Tread warily if using new-tech
Tread warily if using new-tech
By Andrew Blake
EXCITING technology lies ahead to help arable farms. But most of it increases fixed costs and some of it could be downright misleading.
That was the key message from the Arable Research Centres director Mike Carver at last weeks Arable Outlook Conference at Durham.
Hard pressed growers should beware of blinkered thinking, warned Dr Carver. "Just because its new doesnt mean it is better and will suit your farm."
Precision farming, new fungicides and novel seed treatments all have roles to play, he explained. But the key, which some growers have neglected as such tools have caught the imagination, remains cost per tonne of production. "New technology invariably means bigger invoices.
Remarkable results
"We have had some quite remarkable strobilurin results." Inclusion of Amistar (azoxystrobin) in winter and spring barley disease control programmes has boosted yields by up to 75%. "But not in all trials," he stressed. Choice of tank-mix partner can have a profound effect.
ARC is heavily involved in HGCA-funded precision farming research, and yield maps can easily mislead growers, Dr Carver suggested. "We are most interested in what is causing the variations that shape yield and whether that variation is consistent or inconsistent." What matters is whether maps produced over several years indicate the same trends across a field, he explained.
"Precision farming is not about getting a uniform yield across a field. Its about maximising gross margins over each part of that field. Too many people are selling precision technology to a farming community that doesnt understand what its implication might be on their farms.
"You can map anything you like. The important thing is whether it influences yield and whether you could have influenced it anyway?"
Experience with 56 tissue tests for sulphur in a field in 1997 the need for mapping at the right time. "They showed a complete contrast between April and May. The very low S area shifted 200m. That suggests some of the technology to guide precision farming thinking is a little bit suspect. We must be careful not to be sucked into technology that isnt ready to be used. Some decisions could be made on the basis of very spurious information.
"Most of what is being done is based on hindsight agronomy, which can be very dangerous. We must move towards real-time agronomy." Infra-red aerial photography (see picture) to help detect the need for different nitrogen top-dressings across a field as early as January looks particularly promising, said Dr Carver. "Its very exciting."
New technology
New seed treatment technology from Monsanto offers scope to get first wheat performance from take-all prone second crops. But ARC trials show that is only possible when other factors such as sowing date and nitrogen use are optimised, he stressed.
"Without independent evaluation of all these new technologies, farmers will struggle to tell which will suit them and which wont."
• The recent merger of ARC with the North of England Arable Centre reinforces the science behind the vital regional information members demand, he noted.
Input effects on second wheat yield (t/ha)
Sept-sown, 160kg/ha N (split 20:80) 6.97
Oct-sown, 160kg/ha N (split 20:80) 7.81
Oct-sown, 240kg/ha N (split 40:60) 9.18
Sept-sown, 240kg/ha N (split 40:60) + Mon 65506 9.27
Oct-sown, 240kg/ha (split 40:60) + Mon 65506 9.51