SPAA, a non-profit, independent membership organisation - promoting the development and adoption of precision technologies in agriculture, viticulture and horticulture

Precision Ag News

www.spaa.com.au

T H E M A G A Z I N E O F P R E C I S I O N A G R I C U L T U R E A U S T R A L I A I N C .

FeaturesPA support services

Headland management

VR in trees and grapes

PA education

Volume 8 Issue 1 Spring/Summer 2011

The latest precision farming technology may be complex, but using it doesn’t have to be.At Landmark, our agronomists are experts at putting the latest variable rate technology to practical use in the paddock. We can help with collecting and interpreting the data for you, then recommend the best way to optimise the quality and yield of your harvest by applying fertiliser, seed and agricultural chemicals, at variable rates within a paddock.

We can even provide you with a prescription file that will program your airseeder, spreader or spray unit so that it follows our instructions to the letter.* You don’t need to be an expert to get the most out of the latest precision farming technology; you just need to know someone who is. That’s why more Australian farmers look to us.

For more information on Landmark Precision Farming Services, speak to your local Landmark agronomist.

BTB/

LM27

60

*Not all airseeders, spreaders and spray units are suitable for variable rate technology. Please check with your local Landmark agronomist.

landmark.com.au

LM2760 SPAA Ad 210x297 AW.indd 1 19/08/11 10:51 AM

Precision Ag News 3

The latest precision farming technology may be complex, but using it doesn’t have to be.At Landmark, our agronomists are experts at putting the latest variable rate technology to practical use in the paddock. We can help with collecting and interpreting the data for you, then recommend the best way to optimise the quality and yield of your harvest by applying fertiliser, seed and agricultural chemicals, at variable rates within a paddock.

We can even provide you with a prescription file that will program your airseeder, spreader or spray unit so that it follows our instructions to the letter.* You don’t need to be an expert to get the most out of the latest precision farming technology; you just need to know someone who is. That’s why more Australian farmers look to us.

For more information on Landmark Precision Farming Services, speak to your local Landmark agronomist.

BTB/

LM27

60

*Not all airseeders, spreaders and spray units are suitable for variable rate technology. Please check with your local Landmark agronomist.

landmark.com.au

LM2760 SPAA Ad 210x297 AW.indd 1 19/08/11 10:51 AM

ContentsAn exciting time to be in agriculture . . . . . . . . 4

New committee members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Winners and grinners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

PA has to be profitable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Picture perfect vineyard management . . . . . . 10

Break crop selection by soil type . . . . . . . . . . 12

Site-specific soil and nutrient management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Give VR a go . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Aerial images capture water requirement . . 17

More or less? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

New certificate in PA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Precision Ag News is published by SPAA - Precision Agriculture Australia Inc.© 2011 ISSN1449-3705SPAAPO Box 3490 Mildura VIC 3502Ph 0437 422 000 Fax 1300 422 279 Email info@spaa.com.auwww.spaa.com.au

Advertising contact: Nicole Dimos 0437 422 000 or nicole@spaa.com.au

Precision Ag News is edited and produced for SPAA by AgriKnowHow with design by Lightning Designs.

SPAA DISCLAIMERSPAA has prepared this publication, on the basis of information available at the time of publication without any independent verification. Neither SPAA and its editors nor any contributor to this publication represent that the contents of this publication are accurate or complete; nor do we accept any omissions in the contents, however they may arise. Readers who act on the information in this publication do so at their risk. The contributors may identify particular types of products. We do not endorse or recommend the products of any manufacturer referred to. Other products may perform as well or better than those specifically referred to.

SPAA is supported by

Perhaps a Taggle ear tag would help SPAA keep track of retiring committee member Mark Branson (see page 4/5). Photo: Emma Leonard

4 Precision Ag News

G’day.Recently I was fortunate enough to take a brief

camping holiday with several other families. This group included two of Lower Eyre Peninsula’s leading proponents of Precision Agriculture, one a farmer, the other an agronomist. Evening discussions around the fire turned to the upcoming grain harvest and the farmer (in the first year of leasing a new property) mentioned that he was looking forward to harvest as he would finally have some yield maps of the leased area. It made me think how yield maps have gone from a coloured novelty picture to a critical piece of agronomic data.

Here’s hoping your yield maps are accurately calibrated and show positive results for 2011 .

The use of accurately calibrated yield maps initiated several involved questions at the Advanced Training Workshop held last July.

Advanced Training Workshop We briefly reported on the Advanced Training Workshop held in July in the previous edition. This annual event, organised as part of the GRDC funded PA Grower Groups project in the southern region, has proved to be extremely popular. The intensive, two days of hands-on software training with equipment specialists is provided for agronomists and leading growers from the 16 PA

groups involved in the project.

The presentations were very question driven. For example, the group using FarmWorks software wanted to know how to create a nitrogen-rich calibration strip, so that when applying fertiliser at seeding the rate was stepped up automatically. A simple task for Martin Peters, FarmWorks, who helped individuals overcome specific hurdles they were encountering.

The objective is to up skill individuals and encourage them to share this knowledge with others in their farming systems groups. As well as learning from the presenters, there is much sharing of knowledge and experience between participants.

Other specialists presenting included Andrew Bremner, John Deere, who supported the APEX software, Colin Booth, PAM and Farmstar, and Ed Cay who worked on the SMS software as used by CNH Global. SPAA wishes to thank these and all the presenters who made this workshop such a success.

Field daysTo help maximise use of time and resources, SPAA has worked with farming systems and grower groups across the southern region to provide a PA focus at their field days and crop walks. This has proved to be a successful format and helped to ensure that more growers are hearing about the results of the

trials associated with the PA Grower Groups project.

At the joint SA No-Till Farming Association (SANTFA) and SPAA event on Yorke Peninsula, Ashley Wakefield and Peter Treloar presented the variable rate nitrogen trial. This work is trying to establish on which data the rate of nitrogen should be based. Pairs of nitrogen strips are being run across the paddock, with nitrogen rate varied based on one of two data sources - zones created from an EM38 soil survey or the previous year’s yield map. The results will be published in a future issue of Precision Ag News.

SPAA was involved with Yorke Peninsula Machinery Field Days the MFS PA Expo and LEADA activities.

Annual conferenceOne hundred delegates attended this year’s conference, which had a strong line up of scientific, industry and farmer presenters. Sponsor presentations and trade stands also provide an important element to this event. Indeed, CNH Global acknowledged the importance of this event by sending two product managers from North America (USA) to attend.

Several presenters expressed that PA is making it an exciting time to be involved in agriculture.

Brett Whelan, University of Sydney, took us back to the start of PA and demonstrated how far we have come in the past 10 years. Industry speakers took us to the

SPAA news

An exciting time to be in agricultureAn exciting time to be in agricultureRandall Wilksch On the case – CNH Global product managers from Australia and the USA at the Precision Ag Conference in

September 2011 – left to right, Dan Halliday, Kirk Wesley, Adam Rusciolelli, Brad King. Photo: Emma Leonard

Precision Ag News 5

future reporting on some of the developments in the pipeline; apparently autonomous cars are already being road tested in the USA. Committee member, Craige MacKenzie, presented his wide-ranging use of biomass scanning and variable rate for crop and pasture management. For those who missed the conference, Craige was featured in the winter 2011 issue of Precision Ag News.John Hornebuckle, CSIRO, presented on PA irrigation tools but his passing comment on the ability to produce plant available water information across a paddock was of interest to dryland producers. We are working with John to provide information on this in the next issue of PAN.Loxton grain grower, Robin Schaefer shared his experience with using PA on a 4000ha property in the SA Mallee. His key messages were you do not need all the bells and whistles to use PA; keep it simple and compatible and aim for a single PA system across all machines. If you need to harvest with two harvesters with different yield mapping systems, the best way to produce good maps is to harvest pass for pass.Mark Trotter, the University of New England, updated us on the latest in precision grazing including the transmitting geo-locating Taggle ear

tags. He also mentioned the newly purchased farm that the Precision Ag Group is turning into a SMART farm with all the latest PA tools to be used in the crop, pasture and livestock management. The farm will be launched next year and PAN will be keeping abreast of developments.

AGMI am happy to be reporting to you as SPAA - Precision Agriculture Australia’s returning president. There were a few changes to the committee at the AGM. Immediate past president, Mark Branson, stood down, as did SARDI researcher, John Heap and NSW grower, Giuseppe Cuteri. Many thanks to them for their long standing and valuable input to SPAA and its objective of increasing adoption of PA across Australia. I know I’ve always enjoyed discussing PA related issues with Mark, John and Giuseppe and their input will be sorely missed from the committee.Victorian grain grower, Neale Postlethwaite, continues as vice-president and South Australian grain grower, Grant Pontifex, has returned as treasurer. All other committee members have returned and my thanks go to them all and to executive officer, Nicole Dimos, and administrator, Bree Freckleton,

for their work over the past 12 months.There are three new committee members; Robin Schaefer, Stephen Paddick and Jay Hubert. A brief resume and contact details for each can be found below. For details of other committee members, please refer to the spring/summer 2010 issue of Precision Ag News. Copies can be found on the website (www.spaa.com.au).

SponsorsI am pleased to report that Landmark and John Deere have resigned for another 12 months as Gold and Silver corporate supporters respectively. The committee and executive look forward to working with them to help increase adoption of PA.I look forward to working with the new committee members and hope that as we move into the grain and then grape harvest period, all your yield maps are accurate and reflect the effort you have made for season 2011.

Diary Date – Precision Ag Expo - February 2012, Eyre Peninsula, South Australia

Stephen Paddick, South Australia 0438 859 630, stephenpaddick@bigpond.comI manage our family farm based at Wallaroo, Yorke Peninsula. PA to determine different zones in our cropping program is used for all applications especially applying seed and fertiliser. I have 10 years of yield maps and together with EM maps use this information to find non-profitable areas in the farm. These are being planted back to native vegetation.

Jay Hubert, Queensland 0408 598 198, amaryllys2@activ8.net.au“Amaryllys Farming Co. Pty Ltd”, is a family company that farms 217ha, 12kms north of Bundaberg. I am a fourth generation farmer. We are growing about 17,500t of sugarcane. In addition we contract harvest about 55,000t of sugarcane and contract plant about 200ha of sugarcane and rotational crops (soybean, peanut, canola and mustard). We have just begun the journey down the sometimes foggy road that is PA. We are currently involved with a Sugar Research and Development Corporation research project. We have the ability to vary fertiliser rate but await robust decision making tools. I am also heavily involved in local industry management.

Robin Schaefer, South Australia 0417 877 578, robinschaefer@bigpond.comI am a fourth generation farmer and managing director of a collaborative farming venture called Bulla Burra, which specialises in dryland cropping. I am based near Loxton. I use PA to better manage the allocation of resources, to reduce costs and increase profitability. I was awarded a Nuffield Scholarship to travel in 2012, to study farm business management systems and medium to long term weather forecasting. I have been actively involved in PA research through involvement in Mallee Sustainable Farming (MSF) projects.

New committee members

SPAA news

RAB00611-4133

Call us on 1300 30 30 33 or visit www.rabobank.com.au

We’re focused on your community’s growthProud sponsor of the SPAA Precision Agriculture Association

We’re an agribusiness bank. Our local experts live and work where you do. That’s why we’re proud to sponsor the SPAA Precision Agriculture Association.

Rabobank. One focus.

SPAA news

6 Precision Ag News

It may seem a while ago that a Garmin hand-held GPS unit was offered as a lure to encourage

early renewal of membership to SPAA – Precision Agriculture Australia. Well, the names of the winners were drawn by Phil Hoult, Nutrient Advantage Business Development Manager, at the AGM in September.The three lucky winners were: Graeme Baldock, Kimba, SA; Chris Brain, Willaura, Victoria and Chris Graeme, Arthurton, SA.In total, Incitec Pivot provided SPAA with four of these units, three to give away to members and one to be retained for use in trials. These hand-held units are proving popular for logging soil sampling points, laying out trials, calculating areas and distance, or marking areas of problem weeds or any areas of a paddock where a difference occurs. Data can be downloaded into Google Earth and then transferred out to systems that accept files in the .kml format.To help all users of such hand-held devices gain the most from them, committee member Tim Neale, of precisionagriculture.com.au, has put together a few tips for using these devices. Tim also shared these at the Advanced Training Workshop.

Tim’s tips for using hand-held GPS units1. Make sure the GPS is set to

WGS84 Datum - anything else and your GPS position could be hundreds of metres from your actual location.

2. It is best to use UTM data format, which displays all your units in metres. This makes measuring, recording, sharing, and displaying much easier. Make sure you note down the zone number as this is critical when using UTM coordinates.

3. The area mapping capabilities of the better quality units are quite accurate, if data is collected over a short period of time. Our recent testing has shown that hand-helds can be very accurate (less than 3m) from day to day, if the point is marked correctly.

4. To increase your accuracy of measurement, hold the GPS stationary in the spot you want to mark for 5-10 seconds or more. You will notice the GPS signal strengths jump-up. This will improve accuracy and the unit has time to properly calculate its position and stabilise the coordinates

5. Check to see if there are on-line training packages. If available take advantage of these to help gain the most from the unit you have purchased.

Details: Tim Neale, 0428157208, tim@precisionagriculture.com.au

PV winnerCongratulations to Brian Smibert, winner of the SE Natural Resources Management Board’s prize of $2000 worth of precision viticulture services.Brian is a relative newcomer to the grape industry, previously running beef and sheep but now has 63 hectares of vines in the Coonawarra.He has found his involvement in the PV group to be very useful as a rapid way to learn about new and innovative methods of vine management.He will use the prize to carry out an EM38 survey of his vineyard as he is keen to identify areas of shallower soil, with poorer water holding. He is also keen to see the topography data that is gathered at the same time.With improved understanding of his soil depth and topography, Brian wants to better manage the available water. Stepping up his targeted mulching program will be one of his water management strategies.

Winners and grinners Phil Hoult, Nutrient Advantage Business

Development Manager draws the winning names with President Randall

Wilksch at the AGM in September.

Precision Ag News 7

FARM DETAILProperty: 5735 hectares currently 80:20 crop to pasture but moving to 100% cropped

Location: Esperance, Western Australia

Rainfall: 425 to 550mm, winter dominant but becoming more equal. About 40% below average by the end of September 2011

Soil: Circle valley – shallow sand over clay and red to grey sodic clay loam. A small area is non-wetting

Personnel: Phil and Bindi Longmire farming in partnership with Phil’s mother Christine. One full time workman, four casuals at harvest and seeding

Enterprises: Four year rotation – 33% hard and APW wheat, 33% malting barley, 16% canola, 16% field peas

Yield: Average wheat yield 2.65t/ha.

Over the past 10 years, Phil has invested in all the common PA tools and services. He uses

autosteer with guidance providing +/-10cm accuracy, gathers yield data and uses biomass sensors for variable application of liquid nutrients. Some parts of the farm have been mapped with an EM38 and this data has been used for variable rate gypsum and to target pasture species to the grey sodic clay loam soils.However, delve a little deeper and you will find that Phil’s use of PA tools is a little different to many other growers.“For me, the focus of PA has to remain on making my business more profitable.”

Headland managementWhile his country is only slightly undulating, Phil has many paddocks that are not square, contain dams and lakes or have a strong edge effect influence from trees. He had already seen the savings and yield benefits from reduced overlap by adding autosteer and from variable rate. He has been varying seeding fertiliser based on soil type for the past three years. However, his yield maps continually indicated areas of poor productivity on headlands. Phil suspected these

related to crops haying-off due to a mismatch between crop density and available water.“In a regular shaped paddock, it is common to sow about two per cent more land than in the paddock, due to overlap, even with autosteer. In irregular shaped paddocks and those with internal headlands due to dams or scrub, I have calculated I sow up to 27 per cent more area; that is a considerable double up of inputs.”Over his whole farm Phil has calculated that on average he was sowing 11 per cent more land, even with +/-10cm guidance and autosteer. His paddock sizes vary between 31 hectares and just over 400 hectares.Not only was this a waste, it was resulting in poorer yield and higher screenings in parts of the headlands, as the crop ran out of water.In 2011, Phil implemented a system of headland management that he has calculated saved him nearly 24 tonnes of fertilisers, valued at $16,700. This saving was achieved by modifying the fertiliser rate applied on the headland areas by only 10kg/ha. Further savings in seed were also made but the figures have not been calculated.The distance required to turn his seeding rig, which consists of a triple box air-cart and a liquid tank,

PA has to be profitableEmma LeonardMaximising the use of his resources to improve profitability is at the core of Phil Longmire’s farming objectives. That includes making the best use of the PA equipment in which he has already invested.

PA in practice

Varying rates on headlands to account for overlap and competition from trees is helping Phil Longmire improve yield,

reduce screenings and save money.

8 Precision Ag News

is 29.5m. Every headland consists of two runs, the perimeter run is the full 18m of the seeding bar and the second run is 11.5m (Figure 1). The second headland is set at 11.5m so that the rates are not changed before the auto shut-off kicks in at the end of the seeding row.The seed and fertiliser rate on the perimeter run is modified depending on the location of trees or other yield limiting factors. Seed rate on the second headland is reduced by 20 per cent for all crops except canola.To achieve this system and the

impressive savings, Phil has implemented a strategic approach.The starting point was to have every paddock boundary and internal headland accurately mapped. This was done by logging every boundary on the GreenStar™2 (GS2) 2600 touch screen using the SMS Basic to store data and StarFire 2 (SF2) +/-10cm GPS receiver. However, the lines produced were coarse and to refine the zones Rowan Spittle, Landlogic was employed to redraw all the boundaries using a CAD system. Templates were then produced in the SMS format so they could be read by the Maplink GIS system in the Topcon X20 controller.To convert the maps into the SMS file format a program called Quickmaps had to be used and Phil reports this program caused many headaches due to file formats and file structure. The SMS headland templates are used to create variable rate maps that are then added to the overall paddock map (Figure 1). The total map is imported into the TOPCON Maplink software in the X20 rate controller. While Phil has been extremely frustrated with the technical support provided with the X20, in regards to this application, one attribute it has is the facility to have two independent GPS inputs. The Trimble GPS unit mounted on the tractor uses the OmnistarHP signal to control the Case Pro600 autosteer system. The same signal feeds into the guidance software in the X20, which controls the auto-lift and shut-off on the seeder as it turns on the headland. However, due to the length of the seeding-rig a second GPS receiver, a SF2, is mounted on the seeding bar to ensure the rates of seed and fertiliser are varied at the correct start and end points. This signal feeds into the X20 and the Maplink software.“We are currently doing trials with different seed and fertiliser rate combinations on the headlands but this can be very seasonally specific as water tends to be the limiting factor.”In 2011, seed and fertiliser were varied on the headlands of all paddocks except those sown to canola as a separate small seeds box is used that does not have variable rate. Fertiliser was varied as described previously.

Phil is looking forward to seeing the results at harvest that in his view are all cream on the cake over the saving he has already made in fertiliser.To achieve the variable headland management has been a big learning curve and Phil was pleased to have the support of Greg Warren a local, specialist PA consultant with Farm & General in unison with Landlogic. Based on the first year of experience further refinements to the system will be made. For example, where diagonal field boundaries are over 45 degrees the greatest headland overlap occurs. On such headlands the rate of fertiliser will be reduced by 25 per cent to reduce input wastage.

EfficiencyAn important spin-off from using PA tools and especially in the implementation of headland management has been the need to implement a clear file structure. This has been extremely important as each geographic information systems (GIS) system seems to use a different route to finding the data. Some systems have the file structure, year, paddock, operation, while others may require the operator to first find the paddock, then go to the year folder and then to the fertiliser map for example.Phil would love to see a standard structure used by all GIS. This lack of consistency means he has to ensure data is filed accurately and the method of retrieval for a specific system is provided on a ‘cheat sheet’ kept in the tractor cab.“If using a PA specialist to prepare your data, it is important that they know the file structure you require and if you have more than one system then files should be provided in each file structure.”At seeding, Phil employs three drivers. Some have little experience but quickly adopt the use of the PA tools. He has found that with VR both experienced and less experienced drivers sow more efficiently as they are continually checking to see that the rates are changing; problems are responded to more quickly.He finds with PA the operators are more stimulated, interested in the work they are doing and they are more observant. They like the technology providing it is working as it should.

PA in practice

Figure 1. Three stages in creating a variable rate fertiliser map with headland management, a) variable rates on headlands 1 and 2, b) variable rate, on this occasion only two rates for the paddock interior, c) the combined map for the rate controller.

B

C

A

Varying rates of fertiliser 14.5N:14.5P:0K:9S plus trace and seed barley.

100kg/ha plus 53kg/ha seed90kg/ha plus 53kg/ha seed86kg/ha plus 53kg/ha seed80kg/ha plus 42.5kg/ha seed75kg/ha plus 42.5kg /ha seed

Precision Ag News 9

Another important part of efficiency relates to trying to ensure that PA tools have multiple uses and can be moved between machines. When Phil purchases PA tools he does not want them to be sitting idle in the shed for most of the year (Table 1). Basically he runs three guidance subscriptions all with the same provider to make it cost effective. The guidance and autosteer systems in the two boomsprays are transferred to the self-propelled swather and tractor hauling the chaser bin at harvest.

Variable ratePhil runs two 36m boomsprays, one of which is equipped with dual spray lines and two tanks. This set-up allows weed hot-spots to be targeted with higher rates or different herbicide combinations from the front tank, while a blanket rate of herbicide is applied from the rear tank.

Wild radish tends to be the hot-spot weed that Phil needs to target and the location of this is closely associated with the deeper sandy soils. The GS2/ SMS/SF2 systems were used to create soil zones while driving around the paddocks.

The GS2 system, using the HP signal, is then used to control the output

from the front tank, only applying herbicide within the internal soil boundaries. The rear tank and spray line are controlled by the Hardi 5500 rate controller, with auto boom shut-off controlled by the TOPCON X10, while tractor guidance and autosteer are controlled by the CASE CFX 750autosteer and the OmnistarHP signal.

PA has to focus on making my business more

profitableCouch grass is a problem across a small area of many paddocks. While the whole paddock receives a flat rate of glyphosate from the rear tank, hot-spots receive an extra dose from the front tank. Patch management of couch grass is achieved using the same systems except the initial map of hot-spots is created on-the-go by turning the front line on and off manually. This data is then used for further applications.A trial, in 2006, with a GreenSeeker™

highlighted differences in crop colour, undetectable to the human

eye. Following tissue testing these were found to be due to manganese (Mn) deficiency in early plant growth.

Phil has now invested in two Crop Circle™ sensors that are mounted on the front of the tractor, three metres either side of the centre line. At a travel speed of 26km/h, this location provides a 12m lead between the sensor identifying Mn deficiency and the front spray line delivering a full rate.

The crop sensors are permanently mounted on the tractor and biomass readings can be taken at each pass. However, in the recent dry seasons the relationship between biomass and yield has been variable and so this data has not been used to vary in-crop nitrogen. Instead the rate of liquid urea, which is applied through dribble bars, is varied by soil type.

Each year Phil is looking for new ways to use his PA tools to improve efficiency and add to his bottom line. He hopes the manufacturers are working equally hard at improving the compatibility and service provided with their PA tools.

Details: Phil Longmire, 08 9078 7054, pblong@bigpond.com

Table 1. Multiple uses for PA tools to maximise return on investment, items with the same colour are the same but mounted in different machines.

Rate GPS controller Machine/equipment receiver Autosteer GIS or yield and signal monitor

2 line boom spray Fastrac 8250 HARDI 7036 Omnistar HP CASE CFX 750 SMS Basic Hardi 5500 and TOPCONX10

1400L HARDI front tank Omnistar HP SMS Basic Greenstar 2600

Conventional Fastrac 3190 SONIC 5036 Omnistar HP CASE CFX 750 Farmscan 24 V1 boom spray

Seeding tractor Case Steiger 535 Omnistar HP Case Pro 600 SMS Basic Topcon X20

Box Simplicity 12000 VRT

Bar Ausplow DBS 18.3m

4400l Liquid cart

Harvester 1 Case 7120 12m Macdon Trimble 252 HP Case Pro 600 SMS Basic Case Pro 600 Centre Draper

Harvester 2 Case 2388 Omnistar HP Greenstar Greenstar AFS 10.9m Macdon 2600 SF2

Self propelled Case 8870 Omnistar HP CASE CFX 750 SMS Basic - swather 10.9m Centre Draper

Chaser bin Fastrac 8250 30t bin Omnistar HP CASE CFX 750 SMS Basic -

PA in practice

10 Precision Ag News

FARM DETAILProperty: Contracting and management of over 400 hectares of vines

Location: Kingston SE, South Australia

Rainfall: 500mm annual rainfall plus irrigation

Soil: Sandy, sandy loam

Personnel: Steve Ingerson, plus five employees and up to 40 casuals

Enterprises: Contract pruning, post knocking, canopy management and harvesting.

The use of biomass scanning in vineyard management is returning benefits far beyond

improved spatial management. That is the experience of Steve Ingerson, Viticultural Solutions. Steve manages 20 hectares of grapes using biodynamic practices for Cape Jaffa Wines, as well as providing contract services to about 400 hectares of vines in South Australia’s Limestone Coast region.

“People tell me they know where the low and high vigour parts of their vineyard are located but until recently have not had the tools to measure if management is changing these,” says Steve.

“By scanning the vines roughly every month as we carry out routine operations, we can map vine vigour and how it is responding to our targeted management.”

This ability to quantify, visualise, geo-locate, target manage and then compare change over the season is helping Steve provide a better service and result in the vineyards he manages.

The workhorse of Steve’s field operations is a Pellenc multifunction tractor that can be easily fitted with tools for wire lifting, clipping, excess shoot removal, leaf plucking and harvesting. The addition of a GreenSeeker® RT100 biomass scanner to the tractor means that biomass data can be gathered at the same time as other operations.

Basically the GreenSeeker® measures green material, the greater the area of green material/biomass present the larger the reading. Data is presented as normalised difference vegetative index (NDVI). As the

scanner uses the near infrared and red wave lengths, subtle differences that would not be picked up by the human eye can be recorded.

Multiple scansThe first scan occurs in late November when the growing leaf canopy is lifted, trimmed and attached to the trellis to achieve more even coverage.

About a month later, a second scan occurs when high vigour vines are trimmed. In the same pass compost is spread under the lower vigour vines to help improve their performance in the following season. Both the trimming and composting operations are based on the data gathered during the initial scan (Figure 1).

“At Cape Jaffa, we estimated using the scans that only about 15 per cent of the vineyard actually needs compost. Being able to target the low vigour vines will help lift their performance and improve the evenness of the vineyard.”

Southern Precision has set-up the GreenSeeker® so that the data gathered on-the-go is displayed on the Trimble FMX touch screen as a coloured map. The FMX is integrated

PA in practice

Picture perfect vineyard management

Biomass data from a GreenSeeker® is being used to determine the degree to which these tools

are used in the vineyards by Steve Ingerson (left) pictured with employee Barry Martin. Photo: Kate Napper

Emma LeonardThe first year of using biomass scanning is providing positive benefits.

Precision Ag News 11

with a DGPS receiver that provides +/-30cm position accuracy.Data from each scan is provided to Grant Yates of Southern Precision who cleans the data to produce the final maps. Comparison of the on-the-go map and historic maps can be done using Farmworks software.In vineyards in these cooler growing districts, leaves are removed to help improve air and light penetration as fruit exposure is important for wine quality. Data from the second scan is used to determine how much leaf needs to be plucked. The operator is able to see from the on-screen map that a high vigour area is being entered and therefore more leaf needs to be removed in this area.

Quality sensingSteve’s objective is to try and maximise grape quality across the whole vineyard. While he does not

suggest that he can make every vine produce top quality grapes, with targeted management he hopes to increase the quality across the vineyard. Biomass scanning is being tested as a method to help ensure more grapes are picked when they are at their peak quality.About a week before harvest the vines are scanned to establish fruit density. For the previous scans the GreenSeeker® was set at 50 to 60cm above the height of the cordon wire. To scan for fruit density the sensor is lowered to about 30cm above this wire. Reducing the height of the sensors means the side rather than the top of the canopy is scanned, which is where most fruit is located. This pre-harvest scan is compared to the previous month’s scan and areas of difference are identified. These maps are provided to the winemaker and areas of differences are targeted for testing to establish grape quality in relation to harvesting time. Last year this method was tested on the semillon grapes and clearly identified areas where frosting had occurred. High vigour generally means more fruit but the fruit can be less ripe and ground-truthing is always required as vigour and fruit density can vary. Comparing maps generated from scans done at different heights can result in misinformation, which is another reason why ground-truthing is essential.“Having the maps makes you go and have a look to see why there is variation. We cannot determine quality just from the biomass map but it is helping us target quality testing and harvesting.

Vines are scanned at the same

time as routine operations are

carried out“Our initial experience is that biomass sensing is helping us refine the relationship between grape quality and canopy density. Our first season experience was positive and we plan to keep refining the process.”

As Steve points out, using precision viticulture (PV) is enabling the winemaker and not the harvester to blend the grapes. Without PV all

grapes would be harvested at the same time, so that premium and poor quality grapes are mixed together to produce an average product.

Steve has also found that the biomass maps are able to help viticulturalists demonstrate to buyers that they have the ability to exclude poorer fruit from the harvest, helping demand better price for the lower volume of higher quality fruit.

“While selective harvesting can make the process more complex, especially for contractors, the overall result can be an improved margin for all parties.”

Knock-on benefitsViticulture Solutions employs five staff and up to 40 casuals to provide support from pruning to harvest.

Providing those working in the vineyard with vigour maps is helping them visualise and accurately locate where they need to modify operations. For example, at pruning the vigour maps from the previous season were used to indicate where heavier or lighter pruning was required.

“Now the tractor driver is looking at the on-the-go map of biomass, rather than just listening to the radio, and this is helping them better understand why they are performing targeted operations.”

Steve has found the addition of the biomass data has triggered the interest of his team and they are now coming-up with new ideas and logging areas of the vineyard where they think further observations need to be made.

At pruning the tractor operator is able to log broken posts, drippers or other problems on the touch screen, so that a repair map can be produced. With this information the worst areas can be targeted first. Steve notes this information can be assessed against soil type to see if post damage is regularly worse in certain soil types.

Steve believes within five years every vineyard will be using PV tools, especially biomass scanning as part of its standard management.

Details: Steve Ingerson, Viticultural Solutions, 08 8768 5110, steveningerson@hotmail.com

PA in practice

Figure 1. A biomass map illustrates the degree of variation across this 1.8ha vine block. The higher the NDVI reading, which is usually between 0.5 and 0.9 for growing plants, the greater the biomass.

12 Precision Ag News

Large paddocks have resulted in greater management efficiency but this can be at the cost of

productivity gains on some soils. PA tools offer the opportunity for the best of both worlds - large paddock efficiency and soil-specific agronomic gains.

A trial at the Mallee Sustainable Farming Karoonda research site in the South Australian Mallee is now in the third year of evaluating the short and longer-term benefits of diverse and flexible break crop options for different positions in the landscape.

In the low-rainfall Mallee, breaks from consecutive cereal crops are increasingly needed, however break crops are risky. Early results show how some crops are suited to different soil zones and can offer different levels of benefit and risk.

Ground-truthed electromagnetic (EM38) soil maps combined with topography were used to locate the trial over the widest possible range of potential soil zones. In the break crop trial, three adjacent locations were selected. These ranged from deep sand to heavy swale soils with sub-soil constraints (Table 1). After the first year of the trial, the mid-slope was subdivided into two sections due to large variation in soil

properties and consequently crop performance in this zone (Figure 1). In 2009, 11 treatments were established and replicated in each zone. Four break crops were sown (CorrellA wheat, KaspaA field peas, SaharaA mustard and BevyA cereal rye) while the fifth treatment was volunteer pasture. All treatments were sown on May 15th and minimal stored moisture at depth was recorded. Seed rates and fertiliser rates were tailored to each crop but were constant across the soil types.In 2010, wheat (CorrellA) was sown on all the break crop plots and in the wheat on wheat control plots, while a new set of break crops was sown across the wheat plots. Hyola 50A canola replaced SaharaA mustard as the brassica and MandelupA lupins replaced peas. This was due to poor establishment of the mustard on the

mid and hill slope sites in 2009 and the lower erosion risk under lupin stubbles compared to peas. Again all crops were sown on the same day (May 27th) and the volunteer pasture received no fertiliser input.

In 2011 and 2012, all plots are/will be sown to wheat, the crop of preference for this region.

Each year plant biomass data is being gathered at late tillering, flowering and maturity. Soil water and nitrogen budgets are being generated together with crop simulations using the model APSIM. Grain yield and quality are being gathered at harvest and throughout the growing season, daily maximum and minimum temperature and rainfall are gathered from the hill and swale zones.

Crop disease and soil biology measurements being conducted

Table 1. Selected soil information for soil zones in a dune-swale paddock at Karoonda, SA.

EM range Clay % Boron (mg/kg)Zone (ECa dS/m) (0-20cm) (40-60cm)

Hill 0.1-0.5 4 3

Mid-slope 0.5-1.0 5 8

Swale 1-1.5 15 24

Innovation

Break crop selection by soil type

Photo: CSIRO

Bill Davoren, Rick Llewellyn and Therese McBeathThe soil-specific fit of break crop options in the Mallee cropping system is being explored.

Precision Ag News 13

by Vadakattu Gupta (CSIRO) are already showing large differences in biological effects between break crops and soil zones.

Results 2009In 2009, 192mm of rain was received in the growing season (decile 5 to 6), with a dry winter but good finishing rains.

On the swales, volunteer pasture dominated by annual ryegrass produced good early growth compared to the other parts of the paddock. By September, this zone was lower producing than the medic dominated pasture on the mid-slope and hill (respective total biomass yields 1.4t/ha, 2t/ha and 1.75t/ha).

While the mustard failed to establish on the mid-slope and the hills (increasingly sandy and non-wetting with altitude), it performed reasonably well on the heavier swales (0.6t/ha).

The final grain yield of peas was 0.7t/ha over all landscape positions, while rye grain yield on the hill (1.8 t/ha) and mid-slope (1.9t/ha) was more than double that on the flats (0.8t/ha). The effect of cutting (mock grazing) the rye resulted in the grain yield being about half of the un-cut treatments.

Wheat 2010Rainfall in 2010 resulted in a decile 10 year with just over half (342mm) falling in the growing season. Soil moisture was more variable than nitrogen. In the swale after pasture,

there was 48mm less moisture compared to after wheat but 30mm more in the mid-top zone under the same treatment.

Compared to wheat, pasture led to a 20 to 30kg/ha increase in starting soil nitrogen while peas had a more inconsistent effect (one to 18kg/ha). Both options provided a substantial yield benefit of approximately 1t/ha to the subsequent wheat crop.

On the lighter soils where the rye had yielded well in 2009, nitrogen was lower than after wheat. This meant that the only post-rye boost to wheat yield was recorded on the heavy swale (0.7t/ha).

Where mustard established in 2009 on the heavier swale zone a break benefit to the subsequent wheat of 1t/ha was recorded (swale 6.3t/ha, mid-bottom 5t/ha). After mustard, rhizoctonia was reduced significantly.

Grain proteins were similar in all zones irrespective of the previous break crop ranging from 10.7 per cent on the swale, 9.2 per cent in the mid-bottom, 9.7 per cent in the mid-top and 9.8 per cent on the hill.

Break crops 2010In the very wet 2010 season, all break crops performed very well on all soil types, although lupins preferred the lighter soil where they produced up to 1.5t/ha more than on the swale (Figure 1). The ‘grazing’ of cereal rye produced large amounts of early dry matter but reduced grain yield by 20 per cent on the sand and 30 per cent on the swale.

The full value of the different break options for different soil types will be determined by looking at second-year effects on wheat profitability and soil characteristics across multiple season-types. This work will continue until 2013 and is supported by the Grains Research and Development Corporation.

Details: Bill Davoren, Research Officer, CSIRO, 08 8303 8656, bill.davoren@csiro.au

www.topconpa.com

A complete line of precision application, autosteering and guidance systemsto help you increase efficiency, improve yields, reduce costs and protect the environment.

T R U E P R O D U C T I V I T Y

X20 with MapLINKMapping & VRC Software• Up to 11 simultaneous maps• 5 logging layers plus elevation • Maps control up to 8 tanks• Autosection control

System 110 GNSS Lightbar Guidance • Liquid rate & autosection control • Detachable lightbar• Simple to install, easily transferrable • Automatic coverage mapping

System 150 Precision Autosteering • Accuracy up to 2 cm• Liquid rate & autosection control • AES-25 Electric Steering Option• Automatic coverage mapping

NEW! System 350 Complete Control • New X30 console • Autosection control• ISO Virtual Terminal (VT) • AES-25 Electric Steering option

Canola Rye Rye cut Lupins Pasture

Yie

ld t

/ha

4.50

4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00

Swale

Mid-Bottom

Mid-Top

Hill

Figure 1. Grain yield of 2010 break crops and pasture biomass at flowering in the different trial locations.

Innovation

14 Precision Ag News

Soil constraints such as salinity, sodicity, acidity and phytotoxic concentrations of chloride

(Cl-) are major constraints to crop production in much of north-eastern Australia. Many of these constraints occur simultaneously both in top and subsoil layers. However, the soil constraints vary both spatially across the landscape and within soil profiles. In addition, complex interactions can exist between the constraints. These factors provide an opportunity for the application of site-specific management (SSM).

The concept of site-specific management is neither new nor complicated. It has been practised since ancient times. However, modern farming practices and equipment have resulted in large fields and the application of uniform rates of input applied over large areas. Consequently, nutrient use efficiency has reduced as inputs were applied at an inappropriate rate in some parts of the field, especially areas with soil constraints.

Uniform applications of fertiliser nutrients to the constrained parts of a field result in an economic loss and present a greater risk of nutrient losses in leaching and runoff (Wong et al. 2006).

The aim in this study was to quantify the potential economic benefits of site-specific soil and nutrient

management on a case study farm from north-eastern Australia.

SSMA 64 hectare field with known significant spatial variability in grain yield was selected near Biloela, Queensland. Three potential management classes (PMC) were created using k-means classification of the interpolated data of apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) and the available years of grain yield maps.

Uniform applications of

fertiliser nutrients to the constrained soils result in an

economic lossA minimum of four locations was randomly selected within each potential management class for soil sampling. Soil at each site was analysed for pH, electric conductivity (ECa), chloride, clay content, and cations at 0 to 10cm and then 20cm intervals to depth. Hydraulic characteristics of the soil were measured within each class and characterised for bulk density, drained upper limit (DUL), crop lower limit (CLL) and plant available water capacity (PAWC).

In 2009, replicated fertiliser strips were applied at 0 and 23 kilograms of nitrogen per hectare (kgN/ha) across the field aligned in the direction of management operations, while the rest of the field received 46kgN/ha.

Wheat was sown and at crop maturity, plant samples from quadrates were taken within each nitrogen rate strip in each PMC. Nitrogen requirement for each class was calculated using yield potential, protein goal and available nitrogen present in each class.

Partial gross margins were calculated for uniform and variable rate management using standard wheat grain prices of $200/t, and $1000/t for urea fertiliser.

Soil test resultsThree potential management classes were identified (Figure 1):

1. A low yielding class – 29 hectares (mean yield=1.27t/ha; mean ECa=122mS/m; PAWC=78mm);

2. A medium yielding class – 19 hectares (mean yield=1.99t/ha; mean ECa=89mS/m; mean PAWC=112mm); and

3. A high yielding class – 16 hectares (mean yield=3.36t/ha; mean ECa=56mS/m; PAWC=192mm).

Innovation

Site-specific soil and nutrient management

Yash Dang (left) discusses the use of variable rate fertiliser on soils with subsoil

constraints at one of the PA meetings in the GRDC Northern Region.

Yash DangSoil constraints can limit yield potential. Site specific management offers a means of optimising returns on constrained and unconstrained areas.

Precision Ag News 15

Figure 1. Potential management classes based on historic grain yield and ECa.

Soil bulk density in the soil profile (0 to 1.5m) was significantly higher in low yielding class compared with medium and high yielding classes. However, differences in medium and high yielding class were not significant. High bulk density reduces porosity and makes it harder for roots to extract moisture.

Soil chloride was significantly higher (>800mg/kg) below 0.8m depth in low and medium yielding classes compared with high yielding classes. High chloride in subsoil has been shown to restrict the ability of wheat roots to extract soil water and thus results in reduced yields.

Exchangeable magnesium was significantly higher (>25%) in low yielding class compared with medium and high yielding classes at all soil depths, however differences between the medium and high yielding classes were significant only

at 0.4 and 0.8m soil depths. The presence of an excessive extractable magnesium results in soil dispersion thereby reducing water infiltration.

Available nitrogen (NO3-N below 0.6m depth) was significantly higher in low and medium yielding classes compared with high yielding class. The presence of unused nitrogen in the poorest performing parts of the field poses the greatest risk of nitrogen leaching and denitrification losses. This creates the greatest financial and environmental risk.

Soil moisture at the crop lower limit was significantly higher in low and medium yielding classes than the high yielding class at 0.6m soil depth (Figure 1).

These tests identified that the presence of soil constraints increased the lower limit of soil moisture. This reduces plant available water and leads to the lower yield. These limitations also indicate a high risk of deep drainage in these areas of the field.

The cost of uniform applicationsNitrogen requirement was calculated for each of the potential management classes using the formula:

N requirement (kg/ha) = (yield potential x protein goal x 1.75 x 2) - NO3-N to 0.9m

No significant response to applied nitrogen was obtained in low yielding areas. However, a significant increase in wheat grain yield was obtained with increasing rates of nitrogen application in both medium and high yielding zones (Figure 2).

It was calculated that applying the blanket rate of 46kgN/ha across the whole field resulted in 2.1t of urea being wasted (Table 1).

In low-yielding areas of the field (29ha) testing identified substantial reserves of available nitrogen in the soil profile from previous uniform nitrogen applications. Applying a rate of 46kgN/ha was calculated to result in net wastage of 2.0t urea.

With the standard price of urea ($1000/t) this is worth $100/ha/annum.

In addition, this wastage increases the potential environmental pollution due to nitrate-N leaching into ground water.

On the other hand, the high yielding areas of the field (16ha) were under fertilised. These areas were calculated to require 114kgN/ha or an additional 3.9t urea across the 16ha if the potential yield of 3.3t/ha was to be achieved. That is 1.15t/ha more than the average, representing about $220/ha extra income across this area.

Figure 2. Wheat yield response to varying applied nitrogen rates in the low, medium, and high yielding management classes.

Details: Dr Yash Dang, Senior Scientist (Soil and Nutrient Management), 07 4529 1245, Yash.Dang@derm.qld.gov.au

Table 1. Gross margin analysis for comparisons between field-uniform application of nitrogen (46 kg N/ha) and that under optimal rate management.

Low Medium High Field yielding yielding yielding average class class class (64ha) (20ha) (28ha) (16ha)

Average wheat 1.27 2.22 3.36 2.21yield (t/ha)

Nitrogen requirement 59 100 150 101(kg/ha)a

Available NO3-N in 119 55 36 700–0.9m soil (kg/ha)

Actual N required 0 45 114 31(kg/ha)b

Consequence of uniform 2.0t urea 0.06t urea 3.9t urea 2.1t urea N application waste required required wasted

a Calculated using equation: N requirement (kg/ha) = (yield potential x protein goal x 1.75 x 2) - NO3-N to 0.9m;

b Calculated as N requirement – available NO3-N in 0–0.90 m soil

Innovation

Give variable rate a go. This is Darren Jensen’s advice to growers who have equipment

that is variable rate ready.

Darren provided one of the trial paddocks used by Yash Dang in his subsoil constraints and nutrition project. Being involved with this project has revolutionised Darren’s nutrient management.

While rotations and cropping frequency on his 1750 hectare business in central Queensland are determined by the season, the general aim is to follow a grain crop with a legume.

In 2010, the entire area was sown to wheat. Due to the wet season that followed, summer crops of mungbeans or grain sorghum were then sown across the farm. Despite some crops being flooded, the mungbeans averaged 1.7t/ha, which was tremendous at the record prices and the sorghum 3.4t/ha, which was

a little disappointing considering how much rain it had received.Due to the continuing wet, wheat was sown again in 2011 across all but 220 hectares, which was sown to a summer crop of sorghum. The wheat is expected to average 3.2t/ha. Previously, a blanket rate of 46kgN/ha was applied at seeding when the rotation is wheat on wheat. Up to 115kgN/ha has been applied across the season when double cropping. Since seeing the results from Yash Dang’s trial paddock, Darren has doubled the nitrogen rate on the better areas of his paddocks and cut it back on the poorer areas, which suffer from subsoil constraints. To achieve higher rates, a foliar application of UAN is being applied as well as granular urea at seeding. While some paddocks have been EM surveyed, most of the change in fertiliser rate is being based on up to 10 years of yield data.

Based on Yash Dang’s suggestion, Darren applied 2t/ha of gypsum to the poorer parts of the trial paddock. So far, results have been excellent with improved crop growth which Darren hopes will also translate into yield. Now Darren is looking to use foliar applications of calcium in parts of the paddock to improve the crop’s magnesium to calcium ratio.Based on his initial experience of adopting variable rate, Darren encourages growers to have a go. He was surprised to find that he could increase even the best parts of his paddock with more fertiliser and that he was wasting inputs in other parts.“Try putting double the rate of nitrogen on the best and worst parts of the paddock and map the results from the yield data, you could be surprised at what you find,” said Darren.

Details: Darren Jensen, the4jensens@bigpond.com

Unbeatable Global Coverage

OmniSTAR’s reliable, accurate services benefit machine guidance and precision farming, providing:

• Repeatable Positioning• Worldwide Coverage• Real-time Positioning On The Move

With OmniSTAR you can save time and money, with no gaps and no overlaps, optimising yield, while minimising input costs.

OmniSTAR is the market leader in providing real-time satellite delivered positioning solutions.

www.omnistar.com.au | 1800 062 221

Innovation

Give VR a goEmma Leonard

Precision Ag News 17

The aim of modern micro-irrigation systems in orchards and vineyards is to match crop

water supply (irrigation volume) with crop water requirement to optimise plant performance and minimise water losses. This study highlights the importance of adjusting irrigation volumes to account for differences in tree size and demonstrates a new method for obtaining detailed plant size information. Data from aerial images of Goulburn Valley and Sunraysia orchard and vineyard blocks was analysed to determine the crop water requirements of individual plants. A large range in crop water requirements was found between and within blocks of pears, apples, peaches, grapevines, citrus and almonds. Water losses and yield penalties associated with different irrigation strategies were determined in this study, which was supported by the Department of Primary Industries Victoria and the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures.

BackgroundOrchard and vineyard water use efficiency is maximised when crop water supply (irrigation volume) meets crop water requirement, so that yield and quality are uncompromised and water losses are minimised. Modern micro-irrigation systems provide growers with a high degree of control of both the timing and duration of irrigation events. However, spatial variation in crop water requirement can limit a grower’s ability to match water supply to water requirement.

Tree and vine canopy cover (CC) is highly variable in orchards and vineyards. Such variability has immediate implications for irrigation, with small plants using less water than large plants due to differences in canopy size. Irrigating all trees or vines with the same amount of water will inevitably lead to water losses, due to drainage from over-irrigation of small plants and/or yield penalties associated with under-irrigation, that is water stress, of large plants. Canopy cover is relatively simple to estimate with computer analysis of aerial images. CC of individual trees within a block can be readily determined providing comprehensive data on both crop water requirement and potential yield. Modelling can then be applied to tree scale data of crop water requirement and potential yield to estimate the water losses and yield penalties associated with failure to match crop water supply to crop water requirement. The objective of this study was to determine the CC variability and crop water requirement variability within blocks in the Goulburn Valley and Sunraysia irrigation districts. Crop water requirement, water losses and yield penalties were determined for 256 orchard and vineyard blocks based on tree-scale estimates of CC derived from aerial images.

Aerial image analysisAerial images (resolution 30cm/pixel) of the Goulburn Valley (taken in December 2009) and Sunraysia (taken in 2006) irrigation districts were linked to orchard and vineyard

information supplied by SPC Ardmona (2010; Goulburn Valley) and SunRISE21 (2007; Sunraysia) allowing identification of crop type. Blocks representing the major crops within the districts were randomly selected (excluding blocks less than three years old) and data was extracted from the images to determine fractional CC of individual plants within the blocks (Figure 1).

Calculation of crop water requirement, water losses and yield penaltiesCrop water requirement was calculated from the equation:

Crop water = 1.3 × CC × ETorequirement

Where:• ETo was reference crop

evapotranspiration for the 2009/2010 season; and

• CCwascanopycoverdeterminedfrom aerial photographs.

Cumulative ETo was approximately 905mm (November to April) in the Goulburn Valley (www.irrigateway.net) and 1110mm (October to April) in Sunraysia (www.lmw.vic.gov.au).A generic crop water production function was used to relate potential yield to crop water supply such that application of less water than required resulted in a yield penalty (expressed as a per cent reduction in potential yield) and supply greater than crop water requirement resulted in water loss (expressed as a per cent of crop water supply).

Unbeatable Global Coverage

OmniSTAR’s reliable, accurate services benefit machine guidance and precision farming, providing:

• Repeatable Positioning• Worldwide Coverage• Real-time Positioning On The Move

With OmniSTAR you can save time and money, with no gaps and no overlaps, optimising yield, while minimising input costs.

OmniSTAR is the market leader in providing real-time satellite delivered positioning solutions.

www.omnistar.com.au | 1800 062 221

InnovationAerial images capture water requirementLexie McClymont and Ian GoodwinAdjusting irrigation to canopy size saves water without reducing production Photo: Emma Leonard

18 Precision Ag News

Water losses and yield penalties were calculated for two irrigation strategies:1. Crop water supply matched

maximum crop water requirement of the block.

2. Crop water supply matched mean crop water requirement of the block.

Two practical assumptions were made. Firstly that no alternative water was available, that is, plants were not able to access groundwater or water from nearby creeks, dams or channels, and secondly, that water application rates were uniform.

Canopy coverAcross the regions, mean canopy cover of blocks varied three to six-fold, depending on crop type (Table 1). Effectively, this created a range in crop water requirement from 1.6 to 13.1ML/ha for the sampled blocks. On average for the selected crops, the crop water requirement of the majority of trees within a block fell within ± 0.8 to 1.5ML/ha of the mean.

Water losses and yield penaltiesWithin-block crop water requirement of pear, apple, peach, almond and citrus orchards and vineyards was found to be highly variable. Estimates of average water losses for each crop type under the strategy where crop water supply matched maximum crop water requirement were substantial, typically 20 to 25 per cent of water applied (1.6 to 2.9ML/ha). In contrast, the strategy where crop water supply matched mean crop water requirement resulted in low average water loss predictions to just three to four per cent (0.1

to 0.4ML/ha) but created average yield penalties of five to seven per cent. Maximum yield penalties were 12, 14, 9, 10, 11 and 13 per cent respectively for pear, apple, peach, grape, citrus and almond crops. While irrigating a block to the mean crop water requirement is desirable in terms of limiting water losses, the yield penalties associated with this practice could mean that it is more economically beneficial to irrigate to meet maximum crop water requirement.

These findings highlight the need to adjust irrigation inputs according to the canopy cover characteristics of individual blocks. Applying a regional mean crop water requirement will result in under- and over-irrigation of blocks.

Theoretical analysis of within-block variability suggests substantial impacts on drainage and yield, depending on irrigation strategy.

Field experiments are currently being conducted to demonstrate irrigation scheduling based on canopy cover. Site specific irrigation management, whereby blocks are divided to reduce variability in crop water requirement, is being studied. The impacts of these approaches on water use, yield, fruit quality and plant water status will be reported in future articles.

Details: Dr Lexie McClymont and Dr Ian Goodwin, Department of Primary Industries, 03 5833 5260, lexie.mcclymont@dpi.vic.gov.au

Table 1. Average and range of mean block canopy cover (CC) for crops in the Goulburn Valley and Sunraysia irrigation districts. No. = number of orchard blocks.

District Crop Mean CC Range No.

Goulburn Valley Pear 0.43 0.17 – 0.74 70

Apple 0.43 0.15 – 0.63 33

Peach 0.41 0.14 – 0.77 31

Sunraysia Grape 0.55 0.19 – 0.78 72

Citrus 0.41 0.20 – 0.65 30

Almond 0.65 0.19 – 0.91 20

Innovation

Figure 1. Aerial image of orchard blocks within the Goulburn Valley with pear (blue), apple (red) and peach (pink) blocks identified. Data was extracted from the images to determine fractional canopy cover of individual plants within the blocks.

CNH 1005

Be Ready.

Visit www.caseih.com for the details and address of your nearest Case IH dealer.

HIGH ACCURACY AT AN AFFORDABLE PRICEThe EZ-Pilot™ assisted steering system turns the steering wheel for you with an electric-motor drive using GPS guidance from the FM-750™ display and FM-1000™ integrated display. So now you can focus on all the other tasks you need to do in the field while the EZ-Pilot™ system keeps you on track.Check with your local Case IH dealer today about the new Case IH EZ-Pilot™ assisted-steering system which delivers:• high performance,• easy installation,• T3 enhanced terrain compensation technology, and• supports a variety of vehicle types including tractors, tracked vehicles,

combines, articulated tractors, floaters and self-propelled sprayers.

Powered by

FM-750™ FM-1000™

32 41 5 6 7

32 41 5

20 1

CNH1011 CIH Ad.indd 1 18/10/11 5:05 PM

20 Precision Ag News

Adoption of variable rate (VR) application technology in WA is now at about 20 per cent

of grain growers. This is up from less than five per cent a few years ago. Many growers report they are actively researching and planning to adopt the technology.

The challenge for agribusiness is to identify and service these differing levels of PA adoption while recognising that VR cannot be transformed into a one-size-fits-all package.

It has been assumed that the pattern of adoption of PA would follow the traditional curve, which classifies growers into innovators, early adopters, early and late majority and laggards. This pattern assumes that the needs of each group are similar and only differ as to when adoption occurs.

While this is true for the uptake of guidance and spray sectioning, VR is different because the needs and assistance required to support adoption vary from group to group. In working with more than 40 grain growers on adoption of VR over the last five years, we can discern at least five groupings of growers who have different needs in the adoption process.

Understanding these groups offers agribusiness assistance in targeting suitable PA support services to growers.

1. Early adopter and self-sufficient growers are the first group. These growers have developed a VR program with the assistance of research project support. They are usually computer savvy and educated. They research the practices that they want to

adopt. They are able to diagnose and correct problems related to hardware and software.

This group needs little additional support. Local support for hardware related issues is the greatest need, especially if it is not available in their region.

2. Growers who have investigated the economics of VR but need assistance to reach self-sufficiency are the second group. This group is characterised by young, well educated farmers. They tend to have newer equipment that is VR capable. They need unbiased recommendations for new hardware and assistance to create a system from mismatched hardware. They have the ability to develop a full VR program for the farm if they receive training in the advanced use of their PA software and would participate in research projects to develop a VR program. With time they may use a PA consultant to carry out routine data analysis.

3. The third group consists of farmers who prefer to have others do the data analysis and provide it to them for decision making. These people either do not have the confidence in their ability or time to work with the industry software to develop a VR program. They are likely to have multiple years of yield data but have not used the information to develop a VR program. They are willing to pay for a service but want to be part of the decision making process. Yield maps are used to confirm or fine-tune their own knowledge of paddock variability. They are typically large operators with newer

machines and therefore machinery compatibility is less of an issue.

4. Observers looking to become involved in VR are the fourth group. A characteristic of this group is that they intend to adopt, if and when they have the necessary equipment. Some are at risk of being sold a “quick fix” while others are willing to sit back and wait until local support develops. They are often smaller operators who are unable to operate the hardware and lack the data layers to assist in developing a VR program. They need unbiased hardware support and training to develop the VR program or knowledge of what to request if they employ a PA consultant.

5. Lapsed adopters are the fifth group. These are often early adopters who employed a PA consultant or were involved in a research program. They often dis-adopted due to the loss of assistance and/or the consulting industry being unable to meet their needs in a timely way. They are usually large operators with new equipment, and hence do not have an equipment compatibility issue. They require yearly support for the PA program and are willing to pay if a service exists that meets their needs. They are pragmatic and will fall back to using blanket rates when assistance is not available.

Details: Roger Mandel, Curtin University, 08 9690 1526, R.Mandel@curtin.edu.auDr Michael Robertson, CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, 08 9333 6461, michael.robertson@csiro.au

Development and demonstration

More or less?Roger Mandel and Michael Robertson.

Understanding growers’ needs is especially important if agribusiness is to provide PA support services.

Peter Treloar, PA specialist with Vision Ag. Photo: Emma Lenoard

The EZ-Pilot™ assisted steering system turns the steering wheel for you with an electric-motor drive using GPS guidance from the FM-750™ display or FM-1000™ integrated display.

Powered byVisit www.newhollanddealers.com.au

for the location of your nearest New Holland Dealer.

www.newhollandplm.com

Compatible Displays Your New Holland dealer offers a range of display options varying in capability and price.

32 41 5 6 7 32 41 5 20 1

available aCCuraCies

Fm-750™ Fm-1000™

see the NeW ez-pilot™ aFForDable assisteD-steeriNg system toDay at your loCal NeW hollaND Dealer

PRECISION LANDMANAGEMENT

Precision Farming & Guidance Systems

So now you can both ease fatigue and focus on all of the other tasks such as sprayer seeder performance, improving job quality and crop yields, while the system keeps you strictly on track. Too easy!

Check with your local dealer today about the New Holland EZ-Pilot™ assisted-steering system’s features which include:

• high performance,

• easy installation,

• uses the vehicles steering wheel and telescoping functionality

• T3 enhanced terrain compensation technology, and

• supports a variety of vehicle types including tractors (tracked and wheeled), combines, articulated tractors, floaters and self-propelled sprayers.

For more information about the EZ-Pilot™ assisted steering system, see your local New Holland dealer or visit www.newholland.com

ez-pilot™

New Holland - Own a Bright Future

CN

H10

08

CNH1008 NH EZ-Pilot.indd 1 18/10/11 4:42 PM

22 Precision Ag News

Australia’s first Graduate Certificate in Precision Agriculture program will be

offered by the University of New England (UNE), commencing in January 2012.

This study program is based on more than 20 years’ experience within the University’s Precision Agriculture Research Group. Researchers in this team continue to work in the development and application of precision agriculture technologies in a variety of industries including broadacre cropping, horticulture, viticulture, and livestock systems.

The industry-informed course involves the completion of four semester-long units. Study can be done internally or externally and part-time over one or two years.

The two core units, ”Precision Agriculture” and “Introduction to Geographical Information Systems”, cover:

• globalnavigationsatellitesystems(GNSS) and their application;

• handlingspatialdataandthepractical use of geographic information systems (GIS);

• theapplicationofremotesensingof agricultural landscapes;

• soil,vegetationandyieldvariability and the sensors used to measure variation;

• livestocktrackingandpasturemanagement systems;

• theeconomicsofprecisionagriculture; and

• issuesassociatedwiththeadoption of new technologies.

Rural Science undergraduates at UNE have already been following these courses as core or elective topics but this is the first time they have been brought together as an accredited, independent qualification.

Fourth year Rural Science student, Jamie Barwick, has completed both units and hopes they will help him secure a position in the PA industry.

This program meets a

significant need to train experts

in PA“The Precision Agriculture unit gave me a really good background in all the PA technologies available, while the GIS course taught me how to use spatial management software to analyse different sources of spatial data,” said Jamie.

Students following the Graduate Certificate in Precision Agriculture program will have the opportunity to apply their skills through hands-on experience with current and emerging precision agriculture technologies. Such technologies will include EM38 soil sensors, GNSS survey equipment, ground-based active optical sensors, airborne optical sensors, livestock tracking technologies, the ‘Pastures from

Space’ program, and both farm-specific and generic geographical information systems.

A pool of elective units, from which students will select and complete two, includes:

• businessskillsforthe agricultural consultant;

• remotesensingand image analysis;

• spatialanalysisandmodelling;

• remotesensingand surveying; and

• aresearchprojectunitwithaprecision agriculture focus.

PA is a rapidly developing field of research and commercial activity both in the more traditional plant industries and also increasingly in the livestock sector.

This Graduate Certificate program meets a significant need to train experts in this field. The industry is crying out for people who can assist in the implementation of precision agriculture technologies.

The Graduate Certificate in Precision Agriculture course is available for study both on and off campus, and can be completed part-time over one or two years.

Details: Dr Mark Trotter, award coordinator of the Graduate Certificate in PA, University of New England, 0447 441 841, mtrotter@une.edu.au http://www.une.edu.au/parg/

Development and demonstration

New certificate in PAMark Trotter

Students give the thumbs-up to PA in the curriculum.

Senior PARG Technical Officer Derek Schneider demonstrating how to undertake an on-the-go

biomass and EM38 survey as part of the UNE PA course. Photo: David Elkins

1800 800 981 | JohnDeere.com.au

What’s the difference between a good season and a great season?We can help you find out.

Capturing data, especially at harvest time, gives you vital information that can help improve your farming practices, achieve greater productivity, reduce input costs and compare trends over time.

Collect and store agronomic and field data as you plant, spray or harvest with Field Doc™ and Harvest Doc™ as part of a John Deere documentation solution.

Armed with this data you can create map-based prescriptions and reports, refine your precision farming strategy and make better decisions to ensure your future.

Harvest more than just your crop. Talk to your local John Deere dealer today.

Great results start today

IPL6223MFMG_NA_A4.indd 1 10/10/11 3:58 PM