Golf Course Management

MAR 2019

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/1085621

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 92 of 117

03.19 GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT 81 After application of the soil surfactant, 0.03 inch (0.76 cm) of water was used to incorpo - rate the surfactant into the soil. e surfac- tant treatments were small plots within larger blocks of watering treatments. e treatments included three watering treatment regimes based on soil volumetric water contents (SWC) (8%, 12% and 16% SWC). e entire field plot included an au - tomated irrigation system that tracked SWC, temperature and soil salinity every 20 minutes (Integrated Sensor System, RainBird). e ir - rigation system tracked these parameters with soil sensors (TSM-1, RainBird) that were in - stalled horizontally in each plot at a depth of 3 inches (7.62 cm). Low-traffic (5,688 rounds of golf ), mod - erate-traffic (11,376 rounds of golf ) and no- traffic (control) treatments were applied in summer 2013 and 2014 with a traffic simu - lator machine. Traffic treatments were im- plemented using a golf traffic simulator (110 pounds; 49.9 kilograms) modified with extra weight (150 pounds; 68 kilograms). It con - sisted of a 21-inch (0.53-meter) long roller, covering 2.86 square feet (0.266 square meter) with each revolution. Golf cleats (Black Widow Softspikes) were attached to the roller, which was manually pushed across plots to simulate traffic. e three traffic treatments were applied to each 7-foot × 8-foot (2.2-meter × 2.4-meter) plot three times weekly, simulat - ing 237 rounds of golf at the low traffic rate and 474 rounds of golf for the moderate rate of traffic each week, from June 1 to Sept. 15 of each year. e rounds of golf were based on a golf shoe containing an average of 12 spikes per shoe, with the average golfer taking about 26 full steps (52 paces) per putting green. Measurements Time domain reflectometry (TDR) was used to measure SWC at two depths of 1.5 and 4.8 inches (3.8 cm and 12.2 cm) (Field Scout TDR-300; Spectrum Technologies). ese depths were chosen based on probe size avail - ability and rooting characteristics of both spe- cies. Visual turf quality ratings were taken on a scale of 1 to 9, where 1 is poor, 9 is best and 6 is acceptable (2). Canopy reflectance was de - termined by measuring NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) with the use of a turfgrass color meter (Field Scout TCM-500, Spectrum Technologies). is instrument cal - culated an index value range from 0.000 to 1.000, with values closer to 1.000 indicating greater green color. All measurements were re - corded weekly after turfgrass mowing on non- cloudy days between May 13 and Sept. 23 in 2013, and May 28 and Sept. 16 in 2014. Results and discussion Application of the surfactant decreased SWC in the 12% and 16% target SWC turf when compared with SWC in the control turf (Figure 1). Excessive soil water can cause Turf quality 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 June 1 July 1 Aug. 1 Sept. 1 Oct. 1 June 1 July 1 Aug. 1 Sept. 1 2014 2013 Turf quality (1-9) Turf quality (1-9) A B C D Revolution + 8% Revolution + 12% Revolution + 16% Control + 8% Control + 12% Control + 16% Figure 2. Turfgrass quality (on a scale of 1 to 9, where 1 is poor, 9 is best and 6 is acceptable) under 8%, 12% and 16% target soil volumetric water content for controls or turf treated with soil surfactant within (A) creeping bentgrass, 2013; (B) creeping bentgrass, 2014; (C) annual bluegrass, 2013; and (D) annual bluegrass, 2014. Least signifi - cant difference bars are present on dates in which significant dif - ferences were detected among treatments.

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Golf Course Management - MAR 2019