Sandy soil types of the Northern Mallee often underperform despite good weed management and increased inputs of nitrogen and sulphur. There is still a yield gap that can be addressed, with anecdotal evidence of unused water commonly remaining in the soil at depths of approximately 60cm at harvest.

1. The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file.
Managing for increased crop production
on sands
Rick Llewellyn, Therese McBeath, Gupta Vadakattu,
Bill Davoren, Willie Shoobridge, Stasia Kroker,
Michael Moodie
CSIRO AGRICULTURE , WAITE CAMPUS ADELAIDE

2. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
1. Low water holding capacity
2. Subsoil constraints / hard pans
3. Prone to water repellence
4. Poor establishment
5. Poor fertility/ low N supply / low organic matter
6. Low biological activity ‐ root disease/herbicide
residues
7. Brome grass
Sandy soil constraints

3. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
3 |
Long‐term performance of N strategies on sands
(Karoonda est. 2009)

4. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Long‐term performance of N strategies on sands
Karoonda cumulative wheat yields (t/ha) 2011‐2015
4 |
Soil Nil 9 N 40 N Sowing 40 N split LSD
Heavy (2) 12.5 12.3 13.6 13.1 Not sig
Mid (5) 8.1 10.5 14.7 13.3 1.1
Deep sand (8) 4.7 5.8 10.0 8.9 1.8
• 40% more grain using 40N Vs 9N on mid slope sands (4 t/ha)
• 70% more grain using 40N instead of 9N on deep sands (4 t/ha)
• 20N+20N split was never better than 40N at seeding on sand
• No significant N response on heavy flat after 7 yrs

5. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
On or near-row sowing: what could it offer on
sands?

6. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
On‐row Inter‐row On‐row Inter‐row
2015 Establishment (plants/m2)Better crop establishment under marginal sowing
conditions
Karoonda
Non‐Wetting
Loxton
Wetting
Error bars are LSD within a site
Knife points

7. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Up to 4 times more top soil moisture at seeding
with on‐row seeding
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
on‐row inter‐row on‐row inter‐row
Surface Soil Water at Sowing (mm/top 10cm)
a
b
c
c
April Sowing May Sowing
Karoonda Sand 2015 (0‐10 cm soil water)
Photo: Margaret Roper WA

8. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Increased weed suppression by on‐row crops
Brome
plants/
m2
Brome
seeds/m2
On‐row 28 2022
Inter‐row 105 7332
Inter‐row vs on‐row
Karoonda 2015

9. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Increased weed suppression by on‐row crops
Brome
plants/
m2
Brome
seeds/m2
On‐row 28 2022
Inter‐row 105 7332
Inter‐row vs on‐row
Karoonda 2015
In 2014: 80% less brome plants and seed set
(with similar crop densities)

10. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Pre‐emergence herbicide options for brome on
sand
10 |
Results 2013‐14: Can achieve 75%+ brome
plant control using pre‐ems other than
trifluralin but variable

11. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Pre‐emergence herbicide options for brome on
sand (Karoonda 2015)
11 |
1. Trifluralin (control) (1.5 L/ha);
2. Trifluralin + Metribuzin (1.5 L/ha + 150 g/ha);
3. Trifluralin + Metribuzin + post emergence Avadex Xtra (1.5 L/ha + 150 g/ha + 2.0 L/ha);
4. Trifluralin + Avadex Xtra (1.5 L/ha + 2.0 L/ha);
5. Sakura (118 g/ha);
6. Sakura + Avadex Xtra (118 g/ha + 3.2 L/ha);
7. Sakura + Metribuzin (118 g/ha + 150 g/ha).
• Sakura alone resulted in 55% less brome panicles than trifluralin
alone
• Sakura + Avadex resulted in 72% less brome panicles than
trifluralin alone ($$)
With Kleeman, Preston, Gill , University of Adelaide

12. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
No increase in rhizoctonia infection with on‐row seeding
Crown rot
(fusarium) and
Take all weren’t
found

13. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
• Similar levels of N available at sowing at Karoonda on row Vs inter‐row,
but can be some early tie up (e.g. Loxton)
• Greater N availability later in season on row
• 30% more yield on‐row at Karoonda on sand but not on the swale or
Loxton wetting sand
Nitrogen & yield
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
On‐row Inter‐row On‐row Inter‐row
Grain Yield (t/ha)
Karoonda
Non‐Wetting
Loxton
Wetting

14. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Improved nutrition on sands: N, S, Zn: what form
& when?
Presentationtitle | Presenter name14 |
Control (P only)
20N Urea @sow
40N Urea at sow
20N Zn enriched Urea @sow
20N Urea + Zn blend @sow
20N urea + Foliar Zn @ 2‐3 leaves
20N Urea @sow + 20N Urea@G14/S22
20N Urea @sow + 20N Zn enriched Urea@ GS14/22
20N Urea @sow + 20N Urea@GS31
20N Urea @sow +20S gypsum pre‐sow
20N Urea @sow+20S gypsum@ GS14/22
20N Urea @sow
+ 20N Urea@ GS14/22 +20S gyp@GS14/22
20N Urea @sow+20S/20 N SOA+ Urea@ GS14/22
20N Urea @sow+4 S SOA@ GS14/22

15. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
‐ 40 N Urea upfront/early led to best yield
‐ No S response
‐ Zn enriched Urea to be followed up
15 |
Treatment
Grain Yield
(t/ha)
Protein
(%)
Control (P only) 0.96 9.5
20N Urea @sow 1.41 9.1
40N Urea at sow 1.66 10.2
20N Zn enriched Urea @sow 1.53 9.1
20N Urea @sow + 20N Urea@GS31 1.56 10.4
Improved nutrition on sands: N, S, Zn: what form
& when?

16. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Summary
• Early vigour critical to performance on sands – establishment, N supply,
weed competition
• Higher N early has led to gains over 6 years
• Using last year’s crop row is showing promise
• A need for sand‐specific management
• Pre‐emergence herbicides (not trif) can greatly reduce brome seed set
with crop competition
• New work focused on improving water use efficiency on sands to begin
in 2016
16 |

17. The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file.
AGRICULTURE FLAGSHIP
Thank you

18. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Nutrition on sands (Loxton 2015):
‐ 40 N Urea upfront/early best yield
‐ No S response but Zn enriched Urea to be followed up
‐
18 |
Treatment
Grain Yield
(t/ha)
Protein (%)
Control (P only) 0.96 9.54
20N Urea @sow 1.41 9.13
40N Urea at sow 1.66 10.16
20N Zn enriched Urea @sow 1.53 9.13
20N Urea + Zn blend @sow 1.38 9.27
20N urea + Foliar Zn @ 2‐3 leaves 1.39 9.03
20N Urea @sow + 20N Urea@G14/S22 1.61 9.93
20N Urea @sow + 20N Zn enriched Urea@ GS14/22 1.55 9.60
20N Urea @sow + 20N Urea@GS31 1.56 10.45
20N Urea @sow +20S gypsum pre‐sow 1.29 8.88
20N Urea @sow+20S gypsum@ GS14/22 1.35 9.43
20N Urea @sow
+ 20N Urea@ GS14/22 +20S gyp@GS14/22
1.55 9.93
20N Urea @sow+20S/20 N SOA+ Urea@ GS14/22 1.59 9.63
20N Urea @sow+4 S SOA@ GS14/22 1.37 9.25

19. The image part with relationship ID rId17 was not found in the file.
Presentation title | Presenter name19 |