Chickpeas on heavy soil: Pre-harvest update from the Moora trial

By Kate Parker & Simon Kruger, WMG

The West Midlands Group’s heavy soil chickpea trial at Jim Hamilton’s property in Moora is approaching harvest, providing early insights into how Desi chickpeas perform in a challenging season. The site forms part of the broader GRDC funded, GGA led Grain Legumes Project and is testing whether management decisions such as seeding rate and inoculant loading influence establishment, biomass and nitrogen fixation on heavier country in the West Midlands region.

This update summarises findings to date, drawing on plant counts, biomass cuts, ¹?N analysis and seasonal constraints observed across the site. Final yield results will be reported once harvest is complete.

Trial design and seasonal context

The trial evaluated three treatments of Captain (Desi) chickpeas on heavy soil:

TreatmentDescription
Control3.5 kg/ha Nodulator, 100 kg/ha seed
Double inoculant7 kg/ha Nodulator, 100 kg/ha seed
Increased seeding rate3.5 kg/ha Nodulator, 130 kg/ha seed

The site experienced one of the most variable starts in recent seasons. Initial seeding on 14 April was followed by unseasonably hot and dry conditions through April and May, resulting in very poor establishment. The paddock was re-seeded on 9 June, after which plant numbers rapidly recovered, reaching target densities by early July.

From late July onward, the seasonal pattern reversed sharply. Rainfall at the nearby Barberton station far exceeded the long-term average in June, July and August, driving prolonged waterlogging in the top and bottom quarters of the paddock. This had a clear influence on crop development, with saturated soil becoming the dominant constraint through flowering and biomass sampling.

StatisticJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct
20251.65.810.220.82465.2132.7108.636.421
LTA (1911-2025)13.61619.223.655.782.883.964.537.823.6

The 2024 soil tests (0–10 cm) indicated moderate phosphorus, high potassium, slightly acidic pH (5.7 CaCl?) and low organic carbon (1.01 per cent).

Establishment after reseeding

Plant establishment was measured twice: after the unsuccessful April sowing (8 June) and following the June reseeding (1 July). After the reseed, all treatments achieved strong and consistent establishment across the better-drained central portion of the paddock.

Figure 1 and 2. Plant establishment 1. Seeded on April 14th, Plant counts completed on the 8th of June. Plants/m2 (left) and Establishment % (right), Recommended establishment % is 80 percent germination of seeds.

While differences were not statistically significant, the increased seeding rate treatment recorded slightly higher plant numbers, aligning with expectations. By early July, establishment percentages across all treatments were close to the recommended 80 per cent germination benchmark.

Figure 3 and 4. Plant establishment 2. Re-seeded (100kg/ha) on June 9th, Plant counts completed on the 1st of July. Plants/m2 (left) and Establishment % (right), Recommended establishment is 80 percent germination of seeds.

Weed pressure

Weed counts taken at early flowering (21 August) showed no significant treatment effect, though the increased seeding rate plots carried marginally fewer weeds. Weed pressure was patchy, reflecting moisture variability and herbicide performance rather than treatment differences.

Figure 5. Weed counts in plants/m2 for each treatment on 21st of August.
Biomass development through winter
Early flowering biomass

The first biomass cuts (13 August) showed:

  • a clear trend toward higher early biomass in the increased seeding rate treatment
  • double inoculant and control treatments performing similarly
  • a separate “waterlogged reference” recording very low biomass due to persistent moisture stress.
Figure 6. Biomass in kg/ha for each treatment on the 13th of August.

These early results highlight chickpeas’ strong sensitivity to saturated soils. In low-lying areas, growth was severely restricted, with subsequent drone imagery (10 September) showing stark contrasts between waterlogged and better-drained zones.

Peak biomass

Peak biomass sampling on 7 October revealed a statistically significant treatment effect. The increased seeding rate treatment again produced the highest biomass, clearly above the control and double inoculant treatments.

Figure 8. Biomass in kg/ha for each treatment on 7th of October.

Waterlogged areas remained far lower in biomass across all treatments, confirming that soil moisture, not inoculant rate or disease, was the primary limiting factor this season.

Nitrogen fixation: a positive result

¹?N analysis conducted pre-flowering showed exceptionally strong nitrogen fixation across all treatments. Despite chickpeas often being considered “lazy nodulators”, the crop derived the vast majority of nitrogen from biological fixation.

Treatment% N from atmosphereN fixed (kg/ha)
Increased seeding rate96.7%83.2
Control104.8%59.4
Double inoculant90.0%64.7

The increased seeding rate fixed the most total nitrogen due to greater plant biomass at the time of sampling. Importantly, these values are likely conservative, as the crop continued to accumulate biomass beyond the sampling date.

Disease observations

No foliar diseases were detected during flowering, and the patchy chlorosis observed in low-lying areas was attributed to waterlogging rather than disease. Fungicide applications were effective, and there was no evidence of Ascochyta or Botrytis infection.

Key learnings so far

Based on the 2025 season to date, the following insights are emerging from the Moora heavy-soil trial:

  • Early drought followed by prolonged waterlogging created highly variable conditions across the site.
  • Reseeding in June restored plant establishment to target levels.
  • Increased seeding rate may improve canopy closure and weed competition.
  • Nitrogen fixation was very strong across all treatments, providing a positive contribution to soil nitrogen levels.
  • Waterlogging was the major limitation this season, rather than inoculant rate or foliar disease.
  • Yield results are still required to determine whether biomass differences translate into grain yield.
  • Current yield modelling suggests a potential yield of 4.29 t/ha, although actual values may vary depending on harvest conditions.
Next steps

Harvest results will be available shortly. These will help determine whether the benefits observed in biomass and N fixation carry through to final grain yield and what this means for chickpeas as a rotational option on heavy soils in the West Midlands region.

A full post-harvest report will be released in early 2026, including economic analysis and implications for growers considering chickpeas on heavier soil types.

Seeing what NDVI can show: Monitoring potassium responses at Ballidu

By Kate Parker, WMG Project Officer

Late-season NDVI imagery from the 2025 Ballidu potassium demonstration site, part of the GRDC funded K Extension Project, provided useful insights into treatment performance that were not visible through ground assessments alone. While early-season biomass cuts and plant tissue results showed minimal separation between potassium rates, the NDVI sequence revealed subtle differences in canopy development across soil types and treatments later in the season.

Early Season: Uniform NDVI Across Treatments

NDVI imagery from July and early August showed relatively uniform crop vigour across both trial sites. This aligned with field observations and GS30 biomass data, where no K treatment effects were detected. Early uniformity was expected, as potassium responses typically appear later in the season and soil type often plays a greater role than fertiliser rate at early stages.

Satellite imagery of NDVI of the trial site on 19/02/2025 taken from Data Farming website.
Satellite imagery of NDVI of the trial site on 13/08/2025 taken from Data Farming website.
Late Season: NDVI Shows Increasing Variation

From September onwards, NDVI began to show clearer differences between treatments, particularly on the gravelly clay-loam (Site 2). While these differences did not translate into statistically significant treatment effects in biomass or tissue tests, the NDVI maps indicated variation in canopy density and greenness that was not evident during ground-based assessments.

These late-season contrasts suggest that NDVI is a useful tool for detecting subtle nutrient interactions and soil-related variation before yield measurements or further tissue analysis.

Satellite imagery of NDVI of the trial site on 02/09/2025 taken from Data Farming website.

Satellite imagery of NDVI of the trial site on 17/10/2025 taken from Data Farming website.

Reappearance of Historical N-Banking Strips

An unexpected outcome was the re-emergence of an old nitrogen-banking strip at Site 2 in the NDVI imagery. The grower reported that this strip had not produced visible responses or yield differences for several years, yet it became apparent in the 2025 imagery. This may reflect:

  • increased mid-season rainfall improving nutrient mobility,
  • the interaction between residual N and the applied K treatments,
  • or improved root exploration in the gravelly profile.

This observation highlights the value of NDVI in identifying legacy nutrient effects that may not be visible on the ground.

Practical Implications for Growers

The NDVI monitoring at Ballidu demonstrated several practical points:

  • NDVI can detect small differences in canopy growth that field inspections may miss.
  • Potassium responses may not be strongly expressed early in the season, especially in sandy soils.
  • Historical nutrient treatments can reappear under favourable seasonal conditions.
  • NDVI is a useful tool for guiding targeted sampling, identifying management zones, and supporting interpretation of nutrient trials.
Summary

While ground measurements from the Ballidu trial did not show strong potassium treatment responses, NDVI provided an additional layer of evidence that helped identify subtle variations across soil types and historical nutrient zones. As a complementary monitoring tool, NDVI can improve understanding of nutrient behaviour and assist growers in evaluating trial performance and spatial variability within paddocks.

Understanding machinery efficiency in broadacre operations

By Kate Parker & Simon Kruger, WMG

Timeliness remains one of the most influential factors in the success of seeding, spraying and harvest programs across the West Midlands and surrounding regions. While machinery width and travel speed define theoretical capacity, it is efficiency — the proportion of the day a machine spends performing productive fieldwork — that determines real operating capability.

Efficiency helps convert the familiar “how the day went” discussion into a measurable concept. Even well-organised operations encounter periods of downtime, and these intervals shape how many hectares can be completed within a seasonal window.

What efficiency represents

Efficiency describes the relationship between productive operating time and the total available working time. A machine may be capable of covering large areas per hour on paper, but the day-to-day outcome depends on how consistently it can stay in work.

Common contributors to reduced efficiency include:

  • turning at headlands or navigating irregular paddock layouts
  • shifting between paddocks or coordinating support vehicles
  • refuelling, refilling seed, fertiliser or chemical
  • unloading grain or waiting on chaser bin or trucking logistics
  • clearing blockages, checking equipment or completing minor repairs
  • short delays linked to weather or staffing

Individually these delays are minor, but they accumulate across a full day in the paddock.

A whole-operation view

In most broadacre systems, efficiency is best assessed at the whole-operation level rather than machine-by-machine. When two seeders are working together, or a header and chaser bin move as a pair, disruptions usually slow the entire operation. A refill delay, blocked hose or slow move between paddocks affects the flow of all equipment.

Growers often describe this qualitatively — days that “ran well”, or times when “everything kept moving.” Measuring efficiency formalises these observations and enables clearer comparison across seasons, machines and operating setups.

Why efficiency matters for investment decisions

Efficiency provides a practical framework for assessing improvements that do not rely on bigger machinery. Logistics, labour coordination, paddock layout, chemical batching and support equipment all influence how effectively machinery can operate.

This is particularly relevant for growers considering batching or mix-and-transfer systems for spraying. Interest across the region reflects a shift toward reducing the non-spraying portion of the day. While the boom width remains the same, improving turnaround time can lift total daily hectares in a way that resembles a machinery upgrade — without the capital cost.

Efficiency as a decision-support tool

Viewing operations through the lens of efficiency can help growers to:

  • identify bottlenecks that limit daily throughput
  • compare different machinery or logistics setups
  • assess whether operating capacity aligns with seasonal timing
  • prioritise investment in labour, support vehicles or technology

Even modest improvements in efficiency can support timeliness, reduce pressure during peak periods and improve workload distribution.

Linking with the RiskWi$e Project

The importance of efficiency aligns closely with findings emerging from WMG’s work under the RiskWi$e Enterprise Financial Decisions theme, particularly the machinery decisions component. Discussions and survey results from growers across the northern agricultural region consistently highlight that machinery investment decisions are shaped by:

  • capacity to complete seeding, spraying and harvest within tightening seasonal windows
  • the cost of missed or delayed operations, particularly when breaks arrive late
  • the trade-off between upgrading machinery versus improving logistics and labour
  • understanding true machine output using metrics such as hectares per hour, rotor hours and repair-and-maintenance trends

As shown in earlier articles, growers emphasise timeliness as a key driver of both financial and agronomic outcomes. Many are now looking more closely at the whole operating system — rather than individual machines — to determine whether their current setup can reliably meet seasonal risk.

Efficiency %, therefore, becomes a useful companion metric within machinery decisions. It complements economic considerations by providing a realistic view of operational capacity, helping growers judge whether changes in support equipment, batching, labour or workflow may deliver greater value than a major machinery purchase.

WMG’s Timeliness Tool (under development)

To support these conversations, WMG is developing a practical tool to help growers assess whether current machinery combinations can realistically meet critical seasonal timeframes. The tool incorporates machine width, speed, available operating hours, efficiency and desired timing windows to provide an evidence-based view of operational capacity.

The tool is currently in development and will soon be available for grower testing. For more information or to register interest in trialling the tool, please contact the WMG team.

Acknowledgments

West Midlands Group (WMG) and the Mingenew-Irwin Group (MIG) are currently investigating how machinery investment decisions are made by growers across the Northern Agricultural Region as part of the RiskWi$e Project. This work forms part of a broader national initiative under the RiskWi$e Project’s Enterprise Financial Decisions theme, led in WA by the Grower Group Alliance, nationally by CSIRO, and funded by the GRDC.

Shaping the future of WA ag through the Soil CRC landholder survey

By Simon Kruger, WMG Project Communications Officer

Landholders across Western Australia’s Wheatbelt and high-rainfall south-west regions have a fresh opportunity to have their voices heard in a national survey on farm practice, values and decision-making. The Soil CRC’s long-term social benchmarking survey has now returned to WA, and your participation matters.

What the survey covers

The survey invites you to reflect on how you manage land, access information, make decisions, and plan for the future. It collects various insights including:

  • enterprise mix and long-term property plans
  • sources of information and pathways of learning
  • attitudes to risk, soil health, environment, succession and change
  • current practice and intended practice.

It also includes region-specific questions – for example, this year the WA release includes a supplementary survey for grazing properties in the south-west, linked to nutrient-management programs.

Why your response is important
  1. Improved relevance of research and extension. The survey helps groups like grower-networks, regional NRM bodies and industry bodies tailor investment, programs and extension services to what landholders actually need. In WA, previous results helped shape local grower-group priorities.
  2. Tracking change over time. Because this is the second WA wave, the survey allows comparison of how practices, attitudes and challenges are evolving. That longitudinal insight is especially valuable for regions facing climatic, economic and structural change.
  3. Informed policy and investment. The aggregated results build a national dataset that underpins strategic decisions about soil health, land stewardship and farm system resilience.
  4. Your voice matters. While the survey is submitted anonymously, it gives you direct input into how programs and supports are shaped around you and your peers. Associate Professor Hanabeth Luke from Murdoch University says the results of high participation amplify the value.
Who’s involved and what’s the process

For WA, the survey is led by Murdoch University in collaboration with local partners including the West Midlands Group, Wheatbelt NRM, the Liebe Group, the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) and the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD).

Approximately 4,000 landholders across the region have been mailed an invitation. The mailing includes a serial number enabling spatial linkage with soil and weather data, while maintaining anonymity.

If you did not receive a paper notice but have eligible land, you are still encouraged to participate via the online link: https://murdochuni.syd1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cUWMJo5uaP0wYPs.

What happens after you complete the survey

Once completed, the data will be analysed and reported back to regional partners and broadly across the sector. These findings will help steer research, extension and investment decisions tailored to WA. They will also feed into the broader national benchmarking dataset, enabling comparison across regions and farming systems.

How to participate

If you received a survey notice, please complete it – online or via the paper version. Use your serial number included in the letter when completing online. If you didn’t receive the letter but believe you are eligible, you can still access the survey via the online link provided by the Soil CRC.

Taking 10-15 minutes now could make a real difference to how your region is supported in coming years.

Take the online survey now!

For queries or further information, contact Associate Professor Hanabeth Luke (Murdoch University) on 08 9360 7472 or via Hanabeth.Luke@murdoch.edu.au.

WMG features in Soil CRC webinar series on research communication

By Simon Kruger, WMG Project Communications Officer

The Soil CRC recently hosted a three-part webinar series exploring how Australian growers, grower groups and researchers share knowledge, report innovation and communicate findings that support on-farm decisions. The series brought together practitioners from across the country and highlighted several projects where grower groups are driving change in how agricultural R&D reaches its end users.

West Midlands Group featured throughout the series, with the third webinar presented by WMG Project Communications Officer, Simon Kruger. His session focused on the Risk/Reward Tool Project, one of the first Soil CRC projects led by a grower group, and a clear example of how grower groups are shaping the future of extension and reporting.

About the webinar series

The webinar series examined three connected themes:

Collectively, the three webinars reinforced an emerging shift across the sector. Extension is no longer only about transferring results. It now involves helping farmers understand risk, navigate complexity and compare the trade-offs associated with adopting new practices. Grower groups are central in this shift, acting as the next users of research and bridging the gap between technical findings and practical decisions.

Spotlight on Webinar 3

Communicating risks and rewards using a new reporting tool

The final webinar, presented by WMG’s Simon Kruger, focused on the Risk/Reward Tool Project, an initiative developed by WMG in partnership with Corrigin Farm Improvement Group (CFIG), Central West Farming Systems (CWFS) and Charles Sturt University. The project ran from 2022 to 2024 and produced the Risk/Reward Tool Writing Guide, a practical framework for reporting research in a way that aligns with how farmers weigh decisions.

The project grew from a simple but persistent challenge: farmers are making more complex decisions each year, yet much of the information available to them remains fragmented, inconsistent or presented in formats that are difficult to apply on farm. Reports can be long, highly technical or lacking context. Grower groups, who produce a significant proportion of the applied research across regional Australia, often face similar difficulties with reporting consistency and staff turnover.

Webinar 3 traced how the project addressed these challenges through a clear, evidence-based design process that included:

  • scoping existing report formats
  • a farmer survey with 60 respondents across three grower groups
  • a matrix analysis with grower group staff
  • prototype development and iterative testing
  • refinement based on real feedback from farmers and extension practitioners.

The result is a tiered reporting structure that aligns with three stages of decision-making:

  • Infographic – helping farmers quickly assess whether a practice is relevant to them
  • Synthesis report – providing enough detail for evaluation and comparison
  • Full report – offering the full technical picture for trialling or adoption

Each format presents balanced information across agronomic, economic, environmental and social considerations. The intention is to clearly show both the potential benefits and the practical trade-offs of adopting a new practice.

Why this work matters for the industry

The webinar emphasised that while the tool supports farmers, its primary users are grower groups and extension staff. These organisations play a significant role in shaping how research is interpreted, summarised and communicated. A more consistent, practical reporting approach helps:

  • improve the clarity and relevance of extension material
  • reduce the time and duplication involved in creating reports
  • support new and early-career staff with usable templates and guidance
  • increase confidence among farmers that research has been presented transparently and in a locally meaningful way.

CFIG’s experience, shared during the series, reinforced this point. Their team has used the tool across multiple projects, adapting templates for local context and integrating them into staff onboarding and reporting processes. This early adoption demonstrates the potential for broader industry use.

WMG’s contribution to the series

Throughout the webinar series, WMG contributed not only through the Risk/Reward Tool Project but also through broader discussions about what effective extension looks like in practice. The series recognised the growing importance of regionally based grower groups in bridging national R&D with on-ground realities.

WMG’s involvement highlighted:

  • the value of collaborative project design across multiple grower groups
  • the role of participatory testing and farmer input in credible communication tools
  • the importance of investing in extension capability, particularly for early-career staff
  • the need for reporting formats that reflect the complexity of real farm decisions while remaining clear and practical.

These themes have been central to WMG’s work across the Soil CRC, including projects in knowledge sharing, communication capability, risk-aware reporting and long-term soil management.

Looking ahead

The strong interest in the webinar series reflects a broader industry appetite for more consistent, decision-focused communication tools. WMG will continue to refine and apply the Risk/Reward Tool across its own projects, including collaborations in soil amelioration, legumes, machinery investment and the Soil CRC Extension Packages initiative.

There is clear potential for further development, including digital versions and expanded use across natural capital, sustainability reporting or enterprise comparison frameworks. Continued feedback from researchers, extension professionals and farmers will guide this work.

For more information about the Risk/Reward Tool or WMG’s involvement in Soil CRC projects, please contact WMG Project Communications Officer Simon Kruger at extension@wmgroup.org.au.

Growers compare new varieties at Kayanaba NVT and Legume Tour

By Simon Kruger & Kate Parker, WMG

A group of 42 growers, researchers and industry representatives joined the West Midlands Group for this year’s Kayanaba Road NVT and Legume Tour in Dandaragan. The afternoon provided an opportunity to walk through local wheat, barley, oat, canola, lupin and pulse trials, discuss performance under this season’s conditions and hear directly from plant breeders working across the region.

The tour began at Charles Roberts’ Kayanaba Farm, which hosted the GRDC National Variety Trial sites. Breeders walked attendees through canola and lupin lines before moving into wheat, barley and oat plots, providing context on how seasonal conditions had shaped flowering windows, grain fill and disease expression.

From there the group moved down the road to Erin Cahill’s GRDC legume trial and the adjacent paddock-scale lentil demonstration, before finishing at the AGT and RAGT breeding sites to look at commercial breeding programs taking place locally.

Canola and lupin highlights

At the canola and lupin NVT sites, growers compared traits such as pod shatter tolerance, harvest timing, disease packages and overall suitability to the West Midlands environment. There was strong interest in how new Nuseed and Pioneer canola lines were handling the season, particularly around flowering synchrony, standability and ease of harvest.

Questions around crop-topping timing, the use of pre-harvest glyphosate and market implications sparked clear discussion, with breeders providing clarity on label restrictions and management considerations for different delivery grades.

In the lupin plots, conversation focused on pod shatter resistance, harvest height clearance and how new lines may fit into mixed systems where sandplain soils, gravel rises and variable harvest conditions remain a reality for local growers.

Cereal variety comparisons

At the cereal NVT site, representatives from Intergrain, AGT and RAGT shared updates on wheat, barley and oat varieties currently under evaluation. They discussed how a patchy start to the season, followed by a softer finish, influenced disease pressure, grain quality and relative maturity.

Growers compared varieties on standability, frost sensitivity, head loss risk and potential fit within local rotations. Breeders outlined ongoing work to improve performance under key regional constraints, including acid soils, stripe rust and Septoria, and noted which lines were showing promising adaptability in the northern Midlands rainfall zone.

Legumes in focus

The tour’s final stops highlighted local pulse development. Erin Cahill’s GRDC-funded trials and the small paddock-scale lentil demonstration provided an in-depth look at varietal performance, seeding rates and management considerations for pulses grown outside traditional lupin areas.

While sclerotinia and budworm pressure remain challenges, several commercial lentil lines showed promising early pod set and canopy structure. Discussion covered fungicide timing, crop-topping strategies and inoculant management, following mixed nodulation results observed this year.

Growers explored broader rotational benefits too, including nematode control, nitrogen contribution and weed competition. With global demand for pulses remaining strong in developing markets—particularly India—several growers noted interest in expanding pulse options where soil type and herbicide history allow.

Takeaways from the day

Across all sites, growers engaged in practical discussion and shared local experience. Key themes included:

  • Selecting cereal and pulse varieties suited to gravel rises and deep sands common in Dandaragan.
  • Managing residual herbicides effectively when introducing new pulse species.
  • Understanding nitrogen dynamics following legumes and how this influences fertiliser decisions in the following crop.
  • Balancing current market volatility with long-term global demand signals for pulses and canola.
  • Matching variety selection with local seasonal variability and harvest logistics.
Building knowledge through local collaboration

The tour was made possible thanks to the generosity of hosts Charles Roberts and Erin Cahill, and the contributions of breeders including Richie Marsland (Intergrain), Dion Bennett (AGT), Callum Pestell (Nuseed), Tony Munns and Chris Dzoma (Pioneer Seeds), Mackenzie McIntosh and Andrew Heinrich (Pacific Seeds), and David Peake (RAGT). Their insights throughout the afternoon added valuable context to the local trial results.

Thanks also to WMG Board Chair Alana Alexander for her support coordinating the day.

The event closed with an informal catch-up, giving growers, breeders and researchers the chance to continue discussions and reflect on a productive season of trials and WMG events.

EO Report: November 2025

By Gabby Carrivick, WMG Executive Officer

Hello everyone and happy harvest.

As harvest rolls on across the region, the WMG team has been focusing on what matters most: staying connected with our members. During this period, we’re making a point of getting out to paddocks, sheds and utes wherever we can. These short catchups and honest conversations about the season, trial results or project ideas are invaluable. They help ensure our work stays firmly centred on what growers in the West Midlands need. If we haven’t caught you yet, please feel free to give me a call or drop in for a coffee.

WMG EO Gabby Carrivick visiting Walyoo Farm for harvest.

We’ve also had strong interest from industry since our call last month to re-establish the WMG Research Committee. While we’re very pleased by the level of enthusiasm from our industry and research counterparts, we’re keen to see more growers involved so we have strong farm-level representation guiding the direction of our work. If you’re interested in helping shape WMG’s research priorities, please get in touch and we can discuss what’s involved. At this stage, we’re planning for the committee to meet quarterly, with short, purposeful meetings, with an online option made available to those who might not be able to make it in person every time.

Alongside our field visits, we’re progressing a large amount of end-of-year work – grant applications, letters of support, gathering and analysing final trial data and report writing. I would like to take this opportunity to make special mention of our trial site and strip trial hosts this year; John Minty, Jim Hamilton, Peter Rathjen, Brendan van Beek, Jeremy Roberts, Tim Creagh, Corey Mincherton, Will Browne, Mark Drake, Lachie Brown, Duncan Glasfurd & Nick Woods. We couldn’t do this work without your support, generosity and continued cooperation.

Talking soil water repellence and amelioration earlier this year at the Minty’s trial site.

Although this time of year always brings tight deadlines, the opportunities ahead for 2026 are exciting. We have proposals underway across sandy soils, crop establishment, groundcover thresholds, drought resilience tools and livestock systems. Many of these ideas have come directly from member conversations, and your feedback continues to shape our direction.

As I highlighted in my previous EO Report, one of our key projects kicking off in 2026 is the Sustainable Solutions for Sandy Soils Project. As we prepare to launch, we’re looking to connect with growers who have practical or successful approaches that could help guide early case studies, as well as those simply interested in being part of the discussion. If this sounds like you, we’d welcome a call.

Behind the scenes, we’re strengthening WMG’s internal processes as well. Updates to finance systems, clearer HR processes and improved board reporting are all underway to ensure the organisation is efficient, transparent and well supported. The intention is simple: reduce administrative load and increase the time we spend working directly with growers.

Over the coming weeks, our priority remains to get out, listen and stay connected. Whether it’s on the header, in the paddock, at the kitchen bench or over the phone, we’re making every effort to catch up with as many members as possible.

Wishing everyone a safe and smooth finish to harvest. As always, we appreciate your time, support and the trust you place in WMG.

When soil “wakes up”: Ryegrass responses to amelioration

By Kate Parker & Simon Kruger, WMG

The GRDC funded Soil Water Repellence Project trial sites established across the West Midlands in 2024 and 2025 are primarily focused on how different mechanical amelioration strategies can improve crop establishment and soil function. However, observations from one of this year’s sites have highlighted an interesting side effect of certain soil disturbance types, particularly the response of annual ryegrass in the Fanger ploughed plots.

A Different Kind of Activation

At the Gillingarra site, the Fanger machine, which mixes and loosens the soil through a deep churning action, appears to have activated the soil in more ways than one. By aerating the topsoil and breaking through compacted layers, the implement has stimulated soil biological and physical activity, improving water movement and root access. At the same time, this mixing has disturbed and redistributed the existing ryegrass seed bank, bringing dormant seed closer to the surface where moisture and light conditions favour germination.

Gillingarra site barley crop with ryegrass on 16/07/25 following amelioration.

The result has been a noticeable flush of ryegrass in the Fanger plots compared with other treatments. The Plozza plough, which cuts and inverts rather than mixes the soil, tends to bury weed seeds more deeply and has shown fewer weeds overall. The contrast between the two implements illustrates how soil disturbance style can have very different effects on weed seed dynamics.

Gillingarra gravel site weed counts 2025.
Gillingarra sand site weed counts 2025.
Why It’s Not the Same Everywhere

At other regional sites, the same trend has not been seen. In the 2024-established site (Dandaragan), both the Fanger and Plozza treatments have recorded lower weed numbers than the untreated controls. The difference likely reflects a combination of soil type, background seed bank, and timing of amelioration and seeding operations. Where amelioration occurred later and follow-up management was well timed, weeds were less able to establish before the crop gained ground.

Weed counts at the Dandaragan site 2025 (established 2024).

Similarly, at the 2025 site (Moora) that includes combination treatments such as Plozza + Delver + Horsch and Plozza + Delver + Spader, weed numbers are again lowest in the ameliorated plots. This suggests that soil mixing alone is not the only driver and that site history and timing play a large part in the outcome.

Weed counts at the Moora site 2025.
Managing the “Wake-Up” Effect

The flush of ryegrass in the Fanger plots is not necessarily a negative outcome. It shows that the soil has become more active and responsive. The disturbance has released nutrients and exposed seed, temporarily tipping the balance toward weed growth. With follow-up management, this can be a short-lived phase that precedes a more stable and productive soil condition.

Some management options for similar situations include:

  • Taking advantage of the improved soil condition by following with a competitive crop in subsequent years, once the seed bank is reduced.
  • Using early weed control post-amelioration to prevent ryegrass from setting seed in the first season.
  • Considering crop sequencing or rotation to help restore balance and maintain soil benefits without ongoing weed pressure.

It is also important to note that in this case, time constraints around seeding and spraying meant management options were limited. These practical challenges are common and can influence early outcomes, even when the underlying soil improvements are substantial.

Taking the Long View

Across the current network of Soil Water Repellence Project trial sites, amelioration continues to show benefits for crop establishment and overall weed suppression when compared with untreated control plots. The ryegrass response observed in the Fanger plots is a useful reminder that soil change can set off a chain of biological responses, some beneficial and some requiring additional management in the short term.

Over time, as soil structure stabilises and crop competition increases, weed populations are expected to decline. Continued monitoring across these sites will help determine how long these activation effects persist and how they can be best managed to support both soil health and crop performance.

In short, when the soil wakes up, everything within it becomes more active. Understanding and managing that response is part of the process of restoring water-repellent soils to a more productive state.

Infographics simplify potassium management for West Midlands growers

By Simon Kruger, WMG Project Communications Officer

Growers across the West Midlands region are finding that visual tools are helping to make complex soil and nutrient data easier to understand and apply.

As part of the GRDC-funded K Extension Project, West Midlands Group (WMG) has developed infographic-style potassium (K) budgets that turn soil test results, crop uptake, and nutrient recycling data into clear, accessible visuals.

An example WMG K Infographic.

Feedback from local farmers has been positive, with many describing the infographics as clearer and more practical than technical reports or spreadsheets. The visual format helps growers link nutrient data with soil type, crop performance and seasonal variation, providing a starting point for discussion and comparison between paddocks and years.

At the Ballidu demonstration site, hosted by a local grower, these tools have encouraged new conversations around K management. The site was featured as part of the Synergy Consulting spray group crop walk in August, where more than 20 growers from the Wongan Hills–Ballidu area viewed the contrasting responses across two soil types. The event provided an opportunity to introduce the infographic budgets and discuss how potassium interacts with nitrogen, soil constraints and rainfall patterns.

WMG Project Communications Officer Simon Kruger working through some WMG K Infographics with Ballidu grower Corey Mincherton.

Across earlier stages of the project, user testing confirmed that growers value straightforward and visual tools for interpreting nutrient information. Many found the K infographics easier to navigate than data tables, appreciating their ability to summarise soil test and fertiliser data in a way that supports practical discussion. Some early user testing with growers suggested including complementary information such as soil pH, compaction levels or benchmarking data to enhance the tool’s usefulness. These changes have been included in newer versions of the infographic, with other participants noting that results have prompted them to look more closely at sampling depth and nutrient variability across paddocks.

Former WMG Project Officer Melanie Dixon working through an early version of the WMG K Infographic with Warradarge grower Will Browne.

These responses reflect a broader shift toward more informed and strategic nutrient management. Several participants reported incorporating deeper soil sampling, grid mapping and plant tissue testing to refine fertiliser decisions and gain a clearer picture of nutrient cycling across their properties. Others emphasised that while nitrogen remains the main driver of fertiliser programs, understanding potassium’s role in soil productivity is becoming an increasingly important part of whole-farm nutrient planning.

Engagement with the project continues to grow, with strong interest in the infographic approach and an invitation for WMG to present findings at the Synergy Consulting group’s 2026 trials review meeting. Online activity has also been steady, with the project webpage, articles and social media posts collectively reaching more than a thousand growers and advisers.

The K Extension Project is demonstrating how practical communication tools can bridge the gap between research outputs and everyday management decisions. By presenting information in a clear, visual format, WMG is supporting growers to better understand potassium cycling and apply this knowledge to their own farming systems with confidence and context.

Evolving insights from the Soil Water Repellence Project

By Kate Parker & Simon Kruger, WMG

The GRDC-funded Soil Water Repellence Project has continued into its second year, expanding on more than a decade of West Midlands Group (WMG) research into soil amelioration and non-wetting sands. The project is exploring how different approaches perform across sand, sandy duplex, and gravel soils in the West Midlands region, with trial sites established at Dandaragan, Gillingarra and Moora.

Using a participatory action research approach, the project is working closely with local growers to track how amelioration influences soil water repellence, structure, water infiltration, and crop performance over time, and to better understand the practical realities that shape those results.

Shifting Performance Over Time

The 2025 season has provided valuable insight into how amelioration effects evolve beyond the first year. At Dandaragan, where treatments were applied in 2024, both the Plozza Plough and Nufab Rip/Delve (double pass) are now showing clearer benefits. Penetrometer readings indicate that treated plots continue to maintain lower soil strength and allow roots to penetrate more deeply than controls, in some cases reaching over 400mm before encountering resistance.                                           

Penetrometer readings for the Dandaragan site – Year 2 (2025).
Peak biomass at Dandaragan site – Year 2 (2025) *Although not statistically significant, we can see the deep rip/delve treatments are trending higher.

Interestingly, this represents a shift from the first year, when more moderate treatments (such as single-pass or shallower working systems) performed better. As soils have reconsolidated, the initially more aggressive treatments appear to have stabilised, improving both seedbed uniformity and subsoil structure. The finding reinforces the importance of multi-year monitoring, as early establishment benefits do not always predict long-term soil improvement.

At the new Gillingarra site, this season has demonstrated the importance of adapting management to paddock variability. The site features particularly variable sand-over-gravel and gravel soils, deliberately chosen by the host grower to test how different amelioration systems perform under challenging conditions.

The work has highlighted that amelioration is not simply about choosing the right machine, but about planning for what follows. Post-amelioration, the soil was noticeably looser and more “fluffy” than expected, which complicated seeding depth control and affected early establishment. The experience underscored that each amelioration pass changes the physical behaviour of the soil, requiring adjustments in how seeding, nutrition, and weed management are approached.

Although no significant differences in GS30 biomass have been detected statistically, field observations and penetrometer data suggest that treated plots still offered deeper root penetration and greater soil loosening than the controls. The process has provided the host grower with valuable first-hand experience to refine future amelioration programs, including factoring in seeding depth, soil reconsolidation time, and potential weed seedbank activation.

GS30 biomass at Gillingarra sand site – Year 1 (2025).
GS30 Biomass at Gillingarra gravel site- Year 1 (2025).

The Moora site, hosted by local grower John Minty, was the focus of the WMG & Summit Crop Walk earlier this season. The event, held in collaboration with Summit Fertilizers, drew a strong turnout from regional growers keen to see how nutrient management interacts with soil amelioration.

Discussions centred on how deep ripping and inversion treatments can influence the distribution of nutrients through the profile, particularly potassium and nitrogen, and how this affects crop performance over time. NDVI imagery and Peak biomass data supported these observations, showing more even crop growth and stronger biomass development in ameliorated plots compared with the control. While the trial comes to mature, the late-season contrasts are helping growers visualise how amelioration can complement broader soil fertility strategies.

Peak biomass at Moora site – Year 1 (2025).

Across all three sites, field observations remain a vital complement to laboratory results. At Gillingarra, for instance, laboratory testing showed little to no surface repellence, yet on-ground inspections revealed limited water movement in bare soil, with moisture following last year’s furrows. In contrast, areas retaining stubble cover demonstrated more even infiltration, confirming that surface management continues to influence soil wetting behaviour even after physical amelioration.

Looking Ahead

The second year of the Soil Water Repellence Project has reinforced that improving non-wetting soils is a process of refinement rather than a single-step fix. Grower involvement continues to be central to the project’s success, with each site offering unique lessons that extend beyond machinery choice.

Whether it’s managing a looser seedbed post-amelioration, adjusting nutrition strategies, or planning for weed control in disturbed soils, this season’s findings show that success depends on understanding how amelioration reshapes the whole farming system.

Monitoring will continue through 2026, with economic and agronomic analyses to be completed once the full dataset is available. The insights already emerging are helping local growers and advisers take a more informed, system-wide approach to tackling soil water repellence across the region’s variable landscapes.