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:
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.
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
In conjunction with Potatoes NZ, we have a field event in Levin on Wednesday 27 February. The content will be of interest to all growers and supporters – it’s not just potato topics. Of note will be discussion about the Teralytic probes that have been installed. Plant & Food will demonstrate the Nitrate Quick Test. We’ll be updating people on the Future Proofing Vegetable Production project (co-funded by Horizons Regional Council, Potatoes NZ, Gisborne District Council, Ballance AgriNutrients and LandWISE).
2.30pm Chris Pescini’s Farm 52 Kimberley Rd, Levin (old Hort Research station)
R & D TOPICS Teralytic Probes Trial, TPP Spray Trials, Tamarixia Release Trials, Regreening, Powdery Scab, PMTV Update, Future Proofing Vegetables, Urea fertilsers for Vegetables, Quick N Test, Climate Change, Monitoring nitrates in drainage water Call Gemma 027 2404682 or Iain 027 2401092 with any last minute queries
Installing Teralytic probes in Levin potato paddock
Gisborne: Early March
We have not yet set a date or place, but we will have a similar vegetable field day in Gisborne in early March. It will cover the same topics, omitting specific potato issues. Newsletter subscribers will get a notice soon.
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:
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)
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.
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.
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.
Table 2
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.
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.
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
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 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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Herbicide resistant weeds are a real and increasing issue globally and evident in New Zealand. Herbicide resistant ryegrass is for example, a problem in both arable farms and vineyards.
Atrazine resistant Amaranthus (Trevor James photo)
We are working with Trevor James
and AgResearch in a project focused on improved weed control and
vegetation management to minimise future herbicide resistance. The
project is funded through the Ministry of Business, Innovation and
Employment (MBIE) and major co-funder, the Foundation for Arable Research (FAR).
The project has four main work areas:
A Lincoln University team is seeking to identify the weeds most likely to develop herbicide resistance in new regions. Outputs will be a risk index that indicates weeds with a history of herbicide resistance, herbicide resistant weeds that pose the greatest risk if introduced and weeds that have a high likelihood of becoming resistant.
An AgResearch team seeks to identify and describe the drivers of on- and off-farm herbicide practices to more successfully address factors across the supply/value chain that increase the risk of herbicide resistance.
Grasslands and Massey University researchers will develop genotyping and seed bioassays to create ‘quick tests’ for resistance in key weed species. They will also model spread scenarios for resistance genes to determine the greatest risk of resistance i.e. from resistance developing on-site or from dispersal of resistant weeds. They are starting with perennial ryegrass before adding other species for screening.
We are in a team led by Trevor James looking to develop new non-herbicidal interventions (e.g. robotic weeders, abrasion technologies and smart cultivators) and the use of cover crops (in collaboration with FAR) for both managing existing and avoiding new instances of herbicide resistance.
Included in this section is ‘rediscovering’ Māori management practices such as traditional strategic resting and natural pathogenic organisms to target the soil weed seed bank. While virtually all our problem weeds are introduced from Europe and the Americas, the holistic approaches typical in Māoridom seem fully relevant to a systems based approach to weed management. A second group in this team is to isolate and evaluate natural pathogenic fungi and bacteria for their ability and efficacy to kill weed seeds.
LandWISE members are well-aware of the risks of herbicide resistance. It has been an aspect of LandWISE projects since the early 2000s when we began promoting strip tillage and no-till systems to maintain soil quality and reduce energy inputs. The extra pressure on herbicide controls when physical cultivation is reduced saw us publish charts of herbicide groups for different crops. Maybe it is time that work was brought up to date!
Part of my role is keeping our Memberships up to date and working with sponsors and trade displays for the LandWISE Annual Conference. If you have any queries about your membership status, want to become a financial member, or want to get involved with the conference, contact me!
Originally from Palmerston North, I grew up on a small thoroughbred breeding stud and recently beef finishing farm. I studied horticulture at Massey because I’m passionate about growing high quality food sustainably in New Zealand. I was proud to receive a T&G Global Summer Internship which included placement in Hawke’s Bay orchards last year.
I’m keen learn and take on new challenges, so please don’t hesitate to get in contact at georgia@landwise.org.nz if you have any questions or ideas on our projects or the organisation itself.
I’m looking forward to meeting more LandWISE members and helping Dan and the team achieve success on our LandWISE projects.
I have just joined the LandWISE team as Research Manager. I have had an action packed first couple of weeks meeting great people, making a start on some really interesting projects and I’m excited to be involved!
I’m keen to get started with trials and monitoring for the Future Proofing Vegetable Production project. I have spent 2 days in Gisborne and a day in Levin with Dan meeting many people involved in the project and I am really looking forward to working with them. I am off to Queensland next week to learn all about woodchip bioreactors which we hope to install in some areas to reduce nitrate leaching. I will also be involved in an orchard drainage project, and it was great to meet some of the Gisborne orchardists where we will be doing some trial work.
As part of my role, I will be looking to identify opportunities to develop more sustainable cropping systems. I have worked and studied in the New Zealand Centre for Precision Agriculture for the past 8 years using crops sensors, RTK GPS systems, soil EM mapping, running field trials, GIS, image and spatial data analysis… among other aspects of precision ag.
I grew up living and working with sheep and beef, am a keen vege gardener and have studied a mix of subjects including landscape management, weeds, plant pest and diseases, soils… I enjoy learning new things, a challenge, problem solving and will give anything a go, so please don’t hesitate to contact me (pip.mcv@landwise.org.nz) for a chat if you have any thoughts or ideas.
I’m excited to join Dan and the LandWISE community and get involved!
We’ve made a good start on the orchard drainage project, visiting sites in Gisborne, Hawke’s Bay and Nelson.
Many thanks to Illawarra Orchard, T&G Global, MrApple, Bostocks NZ, KONO Horticulture and Waimea West for your active involvement.
The sites confirm the need to address drainage and the consequent track rutting and associated problems in each of the regions. We have begun our survey of sites and regions, aiming to get some objective assessment of the amount and severity of problems, where they most occur and what solutions may be applied. We already see there will not be a one-fix-for-all!
The Gisborne site that initiated the project looks better than it did after harvest 2017. But the issues remain, and we’ll be surveying and planning how to reshape inter-rows to allow surface drainage.
Gisborne orchard after harvest 2017
In Motueka, our preliminary site visit saw the same problems and similar severity. The solution will not be the same, as the land contour is very different and the are no clear exit points for water once it does leave the tree blocks.
Severe rutting in Motueka Orchard
The orchard team has been applying a range of drainage remedies with varying success.
A drainage sump installed in Moteuka. Sumps widely used in low spots, but prone to blocking after a short time.
We visited a number of Hawke’s Bay sites on different soil types. One block in Twyford is being replanted, and pre-plant levelling was carried out. We are looking to trial inter-row levelling in established blocks, with surface water moved to tiles installed at the end of rows.
Installing novaflow in Twyford orchard – pea metal fill to ground level to facilitate entry of surface drainage for inter-rows
