Barley - should I grow malt or feed?

2013
CC BY 4.0

Research organisation

Trial details

Researcher(s) Megan Beveridge (SFS)
Jon Midwood (SFS)
Year(s) 2013
Contributor Southern Farming Systems
Trial location(s) Inverleigh, VIC
Westmere, VIC
Barley - should I grow malt or feed? locations
Aims

A series of trials were set up in 2013 at our Inverleigh and Westmere sites to evaluate a range of commercially available varieties of barley that are either grown for malt, grown for feed or varieties that have the potential to be grown for yield but could still be accepted as malt at receivals.

Key messages
  • In 2013, performance of feed barley varieties was better than malt varieties, on average across both sites.
  • Even in 2013’s favourable season, malt varieties failed to make any considerable increases in yield over 2012 whereas feed varieties did increase their yields.
  • The feed variety Oxford has yielded consistently well across several years of trial data at SFS and NVT.
  • Generally, a narrowing of the spread between feed and malt barley prices means less extra yield is required from feed barley over malt barley for the same gross return.
  • In 2013, the additional costs involved in managing feed barley trials were only $50/ha.
Lead research organisation N/A
Host research organisation N/A
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments N/A
Other trial partners Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Cereal (Grain): Barley
Treatment type(s)
  • Crop : Variety
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Replicated

Inverleigh 2013

Sow rate or Target density 200mm row spacings using 25mm knifepoints
Sow date 24 May 2013
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser

24 May - MAP 60kg/ha (6N)

27 August - Urea 100 kg/ha (46N)

13 Sept - (feed only) Urea 100 kg/ha (46N)

 

Herbicide

The perennial issues of ryegrass and wild radish were well controlled with Boxer Gold PSPE and
a post emergence application of Jaguar in June.

Fungicide

 Disease levels were kept under control with two fungicides timed at GS32 (second node) and GS49 (awns emerging).

Other trial notes Not specified

Inverleigh 2013

Sow rate or Target density 200mm row spacings using 25mm knifepoints
Sow date 24 May 2013
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser

24 May - MAP 60kg/ha (6N)

27 August - Urea 100 kg/ha (46N)

 

Herbicide

The perennial issues of ryegrass and wild radish were well controlled with Boxer Gold PSPE and
a post emergence application of Jaguar in June.

Fungicide

Disease levels were kept under control with two fungicides timed at GS32 (second node) and GS49 (awns emerging).

Other trial notes Not specified

Westmere 2013

Sow rate or Target density 200mm row spacings using 25mm knifepoints
Sow date 28 May 2013
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser

28 May - MAP 80 kg/ha (8N)

28 August - UAN 135 L/ha (57N)

17 Sept - (feed only) Urea 100 kg/ha (46N)

Herbicide

The ryegrass and wild radish were well controlled with Boxer Gold PSPE and a post emergence application of Precept in June.

Fungicide

Disease levels were kept under control with two fungicides timed at GS32 (second node) and GS49 (awns emerging).

Other trial notes

The trial was managed according to best
practices with regards to pests, weeds and disease control. Nitrogen applications were based on crop requirements
determined by a deep N soil test in the autumn, soil type, and yield estimates made in August (assisted by Yield
Prophet).

Westmere 2013

Sow rate or Target density 200mm row spacings using 25mm knifepoints
Sow date 28 May 2013
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser

28 May - MAP 80 kg/ha (8N)

28 August - UAN 135 L/ha (57N)

Herbicide

The ryegrass and wild radish were well controlled with Boxer Gold PSPE and a post emergence application of Precept in June.

Fungicide

Disease levels were kept under control with two fungicides timed at GS32 (second node) and GS49 (awns emerging).

Other trial notes Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Westmere malt barley results

# Variety
Protein (%) Screenings (%) Grain yield (t/ha) Test weight (kg/hL) Retention (%)
1 Granger 11 2.5 8.63 65.7 95.3
2 Henley 10.4 1 8.59 64.2 97.3
3 Westminster 10.3 1.8 8.33 66.9 95.3
4 SY Rattler 10 3.3 8.23 67.2 92.3
5 Commander 10.4 1.5 8.23 66.5 96
6 Gairdner 10.6 2.3 8.06 67.3 92.8
7 Bass 10.8 1.3 7.99 67.2 96.8
8 Flinders 10.4 1.5 7.9 67.3 96.5
9

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Retention %


Loading

Screenings %


Loading

Test weight kg/hL


Loading

Trial results Inverleigh malt barley results

# Variety
Protein (%) Screenings (%) Grain yield (t/ha) Test weight (kg/hL) Retention (%)
1 SY Rattler 10.5 2.3 7.98 67.4 89.1
2 Granger 10.9 1 7.87 69.5 95.3
3 Henley 10.7 1 7.83 67 96.3
4 Bass 11.9 1 7.53 68.1 97.8
5 Westminster 10.8 1.5 7.49 68.7 95.3
6 Flinders 11.6 1 7.48 69.2 95.3
7 Commander 10.5 1.8 7.28 67.6 94.8
8 Gairdner 11.1 2 7.08 67.9 91.1
9

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Retention %


Loading

Screenings %


Loading

Test weight kg/hL


Loading

Trial results Westmere feed barley results

# Variety
Protein (%) Grain yield (t/ha) Percentage of site mean (%)
1 Oxford 10.6 9.62 103
2 Navigator 10.6 9.38 100
3 Granger 11.9 9.39 100
4 Westminster 11.1 9.23 99
5 Henley 11.1 9.16 98
6

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Percentage of site mean %


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Trial results Inverleigh feed barley results

# Variety
Protein (%) Grain yield (t/ha) Percentage of site mean (%)
1 Oxford 11.1 10.7 108
2 Navigator 12.3 9.99 100
3 Granger 12.7 9.75 98
4 Westminster 11.7 9.75 98
5 Henley 11.7 9.52 96
6

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Percentage of site mean %


Loading

Protein %


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
Inverleigh, VIC Sandy loam
Westmere, VIC Clay
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source: ASRIS
Trial site Soil order
Inverleigh, VIC Sodosol
Westmere, VIC Sodosol
Soil Moisture Source: BOM/ANU
Average amount of water stored in the soil profile during the year, estimated by the OzWALD model-data fusion system.
Year Inverleigh VIC Westmere VIC
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000

Climate

Derived climate information

No observed climate data available for this trial.
Derived climate data is determined from trial site location and national weather sources.

Inverleigh VIC

Westmere VIC

Inverleigh VIC

Loading
Loading
Loading

Westmere VIC

Loading
Loading
Loading

Some data on this site is sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology

SILO weather estimates sourced from https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/silo/
Jeffrey, S.J., Carter, J.O., Moodie, K.B. and Beswick, A.R. (2001). Using spatial interpolation to construct a comprehensive archive of Australian climate data , Environmental Modelling and Software, Vol 16/4, pp 309-330. DOI: 10.1016/S1364-8152(01)00008-1.

Trial report and links

2013 trial report

2013 trial report

2013 trial report

2013 trial report



Trial last modified: 23-10-2019 15:14pm AEST