This report has been prepared in good faith on the basis of information available at the date of writing without any independent verification. While the information in this report is believed to be correct, no responsibility is accepted for its accuracy. No liability is accepted for any statement, error or omission. The Corrigin Farm Improvement Group will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or arising by reason of any person using or relying on the information in this report. Readers are responsible for assessing the relevance and accuracy of the content of this report. Please note that permission by the author is required for articles being reproduced or presented. The Corrigin Farm Improvement Group does not endorse or recommend any product, manufacturer or service included in this publication. It is intended for growers to use the information to make more informed adoption decisions about these practices, products or services.
| Researcher(s) |
Simon Wallwork |
|---|---|
| Contact email | admin@cfig.org.au |
| Contact phone | 0476046100 |
| Year(s) | 2013 - 2014 |
| Contributor | Corrigin Farm Improvement Group |
| Trial location(s) |
Corrigin, WA
|
In these trials Corrigin Farm Improvement Group aimed to test the benefits of growing crops on chemical fallowed soil. The trials specifically compared which crop species were most profitable under a chemical fallowing regime. In season 2013 barley was most profitable and in 2014 albus lupins were the most profitable crop grown on chemical fallow.
This project was designed to test the relative benefit of chemical fallow with a range of different crop types. The trials compared different crop types on chemical fallow with the aim to identify which crop is likely to produce the highest return. The trials was a joint effort with Pulse Australia with the aim also to demonstrate and test pulse species in the Corrigin district.
2018
Soil moisture measurements were taken on the 24th of May 2013 to confirm whether there had been carryover moisture from season 2012 in the bare areas of the paddock (due to mice damage in 2012). Based on the soil moisture tests below, and with regard to the bared areas observed in the paddock, the area shaded blue was identified as the only area with a potential representation of the chemical fallow effect. So in regards to final crop yield, this is the only one that was used for continuous crop versus chemical fallow comparisons.
2019
It was observed on the 23rd of July for both the wheat and barley, continuous cropped plots, were less vigorous and weedier than the respective chemical fallowed plots. For the canola on this day the chemical fallowed plot has commenced flowering sooner than the continuous cropped canola plot. There was more purpling on the continuous cropped canola compared with the chemical fallow plots which was possibly a combination of nitrogen deficiency and herbicide damage from the chemical, Intervix. On the 23rd of July it was also observed no differences in vigour between continuous cropped chickpeas and albus lupins when compared with the respective chemical fallowed plots.
On the 31st of July it was observed that net blotch disease had infected the barley plots and needed spraying with fungicide.
On the 1st of December when the trial was harvested it was observed that the chemical fallowed albus lupins appeared to have more terminal pods when compared with the continuous cropped plot. On this day both canola plots showed symptoms of severe shedding. The continuous cropped canola plot was thinner and shorter compared the chemical fallow canola plot. For both the wheat and barley, the chemical fallowed plots were thicker than the respective continuous cropped plots.
The trials over the two seasons has been a valuable learning experience for members of the Corrigin Farm Improvement Group (CFIG). There has been four group field days at the sites and three other smaller group visits including members of the GRDC Western Panel in 2013. The trials have also been an opportunity for CFIG and Pulse Australia (Alan Meldrum) to work together showing farmers pulse options in our area. The results of the trials were presented at the CFIG AGM in early 2014 and will be presented in March 2015 at the CFIG Crop Updates.
Soil moisture measurements were taken on the 24th May 2013 to confirm whether there had been carry over moisture from season 2012 in the bare areas of the paddock (due to mice damage in 2012). Based on the soil moisture tests below, and with regard to the bared areas observed in the paddock, the area shaded blue was identified as the only area with potential representation of the chemical fallow effect. So in regards to final crop yield this is the only that was used for continuous crop versus chemical fallow comparisons.
The trial results show that chemical fallow can offer some large yield and margin gains and these are not limited to cereal crops. Break crops like canola and pulses may offer another seasonal break from cereals to subsequently improve the success of following cereal crops. These higher value break crops, in their own right, may be more profitable than a cereal crop on chemical fallow as indicated by the results in 2014.
Chemical fallow will continue to be adopted in medium rainfall regions if it can help reduce volatility in crop returns by improving crop yields and reducing average inputs costs over a number of seasons. These trials were conducted over two, above average seasons, yet the benefits of chemical fallow were still realised with some of the crop types. It is generally well accepted that chemical fallow can offer higher relative gain in dry seasons. So it is the combination of production upside in both poor and good seasons which means chemical fallow can help reduce the volatility in crop income.
| Lead research organisation |
Corrigin Farm Improvement Group |
|---|---|
| Host research organisation |
Corrigin Farm Improvement Group |
| Trial funding source | COGGO |
| Related program | N/A |
| Acknowledgments |
The Corrigin Farm Improvement Group (CFIG) wishes to thank COGGO for their financial support for this project and special thanks to Simmon Wallwork who donated so much time and resources to the on-farm trials. |
| Other trial partners | Not specified |
| Crop types | Cereal (Grain): Barley Cereal (Grain): Wheat Oilseed: Canola Grain Legume: Chickpeas Grain Legume: Field peas Grain Legume: Lentils Grain Legume: Lupins |
|---|---|
| Treatment type(s) |
|
| Trial type | Experimental |
| Trial design | Unknown |
| Sow rate or Target density | 50 kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 |
| Sow rate or Target density | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery | Not specified |
| Sow date | Not specified |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser | Not specified |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 60kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 |
| Sow rate or Target density | 3.5kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 12grms Triasulfuron + 1% Hasten Crop Oil + 300mls /ha Tilt on Wheat and Barley Strip 4/09/2013 1l/ha Clethodim + 100mls/ha Quizalofop on all Pulses |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 100kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | Not specified |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 12grms Triasulfuron + 1% Hasten Crop Oil + 300mls /ha Tilt on Wheat and Barley Strip 4/09/2013 1l/ha Clethodim + 100mls/ha Quizalofop on all Pulses |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 100kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 80kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 12grms Triasulfuron + 1% Hasten Crop Oil + 300mls /ha Tilt on Wheat and Barley Strip 4/09/2013 1l/ha Clethodim + 100mls/ha Quizalofop on all Pulses |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 114kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 17 May 2013 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
30kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
17/05/2013 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 1.2kg/ha Terbyne + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate @ 60 l/ha Water 3/07/2013 Canola Strip - 1.5 kg/ha Atrazine + 300 ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5 per cent Enhance Crop Oil + 50 ml Alpha Forte 1/9/2013 12grms Triasulfuron + 1% Hasten Crop Oil + 300mls /ha Tilt on Wheat and Barley Strip 4/09/2013 1l/ha Clethodim + 100mls/ha Quizalofop on all Pulses |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 60 kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 23 April 2014 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
50kg/ha DAPNP at sowing, 60l/ha UAN post emergent |
| Herbicide |
23/4/2014 Presowing albus lupins and canola; 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate +0.2% wetter @ 60 l/ha Water. Rest of trial site; 1st knockdown 1.5l/ha Glyphosate + 0.2% wetter 28/5/2014 Presowing barley, wheat and chickpeas; 2l/ha Paraquat + 2l/ha Trifluralin. 29/5/2014 Post sowing, preemergent for chickpeas 120g/ha Balance 9/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins and canola; 500ml/ha Clethodim + 300ml/ha Quizalofop + 1% Hasten + 100ml/ha Alphacypermethrin + 100ml/ha Chlorpyrifos 25/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins; 120ml/ha Diflufenican + 120g/ha Metribuzin 27/6/2014 Post emergent for canola; 500ml/ha Intervix + 0.5% Hasten 16/7/2014 Post emergent for chickpeas; 600ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5% Uptake + 1% Ammo 31/7/2014 Post emergent for canola, wheat, barley 80g/ha Clopyralid + 40 L/ha UAN 6/8/2014 Post emergent for wheat and barley 20 l/ha UAN + 900ml/ha Triathlon (Bromoxynil + Diflufenican + 400ml/ha MCPA LVE + 180 ml/ha Propiconazole + 80 ml/ha Tebuconazole |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 60 kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 23 April 2014 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
50kg/ha DAPNP at sowing, 60l/ha UAN post emergent |
| Herbicide |
23/4/2014 Presowing albus lupins and canola; 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate +0.2% wetter @ 60 l/ha Water. Rest of trial site; 1st knockdown 1.5l/ha Glyphosate + 0.2% wetter 28/5/2014 Presowing barley, wheat and chickpeas; 2l/ha Paraquat + 2l/ha Trifluralin. 29/5/2014 Post sowing, preemergent for chickpeas 120g/ha Balance 9/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins and canola; 500ml/ha Clethodim + 300ml/ha Quizalofop + 1% Hasten + 100ml/ha Alphacypermethrin + 100ml/ha Chlorpyrifos 25/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins; 120ml/ha Diflufenican + 120g/ha Metribuzin 27/6/2014 Post emergent for canola; 500ml/ha Intervix + 0.5% Hasten 16/7/2014 Post emergent for chickpeas; 600ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5% Uptake + 1% Ammo 31/7/2014 Post emergent for canola, wheat, barley 80g/ha Clopyralid + 40 L/ha UAN 6/8/2014 Post emergent for wheat and barley 20 l/ha UAN + 900ml/ha Triathlon (Bromoxynil + Diflufenican + 400ml/ha MCPA LVE + 180 ml/ha Propiconazole + 80 ml/ha Tebuconazole |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 4.7 kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 23 April 2014 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
50kg/ha DAPNP and 30kg/ha Urea at sowing 40l/ha UAN post emergent |
| Herbicide |
23/4/2014 Presowing albus lupins and canola; 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate +0.2% wetter @ 60 l/ha Water. Rest of trial site; 1st knockdown 1.5l/ha Glyphosate + 0.2% wetter 28/5/2014 Presowing barley, wheat and chickpeas; 2l/ha Paraquat + 2l/ha Trifluralin. 29/5/2014 Post sowing, preemergent for chickpeas 120g/ha Balance 9/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins and canola; 500ml/ha Clethodim + 300ml/ha Quizalofop + 1% Hasten + 100ml/ha Alphacypermethrin + 100ml/ha Chlorpyrifos 25/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins; 120ml/ha Diflufenican + 120g/ha Metribuzin 27/6/2014 Post emergent for canola; 500ml/ha Intervix + 0.5% Hasten 16/7/2014 Post emergent for chickpeas; 600ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5% Uptake + 1% Ammo 31/7/2014 Post emergent for canola, wheat, barley 80g/ha Clopyralid + 40 L/ha UAN 6/8/2014 Post emergent for wheat and barley 20 l/ha UAN + 900ml/ha Triathlon (Bromoxynil + Diflufenican + 400ml/ha MCPA LVE + 180 ml/ha Propiconazole + 80 ml/ha Tebuconazole |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 80kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 23 April 2014 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
50kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
23/4/2014 Presowing albus lupins and canola; 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate +0.2% wetter @ 60 l/ha Water. Rest of trial site; 1st knockdown 1.5l/ha Glyphosate + 0.2% wetter 28/5/2014 Presowing barley, wheat and chickpeas; 2l/ha Paraquat + 2l/ha Trifluralin. 29/5/2014 Post sowing, preemergent for chickpeas 120g/ha Balance 9/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins and canola; 500ml/ha Clethodim + 300ml/ha Quizalofop + 1% Hasten + 100ml/ha Alphacypermethrin + 100ml/ha Chlorpyrifos 25/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins; 120ml/ha Diflufenican + 120g/ha Metribuzin 27/6/2014 Post emergent for canola; 500ml/ha Intervix + 0.5% Hasten 16/7/2014 Post emergent for chickpeas; 600ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5% Uptake + 1% Ammo 31/7/2014 Post emergent for canola, wheat, barley 80g/ha Clopyralid + 40 L/ha UAN 6/8/2014 Post emergent for wheat and barley 20 l/ha UAN + 900ml/ha Triathlon (Bromoxynil + Diflufenican + 400ml/ha MCPA LVE + 180 ml/ha Propiconazole + 80 ml/ha Tebuconazole |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery | Not specified |
| Sow date | Not specified |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser | Not specified |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery | Not specified |
| Sow date | Not specified |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser | Not specified |
| Herbicide | Not specified |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| Sow rate or Target density | 110kg/ha |
|---|---|
| Sowing machinery |
Deep Blade System (DBS) on 25cm spacing and knife points |
| Sow date | 23 April 2014 |
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | Not specified |
| Fertiliser |
50kg/ha DAPNP at sowing |
| Herbicide |
23/4/2014 Presowing albus lupins and canola; 1.2 l/ha Glyphosate + 2 L/ha Trifluralin + 1% Ammonium Sulphate +0.2% wetter @ 60 l/ha Water. Rest of trial site; 1st knockdown 1.5l/ha Glyphosate + 0.2% wetter 28/5/2014 Presowing barley, wheat and chickpeas; 2l/ha Paraquat + 2l/ha Trifluralin. 29/5/2014 Post sowing, preemergent for chickpeas 120g/ha Balance 9/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins and canola; 500ml/ha Clethodim + 300ml/ha Quizalofop + 1% Hasten + 100ml/ha Alphacypermethrin + 100ml/ha Chlorpyrifos 25/6/2014 Post emergent for albus lupins; 120ml/ha Diflufenican + 120g/ha Metribuzin 27/6/2014 Post emergent for canola; 500ml/ha Intervix + 0.5% Hasten 16/7/2014 Post emergent for chickpeas; 600ml/ha Clethodim + 0.5% Uptake + 1% Ammo 31/7/2014 Post emergent for canola, wheat, barley 80g/ha Clopyralid + 40 L/ha UAN 6/8/2014 Post emergent for wheat and barley 20 l/ha UAN + 900ml/ha Triathlon (Bromoxynil + Diflufenican + 400ml/ha MCPA LVE + 180 ml/ha Propiconazole + 80 ml/ha Tebuconazole |
| Fungicide | Not specified |
| # | Variety |
Treatment 1
|
Treatment 2
|
Treatment 3
|
Treatment 4
|
Gross margin ($/ha) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | █ | █ Yield (kg/ha) | █ Price $/t | █ Income ($/ha) | █ Total input costs* ($/ha) | Gross Return ( Inc |
| 2 | █ Baudin Barley | █ 3616 | █ 275 | █ 995 | █ 81 | 913 |
| 3 | █ Calingiri Wheat | █ 2902 | █ 310 | █ 900 | █ 86 | 814 |
| 4 | █ Cobbler Canola | █ 845 | █ 520 | █ 439 | █ 80 | 359 |
| 5 | █ Amira Albus Lupins | █ 959 | █ 465 | █ 446 | █ 129 | 317 |
| 6 | █ Cassab Lentils | █ not harvested | █ n/a | █ n/a | █ n/a | n/a |
| 7 | █ Gunyah Field Peas | █ 776 | █ 325 | █ 252 | █ 108 | 144 |
| 8 | █ Ambar Chickpeas | █ 1108 | █ 550 | █ 609 | █ 131 | 479 |
| 9 | █ Genesis 836 Chickpeas | █ 834 | █ 550 | █ 459 | █ 131 | 328 |
| 10 | █ Genesis 836 Chickpeas Chemical Fallow | █ 798 | █ 550 | █ 439 | █ 131 | 308 |
| 11 | █ Neelum Chickpeas | █ 821 | █ 550 | █ 452 | █ 131 | 321 |
| 12 | █ PBA Striker Chickpeas | █ 1016 | █ 550 | █ 559 | █ 131 | 428 |
| 13 | █ PBA Striker Chickpeas Chemical fallow | █ 1320 | █ 550 | █ 726 | █ 131 | 595 |
| 14 | █ Bass Barley | █ 4401 | █ 255 | █ 1122 | █ 80 | 1042 |
| 15 | █ Bass Barley Chemical Fallow | █ 4882 | █ 255 | █ 1245 | █ 80 | 1165 |
| # | Variety |
Treatment 1
|
Treatment 2
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | █ Crop | █ Yield gain/loss (kg) | █ % yield gain/loss |
| 2 | █ Genesis 836 Chickpeas chemical fallow | █ -36 | █ -4% |
| 3 | █ Striker Chickpeas chemical fallow | █ 303 | █ 30% |
| 4 | █ Bass Barley chemical fallow | █ 481 | █ 11% |
| # | Variety |
Treatment 1
|
Profit/Cost ratio (value) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | █ Crop | █ Yield gain/loss (kg) | % yield gain/loss |
| 2 | █ Albus Lupins | █ 360 | 34 |
| 3 | █ Canola | █ 141 | 50 |
| 4 | █ Barley | █ 584 | 50 |
| 5 | █ Wheat | █ 56 | 3 |
| 6 | █ Striker Chickpeas | █ -140 | -20 |
| 7 | █ Genesis 836 Chickpeas | █ -22 | -7 |
| # | Variety |
Treatment 1
|
Treatment 2
|
Treatment 3
|
Treatment 4
|
Cost ($/ha) | Profit ($/ha) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | █ | █ Yield (kg/ha) | █ Price ($/t) | █ Income ($/ha) | █ Diff. in Spray Machine costs ($/ha) | Total input costs* ( | Gross Return |
| 2 | █ Amira Albus Lupins Chemical Fallow | █ 1066 | █ 600 | █ 639 | █ | 134 | 505 |
| 3 | █ Amira Albus Lupins | █ 1425 | █ 600 | █ 855 | █ | 134 | 721 |
| 4 | █ Canola 43Y85 | █ 283 | █ 500 | █ 141 | █ 5 | 117 | 24 |
| 5 | █ Canola 43Y85 Chemical Fallow | █ 424 | █ 500 | █ 212 | █ 5 | 117 | 94 |
| 6 | █ Hindmarsh Barley | █ 1180 | █ 300 (malt) | █ 354 | █ | 87 | 267 |
| 7 | █ Hindmarsh Barley Chemical Fallow | █ 1764 | █ 280 (feed) | █ 494 | █ | 87 | 407 |
| 8 | █ mace wheat | █ 1899 | █ 290 (asw) | █ 551 | █ | 87 | 464 |
| 9 | █ Mace Wheat Chemical Fallow | █ 1955 | █ 280 (agp) | █ 547 | █ | 87 | 461 |
| 10 | █ Striker Chickpeas | █ 702 | █ 495 | █ 348 | █ -5 | 130 | 217 |
| 11 | █ Striker Chickpeas chemical fallow | █ 562 | █ 495 | █ 278 | █ -5 | 130 | 148 |
| 12 | █ Genesis836 Chickpeas | █ 315 | █ 495 | █ 156 | █ -5 | 130 | 26 |
| 13 | █ Genesis836 Chickpeas Chemical Fallow | █ 292 | █ 495 | █ 145 | █ -5 | 130 | 14 |
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 (