Can subsoil constraints be combated economically?

2015
CC BY 4.0

Research organisaton
Funding sources

Trial details

Aims

To determine which ameliorant practice is the most effective and economic in remediating subsoil acidity at depth.

Key messages
  • Cost of treatments repaid in the first year.
  • Grizzly/Control returned the best net margin in the first year.
Lead research organisation Liebe Group
Host research organisation Liebe Group
Trial funding source DAWR DAW00242
Trial funding source GRDC LIE00008
Trial funding source Wheatbelt NRM
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments

Many thanks to the Barnes family or all their help and input in setting up and managing the trial. Thanks to McIntosh and Son, Wongan Hills for use of the Tiny Grizzly and to Rohan Broun, Liebe member, for his time and the use of the spader. Scott’s Watheroo Dolomite for donating dolomite and the McNeill family, Dalwallinu for donating the limesand.

This trial is supported by GRDC funding through LIE00008: Working together to deliver multiple benefit messages to growers through a whole systems approach to soil management, DAW00242: Subsoil constraints - understanding and management and through funding from the Wheatbelt NRM.


Other trial partners Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Wheat
Treatment type(s)
  • Soil
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Replicated

West Wubin 2015

Sow rate or Target density 62 kg/ha Calingiri wheat
Sow date 1 May 2015
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size 11.65m x 14m
Plot replication 4
Paddock history 2012 wheat, 2013 wheat, 2014 fallow
Fertiliser

01/02/2015: 35kg/ha DAPSZC

16/07/2015: 40 kg/ha urea

15/08/2015: 20 L/ha UAN

Herbicide

01/05/2015: 2 L/ha Glyphosate 450, 2 L/ha Trifluralin 480, 0.3% SP 700 Surfactant, 200 mL/ha LV Ester 680,

16/07/2015: 850 mL/ha Diflufenican & Bromoxynil, 400 mL/ha MCPA 570,

 

Insecticide

01/05/2015: 200 mL/ha Chlorpyrifos 500EC

Fungicide

16/07/2015: 150 mL/ha Tebuconazole 430 

Soil amelioration

2009: 1 t/ha lime

2014: 1.5 t/ha lime

2015: 3.2 t/ha Lime only plots, 3.4 t/ha Dolomite only plots,

1.65 t/ha each Lime & Dolomite plots

Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Table 1

# Treatment 1
Grain yield (t/ha) Organic carbon (%) Average net margin ($/ha) pH CaCl2 (pH) Crop Establishment - No Till (plant/m2) NH4 (mg/kg) Phosphorus Cowell (mg/kg) Aluminium (meq/100g) Protein (%) Screenings (%) Return on investment (%) Sulphur (mg/kg) Crop Establishment - Grizzly (plant/m2) EC (dS/m) Crop Establishment - Spader (plant/m2) NO3 (mg/kg) Potassium Cowell (mg/kg) Hectolitre weight (kg/hL)
1 0-5cm 0.79 5.9 3 38 0.12 15.4 0.104 23 42
2 5-10cm 0.71 4.6 1 36 0.24 9.7 0.048 13 24
3 10-20cm 0.36 4.2 1 16 0.42 11.6 0.029 7 22
4 20-30cm 0.28 4.4 1 6 0.34 19.4 0.025 5 17
5 30-40cm 0.16 4.7 2 3 0.24 24.7 0.025 4 18
6 1, 2, 3 - Control Lime Treatment 2 10.2 1.6 78.2
7 4, 5, 6 - Limesand Treatment only 2.3 10.2 1.3 77.5
8 7, 8, 9 - Dolomite Treatment only 2.1 10.4 1.6 78.7
9 10, 11, 12 - Lime & Dolomite Treatment only 1.9 10.4 1.7 78
10 1,4,7,10 - No Till Treatment only 2.1 10.1 1.7 76.8
11 2,5,8,11 - Spader Treatment only 1.9 10.3 1.7 78.9
12 3,6,9,12 - Grizzly Treatment only 2.2 10.6 1.3 78.6
13 1 - Control & No Till 1.8 377 10 2.1 0 77
14 2 - Control & Spader 1.8 274 10.2 1.6 129 79.2
15 3 -Control & Grizzly 2.4 468 10.5 1.3 451 78.3
16 4 - Limesand & No Till 2.4 483 10.1 1.4 551 76.2
17 5 - Limesand & Spader 2.2 308 10.2 2.2 59 78.5
18 6 - Limesand & Grizzly 2.2 346 10.4 1.3 117 77.9
19 7 - Dolomite & No Till 2.3 456 10.1 1.4 661 77
20 8 - Dolomite & Spader 1.9 230 10.4 1.3 28 79.5
21 9 - Dolomite & Grizzly 2.1 315 10.7 1.4 117 79.5
22 10 - Lime & Dolomite & No Till 1.8 292 10.1 2 247 77
23 11 - Lime & Dolomite & Spader 1.7 140 10.3 1.7 -31 78.4
24 12 - Lime & Dolomite & Grizzly 2.1 302 10.7 1.4 79 78.7
25 Dolomite 26 8 8
26 Lime Sand 21 8 9
27 Lime/Dolomite 25 9 6
28 Control 22 8 8

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Aluminium meq/100g


Loading

Average net margin $/ha


Loading

Crop Establishment - Grizzly plant/m2


Loading

Crop Establishment - No Till plant/m2


Loading

Crop Establishment - Spader plant/m2


Loading

EC dS/m


Loading

Hectolitre weight kg/hL


Loading

NH4 mg/kg


Loading

NO3 mg/kg


Loading

Organic carbon %


Loading

pH CaCl2 pH


Loading

Phosphorus Cowell mg/kg


Loading

Potassium Cowell mg/kg


Loading

Protein %


Loading

Return on investment %


Loading

Screenings %


Loading

Sulphur mg/kg


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Site Depth Type pH EC P K N A OC CAT
West Wubin, WA 0 - 5cm Yellow Tammin Sand 5.90 0.10
West Wubin, WA 10 - 20cm Yellow Tammin Sand 4.20 0.03
West Wubin, WA 20 - 30cm Yellow Tammin Sand 4.40 0.03
West Wubin, WA 5 - 10cm Yellow Tammin Sand 4.60 0.05
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
West Wubin, WA Not specified
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source: ASRIS
Trial site Soil order
West Wubin, WA 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 West Wubin WA
2015 333.5mm
2014 275.0mm
2013 299.1mm
2012 298.7mm
2011 299.9mm
2010 270.8mm
2009 293.4mm
2008 314.5mm
2007 250.8mm
2006 282.7mm
2005 279.0mm
2004 273.6mm
2003 278.7mm
2002 225.5mm
2001 254.8mm
2000 324.6mm
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

West Wubin WA 2015


Observed climate information

Rainfall trial gsr (mm) 288mm

Derived climate information

West Wubin WA

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 last modified: 01-11-2017 19:23pm AEST