Category Archives: Soil

AgTech, Drainage, Orchard, Plant Health, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Soil

Orchard Drainage Surveys

June 21, 2019 LandWISE Admin Leave a comment

The Smart Tools for Orchard Drainage project has completed key steps to prepare and implement inter-row land levelling. Terrain analysis has provided a clear indication that a gentle gradient could be developed along the inter-row with minimal soil movement. However, the effects of reducing ponding through slight land shaping would be substantial for management and health and safety in the orchard.

Orchard Contour Mapping

LiDAR data from Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and Gisborne District Council were used to assess the feasibility of inter-row land levelling in the orchard blocks of interest. LiDAR (light detection and ranging) is a type of airborne optical sensing that is used to generate a model of the earth’s surface. It let us create contour maps and look at ground profiles (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Steps for creating interrow profiles: a – LiDAR raw data showing bare earth points (brown) and above ground points (green) from rows of trees (note the difference in the frequency of green points indicating greater tree canopy in the bottom rows in the image); b – contour map created from digital elevation model; c – interrow profiles lines over aerial image; and d – example of an interrow profile

The inter-row profiles were used as a ‘first look’ to estimate the fall across the orchard and provide an indication of the approximate amount of soil to be shifted to remove and prevent areas of ponding.

We also surveyed using ground-based vehicles (quad bike or tractor) with RTK GPS (Figure 2). This system has a vertical accuracy of approximately 20 mm. Corrected elevation data were recorded along the inter-rows using WM-Drain. These data were also used to create accurate interrow profiles.

Figure 2. RTK GPS set up on ground-based vehicles at orchards near Gisborne and Napier

Figure 3: Comparison of profiles generated from LiDAR data (grey line) and ground based RKT survey (red line)

The comparison of the different methods of generating profiles has given confidence that LiDAR is useful for an initial block analysis.

Ponding maps

Two of the orchards were visited after a significant rain event (30+ mm over a weekend). Locations of ponding were collected using the ESRI Collector smartphone app and an EOS Arrow SBAS GPS with a horizontal accuracy of 30-40cm. The interrows at one orchard were covered by Extenday, which meant the areas of shallow ponding were difficult to identify (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Recording ponding areas in the orchards’ interrows after a significant rain event

A drainage analysis created in Optisurface was used as a base map to display ponding locations (Figure 7). After this rain event, the majority of areas of ponding appeared to be located within areas identified by the drainage analysis as areas where ponding would occur.

Figure 7: Map of OptiSurface drainage analysis and measured ponding spots – brown represents drier areas and blue/purple areas of ponding. Points locate areas of ponding after a significant rain event

Figure 8: Example of ruts highlighting the issues of ponding and mud splash on the fruit.

The ponding locations were also compared to the interrow profiles. Although no formal analysis was completed, many of the ponding spots appear to match dips in the profiles (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Profiles generated from LiDAR data (grey line) and ground based RKT survey (red line) with ponding areas after a significant rain event identified (blue dots)

Rut depth measurements

The key measurement for monitoring the effectiveness of the different drainage treatments will be the formation of ruts. A sled has been specifically designed to measure and record the depth of ruts and the location within the orchard blocks, see Figure 10.

The sled uses a linear transducer to measure the difference in height between the bottom of the wheel ruts and the ground surface between the wheel tracks. The location is recorded using the SBAS positioning system with an EOS Arrow 100 GPS with a horizontal accuracy of approximately 0.3-0.4m. The data was recorded on a smartphone using an app, Rut-O-Meter. Points are recorded approximately every 0.2m depending on travel speed as the sled was towed by a quadbike along orchard rows.

Figure 10: Sled design to measure rut depth, measuring the difference in height between the bottom of the wheel tracks and the centre of the inter-row.

The average rut depth (of the left and right wheel tracks) throughout the trial block was measured prior to the soil being cultivated. An example of the rut depth along an orchard row and the corresponding elevation profile are presented in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Example of matching rut depth measurements (a) and elevation profile (b).om the rut measuring sled is presented in Figure 18. The measured rut depths appear to correspond to the drainage analysis (Figure 19) completed in OptiSurface.

A map from the rut measurements is shown in Figure 12. Deeper ruts are darker blue. Pale yellow is no rutting or the inter-row is lower than the wheel tracks. This compares well with the OptiSurface generated ponding map of the block (Figure 13).

Figure 11: Map created from the rut depth measurements from the trial block

Figure 13: OptiSurface drainage and ponding analysis from RTK survey of the trial block

Conclusions

Analysis of LiDAR data and ground based RTK elevation data has shown that land levelling should be possible with minimal soil movement.
The ground based RTK survey, with the GPS antenna on a 2m pole has proven that the connection is not interrupted through dense tree canopies.
The use of the SBAS system, a cell phone and EOS Arrow GPS receiver allows information to be recorded against individual trees, with an accuracy of 30-40cm, even in dense tree canopy.
The ponding areas identified in the orchard after a significant rain event appear to show a relationship to the OptiSurface drainage analysis.
The Rut-O-Meter mapping shows good agreement with the other surveys

Project work by Page Bloomer Associates for NZ Apples and Pears Inc and MPI Sustainable Farming Fund

Agronomy, AgTech, Conference, Drainage, events, Fertiliser, Nutrients, Orchard, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Soil, Vegetables, Weeds

LandWISE 2019: Rethinking Best Practice

May 20, 2019 LandWISE Admin

22-23 May 2019
Havelock North

Do we really know why we farm as we do? Or are we constrained in ways we just don’t see?

Often our current practices have evolved over a very long time – thousands of years of human history, decades of technology developments. Remember the space shuttle and the horse’s rear? We’ve long forgotten some of the reasons behind what we do, so maybe it is time for a reset!

LandWISE was awarded four significant new projects that started in 2018. They cover enhanced GPS, precision drainage for orchards, nitrates in fresh vegetable production and herbicide resistance management. They’ll be among the topics discussed at LandWISE 2019.

LandWISE 2019 Platinum Sponsors

LandWISE 2019 Gold Sponsors

Thank you to our other sponsors…

Agronomy, Plant Health, Precision Agriculture, Research, Soil, Vegetables, viticulture

Regenerative Agriculture – Research Programme to Explore New Pathways for Growers and Farmers

March 4, 2019 Georgia O'Brien Leave a comment

Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research is leading a new research proposal called Regenerative Agriculture, and is looking for a variety of growers and farmers to participate.

The research proposal is seeking government funding to bring together cutting edge science and innovative farming practices that will deliver:

Greater profit for farmers and growers
Superior quality food and fibre
Reduced environmental impact
Resilience for farms, businesses, and families
Capability planning for extreme weather events

If you are a farmer or grower interested in being a part of this project, register your details here: https://goo.gl/forms/EPnTIgUfnNVA906o1

This research project will measure a large host of on-farm indicators of environmental, economic, and social sustainability. For the full list see: https://www.facebook.com/WhereToForNZagriculture

Environmental sustainability measurements will comprise soil and biodiversity values. Soils will be assessed by measures of: soil structural qualities, soil function, and soil toxicity. Biodiversity will be assessed by: earthworm counts, bird, insect, and aboveground plant species richness, abundance of root symbiotic fungi and much more…

Economic sustainability will be assessed through the farm profit metrics of plant DM per ha, and $ revenue/DM less input cost.

Production quality will be monitored in forages and crops through dry matter, total fat and protein content, vitamin C and E concentration, available carbohydrates, as well as heavy metal content. Aspects of food safety will also be included such as pesticide and herbicide residuals in forages and crops. Animal welfare measurements will be included in pastoral systems, via physiological oxidative stress of grazing animals.

Finally, wellbeing (a contributor to social sustainability) will be assessed via a multiple choice questionnaire for farmers to complete. For the full list of measurements to be included in this study, please go to: https://www.facebook.com/WhereToForNZagriculture/photos/rpp.419655358790231/419661105456323/?type=3&theater

These measurements will be free, and available to the farmer or grower as they are collected.

For organisations, businesses, scientists, or other non-farming individuals wanting to participate in the Regenerative Agriculture project, register your interest here: https://goo.gl/forms/2leCr8nbrrDbTESl2

For more information, please contact Gwen Grelet at GreletG@LandcareResearch.co.nz

Fertiliser, Nutrients, Projects, Research, Soil, Vegetables, Water

Fertiliser Calibration Assessments

February 7, 2019 Dan Bloomer

One of the four key areas within the Future Proofing Vegetable Production project aims to improve the accuracy of fertiliser applied. This work is part of the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund “Future Proofing Vegetable Production” project, co-funded by Horizons Regional Council, Potatoes NZ, Gisborne District Council, Ballance AgriNutrients and LandWISE.

Growers were invited to participate in having their equipment assessed. Equipment was tested with growers in both Horowhenua and Gisborne. Ten fertiliser applicators have been assessed through working with eight growers. Multiple settings or products were tested for some equipment.

In-Field Fertiliser Applicator Calibration Test

Performance assessment of fertiliser application equipment provides information on actual rates applied and the evenness of application. Ensuring that fertiliser is applied evenly minimises the risk of leaching if over application occurs, or the risk of yield penalties if under application occurs where nutrient availability is limiting plant growth. Growers were confident their equipment was spreading evenly, however the assessment results show there is room for improvement.

Fertiliser application equipment measured can be split into two main categories:

Broadcast fertiliser spreaders (spinning disc, oscillating spout)
Direct placement machines (banders, side dressers and planters)

Figure 1: Examples of fertiliser application methods commonly used in vegetable growing systems: broadcast (left), potato planter (centre), and modified into 2 row bander (right)

Methodologies

Different methodologies are appropriate for broadcast versus direct placement equipment.

Broadcast fertiliser spreaders were tested according to the FertSpread Protocol: see www.fertspread.nz
Power take off driven placement equipment (banders or adapted oscillating spouts) were assessed by placing buckets under the outlets and collecting fertiliser for a measured time (~30 – 60 Seconds). By determining travel speed the application rate can be calculated.
Ground driven equipment (most side dressers and planters) were assessed by collecting fertiliser from outlets over a set distance in-field or from 20-wheel rotations in static testing.

Tests were repeated twice, however where results between tests appeared quite different, the test was repeated up to six times. For some machines multiple settings or fertiliser products were tested.

Direct placement machines were assessed using a calibration calculator that has been developed over the period of testing this equipment as there is currently no industry accepted assessment calculator available.

The draft fertiliser calibration calculator for the assessment of direct application machines is included in the supporting documentation. This spreadsheet calculates and reports a wide range of statistics to assess performance.

Three key performance indicators are suggested:

Target application rate vs. actual rate applied
Variation between outlets/spouts
Variation between test runs

Results

The application variability of the direct placement equipment tested varied quite markedly; from 0.4% CV to 26.4% CV. A summary of the test results for direct application equipment is provided in Table 1.

All but one of the machines tested are within the SpreadMark accepted performance for broadcast spreaders applying nitrogen-based fertilisers.

The actual rates of fertiliser applied varied from the target rates. In one case the actual average rate applied was 48% of the target rate, the greatest over application was 152% of the target rate.

Fewer broadcast spreaders were assessed as direct placement machines are more commonly used in intensive vegetable production systems. Table 2 provides a summary of the two broadcast spreaders assessed.

Figure 2 gives a snapshot of part of the report produced through the FertSpread website. In this example, if the grower reduced their bout width from 22.5m to 19m, the machine performance would be within the acceptable level for nitrogen and non-nitrogen fertilisers.

Discussion

Assessments have been completed on a range of fertiliser application equipment in both Levin and Gisborne. Most of the equipment tested has been direct application (banders, planters and side dressers), rather than broadcast spreaders. Fertiliser applications for vegetable production are predominantly applied as banded strips along the bed or scarified during planting or as a side dressing. There is currently no accepted protocol for the assessment of this type of equipment.

Direct fertiliser application (banders, side dressers)

To enable the assessments to be completed within the project, a draft protocol and fertiliser calibration calculator for direct applicators has been developed and is being refined. This is currently in an Excel spreadsheet which has been developed as we have been testing equipment. The number of tests required and the statistical analysis to report the suggested three key indicators is still to be discussed and agreed upon. This concept and draft calculator will be taken to the annual Fertiliser and Lime Research Centre conference in February 2019 for advice from leading experts. The acceptable level of equipment performance and report outputs provided to growers will be discussed.

It is currently accepted for broadcast fertiliser spreaders that the coefficient of variation, CV, should not exceed 15% for nitrogen fertilisers and 25% for non-nitrogen fertilisers. The method of calibrating fertiliser rates applied ‘through the spout’ to achieve target rates are accepted, however a different statistical analysis is required for an assessment to be completed and best practice or acceptable levels of variation need to be defined. It is suggested that a CV of 15% for nitrogen or even non-nitrogen fertilisers is well below the capability of these direct placement applicators. Machinery in good working order should achieve a CV of much lower than this, but an acceptable CV is not currently defined.

This has opened discussion around how the acceptable CV is determined and if this is applicable in vegetable production systems. Our understanding is that accepted variance is based largely on pasture value and response curves, we query what values are appropriate for high value vegetable crops. Excess fertiliser increases leaching risk, insufficient fertiliser can make a crop unsaleable through quality loss. This is another area that it is felt important and worth further investigation.

The results of the tests carried out on direct placement equipment highlighted several key areas to address:

The target rate is not often achieved, the results showed machines are both over and underapplying, which have implications for leaching risk and potential marketable yield penalties or decrease nutrient use efficiency.
In some cases, the outlets are not applying fertiliser at equal rates. The cause of this is different for each machine. However, the growers were keen to investigate why one outlet was applying a lower rate. In one case the grower was able to fix the equipment and significantly reduce the variation between outlets.
One machine resulted in different rates being applied in each test. This is a greater concern for older equipment that is worn and manually operated hoppers.
The amount of the fertiliser in the hopper appeared to affect the rate of fertiliser applied. This suggests that as the hopper empties that rate applied to the beds decreases. This also appeared to change significantly with the bulk density of the fertiliser product. More testing is required to investigate this further. There may be a minimum amount of fertiliser (product/bulk density dependent) required to be in the hopper to achieve an even application.

The interest and engagement of growers through testing their equipment has built awareness. Once a protocol is developed, the spreadsheet will then be developed into a tool for growers. Prior to next season, workshops demonstrating how to calibrate equipment, use the tool and interpret the report will be run in Gisborne and Levin, with the possibility of visiting additional regions. Conversations with growers during visits have shown there is good support for an event.

Broadcast fertiliser spreaders

Broadcast spreaders are less commonly used, and only two-disc spreaders were assessed. The results showed that at the current bout width used neither machine was achieving an acceptable CV for nitrogen fertilisers. One of the two was on the limit of acceptable for non-nitrogen fertiliser products. This suggests that the growers need to change either settings and/or bout width to achieve an acceptable CV.

Reports are generated for all equipment we tested and distributed to growers. Some growers have requested that we re-test their equipment after they have made adjustments or prior to next season.

Irrigation, Nutrients, Projects, Research, Soil, Vegetables, Water

Vegetable Irrigator Assessments

February 7, 2019 Dan Bloomer

Introduction

Irrigation assessments are important for ensuring the correct amount of water is applied to avoid yield lose due to moisture stress. However, excessive irrigation is a cause of nitrate leaching. A key aspect of our Future Proofing Vegetable Production project addresses keeping nutrient in the root zone. Through assessing irrigation uniformity and depth applied, machine and irrigation management can be improved.

This work is part of the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund “Future Proofing Vegetable Production” project, co-funded by Horizons Regional Council, Potatoes NZ, Gisborne District Council, Ballance AgriNutrients and LandWISE.

Methodologies

The irrigator assessments followed the ‘bucket test’ protocols as described in the Traveling Irrigator Performance Quick Test. In brief, buckets were place at 1m intervals across the path of the irrigator (see Figure 3). The speed of the irrigator was measured as it travelled over the buckets. Once the irrigator had passed over the buckets, the volume of water collected in each bucket was then measured. The data was entered into IRRIG8Lite software and reports generated.

Bucket test layout under a traveling boom irrigator assessed as prt of Future Proofing Vegetable Production project.

Results

All three irrigators tested were traveling booms. The performance assessment was carried out twice on one of the traveling booms. An example of the distribution graph is provided in Figure 4. Of the four tests completed, the distribution uniformity assessment for two were ‘adequate’ and two were ‘poor’. The distribution uniformity for the four tests were 0.72 and 0.75 for the ‘adequate’ performing machines and 0.6 and 0.45 for the ‘poor’ performing machines.

Example distribution graph from a traveling boom irrigator assessed as part of the project

Discussion

The results so far show that there is room for improvement in the performance of the irrigators tested so far. Higher than average rainfall has meant irrigation events have not been required as often so far this season. However, some growers briefly ran their irrigators to allow tests to be completed. We will continue to assess irrigators as we are able to access them over the coming months.

AgTech, Drainage, Orchard, Plant Health, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Soil

Survey of Drainage Problems in Orchards

February 5, 2019 Dan Bloomer

The MPI Sustainable Farming Fund “Smart Tools to Improve Orchard Drainage” project was initiated in response to extreme weather conditions experienced by pipfruit growers in the late season (March – June) harvest of 2017. It is co-funded by New Zealand Apples and Pears Inc.

A survey conducted over 3 weeks in November and December of 2018 covered 2,238 hectares of pipfruit growing orchards. Conducting the survey with growers via face-to-face interviews produced a greater number and depth of answers, however certain details were still difficult to obtain. Many growers were hesitant to provide or lacked confidence in estimations of the extent and area of wheel rut damage as a result of poor drainage.

To help with consistent assessments, we created a four panel photo scale of drainage issues found in orchards (see below). Growers interviewed considered the scale realistic and relevant. They felt able to correctly match problems areas in their blocks to the photos, but differed in their assessments of how much of a problem it might be.

The key impacts on operations identified by the survey were predominantly categorised into three areas; tree health, access, and labour. Almost all orchardists surveyed believed that poor drainage was contributing to poor tree health (either visibly or evident through low yield) or causing tree deaths (up to 10% in one extreme example). Many orchardists remarked on wheel ruts resulting in staff injuries (due to ladder slips in mud, tripping, or the impact of driving over uneven surfaces). Labour availability was also affected in severe cases where orchard ponding and ruts were the reason some contracting groups did not want to work at those sites. In all cases where extreme damage was present, access for sprayers, and tractors hauling harvest bins was impeded, and occasionally impossible. This meant that costs were incurred as a result of delaying harvest windows, slowing the pace of operations, and risking greater levels of disease at an already busy time of year.

Situational factors common among the orchards studied included:

Frequent passes by heavy orchard machinery for many months of the year (7 – 11)
Low spots in the in the inter-row were the worst affected
Shaded canopies associated with 3D training and mature plantings

The area affected was 44% of the area surveyed (1,479 ha).

Tree Health

Tree trunk width comparison on a poorly drained block
left: high elevation spot, right: low elevation spot

Tree health suffers as a result of poor drainage and water-logging of the soil. This was evident in the Motueka and Richmond site visits, where trunk diameter was clearly smaller to the untrained eye in low spots where ponding and wheel ruts were severe. The same observations were made during site visits in Nelson and Hawke’s Bay.

Other important comments included a noticeably lower yield from trees where drainage problems were evident, and some bins where mud had covered fruit during harvest resulted in a greater number of fruit rots in post-harvest storage. One grower also mentioned that the fruit on Fuji varieties developed russet in the worst affected areas.

Access to the orchard is critical at certain times to complete operational tasks. Where an orchard has particularly severe drainage problems the wheel ruts may be so extreme that tractor or sprayer axles drag through the mud, meaning that they are stuck or unable to enter the block. This has led to some orchardists hiring helicopters to apply fungicides when application during a specific time window is crucial. This is an expensive exercise, and is unable to be utilised for insecticide sprays, as the application method is not effective at reaching the internal area of the canopy. The mud and ruts from poor drainage make harvesting difficult and time consuming as tractors require towing (by another or multiple tractors) out of the mud when they become stuck.

AgTech, Drainage, Orchard, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Soil

Modelling Drainage in Orchards

February 5, 2019 Dan Bloomer

As part of the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund “Smart Tools to Improve Orchard Drainage” project co-funded by New Zealand Apples and Pears Inc., we have been modelling drainage on case study orchards in Hawke’s Bay and Nelson.

Aerial images can show orchard canopy differences and indicate where tree growth is slowed or trees have died. This can be the result of poor drainage.

Aerial image of Illawarra orchard in Gisborne showing visible areas of missing and sparse canopy

We obtained LiDAR elevation data from the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and Gisborne District Council which allowed us to create very detailed contour plans in ArcGIS – provided to us by ESRI and Eagle Technologies. An example is shown here, using LiDAR from Gisborne.

Detailed contour map of apple block at Illawarra in Gisborne,
created from LiDAR data provided by Gisborne District Council

We can see that the block should drain from the high left (brown) corner to the low right (blue) corner. But when we examine the ground profile along the rows, we see the grade is not even.

Uneven grade along the inter-rows stops surface drainage, keeping soil wet for longer and creating conditions for pugging and wheel-track rutting.

A similar story is seen in the Hawke’s Bay case study orchard. Using HBRC LiDAR data, another contour map was made.

Detailed contour map of apple block at Evenden in Twyford,
created from LiDAR data provided by HBRC

Again, inspecting the ground profile shows areas where surface drainage is held up, keeping soils wetter for longer.

Profile of inter-row showing areas where surface drainage is held by rising contour.

Our next step is to survey blocks with high accuracy RTK-GPS, measuring the profiles on the ground. We can use these profiles to design new inter-row profiles, and determine what cut and fill will be needed to ensure the rows can drain effectively. We will mount the GPS antenna as high as we can to avoid trees blocking the satellite signals.

A GPS antenna mounted on a 2 m mast to avoid signal obstruction. We have a 3 m mast option for larger, older orchards. The aerial connects the rover GPS on the quad, to a base station that determines and corrects for signal shift to give best possible accuracy

Many thanks to all the people at Illawarra Orchard, T&G Orchards, Bostock Orchards and to GPS Control Systems for your continuing support with this project.

AgTech, Drainage, Orcharding, Plant Health, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Soil

Smart tools to improve orchard drainage

June 17, 2018 Dan Bloomer

Inadequate orchard drainage, highlighted during the 2017 autumn harvest period, is an extreme expression of a common problem that can occur anytime of the year. Muddy conditions increase disease, increase labour costs and hazards and increase storage fruit rots. Despite numerous attempts to rectify puddles and mud, the problem remains.

LandWISE has joined with New Zealand Apples and Pears Inc in a project which has gained support from the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund. Over the next three years, this project will draw on experience from other sectors and access to new precision agriculture technologies to address the problem through precision surface drainage, particularly in established orchards where it is especially difficult.

Orchard inspections have shown infrastructural factors are limiting surface drainage on at least 25% of the inspected orchard blocks. The microtopography in orchards creates ponding areas that stay wetter for longer. When sprayers and other traffic pass through, the surface is damage and soil smeared. This further reduces natural drainage and the problem spreads.

This project will adapt and pilot use of precision technologies to survey, design and implement surface drainage plans that minimise ponding risk and reduce these negative impacts. These will be supported by guidelines for wheel track management to provide a secure base for harvest traffic. This will become even more critical as the industry automation with picking platforms and robotic harvesters.

As well as designing effective drainage, we will determine the degree of compaction on orchard blocks and assess root development under the permanent wheel tracks. We will develop ways to restore a good working surface in the inter-row that has strength to carry traffic without unduly compromising root development.

For more information, contact Rachel Kilmister Rachel Kilmister Rachel at applesandpears.nz or Dan Bloomer at LandWISE.org.nz

Agronomy, AgTech, Nutrients, Projects, Research, Soil

Future Proofing Vegetable Production

June 5, 2018 Dan Bloomer Leave a comment

Future proofing vegetable production requires ongoing rapid change in farm practice to meet cost pressures and increasingly stringent demands from regulators and markets for enhanced environmental performance and water quality.

It will not be easy but with support from the MPI Sustainable Farming Fund, industry and regional councils, we’re about to start the journey.

LandWISE is partnering with growers and our funders to develop and test new production and nitrogen mitigation techniques. The project draws on and supplements recent and current research to develop new generation good management practices.

We have four main areas of focus:

1. precise nutrient prescription (how much is required)
Test strip used to determine available N in a soil sample
precise application (is it going where it is needed when it is needed)
Ensuring the prescribed rate of fertiliser is applied
maximising retention (ensuring leaching is minimised)
recapturing nitrates that move beyond the root zone (constructed wetlands and wood-chip bioreactors)
Installing a wood-chip bioreactor (Lincoln Agritech image)

We will draw on previous LandWISE work including On-Farm Fertiliser Calibration, Arawhata Sediment and Drainage, and other projects including current research on quick tests for soil nitrate, fluxmeter monitoring of leaching and the use of wood-chip bioreactors to strip nitrate from drainage water.

The research side will be supported with considerable extension and training. We are aware that numerous computer based decision support tools have been developed, but we have identified that many growers need considerable support and upskilling to have the knowledge, skills and experience to effectively use them.

To stay in touch about this project, subscribe to our newsletter for updates!

This project is funded by the Ministry of Primary Industries Sustainable Farming Fund, Horizons Regional Council, Gisborne District Council, Ballance AgriNutrients, Vegetable Growers and LandWISE.

Agronomy, AgTech, Automation, Conference, Data Analytics, Drainage, events, LandWISE People, MicroFarm, Nutrients, Orcharding, Plant Health, Precision Agriculture, Projects, Research, Robotics, Sensing, Soil, viticulture, Weeds

LandWISE 2018 Conference Speakers

May 2, 2018 Dan Bloomer

We are absolutely delighted at the calibre of speakers coming together for LandWISE 2018 – Technologies for Timely Actions. They have a wide range of backgrounds, work in a range of different sectors looking at a wide range of different things.

We’ve put information about the speakers on our discussion (blog) posts. Here, they are presented as a list with links so you can follow as you please.

We are grateful for the support of AGMARDT, McCain Foods and Heinz-Watties for helping bring our international speakers to New Zealand.