Bulletin 25 2010 - BSES

issue 25 | 2010
bulletin
Providing information to the Australian sugarcane industry since 1933
PG 3
Evaluation of varieties
for a controlled-traffic
farming system
PG 10
Canegrub management and
new farming systems
PG 16
Cost savings from zonal tillage
PG 22
Expos´ e on major cane diseases
for new sugar industry staff

Bses Bses LiMiTeD / eOiN WALLis
CeO’s MessAGe
issue 25 2010
Introduction of the new
systems of farming sugarcane
have inevitably led to new
scrutiny of how we manage
pests and diseases.
In this Bulletin issue, BSES researchers
Peter Samson from Mackay, Keith
Chandler from Bundaberg and Nader
Sallam from Gordonvale take us through
a comprehensive review of sustainable
canegrub control in the light of the
new systems.
BSES and the Sugar Research and
Development Corporation (SRDC) have
invested in research to determine the
influence of different agronomic practices
on the risk of canegrub infestations.
Working within this program, Peter
and Keith have contributed to the
development of an integrated approach
to monitoring and managing canegrubs.
Their article outlines the general principles
of canegrub management, the influence
CONTeNTs
of legume rotations, and the implications
of adopting controlled-traffic and reduced
tillage to influence canegrub numbers and
means of their control.
Their research found that the effectiveness
of soil-borne fungal and protozoan diseases
on canegrub numbers was enhanced
under reduced tillage. In far northern
Queensland infections of greyback
canegrubs with Metarhizium fungus were
significantly greater in ratoon fields that
had been prepared with zonal rather
than conventional tillage. They also found
that spores of Metarhizium fungus were
retained in the undisturbed soil when new
cane was planted into old rows, leaving
those spores in higher concentrations
and in the best position to infect future
generations of grubs.
Insecticides still play a vital role in canegrub
control. Peter, Keith and Nader give a
comprehensive overview of insecticide use,
including what types to use, appropriate
Front Cover: pg 16
Cost savings from zonal tillage
dosage, means of application, and
timing. They also highlight the importance
of monitoring as a basis for making
informed decisions about future
canegrub management. They stress
the importance of timing – for instance,
detection of small grubs in autumn is
an indicator that large damaging grubs
will appear in the following spring-
summer if management measures are
not introduced.
An SRDC-funded grower group at Isis is
preparing to test monitoring systems for
canegrub over the next two years. We
await the results with interest. Growers
will also shortly benefit from a booklet
currently in preparation that describes
canegrub management within the new
farming systems.
Eoin Wallis
evALuATiON Of vArieTies fOr A CONTrOLLeD-TrAffiC fArMiNG sysTeM
vArieTies reLeAseD iN 2009
MANAGiNG sOyBeAN sTuBBLe
CANeGruB MANAGeMeNT AND NeW fArMiNG sysTeMs
BiOseCuriTy feATure pArT 5 / rAMu sTuNT
COsT sAviNGs frOM zONAL TiLLAGe
BLAsT frOM The pAsT
suGArCANe CrC sTrives TO eNhANCe BiOTeChNOLOGy eDuCATiON
expOse ON MAjOr CANe DiseAses fOr NeW suGAr iNDusTry sTAff
BrAziL sees OrANGe
WeeD prOfiLe: BeLL viNe / COMMON MOrNiNG GLOry
2009 TeChNiCAL reseArCh repOrTs NOW AvAiLABLe
We encourage and welcome your feedback.
Please visit bses.org.au to contact the team.
3
7
9
10
14
16
19
20
22
24
25
26

QCrOps / BArry sALTer
evALuATiON Of vArieTies
fOr A CONTrOLLeD-TrAffiC
fArMiNG sysTeM
AN srDC fuNDeD prOjeCT TiTLeD ‘evALuATiON Of GeNOTypes fOr A
CONTrOLLeD-TrAffiC fArMiNG sysTeM’ is CurreNTLy uNDerWAy.
Project leader Dr Barry Salter, research
agronomist based at BSES Mackay
discusses progress to date.
Some years ago the Sugar Yield Decline
Joint Venture (SYDJV) recommended
that sugarcane be grown using controlledtraffic,
following its findings that, when
coupled with legume fallow crops and
reduced tillage, a controlled-traffic
system brought significant improvements
to soil health. The system has been
widely adopted, and row spacings
between 1.8 and 2.0 m are now
common throughout the industry.
Now an SRDC-funded project* is underway
to determine whether varieties that
ere selected on 1.5 m single row
configurations are suitable for wider
row configurations (both single and
dual). Experiments in progress are also
determining what changes are needed
TABlE 1 | Trial information.
to the selection system, to ensure that
varieties with good performance on
wide-row configurations are released
in the future.
TriALs
Trials comprising four current varieties
and three row configurations were
established at Bundaberg, Mackay, Ingham
and Meringa. In the Burdekin, six current
varieties and two row configurations were
used. Trial information is summarised in
Table 1.
At the time trials were planted, sugarcane
smut was found in Queensland, therefore
smut-resistant varieties were selected
where possible. In the Burdekin,
researchers included Q117 and Tellus A ,
which were known to have different growth
patterns. Q117 tends to produce a small
number of large stalks, while Tellus A is
characterised by slow growth early in
crop development. Both of these growth
habits may be an advantage in dual row
systems, as plants may suffer less from
lodging than fast-growing varieties with a
large number of thin stalks. All the trials
except Mackay were sampled over the
plant and 1 st ratoon crops.
r esuLTs
The results from Bundaberg (Table 2)
showed that there was no difference in
yield – tonnes of cane per hectare (TCH)
and tonnes of sugar per hectare (TSH) –
among row configurations. Differences
were found among varieties – Q232 A and
Q208 A performed best. No statistically
significant variety-by-row spacing
interaction was found. All varieties reacted
to the different row configurations in a
similar manner. When a variety performed
well it did so on all row configurations.
Trials Genotype Row configuration Planter Land preparation Planting date
Bundaberg
Mackay
Burdekin
Ingham
Meringa
Q151
Q190 A
Q208 A
Q232 A
Q190 A
Q200 A
Q208 A
Q209 A
Q117
Q171 A
Q200 A
Q208 A
KQ228 A
Tellus A
Q135
Q174 A
Q183 A
Q200 A
Q186 A
Q200 A
Q201 A
Q220 A
1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual (500 mm)
1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual (500 mm)
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual (450 mm)
1.63 m single
1.83 m single
1.83 m dual (450 mm)
1.52 m single
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual (500 mm)
DDOP – DOuBlE-DISC OPENER PlANTER. ROW CONfIGuRATION – VAluES IN
BRACKETS REPRESENT DISTANCE BETWEEN DuAl ROWS
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
DDOP
Mouldboard
DDOP
DDOP
Mouldboard
Mouldboard
Mouldboard
Planted flat + hill-up 13–17 September
2007
Pre-formed beds 13–15 September
2006
Pre-formed beds 9–4 May 2007
Planted flat + hill-up 1–9 August 2006
Planted flat + hill up 15–24 August 2006
p 3 i s s u e 2 5

4
QCrOps / BArry sALTer
TABlE 2 | Cane (TCH) and sugar yield (TSH) of varieties Q151, Q190 A , Q208 A and Q232 A grown on 1.5 m single, 1.8 m single and
1.8 m dual rows near Bundaberg.
Bundaberg
crop
Yield
AVERAGES fOllOWED BY THE SAME lETTER ARE NOT SIGNIfICANTlY DIffERENT
At Mackay (Table 3) crops on the
1.8 m single row configuration yielded
significantly less than those on the 1.5 m
single and 1.8 m dual row configurations.
There were variety differences, with
Q190 A performing poorly at the site
but no variety-by-row configuration
interaction. All varieties performed poorly
on the 1.8 m single row spacing.
In the Burdekin (Table 4) no difference
was found between the 1.85 m single
and 1.85 m dual row configurations.
Row configuration
Plant TCH 1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
TSH
1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
1st Ratoon TCH 1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
Q151 A
Although large difference in yield were
found between varieties these differences
were not statistically significant, due to
large variation within the trial. The
variety-by-row configuration interaction
was not significant.
All varieties produced similar yield on
the 1.85 m single and 1.85 m dual row
configurations. There was no evidence that
the growth patterns exhibited by Q117
and Tellus A were an advantage on the
dual row configuration.
At Ingham, there was no significant
difference between row configurations
(Table 5). A variety effect was found
due to the poor performance of Q183 A .
The variety-by-row configuration effect
was not statistically significant. All
varieties responded to the different row
configurations in a similar manner.
TABlE 3 | Cane (TCH) and sugar (TSH) yield of varieties Q190 A , Q200 A , Q208 A and Q209 A grown on 1.5 m single, 1.8 m
single and 1.8 m dual rows near Mackay.
Mackay
crop
TSH
Yield
1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
Row configuration
Plant TCH 1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
TSH
1.5 m single
1.8 m single
1.8 m dual
Average
134.1
134.2
132.5
133.6 ab
18.4
19.1
18.8
18.8 ab
124.9
108.9
95.7
109.8 a
AVERAGES fOllOWED BY THE SAME lETTER ARE NOT SIGNIfICANTlY DIffERENT
Q190 A
124.7
120.6
134.0
126.4 a
Q208A Variety
138.1
134.8
149.9
140.9 ab
Q232 A
144.2
145.6
153.4
147.7 b
[At the time trials were planted, sugarcane smut was
found in Queensland, therefore smut-resistant varieties were
selected where possible.]
21.1
18.6
15.9
18.5 a
Q190 A
93.4
83.6
95.2
90.7 a
15.4
13.9
16.1
15.1 a
17.3
16.7
18.3
17.5 a
116.8
108.8
112.7
112.8 ab
19.5
17.9
18.8
18.7 a
Q200 A
124.6
104.9
125.6
118.4 c
21.9
18.1
21.9
20.6 b
18.6
19.1
21.1
19.6 bc
145.3
140.5
139.5
141.8 c
25.3
24.7
23.6
24.5 b
Q208A Variety
120.1
96.4
127.1
114.6 bc
20.9
16.6
22.6
19.8 b
20.0
21.6
23.0
21.6 c
120.5
127.2
126.0
124.6 b
19.8
21.4
20.5
20.6 a
Q209 A
113.3
98.0
106.1
105.8 b
20.6
17.9
19.3
19.3 b
Average
135.3 a
133.8 a
142.4 a
18.6 a
19.1 a
20.3 a
126.9 a
121.4 a
118.5 a
21.4 a
20.6 a
19.7 a
Average
112.8 b
95.7 a
113.5 b
19.7 b
16.6 a
19.8 b

TABlE 4 | Cane (TCH) and sugar (TSH) yield of varieties Q117, Q171 A , Q200 A , Q208 A , KQ228 A and Tellus A grown on
1.8 m single and 1.8 m dual rows in the Burdekin.
Burdekin
crop
Yield
Row configuration
Plant TCH 1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Average
TSH
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Average
1st Ratoon TCH 1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Average
Q117
162.6
158.4
160.5a AVERAGES fOllOWED BY THE SAME lETTER ARE NOT
SIGNIfICANTlY DIffERENT
[All varieties produced
similar yield on the 1.85 m
single and 1.85 m dual row
configurations.]
TABlE 5 | Cane (TCH) and sugar (TSH) yield of varieties Q135,
Q174 A , Q183 A and Q200 A grown on 1.63 m single, 1.83 m single
and 1.83 m dual rows near Ingham.
Ingham
crop
TSH
Yield
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Average
25.9
26.0
26.0 a
135.5
147.0
141.3 a
21.5
22.6
22.0 a
Row configuration
Plant TCH 1.63 m single
1.83 m single
1.83 m dual
Mean
TSH
1.63 m single
1.83 m single
1.83 m dual
Mean
1st Ratoon TCH 1.63 m single
1.83 m single
1.83 m dual
Mean
TSH
1.63 m single
1.83 m single
1.83 m dual
Mean
Q171A 147.7
150.6
149.1a 23.8
24.2
24.0 a
138.2
136.0
137.1 a
23.5
22.8
23.2 a
Q135
135.8
131.9
159.0
142.2b 21.8
21.5
25.0
22.8 b
104.6
99.1
113.0
105.6 b
16.0
15.6
17.5
16.3 b
Variety
AVERAGES fOllOWED BY THE SAME lETTER ARE NOT SIGNIfICANTlY DIffERENT
Q200 A Q208 A KQ228 A Tellus A
138.3
145.2
141.8 a
21.8
22.3
22.0 a
148.8
149.7
149.3 a
22.6
21.1
21.9 a
Q174A 140.0
136.8
126.0
134.3b 22.2
21.9
20.0
21.4 ab
103.4
96.6
104.0
101.3 b
17.2
15.5
17.4
16.7 b
184.5
172.2
178.3 a
30.4
25.7
28.1 a
148.3
161.1
154.7 a
21.2
22.5
21.9 a
Variety
Q183A 111.4
125.0
118.3
118.2a 17.9
20.3
19.4
19.2 a
92.9
87.5
82.6
87.7 a
15.3
13.8
13.6
14.2 a
165.3
183.3
174.3 a
27.3
28.3
27.8 a
140.2
137.9
139.1 a
22.5
21.4
22.0 a
169.9
176.6
173.2 a
26.5
28.2
27.2 a
160.8
159.3
160.0 a
23.6
23.0
23.3 a
Q200A 119.3
138.3
138.0
131.9b 19.4
22.2
22.6
21.4 ab
101.4
97.7
113.2
104.1 b
16.7
16.1
18.7
17.2 b
Average
161.4 a
164.4 a
26.0 a
25.8 a
145.3 a
148.5 a
22.5 a
22.2 a
Mean
126.6 a
133.0 a
135.3 a
20.3 a
21.5 a
21.8 a
100.6 a
95.2 a
103.2 a
16.3 a
15.2 a
16.8 a
p 5 i s s u e 2 5

6
QCrOps / BArry sALTer
[It is clear from all the trials that current varieties
are suitable for different row configurations. No variety-by-row
configuration interaction was found in any trial.]
TABlE 6 | Cane (TCH) and sugar (TSH) yield of varieties Q186 A , Q200 A , Q201 A and Q220 A grown on 1.52 m single, 1.85 m
single and 1.85 m dual rows at Meringa.
Meringa
crop
AVERAGES fOllOWED BY THE SAME lETTER ARE NOT SIGNIfICANTlY DIffERENT
At Meringa (Table 6) a significant row
configuration effect was found in the
1st ratoon crop. Significantly less cane
(TCH) was produced on the 1.85 m single
row configuration by comparison with
the 1.52 m single and 1.85 m dual row
configurations. Although not significant,
there was also a strong trend for lower
sugar yield in the 1st ratoon crop on the
1.85 m single row configuration.
Q200 A and Q220 A performed well at this
site but again there was no significant
variety-by-row spacing interaction. As
explained previously, this means that the
varieties all responded to the different row
configurations in a similar manner.
DisCussiON
Yield
It is clear from all the trials that current
varieties are suitable for different row
configurations. No variety-by-row
configuration interaction was found
in any trial. This suggests that if you
select a variety that performs well at a
particular site, it will perform well on all
row configurations. It also indicates that
varieties that perform well on wide-row
configurations are making it through the
breeding program (and will continue to
do so).
Row configuration
Plant TCH 1.52 m single
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Mean
TSH
1.52 m single
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Mean
1st Ratoon TCH 1.52 m single
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Mean
TSH
1.52 m single
1.85 m single
1.85 m dual
Mean
Q186A 103.0
91.4
101.4
98.6a 16.5
14.4
15.6
15.5 a
104.0
95.1
105.1
101.4 a
18.9
16.9
19.1
18.3 a
Q200A 115.7
114.8
119.3
116.6bc 18.9
18.0
19.2
18.7 bc
116.8
105.1
117.2
113.0 b
21.1
19.3
21.8
20.7 b
In two trials (Mackay and Meringa)
the wide single-row configuration
produced significantly lower yields than
the narrow single and wide dual-row
configurations. This is most likely related
to the environmental conditions at each
site. Trials that had access to irrigation
(Bundaberg and Burdekin) did not show
any loss of yield on the wide single-row
configuration. Even though irrigation
was available at Mackay, the soil surface
sealed and water was shed from the
beds, resulting in very dry soil conditions
during establishment. It appears that if any
significant stress (drought, waterlogging,
etc.) is encountered, the wide single-row
configuration can produce too few stalks to
reach maximum yield. Environmental stress
can also prevent the stalks that are present
from increasing in size to compensate for
low numbers.
Planting rates on the wide single-row
configuration may also be too low and
contributing to this issue, particularly in
trials where billets are often placed endto-end
due to limited planting material.
Growers planting wide single rows with
billet planters and higher planting rates
don’t appear to be suffering this yield loss.
Variety
Q201A 112.3
100.2
115.6
109.3b 17.7
15.6
18.1
17.1 b
110.3
91.5
102.2
101.4 a
19.2
16.1
17.4
17.6 a
Q220A 123.6
121.0
126.5
123.7c 19.5
19.2
19.7
19.5 c
131.4
117.8
132.6
127.3 c
23.0
20.7
23.6
22.4 b
Mean
113.7 a
106.8 a
115.7 a
18.1 a
16.8 a
18.2 a
115.6 b
102.4 a
114.3 b
20.6 a
18.2 a
20.5 a
Average cane yields for both the narrow
and wide single-row configurations were
118.8 and 112.6 t/ha, respectively (showing
an average 5% reduction in yield on the
wide single-row configuration). If this
reduction was experienced in commercial
crops, it would have to be assessed against
the positive attributes of a controlled-traffic
farming system.
The variety effects found in these trials are
likely to be site-specific. As an example,
the poor performance of Q183 A at the site
near Ingham may just indicate that it was
not suited to that particular soil type rather
than indicating that Q183 A will not perform
well in the Ingham region in general. This
should be kept in mind when assessing the
performance of the varieties at each site.
*BSS296 – Evaluation of genotypes for
a controlled-traffic farming system is
funded by SRDC.

QCANes / vArieTy upDATe
vArieTies reLeAseD
iN 2009
The QueeNsLAND DepArTMeNT Of eMpLOyMeNT, eCONOMiC
DeveLOpMeNT AND iNNOvATiON ApprOves ALL suGArCANe vArieTies
reLeAseD iN QueeNsLAND.
This approval process follows on from
recommendations made by regional
committees and is endorsed by the CEO
of BSES. Varieties are approved for release
to Pest Quarantine Areas (PQAs) based on
their disease ratings. Disease thresholds
have been set in each region for a number
of important diseases and the varieties
must meet these standards.
In 2009 three varieties were released in
Queensland; they are Q238 A , MQ239 A
and Q240 A . A brief description of each
variety, the region and PQA where it is
approved is set out below. for grower
convenience, a full colour copy of the
PQAs and Regulations – set out as an
A3 poster with the shed in mind – is
included with this Bulletin issue.
Q238 A fOr The
CeNTrAL reGiON (pQA4)
This variety was selected from a cross
between Q138 x Q155. Q238 A is resistant
to smut, pachymetra, brown rust, orange
rust, and leaf scald. It has performed well
on poor soil types, however no trials have
been carried out on black earth. This
variety has been observed in the field with
chlorotic streak, so growers should avoid
planting in areas prone to this condition.
Q238 A for the Central region (PQA4).
MQ239 A for the Herbert region (PQA2a).
Q240 A for the Southern region (PAQ5 and 6).
The variety has an erect stool, with many
average-to-thick cream stalks turning light
green on exposure to sunlight. leaves are
erect and curve near the tip. Red stripes
and blotches are present on the leaf sheath,
with few hairs present on the back of the
leaf sheath, no auricles, and a distinct wax
band. Growth cracks are present, trash
remains loosely attached, and arrowing is
normally sparse. Q238 A is also approved for
southern regions (PQA5 and 6) and is being
propagated for release in 2011.
MQ239 A fOr The
herBerT reGiON
(pQA2A)
MQ239 A is a joint BSES-CSR release.
It was selected from the cross between
Q96 x MQ77-340. MQ239 A is highly
resistant to smut and ratoons strongly.
It has a relatively low CCS, but is a highyielding
variety particularly suitable for
very poor soils (eg Ingham line).
This variety has green stalks turning
creamy-brown on exposure to sunlight.
It has wide dark green leaves with a
slightly bunched top and moderately
clingy trash. Habit is generally erect,
but large crops are susceptible to
heavy sprawling/lodging.
Q 24 0 A fOr The
sOuTherN reGiON
(pQA5 AND 6)
Q240 A was selected from a cross between
QN81-289 x SP78-3137. This is the first
variety to be released with a Brazilian
variety (SP78-3137) as the male parent.
SP78-3137 was imported to Australia as
part of a variety exchange agreement
between BSES and the Centro de
Tecnologia Canavieira (formerly known
as Copersucar) in Brazil.
Q240 A is resistant to smut, leaf scald,
mosaic, orange rust, and red rot. It suits
a wide range of soils – black clay, grey
forest, heavy alluvials, poor grey forest and
sands, red forest, red volcanic and light
alluvials. This broad-leaved variety has
green thick-to-average stalks that change
to maroon when exposed to sunlight. It has
a medium-to-strong wax covering, an open
stool, and is hairless or only minimal hairs.
Q240 A is also approved for the central
region (PQA4) and with the industry’s
authorisation it will be propagated for
release in 2012.
The above variety data were retrieved
from the web-based variety information
and whole-farm variety-planning tool
QCANESelect, which growers can access
through the BSES website (bses.org.au).
[Q240 A is the first
variety to be released
with a Brazilian
variety as the male
parent.]
p 7 i s s u e 2 5

8
QCANes / vArieTy upDATe
pesT QuArANTiNe
AreAs (pQA)
N
Latitude 19 degrees 15 minutes (South)
CAMOOWEAL
Latitude 20 degrees 33 minutes (South)
MOUNT ISA
Latitude 23 degrees 27 minutes (South)
Latitude 25 degrees 18.7 minutes (South)
legeNd
GDA
PQA1
PQA2
Latitude 18 degrees 19 minutes (South)
PQA2a
PQA3
PQA4
PQA5
Town
PQA boundary
All coordinates are in
[Geocentric Datum of
Australia 1994]
Far NortherN
WEIPA
Latitude 13 degrees 45 minutes (South)
COEN
COOKTOWN
CoeN to Cardwell
CROYDON
GEORGETOWN
towNsville to BoweN
RICHMOND
INNISFAIL
BoweN to roCkhamptoN
LONGREACH
roCkhamptoN to howard
PQA6
INGHAM
CHARTERS TOWERS
howard to New south wales Border
[In 2009 three varieties were released in Queensland.
They are Q238 A , MQ239 A and Q240 A .]
TULLY
Cardwell to towNsville
AYR
COLLINSVILLE
plant protection
regulation 2002
Latitude 19 degrees 53 minutes (South)
BOWEN
MACKAY
MARLBOROUGH
EMERALD
ROCKHAMPTON
MOUNT MORGAN
MIRIAM VALE
GLADSTONE
BUNDABERG
HOWARD
MARYBOROUGH
ROMA NAMBOUR
KILCOY woodford special
BRISBANE
TOOWOOMBA
PQA7

MAryBOrOuGh CANe prODuCTiviTy serviCes / ANDreW DOuGALL
MANAGiNG sOyBeAN sTuBBLe
iN This ArTiCLe ANDreW DOuGALL, MAryBOrOuGh CANe
prODuCTiviTy serviCes, OuTLiNes fOur WAys TO MAke The BesT use
Of vALuABLe sOyBeAN sTuBBLe.
Soybean stubble is high in nitrogen, it
helps prevent soil erosion and it can
inhibit weeds. Managing stubble should
be on growers’ minds post-harvest. Below
are some tips for gaining the most from
this valuable resource.
spreAD sTrAW eveNLy
Check that the straw spreaders on the
soybean harvester are working well.
Remember that soybean crop residue is
3.5% nitrogen. Therefore, if the stubble is
not spread evenly, some sections of the
field will end up with higher soil nitrogen
than others. This will produce an uneven
sugarcane crop.
1 3
IMAGE 1
Good straw spreading is the first step.
LeAve The sTuBBLe AND
sTrAW ON The sOiL
surfACe fOr As LONG
As pOssiBLe
Once soybean residue is buried, it breaks
down faster and the nitrogen is released
quickly. In winter, there is no crop to take
up this nitrogen.
2
IMAGE 2
Soybean stubble - its valuable! leave it
on the soil surface as long as you can.
Trials in Queensland showed that this
nitrogen could be lost through leaching,
especially if there is a lot of rain. A recently
commenced project in the New South
Wales sugar industry will compare stubble
incorporation after soybean harvest with
leaving it on the soil surface.
CONsiDer MiNiMuM-TiLL
CANe pLANTiNG
Cane planting practices that leave the
soybean stubble on the soil surface can
slow the breakdown of the soybean
residue over summer. This means that the
nitrogen will be released slowly and taken
up, as the cane needs it.
IMAGE 3-4
Minimum till cane planting - note the
stubble retained on the soil surface.
4
CONTrOL WiNTer WeeDs
Winter weeds in your soybean
stubble can:
• maintain or carry over disease
• deplete soil moisture
• cause problems with land preparation
for cane
• use the valuable nitrogen fixed by
soybeans
The best way to control weeds over winter
is with knockdown herbicides as cultivation
is not required. The fallow phase before
and after soybean provides a good
opportunity to treat difficult-to-control
weeds such as nutgrass.
TAke-hOMe MessAGe!
Consider soybean stubble as a valuable
asset in your farming system. By evenly
spreading the straw, leaving it on the
surface as long as possible, minimum
till cane planting and controlling winter
weeds, you can make the best use of
this valuable resource.
p 9 i s s u e 2 5

10 Treatment
QCrOps / peTer sAMsON, keiTh ChANDLer, NADer sALLAM
CANeGruB MANAGeMeNT AND
NeW fArMiNG sysTeMs
iN This ArTiCLe Bses priNCipAL reseArCher peTer sAMsON BAseD AT MACkAy,
seNiOr reseArCher keiTh ChANDLer BAseD AT BuNDABerG AND reseArCher
NADer sALLAM BAseD AT GOrDONvALe DisCuss The iMpOrTANT TOpiC Of CANeGruB
CONTrOL iN The LiGhT Of NeWLy iNTrODuCeD AGrONOMiC prACTiCes.
Many cane growers are adopting one or
more of the farming techniques developed
over the past decade that involve legume
rotations, controlled-traffic and reduced
tillage. Canegrub control is critical to
successful sugarcane farming in Australia.
It is vital that with these changes to
agronomic systems, growers maintain
good control of these pests (as well as
other pests, diseases and weeds).
‘New farming systems’ should encompass
not only sustainable agronomic practices
but also sustainable pest management
with more precisely targeted pesticide
application than has been the rule.
Monitoring to decide when and where to
treat for canegrub control should be part
of any new system.
In this article we consider the influence
of different agronomic practices on the
risk of canegrub infestations, and outline
an integrated approach to monitoring
and managing them. We draw heavily on
recent research on canegrub management
in new farming systems funded in part
by the Sugar Research and Development
Corporation. More detail will be available
in an upcoming booklet.
GeNerAL priNCipLes
Of CANeGruB
MANAGeMeNT
These principles should guide sustainable
pest management in sugarcane:
• When adopting sustainable farming
systems, avoid practices that increase
grub numbers or exaggerate their effect
on the crop
• Adopt pest monitoring systems that
allow you to:
- apply canegrub control measures
when justified by risk and by cost
and expected benefits
- avoid applying insecticides when
not needed – thus saving money
by avoiding unnecessary treatment,
minimising the risk of environmental
contamination, and delaying
development of pest resistance to
insecticides and accelerated
breakdown in soil
iNfLueNCe Of LeGuMe
rOTATiONs
Canegrubs sometimes turn up in soybean
crops that are grown in rotation with
sugarcane, and they will feed on soybean
roots. However, legumes do not create
canegrub problems. There are big benefits
from legume rotations, so growers should
grow legumes and monitor and manage
the risks from canegrubs as set out below.
Soybean crops may harbour greyback and
southern 1-year canegrubs (1-year species)
and Childers and negatoria canegrubs
(2-year species). for the 2-year species,
canegrubs in soybean crops may include
both newly recruited grubs plus grubs
surviving into their second year.
Nevertheless, actively growing crops of
sugarcane are still the most attractive
places for cane beetles to fly to and lay
eggs – see Table 1. The main indicator
determining risk of canegrub attack is
the presence of grubs in the previous
cane crop.
TABlE 1 | Comparison of numbers
of greyback canegrubs in plots with
different fallows; many more grubs
were found in plots with ratooning
cane than in fallow or soybean plots.
Cultivated fallow
Grubs /
8 holes
0.0
Cultivated + soybean 0.3
Sprayout fallow
0.8
Sprayout + soybean 1.0
Ratooning cane
20.3
Soybean crops are an opportunity to
monitor fields for canegrubs, as the
fields are easily accessible and any light
infestations can then easily be managed in
the following cane crop. Cane volunteers
seem to attract egg-laying beetles, so
monitor those first for any sign of grubs.
legume rotations may assist canegrub
management by favouring the occurrence
of natural diseases of canegrubs. A variety
of disease organisms that live in soil can
give some natural control of the grubs.
The two most important of these are the
fungus Metarhizium (the active component
of the biocontrol product BioCane) and
the protozoan Adelina, but other grub
diseases such as milky disease also occur.
Significantly more greyback canegrubs
were infected with the pathogen Adelina
in ratoon fields in far northern Queensland
(where Adelina is abundant) when there
had been a soybean crop prior to planting
(see Table 2).

IMAGE 1 | Spores of the protozoan disease Adelina in the haemolymph (‘blood’) of a
greyback canegrub (CSIRO photograph).
TABlE 2 | Percentage of greyback
canegrubs infected with the grubdisease
Adelina in a survey of canefields
with or without a soybean rotation
before planting (numbers in brackets
are number of fields surveyed).
Region % with different
rotations
Central
Herbert
Innisfail -
Tully
Mulgrave
Combined
Soybeans No rotation
5 (4)
26 (8)
14 (2)
24 (9)
21 (23)
2 (17)
11 (19)
16 (17)
18 (25)
12 (78)
However, similar results were not seen
in central Queensland where the disease
is very uncommon. Changes to farming
systems in districts where pathogens are
currently rare are unlikely to bring about
rapid change in grub disease status in
those fields.
CONTrOLLeD-TrAffiC
AND reDuCeD TiLLAGe
Tillage, even if very intensive, will not
eliminate existing canegrub infestations or
prevent new ones.
for example, canegrubs were sampled in
soybeans that had either been (i) directdrilled
into cane that had been sprayed
out with glyphosate or planted after cane
stools had been disced out; or (ii) planted
after full cultivation (eg plough, disc and
rotary hoe). Prior intensive cultivation did
not eliminate most species of canegrubs
from fields – see Table 3 below.
TABlE 3 | Comparison of numbers of
canegrubs in (i) soybean crops that were
either direct-drilled or planted after discing
or (ii) planted after full cultivation.
Canegrub Average grubs per
hole (no. fields
sampled in brackets)
Greyback
Southern 1-year
Childers:
1st yr grubs
2nd yr grubs
Directdrilled
or disced
0.9 (3)
0.6 (1)
0.9 (6)
0.7 (6)
Reduced tillage also seems to benefit
canegrub control by preserving grub
diseases in the soil. In far northern
Queensland, infections of greyback
canegrubs with the common disease
IMAGE 3 | Greyback canegrub infected and killed by Metarhizium fungus
(CSIRO photograph).
Full
cultivation
0.0 (4)
0.4 (3)
1.1 (9)
0.7 (9)
IMAGE 2 | Canegrub-damaged
sugarcane.
Metarhizium were significantly greater
in ratoon fields where fields had been
prepared for planting with zonal tillage
– cultivation of only the row and not the
interspace – rather than conventional
(full) tillage – see Table 4.
TABlE 4 | Percentage of greyback
canegrubs killed by the disease
Metarhizium in canefields prepared
for planting by either zonal or
conventional tillage.
District Average % infected
(no. fields in brackets)
Innisfail -
Tully
Mulgrave
Combined
Zonal Conventional
22 (4)
11 (6)
15 (10)
6 (14)
6 (28)
6 (42)
IMAGE 4 | Cane stool damaged by
greyback canegrub.
p 1 1 i s s u e 2 5

12
QCrOps / peTer sAMsON, keiTh ChANDLer, NADer sALLAM
We demonstrated at Tully that zero-
or zonal-tillage planting preserves
Metarhizium spores in the cane row – the
best position to come into contact with
future generations of canegrubs. In an
old ratoon where Metarhizium had been
infecting greyback canegrubs, most spores
were under stools in the row, with fewer
on the side of the row and very few in the
interspace – see figure 1.
With zero tillage and a double-disc
opener planter or with zonal tillage (rotary
+ ripper/grubber + rotary in 76 cm band)
and a conventional planter, planting back
into the old rows, the Metarhizium spores
in the new cane crop remained in the best
position to contact future generations of
canegrubs. figure 2 shows results for the
zonal-tillage option.
iNseCTiCiDes
We tested two questions about canegrub
control with insecticide applied when
using double-disc opener planters or in
dual rows, relative to their registrations
for conventional planters and single rows.
The questions were:
Spores/g OD soil (x 10 3 )
50
40
30
20
10
0
OlD RATOON
0 mm 250 mm 500 mm 750 mm
Lateral position
• Should application rates be increased
for dual rows? (There are about 11,100
metres of crop-row per hectare for
dual rows with 1.8 m between beds,
compared with 6,700 row metres for
single rows at 1.5 m spacing.)
• Are the narrow row-bands of
insecticide from double-disc opener
planters as effective as wider bands
that are obtained when using
conventional planters?
fIGuRE 1 | Numbers of Metarhizium spores in an old ratoon crop,
from the centre of the row (0 mm) to the centre of the interspace (750
mm); note that most spores were in the row – where canegrubs live.
[‘New farming systems’
should encompass not only
sustainable agronomic practices but
also sustainable pest management
with more precisely targeted
pesticide application than has been
the rule.]
Effective application rates of insecticides
suSCon Blue, suSCon Maxi and Confidor
Guard in dual rows were within the range
currently on the registered labels: the
high end of current label rates per 100 m
of single row was effective when applied
as the same amount per 100 m of dual-
row bed.
Both suSCon Blue and suSCon Maxi gave
satisfactory control of greyback canegrub
when applied in narrow bands between
the discs of a double-disc opener planter
– comparable to control in conventional
furrow-width bands.
Spores/g OD soil (x 10 3 )
50
40
30
20
10
0
Control of greyback and Childers
canegrubs with suSCon Maxi was also
satisfactory when applied at fill-in of
conventional planting furrows in a dualrow
configuration.
Confidor Guard (liquid imidacloprid) gave
at least 1-year control of greyback and
Childers canegrubs in dual rows when
applied either at planting or at fill-in.
Confidor Guard was effective when applied
using coulters in dual-row ratoons (for
greyback and southern 1-year canegrubs)
and in dual-row plant cane (for greyback
canegrub). When applying Confidor Guard
in dual rows against greyback canegrub,
twin coulters were slightly more effective
than a single coulter.
use patterns in new farming systems
differ from label recommendations in
conventional systems. Despite the fact
that application rates are comparable,
recommendations to industry cannot be
made until the Australian Pesticides and
Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA)
approves the changes.
ZONAl TIllAGE,
CONVENTIONAl PlANTER
Row Shoulder Interrow
0-150 mm 150-300 mm
fIGuRE 2 | Numbers of Metarhizium spores with a zonaltillage
system at two depths; spore distribution in the new crop
(1st ratoon) was similar to the old crop cycle.

MONiTOriNG
Childers canegrub life cycle
Eggs Early instars
Late instars
Dec
Jan -
Mar
GRUB
SAMPLE
Apr -
May Jun -
Sep
Oct -
Apr
DAMAGE
SURVEY
Monitoring allows growers to make
informed decisions on future canegrub
management. The process could involve
monitoring numbers of canegrubs or signs
of their presence– ideally it would be best
to monitor both numbers of grubs and
levels of damage.
A monitoring system for greyback
canegrub in central and northern
Queensland is outlined in the
GrubPlan 2007 booklet, available on the
BSES website. We have developed models
to predict numbers of greyback canegrubs
one year ahead, using monitoring
information. Grower groups near Mackay
(Mount Kinchant) and Gordonvale have
been testing this system over the past two
years while a new group is starting this
year in the Herbert – all with funding
from SRDC.
In southern Queensland, there are
numerous types of canegrubs with either
1-year or 2-year life cycles. In the past,
monitoring of 2-year species such as
Childers canegrub in ratoons has focused
on checking for grubs in spring, after
harvest. The disadvantage of monitoring
grubs in spring is that there is little time
May -
Sep
Oct Nov
Adults fly Egg
lay
Dec
Pupation
3 4
fIGuRE 3
Grubs/stool - Spring
10
Timing of monitoring and damage
assessment for Childers canegrub.
fIGuRE 4
Strong relationship between numbers
of Childers canegrubs counted in
canefields in autumn and the following
spring-summer, 2005.
IMAGE 5
Greyback cane beetles feeding on fig
tree leaves.
for planning management strategies,
and significant crop damage has already
occured by the time grubs are detected or
insecticide is applied.
A more effective monitoring system
relies on sampling Childers canegrubs in
autumn rather than at the traditional
time in spring – see figure 3.
Detection of grubs in autumn gives plenty
of opportunity for the grower to decide
the most cost-effective option (treat or not
treat, or fallow-crop) and to coordinate
harvest date with the chosen treatment
option as well as other cropping activities
such as fertilising, irrigation and weed
management.
large numbers of Childers canegrubs in
autumn indicate an imperative to harvest
that block reasonably early and then
to treat it immediately, or alternatively
develop another cropping plan.
The correlation between numbers of small
Childers canegrubs that we have found in
autumn and then subsequent numbers of
large damaging grubs in spring-summer has
been strong enough to guide management
decisions – see figure 4.
Monitoring results for southern 1-year
canegrub (a 1-year species) must be
8
6
4
2
R
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Grubs/stool - Autumn
2 = 0.7257
interpreted differently from results with
Childers canegrub. With southern 1-year
canegrub, the grubs counted in autumn
are a different generation from those
that may damage the cane the next
season. However numbers of southern
1-year canegrub usually increase from
year to year if unchecked, so grubs in
moderate numbers this year often spell
trouble for next year.
An SRDC-funded grower group at Isis will
further test these monitoring systems for
Childers and southern 1-year canegrubs
over the next 2 years.
Acknowledgment: This project was
funded by BSES limited, SRDC, and the
Queensland Government through the
Department of Employment, Economic
Development and Innovation.
[A monitoring
system for greyback
canegrub in central
and northern
Queensland is
outlined in the
GrubPlan 2007
booklet, available
on the BSES
website.]
p 1 3 i s s u e 2 5

14 Ramu
BiOseCuriTy feATure / pArT 5 rAMu sTuNT
1
rAMu sTuNT
iN This BuLLeTiN’s BiOseCuriTy feATure, Bses reseArChers BArry CrOfT,
rOB MAGArey AND NADer sALLAM Offer Our reADers AN iNsiGhT
iNTO rAMu sTuNT.
stunt was first detected (and has
only been found) in Papua New Guinea
(PNG) where it is recognised as a major
disease. In 1986, Ramu stunt almost
destroyed the entire sugarcane industry
at Gusap plantation in PNG. A 60%
reduction in productivity was recorded
in the highly susceptible cultivar ‘Ragnar’,
which at that time occupied 90% of
the plantation.
Stools infected with Ramu stunt show
severe stunting and eventually die.
In infected plants the leaves become
short, stiff and erect (Images 1–6). leaf
symptoms vary with variety; some show
stunting and chlorosis while in others leaf
flecking is more predominant.
4
2 3
biosecurity feature
CAuse Of The DiseAse
Recent work of BSES Indooroopilly based
researcher Dr Kathy Braithwaite has led to
a major breakthrough. She has identified
a new virus in cane infected with Ramu
stunt. Kathy’s research to characterise the
virus is ongoing.
spreAD Of The DiseAse
A small plant hopper called Eumetopina
flavipes spreads Ramu stunt. The disease
can also spread through infected planting
material. E. flavipes is 3–5 mm in length
and has a distinctive black colour (Image 7).
5 6
Another planthopper common in
Australian sugarcane fields (Perkinsiella
saccharicida) is grey-brown in colour and
does not transmit Ramu stunt.
E. flavipes is widespread in the islands of
the Indonesian Archipelago and is present
on many of the Torres Strait islands; a
small population also survives on the
Australian mainland at Bamaga and New
Mapoon on Cape York. However, the
Australian populations do not harbour the
disease, and this insect has never been
found on Australian commercial crops.
Growers who see this insect on their crops
should contact their nearest BSES office
immediately.

7
risk Of iNTrODuCTiON
The movement of infected planting
material or transport of insects (carried
by aircraft or freight from PNG) pose the
greatest risks of this disease spreading to
Australia. The risk of an incursion by an
infected insect is high in the Torres Strait
islands because some islands are only a
short distance from the southern PNG
coastline. Sugarcane is a common garden
plant in both the Torres Strait and PNG, also
people sell or exchange gifts of sugarcane.
AQIS and Biosecurity Queensland
have active programs in the Torres Strait
to monitor the potential spread of
diseases like Ramu stunt and to control
the movement of plants and animals in
that area of Australia.
CONTrOL
Scientists introduced resistant cane
varieties to the Ramu Estate in PNG and
successfully controlled the Ramu stunt
epidemic. Australia and other countries
have bred varieties with high levels of
resistance to Ramu stunt, and BSES holds
some of these in its variety collections.
for many years BSES, in cooperation with
the Ramu sugar plantation, has screened
Australian varieties grown in PNG for
resistance to this disease. Most Australianbred
varieties possess a high level of
resistance – only 25% exhibit symptoms
of the disease in screening tests when
exposed to high infection pressure.
IMAGE 1 | leaf symptoms of Ramu stunt on the wild cane Saccharum robustum.
IMAGE 2-3 | leaf symptoms on the variety ‘Yassawa’.
IMAGE 4 | Symptoms of Ramu stunt in a susceptible sugarcane variety in a trial
at Gusap, PNG.
IMAGE 5 | Typical stunting of cane stool in the susceptible variety Q124.
IMAGE 6 | Stunting in the variety ‘Pindar’ (diseased foreground, healthy stool
in background).
IMAGE 7 | Planthopper, Eumetopina flavipes, adult and immature stages in the
leaf whorl (PNG).
A new SRDC-funded project aims to improve
the methods of screening for resistance to
Ramu stunt and ensure that all new BSES
varieties are rated for resistance. BSES has
developed a contingency plan in case of an
incursion of Ramu stunt, and the knowledge
of the levels of resistance in Australian
varieties is vital to this plan.
unlike smut, there is a good chance of
eradicating Ramu stunt should it ever enter
Australia. Early identification of an outbreak
greatly lifts the chances of eradicating the
disease. Remember, signs of any unusual
symptoms in crops that growers suspect may
indicate the presence of an exotic disease
should be immediately reported to the
nearest BSES office or on the Exotic Plant
Pest Hotline (1800 084 881)!
p 1 5 i s s u e 2 5

16
QCrOps / BrAD hussey, TiM sTAier
COsT sAviNGs frOM
zONAL TiLLAGe
fOr The LAsT TWO yeArs exTeNsiON OffiCer BrAD hussey AND TeChNiCiAN TiM
sTAier BAseD AT Bses MACkAy hAve iNvesTiGATeD The BeNefiTs Of zONAL TiLLAGe,
ONe Of The Three fArMiNG prACTiCes reCOMMeNDeD TO sTOp yieLD DeCLiNe.
In this article they report their findings.
The Sugar Yield Decline Joint Venture has
identified three farming practices that
growers need to implement to put a stop
to yield decline. They are:
1. Breaking the sugarcane monoculture by
growing legume break crops
2. Managing soil compaction by adopting
controlled-traffic
3. Reducing tillage to preserve soil structure
by adopting reduced tillage practices
[Managing soil
compaction by adopting
controlled-traffic.]
Zonal tillage is an important component
of items 2 and 3. In a 3 year project,
co-funded by SRDC and the Queensland
Government, the project team has firstly
developed a set of zonal tillage equipment.
Team members developed the equipment
with input from a number of growers.
It includes a bed renovator, zonal ripper,
wave disk cultivator and zonal rotary hoe.
They established six trials in each of the
first 2 years to compare various levels
of tillage and measured the fuel and
time inputs to undertake the tillage
operations. Trials planted in the first year
have now been harvested. The tillage
treatments included full cultivation, zonal
bed renovation, zonal ripping, zonal rotary
hoeing and zero tillage.
eCONOMiC COMpArisON
Of TiLLAGe sysTeMs
We compared the economics of different
tillage systems by surveying Central district
grower practices and then using the fEAT
program to cost each of the operations.

Grower Area of
cane (ha)
Soil type Zonal
Number of
operations
TABlE 1 | Results of the survey and the fEAT assessment.
FORM* FORM +
Labour +
Dep + Int
Number of
operations
Conventional
FORM FORM +
Labour +
Dep + Int
1 light 4 107 408 4 302 860
2 80 med 3 130 460 6 438 1414
3 35 heavy 4 178 713 5 578 1996
4 20 heavy 4 221 711 5 328 946
5 70 heavy 5 482 2200 6 343 1584
6 5 light 3 244 1095 6 271 1000
7 10 light 4 109 315 5 162 422
8 150 light 4 177 616 6 313 1098
9 48 med 2 140 560 4 120 560
10 20 light 2 83 346 7 440 1366
11 30 light 2 87 329 5 180 621
12 30 med 2 83 344 7 421 1018
13 35 light 2 56 200 6 213 742
14 30 light 5 173 505 7 230 678
15 100 light 5 113 321 5 215 580
16 150 light 3 167 717 5 480 1736
15
Average 3.4 160 615 5.6 314 1038
To use fEAT we made the following
assumptions:
• Tractors cost $1000 per unit of
horsepower
• Small tractors less than 150 hp are used
for 4 hr/ha of farm size per year
• large tractors of 150 hp or more are
used for the time it takes to undertake
fallow cultivation operations
• fuel usage was the actual fuel use
from the grower’s records, or a
percentage of engine load if fuel use
was not known
• Implements were valued at current new
prices sourced from machinery dealer in
Mackay during November 2009
• Tractors and machinery had a life of 20
years, except for rotary hoes which had
a life of 10 years
Growers should note the benefits of
zonal tillage in the light of these economic
considerations:
• fORM (*fuel, oil, repairs and
maintenance) cost for zonal tillage is
half that of conventional tillage with
an average saving of $154/ha
• full cost of zonal tillage is 60% of
conventional tillage with an average
saving of $400/ha
• Zonal tillage required only 60%
of the number of operations for
conventional tillage
p 1 7 i s s u e 2 5

18
QCrOps / BrAD hussey, TiM sTAier
The effeCT Of zONAL
TiLLAGe ON yieLD
While it is evident that significant
savings can be made from the adoption
of zonal tillage, these savings can soon be
lost if zonal tillage results in lower yields.
The project team assessed yields achieved
from zonal tillage in their trials. So far, only
the trials established in the first year of the
project have been harvested. Additional
trial harvests will take place over the next
2 years as the project progresses. The
tillage treatments included combinations
of full cultivation, zonal bed renovation,
zonal ripping, zonal rotary hoeing and
zero tillage.
Results from the Year 1 trial harvest
are shown in the tables to the right,
firstly as the yield achieved by each of
the treatments in the trials, and then as
a percentage of the yield achieved by the
bed renovator treatment. The second
table allows simple comparisons among
the various tillage systems.
suMMAry Of yieLD DATA
frOM yeAr 1 hArvesT
from the yield data a few observations can
be made:
• All treatments can produce good yields
• Zero till with good soil conditions into
existing beds can produce good results
A few points noted by the project team
include:
• It was hard to achieve good soil-sett
contact with limited cultivation in heavy
clay soils
• Yield is dependent to some extent
on plant establishment (a poor plant
establishment will lead to lower yields)
• Plant establishment is influenced by
soil-sett contact
for more information about this project
contact Brad Hussey (Ph. 07 4963 6803
or 0408 185 139) or Tim Staier
(Ph. 07 4963 6819 or 0419 789 700).
Trial Bed
renovate
Zonal rip
rotary hoe
Zonal rip Zero till Trash
incorporated
1 86 85 87
2 101 92
3 94 95
4 74 70 64
5 62 63 62
6 122 108
TABlE 2 | Actual yields (tonnes cane/ha).
Trial Bed
renovate
Zonal rip
rotary hoe
Zonal rip Zero till Trash
incorporated
1
2
100% 99% 102%
3 100% 101%
4 100% 95% 86%
5 100% 102% 100%
6 100% 89%
Average 100% 95% 99% 101% 93%
TABlE 3 | Yields as a percentage of the bed renovated treatment.
[While it is evident
that significant
savings can be made
from the adoption
of zonal tillage,
these savings can
soon be lost if zonal
tillage results in
lower yields.]

Bses LiMiTeD / eve MCDONALD
past
iN This issue, We CONTiNue Our visiT ‘BACk iN TiMe’ By prOviDiNG A
BLAsT frOM The pAsT
sNAp shOT Of pLANTiNG, Be iT eQuipMeNT Or By hAND.
1
4
6
PHOTO 4
Planting cane seedlings from
pots to the field at Meringa,
1959.
These photographs are a part of the
extensive BSES photo library that contains
historical and current photographs.
Keep an eye out for further Bulletin
issues for more glimpses into the past.
PHOTO 5
Planting sugarcane –
date unknown.
PHOTO 6
Planting cane in 1967.
for further information on these and
other BSES photographs please contact
Eve McDonald on 07 3331 3340 or
emcdonald@bses.org.au.
PHOTO 1
Planting trial at Mackay
Sugar Experiment Station,
August 1963.
PHOTO 2
Digging holes in the drills for
planting seedlings, Meringa 1958.
2
PHOTO 3
Close-up of planter, showing
the attachment for good
fertiliser placement, Mackay
Sugar Experiment Station,
July 1965.
5
3
7
PHOTO 7
Early style cane planter.
p 1 9 i s s u e 2 5

20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
CrC siiB
In a world first, researchers involved in
an innovative CRC-SIIB education project
have developed a series of classroom
biotechnology learning materials and
teacher professional development
workshops. These resources have proven
to be effective in promoting middle and
high school students’ understanding of
biotechnology, and biomaterials, and in
developing teachers’ capacity to teach this
emerging field.
Given the CRC SIIB is one of the most
significant efforts in Australia’s history
to achieve outcomes in sugarcane
biotechnology; we designed the project
to help ensure biotechnology as a science
achieves broad public support.
To achieve this, our Education team
developed a multi-study education
project focused on science educational
strategies. They undertook an in-depth
analysis of how teachers, students, and
parents learn about biotechnology and
biotechnology education.
The project involved biotechnologists
from CRC partner organisations including
*uQ and *BSES limited, educators from
uQ and *EQ, and academics from uQ.
Over 300 students and teachers have
participated in the classroom-based
research or teacher workshops.
** **
cotton
*
* *
* * *
* * **
p

Heather Boreland, Head of the Science
Department at Stretton State College,
Brisbane, said “Students enjoyed
the opportunity to have a voice on
biotechnology (through debate and
discussion) and researched the area
with a sense of purpose.”
reseArCh ApprOACh
Our research comprised of three studies
involving different education approaches.
Two of the studies used classroom-based
research (organised under either the
Middle School or Senior School unit) to
determine how effective our teaching
resources and strategies were in authentic
settings. Classroom-based research was
conducted over several school terms in
different classrooms, in public and private,
middle and secondary schools. To test the
effectiveness of our education, students
were, surveyed, interviewed, filmed and
given standard tests. Over 200 students
participated in the classroom research.
Our third study (Teacher Professional
Development unit) involved the
development of teacher training and
classroom resources. A supporting
study examined scientist-teacher
relationships, and involved observational
and interview data. Over two years,
teachers and scientists were tracked
while working on a number of schemes
to improve the teachers’ scientific
understanding and enhance the value
and relevance of science education. We
evaluated the outcomes for teachers
and scientists and identified how
collaborations could be formalised.
Middle School Unit: Should Australia
Grow GM Crops?
This a theoretical inquiry-based unit in
which students aged between 12 and
15 years explore the question: Should
Australia grow *GM crops? Through
individual inquiry, students posed and
answered their own questions about GM
crops and other applications of modern
biotechnology. Web-based and other
classroom resources were created to
support students’ higher order thinking,
decision-making skills and engagement
ABOVE | School teachers were given the opportunity to attend hands-on workshops and
learn about the latest in biotechnology research.
in collaborative research. Students
learnt about different applications of
biotechnology and completed a variety
of tasks including sharing knowledge
with their parents.
Senior School Unit: The Biomaterial World
This unit was designed to enable students
to learn about fundamental chemistry
concepts (ie chemical bonding and
structure) in the context of *biomaterials.
The unit integrated a wide range of digital
technologies including molecular modelling
software, simulations, and multimedia
authoring tools, to engage students in
theoretical and experimental inquiry tasks.
Students learnt about how the structure
and bonding of biomaterials influence their
properties and developed an understanding
of how biotechnology is applied to create
or modify materials to align their properties
with intended uses.
Teacher Professional Development Unit
Teacher professional development
workshops were conducted around
Queensland and at national science teacher
conferences. These were hands-on with
teachers working through classroom
inquiry-based activities, using software,
and online inquiry-based materials, and
experiencing the activities from a students’
perspective. This unit also involved some
time looking at the benefit of a researcher
being assigned to a classroom to model
teaching strategies and use of materials for
other teachers by instructing their classes.
Overall, teacher feedback was that these
strategies were beneficial and positively
influenced their science instruction.
ADOpTiON
Our new approaches to curriculum
and integration of learning support
technologies have engendered strong
support for uptake within middle and
secondary schools. Our learning activities
have been adopted by the participant
schools. The chemistry curriculum in
a participant school now includes an
extended experimental investigation into
the properties of bioplastics. The schools
that participated in the middle year’s
project have now adopted the
instructional units and resources.
Teachers who participated in the
professional development workshops
have adopted the learning approaches
and technology-based activities into their
classrooms in schools across the state
and Australia.
To assist with future adoption, plans
include the development of teacher
workshop materials and online resources
to support teachers in the implementation
of biotechnology-based activities in the
classroom. Training resources and teacher
workshops will be made available to
Education Queensland.
CONCLusiON
This project is an outstanding example of
collaboration within a CRC that addressed
a national imperative: the need to enhance
students’ and teachers’ knowledge and
understanding of biotechnology and
biotechnology education.
Our CRC believes that a scientifically
literate public is integral to increasing
support for biotechnology and to helping
ensure its success as an emerging field
of research. Researchers working for the
sugarcane biotechnology CRC have made
a bold and significant step in this direction
and have produced high-value up-to-date
biotechnology education materials and
teaching strategies.
*uQ: university of Queensland –
uq.edu.au
* BSES limited – bses.org.au
* EQ: Education Queensland –
education.qld.gov.au
* GM stands for the genetic modification of
a living organism to enhance one or more
of the organisms’ existing traits.
* Biomaterials are base materials used in
the production of a product that depends
on plant materials as its core ingredient,
ie biofuels or bioplastics.
p 2 1 i s s u e 2 5

22
QCANes / Dr NiCOLe ThOMpsON
expOse ON MAjOr CANe DiseAses
fOr NeW suGAr iNDusTry sTAff
The WOrkshOp OffereD 51 pArTiCipANTs hANDs-ON TrAiNiNG fOr
11 MAjOr DiseAses Of suGArCANe iN AusTrALiA
In this article, Quarantine Plant
Pathologist Dr Nicole Thompson, based
at BSES Indooroopilly, reports on a 2 day
workshop where new sugar industry staff
learnt about the major diseases
that affect cane.
Sugarcane Biosecurity was at the forefront
of learning for new sugar industry staff
at the 2009 2-day Pathology Workshop.
Supported by funding from BSES and
SRDC, it was held at the BSES Woodford
pathology farm.
The workshop offered 51 participants
hands-on training for 11 major diseases
of sugarcane in Australia. Participants
studied one disease in detail, and then
presented their findings to a small group
of their peers.
ABOVE | ‘Spot the disease’ pathology field walk.
RIGHT | BSES Biosecurity staff (left to right):
Kathy Braithwaite, Nicole Thompson, Judi Bull, Shamsul Bhuiyan,
Barry Croft (Program leader), Sam Azzopardi, Janet Green,
Rob Magarey, Andrew Greet.
‘for each disease, we examined the
symptoms, undertook a diagnosis, learnt
about the cause and studied how the
disease had affected the sugar industry
in Australia,’ said tutor and BSES Senior
Researcher, Dr Kathy Braithwaite.
‘We also discussed how a disease is spread,
what conditions favour that spread, and
the best means of control. Each group was
motivated to learn as much as possible
about each disease. The participants
who presented their particular disease of
interest did a fantastic job!’
BSES Principal Researcher Dr Rob Magarey,
based at Tully, discussed the wide range
of resources available for diagnosing a
disease. This included the BSES Sugarcane
Diseases field Guide, information sheets,
[Ongoing pathology training for
front-line sugarcane staff is important
for sugarcane Biosecurity.]
books and manuals. Some of the minor
diseases of sugarcane, such as striate
mosaic and Schleropthera, were introduced
in formal presentations, and participants
had an opportunity for a question-andanswer
session.
The participants’ disease recognition
skills developed during the workshop
were put to the test during a specimen
quiz. Eight leaf specimens with symptoms
were presented as a challenge for the
participants to identify. Out of the 51
participants, four managed to correctly
identify the cause of all the symptoms, and
the majority of participants were able to
correctly identify five or more – impressive
statistics, because not all of the symptoms
were caused by a disease!

1
5
A widely used saying in the industry is
‘disease control by using resistant varieties’
– but what is the difference between a
resistant variety and a susceptible one?
Resistance screening is the answer, and
Woodford pathology farm is home to
many disease resistance screening trials.
Participants saw trials taking place, and
had the opportunity to find and examine
diseases in a field situation as they walked
around the property.
Since the sugarcane smut incursion in 2006,
we have been posed the question: ‘What
is the next big disease threat?’ Research
by BSES suggests that this could be Ramu
stunt from PNG, phytoplasma diseases
from South-East Asia, mosaic viruses from
Asia or downy mildew from PNG.
‘This list isn’t exhaustive, and we should
all be on the lookout for anything unusual,’
said tutor Dr Nicole Thompson.
Ongoing research was discussed with the
participants, and some of these disease
threats presented in detail.
feedback received from participants in
the workshop was extremely positive.
‘I found the Pathology Workshop to be
very rewarding in providing a hands-on
approach to disease identification, with
experienced Pathologists on hand to help
with those extra tips not always obtained
from the field guide,’ said participant
Elizabeth Wilson. Ongoing pathology
training for front-line sugarcane staff is
important for sugarcane Biosecurity, and
further training is planned for the future.
2 3
4
‘In 2006 the disease workshop was held
only a few months before sugarcane smut
was found in Queensland. When we were
planning this workshop, we realised that
many things had changed. Sugarcane smut
was not the ‘next big threat’ – it was here.
And there were many new staff in the
industry,’ said Dr Thompson.
‘We believe that staff who attended
the workshop have developed skills to
recognise and diagnose some of the major
diseases in Australia. We hope that they
get out and look at unusual symptoms
and use the resources – including the
knowledge of the Biosecurity staff – to
recognise problems in their areas,’ Dr
Thompson concluded.
further information about Biosecurity
can be found at bses.org.au. unusual
symptoms on sugarcane should be
reported to your local BSES extension
officer or productivity services staff.
TABlE 1 | Sugarcane industry sectors
represented at the workshop.
PHOTO 1 | Recognition of disease
symptoms in the field: participants
spot the fiji leaf gall infected cane
in a leaf scald trial.
PHOTO 2 | Participants learning
about RSD from tutor Janet Green
(top left).
PHOTO 3 | formal presentation
covering resources used in pathology,
given by Dr Rob Magarey.
PHOTO 4 | Barry Croft explaining
fiji leaf gall screening methods used
by BSES.
PHOTO 5 | using the BSES Sugarcane
Diseases field Guide during the quiz.
TABlE 2 | Major diseases of
sugarcane in Australia covered in the
tutorial sessions.
Brown rust
Chlorotic streak
fiji leaf gall (fiji disease virus, fDV)
leaf scald
Mosaic (sugarcane mosaic virus - SCMV)
Orange rust
Pachymetra root rot
Pineapple disease
Ratoon stunting disease (RSD)
Red rot
Sugarcane smut
Organisation Number of Participants
BSES limited 27
Productivity Services 10
Extension Services 7
AQIS 2
QlD Government (DEEDI) 2
Sugar Research Institute of fiji 2
CSIRO 1
Total 51
p 2 3 i s s u e 2 5

24 leaf
Bses LiMiTeD / eve MCDONALD
BrAziL sees OrANGe
BrAziL hAs sOMe 7.8 MiLLiON heCTAres Of fArMLAND CurreNTLy uNDer
CANe, AND is The WOrLD’s LArGesT prODuCer AND expOrTer Of suGAr
AND CANe-BAseD eThANOL.
In December 2009 researchers identified
the first case of orange rust (Puccinia
kuehnii) in Brazil. BSES communications
manager Eve McDonald based at
Indooroopilly reports.
Sao Palo is the number one caneproducing
state of Brazil, accounting
for around 60% of the Brazilian sugarcane
crop, and the first case of orange rust
occurred in this state. At time of printing
the disease has also appeared in Parana
and Mato Grosso do Sul states, and is
expected to spread to other states
in Brazil.
Above-average rainfall in Brazil’s
centre-south since July 2009 has helped
the disease spread and it will receive
another boost once the next rainy season
begins in the region in September 2010.
Government sources in Brazil estimate
that the rust could potentially cause $160
million per year in losses. However, other
reports indicate that the disease will have
minimal impact on the Brazilian industry
due to the high percentage (>70%) of
varieties planted that have resistance to
orange rust.
symptoms of orange rust.
At this stage it looks like only three of the
commercial varieties that make up less
than 10% of their crop are susceptible.
The most susceptible variety is RB72-454,
which was also highly susceptible in New
South Wales where it was a moderately
important variety.
In the years 2007 and 2008 orange rust
was identified in sugarcane crops in uSA,
Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, Nicaragua,
Costa Rica and Jamaica. The bigger picture
of how orange rust will affect Brazil’s
production should emerge in the next
6–12 months.
siTuATiON fOr
AusTrALiA – rusT AND
OTher pesTs
The Australian sugarcane industry is
no stranger to this disease. A decade ago
it devastated cane production in
Queensland when it attacked Q124, one
of the state’s best varieties. We believe
that a new strain emerged in Australia and
attacked Q124; now this new strain has
spread to the Americas.
One of BSES’s strategic objectives is to
try to prevent incursions and prepare
for possible threats from exotic pests
and diseases. BSES’s preparation for
sugarcane smut is now paying off,
with most areas having access to good
smut-resistant varieties. BSES is now
focusing on preparation to combat other
pests and diseases on our doorstep (see
Biosecurity feature article on page 14
and previous Bulletins).
for many years BSES has undertaken
screening of varieties for resistance
to pests and diseases in Papua New
Guinea in cooperation with Ramu
Agri-Industries. This program received a
boost recently with additional funding
from SRDC. This will enable more
screening of Australian varieties and also
help Ramu to improve its methods of
testing varieties for resistance to Sesamia
borer, Ramu stunt and downy mildew.
BSES has funding from the Australian
Centre for International Agricultural
Research (ACIAR) to develop IPM
(integrated pest management) programs

for cane borers that could spread to
Australia from Indonesia. The vast increase
in movement of people around the world,
both legal and illegal, increases the risk
that these pests will jump our borders.
An incursion of a major borer species
could greatly increase the cost of growing
sugarcane. BSES aims to assist AQIS and
DEEDI to keep the pests out, but remain
prepared should one slip through the net.
BSES encourages growers to remain vigilant
for possible new pests or diseases and
report any suspicions about infected plants
to their nearest BSES office or the Exotic
Plant Pest Hotline 1800 084 881.
WeeD prOfiLe
Bell Vine
i pomoea plebeia
A weak-stemmed, annual, twining plant.
leaves are alternate, pale green and covered with scattered
hairs. They are 2.5 to 5 cm long, heart-shaped at the base
with a short blunt point. flowers are white, bell-shaped and
about 1 cm long. Ripe seed capsules are globular, thin and
papery and contain four brown seeds. Seeds are flat on two
sides and rounded on the back. Bell Vine is common in all cane
growing districts.
It is a vigorous and hardy grower which can pull down a cane
crop and cause difficulties during harvesting.
lEfT
A crop of Q124 heavily infected with
orange rust.
Common
Morning Glory
i pomoea purpurea
eND here
A vigorous, annual twining plant.
leaves are alternate with short hairs on both surfaces and
are dark green above and paler green beneath. They are stalked
and heart-shaped, sometimes three lobed, 4 to 15 cm long and
2.5 to 12 cm wide. flowers are about 5 cm long and are carried in
small, stalked groups or singly in the leaf joints. They are purple
with reddish streaks and are paler purple to white outside and
inside the tubes. Seed capsules are globular, papery, about 1 cm
across with up to 6 angular, brown seeds.
Common Morning Glory is widespread and common only
in some localities. It can pull down the crop and cause difficulties
during harvesting.
The above are just two examples of the vigorous Ipomoea species which can infest sugarcane. Vines, when present are always a problem and
early control is essential in order to avoid late applications of herbicide, especially in the wet tropics.
p 2 5 i s s u e 2 5

26
Bses LiMiTeD / eve MCDONALD
2009 TeChNiCAL reseArCh
repOrTs NOW AvAiLABLe
Bses is COMMiTTeD TO iNCreAsiNG The prODuCTiviTy, prOfiTABiLiTy
AND susTAiNABiLiTy Of The AusTrALiAN suGArCANe iNDusTry AND
iMprOviNG TeChNOLOGy TrANsfer TO sTAkehOLDers.
BSES carries out and documents research on various aspects
of the cane cropping system.
These research reports are available to BSES service-fee payers
free of charge via email or through our on-line library catalogue
(WebAlog) accessible through the BSES website (bses.org.au).
Non-service fee payers can obtain electronic copies for a small fee.
for further information please contact Eve McDonald on 07 3331
3340 or emcdonald@bses.org.au.
repOrTs puBLisheD iN 2009:
Eumetopina flavipes incursion management plan – Version 1.
Sallam, NS. (Technical research report number: MN09001).
Oriental sugarcane thrips (Fulmekiola serrata) incursion
management plan – Version 1. Sallam NS. (Technical research
report number: MN09002).
Sugarcane longhorn stemborer (Dorysthenes buqueti) incursion
management plan – Version 1. Sallam NS. (Technical research
report number: MN09003).
Introduction to sugarcane quarantine and disease control.
Instructions for staff of research organisations involved n sugarcane
research. Croft BJ and Thompson N. (Technical research report
number: MN09007).
A new cropping system for the Central district. final report SRDC
project BSS269. Hussey B. (Technical research report number:
SD09001).
Smut-proofing the Australian industry – Ensuring a reliable
cane supply through reduced genetic vulnerability to sugarcane
smut. final report SRDC project BSS265. Croft BJ and Berding N.
(Technical research report number: SD09002).
Conduct an R,D&E Symposium in the Burdekin. final
report SRDC travel and learning project BSS315. Davis M.
(Technical research report number: SD09003).
Delivering web-based irrigation management. final report
SRDC project BSS297. Willcox T. (Technical research report
number: SD09004).
Whole-farm planning for management of varieties to maximize
productivity and reduce losses from diseases. final report SRDC
project BSS294. Croft BJ, Cox M, Millard D, and Burrows A.
(Technical research report number: SD09006).
5th Australasian Soil-borne Disease Symposium (ASDS), Thredbo
Village, 5-7 february 2009. Magarey RC. (Technical research
report number: SR09001).
Review of the Green Grassy Shoot Disease (GGSD) situation in
Nghe An Province, Vietnam 16-26 April 2009. Magarey RC.
(Technical research report number: SR09002).
Review meeting at the Indonesian Sugar Research Institute and
associated industry information meeting 29 March – 4 April 2009.
Magarey RC, Sallam NS, Samson PR. (Technical research report
number: SR09003).
Review of moth-borer resistance screening and report on visit
to South African Sugarcane Research Institute. Samson PR.
(Technical research report number: SR09004).
SmartCane Harvesting and Ratoon Management booklet.
Schroeder B. et al (Technical publication number TE09004).

Bses LiMiTeD / DATe CLAiMers
2010 Bses LiMiTeD
fieL D DAys
BSES field days are valuable vehicles for showcasing a wide
range of machinery, software, sugarcane varieties, farming
systems, and industry information.
BSES staff members will be on hand to answer questions on its
products and services, new farming systems, and regular field
day activities such as the annual variety guessing competition.
Exhibitors will be displaying their current wears and tears.
eLeCTrONiC BuLLeTiN
ANyONe?
Would you like Bulletin issues emailed to you?
File size varies from 1,500 KB to 4,500 KB.
If so please send an email to emcdonald@bses.org.au
and add ‘Yes please email me the Bulletin issues
instead’ in the subject line.
For further information please contact Eve
McDonald on 07 3331 3340 or through the email
address provided above.
• Herbert – 13 April
for further information on the Herbert field day please
contact the BSES Herbert office on 07 4776 8206.
• Mackay – 20-21 May
for further information on the Mackay field days please
contact the BSES Mackay office on 07 4963 6810.
The Bulletin goes green: We are pleased to announce that
this edition of the Bulletin is packaged and produced using
the latest recycled and environmentally sustainable materials.
The paper used is a blend of recycled material and FSC*
certified forestry fibre. *Forestry Stewardship Council
ContACt uS
Letters to the Editor
BSES Limited, 50 Meiers Road
Indooroopilly Qld 4068 Australia
Tel +61 7 3331 3333
Fax +61 7 3871 0383
Email communications@bses.org.au
Subscriptions and more…
For new subscriptions, renewals,
payments, and change of address:
Communications Manager
BSES Limited, 50 Meiers Road
Indooroopilly Qld 4068 Australia
Web & Email
bses.org.au
info@bses.org.au
Sugarcane for the future
ISSN 0810-3240
ISSUE 26 | 2010
www.bses.org.au
Print Post Approved PP424022/1988
bulletin
Providing information to the Australian sugarcane industry since 1933
bulletin
Providing information to the Australian sugarcane industry since 1933
P13
Technology support:
inorganic analytical
laboratory
DISCLAIMER
The Bulletin has been compiled in good faith by BSES Limited. However, no representation is made as to the completeness or accuracy of the information it
contains. In particular, you should be aware that this information may be incomplete, may contain errors or may have become out of date. This publication
and any references to products or services are provided ‘as is’ without any warranty or implied term of any kind. Subject to any terms implied by law and
which cannot be excluded, BSES Limited accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by you as a result of any error, omission or
misrepresentation in this publication. BSES Limited recommends that you contact its staff before acting on any information contained in this magazine.
PG 3
Evaluation of varieties
for a controlled-traffic
farming system
issue 24:2009
Print Post Approved PP424022/1988
Sugarcane for the future
Sugarcane for the future
PG 10
PG 16
bulletin
Providing information to the Australian sugar industry since 1933...
PG 22
P7 Near-infrared
spectroscopy
research directions
Canegrub management and Cost savings from zonal tillage Expos´ e on major cane diseases
new farming systems
for new sugar industry staff
P3 Technology
support: adding value
to our business and
the industry
P17 BSES rises
to the challenge
of international
competition
P14 Biosecurity
P10
issue 23:2009
P23 Building a
Feature Part 3: Pests better picture
that we don’t have and about nitrogen in
don’t want
the lower Burdekin
P19 Floods put
dampener on NSW
variety BN81-1394
@
Zonal tillage reduces
farm input cost

CONTACT us
letters to the Editor:
BSES limited, 50 Meiers Road
Indooroopilly Qld 4068 Australia
Tel +61 7 3331 3333
fax +61 7 3871 0383
Email communications@bses.org.au
suGArCANe
fOr The fuTure
suBsCripTiONs
for new subscriptions,
renewals, payments, and
change of address:
Communications Manager
BSES limited, 50 Meiers Road
Indooroopilly Qld 4068 Australia
The Bses BuLLeTiN is GreeN
We are pleased to announce that this edition of the Bulletin is
packaged and produced using the latest recycled and environmentally
sustainable materials. The paper used is a blend of recycled material
and fSC* certified forestry fibre.
DisCLAiMer
WeB & eMAiL
bses.org.au | info@bses.org.au
suGArCANe fOr The
fuTure
ISSN 0810-3240
The Bulletin has been compiled in good faith by BSES limited. However, no representation is made as to the completeness or accuracy of the information it contains.
In particular, you should be aware that this information may be incomplete, may contain errors or may have become out of date.
This publication and any references to products or services are provided ‘as is’ without any warranty or implied term of any kind. Subject to any terms implied by law and which cannot
be excluded, BSES limited accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by you as a result of any error, omission or misrepresentation in this publication. BSES
limited recommends that you contact its staff before acting on any information contained in this magazine.