Climate savvy grazing (Developing improved grazing and related practices to assist beef production enterprises across northern Australia to adapt to a changing and more variable climate)

There is uncertainty over the potential changes to rainfall across northern Australia under climate change. Since rainfall is a key driver of pasture growth, cattle numbers and the resulting animal productivity and beef business profitability, the ability to anticipate possible management strategies within such uncertainty is crucial. The Climate Savvy Grazing project used existing research, expert knowledge and computer modelling to explore the best-bet management strategies within best, median and worse-case future climate scenarios. All three scenarios indicated changes to the environment and resources upon which the grazing industry of northern Australia depends. Well-adapted management strategies under a changing climate are very similar to best practice within current climatic conditions. Maintaining good land condition builds resource resilience, maximises opportunities under higher rainfall years and reduces the risk of degradation during drought and failed wet seasons. Matching stocking rate to the safe long-term carrying capacity of the land is essential; reducing stock numbers in response to poor seasons and conservatively increasing stock numbers in response to better seasons generally improves profitability and maintains land in good condition. Spelling over the summer growing season will improve land condition under a changing climate as it does under current conditions. Six regions were included within the project. Of these, the Victoria River District in the Northern Territory, Gulf country of Queensland and the Kimberley region of Western Australia had projections of similar or higher than current rainfall and the potential for carrying capacity to increase. The Alice Springs, Maranoa-Balonne and Fitzroy regions had projections of generally drying conditions and the greatest risk of reduced pasture growth and carrying capacity. Encouraging producers to consider and act on the risks, opportunities and management options inherent in climate change was a key goal of the project. More than 60,000 beef producers, advisors and stakeholders are now more aware of the management strategies which build resource resilience, and that resilience helps buffer against the effects of variable and changing climatic conditions. Over 700 producers have stated they have improved confidence, skills and knowledge to attempt new practices to build resilience. During the course of the project, more than 165 beef producers reported they have implemented changes to build resource and business resilience.

Utilizing the assassin bug, Pristhesancus plagipennis (Hemiptera: Reduviidae), as a biological control agent within an integrated pest management programme for Helicoverpa spp. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Creontiades spp. (Hemiptera: Miridae) in cotton

Helicoverpa spp. and mirids, Creontiades spp., have been difficult to control biologically in cotton due to their unpredictable temporal abundance combined with a cropping environment often made hostile by frequent usage of broad spectrum insecticides. To address this problem, a range of new generation insecticides registered for use in cotton were tested for compatibility with the assassin bug, Pristhesancus plagipennis (Walker), a potential biological control agent for Helicoverpa spp. and Creontiades spp. Indoxacarb, pyriproxifen, buprofezin, spinosad and fipronil were found to be of low to moderate toxicity on P. plagipennis whilst emamectin benzoate, abamectin, diafenthiuron, imidacloprid and omethaote were moderate to highly toxic. Inundative releases of P. plagipennis integrated with insecticides identified as being of low toxicity were then tested and compared with treatments of P. plagipennis and the compatible insecticides used alone, conventionally sprayed usage practice and an untreated control during two field experiments in cotton. The biological control provided by P. plagipennis nymphs when combined with compatible insecticides provided significant (P<0.001) reductions in Helicoverpa and Creontiades spp. on cotton and provided equivalent yields to conventionally sprayed cotton with half of the synthetic insecticide input. Despite this, the utilization of P. plagipennis in cotton as part of an integrated pest management programme remains unlikely due to high inundative release costs relative to other control technologies such as insecticides and transgenic (Bt) cotton varieties.

Impact of the Australian litter re-use practice on Salmonella in the broiler farming environment

This study has examined the dynamics (in terms of levels and serovar diversity) of Salmonella in the "dual litter environment" that occurs within a single shed as a result of a management practice common in Australia. The study also looked at the physical parameters of the litter (pH, moisture content, water activity and litter temperature) as a means of understanding the Salmonella dynamics in these litter environments. The Australian practice results in the brooder end of the shed having new litter each cycle while the grow-out end has re-used litter (a "dual litter environment"). Two farms that adopted this partial litter re-use practice were studied over one full broiler cycle each. Litter was sampled weekly for the levels (and serovars) of Salmonella during a farming cycle. There was a trend for lower levels of Salmonella (and a lower Salmonella serovar) diversity in the re-used litter environment as compared with the new litter environment. Of the physical parameters examined, it would appear that the lower water activity associated with the re-used litter may contribute to the Salmonella dynamics in the dual environment.

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.