The key aim was to compare the rate of lime movement down the soil profile and the change in pH down to a depth of 30cm.
• During the early years following trial establishment, there was no grain yield response measured
• In 2004/2005, some 8 years post initial lime treatment, strong visual responses to lime became apparent
• The ‘top up’ application (1.5t/ha, across all initial lime rates of 0, 1 and 2t/ha)) of lime applied in 2005 (9 years post trial establishment) has had dramatic impact on current soil pH, and the soil pH profiles now reflect lime applied
• Only the highest rate of lime treatment (initial 2t/ha) followed by the 1.5t/ha in 2005 have a soil pH profile above the DAFWA recommendations (5.5 in the surface, over 4.8 at depth)
| Lead research organisation |
Liebe Group |
|---|---|
| Host research organisation |
Aglime of Australia |
| Trial funding source | GRDC LIE00008 |
| Related program | N/A |
| Acknowledgments |
The 'Time to Lime' project was a major coordinated research and extension initiative during which time, many of the trials reported upon were initiated, and many organisations contributed:
I acknowledge GRDC project LIE00008, “Working together to deliver multiple benefit messages to growers through a whole systems approach to soil management" |
| Other trial partners | Not specified |
| Crop type | None: No crop specified |
|---|---|
| Treatment type(s) |
|
| Trial type | Experimental |
| Trial design | Replicated |
| Sow date | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | 50m x 200m |
| Plot replication | 3 |
| Other trial notes |
Subsequent lime application across the trial There has been a diverse array of sub treatments applied at 96MO5 since the trial was established in 1996.
For the purpose of simplicity, and to enable comparisons with other trials being assessed in this series, only two additional treatments are reported upon (nil extra lime and the 1.5t/ha extra lime applied in 2005). |
| # | Variety |
Change in soil pH (pH) | Pre Liming pH (pH) | Mid Season pH (pH) | 0 t/ha Lime rate (pH) | 1 t/ha Lime Rate (pH) | 2 t/ha Lime Rate (pH) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | █ 2 t/ha lime 0-10cm | 1 | 4.6 | 5.6 | |||
| 2 | █ 2 t/ha lime 10-20cm | 0 | 4.2 | 4.2 | |||
| 3 | █ 2 t/ha lime 20-30cm | 0 | 0 | 4.6 | |||
| 4 | █ 1 t/ha lime 0-10cm | 0.5 | 4.5 | 5 | |||
| 5 | █ 1 t/ha lime 10-20cm | 0 | 4.1 | 4.1 | |||
| 6 | █ 1 t/ha lime 20-30cm | 0 | 0 | 4.3 | |||
| 7 | █ 0 t/ha lime 0-10cm | 0 | 4.5 | 4.5 | |||
| 8 | █ 0 t/ha lime 10-20cm | -0.2 | 4.5 | 4.1 | |||
| 9 | █ 0 t/ha lime 20-30cm | 0 | 0 | 4.2 | |||
| 10 | █ 1997 Average 0-10 cm | 4.9 | 5.9 | 6 | |||
| 11 | █ 1997 Average 10-20cm | 4.3 | 4.3 | 4.3 | |||
| 12 | █ 1997 Average 20-30cm | 4.5 | 4.4 | 4.5 | |||
| 13 | █ 1998 Average 0-10 cm | 4.9 | 5.9 | 6.5 | |||
| 14 | █ 1998 Average 10-20cm | 4 | 4.2 | 4.2 | |||
| 15 | █ 1998 Average 20-30cm | 4.2 | 4.3 | 4.4 | |||
| 16 | █ 1999 Average 0-10 cm | 4.6 | 5.6 | 6.1 | |||
| 17 | █ 1999 Average 10-20cm | 4.1 | 4.3 | 4.3 | |||
| 18 | █ 1999 Average 20-30cm | 4.3 | 4.4 | 4.5 | |||
| 19 | █ 2000 Average 0-10 cm | 4.7 | 5.1 | 5.8 | |||
| 20 | █ 2000 Average 10-20cm | 4.1 | 4.2 | 4.3 | |||
| 21 | █ 2000 Average 20-30cm | 4.2 | 4.2 | 4.5 | |||
| 22 | █ 2004 Average 0-10 cm | 4.4 | 5 | 5.6 | |||
| 23 | █ 2004 Average 10-20cm | 3.9 | 4.4 | 4.3 | |||
| 24 | █ 2004 Average 20-30cm | 4 | 4.2 | 4.3 |
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.
