There were no significant differences in lentil grain yield among stubble treatments. As seen in 2013, stripper and conventional stubble treatments resulted in taller and more erect lentil plants

Hindmarsh barley grain yield was unaffected by stubble or seeding systems averaging 3.3 t/ha. Of all pre-emergent herbicides trialled a grain yield reduction was observed for Sakura (average reduction 0.18 t/ha). A split application of Boxer Gold (IBS/POST) was slightly safer compared to the full rate IBS.

• Hindmarsh barley grain yield was unaffected by stubble or seeding systems averaging 3.3 t/ha.
• Of all pre-emergent herbicides trialled a grain yield reduction was observed for Sakura (average reduction 0.18 t/ha). A split application of Boxer Gold (IBS/POST) was slightly safer compared to the full rate IBS.

• There were no significant differences in lentil grain yield among stubble treatments.
• As seen in 2013, stripper and conventional stubble treatments resulted in taller and more erect lentil plants.

• 18 cm (7”) systems showed better plant establishment in a drier seeding than the 30 cm (12”) system.
• Higher seeding rates resulted in higher grain yield but also higher screenings and lower protein.
• Grass weeds were lower in the higher seeding rate and in the 18 cm row spacing indicating crop competition is a non-chemical weed reduction method.
• Single row or spread row seeding boots showed little differences in plant establishment, grain yield and quality or grass weed competition.

• Reducing row spacing to 18 cm from 30 cm increased grain yield of wheat by more than 0.5 t/ha in 2015 and 2016.
• Increasing seeding rate also increased grain yield in 2015 and 2016.

• Late grassy weed dry matter was 65% lower, and barley grass weed seed set was 57% lower, with a higher seeding rate.
• 18 cm row spacing had 42% lower grass weed dry matter than 30 cm row spacing.
• Single row or spread row seeding boots showed little differences in plant establishment, grain yield and quality or grass weed competition.

• 18 cm (7”) systems showed better plant establishment in a drier seeding than the 30 cm (12”) system.
• Higher seeding rates resulted in higher grain yield but also higher screenings and lower protein.
• Grass weeds were lower in the higher seeding rate and in the 18 cm row spacing indicating crop competition is a non-chemical weed reduction method.
• Single row or spread row seeding boots showed little differences in plant establishment, grain yield and quality or grass weed competition.

Juvenile snails can be killed with bait (mortality 18-80%), but efficacy is highly variable due to numerous factors. Preliminary studies indicate that bait density is more important than bait size. GRDC is funding a new round of snail/slug research to expand on some of these scoping studies.

• Genetic mutations in the Septoria tritici blotch (STB) pathogen Zymoseptoria tritici can differentially influence the performance of triazole fungicides in the laboratory.
• There should continue to be a focus on the principles of an integrated disease management (IDM) approach to control diseases such as STB, using rotation, cultivar resistance, later sowing, and other aspects of cultural control to compliment fungicide control.
• New research on foliar fungicide indicates that the principal fungicides still give good in-field control of STB up to 30 days after application when applied at full label rates.
• There are significant differences in disease control amongst the different fungicide products and rates of application when monitored leaves are assessed more than 30 days after application.
• Single spray timings of foliar fungicide for control of STB made during the late tillering phase gave less effective disease control than applications made at first node (GS31). Spray application delayed until flag leaf gave the poorest control of STB but gave superior leaf rust control later in the season.

 • Reduced sensitivity of the Septoria tritici blotch (STB) pathogen Zymoseptoria tritici to triazole fungicides is likely to be an increasing problem, following the discovery of more resistant biotypes (R8 strain or Isoform 11) on the mainland in 2016.
• The presence of this strain and its proportion in the population will influence disease management strategies differentially.
• In Tasmania, early season disease control in the field with flutriafol (2017 trials) and tebuconazole (2016 trials) has been reduced by the more resistant biotypes of the pathogen, whilst on the mainland trial sites the activity of flutriafol appears to have been maintained in 2017 for the control of STB.
• The performance of a new SDHI based seed treatment and to a lesser extent fluquinconazole (Jockey) has been better than flutriafol in Tasmanian trials.
• Triazole/strobilurin mixtures based on epoxiconazole and azoxystrobin (e.g. Radial, Tazer Xpert), along with new as yet unregistered combinations of triazole & SDHI have given excellent control of STB.
• In 2016 the advantage of these products was evident in disease control and yield response in wheat but in 2017 the yield response to these products was similar to that observed with Opus and Prosaro (registered in wheat but not registered for STB control).
• Single spray timings of foliar fungicide for control of STB made during the tillering phase gave less effective disease control than applications made between GS31 – GS39.
• The most effective control of STB on a canopy leaf layer is achieved by applying fungicide to that leaf shortly after it has fully emerged but before infection becomes established.
• Where more than one fungicide is used in wheat avoid using the same triazole active ingredient twice in a season, irrespective of diseases to be controlled. If it is not possible ensure it is mixed with another mode of action (strobilurin) at one of the timings.
• Since strobilurins are at higher risk of resistance avoid using products containing these active ingredients more than once in a season.

For the fourth year in a row grain yield was increased by controlling summer weeds. There has been a return on investment in all years of this trial, by controlling summer weeds. Retaining or removing stubble has only a minor effect on yield.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction; sheep’s mouths cause damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface; natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubbles and crops appears to make more N available to crops, which can increase yield; the mechanisms by which this is achieved remain uncertain.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this. 
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this. 
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Sheep grazing on stubbles and crops do not reduce crop yields provided summer weeds are controlled and at least 70% stubble cover (2-3 t/ha cereal stubble) is maintained.
• Reduced water infiltration and yield from grazing are due to removal of cover rather than compaction – it is sheep’s mouths that do damage, not their hooves.
• Sheep do compact soil, but only at the surface and natural shrinking and swelling of soils and sowing with knife points alleviates this.
• Grazing of stubble and crops appears to make more N available to crops which can increase yield, although the mechanisms remain unclear.

• Grazing crop stubbles makes more mineral N available to crops which increases grain N uptake and is perhaps an overlooked benefit of keeping livestock in stubble-retained farming systems.

• Overall the efficacy of pre-emergent herbicide control of ARG increased with increasing water rates. This was particularly the case with Sakura, supporting the results from Western Australia.
• There was no significant difference between weed control treatments (both between and within herbicide treatments) on end grain yield.
• This trial experienced extremely dry conditions throughout the season, as such grain yield was limited.

Ultimately herbicide selection should be based on the suitability of that product to the sowing conditions, weed pressure and rotational fit while trying to completely control ARG in both single & consecutive years, managing for chemical groups.  Annual ryegrass populations can incre3ase rapidly if in any one year poor control occurs.  Therefore careful rotational planning to include crop types, vaqrieties and herbicide technologies is essential in an overarching control strategy.  From the results observed in this two year trial it is evident that effective weed control in year one results in a reduction in seed season are necessary to reduce weed seed bank numbers potentially making Roundup Ready canola systems more viable in a lower risk situation.  Herbicides with lo binding, moderate solubility and longer persistence such as Sakura tend to offer higher levels of weed control.  It is also clear that herbicide technology is not straight forward and attention to detail can mean the difference between a mediocre and first-rate result.  Chemical efficacy can be influenced by a number of factors, especially when using pre-emergent herbicides in a combined chemical IWM strategy.  Little things like stubble load, method of application, level of seedbed cultivation, incorporation timing and technique, rainfall after sowing and the suitability of that herbicide for the particular situation can add incremental gains for the overall result.  For RR canola and TT canola ensure to use every option available, don't settle for just 1 application of RR or rely solely on triazine chemicals for effective control of weeds.

Annual ryegrass control is a long term holistic proposition and no 1 or 2 control methods will solve your issues.  It must be tackled with multiple techniques.

The gravel content of a soil certainly affects soil physics and chemistry as well as crop growth processes.

In terms of nutrient management, currently increased gv% is assumed to reduce the amount of nutrients available to the crops, but not to concentrating the effect of fertiliser inputs. Adjustments for gv% are made in systems which use soil test calibration curves to produce recommendations when in fact those adjustments are probably not justified. All of the adjustments which are made, lead to higher fertiliser recommendations.  Even so, no attempt is made to better sample for or estimate gv%.

Whether it is worth investing further resources to confirm or refute the importance of the questions raised in this study is open to question. The complexity of the effects of gv% in real farming systems is such that there may well be no way to improve the predictive power of the models (both regression and mechanistic) to any great extent.

If resources are found to fund future work then it would be best to start with direct measures of whether gravel is inert or not – particularly with respect to water.  Experimental work used in parallel with ROOTMAP model runs to study the effect of gravel on nutrient uptake could also be worthwhile.

• Grazing perennial native shrubs are being trialled on Eyre Peninsula.
• Three sites established, Elbow Hill, Streaky Bay & Minnipa.
• Perennial native shrubs could potentially help fill the summer-autumn feed gap while providing other benefits such as drought management, nutritional value, reduced soil erosion, carbon sequestration and in some species fodder production in a saline environment.
• Increasing ground cover in low-medium rainfall farming systems.

Eradicating SLN using only herbicides appears to be very doubtful. It is therefore time to consider how to coexist
with the problem weed; at least for the next few years. It is necessary to identify options and implement
cost-effective strategies that prevent the spread of the weed and suppress the infestations. The options
should not be a drain on the farms cash reserves or a strain on one's mental health.

After six years of running the Systems Site comparing farming systems it has become clear that the critical issues are as follows.

Conserving soil water into dry seasons, which can be achieved using either mechanical in a conventional system or chemical means in a reduced till or no till system (assuming there is enough stubble to protect the soil surface from evaporation).

Since the introduction of Frame and Yitpi (CCN resistant wheats) CCN has not been a problem.

Take-all and Pratylenchus neglectus appear to more closely correlate to specific areas in a paddock rather than levels changing because of crop choice or the rotation (field peas did lower Pratylenchus levels). Certainly there did not appear to be any influence of farming system on these two soil borne diseases.

Weed levels have not changed markedly over the duration of the trial and there were no differences between systems after six years. Brome grass is now present at the site at very low levels whereas it was not recorded in 1999 and 2000.

Wind erosion susceptibility and risk is lowest in the No Till plots because of good stubble cover and aggregation of soil particles. The three other systems all had plots which were moderately susceptible to wind erosion, primarily as a result of low stubble cover.

Using current technology and sampling intensity it is not possible to pick up changes in soil available nitrogen levels between different farming systems.

Soil changes in soil biological characteristics are currently being assessed and will be reported by the BCG update in February 2006.

• Soil acidification is a natural process accelerated by high crop yields and fertilizer use. It is an unseen cost of doing business.
• To maintain a good soil pH profile, producers should aim for a pHCa above 5.0 in the 0-10cm of topsoil or 5.5 if subsoil acidity issues are present. The target in the 10-30cm zone is greater than
  pHCa 4.8.
• Correct pH is paramount when growing legumes, especially if the decision to grow them is to increase soil nitrogen levels.
• Liming needs to be thought of as a farm input, like checking and changing the oil in the tractor (maintaining capital), rather than buying urea (dollars returned per dollar invested).

• Soil acidification is a natural process accelerated by high crop yields, fertilizer use and potentially direct drilling and stubble retention. It is an unseen cost of doing business.
• To maintain a good soil pH profile producers should aim for a pH(CaCl) above 5.0 in the 0-10cm of topsoil or 5.5 if subsoil acidity issues are present. The target in the 10-30cm zone is greater than pH (CaCl) 4.8.
• Retesting during 2015 of historic soil pH datasets confirms soil profiles continue to acidify.
• Left unmanaged sub soil acidification is likely to occur in most Central West NSW soils.
• Liming needs to be thought of as a farm input, like checking and changing the oil in the tractor, (maintaining capital) rather than buying urea (dollars returned per dollar invested).
• Cost in managing soil pH are easier to quantify than returns.

• Soil acidification is a natural process accelerated by high crop yields, fertilizer use and potentially direct drilling and stubble retention. It is an unseen cost of doing business.
• To maintain a good soil pH profile producers should aim for a pH(CaCl) above 5.0 in the 0-10cm of topsoil or 5.5 if subsoil acidity issues are present. The target in the 10-30cm zone is greater than pH (CaCl) 4.8.
• Retesting during 2015 of historic soil pH datasets confirms soil profiles continue to acidify.
• Left unmanaged sub soil acidification is likely to occur in most Central West NSW soils.
• Liming needs to be thought of as a farm input, like checking and changing the oil in the tractor, (maintaining capital) rather than buying urea (dollars returned per dollar invested).
• Cost in managing soil pH are easier to quantify than returns.

• Soil pH levels in paddocks across KI are below critical levels which is having an impact on both farm production and the environment.
• Soil acidity potentially remains as a significant land management issue on Kangaroo Island with 94% of all sites analysed the top and sub soil were below the critical level of 5.0 pHCaCl2.
• Amelioration of soil acidity, through lime spreading needs to be conducted to prevent soil acidification.

The results so far (after three dry seasons) indicate that:

- deep ripping has resulted in significantly lower yields, and

- gypsum has had no affect on yield.

• Good soil moisture conditions at sowing reduced the impact of repellence on establishment; all treatments established a healthy number of plants.
• Claying improved crop establishment, growth and grain yield in 2011; this appears to be driven by better seedbed moisture retention and reduced nutrient leaching, espeically nitrogen.
• Good soil moisture conditions during grain fill minimised any water shortage (haying off) effects from claying.
• Cultivation treatment had no impact on grain yield, possibly because seasonal conditions were not conductive to showing differences or because the cultivation impacts are reducing over time, ongoing assessment should clarify this.
• Drier conditions at seeding and harder finishes would be expected to result in greater impact from the repellence management treatments.

• Stubble retention and reduced stocking pressures increase soil microbial activity.
• Activity of soil microbes give soils natural suppression of root diseases.
• Disease suppression has been shown to be substantially increased through retention of stubbles over a 5-10 year period.
• Microbial activity has a strong influence on the availability of soil nutrients to crops, Nitrogen is the nutrient most influenced by microbial activity.
• There are many microbes that can break down chemicals and this break down is often enhanced with increased stubble retention.

Research and trial work across Australia has shown that stubble retention does eventually lead to an improved soil resource

• This trial was implemented in an effort to increase grain yield through improved soil water storage and biological functioning. Organic matter, whether as retained stubble or additional inputs, is a significatn source of crop nutrition, and improved moisture conditions allow for optimal breakdown by soil microbes.
• Further investigation and trial work into the effect of chaff and straw from different crop species would have on yield and soil health properties would be beneficial to evaluate.

It was expected that the imposed treatments to increase soil organic matter would take several years to become noticeable, especially in medium rainfall areas.  Even after three reasonable seasons at Temora with good crop production there were no differences in Soil C stock between the stubble and nutrient supply treatments.  The same result was found at the other seven trial sites located in SE Australia.  Thjis work shows that increasing soil C stocks is a long-term process, and three years was not long enough to measure significant changes with the practices selected.  The Temora Soil C trial will be remeasured again on the completion of the 2016 season after five years of trial work.

Given that carbon sequestration is not an overnight process it is not surprising that there have been few significant results or trends to report on in either an intensive plot or large paddock scale.  Nutrient addition to balance the ration of C;N;P;S has surprisingly had little impact on yield and this is possibly a desirable outcome as no difference between +/- nutrient treatments would indicate that the nutrients are available for sutbble breakdown, rather than crop vegetative mass. Cost associated on a whole farm scale of purchasing nutrients in addition to normal fertiliser requirements could prove prohibitive.

• Seasonal conditions and soil type have a greater effect on carbon than management.
• Providing necessary nutrients and pH for optimum pasture production will potentially increase soil carbon.
• Cropping in a good season might not decrease soil carbon stocks. Opportunities could exist for Monaro landholders to diversify their enterprises when the conditions are right without depleting their soil carbon.
• A rapid increase of soil carbon can easily be followed by a rapid decrease.
• For more information please see our eBook: Soil carbon in the Monaro region (https://itunes.apple.com/au/book/ id1035198100 or http://tinyurl.com/zrr9mht).

• Relatively low levels of stubble cover during January – March provide effective protection against soil erosion.
• Protection against soil erosion is not related to the tillage system employed in crop establishment or management provided stubble is retained over the summer period.
• Ripping techniques in which significant levels of clod are brought to the soil surface are effective in preventing significant soil losses on paddocks without vegetative cover.

• As in 2014, there was a significant difference in yield, in response to the cultivation treatments but not between the lime treatments.
• Screenings in 2015 were much higher in the mouldboard and spaded plots than any other treatments. The percentage of screenings in these treatments increased with the increasing rate of lime.

• This trial is a large-scale experiment, the data collected provides an indication of treatment effects and demonstrates benefits and pitfalls of adopting these subsoil acidity management methods on a large-scale. The small plot trials are more accurate and provided detailed statistical analysis of the impact of different treatments.
• Further years of research and analysis from this site and other sites will confirm these findings.

• The trial provides strong support for the use of soil-specific N management to improve profitability and risk management on Mallee dune-swale paddocks.
• Sandy soil types have consistently shown yield responses to increased inputs of N, while the heavy swale soils have not shown a yield benefit of increased N inputs.
• Nil fertiliser (N and P) has been the most profitable fertiliser treatment on the heaviest swale soil and the least profitable elsewhere.
• Upfront N at a higher rate still appears to generate the most consistent yield increase and profit outcome on the sandy soil types.

• The trial provides strong support for the use of soil-specific N management to improve profitability and risk management on Mallee dune-swale paddocks.
• Sandy soil types have consistently showing yield responses to increased inputs of N, while the heavy swale soils have not shown a yield benefit of increased N inputs.
• Nil fertiliser (N and P) has been the most profitable fertiliser treatment on the heaviest swale soil and the least profitable elsewhere.
• There was still a measurable response in 2013 to a pasture break in 2009.

• The frequency of winter cereals in the rotation have a large impact on crown rot inoculum build up.
• Monitoring paddocks over time is a powerful way to help crown rot management and the PreDictaB™ soil tests are an effective method for achieving this.
• The dominant wheat–canola rotation in southern NSW is increasing the region’s level of risk to losses caused by crown rot.
• Not all paddocks behave the same way and factors other than crop type are affecting crown rot behaviour.

• 55% of paddocks tested in 2014 and 80% of paddocks in 2015 had crown rot.
• 90% of paddocks tested in 2014 and 2015 had take all.
• The previous crop grown in the paddock can greatly influence the pre-sowing levels of crown rot and take all in the following year, particularly in a cereal on cereal rotation.
• Most paddocks with pre-sowing levels of crown rot and take all had increased inoculum levels throughout the growing season.
• Crop rotation and duration, and stubble management can reduce crown rot and take all infection risk.

• Maximise wheat yields by ensuring as much crop flowers during the optimal period as possible – sow on time or early!
• Early sown, slow maturing varieties (winter and spring) yield as well as or better than faster maturing varieties sown later.
• Including an early sown variety in a cropping program can greatly increase whole-farm yield.
• Extra management needs to be considered for disease and nutrition, particularly Septoria tritici.
   

• Chickpea yields were again high in 2011, averaging 3.8t/ha.
• Favourable growing conditions and minimal disease resulted in equal or higher yields from
  early sown treatments.
• Lodging of chickpeas was high in 2011, particularly where sown early. CICA0603, CICA0857
  and Genesis079 were the most susceptible varieties to lodging.

• Stubble treatments showed no yield difference in 2011, however differences in plant height and
  lodging were observed throughout the season which may aid harvestability, particularly in shorter seasons with less biomass

• Despite only close to average growing season rainfall, yields in 2011 (average 2.9t/ha) were
  buoyed by stored soil moisture from summer rainfall, low disease levels and generally
  favourable growing conditions, and performed significantly higher than the wetter seasons of
  2009 (2.4t/ha) and 2010 (2.5t/ha) where growing season rainfall was higher but disease was
  more prevalent. These favourable growing conditions are also likely responsible for the lack of
  sowing date response in 2011.

• Light interception at midday was significantly higher under east-west sowing compared with north-south.
• It is plausible that sowing direction may influence weed seed set.
• To establish a competitive crop against weeds and maximise yields, growers should aim for the narrowest row spacing to suit their system.

• Light interception at midday was significantly higher under east-west sowing compared with north-south.
• It is plausible that sowing direction may influence weed seed set.
• To establish a competitive crop against weeds and maximise yields, growers should aim for the
  narrowest row spacing to suit their system.

The 1.6 t/ha pasture residue had no impact on sowing and plant establishment in drier seeding conditions in 2014. • In 2014 there were no differences in wheat establishment, yield or grain quality due to different pre-sowing treatments with pasture residues. • The wheat stubbles have been harvested at different heights and pasture establishment and will be monitored next season.

• In a non-wetting sand, sowing on-row allowed seedlings to germinate in a wetter soil, with increased competitiveness against weed and disease pressures resulting in significant advantages in crop establishment and biomass production.
• Sowing on-row in sands or loam that did not express non-wetting did not capture the same level of benefits.
• Sowing crops on or very near last year’s crop row greatly suppressed grass weed populations and reduced brome grass seed set by over 70% compared to inter-row seeding.
• Early sowing in the last week of April instead of the third week of May helped to overcome the dry spring conditions and resulted in yield benefits of 28% at Loxton and up to 13% at Karoonda.
• When sowing crops on last year’s row, the potential for higher stubble borne pathogen (Take-All and Fusarium) inoculum and a greater likelihood of N tie-up after opening rains needs to be considered. However, impacts on rhizoctonia disease depend upon inherent biological fertility of soil.

• In a non-wetting sand, sowing on-row allowed seedlings to germinate in a wetter soil, with increased competitiveness against weed and disease pressures resulting in significant advantages in crop establishment and biomass production.
• Sowing on-row in sands or loam that did not express non-wetting did not capture the same level of benefits.
• Sowing crops on or very near last year’s crop row greatly suppressed grass weed populations and reduced brome grass seed set by over 70% compared to inter-row seeding.
• Early sowing in the last week of April instead of the third week of May helped to overcome the dry spring conditions and resulted in yield benefits of 28% at Loxton and up to 13% at Karoonda.
• When sowing crops on last year’s row, the potential for higher stubble borne pathogen (Take-All and Fusarium) inoculum and a greater likelihood of N tie-up after opening rains needs to be considered. However, impacts on rhizoctonia disease depend upon inherent biological fertility of soil.

• In a non-wetting sand, sowing on-row allowed seedlings to germinate in a wetter soil, with increased competitiveness against weed and disease pressures resulting in significant advantages in crop establishment and biomass production.
• Sowing on-row in sands or loam that did not express non-wetting did not capture the same level of benefits.
• Sowing crops on or very near last year’s crop row greatly suppressed grass weed populations and reduced brome grass seed set by over 70% compared to inter-row seeding.
• Early sowing in the last week of April instead of the third week of May helped to overcome the dry spring conditions and resulted in yield benefits of 28% at Loxton and up to 13% at Karoonda.
• When sowing crops on last year’s row, the potential for higher stubble borne pathogen (Take-All and Fusarium) inoculum and a greater likelihood of N tie-up after opening rains needs to be considered. However, impacts on rhizoctonia disease depend upon inherent biological fertility of soil.

• Early sowing has maximised yields of field peas over the last three years at field sites in SA
  representing low, medium and high rainfall pea growing areas.
• Early sowing has been paramount for economical field pea production in low and medium rainfall areas over this period and continues to be the best management strategy providing consideration for black spot, weeds and frost risk occurs.

• Earlier sowing and standing residue was important to maximising grain yield in lentils in the Wimmera.
• Mid to mid/late maturing varieties like CIPAL0803 and PBA Jumbo, where highest yielding in the 2011 season with mild conditions and significant stored moisture.

• Safe application of PSPE herbicides in lentils (metribuzin in this situation) is very reliant on seasonal conditions around the time of sowing. Whilst yield potential is maximised by earlier
  sowing there is increased risk of crop injury from herbicides.
• Winter and spring seasonal conditions were favourable for lentil production in 2010, and lentil
  yield averaged 3.9t/ha across all varieties.
• There was no sowing date response for grain yield at this site in 2010. There was only low to
  moderate levels of disease and so earlier sown lentils were not penalised by disease, and later
  sown lentils were able to capitalise on the late rain.
• Grain weight was equal or higher at the later sowing date for all varieties except Boomer.

• Lentil yields were high in 2011, averaging 4.2 t/ha.
• Favourable growing conditions and minimal disease resulted in equal or higher yields from
  early sown treatments.
• Despite low ascochyta blight foliar infection in lentils a 4% yield response was produced by
  treatments including application of chlorothalonil at early podding. This is most likely due to
  prevention of disease-related pod abortion.
• The recent lentil release PBA Jumbo was the equal highest yielding variety at both sowing dates. The early maturing PBA Blitz was not favoured by the seasonal conditions, particularly
  sown early, and yielded equal lowest.

• Early sowing maximised yield potential resulting in a gain of 20%-120% dependant on the genotype grown. Wider row spacing (>=30cm) resulted higher grain yields for all genotypes.

• Similar to lentils it is important to interpret the grain yield results with caution as it was
  demonstrated that yield loss due to extreme rainfall events was between 0% and 55%.

• It is important to interpret the grain yield results with caution as it was demonstrated that yield loss due to extreme rainfall events was between 27% and 65%.

• No major agronomic interactions were observed in this trial.

• Potential grain yields were likely to be in excess of 3.5t/ha, however due to extreme rainfall events throughout harvest grain yield losses where likely to be greater than 50%.
• The new lentil genotypes, in particular CIPAL0801 continue to show potential in a season
  considerably different from that which we have had for the last decade, which is promising from
  a yield stability perspective.

• Early sown lentils were generally highest yielding, and average 12% higher yield than the late
  sowing date.
• PBA Blitz and CIPAL0501 showed the least sowing date response in the favourable 2010
  growing season.
• Retaining barley stubble at 2t/ha was capable of increasing yield and delaying maturity.
• Stubble retention improved yields at all sowing dates, while standing stubble was most
  important for grain yield at the later sowing date.

• Results must be interpreted with caution due to metribuzin damage in this trial. Damage scores
  showed varieties performed in line with our current understanding of relative tolerance, and may complicate the interpretation of Nipper (the most sensitive variety to metribuzin) to the imposed treatments.

• Early sowing, concurrent with previous research, was highest yielding in 2011. There appear to be several promising new varieties available for southern Victoria, offering a range of grain types and forage options, associated with excellent yield potential. Crop topping results highlights the importance for growers and advisors to be aware of both weed and crop growth stages, otherwise significant grain yield loss could occur.

• Early sowing, concurrent with previous research, was significantly higher yielding in 2011.
• Varietal differences in this trial were minimal. Yield loss from disease, primarily black spot, was significant and economically viable control measures are important to develop.

• Genotypes compared in this trial responded differently to sowing dates.
• Early sowing was optimal for all genotypes, particularly for AF05073, which was the highest yield genotype when sown early

Soil acidity affects up to 5.5 million hectares (50%) of Victoria’s agricultural land and soil acidification looms as a major soil
degradation issue (NHT 2001). Soil acidification can be seen is a cost of productive agricultural systems - whether from
product removal, increased potential for nitrate leaching, the build-up of soil organic acids, or from the increased use of
nitrogen fertilizers.
Soil acidity and acidification are mostly ameliorated by applying agricultural lime. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018)
survey data show the average rate of application of lime is only about 1.5 t/ha, which is considerably less than the general
minimum recommendations of 2.5-7.5 t/ha (Agriculture Victoria 2019). Moreover, few Victorian farmers, about 1,000 (5%),
use variable rate application. Variable rate application is used to apply a wide range of agricultural chemicals, lime being
only one of many, so that the application rate is adjusted to match changing local requirements within the paddock. No
statistics are available on the application of variable rate technology for managing soil acidity, however service providers
supporting variable rate liming are increasingly active.
Agriculture Victoria Research (AVR) studied 10 case-study paddocks in the HRZ of Victoria to demonstrate the net
economic benefits of using intensive point sampling of surface soil pH and the precision application of lime in cropping
systems.
The initial pHCa distribution within each paddock was obtained by sampling at the rate of 100 soil cores per paddock
followed by spatial interpolation to a resolution of 10 square metres.
Discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis was used to generate profit-maximising lime 'prescriptions’ for each homogenous pH
zone (HZ) within the 10 case-study cropping paddocks, and to quantify the net benefits of the precision liming strategy.
These benefits were compared to alternative liming strategies, including traditional approaches and uniform application.
The analysis followed the best-practice method described by Mullen (2001). It involved optimization and simulation; and it
accommodated the dynamic nature of the acidity nature of the soil, in that production in the current year is affected by
current pH and in turn has an impact on pH in the next year.
It was shown that reaping the benefits of the precision liming strategy is difficult, because benefits depend on the
decisions made by farmers and their advisors requiring a high level of data collection and management, interpretation, and
judgement.
When acid tolerant crops are grown, the net benefits of liming can generally be maximised using low-cost traditional
practices. However, if the decision-maker wants the option of planting high-value, acid-sensitive crops then it would pay to
pursue a profit-maximising strategy involving intensive point sampling, pH mapping and variable rate application.
The DCF model described in this report demonstrates the nature of the data, analysis and interpretation involved in the
decision-making process. The model has been prototyped in MS Excel® and uses Evolver, an optimization add-in that is
part of Palisade’s DecisionTools Suite. The DCF model is available from the primary author on request and can be used
with attribution.

• No foliar fungicide can make the leaf area infected turn green again so timing is critical.
• In a wheat plant, the top three leaves: flag, leaf 2 and leaf 3, contribute the most to yield. Fungicide applications must be timed to ensure protection of these leaves.

The plan must address the target and the nature of the target. Is the target small or large, short or tall, fine or course, young or mature. Is the target stressed eg. heat, waterlogged, dry or frosted.

• Adding imidacloprid to standard seed treatments made a significant (P = 0.05) improvement in yield to most varieties in the absense of any visible BYDV.
• Increasing sowing rates significantly (P = 0.05) improved yield for all vareties.
• Fungicide timing was not as critical as it is in a longer growing season.
• Barley produced the best return on investment when compared to wheat.
• None of the varieties of either barley or wheat made a quality receival standard.

• The average yield for the spring wheat trial at Inverleigh was 5.12 t/ha. The highest yields were achieved by the shorter seaons varieties Beaufort (6.95 t/ha) and Derrimut (6.10 t/ha). Both varieties yielded well in the 2008 wheat variety trial at Inverleigh.
• For further take home messages please see the attached trial report.

• Statice seedbanks reduced with targeted management options in three years, providing no new seeds are allowed to set.
• Crop competition and crop-topping to prevent seed set can help to control statice.
• Statice can be hard to control, so good farm biosecurity is important to prevent the introduction of statice. This includes controlling statice in non-crops areas, such as laneways and fence-lines.

• The risk of rust outbreaks in 2007 will be high if there is a build up of inoculum on volunteer cereals over summer.
• Rust diseases will need to be managed to protect returns.
• Resistant varieties are the best form of management where possible.

Stripe rust can be managed in 2004 using a combination of inoculum reduction (removal of volunteer cereals), varietal selection, seed or fertiliser treatment and crop monitoring with a view to fungicide application if necessary.

• Be vigilant and monitor every paddock – they can be very different ƒ
• Do not spray after head emergence – the damage has been done ƒ
• Use early season treatments in the Wimmera and be prepared to apply one spray in crop if it is required. ƒ Stripe rust is a permanent fixture in our environment
• We must all be prepared to control the disease WHEN (not IF) it occurs in 2006.

Select a wheat variety with good stripe rust performance.

Fungicides applied as a seed treatment and/or as a foliar application provide cost effective control of stripe rust.

Grow varieties with the highest SR resistance.

Use a seed dressing on all varieties to protect against SR and smuts.

SR treatments prior to Z39 are unlikely to have a direct yield or income benefit.

Increased rates of N resulted in increased biomass, but the relationship between stubble N content and applied N was poor.

Higher applied  N resulted in higher Harvest Index

Harvest Index ranged from 0.45 to 0.47. 

Stubble direction and height (plus or minus stubble) had no effect on crop establishment or grain yield for Blitz and Ace lentils

• Treatment 1, Nil grazed, moderate stubble yielded the highest, (2.18 t/ha).
• No significant difference in Total Plant Available Water, majority of stored water was below the 50 cm depth.
• There was a significant difference between the eight treatments when comparing available soil nitrogen.
• There was a significant difference in grain quality attributes between the eight stubble treatments.

Adding 70 kgN/ha prior to stubble incorporation addressed in crop N tie-up.

• Grazing stubbles with sheep speeds up N cycling and reduces N tie-up by the stubble.  When yield is N limited, tyhis increases grain yield and quality.
• Burning stubble decreased the amount of water stored over the summer fallow and the crops used by 8 to 21 mm, but this did not always decrease yield due to frost damage, N limitation or adequate subsequent recharge.
• Over the six year experiment grazing and then retaining (not burning) stubble has been the most profitable treatment.

• In 2017, don’t let stubble compromise the big things (weeds, disease, timeliness)
• If the intent is to retain stubble:
◊ Pro-actively manage the stubble for your seeding system
◊ Diversify (add legumes to rotation), deep band N and manage invertebrates. Mice could also be a major problem
◊ For tined seeders, reduce stubble load by mulching, incorporation + nutrients, baling, grazing and consider sowing at 15-19 degree angle to previous sown row
• If stubbles are too thick to sow through, consider strategic late burn, especially before 2nd wheat crop or if sowing canola into large stubbles
• Early monitoring is essential to see how effective actions are to allow for re-planning

• When dealing with annual ryegrass populations, it is a numbers game; the more you can control the better.
• Higher water rates in retained stubble resulted in increased efficacy of pre-emergent herbicides.
• Initial findings suggest that using speedtillers to retain stubble in the system does not result in any negative effects

• When dealing with annualryegrass populations, it is a numbers game; the more you can control the better.
• Higher water rates in retained stubble resulted in increased efficacy.
• In 2014, although canola establishment was lower in plots where stubble was retained; there was no significant yield difference at harvest.

• Reducing stubble loads can reduce the severity and duration of frost events under certain conditions. However, under the situation of multiple and severe frost events the influence of stubble is less defined and stubble reduction does not reduce risk.
• In the Mallee, most stubble management practices carried out prior to seeding to increase stubble incorporation or breakdown (cultivation, slashing) did not reduce stubble loads enough to reduce frost severity and duration.
• In the Wimmera, reducing stubble loads did not consistently reduce frost severity or duration possibly due to a combined effect of greater canopy closure with higher yield potential (2014) and higher stubble break down with low stubble levels (2015).
• Stubble management in frost prone areas is not about complete removal of stubble, but reducing it to a level that minimises your risk.

• Different methods of stubble handling had little impact on yield.
• Early soil testing allowed good decision making for crop nutrition and budgeting.
• Soil biota were more active in the in-row root zone, as opposed to the mid row zone.

• In 2017, don’t let stubble compromise the big things (weeds, disease, timeliness).
• If the intent is to retain stubble:
• Pro-actively manage the stubble for your seeding systemDiversify (add legumes to rotation), deep band N and manage invertebrates. Mice could also be a major problem.
• For tined seeders, reduce stubble load by mulching, incorporation + nutrients, baling, grazing and consider sowing at 15-19 degree angle to previous sown row.
• If stubbles are too thick to sow through, consider strategic late burn, especially before second wheat crop or if sowing canola into large stubbles.
• Early monitoring is essential to see how effective actions are to allow for re-planning.

No real conclusions can be drawn from 2005 data, although the use of scratch tillage at the Inverleigh and Mingay sites showed some promise, but did come at a financial cost if implemented on raised-beds. 

• For different 2013 treatments, the amount of stubble ranged from 2.4 to 4.0 t DM/ha at harvest and from 1.6 to 3.0 t DM/ha at the subsequent sowing. The only statistically significant effect of 2013 treatments on 2014 pre sowing stubble was a difference between wheat and vetch stubble, 2.7 t DM/ha and 2.0 t DM/ha, respectively, reflecting faster breakdown of vetch than wheat stubble.
• Despite significant differences in the amount and types of stubble generated in 2013, and remaining at sowing in 2014, there was no statistically significant effect of 2013 treatments on 2014 soil moisture at sowing or 2014 crop yields.
• There were significant differences between crop types in 2014. Significantly more wheat plants established than canola (49 and 15 plants/m2 respectively) and wheat had a significantly higher grain yield than canola (1.2 and 0.3 t/ha respectively). Both wheat and canola were affected by the dry spring and associated frosts, plus canola had poor establishment.
• Research conducted previously at Walpeup in the 1980s found that maintaining 2 t/ha stubble increased the amount of water stored in the soil at sowing, at depth 0–140 cm, by 16 mm in 1 year of 3. This increase in soil water availability was not reflected in increased crop yield.
• The recent experiment at Ouyen, together with the previous research at Walpeup, indicate that Mallee crop yields are unlikely to be increased by retaining higher levels of stubble, although there can be benefits of reduced soil erosion.