This brief provides an update to the previous review (Sentinel Health and Safety Data for Australian Cotton Farms),1 that was commissioned by the Cotton Research and Development Corporation in 2019. The purpose of the document is to provide contemporaneous data to gauge progress against key work health and safety benchmarks that the industry is seeking to attain.

There is a significant current labour shortage across the Australian agricultural industry. While enrolments in agriculture university degrees have increased recently, this trend has not occurred in vocational education and training courses. The ‘Exploring a cotton and grains agricultural apprenticeship/traineeships model’ project investigates how Vocational Educational Training (VET) and formal apprenticeships/traineeships can be utilised to support viable pathways for school leavers and career changers in the cotton and grains industry. 

This report forms the third part of this three-phase research project. Semi-structured interviews with cotton, grains and other agricultural industry participants including growers, apprentices and trainees, Registered Training Organisations and governing bodies were conducted to ascertain the barriers, pathways and opportunities for an agricultural apprenticeship/traineeship. The qualitative data collected during these interviews has been analysed to understand the complex issues that exist for multiple stakeholders, and which have, to date, prevented the establishment of an agricultural apprenticeship that is fit-for-purpose for the cotton and grains industry. The report concludes with recommendations for strategies and partnerships to increase on-farm workforce capacity of the Australian cotton and grains industry. It outlines how the employment of apprentices and trainees with recognised qualifications has the potential to assist in addressing the labour shortage currently being experienced by the Australian cotton and grains industry by facilitating the development of a skilled, dedicated, and enthusiastic workforce that will contribute to improving farm profitability and productivity and increased adaptive capacity.

Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade (DITT) of the Northern Territory Government is the lead agency engaged in cotton research, development and extension in the Territory. DITT is currently concluding Cooperative Research Centre for Developing Northern Australia (CRCNA) funded ‘Potential for Broadacre Cropping in the Northern Territory’ project. Most recently, CRCNA has approved DITT to lead ‘Addressing the Basics of Cropping-system for Sustainable Growth of Agriculture Sector in the Northern Territory’ project for progressing cotton RD&E in the Territory for next four years. Growing rain-fed cotton has been identified as a high value broadacre cropping option for expanding agriculture in the Northern Territory.

The 2024 Australian Cotton Conference was held in the Gold Coast Queensland, at Gold Coast Convention Centre from 6th to 8th August 2024. Attending the Australian Cotton Conference was an excellent opportunity for DITT team Staci Stanley and Saeedeh Taghadomi-Saberi to engage in cotton RD&E.

Staci, Shah and Simon attendance was sponsored by DITT (CRCNA - Project) and The Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC). The conference presented an opportunity for DITT team to establish networks/connections, exchange information, ideas, and discuss the latest advances from the world of cotton science and production with national and international cotton RD&E stakeholders and learn from their experiences.

Over the 3-day conference NACRA representative Abaigh Gleeson, was able to gain an insight into the wider industry and develop these insights for cotton production in Kunnunurra.

1. ACS Green Chemistry & Engineering conference. I have learnt and explored how green chemistry and artificial intelligence (AI) have been used to design and optimise chemical reactions, particularly the talks from agrochemical industries such as Syngenta, Bayer, Corteva and FMC were most valuable for me because I experienced for the first time was that the combination of AI and green chemistry could be used to design greener pesticide and fertiliser. A new and sustainable way is to identify sustainable reaction conditions and eliminate the use of hazardous solvents first. The efficiency of the chemical reaction were optimised later. These learnings were very useful for NanoSoils to initiate AI and green chemistry in Australia to design green nanoagrochemical formulations for cotton. 2. Nanoscale Science and Engineering for Agriculture and Food Systems conference discussed how nanotechnology were applied for agriculture. Surprisingly, the applications have been explored intensively at both academic and industrial levels across the globe. Some of nano-fertiliser and nano-pesticide products have already been in the market. An impressive talk was from an European Food Safety Authority - Reinhilde Schoonjans. She started by asking the audients “raise your hand if you want nanoparticles in your foods”. Of course, no one raised hands. Then she said “either you liked it or not, the nanoparticles have been already added to your foods. I had to double check what she said and found that in fact we consumed about 1.8 mg of silica nanoparticles/kg body weight a day (J Nanobiotechnol 22, 45 (2024). I also had the opportunity to have a chat with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officer-Raymond Briñas. He is very supportive the nanomaterials to be used in agriculture and food as long as the products satisfy the regulatory requirements.

The Summer 2024-25 edition of Spotlight takes a deep dive into the critical role nitrogen plays on cotton farms and its impact on cotton's greenhouse gas emissions, explores exciting new spray technology from SwarmFarm and the LX Group, and delivers an update on the Australian Cotton Disease Collaboration. 

It also introduces CRDC's new Innovation Broker Nick Tomkins, pays tribute to CRDC's first Executive Director, the late Ralph Schulzé AM, and brings you a snapshot of CRDC's RD&E highlights over the past year. 

Recent decades have seen rapid growth in the implementation of sustainability reporting, which
seeks to evaluate the extent to which an industry, private or public organisation or agency is 
sustainable. While significant progress has been made in measuring environmental and economic 
dimensions of sustainability, there is relatively little consensus about what aspects of social 
sustainability should be monitored and reported, or what it means to be socially sustainable. 
Increasingly, achieving wellbeing is recognised as the goal of social sustainability. In recent years this 
has led to some emerging consensus about key indicators of social wellbeing that are important to 
monitor, as well as identification of other areas that are important to consider monitoring.
The Australian cotton industry released its first sustainability report in 2014, which included some 
initial social sustainability indicators. In 2019, the University of Canberra was commissioned to 
examine a wider range of social wellbeing indicators, and recommend indicators that could be 
included in future sustainability reporting. This report presents the recommended social and 
wellbeing indicators, and explains how they were developed and tested during this project. 
A total of 22 social and wellbeing indicators are recommended for monitoring in this report, several
of which are identified as ideally requiring regular monitoring, while others may be monitored less 
regularly. These recommendations were developed through (i) reviewing existing literature and 
availability of data on social wellbeing, (ii) examining the experiences of those working in the cotton 
industry and those living in cotton communities through in depth interviews, (iii) proposing a set of 
social and wellbeing indicators to include in Australia’s cotton industry sustainability framework, (iv) 
testing the initial indicators through collecting new data and analysing existing data, and (v) 
discussing findings with cotton industry representatives and stakeholders in workshops and 
identifying which indicators would be prioritised based on these discussions. 

This project is a 15 month follow-on from DAN1402 and continues research into herbicide resistant weeds and to identify barriers to adoption of integrated weed management in cotton, particularly the reduced use of residual and layby herbicides. Two Herbicide demonstration sites were established, one at CSD farms (Wee Waa) and the other at the Irrigation Research and Extension Committee [IREC] (Whitton). The addition of pre-emergent or residual herbicides to glyphosate resulted in lower weed numbers and higher yields in those treatments. Glyphosate alone treatments had lower lint yields than the integrated herbicide approach. A weedy control included at IREC, highlights the importance of the “Critical Weed Free Period” in cotton; allowing the weeds to grow unimpeded for six weeks reduced crop yield significantly. This research supports recent scientific publications from Graham Charles.

The project has also reported on the first case of glyphosate and paraquat resistance in two tall fleabane populations in a double knock scenario. In addition to this finding, a hormesis effect was detected when lower doses of paraquat were applied with increases in above ground biomass, plant height and buds per plant.

Weed surveys were conducted during the 2018–19 season. A smaller number of weeds were collected as a result of the dry conditions, however high levels of glyphosate resistance are still being recorded. A total of three populations (out of 11) of Sowthistle are resistant to glyphosate and two populations of Bladder ketmia (narrow) were found to be resistant to glyphosate.

A total of six ryegrass populations were screened; five populations are resistant to glyphosate and all populations are susceptible to both paraquat and ‘double-knock. (glyphosate+paraquat) A total of 23, 16 and 25 populations of Barnyard grass, Windmill grass and Feathertop Rhodes grass were screened with glyphosate, and 52%, 44% and 48% populations were identified as resistant respectively.

A total of 21 and 14 populations of Feathertop Rhodes grass and Barnyard grass were treated with four Group A herbicides including three fops and one dim. Seven and five populations of Feathertop Rhodes grass and Barnyard grass showed resistance to Topik® respectively. Grass populations that are developing-resistance or are resistant to Topik® are also resistant or developing resistance to glyphosate except one population of Barnyard grass (S3) and two populations of Feathertop Rhodes grass (D1 and D12). The importance of not relying on any one herbicide for control of problem weeds is critical for ongoing efficacy of current herbicides. Ecology and biology studies were conducted on emerging weeds collected during the weed surveys. By identifying the patterns of growth and development of these weeds, strategies for their control can be directed at weak links in their lifecycle. Dwarf, Green and Redroot amaranth do not show any seed dormancy. Temperature has significant influences on seed germination of the three tested amaranth weed species. All three species can germinate at a wide range pH solution however; they prefer to geminate in neutral to alkaline conditions. All three species are very sensitive to light and they are photoblastic. Dwarf, Green and Redroot are very sensitive to water stress but Green amaranth is more tolerant than the other two species.

In two populations of Barnyard grass, one Resistant to glyphosate, the other Susceptible, our findings found that herbicide-resistant plants of Barnyard grass will be less fit than wild type in the absence of herbicide (glyphosate), and in the absence of glyphosate, backward selection can occur. This means that without glyphosate applications, the susceptible plants of Barnyard grass, as the fittest population, may eventually dominate in the field. While resistant plants of the same population may dominate when glyphosate is used for control, this depends on glyphosate doses. A research question for the future; is this a possible non herbicide mechanism for controlling a resistant Barnyard grass population? In other words will the fitness penalty be enough to wrest control of resistant populations back or is this an additional tactic to include in an integrated weed control program.

Improving water security can be viewed in terms of five key principles: supply, practice, compliance, markets and policy. Using this framework, new water security concepts can be categorised and an evidence based decision on investment or implementation can be reached providing value for money, clarity and efficiency in the investment process.

Innovations to improve water security

This project identified a range of innovations that can be implemented to improve water security. Categorised under the five key principles, the following recommendations are provided:

Supply Augmentation

Whilst the most obvious method to improve water security is by the provisioning of additional supply it can be the most expensive, with the construction of new dams, enhancement of existing dams and novel water extraction methods being very costly. A range of technologies is emerging that could produce additional water supply for consumptive use, and if these developments achieve water yields that could supply commercially irrigated cotton then additional investment in R&D is recommended. Two areas of research for the augmentation of water supplies are the capture of atmospheric water for consumptive use and the use of low-quality water.  These two areas are investigated further through a case study developed as part of this project.

Practice

There has been significant investment into research and development focused on improved on and off-farm water management and use efficiency practices over the last 30 years. As a result, agricultural water productivity improvements have occurred across all sectors. However, this is still the most likely area in which the greatest improvement in agricultural water security could be made. A range of techniques and methods are available to improve understanding and management of losses from off and on farm irrigation systems. In particular, this includes better management of channel seepage and evaporation mitigation via a range of technologies including novel polymer compounds, infrastructure upgrades, low cost covers and floating solar arrays. Other practices include the management and storage of excess water via managed aquifer recharge as well as reducing the transpiration of cotton by chemicals or genetic methods without compromising yield. Additionally, improved practice could be the aligning of current on and off farm activities with the concept of nature based solutions (NBS). This alignment would identify which current practices are aligned to NBS, what more could be done, and then NBS could be promoted as a way of demonstrating water stewardship. It is recommended that an investment review be undertaken on these identified practices.  

Compliance

In both NSW and Queensland a range of new compliance requirements are being implemented during 2018-19. Compliance is central to improving water security as these laws and regulations protect water users' rights, and minimise the unlawful take or use of water. If compliance is not enforced then any water sharing plan will fail. A recommendation is that the cotton industry invests in the development of a program that advocates the benefits of water compliance to the industry as a way of demonstrating water stewardship. This could be undertaken by a social research approach such as community based social marketing. 

Markets

Water markets in the Murray Darling Basin have been operating for over 30 years but are not necessarily well understood by irrigators. Improved provision of information for effective market operations as well as education on the fundamentals of water trade will allow more efficient resource allocation via the market and hence improve water security. It is recommended that an education and awareness campaign is undertaken to inform growers regarding specific water trading products and how they can use water trades as an operation tool. This understanding will allow growers to make more informed decisions and to better fulfil seasonal cotton water requirements. 

 Policy

The water management policy space is a highly contested and has seen much change mainly since the early 1990. Water management is often embedded within a larger, systemic natural resource reform agenda and as such has many stakeholders and competing interests. With this near continuous revision of policy many cotton growers are pleading for stability and certainty in this area. Improvement in the stability and certainty of policy will create a stable investment environment which in turn will provide for water security. There a number of concepts that would improve water management policy and include the better understanding of: 

•           environmental water requirements

•           the groundwater architecture (aquifer geometry and subsequent modelling) 

•           enhanced accounting of conveyance losses as environmental water, and 

•           better communication between environmental and consumptive users.

Attachment 1 Lit review 

Attachment 2 Case studies 

Attachment 3 Record of interviews

Attachment 4 David Mitchell David Cordina Sarah Dadd 2018 Innovative approaches to water security in the Australian Cotton Industry Irrigation Australia Conference Sydney

Purpose: To attend the 12th ICPP to meet experts in the field of plant pathology, scientific exchange, and develop collaborative professional relationships; meet with Dr F. Trouillas from the US who is assisting us to characterise the morphology of Eutypella spp. of cotton; and inform the international scientific community of our research on two important wilt diseases of cotton in Australia, Reoccurring and Verticillium.

What was achieved:

Met Prof. Zarco-Tejada, an expert on the detection of Verticillium wilt in olive using remote sensing. Discussed current CRDC funded project and he is open to being contacted for advice and to assist where possible. Met with Dr F. Trouillas and discussed our research on Eutypella and gained further incite on research direction. Knowledge was gained to develop a better insight of disease management and disease prediction tools. 

Key points:

· Different expression of disease symptoms and/severity possibly due to change in the environmental conditions and development of more virulent strains was a common theme.

· Harnessing remote sensing and imaging spectroscopy for agricultural disease management is possible and effective.

· Resistance and reduced sensitivity of leaf pathogens to some fungicides is concerning highlighting the importance of fungicide resistance monitoring.

· Spore-trapping and qPCR are effective methods for detection and quantification of pathogens associated with trunk cankers which enables study of seasonal abundance of pathogenic fungi which contributes to the application of management strategies. This supports our future research on Eutypella sp.

· The knowledge of seed mycobiomes is important to prevent spread of pathogenic fungi. Could metagenomics be used to understand cotton seed pathology and health with aim to improve seed quality.

· Volatile organic compounds of pathogens were detected using sensor technology. Could this be applied to early detection of Fov?