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.

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. © 2015 Elsevier B.V.

A multisite managed environment facility for targeted trait and germplasm phenotyping

Field evaluation of germplasm for performance under water and heat stress is challenging. Field environments are variable and unpredictable, and genotype x environment interactions are difficult to interpret if environments are not well characterised. Numerous traits, genes and quantitative trait loci have been proposed for improving performance but few have been used in variety development. This reflects the limited capacity of commercial breeding companies to screen for these traits and the absence of validation in field environments relevant to breeding companies, and because little is known about the economic benefit of selecting one particular trait over another. The value of the proposed traits or genes is commonly not demonstrated in genetic backgrounds of value to breeding companies. To overcome this disconnection between physiological trait breeding and uptake by breeding companies, three field sites representing the main environment types encountered across the Australian wheatbelt were selected to form a set of managed environment facilities (MEFs). Each MEF manages soil moisture stress through irrigation, and the effects of heat stress through variable sowing dates. Field trials are monitored continuously for weather variables and changes in soil water and canopy temperature in selected probe genotypes, which aids in decisions guiding irrigation scheduling and sampling times. Protocols have been standardised for an essential core set of measurements so that phenotyping yield and other traits are consistent across sites and seasons. MEFs enable assessment of a large number of traits across multiple genetic backgrounds in relevant environments, determine relative trait value, and facilitate delivery of promising germplasm and high value traits into commercial breeding programs.

Effects of providing prior experience of a feedlot environment on the performance of feedlot cattle

Cattle sourced for feedlots from extensive properties will generally have little experience of conditions to which they will be exposed in feedlots, eg close contact with humans, confinement, crowding and feed in troughs. Such conditions can result in stress (Fell 1994) which can have adverse effects on health and performance (Moberg 1985). This experiment determined the effect of prior exposure to aspects of a feedlot environment on the feedlot performance of Bos indicus steers. 21st Biennial Conference. 8 - 12 July 1996. University of Queensland. Brisbane.

Tillage and the environment in sub-tropical Australia-Tradeoffs and challenges

Tillage is defined here in a broad sense, including disturbance of the soil and crop residues, wheel traffic and sowing opportunities. In sub-tropical, semi-arid cropping areas in Australia, tillage systems have evolved from intensively tilled bare fallow systems, with high soil losses, to reduced and no tillage systems. In recent years, the use of controlled traffic has also increased. These conservation tillage systems are successful in reducing water erosion of soil and sediment-bound chemicals. Control of runoff of dissolved nutrients and weakly sorbed chemicals is less certain. Adoption of new practices appears to have been related to practical and economic considerations, and proved to be more profitable after a considerable period of research and development. However there are still challenges. One challenge is to ensure that systems that reduce soil erosion, which may involve greater use of chemicals, do not degrade water quality in streams. Another challenge is to ensure that systems that improve water entry do not increase drainage below the crop root zone, which would increase the risk of salinity. Better understanding of how tillage practices influence soil hydrology, runoff and erosion processes should lead to better tillage systems and enable better management of risks to water quality and soil health. Finally, the need to determine the effectiveness of in-field management practices in achieving stream water quality targets in large, multi-land use catchments will challenge our current knowledge base and the tools available.

Free Range Hens Use the Range More When the Outdoor Environment Is Enriched.

To evaluate the role of using forage, shade and shelterbelts in attracting birds into the range, three trials were undertaken with free range layers both on a research facility and on commercial farms. Each of the trials on the free range research facility in South Australia used a total of 120 laying hens (Hyline Brown). Birds were housed in an eco-shelter which had 6 internal pens of equal size with a free range area adjoining the shelter. The on-farm trials were undertaken on commercial free range layer farms in the Darling Downs in Southeast Queensland with bird numbers on farms ranging from 2,000-6,800 hens. The first research trial examined the role of shaded areas in the range; the second trial examined the role of forage and the third trial examined the influence of shelterbelts in the range. These treatments were compared to a free range area with no enrichment. Aggressive feather pecking was only observed on a few occasions in all of the trials due to the low bird numbers housed. Enriching the free range environment attracted more birds into the range. Shaded areas were used by 18% of the hens with a tendency (p = 0.07) for more hens to be in the paddock. When forage was provided in paddocks more control birds (55%) were observed in the range in morning than in the afternoon (30%) while for the forage treatments 45% of the birds were in the range both during the morning and afternoon. When shelterbelts were provided there was a significantly (p<0.05) higher % of birds in the range (43% vs. 24%) and greater numbers of birds were observed in areas further away from the poultry house. The results from the on-farm trials mirrored the research trials. Overall 3 times more hens used the shaded areas than the non shaded areas, with slightly more using the shade in the morning than in the afternoon. As the environmental temperature increased the number of birds using the outdoor shade also increased. Overall 17 times more hens used the shelterbelt areas than the control areas, with slightly more using the shelterbelts in the afternoon than in the morning. Approximately 17 times more birds used the forage areas compared to the control area in the corresponding range. There were 8 times more birds using a hay bale enriched area compared to the area with no hay bales. The use of forage sources (including hay bales) were the most successful method on-farm to attract birds into the range followed by shelterbelts and artificial shade. Free range egg farmers are encouraged to provide pasture, shaded areas and shelterbelts to attract birds into the free range.

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.

Flying-foxes in the Australian urban environment - community attitudes and opinions

The urban presence of flying-foxes (pteropid bats) in eastern Australia has increased in the last 20 years, putatively reflecting broader landscape change. The influx of large numbers often precipitates community angst, typically stemming from concerns about loss of social amenity, economic loss or negative health impacts from recently emerged bat-mediated zoonotic diseases such as Hendra virus and Australian bat lyssavirus. Local authorities and state wildlife authorities are increasingly asked to approve the dispersal or modification of flying-fox roosts to address expressed concerns, yet the scale of this concern within the community, and the veracity of the basis for concern are often unclear. We conducted an on-line survey to capture community attitudes and opinions on flying-foxes in the urban environment to inform management policy and decision-making. Analysis focused on awareness, concerns, and management options, and primarily compared responses from communities where flying-fox management was and was not topical at the time of the survey. While a majority of respondents indicated a moderate to high level of knowledge of both flying-foxes and Hendra virus, a substantial minority mistakenly believed that flying-foxes pose a direct infection risk to humans, suggesting miscommunication or misinformation, and the need for additional risk communication strategies. Secondly, a minority of community members indicated they were directly impacted by urban roosts, most plausibly those living in close proximity to the roost, suggesting that targeted management options are warranted. Thirdly, neither dispersal nor culling was seen as an appropriate management strategy by the majority of respondents, including those from postcodes where flying-fox management was topical. These findings usefully inform community debate and policy development and demonstrate the value of social analysis in defining the issues and options in this complex human - wildlife interaction. The mobile nature of flying-foxes underlines the need for a management strategy at a regional or larger scale, and independent of state borders.