Barley - should I grow malt or feed?

2013
CC BY 4.0

Research organisaton

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

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Retention %


Loading

Screenings %


Loading

Test weight kg/hL


Loading

Trial results Inverleigh malt barley results

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

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Retention %


Loading

Screenings %


Loading

Test weight kg/hL


Loading

Trial results Westmere feed barley results

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

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Percentage of site mean %


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Trial results Inverleigh feed barley results

# Variety
Grain yield (t/ha) Percentage of site mean (%) Protein (%)
1 Oxford 10.7 108 11.1
2 Navigator 9.99 100 12.3
3 Granger 9.75 98 12.7
4 Westminster 9.75 98 11.7
5 Henley 9.52 96 11.7
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 567.4mm451.8mm
2012 579.9mm466.6mm
2011 580.5mm494.5mm
2010 592.9mm483.6mm
2009 508.8mm416.3mm
2008 492.1mm394.1mm
2007 455.4mm381.0mm
2006 467.8mm367.4mm
2005 491.2mm388.6mm
2004 438.6mm392.0mm
2003 416.4mm416.1mm
2002 399.6mm402.3mm
2001 472.4mm451.9mm
2000 448.5mm441.1mm
National soil grid Source: CSIRO/TERN
NOTE: National Soil Grid data is aggregated information for background information on the wider area
Actual soil values can vary significantly in a small area and the trial soil tests are the most relevant data where available

Soil properties

Loading

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 14:14pm AEST