Landline yesterday featured the newly sponsored GRDC soil biology project. They have exactly the right idea. We have seen enough in paddocks to agree that soil biology could lift water use efficiency from current levels of 50 to 60 per cent.
But they have Buckley's chance of doing much more than spending the $20 million over the next five years, and making their case for their third slice of the cake.
What have we learned from the first of these five-year soil biology projects?
And is rhizoctonia a major limitation to crop performance?
The Chicago man, Jack Gilbert, who was "full of praise for the GRDC approach", has already analysed 15,000 soil samples from around the world. We (W.A. farmers) have probably checked 150,000 soil samples over the last 30 years (5,000 samples a year?). What has this done for W.A. soils? Just look at the imbalance that has arisen between phosphorus and lime. So what chance to you give Chicago?
Maybe Pauline Mele's 30 billion bits of data from her Illumina sequencer will be more accurate?
I could go on, but you get the idea.
I wouldn't bother with this, if I couldn't suggest a better way.
But first, check it out for yourself -
http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2012/s3630158.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment