The effect of row configuration on yield reliability in grain sorghum: II. Modelling the effects of row configuration

In recent years many sorghum producers in the more marginal (<600 mm annual rainfall) cropping areas of Qld and northern NSW have utilised skip row configurations in an attempt to improve yield reliability and reduce sorghum production risk. But will this work in the long run? What are the trade-offs between productivity and risk of crop failure? This paper describes a modelling and simulation approach to study the long-term effects of skip row configurations. Detailed measurements of light interception and water extraction from sorghum crops grown in solid, single and double skip row configurations were collected from three on-farm participatory research trials established in southern Qld and northern NSW. These measurements resulted in changes to the model that accounted for the elliptical water uptake pattern below the crop row and reduced total light interception associated with the leaf area reduction of the skip configuration. Following validation of the model, long-term simulation runs using historical weather data were used to determine the value of skip row sorghum production as a means of maintaining yield reliability in the dryland cropping regions of southern Qld and northern NSW.

Floating row covers and pyriproxyfen help control silverleaf whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) Biotype B (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in zucchini

In zucchini, the use of row covers until flowering and the insect growth regulator (IGR) pyriproxyfen are effective methods of reducing the number of insects, especially silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) Biotype B), on plants. We compared floating row covers (FRCs) up until flowering with silverleaf whitefly (SLW) introduced (FRC + SLW), or not introduced (FRC-only), or with introduction of SLW in open plots (SLW-only), or with introduction of SLW in open plots with IGR (SLW + IGR). FRC increased temperature and humidity compared with the uncovered treatments. Average fruit weight was less (P < 0.01) for the FRC + SLW treatment compared with the other treatments and the percentage of marketable fruit was less for the FRC + SLW than for the other three treatments. This result indicates that the use of either row covers or IGR controls whiteflies, reduces fruit damage and increases the size, weight, and quality of fruit, and may also control other sap-sucking insects. However, if SLW are already present on plants, the use of FRC may reduce predation and favour build up of SLW. Thus, FRC and IGR, if used judiciously, may provide an effective alternative to broad-spectrum pesticides in small-scale cucurbit production.

Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 1. Responses in fumigated and non-fumigated soil.

It has been reported that high-density planting of sugarcane can improve cane and sugar yield through promoting rapid canopy closure and increasing radiation interception earlier in crop growth. It is widely known that the control of adverse soil biota through fumigation (removes soil biological constraints and improves soil health) can improve cane and sugar yield. Whether the responses to high-density planting and improved soil health are additive or interactive has important implications for the sugarcane production system. Field experiments established at Bundaberg and Mackay, Queensland, Australia, involved all combinations of 2-row spacings (0.5 and 1.5 m), two planting densities (27 000 and 81 000 two-eyed setts/ha), and two soil fumigation treatments (fumigated and non-fumigated). The Bundaberg experiment had two cultivars (Q124, Q155), was fully irrigated, and harvested 15 months after planting. The Mackay experiment had one cultivar (Q117), was grown under rainfed conditions, and harvested 10 months after planting. High-density planting (81 000 setts/ha in 0.5-m rows) did not produce any more cane or sugar yield at harvest than low-density planting (27 000 setts/ha in 1.5-m rows) regardless of location, crop duration (15 v. 10 months), water supply (irrigated v. rainfed), or soil health (fumigated v. non-fumigated). Conversely, soil fumigation generally increased cane and sugar yields regardless of site, row spacing, and planting density. In the Bundaberg experiment there was a large fumigation x cultivar x density interaction (P<0.01). Cultivar Q155 responded positively to higher planting density in non-fumigated soil but not in fumigated soil, while Q124 showed a negative response to higher planting density in non-fumigated soil but no response in fumigated soil. In the Mackay experiment, Q117 showed a non-significant trend of increasing yield in response to increasing planting density in non-fumigated soil, similar to the Q155 response in non-fumigated soil at Bundaberg. The similarity in yield across the range of row spacings and planting densities within experiments was largely due to compensation between stalk number and stalk weight, particularly when fumigation was used to address soil health. Further, the different cultivars (Q124 and Q155 at Bundaberg and Q117 at Mackay) exhibited differing physiological responses to the fumigation, row spacing, and planting density treatments. These included the rate of tiller initiation and subsequent loss, changes in stalk weight, and propensity to lodging. These responses suggest that there may be potential for selecting cultivars suited to different planting configurations.

Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 3. Responses with different cultivars.

The promotion of controlled traffic (matching wheel and row spacing) in the Australian sugar industry is necessitating a widening of row spacing beyond the standard 1.5 m. As all cultivars grown in the Australian industry have been selected under the standard row spacing there are concerns that at least some cultivars may not be suitable for wider rows. To address this issue, experiments were established in northern and southern Queensland in which cultivars, with different growth characteristics, recommended for each region, were grown under a range of different row configurations. In the northern Queensland experiment at Gordonvale, cultivars Q187((sic)), Q200((sic)), Q201((sic)), and Q218((sic)) were grown in 1.5-m single rows, 1.8-m single rows, 1.8-m dual rows (50 cm between duals), and 2.3-m dual rows (80 cm between duals). In the southern Queensland experiment at Farnsfield, cvv. Q138, Q205((sic)), Q222((sic)) and Q188((sic)) were also grown in 1.5-m single rows, 1.8-m single rows, 1.8-m dual rows (50 cm between duals), while 1.8-m-wide throat planted single row and 2.0-m dual row (80 cm between duals) configurations were also included. There was no difference in yield between the different row configurations at Farnsfield but there was a significant row configuration x cultivar interaction at Gordonvale due to good yields in 1.8-m single and dual rows with Q201((sic)) and poor yields with Q200((sic)) at the same row spacings. There was no significant difference between the two cultivars in 1.5-m single and 2.3-m dual rows. The experiments once again demonstrated the compensatory capacity that exists in sugarcane to manipulate stalk number and individual stalk weight as a means of producing similar yields across a range of row configurations and planting densities. There was evidence of different growth patterns between cultivars in response to different row configurations (viz. propensity to tiller, susceptibility to lodging, ability to compensate between stalk number and stalk weight), suggesting that there may be genetic differences in response to row configuration. It is argued that there is a need to evaluate potential cultivars under a wider range of row configurations than the standard 1.5-m single rows. Cultivars that perform well in row configurations ranging from 1.8 to 2.0 m are essential if the adverse effects of soil compaction are to be managed through the adoption of controlled traffic.

Row spacing and planting density effects on the growth and yield of sugarcane. 2. Strategies for the adoption of controlled traffic.

Controlled traffic (matching wheel and row spacing) is being promoted as a means to manage soil compaction in the Australian sugar industry. However, machinery limitations dictate that wider row spacings than the standard 1.5-m single row will need to be adopted to incorporate controlled traffic and many growers are reluctant to widen row spacing for fear of yield penalties. To address these concerns, contrasting row configuration and planting density combinations were investigated for their effect on cane and sugar yield in large-scale experiments in the Gordonvale, Tully, Ingham, Mackay, and Bingera (near Bundaberg) sugarcane-growing regions of Queensland, Australia. The results showed that sugarcane possesses a capacity to compensate for different row configurations and planting densities through variation in stalk number and individual stalk weight. Row configurations ranging from 1.5-m single rows (the current industry standard) to 1.8-m dual rows (50 cm between duals), 2.1-m dual (80 cm between duals) and triple ( 65 cm between triples) rows, and 2.3-m triple rows (65 cm between triples) produced similar yields. Four rows (50 cm apart) on a 2.1-m configuration (quad rows) produced lower yields largely due to crop lodging, while a 1.8-m single row configuration produced lower yields in the plant crop, probably due to inadequate resource availability (water stress/limited radiation interception). The results suggest that controlled traffic can be adopted in the Australian sugar industry by changing from a 1.5-m single row to 1.8-m dual row configuration without yield penalty. Further, the similar yields obtained with wider row configurations (2 m or greater with multiple rows) in these experiments emphasise the physiological and environmental plasticity that exists in sugarcane. Controlled traffic can be implemented with these wider row configurations (>2 m), although it will be necessary to carry out expensive modifications to the current harvester and haul-out equipment. There were indications from this research that not all cultivars were suited to configurations involving multiple rows. The results suggest that consideration be given to assessing clones with different growth habits under a range of row configurations to find the most suitable plant types for controlled traffic cropping systems.

Weed management in wide-row cropping systems: a review of current practices and risks for Australian farming systems.

Growing agricultural crops in wide row spacings has been widely adopted to conserve water, to control pests and diseases, and to minimise problems associated with sowing into stubble. The development of herbicide resistance combined with the advent of precision agriculture has resulted in a further reason for wide row spacings to be adopted: weed control. Increased row spacing enables two different methods of weed control to be implemented with non-selective chemical and physical control methods utilised in the wide inter-row zone, with or without selective chemicals used on the on-row only. However, continual application of herbicides and tillage on the inter-row zone brings risks of herbicide resistance, species shifts and/or changes in species dominance, crop damage, increased costs, yield losses, and more expensive weed management technology.

Identification of insects, spiders and mites in vegetable crops. Workshop Manual, 2nd edition

Accurate and confident identification of the insects, spiders and mites in vegetable crops is the first step towards successful management of pests and natural enemies. It is an essential prerequisite for crop monitoring, which is the backbone of an effective pest management program. This workshop manual and trainer's handbook were compiled as part of an insect, spider and mite identification program for Australian vegetable growers. The workshop training is designed to help growers to: • know how to collect and preserve insects for identification • be able to classify most common insects (particularly those of horticultural significance) into broad groups • appreciate the importance of these groups in pest, predator and parasite identification and management • collect and classify some insect pests, predators and parasites of horticultural importance.

Implementing sustainable farming practices in the Herbert: The Oakleigh Farming Company experience

The Oakleigh Farming Company has been progressively changing its farming practices on its property at Cordelia in the Herbert River District. During the last ten years the changes have included the adoption of raised beds at 1.8m row spacing, controlled traffic and dual row planting using double disc opener planters. This paper describes some of the changes that have been made to the farming system and examines their impact on farm productivity and economic performance. Since changing to the current farming system, the farm gross margin has increased from $789/ha to $897/ha. In addition to the numerous cost savings, the new farming system has reduced the time spent on tractors by 54% across the whole farm. Return on investment on the 1997 farming system was 1.6% versus 2.7% on their current farming system. The farming company is continually looking for new ways to improve profitability and believes that innovation is critical for the long term sustainability of the sugar industry.

Weed growth and crop yield loss in wheat as influenced by row spacing and weed emergence times

Reducing crop row spacing and delaying time of weed emergence may provide crops a competitive edge over weeds. Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of crop row spacing (11, 15, and 23-cm) and weed emergence time (0, 20, 35, 45, 55, and 60 days after wheat emergence; DAWE) on Galium aparine and Lepidium sativum growth and wheat yield losses. Season-long weed-free and crop-free treatments were also established to compare wheat yield and weed growth, respectively. Row spacing and weed emergence time significantly affected the growth of both weed species and wheat grain yields. For both weed species, the maximum plant height, shoot biomass, and seed production were observed in the crop-free plots, and delayed emergence decreased these variables. In weed-crop competition plots, maximum weed growth was observed when weeds emerged simultaneously with the crop in rows spaced 23-cm apart. Less growth of both weed species was observed in narrow row spacing (11-cm) of wheat as compared with wider rows (15 and 23-cm). These weed species produced less than 5 seeds plant-1 in 11-cm wheat rows when they emerged at 60 DAWE. Presence of weeds in the crop especially at early stages was devastating for wheat yields. Therefore, maximum grain yield (4.91tha-1) was recorded in the weed-free treatment at 11-cm row spacing. Delay in time of weed emergence and narrow row spacing reduced weed growth and seed production and enhanced wheat grain yield, suggesting that these strategies could contribute to weed management in wheat.

Physiological basis of yield variation in response to row spacing and plant density of mungbean grown in subtropical environments

In this study, we investigated the extent and physiological bases of yield variation due to row spacing and plant density configuration in the mungbean Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek variety “Crystal” grown in different subtropical environments. Field trials were conducted in six production environments; one rain-fed and one irrigated trial each at Biloela and Emerald, and one rain-fed trial each at Hermitage and Kingaroy sites in Queensland, Australia. In each trial, six combinations of spatial arrangement of plants, achieved through two inter-row spacings of 1 m or 0.9 m (wide row), 0.5 m or 0.3 m (narrow row), with three plant densities, 20, 30 and 40 plants/m2, were compared. The narrow row spacing resulted in 22% higher shoot dry matter and 14% more yield compared to the wide rows. The yield advantage of narrow rows ranged from 10% to 36% in the two irrigated and three rain-fed trials. However, yield loss of up to 10% was also recorded from narrow rows at Emerald where the crop suffered severe drought. Neither the effects of plant density, nor the interaction between plant density and row spacing, however, were significant in any trial. The yield advantage of narrow rows was related to 22% more intercepted radiation. In addition, simulations by the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator model, using site-specific agronomy, soil and weather information, suggested that narrow rows had proportionately greater use of soil water through transpiration, compared to evaporation resulting in higher yield per mm of soil water. The long-term simulation of yield probabilities over 123 years for the two row configurations showed that the mungbean crop planted in narrow rows could produce up to 30% higher grain yield compared to wide rows in 95% of the seasons.