Adoption of practices to mitigate harvest losses − Phase 2

Patane et al. 2019 determined that Harvesting Best Practice (HBP) is predicated by two essential objectives: 1. Defining the critical point where harvesting losses can be minimised and delivered yields improved to achieve the best economic return for the grower and harvesting operation; and 2. Balancing losses with cane quality, which is determined by sound billet quality with an acceptable level of Extraneous Matter (EM). Despite significant research into the impact of higher harvester pour rates and fan speeds on harvested cane yields, use of HBP recommendations prior to the commencement of the adoption program across the industry was relatively low. Full HBP adoption across the Australian sugarcane industry could substantially increase industry revenue without the need for horizontal expansion (increase in cane land). In 2019, continuing on from the work conducted by Patane et al. (2019), Sugar Research Australia in partnership with the Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries delivered further trials

Improving yield and cane quality through implementation of harvesting best practice-2019 Herbert demonstration

In 2019, the Australian sugarcane industry conducted a month-long demonstration with 12 trials to determine the commercial viability of harvesting best practice. Initiated by a small group of innovative growers and contractors from the Herbert region, the concept of a commercial demonstration sought to determine both agronomic and economic impacts of adopting HBP, including the assessment of possible yield gains without having a detrimental impact on extraneous matter, and economic implication for growers and harvesting contractors arising from revenue and harvesting cost changes. Two Herbert harvesting contractors participated in the demonstration comparing their standard harvesting practices to Sugar Research Australia Harvesting Best Practice (HBP or recommended practice). The results identified an average 4.8 t/ha increase in yield with no additional increase in extraneous matter for the recommended setting. A comprehensive economic analysis was conducted on each of the trials. Detailed harvesting costs and operational information, including machinery, labour, and fuel data, were collected from the respective harvesting operations. Harvesting costs and levies were $37/ha ($0.07/t) higher for the recommended setting due to higher yields, reduced harvester ground speeds and lower extractor fan speeds. Despite the higher harvesting costs, recommended settings obtained significantly higher total revenue ($151/ha, +4.7$114/ha in the adoption of recommended settings (based on a 4.4% higher net revenue calculated as total grower revenue minus harvesting costs and levies). The Herbert demonstrations have proven instrumental in the acceptance of harvesting best practice for the region. The results again confirm that adapting and aligning commercial-scale harvesting practices to crop and paddock conditions have positive impacts on both yield and economic outcomes

Refining nitrogen management under different conditions: economic results from preliminary grower-demonstration trials

Economic findings are presented on a selection of refined nitrogen (N) rate demonstration trials conducted in the Wet Tropics, Burdekin and Mackay-Whitsunday regions of Queensland. Different N rates were examined to account for nutrients supplied by break crops, mill-by-products and groundwater irrigation. Reduced N rates were also considered in final ratoons, on cane varieties with perceived higher N-use efficiency, and where nitrification-inhibiting fertilisers were applied. Approaches to refined N rates were aligned to industry-led programs such as SIX EASY STEPS™ (6ES) and the more recent 6ES Toolbox. Past research has identified that applying N rates above 6ES guidelines often reduced grower profitability. Refining N rates to account for organic sources of N and consideration of production characteristics may provide opportunity for growers to improve profitability whilst maintaining or improving production levels. Agronomists supporting Project Catalyst conducted 11 grower demonstration trials between 2018 and 2020. This program aims to reduce dissolved nutrients, sediment and pesticide loss from sugarcane farms using innovative farm practice improvements. The N treatments evaluated in these trials included standard grower rates, 6ES guideline rates (through following the full 6ES rather than simply following the regulated method) or the 6ES Toolbox to account for alternative sources of N. Yields and commercial cane sugar levels (CCS) from different treatments were analysed. Data on revenue and costs were collected to calculate gross margins and relative profitability of treatments. The largest impact on grower profitability was associated with the groundwater-N trials. Despite results showing improved or maintained gross margins for refined N rates in most trials, there were no significant differences. Although demonstration trials provide a good resource to improve practice adoption by growers, longer-term trials and increased replication across a wider variety of sites are needed to validate refined N management and improve confidence in the results