For results please see the attached trial reprot.

In this trial, six commercial chickpea varieties (PBA HatTrick, PBA Boundary, PBA Seamer, PBA Drummond, Kyabra and CBA Captain) were sown in May 2021 in a paddock near Bellata, NSW.
Chickpea emergence was assessed 40 days after planting (40 DAP). Uniform establishment was obtained with no significant difference in emergence between varieties and a narrow range of only 30-33 plants/m2.
The initial assessment of pod loss was delayed until the end of November due to prolonged wet weather during November. There was no desiccation and the crop ripened naturally. Inspection at the end of November showed all grain was mature. This was considered the ‘harvest ready’ timing and described as 0 days after harvest ready (0 DAHR).
Pod loss was assessed by adopting the industry Heliothis ‘beat sheet’ method. A one metre section of row was ‘beaten’ three times with a stick and the number of pods dislodged were counted. This method was an attempt to provide a repeatable, simulation of the effect of a header, and determine the impact of harvest delay or variety choice on magnitude of pod loss.
A new section of row was used for every assessment. Pod loss was assessed at 0 DAHR, 7 DAHR, 14 DAHR, 21 DAHR and 28 DAHR. NB Plots were inspected for ‘naturally’ occurring pod or individual grain loss prior to each assessment. ‘Naturally’ occurring pod loss was only evident at 21 DAHR.
Counts of dislodged pods showed no significant differences between varieties at any assessment timing or overall. The magnitude of pod loss varied by assessment timing and ‘generally’ increased with length of harvest delay. However, the largest pod loss occurred at the 4th timing (21 DAHR) with a mean across varieties of ~165 pods/m2 which represented ~579 kg/ha of potential grain loss. Yield of PBA Seamer in an adjacent trial was 2.84 t/ha. The pod loss measured by a 21 delay in harvest represented ~20% of the yield potential. Pod loss at the final assessment was ~5% less than at the 4th assessment.
Pods and individual seed were only found naturally dislodged at the 21 DAHR assessment. PBA HatTrick had significantly more pods on the ground than all other varieties with no differences apparent in individual grains. The combined level of pod and individual grain loss equated to ~78 kg/ha of extra grain loss.
Rainfall totals in the week prior to assessment were tabulated. There did not appear to be any clear association between the amount of rainfall in in the week prior to assessment and the pod loss measured.
In this situation, large quantities of pod loss were measured using a beat sheet method in an attempt to simulate the impact from a harvest operation. There was no apparent difference in pod loss between varieties with pod loss generally increasing with length of harvest delay. Although the trial was conducted in a ‘wet’ harvest, there was no clear association between pod loss and the amount of rainfall received in the week prior to sampling.

In this trial, six commercial chickpea varieties (PBA HatTrick, PBA Boundary, PBA Seamer, PBA Drummond, Kyabra and CBA Captain) were sown in June 2021 in a paddock near Pittsworth.
Chickpea emergence was assessed in early August. Uniform establishment was obtained with no significant difference in emergence between varieties and a narrow range of only 28-32 plants/m2.
The trial and surrounding commercial crop sustained high levels of Heliothis damage during November due to prolonged wet weather and limited access. Rainfall totals of ~168 mm were recorded in November and ~113 mm in December. There was no desiccation with the crop allowed to ripen naturally. Some regrowth occurred in all plots but did not have an impact on the maturity or pod loss assessments.
The first assessment of crop maturity was conducted in early November, 142 days after planting (142 DAP) on pods that were not visibly damaged by Heliothis. There was no significant difference in % grain maturity with an overall mean of ~88% for all varieties. PBA Drummond appeared the most mature with PBA Boundary the least mature and a range from 76-98%. A second assessment was conducted at 155 DAP with mean grain maturity 99%. This was considered the ‘harvest ready’ timing and described as 0 days after harvest ready (0 DAHR).
Pod loss was assessed by adopting the industry Heliothis ‘beat sheet’ method. A one metre section of row was ‘beaten’ three times with a stick and the number of pods dislodged were counted. This method was an attempt to provide a repeatable, simulation of the effect of a header, and determine the impact of harvest delay or variety choice on magnitude of pod loss.
A new section of row was used for every assessment. Pod loss was assessed at 0 DAHR, 13 DAHR, 29 DAHR and 37 DAHR. NB There was no indication of ‘naturally’ occurring pod loss at any assessment.
Counts of dislodged pods showed no significant differences between varieties at any assessment timing or overall. The magnitude of pod loss varied by assessment timing and ‘generally’ increased with length of harvest delay. However, the largest pod loss occurred at the 3rd timing (29 DAHR) with a mean across varieties of ~133 pods/m2 which represented ~400 kg/ha of potential grain loss. Pod loss at the final assessment was ~15-20% less than at the 3rd assessment.
Rainfall totals in the week or fortnight prior to assessment were tabulated. There did not appear to be any clear association between the amount of rainfall in either of those periods and the pod loss measured.
In this situation, large quantities of pod loss were measured using a beat sheet method to try to simulate the impact from a harvest operation. There were no apparent differences between varieties with pod loss generally increasing with length of harvest delay. Although the trial was conducted in a ‘wet’ harvest, there was no clear association between pod loss and the amount of rainfall received in the week (or fortnight) prior to sampling.

 Indigo 76 microbial seed treatment was applied @ 3mL/1000kg seed one day prior to planting. There was no significant impact on establishment, NDVI (~crop biomass) or grain yield across the four crop types evaluated. There was however a significant reduction in grain screenings in Indigo treated plots with a reduction in average screenings from 5.6% to 4.9%.The level of impact did not made any difference in the receival grade for any crop. There was no significant difference in barley retention but a clear trend to increased retention when Indigo was applied. Retention increased from 59 to 62%. No change in grain quality was obtained in this situation. In this trial, the application of Indigo 76 microbial seed treatment did not achieve a significant impact on yield or quality grade when applied to wheat, barley, durum or chickpea seed.

To evaluate mixtures of paraquat with Group 14 herbicides for the knockdown control of common sowthistle in fallow

Common sowthistle is one of the most common, problem weeds in the northern cropping region. It is particularly difficult to manage in fallow due to increasing levels of glyphosate tolerance together with a capability to emerge in all seasons. In recent years, a number of new Group 14 (G) herbicides have been registered for improved speed of weed burndown or brownout and control when mixed with glyphosate or paraquat. This project was designed to evaluate the impact of mixtures of Group 14 (G) herbicides with paraquat (Gramoxone 250 formulation) when used as a 2nd knock application. The 1st knock was an application of Glyphosate 450 at 500 mL/ha. This rate was chosen to provide sub lethal control of common sowthistle and allow a more effective evaluation of the impact of the Group G mixtures with paraquat. Standalone applications of Terrador and Sharpen were also applied.

Common sowthistle is one of the most common problem weeds in the northern cropping region. It is particularly difficult to manage in fallow due to increasing levels of glyphosate tolerance together with a capability to emerge in all seasons. In recent years, a number of new Group 14 (G) herbicides have been registered for improved speed of weed burndown/brownout and control when mixed with glyphosate or paraquat.
This project was designed to evaluate the impact of mixtures of glufosinate (Biffo formulation) with Group 14 (G) herbicides when used as a single or 1st knock application.

Total harvest grain losses were ~220 kg/ha. At a price of $1,000/t, this represented a financial impact of ~$220/ha. The grain losses consistedof ~150 kg/ha as pods on the ground, ~30 kg/ha as individual grains on the ground and ~30 kg/ha as pods still attached to plants. The use ofair assist in this situation had no impact on pod loss on the ground, pods still attached to plants or the total grain loss despite a trend (p=10%)to a 7 kg/ha reduction in individual grain loss on the ground.In this situation, a potential crop yield of ~2.5 t/ha was reduced by ~0.2 t/ha in grain losses at the front of the header during harvest.

Total harvest grain losses were ~230 kg/ha. At a price of $1,000/t, this represented a financial impact of ~$230/ha. The grain losses consistedof ~120 kg/ha as pods on the ground, ~50 kg/ha as individual grains on the ground and ~45 kg/ha of pods still attached to plants. The use ofair assist in this situation had no impact on pod loss on the ground, pods still attached to plants or the total grain loss despite a 13 kg/hareduction in individual grain loss on the ground.In this situation, a potential crop yield of ~2.4 t/ha was reduced by ~0.2 t/ha in grain losses at the front of the header during harvest.

Total harvest grain losses were ~370 kg/ha. At a price of $1,000/t, this represented a financial impact of ~$370/ha. The grain losses consisted of~230-250 kg/ha as pods on the ground and ~130-140 kg/ha as individual grains on the ground. The use of air assist in this situation had noimpact on the pod loss on the ground or the total grain loss despite a 14 kg/ha reduction in individual grain loss on the ground.In this situation, a potential crop yield of ~1.5 t/ha was reduced by ~0.43 t/ha due to rain and hail between desiccation and harvest. Inaddition, ~0.37 t/ha were lost at the front of the header during harvest with a final achieved yield of only 0.7 t/ha.

Total harvest grain losses were ~150 kg/ha. At a price of $1,000/ha, this represented a financial impact of ~$150/ha. The grain lossesconsisted of ~100 kg/ha as pods on the ground, ~55 kg/ha as individual grains on the ground with negligible losses as pods attached to stalks.The use of air assist in this situation had no impact on individual grains on the ground or pods attached to stalks. The use of air assist reducedtotal grain loss by ~40 kg/ha and pod loss on ground by ~31 kg/ha.In this situation, a potential crop yield of ~1.15 t/ha was reduced by ~0.15 t/ha in grain losses at the front of the header during harvest.

• No significant impact on yield from additional nitrogen at either rate or time of application  
• No significant impact on yield from addition of Rhizobia 

• No significant impact on yield from additional nitrogen at either rate or time of application  
• No significant impact on yield from addition of Rhizobia  
• High variability within trial for both emergence and yield 
• NB there were significant nitrogen responses in both a canola and wheat trial located within ~20-40 m

• No significant impact on yield from additional nitrogen at either rate or time of application  
• No significant impact on yield from addition of Rhizobia  
• Yield variability within treatments was high 

• This was an extremely nitrogen deficient site with the most consistent levels of ‘apparent’ yield benefit from nitrogen application at planting 
• However there was no significant impact on yield from additional nitrogen at either rate or time of application  
• No significant impact on yield from addition of Rhizobia