Lettuce Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of lettuce. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Low chill stonefruit information kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming series

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1998. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of low chill stonefruit. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Sweet Potato Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide.

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1998. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of low chill stonefruit. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Wine Grape Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.daf.qld.gov.au. This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of wine grape. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Development of profitable milk production systems for northern Australia: a field assessment of the productivity of five potential farming systems using farmlets.

Farmlets, each of 20 cows, were established to field test five milk production systems and provide a learning platform for farmers and researchers in a subtropical environment. The systems were developed through desktop modelling and industry consultation in response to the need for substantial increases in farm milk production following deregulation of the industry. Four of the systems were based on grazing and the continued use of existing farmland resource bases, whereas the fifth comprised a feedlot and associated forage base developed as a greenfield site. The field evaluation was conducted over 4 years under more adverse environmental conditions than anticipated with below average rainfall and restrictions on irrigation. For the grazed systems, mean annual milk yield per cow ranged from 6330 kg/year (1.9 cows/ha) for a herd based on rain-grown tropical pastures to 7617 kg/year (3.0 cows/ha) where animals were based on temperate and tropical irrigated forages. For the feedlot herd, production of 9460 kg/cow.year (4.3 cows/ha of forage base) was achieved. For all herds, the level of production achieved required annual inputs of concentrates of similar to 3 t DM/animal and purchased conserved fodder from 0.3 to 1.5 t DM/animal. This level of supplementary feeding made a major contribution to total farm nutrient inputs, contributing 50% or more of the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium entering the farming system, and presents challenges to the management of manure and urine that results from the higher stocking rates enabled. Mean annual milk production for the five systems ranged from 88 to 105% of that predicted by the desktop modelling. This level of agreement for the grazed systems was achieved with minimal overall change in predicted feed inputs; however, the feedlot system required a substantial increase in inputs over those predicted. Reproductive performance for all systems was poorer than anticipated, particularly over the summer mating period. We conclude that the desktop model, developed as a rapid response to assist farmers modify their current farming systems, provided a reasonable prediction of inputs required and milk production. Further model development would need to consider more closely climate variability, the limitations summer temperatures place on reproductive success and the feed requirements of feedlot herds.

Leaf trait co-ordination in relation to construction cost, carbon gain and resource-use efficiency in exotic invasive and native woody vine species

Background and Aims: Success of invasive plant species is thought to be linked with their higher leaf carbon fixation strategy, enabling them to capture and utilize resources better than native species, and thus pre-empt and maintain space. However, these traits are not well-defined for invasive woody vines. Methods: In a glass house setting, experiments were conducted to examine how leaf carbon gain strategies differ between non-indigenous invasive and native woody vines of south-eastern Australia, by investigating their biomass gain, leaf structural, nutrient and physiological traits under changing light and moisture regimes. Key Results: Leaf construction cost (CC), calorific value and carbon : nitrogen (C : N) ratio were lower in the invasive group, while ash content, N, maximum photosynthesis, light-use efficiency, photosynthetic energyuse efficiency (PEUE) and specific leaf area (SLA) were higher in this group relative to the native group. Trait plasticity, relative growth rate (RGR), photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency and water-use efficiency did not differ significantly between the groups. However, across light resource, regression analyses indicated that at a common (same) leaf CC and PEUE, a higher biomass RGR resulted for the invasive group; also at a common SLA, a lower CC but higher N resulted for the invasive group. Overall, trait co-ordination (using pair-wise correlation analyses) was better in the invasive group. Ordination using 16 leaf traits indicated that the major axis of invasive-native dichotomy is primarily driven by SLA and CC (including its components and/or derivative of PEUE) and was significantly linked with RGR. Conclusions: These results demonstrated that while not all measures of leaf resource traits may differ between the two groups, the higher level of trait correlation and higher revenue returned (RGR) per unit of major resource need (CC) and use (PEUE) in the invasive group is in line with their rapid spread where introduced.

Variation in ecophysiology and carbon economy of invasive and native woody vines of riparian zones in south-eastern Queensland

Exotic and invasive woody vines are major environmental weeds of riparian areas, rainforest communities and remnant natural vegetation in coastal eastern Australia, where they smother standing vegetation, including large trees, and cause canopy collapse. We investigated, through glasshouse resource manipulative experiments, the ecophysiological traits that might facilitate faster growth, better resource acquisition and/or utilization and thus dominance of four exotic and invasive vines of South East Queensland, Australia, compared with their native counterparts. Relative growth rate was not significantly different between the two groups but water use efficiency (WUE) was higher in the native species while the converse was observed for light use efficiency (quantum efficiency, AQE) and maximum photosynthesis on a mass basis (Amax mass). The invasive species, as a group, also exhibited higher respiration load, higher light compensation point and higher specific leaf area. There were stronger correlations of leaf traits and greater structural (but not physiological) plasticity in invasive species than in their native counterparts. The scaling coefficients of resource use efficiencies (WUE, AQE and respiration efficiency) as well as those of fitness (biomass accumulated) versus many of the performance traits examined did not differ between the two species-origin groups, but there were indications of significant shifts in elevation (intercept values) and shifts along common slopes in many of these relationships – signalling differences in carbon economy (revenue returned per unit energy invested) and/or resource usage. Using ordination and based on 14 ecophysiological attributes, a fair level of separation between the two groups was achieved (51.5% explanatory power), with AQE, light compensation point, respiration load, WUE, specific leaf area and leaf area ratio, in decreasing order, being the main drivers. This study suggests similarity in trait plasticity, especially for physiological traits, but there appear to be fundamental differences in carbon economy and resource conservation between native and invasive vine species.

Macadamia Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

ABSTRACT: Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in macadamia grower's handbook. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2004. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of macadamias. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Brassica Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2004. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2004. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of brassica. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Subtropical Banana Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2004. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2004. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of subtropical bananas. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Sweet Corn Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2005. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2005. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of sweet corn. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Tertiary Treatment of Ayr Municipal Wastewater using Bioremediation: A Pilot-Scale Study. A Report Prepared for the Burdekin Shire Council and the Burdekin Rangeland Reef Initiative

This joint DPI/Burdekin Shire Council project assessed the efficacy of a pilot-scale biological remediation system to recover Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorous (P) nutrients from secondary treated municipal wastewater at the Ayr Sewage Treatment Plant. Additionally, this study considered potential commercial uses for by-products from the treatment system. Knowledge gained from this study can provide directions for implementing a larger-scale final effluent treatment protocol on site at the Ayr plant. Trials were conducted over 10 months and assessed nutrient removal from duckweed-based treatments and an algae/fish treatment – both as sequential and as stand-alone treatment systems. A 42.3% reduction in Total N was found through the sequential treatment system (duckweed followed by algae/fish treatment) after 6.6 days Effluent Retention Time (E.R.T.). However, duckweed treatment was responsible for the majority of this nutrient recovery (7.8 times more effective than algae/fish treatment). Likewise, Total P reduction (15.75% reduction after 6.6 days E.R.T.) was twice as great in the duckweed treatment. A phytoplankton bloom, which developed in the algae/fish tanks, reduced nutrient recovery in this treatment. A second trial tested whether the addition of fish enhanced duckweed treatment by evaluating systems with and without fish. After four weeks operation, low DO under the duckweed blanket caused fish mortalities. Decomposition of these fish led to an additional organic load and this was reflected in a breakdown of nitrogen species that showed an increase in organic nitrogen. However, the Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN: ammonia, nitrite and nitrate) removal was similar between treatments with and without fish (57% and 59% DIN removal from incoming, respectively). Overall, three effluent residence times were evaluated using duckweed-based treatments; i.e. 3.5 days, 5.5 days and 10.4 days. Total N removal was 37.5%, 55.7% and 70.3%, respectively. The 10.4-day E.R.T. trial, however, was evaluated by sequential nutrient removal through the duckweed-minus-fish treatment followed by the duckweed-plus-fish treatment. Therefore, the 70.3% Total N removal was lower than could have been achieved at this retention time due to the abovementioned fish mortalities. Phosphorous removal from duckweed treatments was greatest after 10.4-days E.R.T. (13.6%). Plant uptake was considered the most important mechanism for this P removal since there was no clay substrate in the plastic tanks that could have contributed to P absorption as part of the natural phosphorous cycle. Duckweed inhibited phytoplankton production (therefore reducing T.S.S) and maintained pH close to neutral. DO beneath the duckweed blanket fell to below 1ppm; however, this did not limit plant production. If fish are to be used as part of the duckweed treatment, air-uplifts can be installed that maintain DO levels without disturbing surface waters. Duckweed grown in the treatments doubled its biomass on average every 5.7 days. On a per-surface area basis, 1.23kg/m2 was harvested weekly. Moisture content of duckweed was 92%, equating to a total dry weight harvest of 0.098kg/m2/week. Nutrient analysis of dried duckweed gave an N content of 6.67% and a P content of 1.27%. According to semi-quantitative analyses, harvested duckweed contained no residual elements from the effluent stream that were greater than ANZECC toxicant guidelines proposed for aquaculture. In addition, jade perch, a local aquaculture species, actively consumed and gained weight on harvested duckweed, suggesting potential for large-scale fish production using by-products from the effluent treatment process. This suggests that a duckweed-based system may be one viable option for tertiary treatment of Ayr municipal wastewater. The tertiary detention lagoon proposed by the Burdekin Shire Council, consisting of six bays approximately 290 x 35 metres (x 1.5 metres deep), would be suitable for duckweed culture with minor modification to facilitate the efficient distribution of duckweed plants across the entire available growing surface (such as floating containment grids). The effluent residence time resulting from this proposed configuration (~30 days) should be adequate to recover most effluent nutrients (certainly N) based on the current trial. Duckweed harvest techniques on this scale, however, need to be further investigated. Based on duckweed production in the current trial (1.23kg/m2/week), a weekly harvest of approximately 75 000kg (wet weight) could be expected from the proposed lagoon configuration under full duckweed production. A benefit of the proposed multi-bay lagoon is that full lagoon production of duckweed may not be needed to restore effluent to a desirable standard under the present nutrient load, and duckweed treatment may be restricted to certain bays. Restored effluent could be released without risk of contaminating the receiving waterway with duckweed by evacuating water through an internal standpipe located mid-way in the water column.

Australian Prawn Farming Manual: Health Management for profit

The Manual is an easy to read guide for running a low disease risk prawn farm in Australia. Using the combined knowledge of Australia's leading scientists, prawn farmers, extensionists and prawn health specialists, this manual captures what is known about the diseases that threaten the Australian prawn farming industry and how the of disease outbreak can be minimised. Funded by ACIAR and developed in collaboration with the Australian Prawn Farmers' Association, the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries and the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, the manual draws on five years of research conducted across the Australiasia region. The contents reflect the knowledge of a wide array of internationally recognised researchers and the wisdom and research gained through the efforts of the Australian prawn farming industry.

The environmental management of prawn farming in Queensland - worlds best practice

This article provides a summary of research undertaken during a seven-year study from 1995-2002 which focussed on prawn farm ecosystems, their ecological impacts, and cost-effective effluent treatment systems.

Recirculation prawn farming project

This report provides the results from research undertaken in North Queensland towards recirculation of prawn farm waste waters through bioremediation ponds.