSA
LUNCH – available at the Cooks Tent
Trials walk and demonstration
Farm Trials
Perennials/Evercrop Livestock
Crop Varieties
using PA
Jason Emms, SARDI Daniel
Tony Rathjen,
Peter Treloar
George King,
Schuppan,
University of
Michael Wells
MMLAP
RSSA
Adelaide
Amelia Bartlett, Colin
PIRSA
Edmondson,
LRPB
3.00 – 3.50
Farm Trials
using PA
Peter Treloar
Michael Wells
4.00 – 4.30
Field Day wrap up and evaluation – Mike Mooney
www.msfp.org.au
Perennials/Evercrop
Jason Emms, SARDI
George King,
MMLAP
Livestock
Daniel
Schuppan,
RSSA
Amelia Bartlett,
PIRSA
Crop Varieties
Tony Rathjen,
University of
Adelaide
Colin
Edmondson,
LRPB
5
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Variable rate in the Mallee
Peter Treloar, Vision Ag Network
Variable Rate (VR) allows farmers to maximise
their returns from various inputs, including
seed, fertiliser and chemicals, by targeting
inputs to areas of maximum potential.
Once farmers have variable rate capable
equipment the next step is to create
management zones. This is one of the biggest
parts of Precision Ag (PA) as it is a key driver
of profitability, the other being how the
individual zones are managed.
Where Do I Begin?
Yield Mapping is often the first experience
farmers have with PA. Yield Maps are
essential for analysing on farm trials or they
can influence VR. They are also used for
creating management zones but can also be
misleading.
Farmers with Yield Mapping but without VR
capable equipment, can still assess the
potential benefits of adopting VR by sowing
test strips which can then be analysed using
Yield Data.
Making Zones
Farmer drawn zones are the easiest way to
create management zones, often using yield
maps as a guide. This can be very effective
way of beginning variable rate, especially
where the yield maps are relatively stable and
variation carries across seasons.
Variable Rate in the Mallee
The Mallee has several advantages over other
regions to implement VR. Firstly the dominant
landscape of dune-swale has two extremes of
soil type with heavy clay soils in the flats and
deep sands on the hills, this lends itself to
www.msfp.org.au
farmer drawn management zones based on
soil type.
Secondly the Mallee Sustainable Farming
project has identified subsoil constraints and
their influence on soil water as a major driver
of yield potential. Work by Rural Solutions SA
through the project has further shown how
EM38 soil surveying can accurately map the
variation in subsoil constraints.
By creating zones based on stable long term
factors such as subsoil constraints and plant
available water the benefits can be spread
over multiple seasons and taken into
consideration over a range of issues. These
include crop selection, input rates at seeding
and the risks / rewards for applying in season
nitrogen for each zone.
Risk management plays a large part in the
potential benefits of VR, particularly in the
Mallee. For example at seeding a heavy soil
will be unlikely to benefit from extra N, while
the sandy soil will require reasonable levels of
starter N but if the season has above average
rainfall the zone most likely to benefit from
extra N will trend from the lighter to the
heavier soil, following the higher levels of
available water.
On Farm Trials
There is a range of methods for creating
management zones and just as many
agronomic options. It can be overwhelming
when first using VR but when combined with
Yield Mapping farmers can run on farm trials
to assess the benefits of using VR.
On farm trials are also a good way of
monitoring any changes made under VR such
as long term reduced fertiliser in poor zones.
6
Waikerie Field Day
2010
This will help improve farmers understanding
of nutrient availability and requirements per
zone for different seasons.
It is important to know where treatments are
placed so trials can be analysed using Yield
Data. This can be either done within the VR
monitor or manually by noting the run
number or marking it on the fence.
Further tips for on farm trials include
•
•
•
•
•
Make any trials a reasonable size
Place test strips across a range of
zones
Use multiple test strips, very useful
where it is difficult to cover all zones
Repeat test strips either side of any
trial
Keep good records – don’t rely too
much on technology
Further information
Peter Treloar, Minlaton
Ph: 0427 427 238
Michael Wells, Crystal Brook
Ph: 0428 362 474
Felicity Turner, Meningie
Ph: 0400 299 087
www.msfp.org.au
7
Waikerie Field Day
Are Durum wheat varieties
less risky for the Mallee
now than 15 years ago?
A J Rathjen, Waite Research Institute
I was asked to write about whether or not it
was time to re-try Durums in the Mallee. The
simple and correct answer is that I do not
know. There has been startling progress in
breeding Durums for improved adaptability to
our drier cereal growing districts but whether
this is yet sufficient to ensure that the crop is
profitable is not clear.
The breeding program has advanced far
greater than I would have expected on the
basis of my experience with Bread Wheat that
I feel like a bystander watching changes which
I had never anticipated.
We started out with the opinion that Crown
Rot was the dominant constraint and the
knowledge that the growth of the fungus in
the stem bases was enhanced by water stress.
There seems to be useful progress in this
regard with the newer lines being nowhere
near so susceptible but this change is difficult
to quantify in view of the very large
environmental effect in predisposing plants to
the disease i.e. time of onset of the stress in
relation to maturity, plant and tiller density,
fertilizer rates, and presence of other
constraints such as tolerance to microelement
deficiencies and toxicities (including boron,
zinc and pH). All of these confound Crown Rot
assessment for resistance.
The most important constraint now is related
to Crown Rot – the relatively poor yields of
Durum in ‘Hard Finishes’. Over the last two
years, two of the three Durum lines in the
NVT have, on average, out yielded Yitpi but in
the lower yielding, harder circumstances they
were still behind. An interesting explanation
www.msfp.org.au
2010
for this may lie with the salt uptake which is
much higher in Durums than Bread Wheat
and which would be associated with increased
osmotic pressure and therefore, maybe, more
rapid exploitation of soil water. Occasionally I
have observed a Durum crop initially
appearing fresher than a neighbouring Bread
Wheat only to see, later, that the Bread
Wheat had finished the better. Alternatively,
the root architecture of two species appears
to be somewhat different and we know that
the Durums are less tolerant of high pH
subsoils.
In a number of other characteristics there
have been distinct changes so that the more
recent lines have:
•
•
•
•
•
•
much higher frequency of tolerance
to boron
darker blue/green leaf colour
more erect, shorter leaves
much improved grain yields
good processing colour (bright yellow
pasta)
more vigorous early growth.
Along the way we have learnt much about
breeding. Most of our advanced lines
originate from wide crosses, usually involving
bread wheat. However it is not clear that the
subsequent selections include introgression
from this source or that the genetic variation
has its origin in transposons or other genetic
responses. It must be remembered that we
are still amazingly ignorant in regards to
genetics at the genome level and we remain a
little better at understanding the environment
as it affects plants. Don’t believe some of the
extravagant claims that appear in the media!
So back to the question – You will have to
make up your own mind whether or not to try
Durum. However with another round or two
of crossing and selection, we can anticipate a
substantial acreage of Durum in this district.
8
Waikerie Field Day
www.msfp.org.au
2010
9
Waikerie Field Day
Management of Rhizoctonia
disease risk in cereals –
Karoonda and Waikerie
field trials
Gupta, V.V.S.R.1, A. Mckay2 and K.
Ophel-Keller2, R. Llewellyn1, R., A.
Whitbread1 W. Davoren1 and D. Roget
1 CSIRO, Adelaide and 2 SARDI, Adelaide
Rhizoctonia bare patch is a disease of
seedlings caused by Rhizoctonia solani Kühn
AG-8. It decreases root length resulting in
reduced plant growth and yield losses. Recent
estimates indicate that it causes significant
losses in wheat, $59 million pa across
southern Australia (Murray and Brennan,
2009). Although this disease is considered
more of a problem in lower rainfall regions
(<350mm) and in lighter soils it occurs across
the entire southern Australian wheat belt. The
adoption of minimum tillage practices has
resulted in an increase in Rhizoctonia in wider
range of cropping environments. This fungus
grows on soil organic matter and produces a
hyphal network in the surface soil.
While previous research has found the risk of
yield loss can be reduced by management
practices that increase seedling vigour, it
remains a difficult disease to predict and
control. Currently there are no effective
chemical or biological control measures and
limited or no plant genetic resistance against
Rhizoctonia disease.
The incidence of Rhizoctonia bare patch has
increased in recent years due to the higher
frequency of drought years and in particular
below average rainfall in spring and summer.
This has resulted in higher inoculum levels
before sowing. The overall lower level of
microbial activity for long periods during and
www.msfp.org.au
2010
following dry periods favour the growth of the
Rhizoctonia fungi.
The incidence and severity of Rhizoctonia
bare patch depends on the amount of
Rhizoctonia inoculum, composition and
activity of the soil biology community
(inherent suppressive activity), available soil N
levels over summer and at seeding as well as
constraints to root growth.
The complex
relationship makes this a difficult disease to
predict and manage. Developments in DNAbased (inoculum and communities) and
biochemical (catabolic diversity) techniques
help us better measure and link the various
factors to disease incidence.
As part of a GRDC funded project on
Rhizoctonia (CSE00048) and the MSF project,
we investigated the changes in inoculum,
especially over summer, as influenced by
environmental factors and soil biological
activity under different rotation and tillage
systems. This work aims to develop better
prediction and management options based on
a better understanding of the changes in
inoculum levels especially over summer and
its interaction with soil microbial community
and crop.
What we found
Inoculum and disease development field trials
at Karoonda and Waikerie, in the SA Murray
Mallee revealed that:
•
rotation affects Rhizoctonia inoculum
levels
i.
At Waikerie, levels were lowest after
canola, medic pasture and fallow
and highest after wheat. Soil
microbial activity also increased
during summer following canola.
These differences were correlated
with the amount of disease in the
following wheat crop during 2009.
10
Waikerie Field Day
2010
ii. At Karoonda, levels were lowest after
mustard compared to wheat,
pasture and cereal rye both in
mid slopes and flats. Inoculum
levels were generally higher in
soils from flats.
• reduced inoculum levels following
canola, medic pasture and fallow
were associated with increased yield
on Eyre Peninsula but not in the
Mallee.
•
control summer weeds to stop buildup of inoculums
•
encourage early seedling vigour, sow
early
•
cultivate deep and sow shallow (avoid
disc seeders)
•
canola can help reduce inoculum for a
following wheat crop
cultivation prior to sowing reduced
inoculum levels but the inoculum
levels in the Waikerie trial levels were
still in the high disease risk category.
•
barley and wheat are the most
intolerant crops
•
Minimise N deficiency at seeding by
deep banding N and minimise stubble
incorporation at seeding, particularly
if summer rainfall has been low.
•
•
inoculum levels are reduced by
summer rainfall in weed free plots,
but can increase during long dry
periods.
Further information
•
the reduction in inoculum over
summer was also observed in grower
paddocks.
•
microbially
mediated
disease
suppressive activity in intensive crop
rotations is clearly important in
avoiding
major
crop
loss.
Gupta Vadakattu, CSIRO Adelaide
Ph: (08) 8303 8579
GRDC Factsheet March 2008
[http://www.grdc.com.au/uploads/document
s/GRDC_FS_rhizo.pdf ]
Seedling assessments revealed sowing early
reduced damage to the seminal roots
however the crown roots were often severely
affected, especially in no-till systems. This is
probably due to the crown roots emerging
into cold soil and hyphal re-establishment
following soil disturbance at seeding.
Implications
An improved understanding of the factors
influencing Rhizoctonia inoculum levels will
assist growers and advisers to better utilise
diagnostic information to select options and
requirements for improved management of
Rhizoctonia disease.
To reduce risk of yield loss caused by
Rhizoctonia bare patch disease:
www.msfp.org.au
11
Waikerie Field Day
Pasture and no-kill cropping
George King, Murray Mallee LAP
Both Colin Seis and Bruce Maynard operate
family farms in moderate rainfall areas of
NSW. The principals that they have applied to
rescue their land and family enterprises from
collapse have been used with similar success
in other climates.
After a fire devastated his merino/cropping
property in the early nineties, Colin Seis was
faced with a serious rebuilding effort. Colin
reflected on the conventional farming
practices with which his family had been
managing the property for generations. He
changed his management based on the fact
that “high inputs were sending them broke”.
Modern agriculture was decimating his
grasslands and soils, creating conditions for
weeds. His farm was not profitable, had no
summer pasture and required increasing
fertiliser rates.
So he changed his management. He began by
carefully managing grazing on the native
pastures which regenerated after the fire.
After three or four years “natural” succession
led to a productive perennial pasture. After a
couple more years his pasture productivity
had increased over his neighbour’s (his elder
brother) who uses conventional farming
systems, and he had reduced his DAP
application by 70%. Colin is rebuilding his
soils, and increasing the soil organic carbon
and water holding capacity. By scrapping the
plow he has allowed the good soil biota to
recover, making more nutrients and moisture
available to plants.
What really flies in the face of conventional
farming is that Colin has built these pastures
in his cropping paddocks as well. Yes there
was a production “dip” but it was just a dip.
The benefits of maintaining a healthy
www.msfp.org.au
2010
grassland
ecosystem
include
greater
productivity. The summer active grasses are
shaded and out-competed by the winter crop.
Six weeks after harvest Colin’s stock has rich
pasture to graze. He also points out that
“pasture cropping into winter active pastures
doesn’t produce as much of a competition
issue as you might think. The more diverse
and dense our grassland is the more
productive our crop is”.
To the consternation of local agronomists,
Colin stopped using insecticides and
fungicides over ten years ago. He hasn’t had a
crop pathogen problem or any disease
damage in over ten years.
Financially, Colin has vastly decreased input
costs and increased pasture area and
productivity balanced against the initial
decrease in yield. Now, Colin has less costs
and more productivity (including crop yield)
than comparable farms. He is also building his
fundamental capital asset – healthy soil and
ecology. Colin spent $5/hd to feed his sheep
in 2009. His elder brother over the fence (a
traditional best practice cropping/grazing
property) spent $40/hd.
How does this system work in the Mallee?
With half the rainfall that Colin receives what
impact would this have on competition and
productivity? Many Mallee farmers have been
successfully growing crops over medics for
years. Growing canola with wheat has also
been shown to work very well. EverCrop has
begun extensive trials in Western Australia
but the early focus has been in the 350500mm rainfall areas on deep pale sands. The
results have certainly been encouraging. Trial
sites in lower rainfall districts are being
developed.
Speaking at a course in Berri, EverCrop WA
Project leader David Ferris explained that
12
Waikerie Field Day
their focus was to test the viability, quantify
performance and develop informed decision
making tools for land managers. David said
that growers were attracted to the Pasture
Cropping examples because they wanted to
improve soil health, grow more summer feed
and increase the potential for income through
livestock.
An interesting result from the initial trial data
was that more soil moisture was recorded
where a seeder had inadvertently sown the
crop into the pasture furrow. In these
instances, ridge moisture was 9% whilst
furrow moisture was 14%. Over-all both the
quality and yield penalties were low (14%).
Yield penalty was higher at 80 N over 50 N.
David explained that the most interest is
coming from managers with mixed farming
systems, meat dominant systems and or with
large areas of poor sand.
Bruce Maynard started thinking along the
same lines as Colin for similar reasons. His
crisis wasn’t the result of a devastating fire.
Financial and family issues demanded that
Bruce change his management practices or go
broke. He was spending money on farm
inputs that weren’t producing. Bruce tells us
that he decided to manage his family business
for “profit not productivity”. It’s worth noting
that Bruce’s farm is more productive now
than it was when he was using best practice
conventional farming and he has time for his
family and other interests. Under a
conventional farming system his farm
required four to five full-time labour units.
Bruce has tripled production and his farm
requires half a labour unit.
As a lad Colin remembers his dad looking at
successfully established paddocks of sown
pasture and commenting that it was a shame
that they had to remove it to grow their crop.
After educating himself about ecology and soil
health, Bruce started thinking along similar
www.msfp.org.au
2010
lines. Bruce decided to manage healthy
grassland for livestock and crop production.
Conventional farming systems do the
opposite. He developed principals that
enabled him to grow a productive crop into
pasture, eliminate annual weeds, reduce
fertiliser input and stop spraying herbicides
and pesticides altogether. Like Colin and many
others, Bruce hasn’t had a disease problem
since
establishing
ecologically
sound
grasslands.
Bruce’s input costs are $5-$7/acre and he gets
a high return. He reasons that traditional
wisdom dictates that more yield translates to
more profit, (e.g. 12 bags to the acre with 8
bags input leaves 4 bags profit which is better
than 10 bags from 8 leaving 2 profit) yet what
if you put in a bit less to get a bit less but got
more profit and better pasture underneath?
Bruce, Colin and many others have proved
that they can spend less to achieve better
profits on their farms.
What about yields? I had to ask. “Food
security” is a vital concern. Given the rising
global population and depleting soil resource,
can the market afford even a temporary dip in
production that may result from a move away
from conventional farming? Colin made the
point that pasture cropping represents a
greatly reduced erosion risk, enabling growers
to reap crops from land classes that shouldn’t
be cropped with conventional techniques.
Furthermore, pasture cropping and no-kill
cropping can help renovate degraded pasture
far more quickly than good grazing alone – as
long as erosion risk is managed effectively.
EverCrop, the Murray Mallee Local Action
Planning Association (MMLAP), PIRSA,
SAMDBNRM Board and members of the
farming community have recently won a small
grant to trial pasture cropping and no-kill
Cropping in the Murray Mallee. Here’s a
thought though, try it on a hectare or an acre
13
Waikerie Field Day
2010
or a quarter acre at your place and see what
happens. And then tell us about it.
This September we will be establishing some
summer-active species under irrigation (to
replicate a wet spring - if it doesn’t happen) to
compliment the winter-active species we have
currently planted. A crop will be sown over
the trial sites in Waikerie and Wynarka when
ideal in the 2011 season. The CSIRO has
agreed to analyse the plots for yield results
and feed value. Species trialed include
Lucerne (SARDI5, 10 and Jindera (summer
active), numerous summer and winter active
grass species, Creeping Saltbush and Cullen. A
full progress report will be released when
results are available.
Further information
A bus has been booked to visit pasture
cropping enterprises in the Upper North on
September 16 - 17 and to the Eyre Peninsula
on 4 – 8 October with the Mallee Mentors
Program.
Contact George on (08) 8531 3075 for further
details.
www.msfp.org.au
14
Waikerie Field Day
Enrich – better shrub-based
grazing systems
Jason Emms, SARDI
Bill Davoren, Rick Llewellyn, CSIRO
Forage systems based on single species are
unlikely to be suitable as a sole feed source.
However, there is potential to integrate a mix
of suitable plant types together to form a
more complete grazing system. A mixture of
plant types may be more resilient and also
supply a more-balanced livestock diet. It may
be more productive to meet all objectives by
using a suite of species than searching for a
single species that meets all desirable criteria.
‘Enrich’ is a Future Farm Industries CRC (FFI
CRC) research project creating more
productive and better adapted grazing
systems through the incorporation of native
woody perennial species.
The project has taken a multi-pronged
approach to assessing the potential role of
forage perennials by:
(i)
Considering woody perennials in a
system with other pasture species being
produced as complementary plants either
within the shrub block or on nearby paddocks.
(ii)
Quantifying their potential to improve
feed utilisation and health. For example,
species are being assessed for their ability to
enhance rumen health or control internal
parasites. Initial laboratory data suggests that
further examination of some species in regard
to their anthelmintic and methane reducing
potential is warranted.
2010
inclusion in livestock grazing systems. With
the support of the EverCrop project, a trial is
being undertaken at the MSF Waikerie site to
evaluate a shortlist of 15 species based on
favourable traits from the data obtained thus
far. A similar shortlist of species is also being
tested at a further 14 sites across southern
Australia.
The Waikerie site was planted during June
2009 and measured for the first time in April
2010. With assistance from favourable
conditions, survival has been high for most
species (Table 1). Early growth of river,
creeping and old man saltbush has also been
exceptional with around 1t/ha of forage
produced. These plants will be continued to
be assessed for their local adaptation,
productivity and when grazed in 2011, their
relative palatability and re-growth ability.
Whilst other species are not overly productive
in this environment they may still provide a
significant role in grazing systems by being
superior
on
other
soil
types
or
complementary in other traits such as
nutritive value. For example plants that have
a low salt or high energy content may be good
companions to old man saltbush. Principles
for best managing grazing systems containing
numerous different species are also being
developed in the wider Enrich project.
Further information
Jason Emms, SARDI, Waite Campus, Adelaide
Ph: (08) 8303 9602
Email: [email protected]
(iii)
Exploring Australian native species
more thoroughly.
Enrich has identified over 100 Australian
woody perennial species with potential for
www.msfp.org.au
15
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Table 1: Average establishment at Waikerie and across all Enrich sites
Species
River saltbush
Coastal saltbush
Old man saltbush
River Murray saltbush
Creeping saltbush
Tagasaste (tree lucerne)
Nitre goosefoot
Australian bindweed
Ruby saltbush
Tar bush
Tree medic
Fleshy leaved saltbush
Mealy saltbush
Mallee saltbush
Spiny saltbush
Waikerie (%)
94
61
96
100
90
92
88
83
93
55
79
58
91
92
98
Across all sites (%)
67
57
80
90
85
57
77
64
88
79
58
67
86
75
75
Figure 1: Estimated edible biomass of species at Waikerie after 10 months of growth
800
E dible biom as s g plant -1
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
st
a
O
Co
a
Ri
ve
rs
al
tb
us
ls
h
a
ld
ltb
m
Ri
us
an
ve
h
sa
rM
l
t
ur
bu
r
Cr ay s sh
ee
al t
Ta
pi
ga
n g b us
sa
sa h
st
e
lt b
( tr
us
ee
h
N i l uc
t re e r
Au
go n e )
st
os
ra
ef
lia
oo
n
bi
t
n
Ru d w
ee
by
sa d
ltb
us
Ta h
rb
Fl
us
es
Tr
h
hy
ee
le
m
av
ed
ed
ic
M sa l
tb
ea
u
ly
s a sh
M
lt b
a ll
us
ee
h
sa
Sp
ltb
us
in
y
sa h
ltb
us
h
0
Species
www.msfp.org.au
16
Waikerie Field Day
Defining yield potential and
managing soil and season
Anthony Whitbread, Gupta Vadakattu , Rick
Llewellyn and Bill Davoren, Damian Mowat,
CSIRO
Ben Jones, Mallee Focus
Barry Mudge, Rural Solutions
The Mallee environment is one of the most
challenging regions of the world to farm
profitably and sustainably, particularly in the
last decade. Despite these challenges, many
Mallee farmers show that it is possible to do
so with technology and an understanding of
the environment. This paper argues that
better decisions are made more often
through an understanding of soil and season.
This understanding can be informed by
analysing the long term trends in rainfall and
their interaction with soil type and by utilising
in-season yield prediction models to assist in
seasonal management decisions.
Materials and methods
Field research has been carried out over
several years at various sites across the
Mallee as part of the MSF efforts to improve
the productivity and sustainability of the
region. This includes work done by the GRDC
funded Reaping Rewards project on farmers
paddocks at Bimbie (NSW), Carwarp and
Cowangie (Vic), Pinnaroo and Loxton (SA) and
most recently by the Water Use Efficiency
(WUE) projects based at a core experimental
field sites at Karoonda. Information about
soils, weather and crop growth has been
collated from these efforts and used to
parameterise and validate crop-soil models
that are now commonly used to simulate the
major processes that occur while crops and
pastures grow. These include the nitrogen and
carbon dynamics in soil, soil water balance
(including evaporation, drainage, leaching and
www.msfp.org.au
2010
runoff), crop growth and interactions with
daily temperature, radiation and rainfall.
At each of these sites, EM38 survey has been
used to create EM-based soil classifications
corresponding to soils that have low,
moderate or severe sub soil constraints.
Representative soils within these zones have
been characterised for plant available water
capacity (PAWC), by determining the drained
upper limit (DUL) and the crop lower limit
(CLL), as well as chemical analysis for plant
available nutrients (mineral N, colwell P, S,
exchangeable
cations)
and
chemical
constraints such as Boron and salts. Using the
crop model APSIM and long term weather
records sourced from nearby meteorological
stations, wheat growth, using modern
varieties and management was simulated in
each year for the period 1956 to 2009 at N
fertiliser rates of 0, 15, 30, 60, 90 kg/ha. The
soil N and organic matter are reset to the
same level in April each year so that the
effects of season are the only difference
between wheat crops. At this reset, the soil
mineral N was assumed to be negligible for all
soil types and a 1t/ha cover of wheat stubble
was present.
The effects of rainfall,
evaporation, drainage and water extraction by
the crops were all calculated by the model.
Wheat (cv. Yitpi) was sown between April 25
and June 30 and sowing within this period
was triggered by the first rainfall event of 10
mm or more over 5 days.
In-crop rainfall
The six locations chosen for this analysis
represent a range of locations across the 250350 mm rainfall environments of the Mallee.
Summing the growing season rainfall from the
day of sowing to the day of harvest in each
year of the simulations and presenting the
median value shows that the recent decade
has been the driest for Bimbie, Carwarp and
Loxton compared with the 3 decades prior to
this (Table 1). The higher rainfall locations of
17
Waikerie Field Day
Cowangie, Pinnaroo and Karoonda do not
show such dramatic differences in rainfall
over the recent history. Growing season
rainfall calculated as April to October inclusive
results in a similar trend.
The simulation of wheat growth over the
long term
Regardless of locations, the median wheat
yield at the highest N rate (chosen to
represent water limited yield in most seasons)
for the 1956 to 2009 period was consistently
highest on the zones representing soils of low
constraints followed by the moderate and
high sub soil constraints. This reflects the
effects of low plant available water capacity
caused by sub-soil constraints such as salt and
boron as well as the higher clay contents in
these soils that may result in higher soil water
evaporation losses and less efficient
infiltration of rainfall.
The probability of
achieving low yields (<1 t/ha) was therefore
much higher in the high EM zones at all
locations (Table 2).
Interestingly, when the median simulated
yields for each decade from 1970 to 2009 are
examined, median yield for the drier sites
(Carwarp data only displayed) has declined in
almost each decade, with the high EM zones
showing the most disturbing trend (Table 3).
At Carwarp for example, the probability of
achieving <1 t/ha has increased in each
decade from 1970.
At the locations with higher rainfall, such a
pattern is not evident (Table 4 – Karoonda
data only displayed). The chance of achieving
> 1.5 t/ha on high EM zones in the 1980’s and
1990 was 0.6 (or 60% of seasons) but only 0.3
in the most recent decade and similar to the
decade from 1970.
Future directions
2010
evidence provided by farmers. Lower growing
season rainfall and drier springs results in
lower production overall, but particularly on
soils with shallow rooting depth and small
plant available water capacity (PAWC). In the
most recent decade, there were no seasons
where the rainfall was sufficient to make the
most of the higher nutrition on the high EM
zones (heavy flats). In the 1970’s and 1980’s
these season-types, that usually involve a wet
spring, occurred several times and produced
the classic flip-flop effect where heavy flats
out-yield other parts of the landscape. The
latest MSF Water Use Efficiency project is
devising management strategies to better
cope with the vagaries of season. In the case
of the lower rainfall locations where high EM
zone soils so seldom produce economic
returns, particularly over the past decade, a
change in the system may be warranted.
Options may be to continue with a low input
annual cereal system and harvest stubble
biomass rather than gambling on the returns
from grain. On the zones where cropping is
highly risky and rarely profitable the
alternative may be to change land use by
converting the very constrained areas to
perennial pasture or shrub based systems. In
the locations where the production can more
often be economic on high EM zones, making
in-season predictions of potential yield can
help make robust decisions on options such as
harvesting for biomass or grazing in-season.
Further information:
Dr Anthony Whitbread
Ph: (08) 8303 8455
email: [email protected]
Dr Rick Llewellyn
Ph: (08) 8303 8502
email: [email protected]
These observations based on simulated data
are backed up by field data and anecdotal
www.msfp.org.au
18
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Table 1: Median in-crop rainfall (mm from day of sowing to day of harvest) for all years from 1956 2007 and median of decades from 1970.
All Years
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
2000-2009 as
% of all years
Bimbie
157
235
172
157
132
Carwarp
162
174
184
168
119
Cowangie
174
175
201
167
170
Loxton
147
165
165
148
123
Pinnaroo
195
229
200
189
186
Karoonda
202
190
200
218
193
84
73
98
84
95
85
Table 2. Median simulated wheat grain yield (1956 to 2009) and probability of yielding less than
(<) 1 t/ha or greater (>) than 1.5 t/ha yield.
EM38
Median
< 1 t/ha
> 1.5 t/ha
Zone
Yield (t/ha)
Bimbie
Low
2.40
0.16
0.75
Moderate
1.74
0.37
0.57
High
1.04
0.55
0.35
Carwarp
Low
1.89
0.20
0.63
Moderate
1.07
0.49
0.45
High
0.66
0.63
0.35
Cowangie
Low
1.65
0.20
0.69
Moderate
2.25
0.24
0.69
High
1.23
0.49
0.47
Loxton
Low
1.93
0.22
0.65
Moderate
1.62
0.33
0.63
High
0.94
0.59
0.27
Pinnaroo
Low
2.18
0.16
0.80
Moderate
1.56
0.35
0.55
High
1.18
0.53
0.41
Karoonda
Low
2.43
0.14
0.78
Moderate
1.91
0.29
0.65
High
1.28
0.47
0.45
Note. 90 kg/ha of N available to the crop in soil and fertiliser.
www.msfp.org.au
19
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Table 3: Median simulated wheat grain yield at Carwarp for decades from 1970 and probability of
yielding less than (<) 1 t/ha or greater (>) than 1.5 t/ha yield.
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
EM38
Zone
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Median
Yield (t/ha)
2.92
2.16
1.91
2.37
1.26
0.84
1.60
0.85
0.62
0.75
0.25
0.12
< 1 t/ha
> 1.5 t/ha
0.00
0.20
0.30
0.20
0.50
0.60
0.10
0.60
0.70
0.60
0.80
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.60
0.50
0.30
0.50
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.10
0.10
Table 4: Median simulated wheat grain yield at Karoonda for decades from 1970 and probability of
yielding less than (<) 1 t/ha or greater (>) than 1.5 t/ha yield.
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
EM38
Zone
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
Median
Yield (t/ha)
1.84
1.25
0.45
2.47
2.15
1.71
2.94
2.52
2.20
2.34
1.58
0.78
< 1 t/ha
> 1.5 t/ha
0.30
0.30
0.70
0.10
0.10
0.30
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.10
0.40
0.50
0.70
0.30
0.30
0.90
0.90
0.60
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.70
0.50
0.30
This work is part of a CSIRO -Mallee Focus-MSF project. GRDC has funded the Training Growers to
Manage Soil Water, Reaping Rewards and MSF Water Use Efficiency projects. The support of the
participating farmers at each site is gratefully acknowledged.
www.msfp.org.au
20
Waikerie Field Day
Grain marketing and risk
management
Darren Arney, Arney Consulting Pty Ltd
Grain marketing plans should be developed
based on individual farm business and
personal risk as well as business goals. The
financial risks that farm businesses face are:
2010
•
land lease payments
•
drawings
•
depreciation
•
interest
•
rates and fees
•
insurance
•
price / profit
Variable costs include:
•
cashflow
•
fertilizer
•
production / washout
•
chemical
•
fuel
•
repairs and maintenance
•
contractors
These risks can be either reduced or increased
depending on the marketing method used. For
example: a forward cash contract locks in a
price paid per tonne for a set amount of
tonnes, eg. 100t of F1 barley at $160/t
delivered December.
Profit risk and cashflow risk are reduced as the
grower knows how much ($16,000) and when
they will be paid (January). However
production risk is increased as failure to
deliver 100t in December may result in
financial penalty as the seller has to buy 100t
of F1 barley to complete their contract.
Farm businesses differ in their exposure to
financial risks. Farm owners and managers
differ in their risk attitude.
Price Risk
To enable grain growers to manage price risk,
there needs to be an understanding of how
much a tonne of grain costs to produce.
The cost of production in dollars per tonne
can be calculated by dividing the total costs
incurred by the total tonnes produced. Costs
incurred include fixed costs and variable costs.
Fixed costs include:
www.msfp.org.au
The cost of production varies between
farmers and between seasons. During a series
of workshops held in South Australia in early
2010, the cost of production, calculated with
costs provided by the groups, varied between
$177 and $255 per tonne delivered port for
APW wheat.
Once the cost of production is calculated a
profit margin can be added to determine a
target price. The profit margin should reflect
the reward for taking the risks to grow grain.
A farm business with a high equity position
could sell grain below the cost of production
as the business should be able to access carry
on finance for the following year, whereas a
neighbouring business with low equity may
not be able to sustain a loss as financial
reserves have become depleted.
Cashflow Risk
Historically, wheat and barley growers have
sold grain through pools. These pools paid a
significant first advance, approximately 80% of
the anticipated pool return even though the
21
Waikerie Field Day
2010
pool sales program was likely to be
undertaken over the following 12 to 15
months.
minimum standard and a fixed or floating
price can result in significant financial penalty
if tonnage or quality cannot be met.
The first advance was usually received by
growers approximately 15 days from the end
of week of delivery. Therefore growers sold
their grain at harvest time (December) and
received most of the payment for that crop in
January.
Table 1 shows the production variability of the
mean site yield of the National variety trials
for various locations from 2005 to 2009. Grain
growers would be best to calculate their own
production variability from harvest results and
yield predictive models suited to their
environment.
Additionally cash prices on offer to the grower
were either through forward contracts that
paid 14 to 30 days after delivery, or spot cash
prices which paid 14 to 30 days from delivery.
Therefore cash sellers would also receive
payment in the January / February period.
Given a large sum of cash was to be received
in January, grain growers scheduled significant
cash expenses in January and February.
In deregulated wheat and barley markets, the
pool first advances are likely to be lower. Also
pools can close before or during harvest and
therefore reduce support for cash prices at
harvest. However cash prices are likely to be
offered post harvest for grain stored on farm
or in warehouse.
Therefore grain growers need to be aware of
the changes to cashflow timings as there is
less likely to be large cash receipts January
and more likely to be payments received
through the year. Grain growers should give
consideration to expense timing and look to
defer some payments to reduce pressure to
sell grain at harvest to generate cash income.
Production Risk
Grain growing areas throughout Australia vary
in there reliability to produce “average yields”.
This is primarily due to rainfall variability but
may include frost, flooding and heat wave risk.
Grain marketing tools which commit growers
to deliver a fixed tonnage of grain at a
www.msfp.org.au
Table 1: National Variety Trial Site Mean Yield
2005 to 2009 (source NVT)
National Variety Trail 2005-2009
Town
Nunjikompita
Mintaro
Mitchelville
Turretfield
Keith
Kimba
Warramboo
Geranium
Wanbi
Urania
Minnipa
Streaky Bay
Average
1.0
3.8
0.8
3.1
3.0
0.7
1.4
1.3
0.8
2.6
1.7
1.3
Standard
Deviation
(68%)
1.0
1.0
0.4
1.0
0.5
0.6
1.3
0.6
0.5
1.2
1.9
1.0
varitation variation
SD Range SD Range
from
from
(Low)
(High)
average + average +
(t/ha)
(t/ha)
/ - (t)
/ - (%)
0.5
1.5
0.5
47%
3.3
4.4
0.5
13%
0.6
1.0
0.2
24%
2.6
3.6
0.5
16%
2.8
3.3
0.2
7%
0.4
1.1
0.3
44%
0.7
2.0
0.7
48%
1.0
1.6
0.3
24%
0.6
1.1
0.2
28%
2.0
3.2
0.6
22%
0.8
2.6
0.9
55%
0.8
1.8
0.5
36%
Effectively growers in more marginal areas
have less certainty of production than growers
in reliable areas. This affects the sell a third
forward, third harvest and third after strategy
as the marginal grower runs significantly
higher risk of contract default and financial
penalty (whether with swaps or forward
contracts).
Production variability influences growers
personal risk attitude. Growers in marginal
areas may be less inclined to price a high
percentage of their crop forward (whether
with swaps or forward contracts) as they have
experienced (or know of) the impact of prices
rising and poor crop production resulting in
washout costs.
The use of put or call options over grain
futures contracts is therefore perceived as
more beneficial to growers in more variable
22
Waikerie Field Day
2010
production areas compared to more reliable
areas of production.
Australia is unique in that the average
production 1996 to 2009 is approximately
20.2 million tonne. This could equally be split
between WA and the Eyre Peninsula to the
west and NSW Vic and Eastern SA to the east.
However domestic consumption of 7 million
tonnes is spilt disproportionably as west 1
million tonnes and to east 6 million tonnes.
This impacts significantly on basis in drought
years in the east and needs to be taken into
account in grain marketing strategies.
Grain Marketing Tools and Risk Management
Grain marketing tools and products vary in
their ability to manage risk. Forward cash sales
provide a known price and payment terms;
however a financial penalty can be incurred if
contracted tonnage is not delivered.
Grain Marketing Product, Risk Management
Characteristics
Selling
Profit Cashflow
Production
Method
Pools
poor
neutral
good
Options on Futures Contracts
Options are transacted through an exchange
or board of trade. Banks and financial
institutions also offer over the counter (OTC)
option products.
A put option enables the owner of the option
to choose whether to exercise the option at
the strike price anytime between the purchase
of the option and expiry. The buyer pays a
premium up front for an option.
Therefore if futures prices rise, the owner of a
put option would not exercise the option but
sell at the higher futures value. If futures
prices fall the intrinsic value of the put option
rises increasing the value of the option and
therefore value to the owner. If the futures
price towards expiry is similar to the futures
price when the put option was purchased then
the time value of the put option declines.
Value of the Option Premium
The amount paid by the buyer of an option
depends on a number of factors:
•
Harvest
Cash
Sales
Post
Harvest
Sales
Forward
Cash
Sales
Futures
Contracts
/ Swaps
Options
on
Futures
Contracts
poor
good
good
poor
good
good
•
•
•
•
•
good
good
poor
good
good /
poor
poor
good
neutral
good
www.msfp.org.au
strike price v the underlying futures
price
time to expiry of the option
the underlying futures price
the volatility of the underlying futures
price
availability of option sellers
number of buyers competing for the
option
Options can be sold prior to expiry. The sales
proceeds can offset the purchase price of the
option therefore reducing the cost of the
option strategy.
23
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Comparison of Wheat Pricing Tools
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
Selling
Time / Tool
2009
Average
Forward
$ 200.00
$ 220.00
$ 220.00
$ 440.00
$ 300.00
$ 276.00
Harvest
$ 180.00
$ 280.00
$ 435.00
$ 280.00
$ 220.00
$ 279.00
Put Option
(premium buy
price April)
$ 20.00
$ 22.00
$ 25.00
$ 70.00
$ 30.00
Put Option
Result (net of
premium)
$ 180.00
$ 258.00
$ 410.00
$ 370.00
$ 270.00
$ 297.60
Advantages and Disadvantages of Put
Options
Put options provide a number of benefits to
grain growers.
They effectively allow the grower two “bites of the
cherry” when it comes to pricing grain. However the
disadvantage of options is if prices remain flat then the
cost of the put option premium could be greater than
the price move.
Opportunity Cost Storage
Grain value when
delivered
Wheat
$
220.00
Viterra
Graincorp
Company
Item
Cost $/tonne (wheat)
Interest Rate (%p.a.)
9%
9%
Interest Cost
(to June)
$
9.90 $
9.90
Monthly warehouse fee
(to June)
$
3.99 $
9.66
Opportunity Cost
$
13.89 $
19.56
A put option can reduce the financial penalty
associated with production risk. If prices rally
and grain yields are insufficient, then the
financial cost is limited to the cost of the
option premium.
To reduce production risk grain growers may
harvest the grain and warehouse it for sale
later. This incurs a cost of storage and interest
on grain not converted to cash.
When an option is purchased, the option is
purchased when prices are known. Therefore
the grower has set a target “floor price” but
still able to take advantage of upside price
movement. Warehousing on the other hand is
where grain is stored at a known price, for
sale later at an unknown price.
Further information
Darren Arney
Arney Consulting Pty Ltd
email: [email protected]
ph: (08) 8388 0684
www.msfp.org.au
24
Waikerie Field Day
2010
Biosecurity
Lice update and control
•
Amelia Bartlett, Biosecurity, SA
In a year when the national sheep flock fell to
its lowest number since 1916, sheep lice
numbers have been rampant, demonstrated
by more detections at saleyards and an
increase in reports from stock agents and
producers with first time infestations or reinfestations after treatment.
The incidence of lice found at saleyards has
eclipsed the totals for 2008 with Dublin
recording the majority of offences. PIRSA staff
inspect the markets, targeting pens of sheep
showing signs of rubbing and placard all lice
detections. Presenting lousy sheep at the
saleyards is an offence under the Livestock
Act, 2007 and attracts an expiation fee of
$345.
Many producers have expressed frustration at
trying to control lice within their mob.
Infestation occurs for a variety of reasons
including the purchase of lousy sheep, straying
sheep, ineffective treatment application,
failure to treat due to low wool prices, split
shearings, poor musters and more recently
chemical resistance.
There are three important aspects to limiting
the spread or acquisition of sheep lice:
Monitor
•
•
observe sheep for rubbing and biting
and inspect any animals showing
evidence of rub even if you suspect
grass seeds, burrs or a wool break.
if glasses are required for reading,
they will be required to see a louse of
1-2mm.
www.msfp.org.au
•
•
•
•
•
•
assume all introductions are infested
and isolate them until certain they are
lice free (this could be up to 6 months)
- don’t assume wool shedding breeds
are lice free.
Sheep Health Statements are very
important documents, so demand
that you receive lice history details in
order to make the correct treatment
decisions.
prevent your own stock straying allowing lousy sheep to stray is an
offence with an expiation fee of $345.
ensure fence lines are adequate to
prevent stock straying onto your
property and always inspect stray
sheep. In the event of persistent
sheep straying onto your property, an
Animal Health Officer should be
contacted.
ensure thorough musters at shearing
and treat all sheep including pets,
lambs, rams and killers. These animals
present a reinfestation risk.
avoid split shearings
ensure good shed hygiene. Lice have
survived up to 16 days on fibres in a
shearing shed and up to 10 days on
shearers’ moccasins.
Treatment
•
•
•
•
•
•
always apply chemicals according to
the label
weigh sheep to determine correct
dose rate
alternate treatment types and
chemicals
SP’s are not recommended due to
resistance and isolated cases of IGR
resistance have been confirmed
no product guarantees 100% control
in long wool
try to work with neighbours and shear
and treat at a similar time.
25
Waikerie Field Day
2010
While the level of infestation in SA flocks is
undetermined, reports from WA indicated
that 76% of that state’s mobs were affected
by lice. It is estimated that lice cost the
industry up to $120 million per year and at the
farm-gate level, lice can reduce wool cut by
1kg per animal and severely reduce wool
quality.
Options for lice control
Wool Length
6 weeks - 6 months
6 - 9 months
9 - 10.5 months
> 10.5 months
Possible action if lice are detected
Unlikely to eradicate but handjetting with a registered IGR,
spinosyn or Ivermectin, should reduce the amount of fleece
damage.
If a light infestation (less than 2 lice per 10 cm parting), consider
no flock treatment.
If a medium-heavy (>2–5 lice per 10 cm parting), use a registered
long wool product such as Extinosad, Coopers Blowfly and Lice
Jetting Fluid or Paramax. Eradication at this time is very unlikely.
It is essential an eradication treatment be applied after shearing.
If a light infestation, consider no flock treatment.
If a medium infestation, use a registered long wool treatment (as
listed above).
If a heavy infestation, consider premature shearing. An
eradication treatment is essential after shearing.
Options are to wait until the normal shearing, use a product with
a nil wool harvesting interval (Extinosad) or to premature shear.
Table derived from Farmnote 274, 2007.
For more info, contact a PIRSA Biosecurity Animal Health Officer or visit the comprehensive AWI site:
www.liceboss.com.au.
Further information
Amelia Bartlett, Murray Bridge
Ph: (08) 8535 6405
www.msfp.org.au
26
Waikerie Field Day
Alternative fertilizers – is it
muck, mystery or the new
horizon?
Greg Butler, SANFA
The SANTFA alternative fertiliser
demonstration evaluates a number of regimes
and these include low input fertiliser,
alternative fertiliser and some farming
systems choices such as row-spacing and
rotation.
In 2009, low-input DAP was the most costeffective treatment however it is important to
recognise that the biological inputs may
provide benefits over-time and that 2009 was
a tough finish best-suited to low-input
strategies.
Biological products are used in many
industries, such as yeast in winemaking, and
the way we assess and handle biological
products in the broad-acre industry is
improving. Understanding the difference
between dead biological products (such as
humate granules) and living biological
products is critical because living organisms
require a significantly higher duty of care.
Of the living biological products, two are of
particular interest in this demonstration.
2010
Urea and therefore these products offer an
opportunity to reduce the greenhouse
emissions embodied in agricultural
production. The performance of Twin N is
regulated by environmental conditions and
thus can integrate well with the ambitions of a
good finish whereas they will not ‘cook the
crop’ in a poor finish.
SANTFA recognises the co-operation of John
Norton from Bio-tech Organics and Paul Giles
from Neutrog Fertilisers for supporting this
demonstration.
Soil Moisture Monitoring
Soil Moisture Monitoring tools are being used
increasingly in broad-acre agriculture and the
SA MDB NRM Board has sponsored a series of
probes at the MSF field site.
Growers can access this information, in
addition to sites in the mid and southern
mallee, at the website:
http://www.adcontelemetry.com.au:8081
Username: samdb
Password: mdbuser
The probes will be used to assess the soil
moisture infiltration characteristics between a
‘stubble retained’ and ‘stubble removed’
farming system.
First is TrichoShield™ a talc-based seed
dressing containing beneficial Trichoderma
fungal species. The main purpose of the
Trichoshield in this demonstration is to assess
its potential to out compete Rhizoctonia in the
early stages of root development.
Second is Twin N, a free-living nitrogen-fixing
bacteria. Twin N offers two major advantages,
particularly under a carbon constrained
economy and a variable climate. The carbon
foot-print of Twin-N is about 1/70 of that of
www.msfp.org.au
27
Waikerie Field Day
1) The probes are permanently installed below
seeding depth at around 250mm below
ground level, with a further removable probe
sensor ‘plugged’ into the top soil layer
2) Sensors at 10cm intervals provide a trace
for soil moisture at each depth.
2010
At this time of year this is particularly relevant
for managing post-emergent nitrogen
applications.
5) At other SA sites, the variance of soil
moisture infiltration has been observed
between ‘stubble retained’ and ‘stubble
removed’ treatments.
6) The application of soil moisture monitoring
probes is better realised in each successive
season as yields and opening and closing
season soil moistures can be compared, in
conjunction with logged rainfall records.
The infiltration of rainfall events can be
tracked through the profile, displaying as
independent rainfall episodes at the bottom
of the screen. Deeper probes have been used
at the Waikerie site.
3) Plant roots extract soil moisture during the
day but rest at night, resulting in diurnal
stepping on the graph.
4) The growth of roots down the soil profile
can be monitored during the growing season.
The graphs provide a good indication of the
recharge capacity of in season rainfall events
and the reserves of deep moisture.
7) Calibrations of probes to actual levels of soil
moisture further enable growers to observe
the effects of crop transpiration on stored soil
moisture as depreciation of mm’s of stored
soil moisture.
6) Weather data, which includes daily
calculations of reference crop
evapotranspiration, is also available for 33
sites within the South Australian Murray
Darling Basin region. Of these sites 30 are
situated within the Riverland and Mallee
region.
To access these sites (including the Waikerie
MSF core site and the new site at Lowaldie go
to:
http://www.samdbnrm.sa.gov.au/and click on
the weather link then looking at the directory
listing next to the map of the Riverland/Mallee
Region you can either access the Waikerie
MSF core site by selecting Waikerie-Dryland
under the ‘Riverland’ listing, or under ‘Mallee’
you can login into any of the 5 nominated
sites, with the site at Lowaldie being the
newest.
Training in the use of the Soil Moisture
Monitoring equipment is provided periodically
by SANTFA as a FarmReady eligible course for
groups of 6 or more growers. For more
www.msfp.org.au
28
Waikerie Field Day
2010
details, contact the SANTFA office on 8842
4278 or email [email protected]
Training in the use, interpretation and
application of the Weather Station Data
services is provided by the South Australian
Murray Darling Basin NRM Board, contact
Jeremy Nelson on 8582 4477, or 0429 845 216
or by email:
[email protected]
Gladius Wheat, sown on 10/05/2010
1
Nil + Dividend
2
20kg DAP + Dividend
C
40Kg DAP + Dividend
3
45kg Undercover + Dividend
4
90kg Undercover + Dividend
5
100kg Rapid Raiser + Dividend
6
100kg Seamungus + Dividend
C
40Kg DAP + Dividend
7
20kg DAP (Wide-row) + Dividend
8
40kg DAP (Wide-row) + Dividend
9
20kg DAP + PE Twin N
10
20kg DAP + Trichoshield (paste) seed treatment + PE Twin-N
C
11
40Kg DAP + Dividend
20kg DAP + Trichoshield (powder) seed treatment + PE Twin-N
12
13
40kg DAP + PE Twin N
40kg DAP + Trichoshield (paste) seed treatment + PE Twin-N
14
40kg DAP + Trichoshield (powder) seed treatment + PE Twin-N
C
40Kg DAP + Dividend
www.msfp.org.au
29
Waikerie Field Day
www.msfp.org.au
2010
30
Waikerie Field Day
www.msfp.org.au
2010
31
MSF would like to acknowledge and thank the
above organisations for their on-going
support.