TURFGRASS SOILS RESEARCH REPORT Paul Rieke, Michael Saffel, James Murphy and John Rogers III Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, MSU

Transcription

1 17 TURFGRASS SOILS RESEARCH REPORT - 19 Paul Rieke, Michael Saffel, James Murphy and John Rogers III Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, MSU NITROGEN FERTILIZER EVALUATIONS Several nitrogen fertilizer evaluation studies were initiated in 19. One was established on Challenger Kentucky bluegrass at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments shown in Table 1 were applied at the rate of 1 pound nitrogen per 1 sq ft on July. Plot size was 4 feet by 1 feet with 3 replications. Fertilizers were provided by the following companies: N-Serve--Triazon Corporation; Sustane--Sustane Corporation; CIL--Canadian Industries, Limited; Anderson's--The Andersons; Turf Restore and Green Restore--Ringer Corporation; IBDU--Estech; Milorganite--Milwaukee Sewerage Commission; Lesco--LESCO; Lebanon Chemical. Turf quality ratings shown in Table 1 indicate IBDU and N-Sure responded somewhat more slowly than some other materials 1. days after application. IBDU continued to respond more slowly than several other carriers 1 days after application (July 9) but by August 16 all materials resulted in excellent turf quality. No practical differences occurred during August. By late October IBDU and two of the CIL experimenta1s ranked highest while most other materials performed well. Clipping weights were taken in late July from this study on Challenger Kentucky bluegrass (Table ) which demonstrated some differences in growth responses but there was enough variability to reduce the significance of differences which occurred. By late August all treatments gave similar clipping weights indicating there was little difference among treatments. This was consistent with the observations on turf quality ratings in Table 1. Another nitrogen fertilizer evaluation study was established on two perennial ryegrasses at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments outlined in Table 3 were applied July S. Plot size was 4 feet by 1 feet with 3 replications. Turf quality ratings are given in Table 3. At the.s pound rate of nitrogen application, all materials demonstrated a relatively quick response except Milorganite, Turf Restore and Ward fertilizer. At the 1 pound rate of application, IBDU-coarse was a bit slower to respond than others which is to be expected. These plots were watered to prevent wilt but very little rainfall occurred during this study, especially over the first few weeks. Several carriers demonstrated good longevity of response in August but by October essentially all differences had disappeared. In Table 4 clipping weights taken from the study on perennial ryegrass are given. While there are few significant differences among clipping weights for a given rate of nitrogen application, several materials resulted in longer term effects. A third nitrogen fertilizer study was established on a Penncross creeping bentgrass putting green at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments as outlined in Table S were applied on June 1 and August 1. Plot size was 4

2 1 Table Challenger Kentucky Bluegrass Nitrogen Carrier Study Quality Ratings. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments applied as 1 pound of N per 1 square feet on July, 19. Numbers are averages of three replications. Treatment Date of Rating (19)y 7/ 7/9 /16 /3 1/6 N - Sure 7.7c*.abe.3ab 7.3abed Sustane-Medium.3ab.ab Sustane-Fine.3abe 7.7bc.3ab 6.7bed Sustane-Superfine.3abc 7.7bc.ab 6.d ell Experimental Cll Experimental.7ab.7ab.3ab.7a.7a Cll Experimental 3.7ab.7a Pursell-Sulfur Coated Urea.bc.abc.3ab Cll Experimental 4.bc.abc.7a Cll Sulfur Coated Urea.3ab.7ab.ab Andersons ab.ab 6.7bcd Andersons --.7ab 7.7b.7a 6.3ed Turf Restore.3abe.7ab.7ab 7.7abe lsdu-coarse 7.7c 7.c.ab.3a Milorganite.3abe.3ab.7ab.ab * - numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test. y - 9 = excellent 1 = poor

3 19 Table. 19 Challenger Kentucky Bluegrass Nitrogen Carrier Study Clipping Yields. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments applied as 1 pound N per 1 square feet on July, 19. Numbers are averages of three replications. Treatment Date of Clipping Collection(19)y 7/9 /3 N-Sure 1.69ab* 16.7a Sustane-Medium 11.41ab 14.a Sustane-Fine 9. 15b 14.6a Sustane-Superfine.39b 13.96a CIl Experimental 1.ab 17.66a ell Experimental 15.3a 16.4a CIl Experimental 3 15ab 14.a Pursell-SulFur Coated Urea.6b 14.9a CIl Experimental 4 9.b 16.9a CIl SulFur Coated Urea 11.46ab 141a Andersons ab 15.a Andersons ab 157a TurF Rest.ore 11.3ab 145a IBDU-Coarse 7.67b 15.a Milo rganit e 13.ab 15.31a * Means Followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. y Clipping yields expressed as grams per square meter.

4 Table Effects of fertilizer treatments on perennial ryegrass quality ratings. Quality rating scale 9 = best. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatment Material Rate (N/M) Qua 1i ty Rat i ngs Sustane Medium Sustane Fine Sustane Superfine Mi 1 organite Turf Restore CIL Experimental CIL Experimental CIL Experimental Pursel1-Sulfur Coated Urea CIL Experimental CIL Sulfur Coated Urea Andersons Andersons -- N-Sure Sustane Medium Sustane Fine Sustane Superfine Mi 1 organite Turf Restore CIL Experimental CIL Experimental CIL Experimental Pursel1 Sulfur Coated Urea CIL Experimental CIL Sulfur Coated Urea Andersons Andersons -- IBDU - Coarse IBDU - Fine IBDU - Sprayable N-Sure Urea Ward Ward Check 7/ /9 7.abcd* 6.3cd 6.d 6.d 6.6bcd.ab 6.7bcd 6.7bcd 7.abcd 6.3cd.ab 7.7bcd 6.7bcd.3a.3a.4a 6.9abcd 6.3abcd.ab.3a 6.3cd 6.7bcd 7.abcd.ab 6.3cd 6.3cd /15 6.7cd 7.bcd 7.bcd 7.4abcd.abc.abc.abc.3ab.3ab a.labc.3ab.3ab 6.d 7.bcd 7.bcd 1/6 6.3bc 7.abc 7.7ab 7.3abc 7.Oabc 7.3abc 7.3abc 7.3abc 7.Oabc 7.3abc 7.3abc 7.3abc 7.7ab 7.7ab.a.a.a 7. Oabc 7.3abc 7.Oabc 7.3abc 6.3bc 6.c 6.3bc 6.abc 5.3c 6.Oabc 5.3c 6.abc 5.7bc 6.3ab 6.abc 6.3ab 6.3ab 5.abc 6. 5ab 5.abc 6.Oabc 5.abc 6.abc 6.abc 6ab 6.3ab 6ab 6.7a 6. 5ab 6.7a 6ab 6.Oabc 5.abc 6.Oabc 6.abc 5.abc 6.3ab 6.abc 6.3ab 6.abc 5.abc 6.3ab * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

5 1 Table EFFects of Fertilizer treatments on perennial ryegrass clipping weights in grams per square meter. Hancock TurFgrass Research Center. Treatment Rate Material (N/M) C 1 f pp i ng Yield /1 /5 Sustane Medium.45abcde* 1.36cdeFg Sustane Fine. 19abcde 1.deFg Sustane SuperFine 1.96abcde 1.4cdeFg Milo rgan it. e. 1abcde 1. 17deFg TurFrestore 1bcde 1.3cdeFg CIL Experimental 1.7abcde 1.9deFg CIl Experimental.4abcde 1abcdeFg CIL Experiental 3 3abcde 1.96abcde Pursell-SulFur.1abcde 1.49bcdefg Coated Urea CIl Experimental 4.63abcde 1.69abcdef CIL Sulfur Coated Urea 3.ab 1.99abcd Andersons abc 1.4abcdef Andersons abcde 1.74abcdef N-Sure.3abcde 1.47bcdefg Sustane Medium 1..93abcd 1.61abcdefg Sustane Fine 1..abcde 1.61abcdefg Sustane Superfine 1..6abcde 1.4cdefg Milorganite 1..74abcde.4a Turf Restore 1..61abcde.1abcd CIL Experimental abcde 1.69abcdef CIL Experimental ab 1.9abcdef CIl Experimental abcde.6abc Pursell-Sulfur 1..abcde 16abcdefg Coated Urea CIL Experimental abcde 1.31defg CIL Sulfur Coated Urea 1..76abcde 1.65abcder Andersons abcde 1.63abcdef Andersons abcde 1.61abcdefg IBDU - Coarse a.34ab IBDU - Fine 1..6abcde.3abc IBDU - Sprayable 1..35abcde 1.34cdefg N-Sure abc.abcd Urea 1..36abcde 1.abcdef Ward 1.36e 1.7eFg Ward de 1.OFg Check. 11cde.71g * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

6 Table fertilizer quality effects on a Penncross bentgrass green. Treatments applied June 1 and August 11, = highest quality. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Date of Rating (19) Treatment Milorganite Sustane-Medium Sustane-Fine Sustane-Superffne IBDU-fine IBDU-sprayable Lesc6-SCU-Elite Andersons Rate (lbs N/M) 6/4 6/3 7/ 7/6 /11 /3 1/6 4hji*4.k 6.3bcd 6.7cd 6.3cd 5.3f 5.bcd 6.7bc 4.ij 6.cd 6.3cd 6.d 6.ef 4.3e 5.7ef 5.Dhi 5.7d 6.d 6.d 5.7ef 4.7de 6.cde 4.ij 6.cd 6.3cd 6.3cd 6.3de 4.3e 4hji 6.efg 7.7ab.7ab 7.3ab.b 7.ab 4.7hi 5.7gh 7.7ab 7.3bcd 6.3cd.b 6.ab 6.def 5.fg 6.7bcd 7.cd 6.7bcd 7.cd 6.bcd 5.7ef 5.hi 6.cd 6.d 6.d 6.3de 5.cde N-Sure % 4.j 5.7gh 6.3bcd 6.3cd 6.d 6.3de 5.cde Mi lorganite Sustane-Medium Sustane-Fine Sustane-Superfine Green Restore Green Restore Andersons N-Serve 1. 5.gh 6def 7.7ab.7ab 7.a 7.bc 7.ab.a 7.7ab 6.7bcd 6.7cd 6.7bcd.b 6.3bc 7.b 7.bcd 6.7bcd 6.3cd 6.7bcd 7.bc 6.bcd 7.b 6.7cde 7.bcd 7.3bcd 6.7bcd 7.7bc 5.7bcde 4.3ij 4.jk 6.7bcd 7.cd 7.abc 7.cd 5.7bcde 4hji 7.7ab.3a 7ab.a 6.3cd 7.3abc 7.3abc 7.Dabc.b 6.7b 4.j.a.3a 7.abc 7.bc 6.bcd fg 4ijk 5.7d 6.d G.Od 5.7ef 4.3e * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 11.level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

7 3 feet by 6 feet with 3 replications. Sustane, an organic fertilizer produced from turkey waste, gives a quicker response than Milorganite but the length of response was of shorter duration than Milorganite. IBDU responded slowly as expected but provided excellent longevity. The study outlined in Table 6 was initiated on July 6. Turf quality ratings for the Kentucky bluegrass turf indicated considerable variability in the data caused reduced significance in the data taken July 19 and August S. On August IS and September 6 turf quality reflected the effect of nitrogen rate with few differences caused by carrier. Roots were washed from soil samples taken in September, then dried and weighed. Samples were also taken in September to determine the amount of thatch in each plot. Data are shown in Table 7. There was a tendency for lower root weights with higher rate of nitrogen application and with higher rate of potassium application but differences were not consistent. No differences occurred in the amount of thatch as a result of these treatments. WETTING AGENT EVALUATIONS Several wetting agent treatments were applied to a Penncross creeping bentgrass putting green at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center to evaluate effects on localized dry spots, dew and frost formation and phototoxicity. Plot size was 4 feet by 6 feet. Plots were not irrigated to determine the potential for phytotoxicity. Data in Table indicate Hydroflo L (liquid) and were more phytotoxic than AquaGro liquid. While some minor injury was detected with the higher rate of Hydro Wet this proved the safest of the liquid materials evaluated. The Hydroflo and AquaGro granular materials resulted in no injury to the turf. II was considerably less injurious than. In terms of dew reduction the order of effectiveness was Hydroflo L > > AquaGro > HydroWet = II > AquaGro granular = Hydroflo G. A second wetting agent study was begun October 6 to evaluate wetting agent effects on formation on dew and frost. Data are given in Tables 9 and 1 for dew and frost ratings, respectively. Generally, Hydroflo was most effective in reducing dew formations followed by and AquaGro. Other materials reduced dew compared to the check on some dates. Granular wetting agents responded slowly and over the month of this study did not prove of longer effect than liquid applications. Effects of wetting agents on frost formation (Table 1) were less clearly defined although good differences occurred on the October rating date. One of the objectives of these studies was to evaluate the effect of wetting agents on preventative or curative effects on localized dry spots on putting greens on sandy soils. Although treatments were applied, no significant development of localized dry spot developed adequately to permit separation of treatment effects. A modest problem with localized dry spot began to develop in mid-july but rains promptly corrected the condition. GREENS TOPDRESSING STUDIES The long term sand topdressing study begun in 19 was continued through 19. Treatments shown in Table 11 give the quality ratings taken during the year. As observed in the past the higher nitrogen (6 pounds N per 1 sq ft

8 4 Table Kentucky Bluegrass fertility study quality ratings. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments applied in equal amounts July 6, July 5, August 1 and September 6, 19. Averages for three replications. Treatment Rate Rate Date of Rating (19)y Lbs N/M/YR) (K/M/YR) 7/19 /5 /15 9/6 Urea..3a*.a 7.b 7.Od Urea 4..3a.7ab Andersons a 7.a 6.c 7.d Andersons a.a 6.3bc.3ab Urea/KCl a 7.a.7a.3ab Urea/KCl 4..3a.3a.3a ab Urea/KS a 6. 3a. 7a. a Urea/KS4 4..a 7.7a.a ab Andersons --..a.a 7.b 7.d Andersons a 6.3a.a.bc Sustane-Medium a 7.a 7.b 7cd * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 57. level using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test, y - 9 = excellent 1 = poor

9 5 Table Kentucky bluegrass Fertilizer effects on root and thatch weights. Root weights expressed as kilograms per cubic meter of soil. Thatch weights expressed as kilograms per square meter. Fertilizer treatments were applied in equal amounts on July 6. July 5, August 1 and September 6, 19. Hancock TurFgrass Research Center. Treatment Rate Rate September 19 (Lbs N/M/YR) (K/M/YR) Root Weights Thatch Weights -" -" Urea. o.69ab*.6ab.4a Urea 4. o.19abc ab. 1a Andersons o.64ab.31a.a Andersons o.4abc.4ab.a Urea/KCl 4..15bc.3ab.5a Urea/KCl bc.31a 1.76a Urea/KS c.ab. 13a Urea/KS bc.14b. 15a Andersons --. o 3.4a.3a.a Andersons o.4abc.34a.3a Sustane-Med 4. o 1abc.3a. 1a * - Means Followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range test.

10 6 Table. Phytotoxic and dew accumulation effects of wetting agents on a Penncross bentgrass green. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Wetting agents applied August 4, 19. Averages for three repli cations. Treatment Rate Dew Rat i ng Phytotox i c i ty Rat i ng (oz/1) (l=no Dew) (9=Severe Burn) /4 /4 /1 /3 Hydraf1o 15G 3 6.a* l.of l.oe l.od 15G ab 1.ef 1.e 1.d 15g ab l.of 1.e l.od 15 g ab l.of 1.e 1.d L. Oh.d.7d 1.7bcd L c 5.b.bc L 3 1.i 7.a 7.3a 5.3a.g.3def 1.7de l.od b 5.7b.bc I I 4.7d 1 def 1.e l.od I I 16 4.ef 1def d.3b HydroWet 4.3de 1.3def 1.3e 1.d HydroWet de.d. Ode 1.d AquaGro 3.7f.def 1.7de 1.d AquaGro 16. Oh.7de 3.7c 1.3cd AquaGro g 3 5.7c l.of 1.e l.od AquaGro g 64 6.bc 1.Of 1.e 1.d Check 6.a l.of 1.e 1.d * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

11 7 Table wetting agent effects on dew accumulation on a Penncross creeping bentgrass green. Hancock TurFgrass Research Center. Treatments applied October 6, 19. Averages For three replications. Date of Rating (19)y Treatments Rate 1/7 (oz/m) 1/11 1/17 1/19 11/4 HydraFlo 15G 3 5.DEF* 5.3DEFG 5.7DEF 5.3EFG 6.DEF HydraFlo 15G CDE 6.BCDE 6.3CDE 7.3BCD 7.3BCD HydraFlo 15G 1 6.CDE 7.3B.AB 9.A.AB HydraFlo L 4.7A 7.BC 7.BC.AB 6.7BCDEF HydraFlo L 9.A.7A.7A 9.A 7.7ABC HydraFlo L 1 9.A 9.A 9.A 9.A 9.A AB 5.7CDEF 6.3CDE 6.7BCDEF 6.DEF.7A BC 7.7ABC 7.BCDE II 4 6.CDE 4.3FG 4.7F 5.7DEF 6.DEF II 5.7CDE 5.7CDEF 5.7DEF 6.DEF 5.7EF AquaGro.3A 6.7BCD 6.7CD 7.BCDE 6.7BCDEF HydroWet 6.3BCD 5.EFG 5.7DEF 5.FG 5.7DEF AquaGro D 64 5.DEF 5.7CDEF 5.F 5.7DEF 6.3CDEF Naiad 4.7EF 4.7EFG 4.3F 4.GH 5.3F SurFSide 19A 5.3CDEF 4.7EFG 4.7F 5.3EFG 6.DEF SurFSide BC 5.EFG 5.7DEF 5.DEF 5.DEF SurfSide DEF 5.3DEFG 5.3EF 6.3CDEF 6BCDEF Check o 4.F 4.G 3.G 3.H 5.3F * - Means Followed by the same letter are not signficantly different at the 1% level, using Duncan's multiple range test. y - 9 = least dew, 1 = heavy dew

12 Table Wetting agent effects on frost formation on a penncross creeping bentgrass green. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments applied October 6, 19. Averages for three replications. Date of Rating (19)y Treatments Rate (oz/m) 1/1 1/ 11/3 15G 3 6. ABC* 4.3 EFG 15G ABC 5 CDE 3. C 15G A 6.3 ABC. Hydraf', L 4 4. C 5. BCD L 6. ABC 6.7 AS L 1 5. BC 7. A 3.7 B ABC 4. DEF 5.3 A 5.3 CDEF II 4 6. ABC 4 EFG II 5 ABC 4 EFG 3.7 B AquaGro 6. ABC 4 EFG HydroWet 5.3 ABC 4. FG AquaGro D ABC 3.3 GH Naiad 6. ABC 3.3 GH SurfSide 19A 5.3 ABC 3.3 GH SurfSide ABC 4. FG SurfSide ABC 4 EFG Check o 7. AB.3 H * - Means fol lowed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 1% level, using duncan's multiple range test. y - 9 = no frost 1 = heavy frost

13 9 Table 11. Effect of topdressing and nitrogen fertility programs on the turfgrass quality ratings of a Penneagle creeping bentgrass green. Treatments initiated in 19. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Averages for three repl ications. Topdress Treatment N Rate (lbs/1) Date of Rating (19)y 7/1 / 9/6 1/ cu. ft. Spr ing/fa 11 :1 Sand Soil Mix 3 6.cde* 6.c 5.de 7.Obc 1 cu. ft. Spr ing/fa 11 Sand 3 cu. ft. every 3 weeks Sand 6 cu. ft. every 6 weeks Sand de 6.c 5.3de 6.7c 6.7bcd 7.b 5.7cd 6.3c 7.Oabcd 7.b 6.bcd 7.bc Check 1 cu. ft. 5pr ing/fa 1 1 :1 Sand Soil Mix 1 cu. ft.. Spr ing/fa 11 Sand 3 cu. ft. every 3 weeks Sand 6 cu. ft. every 6 weeks Sand e 5.d 4.e 4.d.ab.a 7.abc.3ab 7.3abc.a 7.3ab.3ab.ab.a.a.3a.a 7.3ab.3ab Check 6 7.3abc 6.7b 6.bcd 6. 3c * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 1% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test. y - 9 = excellent 1 = poor

14 3 annually) resulted in higher quality ratings than the lower N rate (3 pounds). The non-topdressed plots (check) ranked significantly lower than where topdressing treatments were applied. The check plots have developed a significant thatch layer which results in a lower quality turf. Using the surface hardness tester developed by John N. Rogers, III at Pennsylvania State University with Don Waddington, the non-topdressed plots were found to be considerably harder than where topdressing was applied. The impact readings were in the range of on topdressed plots compared to an average value of 6 on the check plots. In spite of the thatch layer on non-topdressed plots, the soil below the thatch has become highly compacted while topdressed plots exhibit more resilience. After three years of topdressing with sand or sand mixes it has become apparent that putting green turf quality ratings are improved after topdressing (Table 1). Peak turf quality occurs on plots topdressed in spring and fall after these treatments have been applied while those plots topdressed every 3 weeks tend to have a more consistent quality throughout the growing season. On a few dates topdressing with sand mixes (% sand, % peat or 6% sand, % peat, % loam topsoil) turf quality ranked better than when sand was used alone. All topdressed plots consistently ranked better than non-topdressed plots. Applying Sand Aid with sand when topdressing on a Penncross bentgrass putting green resulted in improved turf quality on certain dates during the growing season. Data are given in Tables 13 and 14 for studies established in 195 on a modified loamy sand and dune sand, respectively. This was particularly evident on the green growing on sand. Interestingly, plots which were cored had less dew on October 17 than plots which were sand topdressed or not treated. This rating was taken during a period of frequent rainfall and low evapotranspiration so differential soil moisture was not considered a factor in the differential in dew formation. SOIL TEST RESPONSES TO PHOSPHATE AND POTASH Ongoing studies on Penncross bentgrass putting greens have been continued in 19. Phosphorus and potassium applications outlined in Tables 15 and 16 have been applied since 19. On the soil green (loamy texture) in Table 15 it is apparent that pounds of P per 1 sq ft annually are needed to increase P soil test over the check on this soil that had a very high P level at the beginning of the study in 19. At such high P levels (375 pounds per acre) it is apparent that P has moved down into the -4 inch depth (194 pounds per acre) compared to lower P levels applied. Potassium also accumulates in this loamy soil as indicated by the K soil tests in Table 15. On the green established on a % sand, % peat mixture (Table 16) there is some residual potassium in the - inch depth from applications made during establishment. Some potash has accumulated in the - inch depth but only at the higher rates of application has much potassium moved into the -4 inch depth. Phosphorus applied to a Penncross creeping bentgrass growing on sand (Table 17) corrected a phosphorus deficiency with as little as 1 pound P applied annually. However, the P soil test of 11 pounds per acre is still considered deficient for good stress tolerance of the turf. It is clear that phosphorus does leach in the sand which has no organic matter added other than what the turf contributes. Regular, light application of phosphorus should

15 31. bo.-i... as. as as (J s:: -...,...,... ('I"),.....-!.-I CI) CI).-I ~,... ~ co,...,... L/") CI).c: s:: Q) (J as (J ~ ~ " as (J s::.. Q) (J. (J... :;:j CI) ('I"). as as. as as as (J ~.u Q) -...,...,...,... ('1") ~ bo CI).-I ~,...,... ~,...,...,... ~ s::.-i CI) ! as CI).u CI) $..l as CI) =' Q) $..l Q) " (J s:: bo. ". C). " $..l.,-l I.l-! ~ as (J as " as. as C) Q) ~ $..l II N,... ('I") ('I"),...,... N..c:: =' u CI) t-l '1 co,...,...,...,... Q) '-' ~~.c: C) as C) CI)...:l as (J Q).u s::.... as as as as as as as as as " f3 Q) ::z:: ('I"),...,...,...,... $..l C),... ~ I.l-! N.c: ~.u.u s::.,-l '1 Q) " ~.-I $..l s::. (J (!) as s:: bo (J (J as (J as (J. " I+-l CI) Q) s:: N ('I") ('I"),... ('I"),... ('I") I+-l Q).,-l.-I -... $..l ~.-I,...,...,...,... '1,... ~ " boo.. as ~ CI) $..l >.. CI) Q).-I CI) CI)"O :>.u.,-l as Q) s:: ~.u as boas...;:t as as as as as as as. (J N.u,...,....,-l.-l,... ("f') """.,-l s::.w -... I+-l Q).r-!,...,...,...,...,...,... ~..-1 N. s:: s::.,-l bo bo.,-l ~ s:: >.. CI).,-l " " C) o..:;:j. " (J.o.u.u Q).u ~ " as (J as. as " Q) as Q)~ N N ('I") N L/") N s:: Q) $..l CI) C) s::...;:t ~,... ~,... ~~ ~...;:t Q). ~ in! CI) CI).,...l as CI) bo.u N s:: as $..l ~.,-l (J Q) (J.u.,-l.-I.-I.-I.-I.u " s:: as.-l >...-I.-I.-I.-I.u s:: s:: $...I.. (J CI) as CI) as CI) as as Q) as Q) Q) s:: ~~ ~~ ~~ ~.-I CI) p... >..$..l Q) Q)-"" Q)-"" Q)-"" -....u =' Q) bo Q) bo Q) bo bo Q) in! as.,-l ('I") ' ~ s:: ~ s:: ~ s:: s:: f3.-i Q).,-l.,-l.,-l.,-l as co boas $..l $..l ('I") $..l ('I") $..l ('I") $..l $..l CI) s:: =' ~ P- P- o.... CI).,-l O"~ tf) tf) tf) tr.l >...,-l CI). rj) rj) CI).-I Q) as Q) " N ~.,-l $..l Q) bo " b.o as ~. CI)..1.l-! $..l -.. co...u $..l Q).-I in! =' ~.u Q).-l.-I L/").u.u s::.u " I+-l Q) as.u ('I") N ('I") N ('I") N N I+-l s:: >.. s:: f3 ~ I+-l.-l.-l.-l.-l.u as S..u CI) rj) rj) as.u $..l as :;:j s:: Q) (J CI) Q) Q) (J S.u in!.-i Q) Q).u $..l =' I+-l ~ s:: t-l -.. r-! Q) in! I+-l.,-l Q) " bo.-i ~ f3 u Q) (J s:: N $..l as CI) s:: p.:::.,-l " (J.,-l s:: N... Q) as.-l N rj).-i If'\ s::.. I.u Q) L/") L/") ~ as.,-l tr.l as.-i I N N I C) Q).u Q). ~ tr.l tr.l Q) ~.-I t-l..,r'- as.,-l..c:: :;:j t-l ::E: t-l co ~ t-l U ~ ~ >.. $..l.,-l in! in!

16 3 Table 13. EFFect of Sand Aid treatments on turfgrass quality and dew ratings of a Penncross creeping bentgrass green grown on loamy sand. Hancock TurFgrass Research Center. Treatments initiated in 195. Quality rating scale of 1-9 with 9 = highest quality turf. For dew ratings 9 = no dew. Averages for three replications Treatment Dew Quality Rating Sand Aid Aux i1iary 1/17 4/6 1/4 1 1 / 1 5% Sand topdress 4.7d* 6.7b 7.abc 5.3a 1% Sand topdress 5.cd 7.3a 7.7a 5.7a None Sand topdress 4.3d 6.c 7.3ab 5.3a 15 lbs Coring 6.ab 5.cd 6.3bc 5.7a 3 lbs Coring 6.7a 5.cd 6.c 6.a None Coring 5.7bc 5.d 6.3bc 6.a None None 4.d 5.3d 6. 1c 4.b * - Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test. Table 14. Effect of Sand Aid treatment on turfgrass quality and dew ratings of a Penncross creeping bentgrass green grown on sand. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Treatments were initiated in 195. Quality rating scale of 1-9 with 9 = highest quality turf. For dew ratings 9 = no dew. Averages for three replications. Treatment Dew Qua 1ity Rat ing Sand Aid Aux illary 1/17 7/6 7/ / 5' Sand topdress 4.c 6.3ab 7.3a 7.3ab 1' Sand topdress 5.b 6.7a.a.a None Sand topdress 4.3bc 4.d 5.7c 6.3bc 15 lbs Coring 7.a 5.3bc 6.bc 7.3ab 3lbs Coring 7.a 6.7a 7.ab.a None Coring 6.3a 6.3ab 6.bc 7.3ab None None 4.3bc 5.cd 5.c 6.c * - Means Followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

17 Table 15. Effects of phosphorus and potassium treatments on soil tests of soil based Penncross creeping bentgrass green at - and -4 inch depths. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Nutrients expressed as lbs per acre. Treatments initiated 19. Samples collected August, 19. Treatment lbs P and K per 1 sq ft P - K inch depth Ca Mg P -4 in K ch depth Cu Mg 1 141b* 159b 13b 375a 14c 157bc 197b 9a 19a 19a 63a 147a 373b 416a 4a 435a 157b 153b 163b 194a 67b 95b 9b 16a 113a 1761a 1761a 176a 345b 34ab 356ab 371a * Means followed by same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test. Table 16. Effects of phosphorus and potassium treatments on soil tests of a sand/peat based Penncross creeping bentgrass green at - and -4 inch depths. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Nutrients expressed as lbs per acre. Initiated 19. Samples collected August, 19. Treatment lbs P and K per 1 sq ft P - ir Lch depth K Ca Mg P -4 inch K depth Cu Mg 1 lid 5c 97b 15a 17b 16a 176a 17a 495a 494a 366a 4491a 717a 7a 793a 7a 5a 16c 31b 3a d 4c b 17a 3733a 396a 4379a 356a 37a 43a 51a 43a * Means followed by same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

18 Table 17. Effects of phosphorus treatments on soil tests of a sand based Penncross creeping bentgrass green at - and -4 inch depths. Hancock Turfgrass Research Center. Nutrients expressed as lbs per acre. Treatments initiated 193. Samples collected August, 19. Treatment P - inch depth K Ca Mg -4 inch depth K Cu Mg 7c 34a 335a 63a c 17a 34a 37a 1 spring 1 fall 9b 36a 337a 63a b a 34a 37a 1 spring lie 4a 396a 6a 9c 17a 11a 7a spring fall 63a 56a 56a 1a 43a a 9a 4a -p- * Means followed by same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level using Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

19 35 probably be used on sand greens. Although greens represent a small area of the golf course, use care to prevent loss of phosphorus by leaching when greens are adjacent to ponds, lakes or streams. OTHER STUDIES A cultivation study on Ram I Kentucky bluegrass at the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center was established in 197 and will continue through 199. Treatments include solid and hollow tine aerifying wi th large, medium and small equipment. No significant data have been taken on these plots as yet. Emphasis will be placed on effects of treatments on the thatch which exists on this turf. Off campus studies established in 19 include a phosphorus and potassium response study on a very low nutrient testing soil at a condominium site near Detroit. A series of different mixes of Kentucky bluegrass, perennial ryegrass and tall fescue were established on an unirrigated athletic field near Traverse City. The objective is to determine the establishment rate, adaptability to the environment and tolerance of moisture stress on this sandy soil. Of particular interest is how the tall fescue will survive in that environment. WEATHER SUMMARY One need not look at the weather statistics for 19 to know it was a very unusual year for turf but a review of the numbers may be helpful in explaining why so much turf loss occurred. From mid-april through mid-july about one inch of rainfall occurred. Average rainfall during that period is over six inches. Temperatures were also well above normal wi th 37 days of high temperatures over 9 F compared to an average of 11 per year. During the severe drought period we also experienced mostly sunny days (% of possible in May through July), strong winds and low relative humidities. Evapotranspiration figures were much higher than normal with many days over.3 inch per day in May, June and early July, figures which would be considered more typical of desert areas. The longest days of the year occur during this time, contributing further to high evapotranspiration rates. On irrigated sites turf managers had difficulty applying enough water to meet turf needs during the drought. When rainfall resumed and relative humidities rose to normal summer levels (just under. inch per day). Disease pressure became a significant problem on many turfs. Ironically, with higher than normal rainfall in August and September and the highest rainfall levels on record in October, we finished the year above normal in rainfall. Unirrigated turfs turned dormant early in the summer. When rainfall came in July, crabgrass germinated and grew rapidly, responding to the high temperatures and without competition from desired grasses. Many turfs recovered reasonably well in August and September while others had suffered significant turf loss, necessitating overseeding or reestablishement practices. Unfortunately, many turfs were not improved in the fall, leaving a major need for overseeding or reestablishment in the spring of 199. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The support of the Michigan Turf grass Foundation and its members wi th financial support and donations of fertilizer and supplies is gratefully acknowledged. Without this support much less work could be addressed.