Golf Course Management

OCT 2018

Golf Course Management magazine is dedicated to advancing the golf course superintendent profession and helping GCSAA members achieve career success.

Issue link: http://gcmdigital.gcsaa.org/i/1031201

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 67 of 101

64 GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT 10.18 using a LECO TruSpec CN Carbon/Nitrogen analyzer (LECO Corp.). e effect of treat - ments on reversing the water-repellent condi- tion of the sands was also determined using the molarity of ethanol droplet test. All treatments were arranged in a com - pletely randomized design with three replica- tions, and the entire experiment was repeated once. Collected data were analyzed, and no treatment-by-experiment interaction was de - tected for all response variables measured; therefore, data from the two experiments were pooled, and significant means were separated. Results and discussion After treatment application and the three sequential washes, total dissolved organic car - bon and particulate organic carbon present in all leachates of each sand column were sum - marized in Figure 3. e water-only treatment removed a minimal amount of dissolved or - ganic carbon, indicating a small portion of the organic compounds in the sand profile was water-soluble (Figure 3A). Compared to water-treated columns, the same amount of dissolved organic carbon was removed from columns treated with pHAcid, suggesting that the effect of pHAcid was similar to that of water. In contrast, Matador and OARS both removed a substantially greater amount of dissolved organic carbon than water. It is important to keep in mind that applications of Matador introduced 1,765 mg of dissolved organic carbon, and applications of OARS introduced 1,409 mg, as the wetting agents are also organic compounds in a water-solu - ble form. In contrast, application of pHAcid only added 23 mg of dissolved organic car - bon. Collectively, it appeared that the amount of dissolved organic carbon found in leachates from Matador- and OARS-treated sand col - umns accounted for 91% and 51% of the dis- solved organic carbon introduced by the two treatments, respectively. Although we were not able to precisely separate the indigenous dissolved organic carbon introduced by the treatment from the dissolved organic carbon that could be washed out from the sand pro - file (even with water as a control), it is clear that at least half of the dissolved organic car - bon introduced by OARS was retained in the sand system despite three washes, suggesting a strong sorption between OARS and the sand. In terms of insoluble particulate organic carbon, the water-only treatment removed a Treatment effects on carbon output Figure 3. Treatment effects on total output of: (A) dissolved organic carbon and (B) particulate organic carbon in all leachates after application of one of two wetting agents, a surfactant, or deionized water, followed by three sequential washes. Bars labeled with the same letters are not significantly different. a b c c a b b b Treatment Particulate organic carbon (mg) Dissolved organic carbon (mg) A B

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Golf Course Management - OCT 2018