This project, funded through the new GRDC initiative ‘Root Systems for Australian Soils’, builds on
current and past research undertaken in WA that has described the pattern of root growth of annual
crops in a range of field soils with chemical and/or physical barriers to growth, including hard soils and
drought. It is not known whether genetic diversity exists for root growth in soils containing a hardpan
among the currently-available wheat cultivars and breeding lines. Genotypic variation in root
penetration ability has been reported in other cereals (Yu et al . 1995; Kubo et al . 2004), and validated
in our own research, using a pot technique where a thin disc of wax and petroleum jelly is placed in a
soil column to simulate a hardpan (Botwright Acuna and Wade 2005). Partitioning of the soil column
by the wax layer makes it possible to examine the interaction between hardpan strength and soil
moisture stress. Our pot experiments have revealed differences in root penetration ability under
drought among 24 wheat cultivars and breeding lines. These results are compared with observations
on their rooting depths in two contrasting soil types in field experiments undertaken in Merredin. This
technique will have application in identifying promising lines for wheat breeding programs and in the
interpretation of field performance of wheat grown in soils containing a hardpan.
This paper reports on the perspective of industry stakeholders in a national project to develop a Learning and Teaching Academic Standards (LTAS) Statement for the Agriculture discipline. The AgLTAS Statement will be aligned with the Science LTAS Statement published in 2011 and comprise a discourse on the nature and extent of the Agriculture discipline and a set of Threshold Learning Outcome (TLO) statements specific to Agriculture. Agricultural research and teaching relies on strong links with industry due to the applied nature of the discipline. Without these links, sustainable and profitable practice change in agricultural systems cannot be achieved. A pilot project, in 2011-2012, with academic staff from three Australian universities identified vocational knowledge as a potential focus for a TLO. The AgLTAS project provides the opportunity to validate or refute this TLO by seeking input from a wider group of stakeholders, including industry. National consensus is being sought by a process of iterative consultation with academics, students and industry stakeholders and tested across four Australian universities. We have collected qualitative and quantitative data from industry participants who attended a series of workshops across most Australian States and Territories and through an online survey. Surprisingly, and contrary to the findings of the pilot project, industry representatives considered vocational knowledge of lesser importance to the need for students to attain highly developed problem solving and communication skills that can generate new opportunities and innovation in agriculture. Industry-specific (vocational) knowledge was generally regarded as attainable during on-the-job training after graduation. This finding prompts the question whether the AgLTAS Statement should be linked to professional accreditation that may be attained after graduation. Â
Water-use efficiency (WUE) for wheat production in Tasmania is highly variable on account of localised differences in climate and soil type and ranges from 7 to around 20 kg/ha mm. A sensitivity analysis of nitrogen and irrigation management showed that increases in both were required to maximise yields and WUE, but this is likely to be economically viable only for low to moderate water supply costs.
Strategic irrigation of barley was demonstrated to have a positive influence on yield, rooting depth and distribution in vertic, duplex soils. Improved understanding of root-soil interactions can be used to develop more effective irrigation to increase yields and water-use efficiency of grain crops in these hydraulically complex soils.
Selection for rapid leaf area growth has the potential to increase wheat biomass, and both water-use efficiency and weed competitiveness early in the season. Several morphological components contribute to increased seedling leaf area, including rapid seedling emergence and production of longer, wider leaves. Early emergence of a large coleoptile tiller has also been demonstrated to increase plant leaf area and biomass in wheat and other grass seedlings. Yet little is known of the extent and nature of genotypic variation for coleoptile tiller growth in wheat. A random set of 35 wheat, barley, and triticale genotypes was evaluated in glasshouse and outdoor studies for seedling characteristics, including coleoptile tiller growth and total plant leaf area. Coleoptile tillers were produced more reliably for seedlings grown outdoors and when supplied with additional soil nitrogen. Genotypic differences in coleoptile tiller frequency and leaf area were large, ranging from 0 to 78% and from 0.0 to 1.4 cm2, respectively at very early growth stages. Australian commercial wheats tended to produce fewer coleoptile tillers of smaller size than overseas germplasm where the coleoptile tiller accounted for up to 12% of total seedling leaf area. This compared favourably with mainstem tiller leaf area, which ranged from 0 to 3.5 cm2 and accounted for up to 16% of plant leaf area. Broad-sense heritabilities were high for coleoptile tiller presence and size in favourable conditions (c. 75%) but low (c. 40%) for seedlings evaluated across nitrogen content-varying soils. Generation means analysis was used to investigate genetic control for coleoptile tiller growth across multiple populations. Significant (P < 0.05) differences were observed among generations for coleoptile tiller frequency and growth (numbers of leaves, leaf area, and biomass). These differences reflected strong additive genetic control with little evidence for any gene action × year interaction. Increases in coleoptile tiller frequency and mass were correlated with larger embryo size and wider seedling leaves to increase seedling leaf area (rg = 0.89). Comparisons between reciprocal F1 and F2 generation means indicated strong maternal effects for coleoptile tiller growth in some but not all crosses. Screening in favourable environments will increase heritability and aid in selection for progenies producing large coleoptile tillers. Evidence for additive genetic control should permit early generation selection but not without some progeny-testing for coleoptile tiller growth together with other early vigour components associated with increased plant leaf area.
Gibberellin (GA)-insensitive dwarfing genes Rht-B1b and Rht-D1b that are responsible for the 'Green Revolution' have been remarkably successful in wheat improvement globally. However, these alleles result in shorter coleoptiles and reduced vigour, and hence poor establishment and growth in some environments. Rht18, on the other hand, is a GA-sensitive, dominant gene with potential to overcome some of the early growth limitations associated with Rht-B1b and Rht-D1b. We assessed progeny from both a biparental and a backcross population that contained tall, single dwarf, and double dwarf lines, to determine whether Rht18 differs from Rht-D1b and hence verify its value in wheat improvement. Progeny with Rht18 had an almost identical height to lines with Rht-D1b, and both were ~26% shorter than the tall lines, with the double dwarf 13% shorter again. However, coleoptile length of Rht18 was 42% longer than that of Rht-D1b. We detected no differences in time to terminal spikelet and anthesis, and few differences in stem or spike growth. Both dwarfing genes diverted more dry matter to the spike than tall lines from prior to heading. No differences were detected between Rht18 and Rht-D1b that could prevent the adoption of Rht18 in wheat breeding to overcome some of the limitations associated with the 'Green Revolution' genes.
“The COVID-19 response is a masterclass in the components of purposeful learning – and of using that learning to build an effective quality system – before our very eyes. Let us make them the foundation of our everyday learning and improvement tools now - and when we're talking about the COVID-19 days in the past tense.” Cathy Baldwin
You can probably pin-point what you were doing, and where, when you first heard about COVID-19. It was my last day of annual leave when I started fielding calls from my Executive Dean about a novel coronavirus and how our students in China were effectively stranded. The next day, my first day back at the office, I recall chairing a meeting at 9 am to start planning our College response for transitioning affected units to online delivery. Roll forward another four weeks, this escalated to needing to shift as many units as feasibly possible to online delivery – which if you are in the higher education sector, you can relate to as a teacher, unit or degree coordinator, or in a leadership role. Working from home was the new normal, while being a few steps ahead of our students in preparing lectures and adapting practicals and rapidly gaining new web conferencing skills. It was at this time our university decided to accelerate a whole of institution academic transformation of our undergraduate degrees, ready for 2021, as part of a longer-term strategy towards a sustainable future. We were adapting our teaching delivery and planning for curricula change so quickly, it was at times a bit of a blur.
For universities, as self-accrediting providers, it is imperative that our teaching and curricula are quality assured to meet legislative requirements. Even though that sounds a bit dry, as educators we surely want the best outcomes for our students. A fundamental question is how the online delivery and associated accommodations to assessment has impacted the quality of our teaching and learning. How will this be reflected in institutional and national quality indicators? How have the expectations of our students changed? It is a large and complicated task to draw this data together, and to have the approval to use it more broadly to communicate our successes and reflect on the challenges. What can we learn from our experiences dealing with COVID-19 to enable us to react to rapid change more effectively in the future?
In mid-2019 (those were the days!) Jo Kelder and I were awarded the inaugural ACDS Teaching Fellowship. Initially proposed as a response to the Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) minimum requirements that include continuous evaluation and the associated Guidance Note: Scholarship (TEQSA, 2018), our fellowship morphed to have a greater emphasis on quality assurance and quality improvement in the context of scholarship. These three interconnecting processes are conceptualised in a ‘Curriculum Evaluation Research (CER) framework’ for the specific characteristics of STEM degrees, with student learning at the core. Other outputs include national workshops at 11 institutions that introduce and refine the CER-STEM framework, a website, and a plan to share case studies and resources developed during the fellowship.
We would love to be able to state that we had the framework implemented in our degrees – but with so many COVID-19 activities, this too had to be temporarily shelved. Reflecting on the disruption to curriculum content and delivery, we all know that some quality was necessarily sacrificed due to the short time frames - there was no opportunity to consult, no efficient mechanisms to monitor student learning experience and engagement. We believe it is important to think clearly about whether, and to what extent, the quality assurance planning embedded in the CER-STEM framework might have informed the context of rapidly evolving curricula. How mechanisms for formative and summative quality improvement could have been deployed to gather and analyse data for quality improvement more effectively. And how a developing culture of scholarly teaching practice might have ensured teaching teams were confident that change-decisions were based on evidence communicated through scholarship.
Cathy Baldwin’s quote, above, reminds us of the need for an effective quality system, which we will explore in the context of the CER-framework. Using our College of Sciences and Engineering as an example, we plan to implement the framework across all our shiny new undergraduate degrees that will be offered from 2021 onwards. This approach will not only enable us to provide multi-faceted evidence of the impact of teaching delivery at the degree-level, but to demonstrate how and why our degrees offer a distinctively Tasmanian learning experience for our students. Not to mention that we will have a comprehensive evidence base with which to inform the next cycle of curriculum renewal.
'/%3e%3c/defs%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0h10080v5040H0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='.6' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23b)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='.4' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23c)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='840' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='504' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cg fill='%23fff'%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' x='2520' y='3780'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='4200'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='6300' y='2205'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='840'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='8680' y='1869'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23e' x='8064' y='2730'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
'%3e%3ccircle r='9'/%3e%3cg id='d'%3e%3cg id='c'%3e%3cg id='b'%3e%3cpath d='m-19 0 1.169 1.169L0 0l-17.831-1.169z'/%3e%3cpath id='a' d='m-.884.116.05.05L0 0z' transform='scale(19.2381)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='scale(1 -1)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23b' transform='rotate(45)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23c' transform='rotate(90)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' transform='rotate(180)'/%3e%3cg transform='translate(-2.02)'%3e%3cg id='f' transform='translate(37.962)'%3e%3cpath id='e' d='M5 0 1.618 1.176l-.073 3.58-2.163-2.854-3.427 1.037L-2 0z'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23e' transform='scale(1 -1)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23f' transform='rotate(120)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23f' transform='rotate(-120)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)