Validating economic and environmental sustainability of a short-term summer forage legume in dryland wheat cropping systems in south-west Queensland.

The present study set out to test the hypothesis through field and simulation studies that the incorporation of short-term summer legumes, particularly annual legume lablab (Lablab purpureus cv. Highworth), in a fallow-wheat cropping system will improve the overall economic and environmental benefits in south-west Queensland. Replicated, large plot experiments were established at five commercial properties by using their machineries, and two smaller plot experiments were established at two intensively researched sites (Roma and St George). A detailed study on various other biennial and perennial summer forage legumes in rotation with wheat and influenced by phosphorus (P) supply (10 and 40 kg P/ha) was also carried out at the two research sites. The other legumes were lucerne (Medicago sativa), butterfly pea (Clitoria ternatea) and burgundy bean (Macroptilium bracteatum). After legumes, spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) was sown into the legume stubble. The annual lablab produced the highest forage yield, whereas germination, establishment and production of other biennial and perennial legumes were poor, particularly in the red soil at St George. At the commercial sites, only lablab-wheat rotations were experimented, with an increased supply of P in subsurface soil (20 kg P/ha). The lablab grown at the commercial sites yielded between 3 and 6 t/ha forage yield over 2-3 month periods, whereas the following wheat crop with no applied fertiliser yielded between 0.5 to 2.5 t/ha. The wheat following lablab yielded 30% less, on average, than the wheat in a fallow plot, and the profitability of wheat following lablab was slightly higher than that of the wheat following fallow because of greater costs associated with fallow management. The profitability of the lablab-wheat phase was determined after accounting for the input costs and additional costs associated with the management of fallow and in-crop herbicide applications for a fallow-wheat system. The economic and environmental benefits of forage lablab and wheat cropping were also assessed through simulations over a long-term climatic pattern by using economic (PreCAPS) and biophysical (Agricultural Production Systems Simulation, APSIM) decision support models. Analysis of the long-term rainfall pattern (70% in summer and 30% in winter) and simulation studies indicated that ~50% time a wheat crop would not be planted or would fail to produce a profitable crop (grain yield less than 1 t/ha) because of less and unreliable rainfall in winter. Whereas forage lablab in summer would produce a profitable crop, with a forage yield of more than 3 t/ha, ~90% times. Only 14 wheat crops (of 26 growing seasons, i.e. 54%) were profitable, compared with 22 forage lablab (of 25 seasons, i.e. 90%). An opportunistic double-cropping of lablab in summer and wheat in winter is also viable and profitable in 50% of the years. Simulation studies also indicated that an opportunistic lablab-wheat cropping can reduce the potential runoff+drainage by more than 40% in the Roma region, leading to improved economic and environmental benefits.

Poor adoption of ley-pastures in south-west Queensland: biophysical, economic and social constraints.

The present review identifies various constraints relating to poor adoption of ley-pastures in south-west Queensland, and suggests changes in research, development and extension efforts for improved adoption. The constraints include biophysical, economic and social constraints. In terms of biophysical constraints, first, shallower soil profiles with subsoil constraints (salt and sodicity), unpredictable rainfall, drier conditions with higher soil temperature and evaporative demand in summer, and frost and subzero temperature in winter, frequently result in a failure of established, or establishing, pastures. Second, there are limited options for legumes in a ley-pasture, with the legumes currently being mostly winter-active legumes such as lucerne and medics. Winter-active legumes are ineffective in improving soil conditions in a region with summer-dominant rainfall. Third, most grain growers are reluctant to include grasses in their ley-pasture mix, which can be uneconomical for various reasons, including nitrogen immobilisation, carryover of cereal diseases and depressed yields of the following cereal crops. Fourth, a severe depletion of soil water following perennial ley-pastures (grass + legumes or lucerne) can reduce the yields of subsequent crops for several seasons, and the practice of longer fallows to increase soil water storage may be uneconomical and damaging to the environment. Economic assessments of integrating medium- to long-term ley-pastures into cropping regions are generally less attractive because of reduced capital flow, increased capital investment, economic loss associated with establishment and termination phases of ley-pastures, and lost opportunities for cropping in a favourable season. Income from livestock on ley-pastures and soil productivity gains to subsequent crops in rotation may not be comparable to cropping when grain prices are high. However, the economic benefits of ley-pastures may be underestimated, because of unaccounted environmental benefits such as enhanced water use, and reduced soil erosion from summer-dominant rainfall, and therefore, this requires further investigation. In terms of social constraints, the risk of poor and unreliable establishment and persistence, uncertainties in economic and environmental benefits, the complicated process of changing from crop to ley-pastures and vice versa, and the additional labour and management requirements of livestock, present growers socially unattractive and complex decision-making processes for considering adoption of an existing medium- to long-term ley-pasture technology. It is essential that research, development and extension efforts should consider that new ley-pasture options, such as incorporation of a short-term summer forage legume, need to be less risky in establishment, productive in a region with prevailing biophysical constraints, economically viable, less complex and highly flexible in the change-over processes, and socially attractive to growers for adoption in south-west Queensland.

Pest-damage relationships for Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on soybean (Glycine max) and dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) during pod-fill.

The response of soybean (Glycine max) and dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) to feeding by Helicoverpa armigera during the pod-fill stage was studied in irrigated field cages over three seasons to determine the relationship between larval density and yield loss, and to develop economic injury levels. H. armigera intensity was calculated in Helicoverpa injury equivalent (HIE) units, where 1 HIE was the consumption of one larva from the start of the infestation period to pupation. In the dry bean experiment, yield loss occurred at a rate 6.00 ± 1.29 g/HIE while the rates of loss in the three soybean experiments were 4.39 ± 0.96 g/HIE, 3.70 ± 1.21 g/HIE and 2.12 ± 0.71 g/HIE. These three slopes were not statistically different (P > 0.05) and the pooled estimate of the rate of yield loss was 3.21 ± 0.55 g/HIE. The first soybean experiment also showed a split-line form of damage curve with a rate of yield loss of 26.27 ± 2.92 g/HIE beyond 8.0 HIE and a rapid decline to zero yield. In dry bean, H. armigera feeding reduced total and undamaged pod numbers by 4.10 ± 1.18 pods/HIE and 12.88 ± 1.57 pods/HIE respectively, while undamaged seed numbers were reduced by 35.64 ± 7.25 seeds/HIE. In soybean, total pod numbers were not affected by H. armigera infestation (out to 8.23 HIE in Experiment 1) but seed numbers (in Experiments 1 and 2) and the number of seeds/pod (in all experiments) were adversely affected. Seed size increased with increases in H. armigera density in two of the three soybean experiments, indicating plant compensatory responses to H. armigera feeding. Analysis of canopy pod profiles indicated that loss of pods occurred from the top of the plant downwards, but with an increase in pod numbers close to the ground at higher pest densities as the plant attempted to compensate for damage. Based on these results, the economic injury levels for H. armigera on dry bean and soybean are approximately 0.74 HIE and 2.31 HIE/m2, respectively (0.67 and 2.1 HIE/row-m for 91 cm rows).

Pest-damage relationships for Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on vegetative soybean.

The response of vegetative soybean (Glycine max) to Helicoverpa armigera feeding was studied in irrigated field cages over three years in eastern Australia to determine the relationship between larval density and yield loss, and to develop economic injury levels. Rather than using artificial defoliation techniques, plants were infested with either eggs or larvae of H. armigera, and larvae allowed to feed until death or pupation. Larvae were counted and sized regularly and infestation intensity was calculated in Helicoverpa injury equivalent (HIE) units, where 1 HIE was the consumption of one larva from the start of the infestation period to pupation. In the two experiments where yield loss occurred, the upper threshold for zero yield loss was 7.51 ± 0.21 HIEs and 6.43 ± 1.08 HIEs respectively. In the third experiment, infestation intensity was lower and no loss of seed yield was detected up to 7.0 HIEs. The rate of yield loss/HIE beyond the zero yield loss threshold varied between Experiments 1 and 2 (-9.44 ± 0.80 g and -23.17 ± 3.18 g, respectively). H. armigera infestation also affected plant height and various yield components (including pod and seed numbers and seeds/pod) but did not affect seed size in any experiment. Leaf area loss of plants averaged 841 and 1025 cm2/larva in the two experiments compared to 214 and 302 cm2/larva for cohort larvae feeding on detached leaves at the same time, making clear that artificial defoliation techniques are unsuitable for determining H. armigera economic injury levels on vegetative soybean. Analysis of canopy leaf area and pod profiles indicated that leaf and pod loss occurred from the top of the plant downwards. However, there was an increase in pod numbers closer to the ground at higher pest densities as the plant attempted to compensate for damage. Defoliation at the damage threshold was 18.6 and 28.0% in Experiments 1 and 2, indicating that yield loss from H. armigera feeding occurred at much lower levels of defoliation than previously indicated by artificial defoliation studies. Based on these results, the economic injury level for H. armigera on vegetative soybean is approximately 7.3 HIEs/row-metre in 91 cm rows or 8.0 HIEs/m2.

Remote sensing applications for cotton.

This paper compares classified normalized difference vegetation index images of cotton crops derived from both low and high resolution satellite imagery to determine the most accurate and feasible option for Australian cotton growers. It also demonstrates a rapid automated processing and internet delivery system for distributing satellite SPOT-2 imagery. Also provided is the profile of two case studies conducted in the Darling Towns demonstrating the potential benefit of adopting this technology for improving in-season agronomic crop assessments and therefore enable improved management decisions to be made.

Seasonal changes in pasture quality and diet selection and their relationship with liveweight gain of steers grazing tropical grass and grass-legume pastures in northern Australia.

The variation in liveweight gain in grazing beef cattle as influenced by pasture type, season and year effects has important economic implications for mixed crop-livestock systems and the ability to better predict such variation would benefit beef producers by providing a guide for decision making. To identify key determinants of liveweight change of Brahman-cross steers grazing subtropical pastures, measurements of pasture quality and quantity, and diet quality in parallel with liveweight were made over two consecutive grazing seasons (48 and 46 weeks, respectively), on mixed Clitoria ternatea/grass, Stylosanthes seabrana/grass and grass swards (grass being a mixture of Bothriochloa insculpta cv. Bisset, Dichanthium sericeum and Panicum maximum var. trichoglume cv. Petrie). Steers grazing the legume-based pastures had the highest growth rate and gained between 64 and 142 kg more than those grazing the grass pastures in under 12 months. Using an exponential model, green leaf mass, green leaf %, adjusted green leaf % (adjusted for inedible woody legume stems), faecal near infrared reflectance spectroscopy predictions of diet crude protein and diet dry matter digestibility, accounted for 77, 74, 80, 63 and 60%, respectively, of the variation in daily weight gain when data were pooled across pasture types and grazing seasons. The standard error of the regressions indicated that 95% prediction intervals were large (+/- 0.42-0.64 kg/head.day) suggesting that derived regression relationships have limited practical application for accurately estimating growth rate. In this study, animal factors, especially compensatory growth effects, appeared to have a major influence on growth rate in relation to pasture and diet attributes. It was concluded that predictions of growth rate based only on pasture or diet attributes are unlikely to be accurate or reliable. Nevertheless, key pasture attributes such as green leaf mass and green leaf% provide a robust indication of what proportion of the potential growth rate of the grazing animals can be achieved.

Tools to manage climate risk in cropping (Australia).

Because of the variable and changing environment, advisors and farmers are seeking systems that provide risk management support at a number of time scales. The Agricultural Production Systems Research Unit, Toowoomba, Australia has developed a suite of tools to assist advisors and farmers to better manage risk in cropping. These tools range from simple rainfall analysis tools (Rainman, HowWet, HowOften) through crop simulation tools (WhopperCropper and YieldProphet) to the most complex, APSFarm, a whole-farm analysis tool. Most are derivatives of the APSIM crop model. These tools encompass a range of complexity and potential benefit to both the farming community and for government policy. This paper describes, the development and usage of two specific products; WhopperCropper and APSFarm. WhopperCropper facilitates simulation-aided discussion of growers' exposure to risk when comparing alternative crop input options. The user can readily generate 'what-if' scenarios that separate the major influences whilst holding other factors constant. Interactions of the major inputs can also be tested. A manager can examine the effects of input levels (and Southern Oscillation Index phase) to broadly determine input levels that match their attitude to risk. APSFarm has been used to demonstrate that management changes can have different effects in short and long time periods. It can be used to test local advisors and farmers' knowledge and experience of their desired rotation system. This study has shown that crop type has a larger influence than more conservative minimum soil water triggers in the long term. However, in short term dry periods, minimum soil water triggers and maximum area of the various crops can give significant financial gains.

Cellular stages of root formation, root system quality and survival of Pinuselliottii var. elliottii x P. caribaea var. hondurensis cuttings in different temperature environments.

Time to first root in cuttings varies under different environmental conditions and understanding these differences is critical for optimizing propagation of commercial forestry species. Temperature environment (15, 25, 30 or 352C) had no effect on the cellular stages in root formation of the Slash * Caribbean Pine hybrid over 16 weeks as determined by histology. Initially callus cells formed in the cortex, then tracheids developed and formed primordia leading to external roots. However, speed of development followed a growth curve with the fastest development occurring at 25C and slowest at 15C with rooting percentages at week 12 of 80 and 0% respectively. Cutting survival was good in the three cooler temperature regimes (>80%) but reduced to 59% at 35C. Root formation appeared to be dependant on the initiation of tracheids because all un-rooted cuttings had callus tissue but no tracheids, irrespective of temperature treatment and clone.

Avocado Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2001. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed reprint information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2001. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of avocadoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

The performance of irrigated mixtures of tall fescue, ryegrass and white clover in subtropical Australia. 2. The effects on yield and botanical composition of managing for quality.

The effects on yield, botanical composition and persistence, of using a variable defoliation schedule as a means of optimising the quality of the tall fescue component of simple and complex temperate pasture mixtures in a subtropical environment was studied in a small plot cutting experiment at Gatton Research Station in south-east Queensland. A management schedule of 2-, 3- and 4-weekly defoliations in summer, autumn and spring and winter, respectively, was imposed on 5 temperate pasture mixtures: 2 simple mixtures including tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) and white clover (Trifolium repens); 2 mixtures including perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), tall fescue and white clover; and a complex mixture, which included perennial ryegrass, tall fescue, white, red (T. pratense) and Persian (T. resupinatum) clovers and chicory (Cichorium intybus). Yield from the variable cutting schedule was 9% less than with a standard 4-weekly defoliation. This loss resulted from reductions in both the clover component (13%) and cumulative grass yield (6%). There was no interaction between cutting schedule and sowing mixture, with simple and complex sowing mixtures reacting in a similar manner to both cutting schedules. The experiment also demonstrated that, in complex mixtures, the cutting schedules used failed to give balanced production from all sown components. This was especially true of the grass and white clover components of the complex mixture, as chicory and Persian clover components dominated the mixtures, particularly in the first year. Quality measurements (made only in the final summer) suggested that variable management had achieved a quality improvement with increases in yields of digestible crude protein (19%) and digestible dry matter (9%) of the total forage produced in early summer. The improvements in the yields of digestible crude protein and digestible dry matter of the tall fescue component in late summer were even greater (28 and 19%, respectively). While advantages at other times of the year were expected to be smaller, the data suggested that the small loss in total yield was likely to be offset by increases in digestibility of available forage for grazing stock, especially in the critical summer period.

Papaw Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website http://www.deedi.qld.gov.au/ (Select: Queenslands Industries - Agriculture Link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2000. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2000. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of papaw. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Mango Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1999. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of mangoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Citrus Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.daf.qld.gov.au This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of citrus. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Rockmelon and Honeydew Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of Rockmelon and Honeydew. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Capsicum and Chilli Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide.

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1999. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of capsicum and chilli. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.