2. INTRODUCTION HOBBS FAMILY – MILLEWA, VIC LINKLATER FAMILY – GOL GOL, NSW

3. Why was BioAgtive appealing? Faced with high input costs and poor seasons Dilemma of whether it was viable to sow a crop using traditional inputs Ongoing viability and profitability under threat Risk management tool BioAgtive is ONE tool we use in our farming system

4. OBSERVATIONS Germination in 3 – 5 days Vigorous root growth Delayed development stages vs crops with traditional fertilizer application – grows in “steps” Horses-for-courses with regard to post emergent inputs ie nutrient Extensive soil audit to monitor available nutrition

5. Early root growth

6. Root development & hyphae

7. Observations cont. Comparative yields to date – two dry years, one average rainfall Predicting comparative yield this year – wetter year Trentham Cliffs – same soil type, management history etc Griffith farmer

8. Wheat, Trentham Cliffs NSW, 20 Oct 2010 Which plant has been force-fed? AB

9. Other Benefits Healthy soils Increase organic carbon  increased water holding capacity Carbon sequestration? - how much? Reduced fossil fuel based inputs – less N₂0 and other GHG emissions Reduced carbon footprint

10. Season 2010 – Trentham Cliffs, NSW

11. Implementing BioAgtive – Marc 1

12. Farmers using the method in Australia 4 in NSW 5 in VIC 2 in SA 6 in WA 2010 is the third season for one farmer, the second for three farmers and the first for thirteen

13. Marc 3

15. Trials Extensive trials in WA – will provide useful post harvest data despite dry season Our own farm trials continue Regular soil tests; annual soil audit In-crop leaf analysis Seeking opportunities for further research and collaboration with scientific community to gain a better understanding of carbon sequestration potential and nutritional benefits for plant and product

16. Thank you