The following impact assessment addresses investment by CRDC in a cluster six sustainability projects.

Sustainability can be defined as a measure of a cropping system's capacity to sustain itself in the long-term without destroying its natural resource base. This has implications not only to maintain or increase the system’s productivity over time by enhancing or protecting its productive resource base (e.g. soil, vegetation, water quality and biodiversity) but also by demonstrating its responsibility as an industry sector to other parts of the community. This is particularly important to the cotton industry as it is a relatively intensive cropping industry and uses significant amounts of water and chemicals.

The primary aim of this project has been to benchmark greenhouse gas emissions across the cotton industry and develop guidelines which potentially reduce nitrous oxide, and associated non-global warming nitrogen gases, which incur a significant penalty on profitability. Due to the episodic nature of emissions, and the difficulty in accessing furrow irrigated field sites, the use of automatic greenhouse gas sampling systems is critical for field studies, however this is not always possible due to both the long-term (1-2 yr) nature of these studies and the expense of the equipment. This project has included a detailed field study on the Darling Downs (Freeser property) to verify previous field studies, and in the final year sought to benchmark field based emissions across the industry and identify industry wide guidelines for reducing emissions.

The Freeser property was specifically selected on the basis that a mixed irrigated cropping rotation (grains-cotton) is representative of diversification in the cotton industry. The mixed cropping system provides a different set of agronomic conditions to those examined in earlier cotton studies using automatic continuous sampling chambers.

Our earlier studies estimated Emission Factors (i.e. % of N emitted as N2O expressed as proportion of N added) from irrigated cotton (only) systems at Narrabri and Dalby ranging from 0.16-0.83%. The current Emission Factor recognised by the Australian Government is 0.5%, however this is based on a limited dataset. Nitrous oxide emission data collected at the Fresser property using the automatic sampling system also suggests an Emission Factor in this range, however there is evidence to suggest that the increased inputs of carbon into soil from grain based system, whilst essential for soil structure and soil carbon sequestration, may also increase the potential for gaseous N losses, therefore N management in mixed cotton-grains system needs to be carefully considered and in many cases, significantly reduced.

Benchmarking studies using a range of cotton monoculture and cotton-grains rotation soils were completed using an intact soil core laboratory incubation approach to estimate both seasonal and maximum potential N2O and total N gas loss (excluding NH3) using fertiliser enriched with the stable isotope 15N. The incubation study also provided information to develop a simple laboratory based diagnostic assay to determine the N2O loss potential and seasonal emissions for widespread use without having to undertake expensive sampling procedures in the long-term.

I. To evaluate the risk of Q-biotype whitefly for Australia: Q-biotype identifications in Australia have not been verified by other methods or researchers. According to research in the US, it is unlikely that they would occur in the field in the presence of predominantly and in the absence of high spray regimes. It is also believed that high temperatures and other environmental conditions affect Q-biotype’s ability to establish. Despite the lower risk factors, it is, however, important to continue monitoring for Q-biotype as they are considered a bio-security risk. While their presence may not have immediate implications for BollGard II cotton in the field, it would for glasshouse breeding and research facilities as well as for horticulture and floriculture industries (eg. especially glasshouse/greenhouse situations). To determine the risk to cotton production the Q-biotype honeydew characteristics would need to be investigated.

II. To gain hands-on knowledge about whitefly management in cotton: Whitefly management in Arizona relies largely on neonicotinoids (imidacloprid) and insect growth regulators (buprofezin and pyriproxifen). The Q-biotype is resistant to all three. Imidacloprid resistance by the B-biotype is increasing in both cotton and vegetable crops. While the cotton industry is managing whiteflies quite successfully, the vegetable industry often still employs older, harsher and cheaper chemistry as IPM in vegetables is not viable. This practice may increase resistance in whiteflies as they move between crops. There are implications for areas of Australia where the cotton and horticultural industries overlap (eg. St. George, Emerald, Burdekin) with respect to whitefly management and resistance buildup. For example, intense selection in the horticultural industry could render products ineffective in the cotton industry.

III. To assess the importance of horticultural industries in whitefly management (eg. vegetable and ornamentals): It is difficult to efficiently manage whiteflies in cotton in areas where vegetable growers use different management strategies. James Bethke suggested that poinsettia was a most likely source of introduction for Q-biotype whitefly in Australia as plants reared for the Christmas season may have been propagated from overseas stock. Sources of commercially sold poinsettias in Australia would need to be verified and it would be advisable to sample poinsettias for Q-biotype incursions as this plant species is an excellent whitefly host.

IV. To learn field techniques for whitefly research experiments: The field studies will help us to design better whitefly experiments with realistically defined parameters to understand the pest’s lifecycle and effect of mortality factors in Australian cotton growing systems.

V. To assess and improve on current Australian whitefly resistance testing based in Toowoomba: Zara Ludgate and Richard Lloyd identified several issues with the techniques they use that can be improved by changing some of their procedures. This should help to make resistance testing more efficient and reliable.

The cotton aphid, (Aphis gossypii), is a pest of increasing concern in Australian cotton. Cotton aphid is considered a pest due to yield reduction if a heavy and persistent infestation occurs. Cotton aphid honeydew is frequently a problem late in the growing season due to honeydew contamination of boll lint. Further cotton aphid is a vector of cotton bunchy top (CBT), a disease of cotton that under certain conditions, can cause serious yield loss.

Cotton aphid is typically managed by using insecticides, however over time cotton aphids have developed resistance to insecticides used against it, most recently to neonicotinoids (Confidor).

A more sustainable approach to aphid management would be to use beneficial arthropods like ladybugs, hoverflies and parasitoids to reduce aphid populations. Unfortunately, little is known about the biology and ecology of these natural enemies, so it is difficult to include their presence in cotton fields into pest management practices.

This project focussed on understanding more about the biology and ecology of the aphid parasitoid Lysiphlebus testaceipes. This parasitoid wasp was introduced to Australia in 1982, but wasn't detected in large numbers in cotton districts until 1997. Overseas the parasitoid is considered an important biological agent, but in Australia there is limited information on its importance as a natural enemy of cotton aphid.

The purpose of my visit was to attend the conference in Auckland New Zealand. At the conference I presented a paper entitled: “The IPM of mirids in Australian cotton: understanding why and when pest managers spray for mirids” which was based on research undertaken in the “Mirid Predation” project (CRC number: 1.10.01). I also talked to other researchers about my current work in the refuge project, particularly mate choice by Helicoverpa.

As I am hosting the ASSAB conference in April 2010 in Narrabri, the second purpose of my visit was to prepare for the Narrabri conference through meetings with organisers of the Auckland conference and ASSAB council members. I also advertised the Narrabri conference by giving a short presentation designed to encourage delegates to attend the Conference in Narrabri.

Each year, Crop Consultants Australia - with support from CRDC - conduct a qualitative survey of cotton consultants regarding their practices and attitudes, as well as those of their cotton grower clients. The resulting report provides valuable information to the Australian cotton industry regarding on-farm practices , helping to benchmark the industry's performance in a range of key areas over time. This report looks at the 2011-12 cotton growing season.

The 2014 Cotton Growing Practices survey was conducted by Roth Rural on behalf of CRDC. It gathers valuable information about cotton farming practices to give a greater understanding of the industry’s current practices and performance in relation to a number of key areas for the 2013-14 cotton crop, and so that trends can be monitored over time. This survey particularly focused on weeds, climate, carbon, riparian areas, irrigation and irrigation pumps. Information was also gathered about cotton yields and fibre quality for the season and grower perceptions of CottonInfo.

CRDC and Cotton Seed Distributors (CSD) commissioned Eco Logical Australia to undertake a review and analysis of the extent of current cotton production and investigation within Australia, as well as opportunities for expansion. Opportunities were identified through a Geographical Information System (GIS) based spatial analysis, testing commonly held metrics and assumptions pertaining to the limits of cotton production. This report contains two volumes - a report of the findings of this research, and spatial analysis and mapping.

The Australian cotton industry has a 21 year history of independent environmental assessments, demonstrating its commitment to monitoring and improving the industry’s environmental performance. The initial assessment, conducted in 1991, saw the cotton industry become the first major agricultural industry undertake such a task, and in 2012, the Third Environment Assessment was conducted to continue documenting performance and practice change.

The Australian Cotton Industry: Third Environmental Assessment made six recommendations for the industry to improve its environmental performance. These recommendations, and the key findings from the Assessment, are outlined in the Assessment Report.

This report outlines CRDC's key priority areas for 'futures research' investment, based on extensive consultation with stakeholders