This document is based on the results from individual trials. Variability in product performance is expected across trials and environments. Different outcomes are possible under different trial situations; brand of herbicide applied; environmental conditions before, at and following application; sprayer setup; adjuvant choice; water quality and spray volume; weed size and weed stress; and herbicide resistance status of the population. Trials seek to build on current knowledge – therefore this summary may contain experimental use patterns that are currently not specifically labelled for all of the weed(s) targeted in the trial, or treatments applied at a weed growth stage or application timing that may differ to the product label. In some circumstances, inclusion of a particular treatment is included to demonstrate why this product should not be used in that particular situation. Any research with unregistered agricultural chemicals or of unregistered products, rates or use patterns reported in this document does not constitute a recommendation for that particular use by the authors or the authors’ organisations. All agricultural chemical applications must accord with the currently registered label for that particular agricultural chemical, crop and region.
Any recommendations, suggestions or opinions contained in this publication do not necessarily represent the policy or views of the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) or Independent Consultants Australia Network (ICAN) or trial contractors. No person should act on the basis of the contents of this publication without first obtaining specific, independent, professional advice. The GRDC, ICAN and trial contractors 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 publication.
| Researcher(s) |
Mark Congreve |
|---|---|
| Contact email | mark@icanrural.com.au |
| Contact phone | 0294824930 |
| Year(s) | 2025 |
| Contributor | ICAN Rural |
| Trial location(s) |
Spring Ridge, NSW
|
Trial objectives
In this trial there was no significant difference between glyphosate +/- ammonium sulphate or Li700 in bore or rainwater when applied at 60 L/ha spray volume.
When applied at 100 L/ha spray volume, glyphosate +/- ammonium sulphate or Li700 also delivered equivalent performance when rainwater was used. When bore water was used at 100 L/ha spray volume, there was a major reduction in performance of glyphosate alone, however performance was largely able to be restored by pre-treating the bore water with the range of water conditioning surfactants tested.
Additional treatments were included to understand the impact of zinc (as PlantPro Allround Zinc) and calcium (as Sett Enhance) on the performance of glyphosate in rainwater and 100L/ha. As can be seen in the graph, the addition of zinc did not impact the performance of glyphosate. However, the addition of calcium significantly reduced the performance of glyphosate (which reflects a similar outcome to many bore water sources, which are also high in calcium).
Results and discussion
In this trial there was no significant difference between glyphosate +/- ammonium sulphate or Li700 in bore or rainwater when applied at 60 L/ha spray volume.
When applied at 100 L/ha spray volume, glyphosate +/- ammonium sulphate or Li700 also delivered equivalent performance when rainwater was used. When bore water was used at 100 L/ha spray volume, there was a major reduction in performance of glyphosate alone, however performance was largely able to be restored by pre-treating the bore water with the range of water conditioning surfactants tested.
Additional treatments were included to understand the impact of zinc (as PlantPro Allround Zinc) and calcium (as Sett Enhance) on the performance of glyphosate in rainwater and 100L/ha. As can be seen in the graph, the addition of zinc did not impact the performance of glyphosate. However, the addition of calcium significantly reduced the performance of glyphosate (which reflects a similar outcome to many bore water sources, which are also high in calcium).
| Lead research organisation |
ICAN Rural |
|---|---|
| Host research organisation |
AMPS Agribusiness |
| Trial funding source | GRDC ICN2404-002RTX;ICN2403-002RTX |
| Related program | N/A |
| Acknowledgments | N/A |
| Other trial partners | Not specified |
| Crop type | Weed: Other broadleaf |
|---|---|
| Treatment type(s) |
|
| Trial type | Experimental |
| Trial design | Randomised,Replicated,Blocked |
| Sow date | Not specified |
|---|---|
| Harvest date | Not specified |
| Trial design method | RCBD Randomised Complete Block Design |
| Plot size | Not specified |
| Plot replication | 3 |
| Plot randomisation | Y |
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.
