Abstract. Water-repellent ('non-wetting') soils are a major constraint to agricultural production in southern and south-west Australia, affecting >10 Mha of arable sandy soils. The major symptom is dry patches of surface soil, even after substantial rainfall, directly affecting agricultural production through uneven crop and pasture germination, and reduced nutrient availability. In addition, staggered weed germination impedes effective weed control, and delayed crop and pasture germination increases the risk of wind erosion. Water repellency is caused by waxy organic compounds derived from the breakdown of organic matter mostly of plant origin. It is more prevalent in soils with a sandy surface texture; their low particle surface area : volume ratio means that a smaller amount of waxy organic compounds can effectively cover a greater proportion of the particle surface area than in a fine-textured soil. Water repellency commonly occurs in sandy duplex soils (Sodosols and Chromosols) and deep sandy soils (Tenosols) but can also occur in Calcarosols, Kurosols and Podosols that have a sandy surface texture. Severity of water repellency has intensified in some areas with the adoption of no-till farming, which leads to the accumulation of soil organic matter (and hence waxy compounds) at the soil surface. Growers have also noticed worsening repellency after 'dry' or early sowing when break-of-season rains have been unreliable.Management strategies for water repellency fall into three categories: (i) amelioration, the properties of surface soils are changed; (ii) mitigation, water repellency is managed to allow crop and pasture production; (iii) avoidance, severely affected or poorly producing areas are removed from annual production and sown to perennial forage. Amelioration techniques include claying, deep cultivation with tools such as rotary spaders, or one-off soil inversion with mouldboard ploughs. These techniques can be expensive, but produce substantial, long-lasting benefits. However, they carry significant environmental risks if not adopted correctly. Mitigation strategies include furrow-seeding, application of wetting agents (surfactants), no-till with stubble retention, on-row seeding, and stimulating natural microbial degradation of waxy compounds. These are much cheaper than amelioration strategies, but have smaller and sometimes inconsistent impacts on crop production. For any given farm, economic analysis suggests that small patches of water repellency might best be ameliorated, but large areas should be treated initially with mitigation strategies. Further research is required to determine the long-term impacts of cultivation treatments, seeding systems and chemical and biological amendments on the expression and management of water repellency in an agricultural context.

Sandplain soils on the south coast of Western Australia have multiple limitations to crop production that include water repellence, low water and nutrient retention, subsoil acidity, and high soil strength. Crops on sandplain soils achieve, on average, almost 85% of their rainfall-limited yield potential; however, where there are multiple limitations the corresponding value is often <50% in any given year. Previous research has shown the value of applying clay-rich subsoil ('claying') to ameliorate water repellent soils and improve nutrient retention. Other studies have shown that deep ripping is effective in reducing compaction in sandplain soils. This paper quantifies the effects of 5 subsoil clay rates (0, 50, 100, 200, and 300 t/ha), with and without deep ripping to 0.5m, on soil properties, crop growth, and profitability in a replicated field experiment.Crop yields were increased by 0.3-0.6 t/ha as result of added clay. The clay content of the surface soil required to alleviate water repellence and achieve the highest yield increases was 3-6% in soils with~1% organic carbon. Longer term effects of claying included increased soil organic carbon by 0.2%, pH by 0.6 units, potassium by 47 mg/kg, soil strength by 250 kPa, and cation exchange capacity by 1.3 cmol c /kg to a depth of 0.1 m. However, changes in plant-available water (mm/m) were inconsistent between the clay treatments. Deep ripping to 0.5 m increased crop yields by 0.1-0.5 t/ha. These crop yield responses were still evident 3 years after the ripping treatment had been applied. Soil strength measurements indicate that re-compaction of the ripped treatments had occurred to a depth of 0.2 m in the second year following ripping. Crop responses to claying and deep ripping were additive. Claying and deep ripping, while almost doubling yields, achieved only 50-70% of the rainfall-limited yield potential on these marginally fertile soils. The highest clay rates (>3-6%) had cumulative discounted cash returns $AU100-200/ha higher than the unclayed 'control' treatment and $300/ha higher than the lowest clay rates. For most of the clay treatments, deep ripping increased discounted returns between 2005 and 2007 by $80-120/ha.

Soil acidity or aluminum (Al) toxicity is a major limitation to crop production. In this paper, we examine the effects of surface-applied lime and gypsum on soil profile chemical properties that affect Al toxicity in short-term (1 year), medium-term (2 years and 8 months) and long-term (10 years) experiments. Sulfate applied to the soil surface as gypsum was leached rapidly to a depth of 40 cm in the short-term despite relatively low amounts (279 mm) of rainfall. In the medium and long-term experiments, 28–54% of the sulfate applied as gypsum was retained in the 0–50 cm soil layer due to adsorption and precipitation reactions. The combined application of lime and gypsum increased soil calcium, to a depth of 30 cm in the short-term and to a depth of 50 cm in the medium and long-terms. Increases in soil sulfate and calcium were associated with greater electrical conductivity to a depth of 50 cm for all sampling times. Application of lime alone had no impact on soil Al, pH, and calcium in the soil layers below 10 cm in the short and medium terms. In the long-term, increasing the rate of lime application from 2 to 8 t L ha−1 increased soil pH in the 10–20 cm soil layer while soil Al decreased to a depth of 30 cm. The combined use of lime and gypsum decreased soil Al in the 30–50 cm soil layer in the medium-term and the 20–30 cm soil layer in the long-term which was more than when only lime was applied. Hence, we recommend the use of lime plus gypsum for treating soils with subsoil Al toxicity. Additionally, soil Al measurements are a more sensitive measurement of the impact of surface application lime and lime plus gypsum than soil pH.

Surface (0–10 cm) and subsoil (soil layers below 10 cm) acidity and resulting aluminum (Al) toxicity reduce crop grain yields. In South Western Australia (SWA), these constraints affect 14.2 million hectares or 53% of the agricultural area. Both lime (L, CaCO3) and gypsum (G, CaSO4) application can decrease the toxic effect of Al, leading to an increase in crop grain yields. Within the region, it is unclear if G alone or the combined use of L and G has a role in alleviating soil acidity in SWA, due to low sulfate S (SO4–S) sorption properties of the soil. We present results from three experiments located in the eastern wheatbelt of SWA, which examined the short-term (ST, 2 growing seasons), medium-term (MT, 3 growing seasons), and long-term (LT, 7 growing seasons over 10 years) effects of L and G on grain yield and plant nutrient concentrations. Despite the rapid leaching of SO4–S and no self-liming impact, it was profitable to apply G, due to the significant ST grain yield responses. The grain yield response to G developed even following relatively dry years, but declined over time due to SO4–S leaching. At the LT experimental site had received no previous L application, whereas, at the ST and MT sites, L had been applied by the grower over the previous 5–10 years. For the LT site, the most profitable treatment for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain yield, was the combined application of 4 t L ha−1 with 2 t G ha−1. At this site, the 0–10 cm soil pHCaCl2 was 4.6, and AlCaCl2 was greater than 2.5 mg kg−1 in the 10–30 cm soil layer. In contrast, at the ST and MT sites, the pHCaCl2 of 0–10 cm soil layer was ≥5.5; it was only profitable to apply G to the MT site where the soil compaction constraint had been removed by deep ripping. The use of L increases soil pHCaCl2, resulting in the improved availability of anions, phosphorus (P) in the LT and molybdenum (Mo) at all sampling times, but reduced availability of cations zinc (Zn) in the LT and manganese (Mn) at all sampling. The application of G reduced Mo concentrations, due to the high SO4–S content of the soil.

Deep sands on the south coast sandplain of Western Australia (WA) have multiple soil constraints including water repellence, high soil strength, low nutrient levels and subsoil acidity. The aim of the study was to test contrasting methods of managing water repellence and to assess their impacts on one or more soil constraints to crop production. These methods included seeding tyne design (knife point, winged points, paired row), soil wetting agent addition, strategic inversion tillage (rotary spading, mouldboard ploughing to 0.35 m) and clay-rich subsoil addition (170 t ha−1 with incorporation by spading to 0.20 or 0.35 m). Limesand (2 t ha−1) was applied as a split plot treatment prior to tillage. Cumulative crop yields were increased by 2.1–2.6 t ha−1 over five years by the strategic deep tillage and clay application treatments compared to the control. Water repellence was reduced by the inversion ploughing and subsoil clay addition treatments only. The effect of water repellence on crop establishment was expressed only in low rainfall years (Decile < 4) and mitigated by the paired row, wetting agent, spader and clay-amended treatments. In all years, plant numbers were adequate to achieve yield potential regardless of treatment. Soil K and plant tissue K and B were increased where clay had been applied. Inversion tillage reduced soil pH, organic carbon (OC) and macro nutrients in the 0–0.1 m layer although in most years there was no significant decline in plant tissue macro nutrient levels. Soil strength was reduced as a result of the inversion tillage to a depth of 0.35 m. However, the alleviation of soil strength and the crop yield responses diminished with time due to re-compaction. No crop response to the applied lime was found over five years at this site since the soil pHCaCl2 exceeded 4.7 within the root zone. In terms of soil constraints, we conclude that compaction was the dominant constraint at this site followed by water repellence and K deficiency.