Woolwise News Edition 6
7 June, 2001

Wool prices in Australia are rocketing, despite the global trend for falling textile prices.
The fibre is in short supply because it is back in fashion, sending prices rocketing.
In contrast to cotton and synthetics, especially polyester and acrylics, prices for wool have increased on average by 10 per cent.
Cotton prices went down to 48 cents a pound last week, compared with 65 cents a pound in December, partly due to the economic uncertainty in the US.
Over capacity of polyester and acrylic processing in Asia and the US is dampening values of synthetics.

And reduced supplies in other countries, including the UK which is forecast to see an 18 per cent decrease in next season's woolclip due to foot and mouth, was also helping to push prices up.

The Australian Wool Innovation organisation (AWIL) warned that one country to watch carefully was China, which had been the mainstay of raw wool demand for the past 18 months.

AWIL said imports had slowed down during the first three months of the year compared with the country's record purchases last year.

WOOL CONTAMINATION CAUSED BY CROSSBREEDING MERINO EWES WITH DAMARA FAT TAIL RAMS THE LATEST RESEARCH FROM MALCOLM FLEET (SARDI, ROSEWORTHY & TURRETFIELD)

(Malcolm Fleet gave a seminar a few weeks ago at Roseworthy and has kindly provided me with notes to pass on to interested parties. This information should supplement, and reinforce that supplied in the Woolclasser Development Program.)

The Problems

1. When first introduced into the country, some Damara promoters suggested there was no contamination of Merino wool (i.e. the pure Merino ewes wool) involved in the crossbreeding exercise, or it would be overcome by short break in exposure from the contaminating source (the Damara rams, or the Damara cross lambs).
   
2. Merino wool affected by contamination from Damara fibres is not being identified in market because there is currently no presale measure available for dark fibres.
   
3. This situation poses a threat to wool industry reputation  both locally and overseas.
   
4. Research into these problems and woolclassing revision was needed, hence the study that Malcolm undertook.

The Support
Industry groups including the Wool & Fibre Industry Development Board, the Damara Breeders Group, and GH Michell & Sons supported the study conducted at SARDIs Minnipa Agricultural Centre. It commenced in April 1999, with fieldwork completed in April 2000, raw wool measurements finished in March 2001, and reports being published in journals in September 2000, and April 2001.

The Research
2 Damara rams were each mated to 65 merino ewes, while 2 Merino rams were each mated to 32 Merino ewes to provide a control. One Damara ram was black and the other tan. All the Merinos were selected to be above the average of the flock they were drawn from, and without obvious pigmentation. The study looked at the contamination of the Merino EWE wool after mating, and after rearing Damara cross lambs.

The Results - Effects of Mating on Merino wool
This part of the study looked at the influence of the ram on contamination levels in the Merino ewes fleece. The ewes were shorn immediately after the rams were removed from the flock at the end of mating. There was no significant difference in the number of pigmented fibres in the Merino ewes wool after mating with Damara or Merino Rams. The Damara mated ewes had on average 0.33 pigmented fibres per 10 grams of scoured staple, while the Merino mated ewes had 0.22 pigmented fibres per 10 grams of scoured staple. Remember that the tolerance for pigmented fibres in tops is between 0.01 and 1.0 per 10 grams. So both groups of ewes were in the acceptable level and there was also no major increase in contaminant fibres detected.

Results - Effects of Weaning on Merino wool
The ewes mated to Damara rams were divided into two groups to look at the effect of long and short wool at weaning. The following table summarised the results.

• # Pigmented fibres / 10g scoured staple
  
• Wool growth 7 months or 4 months
  
• Greater than 3mm 54 113
  
• Greater than 10mm 30 50
•  
• Greater than 25 14 25
  
• Medullated greater than 10mm 3.6 6.1

The differences between the number of pigmented and medullated fibres recorded in the two wool lengths are statistically significant. The contamination is diluted by the amount of wool in the fleece, which is why the ewes with 7 months wool recorded lower contamination than the ewes with 4 months wool at weaning. However, all results are still well in excess of top tolerances.

Results  Effects of Delaying Shearing after Weaning
This part of the study compared levels of contamination if the Merino ewes were shorn immediately after they had weaned their Damara cross lambs (these ewes had 4 months wool), or if shearing was delayed 3.5 months. The following table summarised the results.

• # Pigmented fibres / 10g scoured staple
  
• Shorn at weaning or 3.5 months after weaning
  
• Greater than 3mm 113 21
  
• Greater than 10mm 49 9.8
  
• Greater than 25 25 4.0
  
• Medullated greater than 10mm 6.1 0.3

Again the differences between the two groups are statistically significant. There is a decline in contamination when a 3.5-month interval is used between weaning and shearing, caused by physical loss of contaminating fibres, as well as the dilution mentioned in the previous experiment. But the amount of contamination would still cause contamination of tops.

Other findings
Malcolm found that there was no difference in contamination of the ewes fleece based on the number of lambs reared. Merino ewes mated to Damara rams in this study were found to be more likely to have multiple births, and to rear them, but this did not cause a real increase in contamination of the fleece.

GH Michells provided some lines of Merino wool where ewes had reared Damara cross lambs. These were core sampled, and then Malcolms group measured the pigmentation levels. Pigmented and medullated fibres were detected in every core sample, at levels well in excess of that needed to contaminated tops.

This experience has led to collaboration with AWTA to develop a presale test for this type of pigmented contamination. Because the fibres from Damaras are spread so consistently through the fleece, and therefore the bale and the core sample, it might be possible to accurately detect and measure these fibres in a presale test. This wouldn't enable us to detect one-off pigmentation from black spots, but it would give growers, classers, and buyers, some confidence about describing and buying Merino wool when the mating history wasn't known, or revealed.

Take home messages

1.  Merino wool contamination from Damara crossbred lambs has been proven.
   
2. Delayed shearing is NOT an adequate control.
   
3. This information has been the basis for revisions to Code of Practice, and information in the Woolclasser Development Program.
   
4. Bale core sampling is possible, but development of a practical presale test is required.

THE COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTRE FOR PREMIUM QUALITY WOOL: 1993 2000 - AN EVALUATION.

Lionel Ward Director - 26/4/01

THE CRC PROGRAM
An evaluation of any cooperative research centre (CRC) has to be undertaken within the context of the broad objectives of the Commonwealths CRC program which began in 1991. It aims to enhance Australias economic growth by improving the efficiency and effectiveness with which research resources are used. Specifically, the program facilitates a much higher level of cooperation by encouraging:

• 7 Collaboration between research scientists, both within institutions and between research teams.
  
• 7 Industry participation in research and collaboration with participating scientists.
  
• 7 An integration of research, industry and education resources in developing and implementing education programs.

The Commonwealths funding of the CRC Program provides the incentive for parties to participate in individual CRCs and the framework which provides a cooperative approach to scientific research in Australia. Successive reviews of the CRC program during the 1990s concluded that it was meeting its goals and should be continued.

THE WOOL CRC
The Cooperative Research Centre for Premium Quality Wool (Wool CRC) commenced in July 1993 with six core parties; CSIRO (Animal Production and Wool Technology), AWRAP, Agriculture WA, University of WA, Uni of New England and University of NSW. A seventh party, University of Adelaide, joined in 1995.

The Wool CRCs overall objective was:

To undertake high quality strategic research focused on improving productivity and product quality at all stages of the wool pipeline and to support this activity with innovative education and technology transfer programs to achieve a more competitive and profitable Australian wool industry.

The four individual research programs and one education program had the following goals:

Program 1: To develop genetic technologies that enable manipulation of important determinants of textile fibre quality, especially fibre diameter, and at the same time maintain or enhance other economically important aspects of productivity.

Program 2: To develop and commercially evaluate new technologies that increase wool strength and processing performance, especially in wools from Mediterranean and other production environments where there are dramatic seasonal variations in feed quality and quantity.

Program 3: To develop improved understanding of a) he process of fibre growth and the impact of changes in follicle function on the physical structure and chemical composition of the fibre and its ultrastructural components, b) the relationships between fibre composition, fibre structure and processing performance and to assess the significance of these relationships of the development of new products and processing practices.

Program 4: To develop and utilise transgenesis technologies for improving wool quality, production efficiency and parasite resistance by manipulation of biochemical pathways, follicle function, fibre composition and structure.

Program 5: To develop the resources of the CRC into an integrated academic network, specialising in education and training at all levels and for all sectors of the wool industry, and utilising modern technology in local and distance communication to deliver education and training programs Australia-wide.

During its seven-year funding period to June 2000, the Wool CRC received $15.5m from the Commonwealth Government and approximately $12.5m from industry, a high proportion of which was contributed by AWRAP on behalf of wool growers. In addition to its cash funding, in-kind contributions by core parties and supporting groups (eg. NSW Agriculture and South Australia R&D Institute) totalled around $40m, comprising the estimated cost of scientists and research facilities.

Although funding of the Wool CRC ceased in 2000, approval was received to undertake some final activities into an eighth year to utilise residual funds of approximately $500,000.

FORMAL EVALUATION
Towards the end of its seventh year, the Wool CRC, as part of its formal reporting to the Commonwealth, commissioned the BDA Group to conduct an independent evaluation of the benefits generated by the Wool CRC relative to the associated costs. Reporting in June 2000, the Groups report stated:

the economic pay-off on funds invested by the Wool CRC and it partners was attractive from an economic perspective. The net present value of investment in the Wool CRC between 1993 and 2000 was estimated at $322 million and the benefit:cost ratio was estimated at 5:1.

The report also tested, under a range of assumptions, the timing and benefits arising from the Commonwealths contribution and concluded:

The economic pay-off from the Commonwealths support is likely to be considerable.

In preparing its estimates the BDA Group did not attempt to evaluate individual outcomes because of the difficulty of isolating the contribution by the CRC to specific developments and the level of subjectivity involved. The Group therefore adopted an organisational approach in which an estimate was prepared of the impact of the CRC on the current and future rate of profit growth in the wool industry.

In addition to the formal evaluation at the end of its funding period, the Wool CRC was subject to major reviews by the Commonwealth during its third and fifth years. Reports from the reviews, which examined progress of outcomes against milestones as well as financial and administrative management, were extremely positive. The Year 5 Report concluded (in its overview):

the overall objectives of a cooperative research centre have been successfully meet (and) the review panel recognises the particular value of the Wool CRC in establishing and linking a single research pipeline covering the full range of activities from farm production, through harvesting and processing. The presence of the CRC acted as a major catalyst in linking together researchers in these otherwise disparate disciplines and groups. It is unlikely that this coverage would have been achieved without the establishment of the CRC.

A LESS FORMAL EVALUATION
The quote from the Year 5 Review Report illustrates one of the inherent difficulties in evaluating a CRC; namely, the evaluation of cooperation and the linkages that are established within and between research disciplines.

The overt outcomes can be readily stated. For example, for the Wool CRC:

• 7 Growers now have the genetic technology by which to more rapidly reduce the fibre diameter of their clip over a much wider geographic area and to do so without sacrificing average fleece weight.
  
• 7 Through a combination of genetic and nutrition technologies and improved pasture management, growers are now able to achieve economically significant control of staple strength in a wide range of climatically diverse regions.
  
• 7 Much more is known about how on-farm practices affect characteristics of the raw wool fibre and the implications they have for subsequent processing and spinning performance.
  
• 7 The Wool CRC has achieved gains in fundamental technology through its successful breeding of genetically engineered sheep, providing new insights into fibre structure and composition.
  
• 7 For five years, the Wool CRC used experts in their fields from universities, research institutions and industry to present four undergraduate wool science course by videoconference simultaneously to its four participating universities, and that material, having been captured electronically, is now available commercially on the internet and as CD Roms.

Nobody would suggest that these outcomes resulted only because of the Wool CRC, but the Commonwealths funding and the collaborative structure it provided was a significant contributing factor. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest that effective collaboration would have been achieved without the CRC structure. Collaboration can be seen from two perspectives:

• 7 The Wool CRCs central position relative to the institutions and industry sectors it services (Figure1)
  
• 7 Within the CRC, the linkages established within and between the research programs and their collective contribution to education and training (Figure 2)

(The graphics are available at http://www.woolwise.com/woolcrc/Evaluation.html)

Among the more important subjective outcomes to which it is difficult to assign a value are the following:

1. The Wool CRCs research program was based on a strategic seven-year plan that increased efficiency of resource use, avoided duplication of research effort and provided strong links between research teams.

2. The resulting comprehensive network facilitated communication at three levels:

• 7 At program level regular telephone hook-ups across Australia
  
• 7 Across programs through regular teleconference meetings of Program Managers
  
• 7 With industry through the Executive Committee (Program Managers plus industry representatives) and the Board,

all of which contributed to sharing of information, joint planning and as collaborative approach to technology transfer.

3. Cash funding injected by the Commonwealth and industry sources had a significant impact on decisions by research institutions to commit their own resources to wool research (a reverse effect has been witnessed as CRC funding ceased).

4. Strict accountability standards established by the Commonwealth have been instrumental in creating a disciplined environment in which high priority was given to efficient resource utilisation, technology adoption and monitoring of progress against milestones.

5. Arising from the emphasis on technology adoption, the Wool CRC has established a technology transfer framework within which the ongoing adoption of CRC technologies over future years is more assured.

Had there been no Wool CRC, wool R&D would have continued, but with less total resources, less efficiently used and with a further decline in education and training in the wool sciences. The wool industry is significantly better off as a result of the Wool CRCs seven-year set of programs and it has set a precedent that will encourage ongoing cooperation in wool research. The measure of those net gains, however, will remain a matter of subjective judgement.