Researcher(s) |
Trent Butcher (ConsultAg) |
---|---|
Year(s) | 2015 - 2017 |
Contributor | ConsultAg |
Trial location(s) |
Corrigin, WA
|
This research highlights how important a tactical approach to STNB management is in the medium rainfall zone. In dry seasons there is lower disease pressure, resulting in a potentially expensive fungicide strategy which can be marginal in returns. Conversely, where there is high disease pressure usually from wet conditions early in the season, then a double spray strategy can improve grain quality, yield and returns to the grower.
Where growing barley on barley, growers should budget for a fungicide spray at Flag-1 every year to protect the top 3 leaves in the canopy. Where conditions are wet early post emergent (especially if stubble is retained) allowing early disease pressure and high yield potential then a fungicide spray at Z31-Z32 can reduce disease pressure and protect the canopy until the Flag-1 spray is applied.
Under high disease pressure situations (wet conditions early post emergent) removing stubble prior to sowing barley on barley can reduce inoculum levels and the build up of early disease pressure. This will also help to reduce the selection pressure for fungicide resistance.
Where there is a dry start to the season and a slow build up of disease then stubble management has minimal impact on the buildup of STNB levels.
Burning barley stubble prior to planting barley on barley has shown to increase yield buy between 325 and 400kg in 2017 and 2015. While removing stubble can reduce early disease pressure, not all the yield increase can be accounted for by disease. Other factors are involved that may require additional work to understand (N mineralization, allelopathic impacts of stubble or improved seed bed). Where erosion risk is low growers should consider burning to remove barley stubble if planting consecutive barley crops.
We feel that there is no further work required to investigate the hypothesized link between STNB levels and pre-harvest head loss.
Growers, advisors and the wider barley industry are the key beneficiaries of this research. Being able to manage disease to maintain grain quality, yield and economic returns to the grower is critical for a competitive barley industry.
This research highlights how important a tactical approach to STNB management is in the medium rainfall zone. In dry seasons there is lower disease pressure, resulting in a potentially expensive fungicide strategy which can be marginal in returns. Conversely, where there is high disease pressure usually from wet conditions early in the season, then a double spray strategy can improve grain quality, yield and returns to the grower.
Where growing barley on barley, growers should budget for a fungicide spray at Flag-1 every year to protect the top 3 leaves in the canopy. Where conditions are wet early post emergent (especially if stubble is retained) allowing early disease pressure and high yield potential then a fungicide spray at Z31-Z32 can reduce disease pressure and protect the canopy until the Flag-1 spray is applied.
Under high disease pressure situations (wet conditions early post emergent) removing stubble prior to sowing barley on barley can reduce inoculum levels and the build up of early disease pressure. This will also help to reduce the selection pressure for fungicide resistance.
Where there is a dry start to the season and a slow build up of disease then stubble management has minimal impact on the buildup of STNB levels.
Burning barley stubble prior to planting barley on barley has shown to increase yield buy between 325 and 400kg in 2017 and 2015. While removing stubble can reduce early disease pressure, not all the yield increase can be accounted for by disease. Other factors are involved that may require additional work to understand (N mineralization, allelopathic impacts of stubble or improved seed bed). Where erosion risk is low growers should consider burning to remove barley stubble if planting consecutive barley crops.
We feel that there is no further work required to investigate the hypothesized link between STNB levels and pre-harvest head loss.
Growers, advisors and the wider barley industry are the key beneficiaries of this research. Being able to manage disease to maintain grain quality, yield and economic returns to the grower is critical for a competitive barley industry.
Lead research organisation |
ConsultAg |
---|---|
Host research organisation | N/A |
Trial funding source | GRDC TAR00006,TAR00007 |
Related program |
Regional Cropping Solutions Network |
Acknowledgments |
This has been a collaborative project between ConsultAg and the Deparment of Primary Industries and Regional Development. In particular thanks must be given to Geoff Thomas from the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development for assistance in disease severity assessments and statistical analysis. This ensured rigour and consistency of assessments to match standard practices. |
Other trial partners | DPIRD, CFIG |
Crop type | Cereal (Grain): Barley |
---|---|
Treatment type(s) |
|
Trial type | Experimental |
Trial design | Randomised,Replicated,Blocked |
Sow date | Not specified |
---|---|
Harvest date | Not specified |
Plot size | Not specified |
Plot replication | Not specified |
Sow date | Not specified |
---|---|
Harvest date | Not specified |
Plot size | Not specified |
Plot replication | Not specified |
Sow date | Not specified |
---|---|
Harvest date | Not specified |
Plot size | Not specified |
Plot replication | Not specified |
@T1: 2017 Assessment Following Z32 Application (01-01-2017) | @T2: 2017 Assessment Following Z37 Application (01-01-2017) | @T3: 2017 Grain Yield (01-05-2017) | @T4: 2016 flag leaf assessment (01-01-2016) | @T5: 2016 flag-1 leaf assessment (01-01-2016) | @T6: 2016 flag-2 leaf assessment (01-01-2016) | @T7: 2016 flag-3 leaf assessment (01-01-2016) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
# |
Treatment 1
|
Treatment 2
|
Disease Severity Z32 (% leaf area affected) | Disease severity Z37 (% leaf area affected) | Grain yield (t/ha) | Disease severity flag leaf (% leaf area affected) | Disease severity flag-1 (% leaf area affected) | Disease Severity Flag-2 (% leaf area affected) | Disease Severity Flag-3 (% leaf area affected) |
1 | █ Amistar (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | █ Tilt (Z32) | 1.3 | 2.833 | 2.521 | 5.7 | 8.426 | 9.93 | |
1 | █ Tilt (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | █ Tilt (Z37) | 1.7 | 2.667 | 1.563 | 2.813 | 4.237 | 6.881 | |
1 | █ Prosaro (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | █ Tilt (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | 1.7 | 2.917 | 1.34 | 1.85 | 3.137 | 5.066 | |
1 | █ Tilt (Z37) | █ Prosaro (Z32) | 1.9 | 2.622 | 3.789 | 7.338 | 11.575 | 12.348 | |
1 | █ Prosaro (Z37) | █ Prosaro (Z37) | 2.7 | 2.748 | 2.438 | 4.663 | 7.725 | 9.379 | |
1 | █ Tilt (Z32) | █ Prosaro (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | 1.094 | 4.1 | 2.683 | 1.706 | 2.063 | 3.938 | 5.576 |
2 | █ Amistar (Z32) | █ Amistar (Z32) | 1.125 | 4.3 | 2.547 | 3.625 | 6.138 | 8.537 | 11.168 |
2 | █ Prosaro (Z32) | █ Amistar (Z32) + Tilt (Z37) | 1.984 | 5.2 | 2.685 | 1.413 | 2.675 | 3.537 | 5.316 |
2 | █ Untreated Control | █ Untreated Control | 2.772 | 8 | 2.525 | 4.988 | 8.475 | 12.412 | 16.208 |
2 | █ | █ | |||||||
2 | █ | █ | |||||||
2 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
3 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
4 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
5 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
6 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
7 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
8 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ | |||||||
9 | █ | █ |
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.