102nd Merredin Research Station Annual Field DayField Day Booklet

23 September 2015

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.....................................................................................................................2

Program of events – Group one...............................................................................................3Program of events – Group two...............................................................................................4

Introduction..............................................................................................................................5Flowering window in dry sown wheat crops.............................................................................6

Impact of early water deficit on wheat and canola...................................................................8Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to applied nitrogen (N) and time of sowing...........................................................................................................10Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to seed rate (SR) and time of sowing.................................................................................................................11Assessing the value of the chemical DMPP (as ENTEC urea) on nitrogen use efficiency of wheat cv. Mace......................................................................................................................12Agronomic options for managing new barley varieties – response to nitrogen rate and nitrogen timing......................................................................................................................................15Reducing variety selection risk – the Yardstick trial...............................................................18

Barley NVT.............................................................................................................................20Wheat NVT.............................................................................................................................22

Crown rot yield loss variety trials – barley and wheat............................................................24Producing drought tolerance ratings for wheat......................................................................27

Screening canola varieties for tolerance to soil aluminium (Al).............................................30Retaining hybrid canola seed-does seed source affect loss of hybrid vigour?......................33

Improving the sustainability of continuous wheat...................................................................35Retaining hybrid canola seed-how can we minimise loss of hybrid vigour?..........................37

Biological amelioration of subsoil acidity................................................................................39Disease surveillance is about protecting Australian livestock industries...............................45

Biosecurity Blitz 2015.............................................................................................................46List of this year’s trials............................................................................................................47

Program of events – Group one

9:30 Welcome and board buses

9:40 Oats and barley agronomyGeorgie Troup and Blakely Paynter (DAFWA)

10:30 Dry seeding decision makingDoug Abrecht and Darshan Sharma (DAFWA)

11:00 CSIRO crop residue and nitrogenCathryn O’Sullivan (CSIRO)

11:35 Managed Environment Facility (MEF)Blakely Paynter (DAFWA)

12:00 Lunch and barn displays

13:00 Ripping demonstrationGlen Riethmuller (DAFWA)

13:45 Canola establishment after ripping/ploughingGreg Shea (DAFWA)

14:30 Canola grazing trialBrad Joyce (Consultant)

15:20 “Yardstick” trial - MADFIG siteDoug McGuinness (local farmer)

15:50 National Variety Trials (NVT)Angela Hampson (Kalyx Australia)

14:30 Close and sundowner at the barn

Acknowledgement of Support:GRDC for their commitment to Research and Development at the Merredin Research Station.

Program of events – Group two

9:30 Welcome and board buses

9:40 Dry seeding decision makingDoug Abrecht and Darshan Sharma (DAFWA)

10:30 Oats and barley agronomyGeorgie Troup and Blakely Paynter (DAFWA)

11:35 Managed Environment Facility (MEF)Blakely Paynter (DAFWA)

11:00 CSIRO crop residue and nitrogenCathryn O’Sullivan (CSIRO)

12:00 Lunch and barn displays

13:00 Ripping demonstrationGlen Riethmuller (DAFWA)

13:45 Canola establishment after ripping/ploughingGreg Shea (DAFWA)

14:30 Canola grazing trialBrad Joyce (Consultant)

15:20 “Yardstick” trial - MADFIG siteDoug McGuinness (local farmer)

15:50 National Variety Trials (NVT)Angela Hampson (Kalyx Australia)

14:30 Close and sundowner at the barn

Acknowledgement of Support:GRDC for their commitment to Research and Development at the Merredin Research Station.

Site Manager’s introductionGreg Doncon (DAFWA) Welcome to the 102nd Annual Merredin Research Facility field day. This year’s theme ‘Capture the Opportunity’ reflects the season. Early season rainfall built up the subsoil moisture with many soils having full profiles mid-April. Unfortunately early winter rains were poor and the predictions for the coming season were mixed. Critical to capturing the opportunity were contingency plans to respond to weather events; and being ready to act. Grain growers will increasingly have additional tools to assist with decision making including advanced warning of weather events. These tools are being supported by a number of State Government projects including the $10 million ‘Helping Grain Growers Better Manage Risk’ project. In addition, the State Government’s Royalty for Region program will invest $23 million in Doppler radar technology to improve the current radar coverage. Doppler radar provides real-time information on weather systems and rainfall intensity. This will enable farm businesses to make more informed decisions around sowing, fertiliser and chemical applications. One of the new sites will be at Doodlakine, providing information for a 200 kilometre radius. DAFWA has invested in a number of free apps to assist with paddock decisions. One of these, the ‘DAFWA Weather Stations App’ provides timely weather information across the Grainbelt and South West including temperature, rainfall, wind speed and humidity. It also contains a range of derived information, such as delta-T, which can assist with spraying programs. Information is updated every 10 minutes from a network of 130 automatic weather stations. DAFWA has also embarked on a four year $20 million Boosting Grains Research and Development project funded through Royalties for Regions. A component of the project is to establish a new Grains research and development model, to deliver high-value targeted agronomic R&D that addresses industry priorities. This year there are over 50 trials and demonstrations located at the DAFWA Merredin Research Facility and many more at grower group sites. The majority of these trials are components of projects funded by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC). DAFWA also works in conjunction with other industry partners to support the profitability of WA’s grain growers. This includes the Grain Industry Association of Western Australia, the Grower Group Alliance, grower groups and the Australian Association of Agricultural Consultants. A highlight of today is the presentation of the AgInstitute Australia, WA Division’s Award of Excellence to Dr Bob French. This award recognises outstanding contributions to agriculture by professionals who are based in regional areas of WA. Today we will also visit a number of the Merredin and District Farm Improvement Group (MADFIG) trial sites on nearby properties including the trial managed by ConsultAg that looks at taking advantage of early sowing opportunities to establish and graze canola, and the MADFIG yardstick trial that generates local information about new wheat and barley varieties as part of the national variety testing (NVT) initiative. We are looking forward to what is potentially going to be a fantastic harvest. In the 2014/15 season it is estimated the WA grains industry exported a total of $3.7 billion of cereals. This is shaping up to be the season that breaks past records. This field day, and the many more to come, will present the research and decision tools that will enable you, the grain grower to make informed decisions, enabling you to capture the opportunities that a wait in the future.

Flowering window in dry sown wheat cropsDarshan Sharma (DAFWA), Doug Abrecht (DAFWA), Andrew Fletcher (CSIRO)

Key messages Farm level risk of frost and terminal heat associated with dry seeding can be managed

by tactically choosing variety on each sowing day. For this, at every sowing run, dry or wet, consider when the previously sown (or

emerged) crop is likely to flower in the given seasonal scenario and then develop/modify the schedule for remaining programme.

BackgroundDate of opening rains is the uncertain component of dry seeding. This puts dry sown crops to varied risks of frost and heat damage depending on the date of opening rains. However, we hypothesise that if varieties are chosen and matched to sowing dates carefully, desired flowering windows can be targeted under most conditions.In this un-replicated trial, we artificially created (using irrigation) different timings of opening rains and have demonstrated how tactical variety choice compares with monoculture in lowering the risks of frost and heat.

AimTo investigate and demonstrate if tactical variety choice can be used to manage heat and frost damage in a dry sown program.

Trial detailsTable 1. Varieties sown on 15 sowing dates. Shading indicates 'sown on moist soil', unshaded indicates 'dry sown'.

Sowing Date

Tact

ical

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

08

June

1 va

riety

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

08

June

Tact

ical

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

18

May

1 va

riety

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

18

May

Tact

ical

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

26

Apr

il

1 va

riety

O

peni

ng ra

ins:

26

Apr

il

Late

mat

urin

g W

et th

roug

hout

mid

mat

urin

g W

et

thro

ugho

ut

Early

mat

urin

g W

et th

roug

hout

20-Apr Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace

24-Apr Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

29-Apr Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

5-May Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

8-May Mace Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

11-May Mace Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

14-May Mace Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

18-May Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

21-May Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

25-May Cobra Mace Yitpi Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

28-May Cobra Mace Mace Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

2-Jun Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

5-Jun Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Mace Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

8-Jun Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

11-Jun Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Cobra Mace Yitpi Mace Cobra

ResultsData is being recorded. Observations so far suggest that tactical choice is better than growing only Mace.

SummaryThis trial tests if tactical choice of variety can be useful in managing the frost and terminal heat risk of dry sown crops. The 15 times of sowing ranged 20April to 11June.

Three scenarios of date of opening rains, 26April, 18May and 08June, were created and varieties for each of the 15 sowing dates were chosen per plan depending whether season had opened or not.

AcknowledgmentsGRDC for funds; Project code: WAN 0002.Dave Allen, Gary Ogden, Glen Riethmuller and Merredin staff for help in implementing dry seeding experiments and cooperation.

Impact of early water deficit on wheat and canolaDoug Abrecht, Darshan Sharma (DAFWA) Andrew Fletcher (CSIRO)

Key messages Earliness in cropping programs underpins dryland crop productivity in low rainfall WA,

largely through moderating exposure to water deficit in spring In most seasons, sowing into dry or marginal soil moisture conditions in May is an

essential practice for early crop establishment and efficient use of machinery and time Early water deficit reduces growth, slows development and may change grain yield

components (number of plants, number of grains and grain weight) as the crop adapts to seasonal conditions

BackgroundResurgence in interest in establishing crops early in the season has led to revision of the ‘sowing season’ and an increase in the proportion of crop sown into dry or marginally wet soil. Farmer interest has been matched with growth in research and development activities, aiming to identify and manage the risks and opportunities at paddock and cropping program scales.

Sowing strategies are designed to establish profitable crops with manageable production risks. Changing production risks are a key focus emerging from changes in seeding strategies, driven by the impact on crop performance of climate and soil factors, crop agronomy, pests and diseases and weeds. Of these risks, the impact of water availability during crop establishment and the impact of high and low temperatures and water availability during flowering and grain filling are proving to be of most concern to growers.

AimTo determine the impact of water availability during crop establishment on crop growth, development and grain production.

Trial detailsDesign: Main plots Wheat and Canola with treatments as row (early water deficit, north-south) - column (spring water availability east-west). 3 replicates

Crop: Yitpi Wheat and Pacific seeds GT50 Canola

Fertiliser: 100kg K till at seeding and 30kg.ha N as ammonium sulphate on 16 July

Weed management: Pre-emergent Boxer gold (2.5 L/ha) on wheat and canola. Velocity (1.0 L/ha) on wheat to control broadleaf weeds.

Sowing and emergence: Seeded at 15mm depth in dry soil conditions on April 24. 10mm water applied by sprinkler on 29 April for even emergence.

Early water deficit treatments: 9 treatments 19mm-51mm in 4mm steps applied 5-7 May with TTape.

Spring water treatments: 0mm, 30mm and 60 mm applied 15 September with TTape. (Reps B and C only)

Merredin seedling water deficit 2015

Crop species Wheat Canola

September water treatments (east-west) 0 30 60

May water treatments (south-north)

May # May mm

2 23

5 35

9 51

1 19

6 Rep A 39

8 47

4 31

7 43

3 27

3 27

7 43

1 19

9 51

4 Rep B 31

6 39

2 23

8 47

5 35

8 47

3 27

2 23

4 31

1 Rep C 19

6 39

9 51

5 35

7 43

ResultsIncrease in early crop growth with increasing water.

One week delay in flowering for both wheat and canola from wettest to driest treatment.

Wheat head size and canola pod number reduced by early water deficit.

SummaryTreatments applied show the impact of a wide range of seasonal conditions on crop performance. Understanding the impact of early water deficit on crop performance provides guidance for improving a range of activities which could improve crop performance including soil/seedbed management, and species and cultivar selection.

Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to applied nitrogen (N) and time of sowingGeorgie Troup (DAFWA)

2015 Trial results - key messages Stem diameter, hectolitre weight and screenings of Bannister and Williams were more

sensitive to changes in crop management than for Carrolup, Yallara and WA02Q302-9. Bannister out yielded Carrolup 15%. Williams out yielded Carrolup 20%. Williams had the highest screenings and exceeded the Oat1 screenings specifications

when 80 kg N/ha was applied. Prepare your paddocks and source your seed early for 2016.

BackgroundThe National Oat Breeding Program has recently had two of their oat varieties, Bannister and Williams, approved for milling purposes. Whilst both varieties have been released for their superior yield to Carrolup, the management tips to maximising their productivity are not widely understood. There is also WA02Q302-9, which is due to be released in 2016 as a potential milling variety. There is also little known about its response to crop management inputs. Whilst there is a focus on milling performance, many milling oat varieties such as Carrolup and Yallara are grown in Western Australia for domestic and/or export hay. Consequently there is interest in the suitability of Bannister and Williams as dual purpose oat varieties.

Aim(1) Compare the responses of six oat varieties to changes in date of seeding,(2) Compare the responses of six oat varieties to changes in nitrogen rate,(3) Determine if there are significant variety by date of seeding by nitrogen rate interactions,(4) Provide information on the responsiveness of new varieties to management and the consequences for grain yield, grain quality, hay yield, hay quality, and overall agronomic performance, and (5) Develop management guidelines for growers and the industry on new oat varieties.

Trial detailsExperimental design: 6 varieties x 4 N applied x 2 time of sowing x 3 reps (144 plots)

Treatments:1) Nitrogen applied

0 kg N/ha20 kg N/ha40 kg N/ha80 kg N/ha

2) Time of sowing1) 8th May 20152) 8th June 2015

Fertiliser: Super Copper Zinc Molybdenum (9 %P, 10.1% S, 0.60 % Cu, 0.30 % Zn, 0.06% Mo)

at 120 kg/ha

Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to seed rate (SR) and time of sowingGeorgie Troup (DAFWA)

BackgroundThere is a growing desire to expand oat production in the low rainfall region throughout the Eastern Wheatbelt to diversify crop sequences and maximise farm profitability. In 2014 DAFWA undertook oat agronomy trials at Cunderdin and Holt Rock to determine if the recent oat varieties Williams and Bannister were suitable options for hay and grain, and if they required variety specific agronomy. The results of these trials indicated that Williams and Bannister were higher yielding. However they were more sensitive to crop management than Carrolup, Yallara and the potential milling variety WA02Q302-9.

Aim(1) Compare the responses of six oat varieties to changes in date of seeding,(2) Compare the responses of six oat varieties to changes in seeding rate,(3) Determine if there are significant variety by date of seeding by seeding rate interactions,(4) Provide information on the responsiveness of new varieties to management and the consequences for grain yield, grain quality, hay yield, hay quality, and overall agronomic performance, and (5) Develop management guidelines for growers and the industry on new oat varieties.

Trial detailsExperimental design: 6 varieties x 4 seed rates x 2 time of sowing x 3 reps (144 plots)

Treatments:

1) Seed rate1) 75 plants/m2 (approx. 21 kg/ha)2) 150 plants/m2 (approx. 45 kg/ha)3) 300 plants/m2 (approx. 95 kg/ha)4) 450 plants/m2 (approx. 210 kg/ha)

2) Time of sowing1) 8th May 20152) 8th June 2015

Fertiliser: Summit K-rite: 9 %P, 10.1% S, 0.60 % Cu, 0.30 % Zn, 0.06% Mo @ 180 kg/ha Urea: 43 kg/ha All applied at seeding

Assessing the value of the chemical DMPP (as ENTEC urea) on nitrogen use efficiency of wheat cv. MaceElliott Duncan, Margaret Roper, Cathryn O’Sullivan, Kelley Whisson and Karen Treble (CSIRO)

Key messages This trial assesses whether 3,4-dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) (applied as

ENTECTM urea) slows mineral N losses, improves wheat grain yields and increases grain protein content.

Preliminary data (up to stem elongation) suggests that applying ENTEC urea does not improve mineral N retention or increase plant biomass.

Applying ENTEC urea at sowing has no benefit compared to a split N application at seeding and 4 weeks after seeding.

BackgroundFertiliser nitrogen (N) applications are generally inefficient with more than 50% of applied N lost [1, 2]. DMPP is a nitrification inhibitor which limits the growth of soil microorganisms responsible for the first step of nitrification (NH4

+ → NO2-) [2]. Application of ENTECTM urea has been shown

to minimise soil mineral N losses [2-4]. However, it is uncertain if it improves wheat yields or grain protein concentrations, particularly under WA conditions.

AimTo establish whether the use of ENTECTM urea can retain mineral N resources in soil for longer and increase wheat grain yields and grain protein in WA cereal cropping systems.

Trial detailsEight replicate blocks were prepared for the trial, four on canola stubbles and four on wheat stubbles (Fig 1). Wheat cv. Mace was sown on all blocks at a planting density of 80 kg ha -1. Each block was divided into eight plots of 2m x 10m (Fig 1). Each plot received one of the following fertiliser N treatments: 10, 30, 60 and 90 kg N ha-1 as urea, 30, 60 kg N ha-1 as ENTECTM urea (Incitec Pivot). All of these treatments received 10 kg N ha -1 at seeding with the remainder applied five weeks later. Of the remaining two plots, one received 60 kg N ha-1 as ENTECTM all applied at seeding, and the other was a farmer reference 0 N treatment (this treatment plus all others contained between 16-19 mg N kg-1 as residual N) (Fig 1).

Figure 1: Layout of the 2015 trial at the Merredin research station. Black box illustrates a close-up view of the plot structure within each stubble block.

The trial was set up on both wheat and canola stubbles to assess whether crop rotation influences the effectiveness of ENTECTM urea. Canola is known to produce biofumigants [5] and thus may alter microbial community composition and therefore soil N cycling. However, the interactions between nitrification inhibitors and different crop stubbles are unknown.

Rates of nitrate production (PNR), Mineral N concentrations, abundances of nitrifying microbiota, grain yield, biomass production and grain protein concentrations are being determined over the season. This trial was preceded by controlled-environment laboratory and glasshouse trials in 2013-14 and also has sister trials at Cunderdin (WANTFA), Wongan Hills (DAFWA) and Shenton Park (UWA).

ResultsInitial data (at stem elongation stage) suggests that the application of ENTECTM urea has little effect on improving wheat growth (Fig 2). In addition, few differences have been observed in nitrate production rates (data not shown) when different N treatments were applied.

The application of ENTECTM urea all at seeding (i.e. 60 kg N ha-1) resulted in a less advanced crop at the stem elongation stage than when a split 60 kg N ha -1 ENTECTM urea application was applied (Fig 3). In addition, there was no difference in the nitrate production rates in plots when 60 kg N ha-1 ENTECTM urea was applied at seeding relative to when 60 kg N ha-1 ENTECTM

urea was supplied as a split application (Fig 4).

Figure 2: No differences in plant growth at stem elongation when N was supplied at 30 kg N ha-1 as urea (Left) or ENTEC urea (right) on wheat stubbles.

Figure 3: Differences in plant growth at stem elongation when ENTECTM urea supplied at 60 kg N ha-1 in a split application (10:50) over first five weeks of growth (Left plot) or applied at seeding (60:0) (Right plot).

0 10 urea 10 ENTEC 60 ENTEC0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2Wheat Stubble

Canola Stubble

Fertiliser N applied at seeding (kg N ha-1)

Nitra

te p

rodu

ctio

n ra

te (P

NR)

Figure 4: Potential Nitrification Rate (PNR) (at 39 DAS) of wheat cv. Mace when different fertiliser N rates were applied at seeding. Values are means ± SE (n=3). (note treatments

designated as 10 urea include 10, 30, 60 and 90 kg N ha-1 treatments as they all received the same basal fertiliser rate. Similarly 10 ENTEC includes 30 & 60 kg N ha-1 treatments as they also received the same base fertiliser rate).

SummaryThis trial aims to establish whether the use of ENTECTM urea can improve grain yields and protein concentrations thereby limiting N losses in WA soils. Early indications suggest that applying ENTECTM urea at seeding does not improve plant performance or slow nitrification. Further data will be available at the end of the growing season to determine the value of ENTECTM urea in WA cereal cropping systems.

References[1] Fillery IR. Plant-based manipulation of nitrification in soil: a new approach to managing N loss? Plant and Soil. 2007, 294(1-2), 1-4.[2] Weiske A, Benckiser G, Herbert T, Ottow J. Influence of the nitrification inhibitor 3, 4-dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) in comparison to dicyandiamide (DCD) on nitrous oxide emissions, carbon dioxide fluxes and methane oxidation during 3 years of repeated application in field experiments. Biology and Fertility of Soils. 2001, 34(2), 109-17.[3] Weiske A, Benckiser G, Ottow JC. Effect of the new nitrification inhibitor DMPP in comparison to DCD on nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions and methane (CH4) oxidation during 3 years of repeated applications in field experiments. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst. 2001, 60(1-3), 57-64.[4] Zerulla W, Barth T, Dressel J, Erhardt K, von Locquenghien KH, Pasda G, Rädle M, Wissemeier A. 3, 4-Dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP)–a new nitrification inhibitor for agriculture and horticulture. Biology and fertility of soils. 2001, 34(2), 79-84.[5] Kirkegaard J, Wong P, Desmarchelier J. In vitro suppression of fungal root pathogens of cereals by Brassica tissues. Plant pathology. 1996, 45(3), 593-603.

Agronomic options for managing new barley varieties – response to nitrogen rate and nitrogen timingBlakely Paynter1, Georgia Trainor1 and Raj Malik2, (DAFWA, 1Northam and 2Katanning)

Key messages The best strategy to maximise grain yield rarely optimises grain quality and straw

strength Chasing yield with nitrogen does influence grain quality and reduce straw strength These trials are assessing whether the best nitrogen management strategies (N rate

and N timing) for the new malt varieties differ

BackgroundThere have been plenty of N trials over the years, but the varieties we are working with are consistently changing with the seasons. So we need to check that our previous rules apply to the new varieties or if modifications to management are required, to better manage a new variety and thereby reduce risks.

Varieties differ in their straw strength (lodging risk)We know that the current suite of ‘malt’ barley varieties differ in their lodging risk. All barley varieties are susceptible to lodging as N increases. Compass and Scope CL have a high lodging risk without N and are more sensitive to N application than Flinders and Granger. Trials at Cunderdin and York in 2014 showed higher nitrogen rates usually result in more lodging.

3.3

3.5

3.7

3.9

4.1

4.3

0 30 60 90

Grai

n yi

eld

(t/h

a)

N applied (kg N/ha)

Bass Buloke Commander Granger La Trobe

LSD (p=0.05) = 0.09 t/ha

Figure 1: Grain yield response (t/ha) of five barley varieties averaged over 20 national agronomy trials (2012-2014) to a single application of N at 3-6 weeks after sowing.

Varieties have a different grain yield response to NVarieties differ in their grain yield without N and in how they respond to N application (Figure 1). A multi-environment analysis of 20 national agronomy trials found that Commander, Granger and La Trobe had a higher grain yield at nil N than Bass and Buloke, but La Trobe was the highest yielding variety at 90 kg N/ha, followed by Commander then Bass, Buloke and Granger, which all had the same grain yield. Response to nitrogen showed that La Trobe was the most responsive to N, then Commander. Granger was the least responsive to N. These differences in yield and responsiveness influence the economics of N application.

Varieties differ in the grain protein concentrationRecent malt varieties have had a similar grain protein concentration for their grain yield. New malt varieties like Bass (+0.5%) and Commander (-0.5%) differ from the normal (Table 1). Since N levels in the soil and N fertilisation are major factors that affect grain protein concentration in a given variety, the challenge is to understand how tactical management of N fertiliser rates and timing can be used to achieve the targeted protein level of varieties which differ in their inherent protein concentration.

Table 1: Expected grain protein deviation (%, db) for accredited malt and food barley varieties when grown in Western Australia after removing the influence of grain yield

CommanderHenley

BaudinBuloke

FlagshipGairdnerGranger

HindmarshLa TrobeScope CL

FlindersHamelin

VlaminghWimmera

BassStirling

-0.6 to -0.3% -0.3 to -0.1% -0.1 to +0.1% +0.1 to +0.3% +0.3 to +0.6%Lower Slightly lower Normal Slightly higher Higher

Varieties differ in how they set their yield potential

We know that barley varieties differ in the way they set up their grain yield. In a comparison between Compass and La Trobe at Northam in 2014, La Trobe set ~100 more tillers/m2 and 1 grain more per ear than Compass but yielded the same as Compass whose grains were 6 mg heavier than La Trobe grains. In the same trial, Flinders set ~100 more tillers/m2 with a similar grain number per ear as Granger but yielded the same as Granger whose grain were 4 mg heavier than Flinders grains.

Aim

The influence of N rate and N timing on the agronomic performance of new malt barley varieties released since 2012 is not well understood.

The aim of this trial series (6 trials spread around Western Australia) is to compare and contrast the lodging, grain yield and grain quality response of six barley varieties to 12 N (rate and timing) strategies. The question we are asking is how different is the optimum N management package for each variety?

Trial detailsDesign: 6 varieties x 3 N rate x 4 N timing x 3 reps = 216 plots + 12 buffers

Varieties: Pedigree Tested as1) Bass WABAR2023/Alexis WABAR23152) Compass County/Commander//Commander WI45933) Flinders Baudin/Cooper WABAR25374) Granger Braemar/Adonis SMBA09-33535) La Trobe Dash/VB9409 IGB11016) Scope CL Franklin/VB9104//VB9104 VBHT0805

N treatments N rate (kg N/ha) N timing1) 15 N at 0 WAS 15 0 WAS2) 45 N at 0 WAS 45 0 WAS3) 105 N at 0 WAS 105 0 WAS4) 15 N at 5 WAS (Z25) 15 5 WAS5) 45 N at 5 WAS (Z25) 45 5 WAS6) 105 N at 5 WAS (Z25) 105 5 WAS7) 15 N at 10 WAS (Z31) 15 10 WAS8) 45 N at 10 WAS (Z31) 45 10 WAS9) 105 N at 10 WAS (Z31) 105 10 WAS10) 5 N at 0, 5 and 10 WAS 15 Split11) 15 N at 0, 5 and 10 WAS 45 Split12) 35 N at 0, 5 and 10 WAS 105 Split

Locations Sown1) 15GE19 – Dandaragan 12 May 20152) 15WH15 – Wongan Hills 20 May 20153) 15NO18 – Cunderdin 20 May 20154) 15NO19 – York 19 May 20155) 15ME10 – Merredin 20 May 20156) 15KA14 – Pingrup 19 May 2015

SummaryWe have previously observed that the rate of N applied is more important than when it is applied, but when it is applied is still an important component of getting the rate right. We are checking if these principles still hold true with the new ‘malt’ varieties.

The new ‘malt’ barley varieties differ in their phenotype (straw strength, grain yield and grain quality). We expect these differences in phenotype to influence the optimum N strategy for each variety.

AcknowledgmentsTechnical support was provided by Sue Cartledge, Rod Bowey and DAFWA Technical Service teams at Geraldton, Wongan Hills, Northam, Merredin and Katanning. This research is supported by DAFWA and the GRDC (DAW00224).

Reducing variety selection risk – the Yardstick trial Merredin and Districts Farm Improvement Group (MADFIG)

BackgroundVariety selection is an important management decision that can have a big impact on final returns at the end of season. Effective variety choice requires growers to take into account sowing opportunities, quality objectives, seasonal outlook, frost risk, soil type, nutritional management, disease and weed management.

Adopting a new variety is a costly exercise, especially if that variety is later found to have a poor fit and is deemed not suitable to business objectives. Having reliable information on how new varieties perform under a range of management practices and in a variety of situations can assist in the decision on whether to invest in a new variety or not.

The National Variety Testing (NVT) trial program provides valuable information on how varieties perform within a ‘standardised’ testing framework. However, unfortunately NVT trials sometimes fail and locally generated variety information that would have otherwise assisted growers in their variety selection decision making is unavailable.

This trial has been established adjacent to the NVT wheat and barley to address concerns about the lack of locally generated variety information, including variety performance under different agronomic management regimes. It is funded by the Kwinana East Regional Cropping Solutions Network (KERCSN). Established by Kalyx and managed by MADFIG.

AimTest performance of recently released wheat and barley varieties under different nutrition strategies.

ResultsNo results available to date. Results will be made available at the end of the season through the Regional Cropping Solutions Network.

SummaryThe trial has been established on medium to heavy soil with good stored soil moisture from summer rain. It was sown on 15th May into dry soil conditions above moisture. The dry conditions affected emergence in parts of the trial, but by the end of June most of the plots had evened up. At the time of sowing it was estimated that there was about 70 mm of plant available soil water.

The site has been registered as a Yield Prophet® site and included as part of the GRDC Kwinana East Regional Cropping Solution Network (KERCSN) project ‘Understanding soil moisture information from moisture probes and Yield Prophet®’ DAW 00251. Yield prophet reports for the MADFIG yardstick trial site can be found at the Birchip Cropping Group's Yield Prophet website - http://www.yieldprophet.com.au/yp/wfLogin.aspx

To view the information coming from these sites you can log in using 'yp' as both your username and password to access the yield summaries and reports.

Ten wheat (Mace, Calingiri, Magenta, Trojan, Hydra, Emu Rock, Zen, Corack, Cobra, Impress CL) and five barley varieties (Hindmarsh, Scope, La Trobe, Compass and Fathom) have been included in the trial. The varieties selected are a mix of the main varieties grown at present in

the area and varieties which have been recently released and promoted as having a fit in our area.

There are four nutrient management scenarios in the trial. Fertiliser treatments were determined based on soil test results, soil type, soil moisture and seasonal conditions at time of sowing. The 4 fertiliser regimes typical to different season deciles were decided by group members in consultation with Geoff Fosbery (ConsultAg) and Caroline Peek (DAFWA). Fertiliser treatments were banded at seeding and are

Decile 1 - 0 P, O N; Decile 4- 5 P, 10 N; Decile 7-8 - 5 P, 30 N; Play the season 5 P, 10 N + 10 N post emergence

For more information contact: Vanessa and Doug McGinnissPhone: (08) 9044 1024Mobile: 0429 441 007e-mail: admin@madfig.com.au

Barley NVTAngela Hampson (Kalyx Australia)

Key messages All trials are sown and harvested as close to or before district grower practice to ensure

variety performance is similar to that seen by growers on their farms. Growers need to be aware that individual trial results from NVT provide only a snapshot

in time and may lead to unsuitable varietal choice. The latest reporting of results, where varieties are analysed into multi-environment

groups and reported using a unique production value (PV) for each variety in each environment provides the most accurate prediction of relative yield performances of varieties for an environment.

Background

The National Variety Trial (NVT) program is funded by the GRDC and was established in 2005. The program is designed to evaluate barley varieties entering the market that have gone through selection and evaluation within the various breeding programs. NVT results are currently analysed based on long term multi-environment groups (MET) and reported using a unique production value (PV) for each variety in each environment.

AimTo evaluate a range of current and soon to be released barley varieties established at a single sowing time under grower practice at Merredin, Western Australia. The results of the research will be extended to local farmers and to the wider agricultural community.

Trial detailsN

Range 1 Range 2 Range 3 Range 4 Range 5 Range 6Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 1 (Hindmarsh)

Row 1 Baudin WI4933 IGB1305 Fleet Compass WI4897

Row 2 Buloke Gairdner Oxford Navigator Flinders Fathom

Row 3 IGB1302 Granger WI4896 LaTrobe Charger SMBA12-2297

Row 4 Lockyer Mundah ScopeFiller (Hindmarsh) Hindmarsh Alestar

Row 5 Bass SMBA12-1361 Commander IGB1334T Litmus IGB1414T

Row 6 WI4897 Litmus Bass IGB1302 LaTrobe SMBA12-1361

Row 7 IGB1305 Scope Compass IGB1414T Mundah Buloke

Row 8 Hindmarsh Fleet Fathom Charger Commander WI4933

Row 9 SMBA12-2297 Flinders Lockyer Gairdner WI4896Filler (Hindmarsh)

Row 10 Navigator IGB1334T Granger Alestar Baudin Oxford

Row 11 Commander Alestar Flinders WI4897 Gairdner Granger

Row 12Filler (Hindmarsh) Charger Baudin Mundah Fleet Bass

Row 13 Fathom Oxford Litmus WI4933 IGB1302 Scope

Row 14 LaTrobe Compass Buloke SMBA12-2297 IGB1305 IGB1334T

Row 15 IGB1414T WI4896 Hindmarsh SMBA12-1361 Navigator Lockyer

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

Buffer 2 (Hindmarsh)

FEN

CE

Property: Doug and Vanessa McGuinessPlot size and replication:

Length: 10m Width 1.76m Reps 3

Soil type: Loamy ClaySowing Date: 16/05/15Seeding Rate: 65 kg/haFertiliser (kg/ha): IBS: Urea 50 kg/ha; Gusto Gold

100 kg/haPaddock rotation:

2014: Wheat; 2013: Canola; 2012 Wheat

Crop Protection: IBS: Trifluralin 2 L/ha, Chlorpyrifos 0.5 L/ha; Roundup 1.5 L/haPost Em 4WAS.:Velocity 1 L/ha, Lontrel 0.12 kg/ha, Hasten 1 L/haPost Em 6 WAS Velocity 1 L/ha, Lontrel 0.3 L/ha, Hasten 1.5 L/haPost Em 12 WAS Prosaro 0.3 L/ha, Alphacypermethrin 0.4 L/ha

SummaryThis trial was sown dry into a grey valley floor clay. The seed bed was cloddy in areas due to the nature of the soil. The trial received 8mm of rain 1 hour post seeding and 12mm over the subsequent two days, but this rain was insufficient to provide an even germination. A significant dry period followed seeding contributed to a staggered germination.

Wheat NVTAngela Hampson (Kalyx Australia)

Key messages All trials are sown and harvested as close to or before district grower practice to ensure

variety performance is similar to that seen by growers on their farms. Growers need to be aware that individual trial results from NVT provide only a snapshot

in time and may lead to unsuitable varietal choice. The latest reporting of results, where varieties are analysed into multi-environment

groups and reported using a unique production value (PV) for each variety in each environment provides the most accurate prediction of relative yield performances of varieties for an environment.

BackgroundThe National Variety Trial (NVT) program is funded by the GRDC and was established in 2005. This national crop evaluation system is inclusive of all potential new varieties of crops, regardless of the public or private company responsible for the breeding and release of the variety. Acceptance of entries into the NVT trials is conditional that the crop varieties under evaluation are very close to release or are currently available to growers.

AimThe objective of the National Variety Testing (NVT) system is to provide growers and their advisers with independent information on the performance of newly released varieties relative to the current commercial varieties grown in their area.

Trial detailsN Range 1 Range 2 Range 3 Range 4 Range 5 Range 6

Buffer 1 (Trojan) Buffer 1 (Trojan) Buffer 1 (Trojan) Buffer 1 (Trojan) Buffer 1 (Trojan) Buffer 1 (Trojan)Row 1 Tenfour IGW6148 Fortune B53 Bremer EGA Bonnie RockRow 2 Cobra EDGE06-034-14 Emu Rock IGW6111 Scout WedinRow 3 LPB11-1728 Magenta IGW6124 RAC2119 Zen HarperRow 4 RAC2182 LPB11-2094 IGW6125 Yitpi RAC2107 LPB09-0358Row 5 LPB11-1727 Cobalt LPB11-1798 IGW4157 LPB11-2076 EDGE11V-29-05Row 6 Justica CL Plus Mace Jade Westonia LPB11-1837 CalingiriRow 7 IGW4119 RAC2069 Grenade CL Plus Supreme Hydra TrojanRow 8 Impress CL Plus IGW6112 IGW8027 Wyalkatchem Corack BuchananRow 9 IGW4162 IGW6161 Mace Scout IGW8027 Westonia

Row 10 Jade EDGE11V-29-05 IGW6112 LPB11-1728 IGW6111 IGW4162Row 11 RAC2119 Emu Rock RAC2107 Cobalt IGW4119 B53Row 12 LPB09-0358 Zen LPB11-2094 Wedin LPB11-1798 Justica CL PlusRow 13 LPB11-1837 Supreme LPB11-1727 Impress CL Plus Yitpi MagentaRow 14 Grenade CL Plus LPB11-2076 Corack IGW6161 Fortune CobraRow 15 EGA Bonnie Rock IGW6124 Trojan Tenfour EDGE06-034-14 WyalkatchemRow 16 IGW4157 Calingiri RAC2182 Buchanan RAC2069 IGW6148Row 17 IGW6125 Bremer Harper Hydra IGW4157 LPB11-1728Row 18 IGW8027 Hydra Cobra Calingiri Tenfour IGW6125Row 19 Trojan LPB11-1798 LPB11-1837 Zen LPB11-1727 IGW6161Row 20 Wedin RAC2107 IGW4162 EGA Bonnie Rock Mace SupremeRow 21 B53 Wyalkatchem EDGE11V-29-05 RAC2069 Impress CL Plus LPB11-2094Row 22 Corack Westonia IGW4119 LPB09-0358 IGW6124 IGW6112Row 23 Scout Fortune Magenta LPB11-2076 RAC2182 RAC2119Row 24 Yitpi Harper IGW6148 Justica CL Plus Emu Rock Grenade CL PlusRow 25 Buchanan IGW6111 Bremer EDGE06-034-14 Jade Cobalt

Buffer 2 (Trojan) Buffer 2 (Trojan) Buffer 2 (Trojan) Buffer 2 (Trojan) Buffer 2 (Trojan) Buffer 2 (Trojan)

Property: Doug McGuinessPlot size and replication:

Length: 10m Width 1.76m Reps 3

Soil type: ClaySowing Date: 16/05/15Seeding Rate: 75 kg/haFertiliser (kg/ha): IBS: Urea 50 kg/ha; Gusto Gold

100 kg/haPaddock rotation:

2014: Wheat; 2013: Canola; 2012 Wheat

Crop Protection: IBS: Trifluralin 2 L/ha, Chlorpyrifos 0.5 L/ha; Roundup 1.5 L/haPost Em 4WAS Velocity 1 L/ha, Lontrel 0.12 kg/ha, Hasten 1 L/haPost Em 6WAS Velocity 1 L/ha, Lontrel 0.3 L/ha, Hasten 1.5 L/haPost Em 12WAS Prosaro 0.3 L/ha, Alphacypermethrin 0.4 L/ha

SummaryThis trial was sown dry into a grey valley floor clay. The seed bed was cloddy in areas due to the nature of the soil. The trial received 12mm over the two days following. The marginal moisture after sowing affected emergence across ranges, and even within rows.

Crown rot yield loss variety trials – barley and wheatDaniel Hüberli, M. Connor and K. Gajda (DAFWA, South Perth)daniel.huberli@agric.wa.gov.au or 9368 3836

Key messagesYield loss to crown rot is influenced by variety resistance ranking; understand the crown rot risk in your paddock to make the right choice of barley or wheat variety.

BackgroundCrown rot can be a significant limitation to grain production in Western Australia, and appears to be increasing. Crown rot is most damaging in seasons with moisture stress during grainfill. Management strategies to minimise yield loss in cereals include non-cereal break crops, inter-row sowing, cereal variety choice and controlling the summer and autumn green bridge. In previous work, the wheat variety, Emu Rock, has been shown to be more tolerant of crown rot than the commonly grown variety Mace.

With the recent release of wheat varieties with reduced susceptibility to crown rot, and the expectation of further releases of wheat and barley varieties with improved resistance, there is a need to evaluate varietal tolerance to crown rot in the field to demonstrate potential yield impacts and economic benefits of adoption.

AimTo determine the relative yield loss of barley and wheat varieties to crown rot as an indication of disease tolerance.

Trial details Wheat and barley trials at Merredin and Wongan Hills in 2014; repeated in 2015 and 2016. Paired plots +/- crown rot inoculum with 12 barley and wheat varieties; 4 reps.

Barley varieties in 2015: Bass, Baudin, Commander, Compass, Fathom, Flinders, Granger, La Trobe, Litmus, Mundah, Scope CL, and Hindmarsh.

Wheat varieties in 2015: Calingiri, Cobra, Corack, Emu Rock, Harper, Justica CL, Mace, Magenta, Trojan, Westonia, Wyalkatchem, and Yitpi.

ResultsResults presented are from Wongan Hills in 2014, where uninoculated plots had minimal levels of crown rot. Differences between inoculated and uninoculated plots at Merredin were more difficult to analyse because of underlying crown rot inoculum at site and significant moisture stress.All barley and wheat varieties had some level of crown rot infection and experienced yield reductions (Figure 1 and 2) in inoculated plots. There were significant differences evident between varieties. In barley, Litmus, LaTrobe and Baudin had the lowest yield reduction from crown rot inoculation, with Litmus being the highest yielding variety in the presence of crown rot (Figure 2). A similar trend in variety yield response was observed at Merredin.

Litmus

La Trob

e

Scope

Baudin

Fathom

Commande

r

Flinde

rs

Munda

h

Grang

er

Stirling

Compass

Bass

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

0

10

20

30

40

50

Nil Inoculated White heads (%)G

rain

yie

ld (t

/ha)

Whi

te h

eads

(%)

Figure 1. Grain yield (12 varieties) and white head incidence (6 varieties) for barley in nil and crown rot inoculated plots at Wongan Hills in 2014. Crown rot resistance rankings are not available.

Emu Roc

k

Corack

Weston

ia

Harper

Magen

taMac

e

Wyalka

tchem

Cobra

Calingiri

Yitpi

Trojan

Justi

ca0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

0

10

20

30

40

50Nil Inoculated White heads (%)

Gra

in y

ield

(t/h

a)

Whi

te h

eads

(%)

Figure 2. Grain yield and white head incidence for 12 wheat varieties in nil and crown rot inoculated plots at Wongan Hills in 2014. Resistance rankings: Emu Rock (MS), Trojan (MS), Magenta (MSS) and remaining varieties (S) to crown rot.

In wheat, Emu Rock had the highest yield and the lowest white head expression in crown rot affected plots and also had the least reduction in yield from crown rot infection. More than 500 kg/ha yield loss and elevated disease expression occurred in Justica, Mace, Wyalkatchem, Cobra and Calingiri. At Merredin, Emu Rock was also the best performing variety.

SummaryThis is the first report of inoculated crown rot field experiments to evaluate infection and yield loss in barley and wheat varieties in WA. All varieties of barley or wheat were found to be affected by the disease and all had some level of yield reduction. However significant differences between varieties in incidence of infection and yield loss were evident.

The results show that variety choice under crown rot inoculum can have an impact on yield. Emu Rock yielded 300 kg/ha more than Mace under crown rot inoculum. However, in the plots without crown rot, Mace out-yielded Emu Rock by 200 kg/ha.

These preliminary results indicate that understanding the crown rot disease history of a paddock and choosing varieties with appropriate disease resistance ranking can influence crop yield performance.

Producing drought tolerance ratings for wheatGlenn McDonald (DAFWA)

Key messages Desired drought tolerance rankings for breeders are different to growers There is genetic variation in drought tolerance

BackgroundThis one year project extension is aiming to provide growers and industry with practical information in the form of drought tolerance scores for commercial varieties. This information will enable growers to make decisions on whether the variety they choose to grow will be able/unable to take advantage of any additional rainfall at the end of the season, or conversely whether a drier than expected finish to the season will result in lower yield for a variety in comparison to other varieties.

AimThe aim of the project is to produce drought tolerance ratings for elite wheat varieties from the national list of NVT entries.

Trial detailsThe entire list of national NVT entries in addition to other test lines (128 entries) are sown in two treatment blocks at the Merredin Managed Environment Facility (MEF). All entries are replicated twice with extra replicates for selected variety controls. The first treatment block receives natural rainfall and the second block is irrigated during spring to create a yield differential (Figure 1). All plots are monitored and measured over time to evaluate genetic traits that may contribute to drought tolerance.

ResultsThere are two competing uses for the results from this research. The first is the plant breeding companies who are interested in the most drought tolerant varieties. Varieties with high drought tolerance will have rainfed yields close to the irrigated yields which indicated that they reached close to the yield potential during the drier treatment. For breeders the variety does not need to have a higher yield.Conversely, growers are more interested in varieties that have a higher yield under rainfed conditions but also have the capacity when extra ‘rainfall’ occurs to yield proportionally higher than other varieties so a lower drought index is desirable. For example in Figure 2 when comparing similar yielding Corack and Derrimut, Corack would be preferred by growers as it has a higher irrigated yield, and hence a lower drought index.

Recently analysed results from previous years highlights the genetic variability in the drought tolerance of varieties. For example during the 2011 season for all the varieties that had yield of 2.0 t/ha, there was a corresponding range in irrigated yields of between 3.5 and 4.2 t/ha (Figure 3). This is good for plant breeders as they can identify varieties with a high drought index to use in their breeding programs.

SummaryThis research at the Merredin Managed Environment Facility, along with similar trials at other sites, is showing valuable results for both growers and plant breeders that can be used by both sections of the industry to make more informed decisions.

1-M

ay8-

May

15-M

ay22

-May

29-M

ay5-

Jun

12-J

un19

-Jun

26-J

un3-

Jul

10-J

ul17

-Jul

24-J

ul31

-Jul

7-A

ug14

-Aug

21-A

ug28

-Aug

4-S

ep11

-Sep

18-S

ep25

-Sep

2-O

ct9-

Oct

16-O

ct23

-Oct

30-O

ct6-

Nov

13-N

ov20

-Nov

27-N

ov

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 Rain2012 Irrigation2013 Rain2013 Irrigation2014 Rain2014 Irrigation

Week Starting

Rain

fall

(mm

)

Figure 1. Cumulative daily rainfall and rainfall plus irrigation at Merredin MEF, 2012-2014

Em

u R

ock

Wya

lkat

...Im

pres

s ...

Sup

rem

eS

abel

CL.

..C

alin

giri

AG

T S

c...

Sun

top

Gau

ntle

tY

itpi

Zipp

yY

anda

n...

Gile

sO

rion

Sen

tinel

Cat

alin

aG

asco

igne

Strz

elec

kiS

unva

leH

46E

GA

Bo.

..LR

Hor

net

Gaz

elle

Sun

coE

lliso

n

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2Rainfed Irrigated DI

Yiel

d (t/

ha)

Drou

ght I

ndex

Figure 2. Grain yields and drought index for highest rainfed yielding varieties (>2.25 t/ha) from Merredin MEF, 2011-2014

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.00.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

ME 2011ME 2012ME 2013ME 2014

Rainfed Yield (t/ha)

Irrig

ated

Yie

ld (t

/ha)

Figure 3. Grain yields from Merredin MEF site, 2011-2014

Screening canola varieties for tolerance to soil aluminium (Al)Bob French, DAFWA, Merredin

Key messages Extractable aluminium associated with soil acidity is a significant constraint to canola

production in WA We have found differences among canola genotypes in their sensitivity to soil Al.

BackgroundThe area of canola grown in Western Australia has expanded rapidly in the past 5 years, especially in medium to low rainfall areas. In these areas canola tends to be grown on sandier textured soils because these are at less risk of crop failure in dry years. However these soils are often acid with high levels of toxic aluminium (Al) in the soil solution, to which canola is reputed to be particularly sensitive. The ultimate long-term solution to this problem is to correct soil acidity by liming but this is expensive and takes time to become effective. In the meantime improving crop Al tolerance will be helpful. There is very little publicly available information on the relative sensitivity of Australian canola germplasm to Al; this knowledge would be very useful to growers deciding which varieties to grow, it would also be useful to plant breeding companies in developing new varieties.

AimTo evaluate the relative tolerance of commercially available canola germplasm to soil Al

Trial detailsThis trial is on a site with adjacent blocks of high and low extractable Al (see Figure 1), achieved by applying lime in 2008 and again in 2011. The Al responses of 40 old and new Australian canola varieties are being compared.

Canola varietiesTriazine tolerant varieties

Roundup Ready varieties

Clearfield varieties

Atomic 43Y23 45Y88Bonito 45Y22 Hyola 474Cobbler AN14R5074 Hyola 575Crusher Eclipse Hyola 577Gem GT Cobra Hyola 970Hyola 450 GT ViperHyola 525 GT41Hyola 555 GT50Hyola 559 Hyola 400Hyola 650 Hyola 404Jardee Hyola 505Mallee Hyola 600Nitro IH30Stingray IH50Stubby TaipanSturtTanamiTelferThumper

Triazine tolerant varieties

Roundup Ready varieties

Clearfield varieties

Wahoo

The trial was sown on 6 May into marginally moist soil with 100 kg/ha Agras.

ResultsThe marginal moisture conditions meant that emergence of this trial was delayed, and emergence of some varieties was very poor because seed was several years old. Liming had affected Al contents down to about 40 cm (see below). There are still high levels of Al below that (levels above 5 mg/kg are considered high).

0 5 10 15 20 250

20

40

60

80

100

120

LimedUnlimed

Al (CaCl2) mg/kg

Dept

h (c

m)

Figure 1: Extractable aluminium concentration for limed and unlimed soils measured at intervals through the soil profile.

There was a significant early growth response to lime. This is shown by the normalised differential vegetation index (NDVI) measured with a Greenseeker. Although there were greater NDVI responses in some varieties than others we need corroborating growth and yield data before ranking varieties for their sensitivity to Al. Data for two lines, ANR14R5074 and IH 50, that differ in their response to lime are shown in Figure 2.

LimedUnlimed0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

IH 50 4 AugANR 4 augIH 50 22 JulyANR 22 JulyIH 50 8 JulyANR 8 July

NDVI

Figure 2: Normalised Differential Vegetation Index (NDVI) values measured at three times, for limed and unlimed treatments of IH 50 (less Al tolerant)and ANR14R5074 (more Al tolerant) canola.

SummaryThere are significant areas of acid soils in Western Australia where high levels of extractable Al constrain crop growth. Raising the Al tolerance of canola will improve its adaptation to these soils. We have detected significant differences in the tolerance of early growth to soil Al among commercial varieties. Final yield data from this trial will enable us to rank canola varieties for their Al tolerance. This information will be useful for growers as well as for plant breeders trying to improve general crop adaptation.

Retaining hybrid canola seed-does seed source affect loss of hybrid vigour?Bob French, DAFWA, Merredin

Key messages Hybrid canola varieties will become more dominant in the industry in the future We are assessing how much hybrid vigour is lost when seed of hybrid varieties is

retained on-farm. We are also assessing how much crop productivity depends on the environment seed is

produced in.

BackgroundHybrid vigour in canola can lead to better yield potential and better weed competitiveness and breeding companies are increasingly concentrating on producing hybrid rather than open-pollinated varieties. DAFWA trials over the past two years have shown that hybrids can yield better than open-pollinated varieties even in low rainfall environments. There are two disadvantages of hybrid varieties. The first is that they do not breed true so that hybrid vigour degrades with each successive generation. For this reason growers are encouraged to buy fresh seed each year rather than retaining farm grown seed. The second is that hybrid seed is expensive to produce and so is expensive for growers to buy. This is a disincentive for low rainfall growers to expand canola, which they see as a risky crop, area. But the loss of hybrid vigour might be less important in low rainfall areas with lower inherent yield potential.Crop vigour may also be affected by the environment in which the seed was produced through effects on seed size but also on other factors. This could have implications for seed choice and also seed production.

AimTo measure the loss of hybrid vigour after one generation of keeping hybrid canola seed and to test whether this differs between environments in which that seed is produced.

Trial detailsTreatmentsSeed used in this trial was obtained from commercial sources or retained from DAFWA trials in 2014 at various locations

Commercially produced seed

Retained seed:Hyola 450 (F2) from 2014 trials at the following locations

Retained seed: Bonito (OP) from 2014 trials at the following locations

Bonito (OP) Binnu BuntineHyola 450 (F1 hybrid) fresh in 2014

Mingenew Wongan Hills

Hyola 450 (F1 hybrid) fresh in 2015

Buntine Holt Rock

Wongan HillsHolt RockSalmon Gums

Each seed lot was sown at two target densities: 20 and 40 plants/m²

The trial was sown on 23 April into dry soil with 100 kg/ha Agras.

ResultsEmergence was staggered in this trial due to the dry conditions. About half of the trial emerged within 10-14 days of sowing while the other half did not emerge until after rain in mid-May. There were no discernible differences between treatments in emergence under dry conditions. The trial began flowering in mid-July

Improving the sustainability of continuous wheatBob French, DAFWA, Merredin

Key messages Trial being set up to compare the sustainability and productivity continuous wheat with

sequences including fallow and canola

BackgroundContinuous wheat sequences are very common in many parts of the WA Wheatbelt despite break crops significantly improving the productivity of wheat crops. This is partly because of the riskiness of most break crops, and their lower profitability compared to cereals.

In the Merredin district continuous wheat is practised mainly on medium to heavy soils but is most profitable on medium soils. Continuous wheat sequences can become unproductive due to excessive build-up of weeds, particularly wild radish, annual ryegrass, and brome grass. Cereal diseases such as crown rot and yellow spot can also contribute to poor productivity of continuous wheat in the district. The alternative to wheat on these soils is usually pasture, which is often very poor, chemical fallow on farms without livestock, or canola. Canola is more likely to yield poorly in dry seasons than wheat, but this risk can be reduced by growing it after fallow. A two-year break (e.g. fallow-canola) is necessary to get weed populations under control where they have become unmanageable. This trial is designed to quantify the constraints to continuous wheat production and to investigate whether some varieties are more suitable than others.

Aim1. To quantify the constraints to wheat production in continuous sequences in the Eastern

Wheatbelt.2. To identify differences in cultivar response to these constraints.3. To identify ways of managing wheat-based cropping sequences to minimise their

effects.

Trial detailsThe trial is on a medium soil site cropped to wheat in 2013 and 2014 and will run for 4 years. The 2014 crop had a high incidence of crown rot. It is laid out in blocks of different sequences that can be split for a range of treatments in year 4. A separate instance of each sequence is present for the wheat varieties Mace, Magenta, and Emu Rock.

Crop sequences2015 crop 2016 crop 2017 crop 2018 cropWheat Wheat Wheat WheatFallow Wheat Wheat WheatCanola Wheat Wheat WheatCanola Fallow Wheat WheatFallow Canola Wheat WheatWheat Fallow Canola Wheat

The trial was sown on 16 June into moist soil with 100 kg/ha Agras and has since been sprayed with 30 L/ha Flexi-N.

Results2015 is a set-up year for this trial so only a minimal data set is being collected this year. Soil samples from the site have been collected for site characterisation and for Predicta-B testing for soil borne diseases, and stubble samples were sent to NSW to estimate the level of crown rot inoculum. No results are yet available. We are also monitoring soil water content under the different sequences and will monitor changes in weed populations through the life of the trial.

SummaryWe have set up a 4-year trial to compare the performance of crop sequences including fallow and canola phases with continuous wheat. This trial will identify the relative strengths and weaknesses of different wheat varieties for continuous sequences in this environment.

Retaining hybrid canola seed-how can we minimise loss of hybrid vigour?Bob French, DAFWA, Merredin

Key messages New hybrid canola seed is much more expensive than farm-retained seed but hybrid

vigour declines if hybrids are retained on-farm. This trial will help assess the costliness of that decline

BackgroundHybrid vigour in canola can lead to better yield potential and better weed competitiveness and breeding companies are increasingly concentrating on producing hybrid rather than open-pollinated varieties. DAFWA trials over the past two years have shown that hybrids can yield better than open-pollinated varieties even in low rainfall environments. There are two disadvantages of hybrid varieties. The first is that they do not breed true so that hybrid vigour degrades with each successive generation. For this reason growers are encouraged to buy fresh seed each year rather than retaining farm grown seed. The second is that hybrid seed is expensive to produce and so is expensive for growers to buy. This is a disincentive for low rainfall growers to expand canola, which they see as a risky crop, area. But the loss of hybrid vigour might be less important in low rainfall areas with lower inherent yield potential.

AimTo measure the loss of hybrid vigour after one generation of keeping hybrid canola seed and to test whether increasing seed rate or grading seed will overcome that loss.

Trial detailsTreatments

Fresh seed

Retained seed (grown at Wongan Hills in 2014)

Mixed fresh and retained

Bonito (OP) Hyola 450 (F2) Hyola 450 25:75 F1/F2

Hyola 450 (F1 hybrid) 2014 seed

Hyola 450 (F2) <1.8 mm

Hyola 450 50:50 F1/F2

Hyola 450 (F1 hybrid) 2015 seed

Hyola 450 (F2) >1.8 mm

Hyola 450 75:25 F1/F2

Each seed lot was sown at 2 target densities 20 and 40 plants/m²

The trial was sown on 23 April into dry soil with 100 kg/ha Agras.

ResultsEmergence was staggered in this trial due to the dry conditions. About half of the trial emerged within 10-14 days of sowing while the other half did not emerge until after rain in mid-May.

There were no discernible differences between treatments in emergence under dry conditions. The trial began flowering in mid-July

SummaryFuture canola varieties are likely to mostly be hybrids. To make best use of hybrid varieties fresh seed should be obtained each season. Hybrid seed is expensive to produce so is expensive to buy. This could make seed cost a relatively large part of overall production costs which is not desirable in low rainfall environments where canola yields are usually not high and there is a real risk of crop failure. However, hybrid vigour will not express itself to the same extent in low yield potential environments so its loss may not be critical in low rainfall environments. This trial is part of a series to quantify how declining hybrid vigour from F2 seed affects canola yield in a low yield potential environment.

Biological amelioration of subsoil acidity

Craig Scanlan, Chris Gazey and Daron Malinowski (DAFWA)

Key messages Subsoil acidity develops due to an imbalance between the acidity and alkalinity profiles

created by crop production. Using calcium nitrate as a nitrogen source may help slow or reverse subsoil acidity

because roots release alkaline ions to take up nitrate. This 5-year trial has been designed to measure cumulative effects of nitrogen source on

soil pH, grain yield and profit.

BackgroundSubsoil acidity develops due to an imbalance between the acidity and alkalinity profiles created by crop production. There are two components to crop-induced acidity. First, grain, hay and straw are alkaline and removal of these leads to an increase in acidity of the soil ‘bucket’ over time. The second component is stratification. Crop roots tend to acidify the whole root zone but the accumulation of alkaline materials as crop residue only occurs at the surface. As a result, the rate of rundown of soil pH is usually greatest between 10 and 30 cm soil depth and is most evident in sands and loamy earths which have a low pH buffering capacity.

A change in nitrogen fertiliser source may offer an opportunity to address the imbalance between the acidity and alkalinity profiles created by crop production. Crop roots create acidity because in general, they take up more cations than anions. To take up a cation, roots release H+ ions (acidity) and to take up anions roots release OH- or HCO3

- ions (alkalinity). Nitrogen source affects the acidity / alkalinity balance because some products provide all the N as ammonium (plants must release acidity to take it up) while others provide all the N as nitrate (plants release alkalinity to take it up). Work in NSW has shown that application of nitrogen as calcium nitrate can lead to an increase in subsoil pH though at very high rates of N applications. The effectiveness of using calcium nitrate for biological amelioration of subsoil acidity has not been assessed in a low-rainfall environment.

AimTo quantify the long-term effect of: nitrogen source, nitrogen placement, lime application and K rate on:

Soil pH Grain yield Profit

Trial detailsThis long-term trial is designed to measure cumulative effects of nitrogen fertiliser source, lime and potassium application. The trial was established in 2015 and will run for 5 years and treatments will be repeated on the same plots each year. The crop rotation will be: oats, wheat, wheat, canola, barley. The rotation has been designed to shift from highly aluminium tolerant to aluminium sensitive species to maximise the potential for biological amelioration in the first few years and the potential to detect differences in crop performance in the last 2 years. The design is a complete factorial of:

Nitrogen source: calcium nitrate, ammonium sulphateNitrogen placement: topdressed at seeding, banded at 10 cm

Potassium rate: 0, 80 kg K/ha as muriate of potash.Lime rate: 0, 5 t/ha as limesand.

In 2015, Bannister oats was sown at 80 kg/ha and was treated with Emerge and Vibrance. All nitrogen treatments were applied at 25 kg N/ha. Phosphorus was applied at 8 kg P/ha as double superphosphate.

Results

Soil chemical analysis of trial site April 2015.

Soil

dept

h (c

m)

Soil

pH

(CaC

l 2)

Alu

min

ium

(C

aCl 2)

Phos

phor

us

Col

wel

l (m

g/kg

)Po

tass

ium

C

olw

ell

(mg/

kg)

Sulp

hur

(mg/

kg)

Org

anic

C

arbo

n (%

)

0 to 10 4.4 1 47 72 12 1.010 to 20 4.0 13 11 35 30 0.6

20 to 30 4.0 19 4 34 49 0.3

30 to 40 3.9 21 3 34 66 0.2

40 to 60 3.9 21 6 31 71 0.2

AcknowledgementsThis research is funded by the Soil Constraints West initiative by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (Project code DAW00252).

Long-term assessment of nutrient management strategies in a low rainfall environmentCraig Scanlan, Ross Brennan and Gavin Sarre (DAFWA)

Key messages Economic analysis after 3 years shows that treatments with an intermediate level of

investment are the most profitable There are a range of treatments that produced about the same profit Cumulative effects of low inputs reduced grain yield in 2014

BackgroundThis trial has been designed to examine the long-term profitability of different nutrient management strategies. In this trial, farmer practice is the control treatment and we are interested in how changes to farmer practice affect profit. Treatments are repeated on the same plot each year.

AimTo determine the long-term economic effect of changes in nutrient management and investment in lime and deep ripping.

Trial detailsTreatments

1. Farmer practice [30 k/ha MAP + 55 kg/ha Urea (7 kg P/ha and 29 kg N/ha)]

2. Farmer practice + 1t/ha lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 + 1 t/ha lime 2013

3. Farmer practice + 1t/ha lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013

4. Farmer practice 0 kg P/ha

5. Farmer practice 15 kg P/ha

6. Farmer practice tactical N (3.3 kg N/ha at seeding + 25 kg N/ha at 4 weeks after seeding)

7. Farmer practice + 2t/ha lime 2013

8. Maximum gross margin (0 kg N/ha and 0 kg P/ha 2012 and 2013. 25 kg N/ha in 2014)

9. Maximum yield (120 kg/ha MAPSCZ + 55 kg/ha Urea (24 kg P/ha, 39 kg N/ha, 7 kg S/ha)

Results2012 - Grain yield results for canola in 2012 were highly variable there were no significant differences (Table 1).

2013 - Grain yield for wheat in 2013 showed significant responses to both nitrogen and phosphorus fertiliser. Treatment 4 (Farmer practice 0P) where no P was applied yielded significantly less than treatment 1 (Farmer practice) where 7 kg P/ha was applied and treatment 5 (Farmer practice 15P) where 15 kg P was applied as fertiliser yielded significantly higher than treatment 1.

2014 – There was a trend towards higher yields with higher inputs. Farmer practice 15P was significantly higher than Farmer practice 0P though farmer practice

(7P) was not. The cumulative effects of low inputs in Treatment 8 led to a significantly lower grain yield than Farmer practice.

Table 1: Grain yields (kg/ha) from 2012-2014 

Treatment2012

Canola (Cobbler) grain yield

(kg/ha)

2013Wheat (Mace)

grain yield (kg/ha)

2014Wheat (Mace)

grain yield (kg/ha)

1. Farmer practice (30 MAP + 55 Urea) 532 2388 1398

2. Farmer practice + 1 t/ha Lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 + 1 t/ha Lime 2013

539 2578 1547

3. Farmer practice + 1 t/ha Lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 383 2424 1317

4. Farmer practice 0 P 450 2123 1136

5. Farmer practice 15 P 502 2656 1457

6. Farmer practice 25 N tactical 479 2054 1163

7. Farmer practice + 2t/ha lime 2013 555 2562 1596

8. Maximum gross margin (0 kg N/ha + 0 kg P/ha in 2012 and 2013)

446 1857 1087

9. Maximum yield (120 MAPSCZ + 55kg/ha Urea + 1t/ha lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 + 3t/ha lime 2013)

544 3123 1574

Significance level Not significant 5% 5%

Least significant difference (LSD) between means - 220 280

Table 2: Treatments ranked by net present value (NPV) of cashflow for the years 2012 to 2014. A discount rate of 5% was used. Treatments followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05).

Treatment Net Present Value ($/ha).

5. Farmer practice 15 P 960 a1. Farmer practice (30 MAP + 55 Urea) 957 a7. Farmer practice + 2t/ha lime 2013 929 ab2. Farmer practice + 1 t/ha Lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 + 912 ab

6. Farmer practice 25 N tactical 881 ab4. Farmer practice 0 P 858 ab3. Farmer practice + 1 t/ha Lime 2012 + Deep ripping 2013 831 ab

8. Maximum gross margin (0 kg N/ha + 0 kg P/ha in 2012 and 2 811 ab

Treatment Net Present Value ($/ha).

9. Maximum yield (120 MAPSCZ + 54kg/ha Urea + 1t/ha lime 201 737 b

Our economic analysis shows that treatments with an intermediate level of investment were the most profitable although there were few statistically significant differences. Treatments 5 and 1 have a significantly higher NPV than treatment 9. Our results suggest that NPV is reduced by either very high or very low investment and there are a range of strategies that produce about the same profit.

AcknowledgementsThis research is funded under the More Profit from Crop Nutrition initiative by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (Project code DAW00222).

Bednar Terraland TO 6000 demonstrationGreg Shea and Glen Riethmuller (DAFWA) Key messageThe new Bednar Terraland TO 6000 will be demonstrated, as well as a shallow leading tine. Agrowplow will assess the soil mixing ability of both machines. BackgroundThe Bednar Terraland TO 6000 is a trailed chisel plough for intensive tillage depths of up to 55cm on a 5.6m working width (13 tines at 43cm). This machine is potentially a one pass solution to soil renovation in the light sandy soils which are prone to acidification. The machine comprises two rows of heavy duty tines with hard faced chisel points fitted below a wing assembly that mixes soil. A tandem spiked roller following completes the job while also levelling. Incorporation of lime into the soil after spreading should help to ameliorate subsurface acidity faster, and assist the lime to dissolve and react more rapidly by improving its contact with acid soil. Lime dissolves very slowly, allowing it to neutralise soil acidity only in the solution immediately surrounding each lime particle. One way to speed the process is to use the finest particles available and cultivating to distribute them evenly through the soil. The economic imperative is to get a return on the considerable expense of liming as soon as possible. Increased mixing of the lime with the acidic soil has, in trials, sped up the amelioration of the acidity, and allowed a response in yield as soon as possible after the lime is applied. An assessment of the degree of mixing achieved will be done by using three coloured sand layers in a trench and comparing to an 11 tine Agrowplow with five shallow leading tines in between six deep working tines (at 44.5cm spacing). AimTo demonstrate and assess the new Bednar Terraland TO 6000 chisel plough against a shallow leading tine Agrowplow. Demonstration detailsA trench with different coloured soil in layers has been dug so that the degree of mixing of the soil can be assessed after cultivation. The chisel plough soil mixing will be compared to our 2.5m wide shallow leading tine Agrowplow. 

Biosecurity Blitz 2015

Biosecurity Blitz 2015 is a collaborative effort by all to discover and report as many unusual or damaging pests (ie: insects, diseases, weeds and animals) as possible across Western Australia. The Blitz is slightly different in that it engages the public to use a suite of pest reporting apps developed by the DAFWA, such as the MyPestGuide – Reporter app to head outdoors and record observations over a two week period (18-30 September).

The origin of the Biosecurity Blitz comes from the Boosting Biosecurity Defences “E-Surveillance of pests and diseases projects” made possible by Royalties for Regions and Council of Grain Grower Organisations. The project manager Rosalie McCauley and her team have worked hard to promote DAFWA’s reporting apps by presenting information about biosecurity to over 40 stakeholder and school groups, attending agricultural farm field days, as well as at university and local garden club days.

“Reporting any unfamiliar pest found in a paddock to the pantry protects our valuable environment, our food and helps maintain access to Australia’s export markets, thus sustaining our enviable standard of living and securing employment across the supply chain for many industries. I encourage everyone to download one of the apps and participate in the first ever Biosecurity Blitz,” she said.

To participate in the Biosecurity Blitz, you’ll first need to download one of the free reporting mobile apps below onto your smartphone:

MyPestGuide is for everyone to quickly report pests by taking up to four photos and sending it to DAFWA. Experts will identify the pest, reply back to you on your device, and map it online.

PestFax (iPhone only) is for those who are already confident at identifying pests in the field. It sends reports to the PestFax Map and Editor service and users can request feedback.

MyCrop is a suite of diagnostic apps to help identify and report crop constraints (ie: pests, diseases, nutrient disorders and herbicide damage) in wheat, barley, canola or pulse fields. Users can request support from DAFWA experts when reporting.

If you don’t have a smart phone, you can still report pests using either the MyPestGuide or PestFax online websites or by calling the department’s Pest and Disease Surveillance team on 1800 084 881.

DAFWA will use the results of the Biosecurity Blitz to support and verify Australia’s freedom from certain exotic pests and diseases, such as the Brown marmorated stink bug, which is a very important step to maintain Australia’s access to export markets.

To download a free reporting app, or for more information about how to participate in the Biosecurity Blitz 2015, please visit DAFWA’s Biosecurity Blitz webpage at https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/biosecurity/biosecurity-blitz-2015-coming-soon-western-australia

Sincerely,MyPestGuide@agric.wa.gov.au

MyPestGuide https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/plant-biosecurity/mypestguide-appPestFax https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/pestfax/id998246180MyCrop https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/mycrop

NewslettersIf you would like to sign up to any of the following newsletters please email Tanya Kilminster at Tanya.Kilminster@agric.wa.gov.au. AgMemoThe Central Agricultural Region AgMemo is produced for growers and industry in the districts of Lake Grace, Merredin, Narrogin and Northam. 

eWeedeWeed is a newsletter service providing information on weed control issues arising throughout the growing season, general weed management advice, herbicide resistance and integrated weed management. eWeed is generally produced between March and October. 

AgTacticsTactical farming information - when you need it! AgTactics provides up to the minute information focused on the local issues affecting farming in the agricultural zones. Investigate livestock deathsRoy Butler (DAFWA) The Subsidised Disease Investigation Pilot Program subsidises the full cost of a full veterinary investigation into signs of disease in cattle, sheep, goats or pigs in WA and is available for the next two years. For more information: Visit agric.wa.gov.au and search for ‘disease investigation pilot’ Contact Kevin Hepworth (program coordinator), or Roy Butler (Merredin District Veterinary

Officer) Kevin.Hepworth@agric.wa.gov.au, phone 9780 6282 or 0475 834 486 Roy.Butler@agric.wa.gov.au, phone 90813 111 or 0427 197 242 

List of this year’s trials

1 Seeding rate trial - Wheat2 Demonstration of canola response to density and timing of nitrogen3 Demonstration of summer serradella pod sowing and herbicide treatments4 Demonstration of lime diagnostics and ameliorating subsoil constraints5 Comparing dry sown wheat and canola for responses to water deficit conditions6 Canola production with precision seeder7 Tactical wheat agronomy for the low rainfall-plant density and nitrogen response

of selected wheat varieties8 Tactical wheat agronomy for the low rainfall - plant density and nitrogen

response of selected wheat varieties9 Tactical agronomy for the low rainfall areas - Nitrogen timing10 What is the value of seedling resistance in the management of spot type net

blotch in barley?11 Crown rot yield loss variety trials - barley12 Crown rot management trial – seed-dressing and wheat varieties12 Crown rot yield loss variety trials - wheat14 Crown rot yield loss response curves for wheat varieties15 Effect of sowing date and wheat varieties on crown rot level16 Fungicide options for the management of spot type net blotch in barley in two

barley varieties17 Chickpea Genetic Evaluation18 Field Pea Genetic Evaluation19 Lupin Genetic Evaluation20 Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to

nitrogen applied and time of sowing21 Oat Grain Genetic Evaluation22 Agronomic options for managing new barley varieties - response to nitrogen rate

and nitrogen timing23 Biological amelioration of subsoil acidity24 Biological amelioration of subsoil acidity25 Flowering windows in dry sown wheat crops26 Seedling mortality of dry seeded wheat and canola27 Long-term assessment of nutrient management strategies in a low rainfall

environment28 Evaluation of lentil breeding lines29 Effect of soil pH on the residual value of phosphorus fertiliser30 Effect of soil pH and potassium fertiliser on the response of barley to

phosphorus fertiliser31 Effect of lime incorporation on soil nutrient availability - a paddock-scale

demonstration.32 Retaining F2 hybrid Triazine Tolerant seed in low rainfall areas - does the

source of the F2 seed matter?33 Retaining F2 and F3 hybrid TriazineTolerant (TT) seed in low rainfall areas –can

increased seed rates, grading or using mixes overcome lack of hybrid vigour in F2 and F3 seed?

34 Agronomic options for managing oat varieties for hay and grain - response to seeding rate (SR) applied and time of sowing

35 Digital soil mapping – EM38

36 Canola grazing37 Investigating alternative methods of increasing water infiltration (Nangeenan)38 Screening canola varieties for tolerance to soil Aluminium (Al)39 Improving the sustainability of continuous wheat40 NVT trial – Reducing variety selection risk through understanding varietal

performance with different management packages41 Wheat NVT42 Barley NVT43 Effect of row spacing, deep ripping, Wesley wheel and gypsum application on

grain yield and quality grown on heavy soils.44 Screening genetic variation wheat and barley for germination and establishment

under limited soil water45 Effect of lime and deep incorporations on grain yield and quality grown on acidic

yellow sands.46 Characterisation of selected wheat varieties on alkaline sodic soil in the low

rainfall zone of WA - Merredin region47 Characterisation of diverse wheats from international and national collections on

alkaline sodic soil in the low rainfall zone of WA - Merredin region48 Improving wheat nutrient use efficiency by harnessing nutrient interactions49 Adaptation of high vigour wheat genotypes under Western Australian conditions50 Investigating the varieties of wheat and barley to drought, Al toxicity and subsoil

salinityAchieving high and stable canola yield across the rainfall zones of Western Australia

51 Investigating new canola germplasms for tolerance to acid and Aluminium (Al) toxic soils in Merredin

52 Callum Wesley trial – Wesley Wheels53 Early water stress and wheat54 Evaluation of Field Pea breeding lines55 Barley Pre-breeding56 Benchmarking for Drought Tolerance - Managed Environment Facility