Sowing and Nutrition - for Seed Sown Zoysia

This question is a perennial one that is regularly asked by those developing a new turf area.  While there are some guides about how to sow seed, the nutrition aspects are not widely available particularly for conditions outside of the USA.  

Zoysia from seed is effectively established with modest nutrition – we suggest 2 applications each of 200g / 100 sq m of a good mixed NPK fertiliser with trace elements, applied evenly to dry soil before sowing and raked into the soil, and at 3-4 weeks after sowing which can be irrigated into the ground.  Suitable products include Yara Hydrocomplex NPK 12:15:10 [or similar as many blends are close to this] plus trace elements and iron.  Others potentially available include Crop King 55 and 88, Nitrophoska Blue and a range of other suitable all-purpose fertilisers used at sowing depending on availability at your local supplier.

Follow that by switching to a slow release fertiliser eg Scotts  - [ or other brands that may be available from many garden shops incl Bunnings and BigW in 2kg and 4 kg  bags, but do not use any with herbicide while the area is so young], applied at about 6-8 weeks  from sowing and thereafter at 12 week intervals in year 1 – you can use about one half of the recommended rate for zoysia – the recommended rate is broadly based for use on couch.  After that maybe 2-3 times a year is enough -August to October [depending on location], early March and [maybe in warm areas] May. for larger areas, sometimes a 25kg bag is a sensible buy - store it in a secure lidded plastic pail and it will be okay for several years. 

Slow release fertiliser is strongly recommended for all zoysia turf areas.  Avoid excess fertilising and non-slow release nitrogen fertiliser – that encourages thatch development.

If more green colour is needed for your turf – apply 0.5% - 1% iron sulfate solution [no stronger please] – great colour can be achieved but not too much growth! 

We strongly suggest additional potassium in September/October and March each year [ southern hemisphere areas] – use potassium sulfate [sulfate of potash] at 1kg / 100 sq m, and avoid muriate of potash.  This potash product is sold in 1.5 and 2.5 kg pails from many major garden stores and also is available in larger sizes [25kg] if required.

At sowing, a very light mulch cover can be helpful to manage and assist with holding moisture close to the surface during the vital early few weeks.  Light materials are best including sugar cane mulch and mature fine compost or similar, with a very thin cover helpful – no more than 1-2mm that holds moisture close to the surface where the seed is germinating.  

After sowing, irrigation during the day, for a few minutes each time, is needed to dampen the surface but not make it too wet.  As to the number needed - suggest 2-3 times each day at late morning and early afternoon as a start………but need to adjust as needed, and it will be temperature and wind dependent.  This can be reduced once seedlings emerge – some individual judgment is needed on this issue, as all sites and conditions are different.  The need is for SURFACE DAMP not SURFACE  DROWNING.

Seed emergence can be sped up with seed priming – soak seed for up to 36 -48hrs in warm [definitely not cold] water at around 20C eg and keep inside where it is warmer, then drain and lay out seed to surface dry in the sun next morning………..can speed emergence by a quite a few days [ see info from Pickseed].

Weeds can be troublesome at some, often older or renovated sites.  Make sure the weed is identified correctly before rushing to use any herbicide. Often repeated mowing will aid removal of the weeds as the turf species develops and strengthens often choking out the weeds. 

DO NOT use glyphosate / Roundup® or similar products on zoysia – it is quite sensitive to this type of product!  There are some products that may be useful; with an MCPA /dicamba mix often well suited for broadleaf weed control [one trade name is Kamba M – there are some others].  Try to avoid use of herbicides when the area is very young, unless you really understand what you are doing or have sought professional advice.  If in doubt ask us – there are often solutions available.

Prepare in advance, be organised at sowing and be prepared to invest time and effort then – it will be rewarded with a great lawn nearly always achievable [If in doubt, checkout the You Tube videos].  Most poor outcomes are traced back to problems at sowing and site preparation.

For larger zoysia seeded areas – eg over 1000 – 2000 sq m, often using hydroseeding may be a suitable option.  It works very well with the mulch used at sowing acting as a very good surface mulch and erosion management tool.  For smaller areas costs of cleaning equipment before hand  can make using hydroseeding too expensive, even though results are generally very good.

Which Fertiliser for Compadre Zoysia?

Choice of fertiliser is always a bit of a conundrum these days with so many types and blends available.

There is some benefit in using organic fertiliser for example pelletised chicken manure , or DPM - densified poultry manure.  It adds organic matter and some nutrients but the nutrient level is relatively low, and it can be more expensive if freight costs are an issue eg in rural and remote areas.  It can be short in some nutrients as well.  It can be useful if the turf is growing on light sandy loam soil or sand.

Conventional inorganic fertiliser is modestly priced, and there are blends that mostly meet criteria for use on turf, but all have generally rapid availability of nutrients and they can often leach quickly.  Because they are mostly readily available you get rapid lawn growth = more mowing, then the nutrients disappear and you need more, maybe in 4 weeks.  And more mowing still!!  Not the best choice at all.

Slow release turf fertilisers are ideal.  They release the nutrients, especially the nitrogen, over an extended period [often 10 -16 weeks, but longer release period products are also available].  The result is less mowing, a better appearance lawn and better availability of plant nutrients.  Many are available in small bags through garden stores and chain shops - 2-4kg sizes, but for best cost effectiveness, buy a 25kg bag and store it in a sealed plastic bin, in the bag.  It will stay usable for 2-3 years at a lower cost.

Domestic Compadre zoysia turf - Darwin area, 20 weeks after sowing seed

The blend is important, and a general use product has around 15- 25% nitrogen, 1-3% phosphorus and 10 -20% potassium, plus some sulfur [ 5-10%] , trace elements if possible, and most importantly a small amount of iron - 0.5 -1.0%.  The iron boosts the lawn colour to a lovely green, without much effect on growth.

The potassium level is important, particularly in wetter and /or warmer climates.  Potassium is mobile so can leach out in wetter periods but its role is to strengthen cell walls and provide better stress resistance, hence the need for decent potassium levels in hot weather.  Modest to low phosphorus is better, assuming the soil does have a reasonable base P level.  With more P you tend to promote legume growth [ essentially a weed in turf].

For zoysia, which is not a prolific growing lawn, the iron is especially important as mowing is less frequent and that delightful green colour is impressive for many weeks, without being cut off.

The other question is always how much.  We suggest halving any recommendation on a fertiliser bag if applying to zoysia, of any type.  Many products recommend 3 - 4kg/100 sq m for slow release fertiliser for eg couch lawns.  For zoysia - 1-2 kg/100 sq m is usually enough.  The exception may be on new lawns less than 1 year old, when you are building up a store in the soil when the recommended rate may be okay in peak growth periods.

And of course in cooler months - applying fertiliser is really not needed as the lawn is not growing very much anyway.  And not too much in wet summer conditions - it means more mowing!

If one of the common types of slow release turf fertiliser is used with a nominal 12 week release period, for zoysia of any type - twice a year is okay, once established.  Nominally apply in Autumn and Spring [or late wet season and late dry season].

The fertiliser question is always tricky and individual areas may require a slightly modified approach in areas where particular nutrients are in short supply or even may be in abundance.

But the above maxims apply in many areas, and are a suitable starting point.

Enjoy your zoysia turf.....and apply a bit of TLC!!

Plants CAN Do Maths -YES.

Humans do math or at least some humans can do so.  

New research shows that to prevent starvation at night, plants perform accurate arithmetic division.  The calculation allows them to use up their starch reserves at a constant rate so that they run out almost precisely at dawn.  Plants feed themselves during the day by using energy from the sun to convert carbon dioxide into sugars and starch. Once the sun has set, they must depend on a store of starch to prevent starvation.

In research to be published shortly in the open access journal eLife, Professors Martin Howard and Alison Smith, scientists at the John Innes Centre show that plants make precise adjustments to their rate of starch consumption.  These adjustments ensure that the starch store lasts until dawn even if the night comes unexpectedly early or the size of the starch store varies.

Starch is a carbohydrate consisting of a large number of glucose units joined by glycosidic bonds. This polysaccharide is produced by all green plants as an energy store. It is the most common carbohydrate in the human diet and is contained in large amounts in such staple foods as potatoes, wheat, maize (corn), rice, and cassava.

In photosynthesis, plants use light energy to produce glucose from carbon dioxide.  The glucose is stored mainly in the form of starch granules, in plastids such as chloroplasts and especially amyloplasts. Toward the end of the growing season, starch accumulates in twigs of trees near the buds.  Fruit, seeds, rhizomes, and tubers store starch to prepare for the next growing season.

The John Innes Centre scientists show that to adjust their starch consumption so precisely they must be performing a mathematical calculation — arithmetic division.

"The capacity to perform arithmetic calculation is vital for plant growth and productivity," said metabolic biologist Professor Alison Smith. "Understanding how plants continue to grow in the dark could help unlock new ways to boost crop yield."

During the night, mechanisms inside the leaf measure the size of the starch store and estimate the length of time until dawn. Information about time comes from an internal clock, similar to our own body clock. The size of the starch store is then divided by the length of time until dawn to set the correct rate of starch consumption, so that, by dawn, around 95% of starch is used up.

"If the starch store is used too fast, plants will starve and stop growing during the night. If the store is used too slowly, some of it will be wasted," according to Prof Smith.

The scientists used mathematical modelling to investigate how such a division calculation can be carried out inside a plant. They proposed that information about the size of the starch store and the time until dawn is encoded in the concentrations of two kinds of molecules (called S for starch and T for time).

 If the S molecules stimulate starch consumption, while the T molecules prevent this from happening, then the rate of starch consumption is set by the ratio of S molecules to T molecules, in other words S divided by T - so the plants are doing maths!!

plants growing and doing maths

 

 

SRI - System of Rice [or Root] Intensification

Something for nothing? This method of rice growing seems to offer that, with labour replacing other inputs.  Does it work?  It seems to for many, with crop yields substantially increased.

It seems as if yield per plant is once again the driver, and with intensified root proliferation, to extract every last vestige of nutrient and water in the soils.

There is some modern science that supports the concept theory, with microbial activity the driver to extract the nutrients and with organic inputs to create more soil carbon as a significant part of the system.

Whatever, it really has driven some monumental changes in parts of India and other areas and even more recently in Indonesia.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2013/feb/16/india-rice-farmers-revolution

This article is a well put together overview of some of the developments, and there are plenty more to peruse online.  In this article the yield increases are staggeringly large, with world record yields of 22.4 tonnes per hectare!

The concept was started by a Jesuit priest / agronomist in Madagascar, but has spread quite widely.

In Indonesia another aspect has been pushed, which is a curious conundrum.

Us in the developed world seem to be able to afford to pay for organic produce, and some want to exercise that right and use organic produce, with consumers in parts of Europe, Japan  and even China fearful of ordinary produce so will pay big money for organic foods.

Some areas of Indonesia have been cleverly developing export markets for this organic produce side, while also achieving higher yields and lower input costs - a real win for the farmers.  They have achieved organic certified status and are using that to drive better prices and overall much superior returns. More on that story here -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-11/revolutionary-rice-farmers-reach-international-markets/4623706
That is a very clever outcome.

While some scientists debate the issue, othes have been strong supporters, including some very senior scientists at major international research institutes.

This is an ongoing debate, and the concept has also been extended to some of the other major food crops.

Some say the labour demands are too high.......but that is often the input most readily available to poorer third world farmers, not cash to buy inputs.  But the yield outcomes seem to apply to local unimproved varieties as well as even advanced GM varieties.

Can this be part of another green revolution in crop yields?

Gene for Improved Phosphorus Uptake Found

Rice Genes

 

/top_stories/article/44844Rice is a cereal grain, it is the most important staple food for a large part of the world's human population, especially in Asia and the West Indies.

It is the grain with the second-highest worldwide production, after maize (corn), according to data for 2010. Since a large portion of maize crops are grown for purposes other than human consumption, rice is the most important grain with regard to human nutrition and caloric intake, providing more than one fifth of the calories consumed worldwide by the human species.

  Scientists have now pinpointed a gene that enables rice plants to produce around 20% more grain by increasing uptake of phosphorus, an important, but limited, plant nutrient. The discovery unlocks the potential to improve the food security of rice farmers with the lowest value phosphorus-deficient land allowing them to grow more rice to add to global production, and earn more.

As of 2009 world food consumption of rice was 531,639 thousands metric tons of paddy equivalent , while the far largest consumers were China consuming 156,312 thousands metric tons of paddy equivalent (29.4 % of the world consumption) and India consuming 123,508 thousands metric tons of paddy equivalent (23.3% of the world consumption). Between 1961 and 2002, per capita consumption of rice increased by 40%.

The studied gene — called PSTOL1 which stands for Phosphorus Starvation Tolerance — helps rice grow a larger, better root system and thereby access more phosphorus. Farmers can apply phosphorus fertilizers to increase productivity but on problem soils phosphorus is often locked in the soil and unavailable to plants.

Also, phosphorus fertilizer is often unaffordable to poor farmers. Adding to the problem is that phosphorus is a non-renewable natural resource and rock phosphate reserves — the source of most phosphorus fertilizers — are running out.

“We have now hit the jackpot and found PSTOL1, the major gene responsible for improved phosphorus uptake and understand how it works,”� Heuer (author)said.

According to Dr. Wricha Tyagi at the School of Crop Improvement at the Central Agricultural University in the Indian state of Meghalaya, knowledge of the exact gene will be critical for future breeding programs suited to Eastern and North-Eastern parts of India where rice productivity is less than 40% of the national average due to acidic soil and poor availability of phosphorus.
Dr. Joko Prasetiyono, of the Institute for Agricultural Biotechnology and Genetic Resources Research and Development in Indonesia, is breeding rice plants with the PSTOL1 gene. The plants are not genetically modified just bred using smart modern breeding techniques.

"In field tests in Indonesia and the Philippines, rice with the PSTOL1 gene produced about 20% more grain than rice without the gene," said Heuer. "In our pot experiments," she added, "when we use soil that is really low in phosphorus, we see yield increases of 60% and more, suggesting it will be very effective in soils low in phosphorus such as in upland rice fields that are not irrigated and where farmers are often very poor."

The discovery also demonstrates the importance of conserving the genetic diversity of traditional crop varieties such as Kasalath. IRRI conserves more than 114,000 different types of rice in the International Rice Genebank.

For further information see New Gene.

This is an important advance in crop development as phosphorus is so important in crop development and yield, worldwide.  While phosphorus is not critically in short supply, it is expensive and especially so in less wealthy countries.

I am sure that plant breeders for many other crops will be very interested in incorporating this gene into their crop for evaluation.

It might be a few years before this genetic advance is publicly available but it does seem to augur well for improved crop yields across many crops in future, while reducing costs, and allowing lower quality phosphorus sources.

Using Livestock to Reduce Carbon Emissions - YES!

Cows have been pilloried as the great methane producer, and as the most potent greenhouse gas emitter of all. There are a lot of cows around the world!

Recent thinking now says that it is not cows as the culprit, but rather their management, particularly when fire is included in the system, as it commonly is.

Reduce the use of fire, often used to remove excess forage, while enhancing the consumption of forage by livestock in a way that encourages regrowth eg Savory grazing system option may offer a smart option to actually reduce greenhouse gas production, even if the forage is of poorer quality at times.

It is known that higher digestibility forage does reduce methane production in the livestock gut system, although not all plants have high digestibility, particularly in the tropics. But independent of that, livestock act as the great recyclers of carbon, by consumption and manuring, rather than seeing it lost in a fire.

It is a complex argument, with more detail here -
http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/livestock/cattle/cows-conserving-carbon/2307077.aspx?storypage=0

But the essence of it is that cows might actually be useful in the soil carbon story!

About time there was some enlightened thinking, for livestock is definitely NOT going away anytime soon

Problems with Glyphosate??

This article appeared in a recent on-line edition of Queensland Country Life. It is an important issue and needs a wide readership as the use of glyphosate is of considerable importance for weed control, plant health and overall yield performance.

While the issue is aimed at broad acre farming it is probably of as much or more relevance for the urban use of glyphosate, especially by local councils, where the indiscriminate use is seen as great waste areas around the local posts and trees, often resprayed every year, even though there is NOTHING growing, and the bare areas are getting larger!!

Glyphosate is a very good agrochemical.........more careful use is needed.

There has also been a series of articles I have seen suggesting that glyphosate has even more sinister effects, including effects on people. Some of these have been a bit outrageous, but often there can be some truth hidden within the rants.

However, the issues with more general nutrition effects have a degreee of documentation. But it is about over use........and not sensible usage, including various rotation systems.

Maybe the Otto von Liebig's and the scientists at Rotheamstead of the 1800s were right afterall about sensible sustainable farming!!

Glyphosate: friend or foe?
MATTHEW CAWOOD
05 Sep, 2011 04:00 AM

Glyphosate, the chemical underpinning the world's most productive farming systems, may becoming an agent of harm, a visiting US scientist believes.

"Glyphosate has been a very powerful tool for us in weed control, but it's been seriously abused by continued overuse," said veteran American plant pathologist, Dr Don Huber. "I feel that's one of the main reasons that we're seeing a lot of other factors come to threaten the sustainability of our production."

Dr Huber links glyphosate to the increasing severity of diseases like fusarium and take-all, and the explosion of Goss's wilt of corn and Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS) in soybeans in America's mid-west.

Now retired from his career as a plant pathologist at Purdue University, but retaining the title of Professor Emeritus, Dr Huber is in Australia to air those concerns at the invitation of Owen McCarron, director of the IPM Masterclass series.

If it is allowed to accumulate in the soil, glyphosate doesn't just kill weeds, Dr Huber told Rural Press.
The chemical is a strong chelator, meaning that it can bind positively-charged mineral ions in the soil to its own molecules, making the mineral unavailable to plants. It is known to have an affinity for copper, zinc, manganese and molybedenum, among others.

"Glyphosate can make a number of elements unavailable for the plant to use, so there are many of the physiological functions of the plant that are compromised," Dr Huber said "In that compromise period that plant becomes very susceptible to diseases, fungal diseases especially."

Glyphosate also affects important soil organisms in different ways, according to Dr Bob Kremer, a microbiologist with the USDA's Agricultural Research Service and adjunct professor at the University of Missouri.

In the soil, where it is carried by spray, rainfall or plant roots, the chemical is an energy source for some microbes - including those responsible for its degradation in the soil - but a killer of others.
Among the organisms that flourish in the presence of glyphosate appear to be certain strains of fusarium, which in European studies were shown to multiply in the presence of the compound, Dr Kremer told Rural Press.

That appears to line up with old Canadian research which found that wheat sown in fields that had been fallowed with glyphosate was more susceptible to fusarium head blight than control wheat plantings.

"(The researchers) hypothesised as the susceptible weeds died, it built up the fusarium populations and then when the wheat was planted later, there was a higher instance of fusarium head blight compared to fields that did not receive glyphosate treatment," Dr Kremer said.

Other organisms are suppressed by glyphosate, including the rhizobium bacteria reponsible for nodulation in legumes and the the algaes that are an important soil glue.

But Dr Kremer said the research needed to clarify these effects isn't being done. When he wants to interpret some of his own observations, he often has to look at research done decades ago.
And yet, he acknowledged, some of these processes, and glyphosate's chelation effect, have the potential to be highly damaging to crop profitability.

Dr Huber became interested in glyphosate when, after a long career in plant pathology, he and his colleagues saw crop diseases that had been adequately managed for decades suddenly burgeon out of control. Goss's wilt of corn, for instance, was first discovered in the US in 1969, but only in the past few seasons it has emerged as a major pest of the Mid-West corn belt.

Dr Huber believes that genetic modification for glyphosate resistance contributes to disease vulnerability.

"Just the presence of the glyphosate resistance gene reduces the efficiency of the plant for many of the micronutrients - like manganese, iron - up to 30 or as much as 70 per cent, depending on the original variety," he said. "When glyphosate is applied there will be an additional reduction in uptake and efficiency of micronutrients that are immobilised by the chemistry."

He is calling for "much more prudent use, and certainly much greater research to establish glyphosate's safety".

"There are a lot of indicators that it's not nearly as benign a product as we thought. With the growing residues that we're finding in our soils and crops and feedstocks, there's a very serious concern for the health and safety aspects of the products."

* Dr Huber will be talking in Bendigo, Vic. on September 5 and Corowa, NSW, on September 7. For more information call Oen McCarron on 0419 006 100 or email owen@ipmmasterclass.com

[ from online edition of Qld Country Life]

New Red LED to Boost Greenhouse Horticulture Production

SIEMENS subsidiary Osram Opto Semiconductors has developed a powerful LED for use in plant cultivation.

The new LED emits a deep-red light at a wavelength of 660 nanometers, the ideal light for plant photosynthesis. The LED has an efficiency of 37%, which is one of the highest for a light source of this colour, and yields considerable energy savings compared to conventional lamps. 5000 of the new LEDs were used in a pilot project in Denmark to illuminate a cultivation area of several thousand square meters.

The trial saw power consumption in the greenhouse fall by 40%.

According to Siemens, relatively little of the light used by plants for their growth is from the visible light spectrum. Chlorophyll molecules mostly absorb deep-red and blue light for the purposes of photosynthesis. The efficient red LED from Osram Opto Semiconductors has an emission curve that is very closely matched to the spectral sensitivity of chlorophyll. The new LED is based on the thin-film technology used for high power semiconductor chips.

In greenhouse cultivation, some plants are grown on several levels stacked on top of one another. For this reason, the new LED is available in two variants, each with a different beam angle. The Golden Dragon Plus has a beam angle of 170 degrees and is well suited for use in reflector lamps for illuminating large areas under cultivation. The Oslon SSL LED, with a beam angle of 80 degrees, is designed for use in multi-level applications, such as those for the cultivation of lettuce.

Using LED light, it is also possible to promote different growth phases of the plant under cultivation. Red light, for example, encourages plants to grow in length, whereas blue light fosters bud formation. Controlled variation of the proportion of blue light between ten and 30 percent can reduce the use of fertilizer and other chemicals.

The developers claim that compared to conventional high-pressure sodium lamps, the luminous efficacy of the system as a whole is 60% higher with red and blue LEDs. The diodes have a service life of 100,000 hours for maintenance-free operation for many years.

----------------------

This sounds pretty interesting for greenhouse growers, especially in higher latitudes where daylength and daylight is severely restricted in winter months. Even if only partially as effective as claimed.

As an aside.........I am sure that hydroponic marijuana growers will also find an exciting use for the technology too! [I am not advocating its use] Reports seem to indicate they usually apply the latest and greatest technology.

Composting in Australia - More Action Needed

Breaking down the benefits of composting
Tuesday, 16 November 2010

A press release worth reading.......

Increasing the use of organic compost to intensive agriculture industries such as citrus could save 30% of irrigation water and deliver millions of dollars of extra income through increased crop yields to regions such as the Riverina as well as providing significant carbon abatement and sequestration opportunities for the nation, according to the Waste Management Association of Australia (WMAA).

CEO of the WMAA, Val Southam. believes greater investment in the utilisation of organic materials in agriculture may be part of the solution to restoring health to the Murray-Darling Basin without jeopardising the livelihoods of farmers and regional communities.“The economic and environmental benefits of composting are enormous. In addition to improving water use efficiency, there are significant environmental benefits accrued through carbon abatement and sequestration.

Organic material diverted from landfill could abate 2 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent every year- approximately 461,893 cars off the road annually.

“Around 420,000 tonnes of compost is used in our intensive agricultural industries per year. Compost improves soil condition by adding organic matter, and a 5% increase in soil organic material will result in the quadrupling of a soil’s water holding capacity. It also suppresses weed growth thus reducing the need for chemicals.” Southam said composting also prevents the loss of valuable top soil and reduces the damaging effects of erosion - savings of between 2.3 and 17 tonnes per hectare of soil loss due to erosion can be achieved. “Our industry is calling on all levels of government to provide R&D funding to fully evaluate the economic and environmental benefits of composting and fund programs which promote awareness of the benefits of compost use in our agricultural industries and wider community,” she said.

Chair of Compost Australia (a division of WMAA), Peter Wadewitz believes there’s much more government, industry and the community can do to increase the use of compost. “At least 20 million tonnes of organic material is available for recycling through composting. Composting organic material such as cardboard and food scraps can reduce the amount of waste going to landfill by as much as 50%. “The Recycled Organics Industry is already processing over 5 million tonnes of organic material annually but the benefits to our environment and economy from increasing this amount are significant,” Wadewitz said. “In addition to increased R&D funding and raising awareness of the benefits of composting, one option may be to establish tax incentives for producers of recycled organic products in more sustainable agricultural production systems,” he added.

Compost for Soils reported that SARDI (South Australian Research and Development Institute) citrus trials (composted green organics, grape marc, animal manure) showed a positive return on the initial investment.An application of 40 m3ha-1 of composted green organics in Loxton North produced the highest benefit at 5.38 – that is, for every dollar invested around $5 is returned to the grower.

---------------------

While this information is not new, in our current debate about carbon, and improved productivity in Australian agriculture, this is a very timely press release and should be heeded around the country.

There is so much wasted food and recyclable organics available. There is technology available to do a lot more, from very simple systmes to quite complex operations. Other countries see this as a valuable resource for agriculture, yet we in australia with relatively poor soils and low moisture holding capacity in soils, really do need this material to improve productivity of the land.

And that applies especially so in the tropics, with higher temperatures driving a faster turnover of the soil carbon as well as a faster soil moisture cycle........and even poorer soils in general.

There are structural issues, with local government [or their contractors] often the handler of organic wastes, yet it must have better leadership at State or National level to achieve serious change.

Yes, there are skilled people that could achieve more.........let there be some action along the lines proposed in terms of R and D!!

Phytoremediation with Napier grass

Napier grass for Phytoremediation

Phytoremediation often seems a simple but slow and unobtrusive process. Not visually obtrusive, no flash pumps nor any drill rigs, but a simple plant, just growing and doing its thing to improve soil quality.

Recent research by a group that involves the Australian CRC, CARE – based in Adelaide – has shown that a commonly used tropical pasture grass – Napier grass , Pennisetum purpureum may offer some simple options for phytoremediation of soil in the tropics.

The specific details are detailed in a generic way in the following link on the ABC web site :
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/10/29/3052165.htm?section=justin

although more details are on this link, direct to the CRC CARE:

http://www.crccare.com/view/index.aspx?id=51669
but the potential seems to operate through metal uptake from soils as well as degradation of some hydrocarbon materials.

Napier grass is a fairly common perennial pasture species used in the tropics, particularly in those regions with rain most of the year. Napier grass which is perennial, has a few relatives in the grass genera that are very deep rooted and do grow on poor, dry soils for example – pearl millet, an annual species. It would be interesting to see how these species perform in the tropics.

There are not many plants considered suitable for phytoremediation use in the tropics so another candidate species is very welcome.

Cannot understand why it is being imported into Australia though, unless these characters are very specific to a new cultivar as would have thought the generic plant was readily available in northern Australia. Bana grass [ same species ] is used commonly as a windbreak grass in north Australia, and there is at least one Australian derived cultivar. See the following for more information:
http://www.tropicalforages.info/key/Forages/Media/Html/Pennisetum_purpureum.htm
and there is plenty more online.

Vetiver grass [ Chrysopogon zizanoides] also has a reputation as a species with metal accumulation properties, as well as being a great erosion control species and one that will colonise on tough soil conditions. Plenty of information on the web site www.vetiver.org

Could Roundup Ready GM Crops Induce Nutrient Deficiency?

The answer appears to be yes, but only due to the mode of action of the glyphosate. Longer term, overuse of glyphosate or continual regular use without other products use, may lead to mineral tie up in soils...........and nutrient deficiency. No doubt, this can be adjusted, with additional fertilisers.

But the real issue is, as Monsanto has proclaimd loud and strong for almost forever..............do not continually use glyphosate. There are issues of weed resistance, as well as potential nutritition issues. Trouble is.........some, possibly many, users are either not listening, or ignorant of the potential problems.

This does not necessarily imply using GM crops is bad. One needs to make informed choices, as already stated in a previous post.

Glyphosate is a very good and very useful chemical, probably the most successful product in this group - ever. Its ongoing efficacy requires users to use it properly.

The following article cover this issue in more depth.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Glyphosate is to weed control what penicillin was to disease control in humans when it was first introduced. But as over-reliance on penicillin led (inevitably, as we now know) to resistance in disease organisms, so over-reliance on glyphosate has led not only to resistance in several weed species, but also to the gradual lessening of nutrient availability to plants.

Both trends have worrying implications for crop production worldwide.

Glyphosate resistance in weeds

Professor Stephen Powles, of the University of Western Australia, has identified glyphosate resistance in nearly a dozen species of weeds in North and South America (Powles 2008). Where only 14 years ago farmers began growing Roundup Ready crops, including maize, soybeans, cotton and Canola, which survive the direct application of glyphosate while everything else succumbs, the continued use of glyphosate alone – in direct contravention of Monsanto’s advice to rotate herbicides – has seen the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds that mean crop failure. Powles attributes this sudden rise in weed resistance to the sole use of glyphosate on every crop by farmers eager to maximise their profits. This short-term gain comes at the cost of long-term viability.

Unlike in the USA, farmers in Canada regularly rotate their herbicides with their crops. The result is that glyphosate resistance is unknown in Canada (Holmes 2010). Powles emphasises that rotation is the only way to secure the continued viability of glyphosate.

Hidden nutrient deficiencies

A more insidious trend, although just as worrying, is the emergence of evidence that continued use of glyphosate can reduce the availability of nutrients in the soil, and that regular use on Roundup Ready crops can interfere with nutrient use by plants. Dr Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University, USA, reports (Huber 2010b) that because glyphosate acts by chelating (tying up) certain metal ions, which are essential in plant enzymes, not only does it kill susceptible plants (by stopping the enzymes from working), but it also ties them up in soil.

He states that contrary to popular belief, glyphosate does not break down in soil (nevertheless, see the references in an earlier article that describe the breakdown of glyphosate by microorganisms), and that it can continue to tie up metal ions (some of which, such as Mn, Cu, Fe, Mg and Zn, are essential plant nutrients) in the soil, preventing plant uptake. (Certainly glyphosate bound to soil minerals is free to tie up metal ions.) He points to evidence of a long-term decline in crop growth in trials in Germany (Huber 2000a) as a result of glyphosate build-up in soil.

In addition to its effects in soil and susceptible weeds, glyphosate ties up metal ions within Roundup Ready plants as well. The resistance gene in Roundup Ready crops does not degrade the glyphosate in the plant; it simply bypasses its effects. So every time a Roundup Ready plant is sprayed with glyphosate, the plant takes up that glyphosate, which then adds to the store of locked-up nutrients in the plant. This effect explains the brief yellowing of resistant plants after an application.

The net result is a reduction in crop yields, both within the growing season and over several years. (Research cited by Wikipedia showed that crop yields were reduced by 6.7%.)

What you can do

If you suspect the emergence of resistant weeds, your best course of action is to switch herbicides for a year. Speak to your local district agronomist or district horticulturist for advice on suitable chemicals. Or use "double knock" techniques. There is additional material available from the web site of the GRDC - www.grdc.com.au

If you are worried about the locking up of nutrients, have your soil and plants tested. There are tests for the presence of glyphosate residues in both. If nutrient availability is low, we can advise you of how much of which nutrients to apply.

Further reading

Holmes R. 2010. Weed resistance could mean herbicide is futile. New Scientist 2760 (15 May): 12.
Huber DM. 2010a. What’s new in ag chemical and crop nutrient interactions. Fluid Journal 18(3).
Huber DM. 2010b. Ag chemical and crop nutrient interactions – current update. Botany and Plant Pathology, Purdue University, Indiana, USA.
Powles SB. 2008. Evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds around the world: lessons to be learnt. Pest Management Science 64(4): 360–365.
SESL. 2009. The Loam Ranger – Glyphosate.
Wikipedia: Roundup.

[latter information modified from other sources]

Soil Carbon May Come from the Tractor Exhaust

A Canadian inventor may have found a very useful tool that can inject tractor exhaust gases into the soil and help build soil carbon and stimulate soil microbes.

Yes.......there are many snake oil salesmen around, but this does sound possible. It fits well with some recent agronomic evidence that if small doses of nitrogen are applied to agronomic systems they may act first on microbial populations that are able to then grow and act on soil minerals and organic systems that have stored nutrients, to help release N and P in the soil in a form that can be taken up by plants, rather than directly on the plants themsleves.

Yes.......it is still relatively early days, but there are some serious scientists giving it a tick already.

Read about it yourself............and think.
-------------------
When the smoke from a tractor exhaust goes up, that’s pollution. But get those emissions down into the soil and they become fertiliser, as Canadian farmer, Gary Lewis, is demonstrating.

Mr Lewis has spent the best part of a decade developing and refining a system that pipes tractor exhaust emissions through a condenser and into the pneumatic system of air seeders, which then injects the carbon and nitrogen-rich emissions into the ground with the seed.

What is generally considered as pollution is in fact prime soil food, Mr Lewis said, and tractor exhaust has allowed him and other farmers working with his technology to grow excellent crops without using conventional fertilisers. The exhaust gases are believed to stimulate microbial activity and root growth, allowing the plants to more efficiently extract nutrient and moisture from the soil.

The United Nations has shown an interest in the system, which might not only reduce fertiliser dependency but cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr Lewis, an Alberta rancher and former auto mechanic who specialises in growing timothy hay for export, claims not to have used fertiliser on his 250-hectare irrigation farm for at least six years, instead fertilising it with his “BioAgtive” technology. Mr Lewis said he had seen no loss of production, his soils had moved from pH 8.0 (the same as the irrigation water) to a pH of about 7.0, and soil organic matter levels were now at about 10 per cent.

In testimonials quoted on the BioAgtive website, former Agriculture Canada scientists turned consultants, Dr Jill Clapperton and Dr Loraine Bailey, agree that something positive is happening in BioAgtive treated soils. “The obvious conclusion is that the exhaust had a positive effect on crop growth, yield and quality, and may have positively enhanced soil nutrients and nutrient chemistry,” Dr Bailey writes.

Meanwhile, Dr Clapperton is working on a scientific paper outlining how the technology works.

Understanding why BioAgtive is not just “blowing smoke”, as Mr Lewis feels many scientists think he’s doing, requires a different perspective on exhaust emissions.

Surprisingly, a breakdown of the content of diesel exhaust looks like a partial Christmas shopping list for plants. A Volkswagen analysis of light-duty diesel engine exhaust published in a World Health Organisation-sponsored report gave an analysis by weight of 75 per cent nitrogen, 15pc oxygen, seven per cent carbon dioxide and 2.6pc water vapour. Several other substances existed in quantities of less than 0.1pc.

Mr Lewis calculates a zero-till rig will put 1100 kilograms of air through the tractor engine to work a hectare.

Dr Bailey writes that the exhaust treatment “resulted in significant release of soil N and/or stimulated the crops to take up soil N”. She said there were also small increases in the uptake of phosphorus, potassium and sulphur and slight shifts in the amount of some micro-nutrients taken up by the crops.
If it proves viable, BioAgtive will also be a tool for farmers wanting to reduce their profile under emissions trading.

The system relies on attraction between negatively-charged ions in the gases and the soil’s positively charged alkaline component to hold the gases in the soil, as well as sealing it in.

Some Canadian farmers are now growing their own biofuel crops using BioAgtive technology, Mr Lewis said About 150 farmers around the world, including in Australia and recently China, had bought into the concept.

While the system doesn’t come cheap, at about $C40,000, Mr Lewis points to what he says is the potential to save hundreds of thousands of dollars in fertiliser in a year.

Gary Lewis is booked to talk at the Carbon Farming Conference and Expo at Orange, later this year on November 4-5.

[ partially sourced Qld Country Life]

Africa Saved by Organic Food - Really??

In the 1970s and 80s, two well renowned CGIAR Centres - IITA and ICRISAT had major programs originally in India and then in Africa to examine crop production. A focus of much of the work was plant establishment and performance in the heavy but erratic rains of the monsoonal and similar tropical areas. Crucial issues to improved performance and crop yield were the use of soil mulches [often legumes] to reduce erosion and lower soil temperatures to mangeable ranges in which seeds could germinate and establish. Mulch also enabled soil moisture to be retained and thus allowed better establishment. Without satisfactory establishment and early growth, crops would fail to perform.

This system was very successful, and similar modified large scale systems have been developed for the tropics in Australia and Brazil, for example. Part of the Australian system involved a ley farming phase in which tropical pastures were used for animal grazing with the leguminous residuals aiding the next crop establishment, in the manner above.

This is not organic farming, although undoubtedly, using organic residuals over time will build soil carbon and enhance soil quality. In Africa, the tropical soils are often nutrient deficient, and yields are restricted by poor plant nutrition. Finding and adding those plant nutrients at low cost is near impossible, except for very small restricted areas - for example home gardens. Yes, it is undoubtedly true that soil mycorhiza can allow release of nutrients from otherwise non available sources, but the amounts are unlikely to be adequate to completely supply enough to grow good crops.

A new media release by the organic lobby in Australia uses a recent UNEP article that espouses the view that organic agriculture will radically improve African agriculture. Organic agriculture to be the saviour of Africa!

I am not so sure, except for those smaller areas. Yes, some of the soil carbon principles are important. BUT........this is not new for the tropics; it is nearly 40 years of old news, written up and published in eminent journals and as layman's reading, and acted on around the world in the tropics.

Read the media release and the link to the UNEP article.

It's Official: Organic farming provides answers to feeding Africa

A major study by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) concludes organic farming offers Africa the best chance of breaking the long inherent cycle of poverty and malnutrition. (1)

Research conducted by UNEP suggests that organic, small-scale farming can deliver the increased yields which were thought to be the preserve of industrial high-tech farming, in addition to reversing environmental and social damages, leading to greater food security.

The head of the UN's Environment Programme, Achim Steiner, says the report "indicates that the potential contribution of organic farming to feeding the world may be far higher than many had supposed."(1)

Dr. Kristen Lyons is a senior lecturer at the School of Biomolecular and Physical Sciences at Griffith University (QLD) and the director of Mukwano Australia, a non-for-profit group supporting the development of health care services in African organic farming communities.

"Organic agriculture offers an alternative - and sustainable - future for African farmers," says Dr. Lyons. She says the report provides a clear direction for reducing the current crisis in agriculture and food systems in developing countries - organic, all the way. "It demystifies the assumption that genetic engineering and other high-tech approaches to farming are required to feed the world.
"In contrast, it is organic farming systems that have demonstrated the greatest potential to feed the world's one billion starving people, and to ensure the long term sustainability of global food production," she says

The UNEP report proposes that African communities need to look to alternative methods of farming as genetic engineering is prohibitively expensive and therefore out of reach for most African farmers. (1)

Organic farming in Africa has lead to benefits to the natural environment, with the UNEP report showing a 93 per cent of case studies reporting benefits to soil fertility, water supply, flood control and biodiversity. (1)

Also, when sustainable agricultural practices, which covered a variety of systems and crops, were adopted, average crop yields increased by 79 per cent. (1)

Overall, the report found an increase in organic farming in Africa could lead to savings on production costs (due to no expenditure on synthetic inputs), promote economic viability and encourage food self-reliance. (1)

Data: (1) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development United Nations Environment Programme, Report: UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity-building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development, Organic agriculture and food security in Africa, Unite Nations, New York and Geneva, 2008
[media release by BFA Australia]
-----------------------
Of course this report is in contrast to recent publications about the need to boost food production, and fast in these areas.

The truth probably is somewhere in the middle. But I doubt, given the wide range of problems that interfere with accumulation of quality organic residuals in Africa, that enough can be accumulated to go totally organic. Embracing the work of the 70s and 80s to enhance establishment and reduce erosion is a vital start to improvement. The technology has been around for some time; getting it adopted widely is more difficult, and often social and machinery issues can interfere with adoption of promising technolgies.

BUT....it is not organic farming, as most people would define it.

Great Turf - Great Frontage .........Great Business!

Appearances do count but water is precious………..do YOUR bit for the environment!

Peter Harrison –office@abovecapricorn.com.au

Many businesses want their premises to look smart, neat and tidy, both inside and out. The old adage of “initial impressions count” might have been said with business in mind.

Effort and money goes into a neat, turfed street frontage at a business. In the NT, watering of the area is vital to maintain appearances, with most having some form of pop-up sprinklers. But they are often a cause of frustration.

In numerous areas, vandals or other incidents damage the sprinkler, they commonly over spray on to hard surfaces and with our intermittent power supply , suddenly the timer operates in the middle of the day, spraying customers. As well, many, if not all over irrigate or supply water in a fashion that does not provide a suitable soil moisture regime, which should be deeper watering, less frequently.

The modern solution is the Kapillary Irrigation Sub Surface System, or KISSS. Already widely used in eastern states to improve water efficiency it can be a great option here too. More information at www.kisss.net.au. This system is usually cost comparable with sprinklers, but with superior operational benefits.

· “Anytime” watering when plants need it most without interfering with business operations
· Wide area underground watering
· Extremely high water use efficiency – commonly save 50% over sprinkler use
· NO over spray on hard surfaces or roadways
· Reduced cost of irrigation, due to reduced water use and low pressure systems
· Lowered maintenance

Even without improved water use efficiencies, addressing issues of suitable species choice, adequate plant nutrition, weed management, thatch and mowing height and frequency can save you many dollars. Consider revisiting what you do in these areas; seek professional advice, do not rely on your mowing contractor – they make money by cutting more grass and selling more services. You want to reduce their costs, while maintaining or improving aesthetics.

As well as improved water use efficiency, many premises may wish to consider rainwater capture off the roof. This is a very practical option for business, as large roof areas of shed facilities used in conjunction with, for example 30 - 60KL of tank storage [above or below ground in many different forms] can provide adequate water for many on site uses, for around $5 - 7000. This water use includes toilet flushing, vehicle washdown and some irrigation. It reduces polluted stormwater flows, and improves the harbour water quality by reducing these inflows, for most stormwater ends up there. Yes…….there is a cost, but green businesses are often perceived as “good” businesses by customers.

With all of us needing to do more environmentally, these options are technically and financially feasible for the NT.

Agriculture and Environment Can Work Together to Benefit Both

International award for CSIRO sugar breakthrough
Australia Friday, 24 August 2007

Agriculture has often been seen as the enemy of the environment. Recent work in sugar cane shows that yields can be maintained while improving environment outcomes. It has been recognised that run off from predominantly sugarcane land has contributed to nutrient loads in the offshore areas, including the Barrier Reef. Work has been underway to addess this problem and CSIRO's new approach to reducing fertiliser run-off into the Great Barrier Reef has won best agriculture paper at an international conference on sugarcane.

The team of researchers, led by Dr Peter Thorburn, has developed the 'N Replacement' approach to nitrogen fertiliser management, which could have major environmental and economic benefits for sugarcane-growing regions.
"Our initial trials indicate that this approach may enable farmers to cut their nitrogen fertiliser use by an average of 30pc with very little affect on sugar yields," Dr Thorburn said. "That could translate to an estimated 80pc reduction in the amount of nitrogen that leaches out into waterways from sugarcane paddocks, which would be very good news for the Great Barrier Reef."

The International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists, representing scientists from 23 countries, presented Dr Thorburn and his co-authors with the award for best agricultural research paper at its triennial congress in Durban, South Africa earlier this month.

The winning study was titled 'Systems to Balance Production and Environmental Goals of Nitrogen Fertiliser Management' and sums up the results of three years of field trials in Queensland and NSW.

"It's a great honour to receive this award from our colleagues around the world," Dr Thorburn said. "The cooperation and advice we've received from local grower groups in northern NSW, Maryborough, Innisfail, Mulgrave, Mossman, and the Burdekin has been invaluable in shaping our ideas."

The paper also incorporates work done in cooperation with BSES Ltd on monitoring nitrogen levels in harvested cane using near infrared spectroscopy instruments (NIR) at the sugar mill to provide important information to help farmers to better manage fertiliser use in their crop.

Dr Thorburn says the N Replacement approach and NIR system are now at the 'proof of concept' stage, and more work is required before it can be rolled out across the industry.

"The Six-Easy Steps program developed by BSES Limited for soil-specific nutrient management practices in sugarcane production is currently the best technique widely available to growers, but we hope in a few years N Replacement will provide a new option for growers wanting to further reduce their nitrogen use and their environmental impact," he said.

The prize-winning research was funded by the Sugar Research and Development Corporation in partnership with CSIRO.

partially sourced: CSIRO

New Wave of Soil Inoculants Coming to Australian Agriculture

Most Australian farmers have used legume inoculants, commonly in a peat carrier. Whether sowing a legume crop such as soybeans, or pastures including centurion cv Cavalcade or Bundy or even the old standby of cowpeas. There are a wider range of options in this market today, with some liquid formulations making inroads into the traditional peat formulations, at least in cropping regions.

However, the newer options are likely to include a wider range of microbiologically active soil based additives, but still including better legume inoculants.

Under development are products that may assist with mobilisation of stored soil phosphorus, materials that are antagoniostic to existing soil borne diseases, and hence control these problems, plus the more widely used legume active rhizobia that fixes nitrogen for the plant.

This edition of Harvest Radio from the GRDC web site discusses the latest developments in soil inoculant research. Sandy Gleddie (Philom Bios) outlines some of the new developments in the pipeline for soil inoculants aimed to boost plant productivity. David Herridge (NSW DPI) also outlines some of new formulations of inoculants available to industry.

For more information contact: Sandy Gleddie, Philom Bios, 08 8303 7142 David Herridge, NSW DPI Tamworth, 02 6763 1143

The direct link is: Listen to Soil Inoculants [mp3, 2.44MB, 6:05 min]

This can be listened to on your PC, if audio enabled, or downloaded as an MP3 file for later listening.

Whle all this is being developed for temperate Australia, and crops in that region, it is likely that once again, northern regions of Australia may not see these for many years.

NT Now Has Top Quality Fertiliser and Plant Nutrition Support

Agsafe the national registered training organisation for rural industries has recently issued a Fertcare Level C certificate to Mr Peter Harrison of Above Capricorn Technologies, Darwin following his successful completion of the training program and exams for this course.

The Fertcare program is designed to lift the skills and knowledge of all individuals involved in the supply and distribution of fertilizers and to assist in optimising environmental stewardship, occupational health and safety, food safety and agricultural profitability.

Mr Harrison’s training was specifically designed to meet the needs of agricultural advisors and crop and pasture nutrition advisers and consultants who are providing detailed plant nutrition advice based on soil and plant testing to the agricultural and horticultural industries

Using the latest adult learning methods, the Fertcare training received by Peter Harrison delivered leading-edge information, support and practical advice to improve professional competencies for advisors and covers detailed and complex knowledge of:
environmental issues, particularly in relation to fertilisers and fertiliser management;
fertiliser environmental stewardship review methodology (FESR);
food safety issues;
soil and tissue sampling;
the regulatory framework and label requirements; and
an awareness of OH&S and stewardship issues in transport, storage, handling and application of fertilisers.

Fertcare training is underpinned by eco-efficiency principles and informs participants on the proper use of fertilisers and soil ameliorant products to achieve optimum agricultural production together with effective practices for improved environmental outcomes.

The formal training is used together with the assessment and recognition of prior competency which includes the assessment of competency in;
soil, nutrient and fertiliser knowledge; and
systematic development of interpretation and
recommendations based on sound science.

The Fertcare Accreditation Level C is seen as a basic requirement for qualified professionals that provide professional advice and support in plant nutrition and fertiliser use in the rural industries across rural Australia, and has been a sought after qualification in other jurisdictions around Australia. Ask your fertiliser supplier or advisor – are you qualified?

Peter Harrison from Above Capricorn Technologies provides independent advice and can assist in developing a sound program for crops on your property. Contact him by phone 89481894 or e-mail to - office@abovecapricorn.com.au .