Targeting resource investments to achieve sediment reduction and improved Great Barrier Reef health

Concerns about excessive sediment loads entering the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) lagoon in Australia have led to a focus on improving ground cover in grazing lands. Ground cover has been identified as an important factor in reducing sediment loads, but improving ground cover has been difficult for reef stakeholders in major catchments of the GBR. To provide better information an optimising linear programming model based on paddock scale information in conjunction with land type mapping was developed for the Fitzroy, the largest of the GBR catchments. This identifies at a catchment scale which land types allow the most sediment reduction to be achieved at least cost. The results suggest that from the five land types modelled, the lower productivity land types present the cheapest option for sediment reductions. The study allows more informed decision making for natural resource management organisations to target investments. The analysis highlights the importance of efficient allocation of natural resource management funds in achieving sediment reductions through targeted land type investments. © 2012.

Managing glyphosate resistance in Australian cotton farming: modelling shows how to delay evolution and maintain long-term population control

Glyphosate resistance is a rapidly developing threat to profitability in Australian cotton farming. Resistance causes an immediate reduction in the effectiveness of in-crop weed control in glyphosate-resistant transgenic cotton and summer fallows. Although strategies for delaying glyphosate resistance and those for managing resistant populations are qualitatively similar, the longer resistance can be delayed, the longer cotton growers will have choice over which tactics to apply and when to apply them. Effective strategies to avoid, delay, and manage resistance are thus of substantial value. We used a model of glyphosate resistance dynamics to perform simulations of resistance evolution in Sonchus oleraceus (common sowthistle) and Echinochloa colona (awnless barnyard grass) under a range of resistance prevention, delaying, and management strategies. From these simulations, we identified several elements that could contribute to effective glyphosate resistance prevention and management strategies. (i) Controlling glyphosate survivors is the most robust approach to delaying or preventing resistance. High-efficacy, high-frequency survivor control almost doubled the useful lifespan of glyphosate from 13 to 25 years even with glyphosate alone used in summer fallows. (ii) Two non-glyphosate tactics in-crop plus two in-summer fallows is the minimum intervention required for long-term delays in resistance evolution. (iii) Pre-emergence herbicides are important, but should be backed up with non-glyphosate knockdowns and strategic tillage; replacing a late-season, pre-emergence herbicide with inter-row tillage was predicted to delay glyphosate resistance by 4 years in awnless barnyard grass. (iv) Weed species' ecological characteristics, particularly seed bank dynamics, have an impact on the effectiveness of resistance strategies; S. oleraceus, because of its propensity to emerge year-round, was less exposed to selection with glyphosate than E. colona, resulting in an extra 5 years of glyphosate usefulness (18 v. 13 years) even in the most rapid cases of resistance evolution. Delaying tactics are thus available that can provide some or many years of continued glyphosate efficacy. If glyphosate-resistant cotton cropping is to remain profitable in Australian farming systems in the long-term, however, growers must adapt to the probability that they will have to deal with summer weeds that are no longer susceptible to glyphosate. Robust resistance management systems will need to include a diversity of weed control options, used appropriately.

Strategic tillage in no-till farming systems in Australia’s northern grains-growing regions: II. Implications for agronomy, soil and environment

In semi-arid sub-tropical areas, a number of studies concerning no-till (NT) farming systems have demonstrated advantages in economic, environmental and soil quality aspects over conventional tillage (CT). However, adoption of continuous NT has contributed to the build-up of herbicide resistant weed populations, increased incidence of soil- and stubble-borne diseases, and stratification of nutrients and organic carbon near the soil surface. Some farmers often resort to an occasional strategic tillage (ST) to manage these problems of NT systems. However, farmers who practice strict NT systems are concerned that even one-time tillage may undo positive soil condition benefits of NT farming systems. We reviewed the pros and cons of the use of occasional ST in NT farming systems. Impacts of occasional ST on agronomy, soil and environment are site-specific and depend on many interacting soil, climatic and management conditions. Most studies conducted in North America and Europe suggest that introducing occasional ST in continuous NT farming systems could improve productivity and profitability in the short term; however in the long-term, the impact is negligible or may be negative. The short term impacts immediately following occasional ST on soil and environment include reduced protective cover, soil loss by erosion, increased runoff, loss of C and water, and reduced microbial activity with little or no detrimental impact in the long-term. A potential negative effect immediately following ST would be reduced plant available water which may result in unreliability of crop sowing in variable seasons. The occurrence of rainfall between the ST and sowing or immediately after the sowing is necessary to replenish soil water lost from the seed zone. Timing of ST is likely to be critical and must be balanced with optimising soil water prior to seeding. The impact of occasional ST varies with the tillage implement used; for example, inversion tillage using mouldboard tillage results in greater impacts as compared to chisel or disc. Opportunities for future research on occasional ST with the most commonly used implements such as tine and/or disc in Australia’s northern grains-growing region are presented in the context of agronomy, soil and the environment.

Strategic tillage in no-till farming systems in Australia’s northern grains-growing regions: I. Drivers and implementation

Development of no-tillage (NT) farming has revolutionized agricultural systems by allowing growers to manage greater areas of land with reduced energy, labour and machinery inputs to control erosion, improve soil health and reduce greenhouse gas emission. However, NT farming systems have resulted in a build-up of herbicide-resistant weeds, an increased incidence of soil- and stubble-borne diseases and enrichment of nutrients and carbon near the soil surface. Consequently, there is an increased interest in the use of an occasional tillage (termed strategic tillage, ST) to address such emerging constraints in otherwise-NT farming systems. Decisions around ST uses will depend upon the specific issues present on the individual field or farm, and profitability and effectiveness of available options for management. This paper explores some of the issues with the implementation of ST in NT farming systems. The impact of contrasting soil properties, the timing of the tillage and the prevailing climate exert a strong influence on the success of ST. Decisions around timing of tillage are very complex and depend on the interactions between soil water content and the purpose for which the ST is intended. The soil needs to be at the right water content before executing any tillage, while the objective of the ST will influence the frequency and type of tillage implement used. The use of ST in long-term NT systems will depend on factors associated with system costs and profitability, soil health and environmental impacts. For many farmers maintaining farm profitability is a priority, so economic considerations are likely to be a primary factor dictating adoption. However, impacts on soil health and environment, especially the risk of erosion and the loss of soil carbon, will also influence a grower’s choice to adopt ST, as will the impact on soil moisture reserves in rainfed cropping systems.