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.

Resource use and greenhouse gas emissions from grain-finishing beef cattle in seven Australian feedlots: a life cycle assessment

Grain finishing of cattle has become increasingly common in Australia over the past 30 years. However, interest in the associated environmental impacts and resource use is increasing and requires detailed analysis. In this study we conducted a life cycle assessment (LCA) to investigate impacts of the grain-finishing stage for cattle in seven feedlots in eastern Australia, with a particular focus on the feedlot stage, including the impacts from producing the ration, feedlot operations, transport, and livestock emissions while cattle are in the feedlot (gate-to-gate). The functional unit was 1 kg of liveweight gain (LWG) for the feedlot stage and results are included for the full supply chain (cradle-to-gate), reported per kilogram of liveweight (LW) at the point of slaughter. Three classes of cattle produced for different markets were studied: short-fed domestic market (55–80 days on feed), mid-fed export (108–164 days on feed) and long-fed export (>300 days on feed). In the feedlot stage, mean fresh water consumption was found to vary from 171.9 to 672.6 L/kg LWG and mean stress-weighted water use ranged from 100.9 to 193.2 water stress index eq. L/kg LWG. Irrigation contributed 57–91% of total fresh water consumption with differences mainly related to the availability of irrigation water near the feedlot and the use of irrigated feed inputs in rations. Mean fossil energy demand ranged from 16.5 to 34.2 MJ lower heating values/kg LWG and arable land occupation from 18.7 to 40.5 m2/kg LWG in the feedlot stage. Mean greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the feedlot stage ranged from 4.6 to 9.5 kg CO2-e/kg LWG (excluding land use and direct land-use change emissions). Emissions were dominated by enteric methane and contributions from the production, transport and milling of feed inputs. Linear regression analysis showed that the feed conversion ratio was able to explain >86% of the variation in GHG intensity and energy demand. The feedlot stage contributed between 26% and 44% of total slaughter weight for the classes of cattle fed, whereas the contribution of this phase to resource use varied from 4% to 96% showing impacts from the finishing phase varied considerably, compared with the breeding and backgrounding. GHG emissions and total land occupation per kilogram of LWG during the grain finishing phase were lower than emissions from breeding and backgrounding, resulting in lower life-time emissions for grain-finished cattle compared with grass finishing.