Research Report Brought To You By

2y ago
48 Views
2 Downloads
1.12 MB
25 Pages
Last View : 12d ago
Last Download : 6m ago
Upload by : Mollie Blount
Transcription

Evaluation of Products for Alleviation of Localized Dry Spots (LDS)and Drought Stress on TurfAt the conclusion of each experiment, the water droplet penetration test was performed on three soil coresamples per plot. Water droplets were placed at the thatch-soil interface and 1 cm below. Absorption wasmeasured from 1 (instantaneous; hydrophilic) up to 300 seconds (hydrophobic).Research Report Brought To You By:

Evaluation of Products for Alleviation of Localized Dry Spots (LDS)and Drought Stress on TurfJim Baird, Turfgrass SpecialistMarco Schiavon, Postdoctoral ScholarJacob Gray, Laboratory AssistantKatarzyna Zak, Laboratory AssistantToan Khuong, Assistant SpecialistAlea Miehls, Graduate AssistantTyler Mock, Graduate AssistantRyan Nichols, Graduate AssistantJon Montgomery, Graduate AssistantDepartment of Botany & Plant SciencesUniversity of California, RiversideRiverside, CA 92521951-333-9052 ! jbaird@ucr.eduThe Bottom Line:As many as 39 products or product combinations were tested in five separateexperiments (3 putting greens; 2 fairways) on three golf courses in northern Californiaand at the University of California, Riverside for their ability to alleviate drought stressand localized dry spots (LDS) on turf. None of the products tested caused turf injuryfollowing applications. Localized dry spot, as the name implies, often occurs randomlyand non-uniformly in turf thus making it challenging to assess product effects in areplicated experiment and practically impossible in a non-replicated demonstration. As aresult, most of the products tested were not significantly different from the untreatedcontrol at most locations, and all products tested were no different from the controlwhen irrigation or soil water was not limiting. However, under extreme water stressconditions, Revolution (Aquatrols) performed the best of all products tested in alleviatingturf drought symptoms and LDS incidence. TriCure AD (Mitchell Products) was nextbest and the following products deserved honorable mention (in alphabetical order):A16982A; Affinity (BASF); NT-0949; and Neptune (Numerator Technologies).2

IntroductionMaintaining drier, firmer turf is desirable for water conservation and producing optimalplaying conditions. However, often there is a fine line between minimal water use anddevelopment of persistent localized dry spots (LDS) or even sudden loss of turf. Soilwetting agents or surfactants are commonly used to reduce surface tension of waterand increase wetting of the turf profile. Soil fungi can also produce hydrophobic effects(fairy rings) that can be mitigated by fungicides. Overall, there are a plethora ofcommercial products available that are purported to aid in turf water conservation. Theprimary objective of this research was to assist California turf managers in identifyingcommercial and experimental products that can alleviate turf drought stress and/orissues related to LDS.General Study ConditionsSprayer CO2-powered backpack hand boom Four TeeJet 8004VS flat fan nozzles; 9.5-inch spacing Pressure: 30 psi Groundspeed: 2.0 mph Output: 2 gal/M All treatments were watered in following application except for Upplause Plusand MegAlex at UCRExperimental Design Randomized Complete Block 3 replications 4 ft by 6 or 9 ft plotsRatings - weekly (UCR) to monthly (northern California) Turf Quality (1 to 9 scale, 9 best) Localized Dry Spot (0 to 100%) Turf Cover (0 to 100%) – UCR only Surface Canopy Temperature (C) – NorCal only Soil Volumetric Water Content (%) – FieldScout TDR 300 (Spectrum Tech.) Turf Injury (0 to 100%) Green Firmness – USGA TruFirm or Clegg Impact Tester Water Droplet Penetration – 29 July 2013 (UCR); 12-14 August 2013 (NorCal)Study LocationsMartis Camp Club Truckee, CA Scott Bower, Director of Greens & Grounds Clint Luedtke, Course Manager Jonathan Moulton, Assistant Course Manager 10th Green, Putting Parko 39 17’31” N, 120 9’49” Wo Creeping bentgrasso USGA Rootzone mixo Mowing height – 0.110 inches3

8th Fairwayo 39 17’11” N, 120 10’27” Wo Kentucky bluegrasso Native soil amended with topdressing sando Mowing height – 0.450 inchesSpray RecordTimingDateTimeTemperatureWindConditionsA20 May 201316:30 to 19:0070FCalmClearB18 June 201317:00 to 19:0057FBreezyClearC16 July 20139:45 to 11:3066FBreezyClearCallippe Preserve Golf Course Pleasanton, CA Mike Garvale, Director of Golf Course Operations Tom Doyle, Superintendent Practice Putting Greeno 37 37’41” N, 121 51’40” Wo Creeping bentgrass/annual bluegrasso USGA Rootzone mixo Mowing height – 0.110 inches Spray RecordTimingDateTimeTemperatureWindConditionsA21 May 20138:00 to 9:0055FWindyCloudyB18 June 20138:00 to 8:4563FWindyClearC16 July 201317:00 to 17:4575FBreezyClearPreserve Golf Club Carmel, CA Cory Isom, Superintendent Matt Coombs, Assistant Superintendent 13th Fairwayo 36 26’23” N, 121 46’42” Wo Colonial bentgrass/annual bluegrass/perennial ryegrasso Native soil capped with sando Mowing height – 0.350 inches Spray RecordTimingDateTimeTemperatureWindConditionsA22 May 20139:30 to 11:3065FCalm to breezyClearB17 June 201311:00 to 13:0063F to 70FCalm to breezyClear4C17 July 20138:30 to 10:0063F to 70FCalmClear

University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA Research Plot 12G-6o 33 57’54” N, 117 20’18” Wo Creeping bentgrass/annual bluegrasso Native soil amended with sando Mowing height – 0.125 inches Spray RecordTimingDateTimeTemperatureWindConditionsA (day 0)14 June 20135:45 to 7:3059FCalmOvercastB (day 14)28 June 20135:45 to 6:4070FCalmClearC (day 21)4 July 20136:45 to tionsD (day 28)12 July 20136:40 to 7:5070FCalmPartly sunnyE (day 0)8 August 20136:00 to 7:3060FCalmClearF (day 14)23 August 20137:00 to tionsG (day 21)29 August 20139:00 to 9:1579FCalmClearH (day 28)6 September 20136:45 to 8:4570F to 81FCalmPartly CloudyFinal ratings were taken on 26 and 29 (droplet test) July 2013; area was then aerated,topdressed, fertilized, and seeded with bentgrass. Treatments resumed again on 8August 2013 and final ratings (excluding droplet test) were taken on 5 September 2013,one week before Field Day.5

ResultsCallippe Preserve Golf Course Putting Green" No significant differences were found among treatments (Table 1) for allmeasurements taken (turf quality, LDS, canopy temperature, firmness, soil water,and water droplet test) at all rating dates (data not shown). The practice greenwhere the study was located is three-tiered with both steep and flat areas (Fig.1). Although we attempted to account for this in our experimental design and thegolf course staff adequately dried down the green prior to some of the ratingdates, replication differences (whether or not a treatment was randomly placedon a slope or a flat area) were too great to identify differences among treatments." None of the treatments caused turf injury following any of the three applicationdates (data not shown).Figure 1. Study area on the practice putting green at Callippe Preserve Golf Course,Pleasanton, CA. Photo taken in May 2013 before first application of treatments.Although a green like this would benefit from a product that could help retain soil wateron sloped areas, the contours of this green made it difficult to differentiate among the 21treatments tested.6

Table 1. Treatments tested in the localized dry spot (LDS) study on a practice puttinggreen at Callippe Preserve Golf Course, Pleasanton, CA from May to August SA-80Aqua PlusAqueductRevolutionES TC006ADisplace10 GB-693111 TriCure AD12 Neptune13 Revert14 NT-094915 NT-R00816 Cascade Duplex17 PX1300218 PX1301119 PX1301220 Rely II21 RootzoneCompany--BASFAmwayCreative 5.06.015.0ABCABCABCABCABC7

Martis Camp Club Putting Green" Drought stress and presence of LDS were minimal on the putting green study ateach of the monthly rating dates (Fig. 2); consequently, only soil volumetric watercontent was significantly different among treatments in July and August (Table2). Several products increased water content compared to the control; Neptuneand Displace yielded the highest values in July and August, respectively." No significant differences were found among treatments for all othermeasurements taken (turf quality, LDS, canopy temperature, firmness, and waterdroplet test) at all rating dates (data not shown).Figure 2. Study area on the 10th Putting Park green at Martis Camp Club, Truckee, CA.Photo was taken on 12 August 2013, the final rating date for the study. Similar to theUSGA TruFirm instrument, the Clegg Impact Tester (shown here) provides ameasurement of surface firmness.8

Table 2. Effects of treatments on volumetric water content (%) in the upper 3 inches ofthe root zone in the localized dry spot (LDS) study on the 10th Putting Park green atMartis Camp Club, Truckee, CA.No. Aqua Plus68910AqueductCascade DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931--BASFAmwayCreative 08PX13002PX13011PX1301217Revert1819RevolutionRely II20TriCure 2AB19.6ABCDE3.0ABC27.4ABCD 19.6ABCDE8.0ABC26.9BCDPrecision Labs5.0ABC27.3ABCD 20.6ABCDGrigg BCD16.0CDETreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different(! 0.05).9

Martis Camp Club Fairway" Similar to the putting green study, drought stress and presence of LDS wereminimal on the fairway study at each of the monthly rating dates (Fig. 3);consequently, only turf quality was significantly different among treatments at thefinal rating date in August (Table 3). This was mostly due to the location of sometreatments in the dry area (Fig. 3). Most of the products were not significantlydifferent from the control and Briskway fungicide A16982A produced thenumerically highest turf quality (8 out of 9)." Volumetric water content was significantly different among treatments at all ratingdates including May when treatments were first applied (Table 4). Sometreatments (e.g., Briskway fungicide A16982A) appeared to be favored byhaving higher soil water in the plots before the study began; whereas othertreatments appeared to enhance soil water retention even though antecedentwater content was relatively low." No significant differences were found among treatments for all othermeasurements taken (LDS, canopy temperature, and water droplet test) at allrating dates (data not shown).Figure 3. Study area on the 8th fairway at Martis Camp Club, Truckee, CA. Photo wastaken on 12 August 2013, the final rating date for the study. As is often the case withLDS, note the relatively small dry area (right center) among otherwise non-stressed turf.10

Table 3. Effects of treatments on turf quality (1 to 9 scale, 9 best) in the localized dryspot (LDS) study on the 8th fairway at Martis Camp Club, Truckee, PSA-806Aqua de DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 92021LT120Microbic 30RevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IITriCure any---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsSustaneSyngentaSyngenta--Rate n Labs5.0ABC7.7ABGrigg chnologiesAgriBioticProductsJohn rTechnologiesAquatrolsAquatrols-SimplotMitchell CD5.7BCD6.0ABC7.0ABCD6.06.09.06.06.016.0 7.3ABC6.3ABCD5.3CDTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).11

Table 4. Effects of treatments on volumetric water content (%) in the upper 3 inches ofthe root zone in the localized dry spot (LDS) study on the 8th fairway at Martis CampClub, Truckee, ffinityAPSA-80Aqua PlusAqueductBolsterBriskwayBriskwayA16982ACascade DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 8PX13002PX13011PX13012RevertRevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IITriCure DE33.4ABCDE44.7ABCD37.2ABCDETreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).12

Preserve Golf Club Fairway" The 13th fairway at Preserve Golf Club provided the most consistent and uniformdrought stress and LDS of all study locations presented in this report (Fig. 4). Asa result, significant treatment differences were found for turf quality, LDS, soilwater, and the water droplet test." Turf quality was significant in July and August (Table 5). Although mosttreatments were not significantly different from the control in August, Revolutionprovided the highest and most consistent turf quality followed by TriCure AD." LDS was also significant in July and August (Table 6). Although most treatmentswere not significantly different from the control, Revolution and TriCure ADresulted in the lowest incidence of LDS (Fig. 5)." Soil water content was significant in July and August (Table 7). TriCure ADproduced the highest volumetric water content in July and was nearly highest inAugust next to Affinity." There were no significant differences among treatments for water dropletpenetration at the thatch-soil interface (data not shown); however, significantdifferences were found at 1 cm below (Table 8). Treatments containing Affinity orA16982A resulted in the fastest penetration of water droplets into the soil profile." In summary, Revolution and TriCure AD provided the best overall results inregard to alleviation of drought stress and LDS at Preserve Golf Club.thFigure 4. Fairways like the 13 at Preserve Golf Club, Carmel, CA are prone to LDS and drought stress duringsummer months when rainfall is scarce and irrigation is minimized, making this an ideal location to test products.13

Table 5. Effects of treatments on turf quality (1 to 9 scale, 9 best) in the localized dryspot (LDS) study on the 13th fairway at Preserve Golf Club, Carmel, PSA-806Aqua de DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 92021LT120Microbic 30RevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IITriCure any---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsSustaneSyngentaSyngenta--Rate BC5.7BCDE5.0ABCPrecision Labs5.0ABC6.3ABCD4.7ABCGrigg chnologiesAgriBioticProductsJohn rTechnologiesAquatrolsAquatrols-SimplotMitchell DE4.7ABC6.06.09.06.06.016.0 .7ABC5.3CDE4.3ABCTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).14

Table 6. Effects of treatments on localized dry spot (LDS) incidence (0-100%) in theLDS study on the 13th fairway at Preserve Golf Club, Carmel, PSA-806Aqua de DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 92021LT120Microbic 30RevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IITriCure any---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsSustaneSyngentaSyngenta--Rate 7ABCD35.0ABC33.3ABC46.7ABC13.3ABCD40.0ABCPrecision Labs5.0ABC11.7ABCD35.0ABCGrigg chnologiesAgriBioticProductsJohn rTechnologiesAquatrolsAquatrols-SimplotMitchell 9.06.06.016.0 .3BC21.7BC45.0ABC21.7ABCD51.7ABCTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).15

Table 7. Effects of treatments on volumetric water content (%) in the upper 3 inches ofthe root zone in the localized dry spot (LDS) study on the 13th fairway at Preserve GolfClub, Carmel, PSA-806Aqua de DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 92021LT120Microbic 30RevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IITriCure any---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsSustaneSyngentaSyngenta--Rate 3ABC10.2C32.7ABC16.2ABCPrecision Labs5.0ABC27.3BC12.9BCGrigg chnologiesAgriBioticProductsJohn rTechnologiesAquatrolsAquatrols-SimplotMitchell BC22.9AB6.0ABC30.6BC16.2ABC6.06.09.06.06.016.0 2A21.3ABC15.8ABC26.5BC14.8ABCTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).16

Table 8. Effects of treatments on water droplet penetration (seconds) into soil cores 1cm below the thatch-soil interface in the localized dry spot (LDS) study on the 13thfairway at Preserve Golf Club, Carmel, CA. 14 August 2013.No.Rate (oz/M)Timing---BASFAmwayCreative sion 0ABC75.7ABCDEF6.06.09.06.0ABCABCABC43.2DEF6.016.0 APSA-806Aqua de DuplexDisplaceES TC006AGB-6931Heritage TLHeritage 1PX1301229Revert30RevolutionRevolutionES TC006ARely IIGrigg chnologiesAgriBioticProductsJohn rTechnologiesAquatrolsAquatrols-SimplotTriCure ADUCREXPF1XzemplarXzemplarAffinityMitchell Microbic BCDEF45.6CDEF90.6ABCDEF29.2EF7.3FTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).17

Figure 5. Plot pictures (outlined by golf balls) of Revolution (top left), TriCure AD (topright), and untreated control (bottom) treatments taken on 17 July 2013. Preserve GolfClub, Carmel, CA.18

University of California, Riverside Research Putting Green" Conducting this study on a research putting green at UCR allowed us to push theturf to the edge of drought stress (and over) and to test product efficacyaccordingly. While the site was more variable than desired for testing products onLDS (e.g., most treatments did not differ from the control), the overall occurrenceof LDS and long duration of the study allowed us to gain valuable informationabout the products tested." Shortly after the initial application of treatments in June, the study area was driedtoo rapidly and severely to allow products enough time to work (Fig. 6). This isfurther evidence that while many products can be an effective aid to turf underdrought stress, they cannot perform miracles in the complete absence of water.Because substantial turf loss occurred during this time, turf cover was evaluatedthroughout the remainder of the experiment; however, no differences amongtreatments were found (data not shown)." Turf quality was significant on three dates (Table 9). Although rarely differentfrom the control, Revolution provided the highest and most consistent turf quality.NT-0949, Affinity, A16982A, and TriCure AD also provided good quality but notas consistently as Revolution." LDS was also significant at the same dates (Table 10) and the general trend wasthe same as for turf quality. Some additional products including fungicides alsoappeared to reduce LDS intermittingly throughout the study. Fairy ring symptomswere not observed during this or any of the other aforementioned studies." Soil water was significant at three dates (Table 11). However, there appeared tobe no clear relationship with turf quality and LDS incidence other than for NT0949, which held the most water during the first part of the experiment." In general, treatments that tended to hold more water also produced a softer turfsurface and vice versa (Table 12). And similar to the water droplet penetrationtest at Preserve Golf Club, better performing products against LDS tended tohave shorter droplet retention times (Table 12)." In summary, Revolution provided the best overall results in regard to alleviationof drought stress and LDS at UC Riverside. TriCure AD, NT-0949, Affinity, andA16982A also provided good results although not as consistently as Revolution.19

Table 9. Effects of treatments on turf quality (1 to 9 scale, 9 best) in the localized dryspot (LDS) study on a research green at the University of California, 16982AAffinityAPSA-80Aqua Plus---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsAquatrols-Grigg ratorTechnologies---Precision Labs789101112AqueductRevolutionES TC006ADisplaceGB-6931TriCure ascade DuplexPX13002PX13011PX13012Microbic withSumaGrowRevolutionES TC006AHeritage TLHeritage tureManagerMegAlexUpplause PlusControl genta-Syngenta-BASFBASFBASFJohn 14 (28)14 d5.3abcdTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significantly different (! 0.05).Treatments 7 and 8 were applied at 14-d intervals during the first part of the experiment (June/July) asper another company’s protocol and 28-d intervals during the second part (August/September) as per thelabel. Treatment 29 was applied on June 14 (A) and August 8 (E).20

Table 10. Effects of treatments on localized dry spot (LDS) incidence (0-100%) in theLDS study on a research green at the University of California, 16982AAffinityAPSA-80Aqua Plus---BASFAmwayCreative EcoSystemsAquatrolsAquatrols-Grigg ratorTechnologies---Precision Labs789101112AqueductRevolutionES TC006ADisplaceGB-6931TriCure ascade DuplexPX13002PX13011PX13012Microbic withSumaGrowRevolutionES TC006AHeritage TLHeritage tureManagerMegAlexUpplausePlusControl genta-Syngenta-BASFBASFBASFJohn 2.06.06.014 (28)14 fghi22abc42ab22abc22abcTreatment means followed by the same letter in a column are not significan

4 APSA-80 Amway 5.0 ABC 5 Aqua Plus Creative Eco Systems 3.0 ABC 6 Aqueduct Aquatrols 8.0 ABC 7 Revolution Aquatrols 6.0 ABC 8 ES TC006A -- 9.0 ABC 9 Displace Grigg Brothers 12.0 ABC 10 GB-6931 -- 6.0 ABC 11 TriCure AD Mitchell Products 6.0 ABC 12 Neptu

Related Documents:

work/products (Beading, Candles, Carving, Food Products, Soap, Weaving, etc.) ⃝I understand that if my work contains Indigenous visual representation that it is a reflection of the Indigenous culture of my native region. ⃝To the best of my knowledge, my work/products fall within Craft Council standards and expectations with respect to

Wesley Marsh led our group with his ever faithful M274 Mule. Bob Durham brought his 1943 MB Jeep along with “Rosie the Riveter”. John Booth brought his 1944 M6 Bomb Truck. Lee Booth drove John’s M151 Jeep. Bill Grimes brought his M151 Jeep. Dan Simmon’s brought his newly restored Do

She brought us the special treat of Krispy Kreme donuts and Del Thomas made certain the See’s Candy arrived she delivered that box of chocolates to Betty Collins who brought the candies to the meeting. Again, thank you, everyone! November meeting is our fundraiser – FEST. No birthday treats need to be brought for the Hospitality Table.

brought along 2 part built models for display. Firstly his “Bluenose II” which has been 3 years in the mak-ing (as he is build-ing several models at the same time). Tom also brought along his model of “HMT Dunera”, which has been 8 years in the making. These models were brought along

Gordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics, Princeton University 609.258.3358 blinder@princeton.edu Mark Zandi Chief Economist, Moody's Analytics 610.235.5151 mark.zandi@moodys.com. HOW THE GREAT RECESSION WAS BROUGHT TO AN END 1 How the Great Recession Was Brought to an End

If you have permission, you can view (but not edit) report content in SAS Report Viewer (the viewer). To open a report in the viewer: From SAS Home, click (the object inspector icon) next to a report, and then click View. Figure 6 shows a report in the report viewer: Figure 6. Report with Default Report Theme in SAS Report Viewer

Mark Scheme 128 Unit 2 Paper 02 129 Mark Scheme 144 CAPE Food and Nutrition Subject Reports 2004 Subject Report 2005 Subject Report 2006 Subject Report 2007 Subject Report 2008 Subject Report (Trinidad and Tobago) 2008 Subject Report (Rest of the Caribbean) 2009 Subject Report 2010 Subject Report 2011 Subject Report 2012 Subject Report 2013 .

User Guide 3 Introduction 21 Chapter 1: Report Studio 23 Planning Reports 23 Working in Report Studio 23 The User Interface 23 Basic Report Structure 25 Working with Objects 27 Set Options 28 Creating a Report 29 Specify the Package 29 Choose a Report Template 30 Add Data to a Report 31 Working with Dimensional Data 31 Save a Report 33 Run a Report 33 Print a Report 37 .