Driving better vegetable irrigation through profitable practice change

The availability and quality of irrigation water has become an issue limiting productivity in many Australian vegetable regions. Production is also under competitive pressure from supply chain forces. Producers look to new technologies, including changing irrigation infrastructure, exploring new water sources, and more complex irrigation management, to survive these stresses. Often there is little objective information investigating which improvements could improve outcomes for vegetable producers, and external communities (e.g. meeting NRM targets). This has led to investment in inappropriate technologies, and costly repetition of errors, as business independently discover the worth of technologies by personal experience. In our project, we investigated technology improvements for vegetable irrigation. Through engagement with industry and other researchers, we identified technologies most applicable to growers, particularly those that addressed priority issues. We developed analytical tools for ‘what if’ scenario testing of technologies. We conducted nine detailed experiments in the Lockyer Valley and Riverina vegetable growing districts, as well as case studies on grower properties in southern Queensland. We investigated root zone monitoring tools (FullStop™ wetting front detectors and Soil Solution Extraction Tubes - SSET), drip system layout, fertigation equipment, and altering planting arrangements. Our project team developed and validated models for broccoli, sweet corn, green beans and lettuce, and spreadsheets for evaluating economic risks associated with new technologies. We presented project outcomes at over 100 extension events, including irrigation showcases, conferences, field days, farm walks and workshops. The FullStops™ were excellent for monitoring root zone conditions (EC, nitrate levels), and managing irrigation with poor quality water. They were easier to interpret than the SSET. The SSET were simpler to install, but required wet soil to be reliable. SSET were an option for monitoring deeper soil zones, unsuitable for FullStop™ installations. Because these root zone tools require expertise, and are labour intensive, we recommend they be used to address specific problems, or as a periodic auditing strategy, not for routine monitoring. In our research, we routinely found high residual N in horticultural soils, with subsequently little crop yield response to additional nitrogen fertiliser. With improved irrigation efficiency (and less leaching), it may be timely to re-examine nitrogen budgets and recommendations for vegetable crops. Where the drip irrigation tube was located close to the crop row (i.e. within 5-8 cm), management of irrigation was easier. It improved nitrogen uptake, water use efficiency, and reduced the risk of poor crop performance through moisture stress, particularly in the early crop establishment phases. Close proximity of the drip tube to the crop row gives the producer more options for managing salty water, and more flexibility in taking risks with forecast rain. In many vegetable crops, proximate drip systems may not be cost-effective. The next best alternative is to push crop rows closer to the drip tube (leading to an asymmetric row structure). The vegetable crop models are good at predicting crop phenology (development stages, time to harvest), input use (water, fertiliser), environmental impacts (nutrient, salt movement) and total yields. The two immediate applications for the models are understanding/predicting/manipulating harvest dates and nitrogen movements in vegetable cropping systems. From the economic tools, the major influences on accumulated profit are price and yield. In doing ‘what if’ analyses, it is very important to be as accurate as possible in ascertaining what the assumed yield and price ranges are. In most vegetable production systems, lowering the required inputs (e.g. irrigation requirement, fertiliser requirement) is unlikely to have a major influence on accumulated profit. However, if a resource is constraining (e.g. available irrigation water), it is usually most profitable to maximise return per unit of that resource.

Immediate, cumulative and residual effects of short- and long-term low plane of nutrition on milk protein and casein composition

Immediate and residual effects of two lengths of low plane of nutrition (PON) on the synthesis of milk protein and protein fractions were studied at the Mutdapilly Research Station, in south-east Queensland. Thirty-six multiparous Holstein-Friesian cows, between 46 and 102 days in milk (DIM) initially, were used in a completely randomised design experiment with three treatments. All cows were fed on a basal diet of ryegrass pasture (7.0 kg DM/cow.day), barley-sorghum concentrate mix (2.7 kg DM/cow.day) and a canola meal-mineral mix (1.3 kg DM/cow.day). To increase PON, 5.0 kg DM/cow.day supplemental maize and forage sorghum silage was added to the basal diet. The three treatments were (C) high PON (basal diet + supplemental silage); (L9) low PON (basal diet only) for a period of 9 weeks; and (L3) low PON (basal diet only) for a period of 3 weeks. The experiment comprised three periods (1) covariate – high PON, all groups (5 weeks), (2) period of low PON for either 3 weeks (L3) or 9 weeks (L9), and (3) period of high PON (all groups) to assess ability of cows to recover any production lost as a result of treatments (5 weeks). The low PON treatment periods for L3 and L9 were end-aligned so that all treatment groups began Period 3 together. Although there was a significant effect of L9 on yields of milk, protein, fat and lactose, and concentrations of true protein, whey protein and urea, these were not significantly different from L3. There were no residual effects of L3 or L9 on protein concentration or nitrogen distribution after 5 weeks of realimentation. There was no significant effect of low PON for 3 or 9 weeks on casein concentration or composition.

Immediate and residual effects of heat stress and restricted intake on milk protein and casein composition and energy metabolism

The effects of heat stress on dairy production can be separated into 2 distinct causes: those effects that are mediated by the reduced voluntary feed intake associated with heat stress, and the direct physiological and metabolic effects of heat stress. To distinguish between these, and identify their effect on milk protein and casein concentration, mid-lactation Holstein-Friesian cows (n = 24) were housed in temperature-controlled chambers and either subjected to heat stress HS; temperature-humidity index (THI) ~78 or kept in a THI < 70 environment and pair-fed with heat-stressed cows (TN-R) for 7 d. A control group of cows was kept in a THI < 70 environment with ad libitum feeding (TN-AL). A subsequent recovery period (7 d), with THI < 70 and ad libitum feeding followed. Intake accounted for only part of the effects of heat stress. Heat stress reduced the milk protein concentration, casein number, and casein concentration and increased the urea concentration in milk beyond the effects of restriction of intake. Under HS, the proportion in total casein of αS1-casein increased and the proportion of αS2-casein decreased. Because no effect of HS on milk fat or lactose concentration was found, these effects appeared to be the result of specific downregulation of mammary protein synthesis, and not a general reduction in mammary activity. No residual effects were found of HS or TN-R on milk production or composition after THI < 70 and ad libitum intake were restored. Heat-stressed cows had elevated blood concentrations of urea and Ca, compared with TN-R and TN-AL. Cows in TN-R had higher serum nonesterified fatty acid concentrations than cows in HS. It was proposed that HS and TN-R cows may mobilize different tissues as endogenous sources of energy.