 There was no effect of plant density on grain yield of 45Y28 RR.
 There was no significant lodging in 45Y28 RR even at the highest plant densities.

 There were large differences in vegetation index (NDVI) through to mid-July but the treatments converged by bud visible stage.
 There was no significant effect of plant density on grain yield, oil concentration or seed size.

 There was no significant effect of plant density on grain yield, oil concentration or seed size.
 20 plants/m2 is enough to achieve similar yield to high seeding rates.

 Plant densities achieved were generally within 10% of target plant densities.
 Vegetation assessments (NDVI) showed little differences in vegetative biomass of the two higher plant densities, with the 30 plants/m² density also coming close to the two higher densities by late winter.
 The low density (15 plants/m²) treatment was always lower on vegetative biomass than the three higher treatments.
 Yield of the 15 plants/m² target treatment was 0.73t/ha lower yielding than the 30 plants/m² target treatment.
 There was no impact of plant density on any grain quality parameter.

 Canola is an extremely plastic crop:
o There was no overall effect of seeding rate (from 15 to 70 plants/m²) on grain yield, oil concentration or harvested seed size (thousand seed weight).
 45Y28 (RR) was higher yielding than HyTTec Trifecta at all seeding rates.

 There was no overall effect of seeding rate on grain yield, but 45Y28 RR was generally higher yielding than HyTTec Trifecta.
 This trial will be completed again in 2021 with a winter cultivar.

 There was no difference in grain yield with any plant density above 20 plants/m² but yield was reduced when plant density dropped below 20 plants/m² for both cultivars.
 Similar to the GEM trial, the Clearfield cultivar 45Y93 CL was higher yielding than the TT cultivar HyTTec Trifecta.
 Seed size (thousand seed weight) increased as plant population increased, possibly due to their being a greater portion of grain yield (>75%) deriving from the main stem and primary branches in higher plant populations. At low populations yield derived from the main stem and primary branches was ~55%.

•  There were no significant yield effects of fungicide application at either V8 (8 leaf) or VT.
• No disease was observed in the trial and there was little evidence to suggest that fungicides improved green leaf retention when assessed at V14, V15 and V16.

• There was a significant interaction between fungicide product and the timing of application with propiconazole being more effective than prothioconazole at the later VT timing and visa versa at V8, however there is no evidence that this is a real effect.
• Application of three different fungicide active ingredients (four products) at either V8 (8 leaf) or VT tasselling produced no yield response at the Kerang site
• Application of a fungicide at either 8 leaf or tasselling did not result in an extended period of green leaf retention during grain fill.
• No disease was evident in the trial for the duration of the season. 

• Application of three different fungicide active ingredients (four products) at either V8 (8 leaf) or VT tasselling produced no yield response at the Yenda site.
• Application of a fungicide at either 8 leaf or tasselling did not result in an extended period of green leaf retention during grain fill.  
• No disease was evident in the trial for the duration of the season.

• Decreasing row spacing from 750mm (approx. 30 inch) to 500mm (approx. 20inch) significantly increased grain yield with a 3.21 t/ha yield increase (trials hand harvested).
• There were no significant effects of plant population in the trial when 90,000, 105,000 and 120,000 plants/ha were compared.
• Variable wind damage resulted in hand harvest quadrats being used as the basis of yield this invariably increases overall yields compared to machine harvest.
• There was no interaction between plant population and row spacing evident within the trial.
• At 500mm row spacings there was a significant increase in dry matter production and nitrogen uptake in the canopy compared to the 750mm row spacing when recorded at harvest.
• A Strong linear relationship between dry matter production and nitrogen content was present throughout the growing season observed at V6 (R2=0.867) and at harvest (R2 = 0.824).

 AGFCA014120, Phoenix CL and CL214103 were the highest yielding cultivars, all significantly higher yielding than Hyola 970CL, RGT Nizza CL and SFR65-056-CL.
 AGFCA014120 and CL214103 also had the highest oil concentration, both either at or close to 49%.
 Despite high N input and a fertile soil, protein levels were low with an average of 17.3%, meaning only 27.7 kg/ha nitrogen was harvested per tonne of grain harvested.

Clearfield trial
 45Y93 CL and 45Y95 CL were the standouts for grain yield, yielding above 5.6t/ha.
 The European spring cultivar AGFCA014520 was very tall but lower yielding compared to the best Australian bred cultivars.
 Oil was highest in the unreleased PS-21CL211 and PS-21XC318.

Glyphosate tolerant trial (Roundup Ready and Truflex)
 NCH20Q729 was the highest yielding and tallest cultivar.
 There was no difference in oil concentration in the glyphosate tolerant trial.

Triazine tolerant trial
 There was no statistical difference in yield between the four TT cultivars.
 ATR Wahoo and HyTTec Trifecta had the highest oil concentration.

Overall conclusions
 There were larger yield differences observed within trials than between trials. It is best to pick the appropriate herbicide tolerance required for a paddock than select the best cultivar within that herbicide tolerance group.
 Protein was higher than the winter screen, with an average of 21.8% meaning 34.3kg/ha nitrogen was harvested per tonne of grain harvested.

 Hyola Feast CL was higher yielding than Hyola 970CL, with an average benefit across treatments of 1.05t/ha.
 There was no effect of management level on grain yield in this trial.

 Blackleg crown canker reduced with higher input, but this did not relate to yield, with no effect of management level on grain yield.
 45Y95 CL was the standout cultivar for yield, with an average of 6.26t/ha. This was 2.59t/ha higher yielding than the open-pollinated triazine tolerant ATR Wahoo and even 0.52t/ha higher yielding than the second-best cultivar, 45Y93 CL.

 Plant populations achieved were generally about 60% of target populations.
 There was some variability in yield across replicates due to lodging at high plant populations resulting in no significant difference in grain yield observed.
 There was no difference in protein or oil due to plant population. Oil concentration was high (average 48.4%) and protein concentration was low (average 15.4%).

 Yield was lower for the 15 plants/m² target population (15.6 plants/m² actual population) than the higher population targets of 30 to 75 plants/m².
 The penalty of the low population was close to 1t/ha.
 This is the second year with a similar response at the SA site, suggesting that plant population targets should be higher than other hyper yielding crops environments.
 Winter is relatively mild at Millicent (maritime environment with high minimum temperatures) and development is rapid but with short days and low light intensity during winter growth is slow. Increasing plant population from 15 to 30 plants/m² may be a useful
tactic to ensure enough vegetative biomass to reach full yield potential.

 Canola responded to N input (as urea) but only to 75 kg/ha N, with no yield response with further urea N input.
 The application of pig manure at 6.7t/ha with 225kg/ha N increased yield compared to where 225kg/ha N (as urea) was applied alone.
 The project team will aim to better understand the response to manure, especially as the response was over and above a very high rate of applied N. Should phosphorus input recommendations be changed for very high yield potential environments or are there other
aspects of the manure driving the positive yield response?
 There was no effect of nutrient management on oil or protein concentration, but the manure application increased crop height by 8.7 cm.

 There were small differences in blackleg leaf lesion infection on seedlings of HyTTec Trifecta, but this did not manifest into a difference in grain yield, with no effect of seed or seedling foliar fungicide on grain yield.
 Average yield of HyTTec Trifecta in this trial was 4.67t/ha.

 There were small differences in blackleg leaf lesion infection on seedlings of 45Y28 RR, but this did not manifest into a difference in grain yield, with no effect of seed or seedling foliar fungicide on grain yield.
 Average yield of 45Y28 RR in this trial was 5.54t/ha.

 There were no differences between cultivar choice or fungicide management for a spring (August) sowing of canola.
 Average yield of the cultivars in this spring sown trial were approximately 50% of autumn sown.

Established plant densities ranged from 75 plants/m2 to 277 plants/m2.
Yield ranged from 9.28 at 75plants/m2 to 10.69t/ha at 227 plants/m2.
Yields were lower at plant densities less than 160 plants/m2, and therefore the recommendation to ensure >150 plants/m2 for spring sown barley remains true in line withpublished and previous HYC data.
Similar yields have been achieved from different plant yield component structures highlighting how plastic and compensatory barley can be.
In this experiment similar biomass was achieved across all seeding densities, however there is evidence in this trial that harvest indices approaching 60% maybe possible in the HRZ

 A low seed density of 100 seeds/m2 yielded 0.5 t/ha less than the current recommended rate for spring sown barley (300 seeds/m2)
 Seeding rates greater than 200 seeds/m2 up until 500 seeds/m2 did not result in additional yield or quality responses.
 Lodging was not exacerbated by higher seeding densities
 These results confirm growers can continue to target current recommended seed densities of 300 seeds/m2 for spring sown barley

• Under overhead irrigation in a relatively fertile rotation position (first barley after canola) the spring barley RGT Planet significantly out yielded the winter cultivar Cassiopee (10.07 vs. 8.98t/ha).
• Applying Moddus Evo at 400 ml/ha either as a single application (GS31) or split (GS31 & GS33) led to a significant increase in grain yield (9.87 – 9.92 t/ha) compared to the grazed or untreated plots (8.97 & 9.35 t/ha), averaged across both varieties.
• There was no interaction between variety and PGR application or grazing on plant height, lodging or yield indicating that both the spring and winter cultivar responded similarly.
• Cassiopee grew taller and was subject to significantly more lodging than RGT Planet.

• Both varieties showed positive responses to PGR applications of Moddus Evo (trinexapac ethyl) in terms of reduced crop height, lodging control and final grain yield.
• Grazing achieved a significant reduction in crop height (6cm) at harvest; statistically the same as the effect of Moddus Evo at either rate however it was associated with reduced yield and grain protein (data not shown).
• Grazing winter barley at GS30 produced significantly more dry matter than grazing spring barley that reached GS30 earlier in the winter (1928 vs 726kg DM).
• Unlike other trials conducted on cereals at the Finley site grazing did not reduce lodging in this experiment.
• A single application of Moddus Evo 400mL/ha at GS31 had significantly less lodging than the untreated plots.

• Spring barley germplasm cv Planet following canola with an estimated 146 kg N/ha available soil mineral N (0-90cm) gave a small response to applied nitrogen fertiliser with yield maximised (9.74 t/ha) with 80 kg of applied nitrogen per hectare.
• The highest yield (10.1 t/ha) was achieved with an application of 240 kg N/ha; however, this was not significantly higher than the yield achieved (9.74 t/ha) when 80 kg N/ha was applied.
• No lodging was observed in this trial.
• When 200kg N/ha or more was applied grain protein was higher than 12.0% and grain was no longer classed as malt quality.
• There was a significant increase in final dry matter production associated with 80 kg N/ha in comparison to the unfertilised (14.83t/ha increased to 17.7 t/ha).
• At higher rates of nitrogen, the dry matter steadily increased to 20.8 t/ha at the highest rate of 320kg N/ha.
• Since there were no significant yield increases associated with higher N rates harvest index (proportion of harvest dry matter harvested as grain) decreased at higher N inputs, however the differences were not statistically significant varying from 51.8 to 42.3%.
• There was no statistical difference in nitrogen offtake in the crop canopy at harvest in the grain & straw between 200-320kg N/ha applied an uptake of 238-292kgN/ha assuming straw and grain was removed from the paddock.
• N uptake associated with applied N rates above 160N were not translated into higher grain yields but were associated with higher grain protein.
• N offtake in the crop canopy peaked at 292kg N/ha when 280kg N/ha was applied.
• Head number was significantly increased by nitrogen applied although there were no yield increases associated with head numbers above 840 heads/m2 in this trial.

• Lodging began in early October with the general trend being more lodging as the N rate increased but not necessarily as a lineal progression.
• The uptake of N by the crop did increase as rates applied increased. This resulted in higher total biomass but not necessarily higher grain yield. Of the two rates assessed, the uptake of applied N was approximately 45%.
• Highest yielding treatments were those that received 80 – 280 kg N/ha. 0 kg N/ha or the highest rate of 320 kg N/ha resulted in decreased yield.
• While 120 kg N/ha did not see a yield increase over the 80 kg N/ha treatment, it did see grain protein high enough to meet malting specification.
• As a general trend, higher applied N resulted in higher grain protein and lower retention. Using the yield results from the 120 kg N/ha treatment, the Nitrogen Use Efficiency was 30 kg N required per tonne of grain.
• WUE of the trial averaged 19 kg/mm.

• Barley yields cv RGT Planet of over 6t/ha were achieved in 106 days from sowing to harvest with no applied nitrogen.
• Yield was maximised with no addition of nitrogen fertiliser.
• At the highest rate of 240 kg N/ha, there was a significant reduction in yield (6.03t/ha) compared to where no nitrogen was applied (6.24 t/ha).
• There was no difference in grain yield when nitrogen application timing was varied.
• Grain protein increased as higher rates of N were applied up to 160 kg N/ha. Between 160 and 240 kg N/ha, there was no difference in grain protein.
• The grain protein was too high to achieve malt quality in all application timings and rates of nitrogen in this trial.

• There was no interaction between nitrogen rates and nitrogen timing in this trial.
• With moderately high soil fertility following canola (146 kg N/ha available mineral N (0-90cm)) there was no significant difference in grain yield at N rates between 80 – 240kg N/ha (identical result to Trial 1).
• Delaying nitrogen application to GS32 (second node) and GS37 (flag leaf visible) gave a significantly higher yield (9.95 t/ha) than applying nitrogen at sowing and GS30 application (9.37 t/ha).

• Delaying the nitrogen applications to the development window GS32-GS37 increased protein slightly and although the effect was not statistically significant the risk of not achieving malt quality is increased at higher N levels.
• Grain protein increased as higher rates of N were applied, at 160 - 240 kg N/ha, protein was above the maximum 12% required to achieve malt quality irrespective of N timing.
• There was no significant differences in test weight (data not shown), although it was a factor in some treatments not achieving a malt quality grade.
• N uptake in the crop at harvest indicated that over 200kg N/ha had been taken up in the crop.