1. Home ::  
  2. Trial Search

Lime versus fertiliser comparison trial

2013
CC BY 4.0

Research organisation
Mingenew-Irwin Group

Trial details

Researcher(s) Brooke Forsyth (MIG)
Debbie Gillam (MIG)
Sebastian Recabarren (MIG)
Year(s) 2013
Contributor Mingenew-Irwin Group
Trial location(s) , WA
Lime versus fertiliser comparison trial locations
Aims

To investigate the effect of substituting compound fertiliser with lime sand and post seeding nitrogen in wheat.

Key messages
  • A high application of compound fertiliser and post nitrogen produced the highest yield but it was not siginificantly higher than the other treatments.
  • Applications of lime at 2 t/ha applications are as good as fertiliser aplications (100 kg/ha Agstar) but not better than high levels of compound combined with post nitrogen at this site.
  • Even though plants per m2 vary between treatments the variation is not significant.
  • Lime has been applied to this paddock previously.
Lead research organisation Mingenew-Irwin Group
Host research organisation N/A
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments

Many thanks to the Horwood family for the trial site and assistance during the season.
Other trial partners Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Cereal (Grain): Wheat
Treatment type(s)
  • Fertiliser : Type
  • Soil Improvement
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Replicated

2013

Sow rate or Target density 90 kg/ha (Wyalkatchem)
Sowing machinery

DAFWA Small plot cone seeder, Knife points and press wheel
Sow date 21 May 2013
Harvest date Unknown
Plot size 2m x 20m
Plot replication Not specified
Fertiliser
  • Pre: As per treatments
  • Post: 50 kg/ha NS41
Herbicide
  • Pre: 1.2L/ha SpraySeed + 2.0L/ha Trifuralin
  • Post: 1.0 L/ha Decision + 1.0% Hasten, 670 ml/ha Velocity + 1.0% Hasten
Pesticide

Pre: 200ml Talstar + 100ml Dominex
Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Table 1

# Treatment 1
Plant density (plants/m2) Protein (%) Screenings (%) Grain yield (t/ha) Test weight (kg/hL) Returns ($/ha)
1 █ 100 kg/ha Agstar Extra + 60 kg/ha NS61 at tillering 114 12.9 1.7 2.63 79.7 810
2 █ 100 kg/ha Agstar Extra + 2.0t/ha lime 100 11.9 2.08 2.5 80 770
3 █ 50 kg/ha NS61 at Tillering + 2.0 t/ha lime sand 126 13.1 1.49 2.48 80.2 763
4 █ 100 kg/ha Agstar Extra 110 11.5 2.05 2.38 80.3 733
5 █ 0 kg/ha Agstar Extra + 2.0 t/ha ime sand 93 11.8 2.01 2.38 80 733
6 █ 50 kg/ha Agstar Extra + 2.0t/ha lime 109 11.7 1.95 2.37 80 730

Grain yield t/ha

Loading

Plant density plants/m2

Loading

Protein %

Loading

Returns $/ha

Loading

Screenings %

Loading

Test weight kg/hL

Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
, WA Not specified
Derived trial site soil information
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 WA
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000

Climate

WA 2013

Observed climate information

Rainfall avg ann (mm) 283mm

Derived climate information

WA

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

2013 trial report



Trial last modified: 19-01-2026 04:15am AEST