| Researcher(s) |
Peter Keating (Bioscience) Falko Mathes (Bioscience) |
|---|---|
| Year(s) | 2016 |
| Contributor | West Midlands Group |
| Trial location(s) |
Moora, WA
|
The trial purpose was to compare seed dressing and foliar application of Bioprime using granular and liquid fertilisers.
The West Midlands site had an average yielding year for the Moora area. The Liebe Long Term Research Site had a good growing season in terms of rainfall and seasonal distribution. The average yield was about 50% higher than previous wheat trial years. This was similar to Forrestdale which also had good rainfall and seasonal distribution.
On average, all Bioprime treatments combined resulted in a 4% yield increase. Treatment 2 (foliar Bioprime and granular fertiliser) performed best, achieving a 10% yield increase averaged across the three sites). At the WMG site, five Bioprime treatments resulted in positive yield responses whereas this number was lower at the Liebe site (2 treatments). With data corrected for outliers, all Bioprime treatments resulted in a positive yield response. Given that the Liebe site, relative to the WMG site had a higher soil pH, and higher pre-seeding phosphate and exchangeable cations concentrations (Table 2), an average higher yield was expected and achieved here compared to the WMG (3.36 t/ha and 2.15 t/ha, respectively in unamended control treatments). Thus, the higher soil quality and soil health present at the Liebe site combined with the good 2016 season in terms of rainfall likely narrowed the yield gap.
As such any management options aiming to close the gap between actual and potential yield, would have had less scope to achieve this at the Liebe site in 2016. In contrast, the lower soil fertility at the WMG allowed Bioprime to more consistently improve crop production. The 2016 data suggest the opportunity to improve yield on a poor soil in a poor year is greater than on good soil in a good year.
Ongoing research will continue to further develop Bioprime technology as a tool to improve soil biology and maintain plant health and yield. There is a substantial database of microbiological and yield results which continues to expand with the expectation of understanding the links between root and plant colonization by beneficial bacteria and fungi with Bioprime application and growth improvements.
| Lead research organisation |
Bioscience Pty Ltd |
|---|---|
| Host research organisation |
West Midlands Group |
| Trial funding source | Bioscience |
| Related program | N/A |
| Acknowledgments |
Living Farm who conducted the trials at WMG. |
| Other trial partners | Not specified |
| Crop type | Cereal (Grain): Wheat |
|---|---|
| Treatment type(s) |
|
| Trial type | Experimental |
| Trial design | Randomised,Replicated,Blocked |
| Sow rate or Target density | 75kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Living Farm, small plot seeder & harvester |
| Sow date | 15 June 2016 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | 12m x 14.4m |
| Plot replication | 8 |
| Fertiliser |
100 kg/ha Gusto Gold, 50 kg/ha Urea, post 50 L/ha UAN. |
| Herbicide |
pre: 1.5L/ha Glyphosate, 2L/ha Trifluralin, 118g/ha Sakura, 400g/ha Diuron. Post emergent 1L/ha Velocity. |
| Insecticide |
Pre-emergent insecticides 1L/ha Chlorpyrifos, 300 ml/ha Bifenthrin. |
| Rainfall trial gsr (mm) | 324mm |
|---|
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.
Plant Breeders’ Rights (PBR)
Some crop varieties used in research trials may be covered by Plant Breeders' Rights (PBR). Users should confirm PBR status of relevant varieties by searching the IP Australia PBR database, http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/pbr_db/ or Variety Central (http://varietycentral.com.au/) and contacting variety owners for further information if required. Where possible, varieties have been listed according to their registered PBR name, although OFT cannot and does not guarantee that the information is accurate or complete.
Note that PBR cover is administered through the Plant Breeders’ Right Act 1994 (