The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (July 2017) and may not be accurate, current or complete. The State of New South Wales (including the NSW Department of Industry), the author and the publisher take no responsibility, and will accept no liability, for the accuracy, currency, reliability or correctness of any information included in the document (including material provided by third parties). Readers should make their own inquiries and rely on their own advice when making decisions related to material contained in this publication. The product trade names in this publication are supplied on the understanding that no preference between equivalent products is intended and that the inclusion of a product name does not imply endorsement by the department over any equivalent product from another manufacturer.
| Researcher(s) |
Luke Beange (NSW DPI) John Cameron (Independent Consultants Australia Network) Graeme Schwenke (NSW DPI) |
|---|---|
| Year(s) | 2016 |
| Contributor | Department of Primary Industries NSW |
| Trial location(s) |
Tamworth Agricultural Institute, NSW
|
| Further information | View external link |
Toreport on decisions used by NSW grains industry advisers to determine nitrogen fertiliser management recommendations.
Key findings:
The northern results on N loss pathways are less relevant to advisers in the central and southern regions where N application timing, soil type and climatic differences are generally quite different from the dominant medium-heavy clays of the north. New N loss research is recommended for the lighter textured soils in regards to the potential for N volatilization losses from surface N application of various products. Economic outcomes from the various strategies being practiced are also needed. Nitrogen loss research should focus less on expensive slow-release products and more on optimising results from urea, the cheapest N source.
Research into better soil water measurement was seen as a priority area, especially given the importance all advisers place on knowing this when making expensive N-fertiliser decisions for a coming cropping season. Zonal management within paddocks is not possible with single site characterisations, so atypical areas of paddocks are over or under-fertilised.
The very early application of N fertiliser ahead of a winter cropping season is well established, but what is not known is how well the subsoil N may be protected or at risk from denitrification in flooding events. Also, better knowledge on specific N use within the profile during the cropping season will help growers to know when late-applied N is likely to be inaccessible to crop use.
Nitrogen mineralisation was highlighted by agronomists from all three regions as an area for greater understanding with regards to the differences caused by climatic conditions, especially rainfall. They also require better understanding of the N produced from both native organic matter and recent legume pasture residues.
There are a number of good decision support tools available currently, with several advisers suggesting that combining the best points of each into one package, even one available as an app, would be highly useful, particularly one with good grower-friendly reports.
Many farmers have low confidence in soil testing. This may be related to a range of factors from poor sampling strategies, to poor sample handling, to poor service from laboratory analysts, to insufficient sample numbers or poor interpretation of the results. It is seen as an expensive option for many, with some advisers looking for quicker and cheaper means of estimating soil mineral N.
Variety-specific N management packages were seen by some senior advisers as key areas for continued research funding, as results from some new varieties have been quite different in terms of N uptake and protein outcomes.
| Lead research organisation |
Department of Primary Industries NSW |
|---|---|
| Host research organisation | N/A |
| Trial funding source | GRDC UQ00079 |
| Related program | N/A |
| Acknowledgments |
This survey and follow-up interview series was part of the project Organic matter and nutrient availability (UQ00079), a collaborative project between state agencies and universities in Queensland, NSW, Victoria and Western Australia with joint investment by GRDC. Special thanks to Fiona Pearson (NSW DPI) for transcribing the hard copy surveys, to Georgia Rose and Erica McKay (ICAN) for collating the survey data and transcribing the interviews, and to Helen Squires (NSW DPI) for producing the map. |
| Other trial partners | Not specified |
| Crop type | None: No crop specified |
|---|---|
| Treatment type(s) |
|
| Trial type | Article/commentary |
| Trial design | Not applicable |
| Sow date | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Psuedoreplication | Not specified |
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 (