Portrait of Hillel Meyerhof; Israel.

Hillel (Herbert) Meyerhof, born 1912

Portrait of Sassona "Sony" Baron nee Meyerhof.

1994 photo of Sassona (Sony) Meyerhof (1952-) married Baron;

Fallow management Calculating the profitability of different fallow management options

The method used to manage a fallow can influence your overall farm profitability. The benefits of a well managed fallow include improved soil health, reduced weed control costs, a reduction in the number of machinery operations and an increase in sugarcane productivity. Growers generally have two main options for managing their fallow; 1) bare fallow or 2) rotational crop. A bare fallow predominantly involves the use of tillage or herbicides to keep the block free of weeds and volunteer cane. Growing a rotational crop generally uses legumes like soybeans or cowpeas because of their soil health and nitrogen benefits. This paper looks into some of these methods and the flow on effects on farm profitability. Fallow management should never be viewed in isolation, as it is an integral part of the cane farming system. In this analysis we will investigate the effect of fallow management and farming system practices on the whole of farm profitability. There are many factors to consider when looking at different fallow management options. These include the type of farming system practices used and the suitability of a legume crop to a particular situation. Legume crops may not be suited to all situations, therefore it is recommended to consult with your local agronomist for more specific advice. One method of examining the options is to work through an example. In this case we will look at four options that are based on some common fallow management and farming system practices used in the Herbert region.

"Dancing Lady" sculpture by Ellen Bernkopf nee Catzenstein Artworks

Digital Image

Arno Nadel (2nd from right) with undentified men listening to new recordings; Berlin Portraits; Groups; Men

Verso: "Listening to new recordings. Berlin 1932"

Reiss family portrait on the occasion of the wedding of Harry Gould to Eva Fantl; Royal Connaught Hotel, Hamilton, Ontario.

Standing l-r: George? son of Max Reiss?, Max Reiss, Harry Gould, Moritz Reiss, Joe Reiss, and Herbert Reiss; Seated l-r: Trude Reiss (wife of Herbert), Else Reiss (mother of Joe), Lily Friedlander Gould, Eva Fantl Gould, Trude Reiss (wife of Joe), and Marta Reiss (wife of Max)

Two unidentified women working in the Library of the ZFA (Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung; Center for Research on Antisemitism); Berlin Portraits Women

Digital Image

Telephone and security pad at the entrance of the ZFA (Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung; Center for Research on Antisemitism); Berlin.

Digital Image

Stamped portrait of Magdalena Strauss.

Mother of Herbert Strauss

Studio portrait of Magdalena Strauss.

Mother of Herbert Strauss

Outdoor group portrait of attendees of the International Meeting of the World Union for Progressive Judaism; London.

Includes Rabbi Leo Baeck, E.L. Ehrlich of Basel, Herbert Strauss of Bern, and Rabbi Eugen Messinger of Bern

Seminar with Helen Fein at the ZFA (Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung; Center for Research on Antisemitism); Berlin Portraits Men

Participants include Christhard Hoffmann and Norbert Karpe

Portraits of Magdalena Strauss.

Mother of Herbert Strauss

Studio portraits of Benno Strauss and Magdalena Strauss.

Parents of Herbert Strauss

The impact of a streamlined funding application process on application time: Two cross-sectional surveys of Australian researchers

Objective: To examine if streamlining a medical research funding application process saved time for applicants. Design: Cross-sectional surveys before and after the streamlining. Setting: The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia. Participants: Researchers who submitted one or more NHMRC Project Grant applications in 2012 or 2014. Main outcome measures: Average researcher time spent preparing an application and the total time for all applications in working days. Results: The average time per application increased from 34 working days before streamlining (95% CI 33 to 35) to 38 working days after streamlining (95% CI 37 to 39; mean difference 4 days, bootstrap p value <0.001). The estimated total time spent by all researchers on applications after streamlining was 614 working years, a 67-year increase from before streamlining. Conclusions: Streamlined applications were shorter but took longer to prepare on average. Researchers may be allocating a fixed amount of time to preparing funding applications based on their expected return, or may be increasing their time in response to increased competition. Many potentially productive years of researcher time are still being lost to preparing failed applications.