Assessing the yield response to deep ripping in the northern Albany Port Zone, Western Australia. 2018 Harvest Update

2018

Research organisaton
Funding sources

Trial details

Researcher(s) N/A
Contact email joel@mapiq.com.au
Contact phone 0429917743
Year(s) 2018
Contributor agVivo
Trial location(s) Site 4, Hyden, WA
Assessing the yield response to deep ripping in the northern Albany Port Zone, Western Australia. 2018 Harvest Update locations
Aims

To assess the impact of deep ripping on crop yield over a two year period in the To assess the impact of deep ripping on crop yield over a two year period in the eastern wheatbelt

Key messages
  1. Removing subsurface soil compaction can provide benefits over many years.
  2. Deep ripping provides the opportunity to address other soil constraints such as sub surface acidity
Lead research organisation N/A
Host research organisation N/A
Trial funding source GRDC AVP00003-A
Trial funding source NLP 4-3HOOIWT
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments

The research undertaken was made possible by the significant contributions of the Cusack family who setup the demonstration sites. This assessment of the trial and report is an investment by the GRDC.


Other trial partners Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Wheat
Treatment type(s)
  • Soil: Compaction
  • Soil amelioration: Type
  • Soil amelioration: Rate
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Blocked

Hyden 2018

Sowing machinery

18m DBS

Sow date Not specified
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size 18m x 150m
Plot replication 4
Soil amelioration

Deep Ripping

Deep Ripping + Spading

Offset Discs

Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Table 1: Cost of Treatment

# Treatment 1
Cost ($/ha)
1 Control 0
2 3 t/ha lime 188.6
3 3 t/ha lime + disc 199.6
4 3 t/ha lime + rip 227.1
5 3 t/ha lime + rip + spade 302.2
6 6 t/ha lime 377.1
7 6 t/ha lime + disc 388.1
8 6 t/ha lime + rip 415.6
9 6 t/ha lime + rip + spade 490.8
10 Disc only 11
11 Rip only 38.5
12 Rip + Spade only 113.7

Cost $/ha


Loading

Trial results Table 2: Soil Compaction

# Treatment 1
Soil strength (kPa) Depth (cm)
1 Control 0 0
2 Control 3600 10
3 Control 5000 20
4 Control 4600 30
5 Control 3000 40
6 Control 2500 50
7 Deep Rip 0 0
8 Deep Rip 500 10
9 Deep Rip 600 20
10 Deep Rip 550 30
11 Deep Rip 600 40
12 Deep Rip 800 50

Soil strength kPa


Loading

Trial results Table 3: Soil pH

# Treatment 1
pH CaCl2 (pH) Depth (cm)
1 Control 6.5 0
2 Control 5 10
3 Control 4.5 20
4 Control 4 30
5 Control 4 40
6 Control 4 50
7 Deep Rip 6.4 0
8 Deep Rip 5.5 10
9 Deep Rip 5 20
10 Deep Rip 4.4 30
11 Deep Rip 4 40
12 Deep Rip 4 50
13 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 5.6 0
14 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 5.4 10
15 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 5 20
16 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 4.8 30
17 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 4.6 40
18 Deep Rip + Spade + 6t Lime 4.4 50

pH CaCl2 pH


Loading

Trial results Table 4: Average treatment yield for 2017 canola.

# Treatment 1
Grain yield (t/ha)
1 Control 0.45
2 3 t/ha lime 0.5
3 3 t/ha lime + disc 0.65
4 3 t/ha lime + rip 1.1
5 3 t/ha lime + rip + spade 0.1
6 6 t/ha lime 0.5
7 6 t/ha lime + disc 0.65
8 6 t/ha lime + rip 1.2
9 6 t/ha lime + rip + spade 0.15
10 Disc only 0.65
11 Rip only 1
12 Rip + Spade only 0.15

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Trial results Table 5: Average treatment yield for 2018 wheat.

# Treatment 1
Grain yield (t/ha)
1 Control 3.08
2 3 t/ha lime 2.89
3 3 t/ha lime + disc 3.02
4 3 t/ha lime + rip 3.5
5 3 t/ha lime + rip + spade 3.54
6 6 t/ha lime 3.02
7 6 t/ha lime + disc 2.91
8 6 t/ha lime + rip 4.04
9 6 t/ha lime + rip + spade 3.35
10 Disc only 3.03
11 Rip only 3.91
12 Rip + Spade only 3.75

Grain yield t/ha


Loading

Trial results Table 6

# Treatment 1
Return on investment compared to control ($/ha) Treatment Cost ($/ha) Net 2-year benefit ($/ha) Net 1-year benefit ($/ha)
1 Control 0 0 0 0
2 3 t/ha lime -256 188.6 -92 25
3 3 t/ha lime + disc -129 199.6 -29 100
4 3 t/ha lime + rip 310 227.1 212 325
5 3 t/ha lime + rip + spade -245 302.2 232 -175
6 6 t/ha lime -382 377.1 -30 25
7 6 t/ha lime + disc -370 388.1 -82 100
8 6 t/ha lime + rip 442 415.6 483 375
9 6 t/ha lime + rip + spade -505 490.8 136 -150
10 Disc only 64 11 -25 100
11 Rip only 655 38.5 418 275
12 Rip + Spade only 73 113.7 337 -150

Net 1-year benefit $/ha


Loading

Net 2-year benefit $/ha


Loading

Return on investment compared to control $/ha


Loading

Treatment Cost $/ha


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
Site 4, Hyden, WA Not specified
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source
Trial site Soil order
Site 4, Hyden, WA Tenosol
National soil grid Source
NOTE: National Soil Grid data is aggregated information for background information on the wider area
Actual soil values can vary significantly in a small area and the trial soil tests are the most relevant data where available

Soil properties

Loading

Climate

Derived climate information

No observed climate data available for this trial.
Derived climate data is determined from trial site location and national weather sources.

Site 4, Hyden 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 last modified: 25-09-2019 11:48am AEST