Do the rotational benefits of break crops improve the profitability of subsequent cereal crops?

2011
CC BY 4.0

Research organisatons
Funding source

Trial details

Researcher(s) Paul Breust (FarmLink Research)
James Hunt (CSIRO)
Guangdi Li (CSIRO)
Richard Lowrie (Graham Centre)
Mark Peoples (CSIRO)
Antony Swan (CSIRO)
Laura Watson (CSIRO)
Year(s) 2011
Contributor FarmLink Research
Trial location(s) Junee Reefs, NSW
Do the rotational benefits of break crops improve the profitability of subsequent cereal crops? locations
Aims

To determine whether rotational benefits of break crops improve the profitabiliyt of first wheat after break crops.

Key messages
  • Results from experimentation undertaken in southern NSW in 2011 and 2012, have demonstrated that crop sequences which include a brassica or legume break crops can be as profitable as, and in many instances more profitable than, continuous wheat.
  • Canola was consistently the most profitable break crop option. However, the rotational benefits of canola were usually restricted to just the first subsequent wheat crop whereas additional wheat yields can occur for two years after a legume.
  • Growing pulses for grain maximises profit, particularly in favourable seasons, but compromises grass weed control and (depending upon species) reduces N available to subsequent crops compared to brown manuring.
  • Growing pulses for hay was found to be profitable across a range of season types, achieves excellent grass weed control and provides greater N inputs and higher carry-over of soil water than when the same crop is grown for grain.
  • Growing pules for brown manure loses money in the year they are grown, but achieves excellent grass weed control, high N inputs, residual carry-over of soil water, provides more ground cover, and requires less labour than when grown for hay or grain.
Lead research organisation Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Host research organisation FarmLink Research
Trial funding source GRDC
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments

We thank the GRDC for financial support. We are also indebted to Bernard Hart and Rob Hart at Junee Reefs for allowing us access to their land to establish on-farm experiemental trials, and NSW DPI (Dr Eric Armstrong), the Graham Centre (John Broster) and from Kalyx (Peter Hamblin) for provision of unpublished data.


Other trial partners Graham Centre (CSU/NSW DPI)
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Cereal (Grain): Wheat
Treatment type(s)
  • Crop: Rotation
  • Fertiliser: Rate
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Replicated

Junee Reefs 2011

Sow rate or Target density Target density of 75 plants/m2 (low input) and target density of 150 plants/m2 (high input)
Sow date mid-May
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser

Low/high inputs as per treatments in trial reports

Herbicide

Low/high inputs as per treatments in trial reports

Insecticide

Low/high inputs as per treatments in trial reports

Fungicide

Low/high inputs as per treatments in trial reports

Seed treatment Low/high inputs as per treatments in trial reports
Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Junee Reefs

@T1: T1 @T2: T2
# Variety
Treatment 1
Treatment 2
Gross margin ($/ha) Grain yield (t/ha) Cost of production ($/t) Protein (%) Gross income ($/ha) Profit/Cost ratio (value) Shoot dry matter (t/ha) Shoot dry matter (t/ha)
1 Spitfire 2011 Canola - low input Low input 545 3.4 92 9.8 861 1.7 666 10.3
1 Spitfire 2011 Canola - high input Low input 581 3.6 88 9.8 896 1.8 432 9.2
1 Spitfire 2011 Lentils Low input 764 4 78 11.2 1079 2.4 771 11.2
2 Spitfire 2011 Barley Low input 537 3.4 93 10.3 852 1.7 495 8.7
2 Spitfire 2011 Wheat - high input Low input 617 3.5 91 11 933 2 439 10
2 Spitfire 2011 Lupin Low input 821 3.9 80 12.4 1136 2.6 737 10.8
3 Spitfire 2011 Wheat - low input Low input 540 3.4 92 3.4 855 1.7 614 9.4
3 Spitfire 2011 Chickpeas Low input 851 4 78 12.4 1166 2.7 863 12.2
3 Spitfire 2011 Pea BM Low input 861 4.1 77 12.3 1176 2.7 860 11
4 Spitfire 2011 Lupin BM Low input 902 4 79 13.6 1218 2.9 951 11.2
4 Spitfire 2011 Canola - low input High input 456 3.8 147 11.3 1013 0.8 903 10.2
4 Spitfire 2011 Canola - high input High input 498 3.9 142 9.8 1054 0.9 1013 10.6
5 Spitfire 2011 Lentils High input 558 3.8 144 12.9 1114 1 1114 10.9
5 Spitfire 2011 Barley High input 448 3.7 149 11 1004 0.8 803 10.4
5 Spitfire 2011 Wheat - high input High input 442 3.7 150 11.2 998 0.8 813 10.4
6 Spitfire 2011 Lupin High input 396 3.7 152 13.7 952 0.7 1195 10.9
6 Spitfire 2011 Wheat - low input High input 527 3.8 148 11.7 1083 0.9 827 9.9
6 Spitfire 2011 Chickpeas High input 414 3.7 149 13.9 971 0.7 1386 10.7
7 Spitfire 2011 Pea BM High input 428 3.8 147 14.1 984 0.8 1201 11.1
7 Spitfire 2011 Lupin BM High input 404 3.7 151 15.1 961 0.7 1558 11.1
7 Spitfire
8 Spitfire
8 Spitfire
8 Spitfire
9 Spitfire
9 Spitfire
9 Spitfire
10 Spitfire
10 Spitfire
10 Spitfire
11 Spitfire
11 Spitfire
11 Spitfire
12 Spitfire
12 Spitfire
12 Spitfire
13 Spitfire
13 Spitfire
13 Spitfire
14 Spitfire
14 Spitfire
14 Spitfire
15 Spitfire
15 Spitfire
15 Spitfire
16 Spitfire
16 Spitfire
16 Spitfire
17 Spitfire
17 Spitfire
17 Spitfire
18 Spitfire
18 Spitfire
18 Spitfire
19 Spitfire
19 Spitfire
19 Spitfire
20 Spitfire
20 Spitfire
20 Spitfire

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Cost of production $/t


Loading

Gross income $/ha


Loading

Gross margin $/ha


Loading

Profit/Cost ratio value


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Shoot dry matter t/ha


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
Junee Reefs, NSW Not specified
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source: ASRIS
Trial site Soil order
Junee Reefs, NSW Kandosol
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 Junee Reefs NSW
2011 466.3mm
2010 490.8mm
2009 387.5mm
2008 371.9mm
2007 353.9mm
2006 370.5mm
2005 388.7mm
2004 326.2mm
2003 316.5mm
2002 328.4mm
2001 416.9mm
2000 455.2mm
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

Junee Reefs NSW 2011


Observed climate information

Rainfall trial gsr (mm) 169mm

Derived climate information

Junee Reefs NSW

NOTE: Exact trial site locality unknown - Climate data may not be accurate
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

2011 trial report



Trial last modified: 09-12-2019 09:34am AEST