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.

Water repellency in soils is caused by waxy coatings on particles and can seriously limit agricultural production. Bioremediation of these soils, using wax-degrading bacteria isolated from soils and other sources rich in microorganisms, was investigated. Wool wax, a complex mixture of fatty acids and alcohols, was used to select bacteria capable of metabolising hydrophobic compounds. Of the 37 stable isolates, two-thirds were actinomycetes. These organisms are known for their ability to metabolise a wide range of organic compounds. Degradation of waxes associated with soil particles is facilitated by the production of biosurfactants that emulsify hydrophobic compounds. Measurement of biosurfactant production indicated that those isolates that grew best on hydrocarbon were also the most prolific biosurfactant producers. Inoculation of water-repellent soils, under controlled conditions, with the most efficient wax-degrading bacterial isolates resulted in significant improvements in soil wettability.

Water repellency can significantly reduce crop and pasture establishment and production in sandy soils. Management practices that increase the rate of water infiltration into dry soils following the first rains at the end of the dry season were investigated. In the laboratory, addition of water to water repellent soil and maintenance of warm moist conditions produced a gradual decline in water repellency. This was supported by results in the field which showed that under daily irrigation there was a gradual decline in water repellency over time. However, under dryland conditions, other mechanisms to increase water infiltration had to be found. In the laboratory, after the addition of lime and kaolinite clay, there was an initial rapid decline in repellency, indicative of a physical mechanism, followed by a more gradual decline suggesting a biological response. In the field, under dryland conditions, the addition of lime and kaolinite clay resulted in a reduction in water repellency, and in the case of lime, this effect increased with the size of application. Estimates of the numbers of wax-degrading bacteria in the treated soils, using a most-probable-number assay, showed at least a 10-fold increase in lime-treated sands, but not in the clay-treated sands. The results suggest that lime may provide a viable alternative for increasing the wettability of soils by physical mechanisms and by promoting microbial activity by bacteria responsible for wax degradation, resulting in more consistent plant germination and establishment, and increased crop yields.

A 7-year tillage experiment was conducted on a deep sand in the central wheat belt of Western Australia between 1998 and 2004 to evaluate the impact of tillage intensity [no-tillage (NT), conservation tillage (CT), and rotary tillage (RT)] on soil organic matter, microbial biomass and function, and crop yields in a wheat–lupin rotation. A fourth treatment (subterranean clover pasture, Pasture) with least soil disturbance was included as a comparison. By March 2004, total soil carbon (C) in NT and CT increased by 4.4 and 2.6 t/ha, respectively, to an average of 17.6 t/ha in the top 0.1 m of the soil profile. There was a loss of total soil C in RT (–0.5 t/ha), which was significant compared with the other 2 tillage treatments. Total soil C and nitrogen (N) contents in the pasture treatment were similar to those in NT and CT at the end of the experiment. Labile fractions of soil C responded more rapidly to tillage practice, with significant reductions by 2001 in light fraction C and dissolved organic C in the RT treatment compared with the other 3 treatments. The effect of RT on biology and function was seen early in the experiment and, compared with Pasture, NT, and CT, intense tillage in RT significantly reduced microbial biomass and cellulase activity in the surface 0.05 m by the third year of the experiment. However, at a depth of 0.05–0.10 m there were no significant differences between treatments. Grain yields in NT, CT, and RT were unaffected by tillage except in 2003, when lupin yield under RT (1.6 t/ha) was significantly less than under NT (2.0 t/ha) and CT (1.9 t/ha). Minimal differences between NT and CT are a reflection of the minimum disturbance in the CT treatment, although there were significant differences between CT and NT in microbial indices such as microbial quotient and metabolic quotient, suggesting a future divergence of these treatments.