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/467557

86 GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT 03.15 plot area (4). Percent relative green cover was calculated by dividing the percent green cover area for each surface by the mean per - cent green cover area for the appropriate non- treated control surface (6). Results Experiment 1 (20-milliliter fuel application) For creeping bentgrass fairways (Figure 2, top), there were signifcant differences in per - cent relative green cover by fuel type in three of four comparisons by week. Plots treated with B20 and B100 had signifcantly higher percent relative green cover than plots treated with petroleum diesel at two, four and six weeks post-application. By week 6, relative green cover of creeping bentgrass was 45% for treatments with petroleum diesel, 62% for treatments with B20 and 70% for treatments with B100. Fuel temperature did not have a signifcant independent effect on percent rela - tive green cover for creeping bentgrass at the 20-milliliter application rate. Bermudagrass fairways exhibited a con - sistent and signifcant difference in percent relative green cover by fuel type in each of the four comparisons by week. Within each week, percent relative green cover was signifcantly lower for plots treated with petroleum diesel, intermediate for those treated with B20 and higher for those treated with B100 (Figure 2, middle). By week 6 of the bermudagrass fair - way treatments, relative green cover was 77% for petroleum diesel, 84% for B20 and 96% for B100. Fuel temperature did not have a sig - nifcant independent effect on percent relative green cover for bermudagrass at the 20-mil - liliter application rate. Zoysiagrass fairways responded differently to the simulated fuel spills when compared to creeping bentgrass and bermudagrass fair - ways. With zoysiagrass, there were no signif- cant differences in percent relative green cover by fuel type for any week (Figure 2, bottom). Zoysiagrass exhibited less initial damage and more complete recovery (as measured by per - cent relative green cover ) to all types of fuel spills compared to creeping bentgrass and ber - mudagrass. By week 6, the percent relative green cover for zoysiagrass exceeded 90% re - gardless of fuel type. Again, fuel temperature did not have a signifcant independent effect on percent relative green cover for zoysiagrass. Experiment 2 (10 milliliters fuel application) In the frst experiment, 20 milliliters of Figure 2. Percent relative green cover by week for petroleum diesel (PD), 20% biodiesel (B20) and 100% biodiesel (B100) applied at 20 milliliters on creeping bentgrass, bermudagrass and zoysiagrass fairways. Within each species and week, bars with the same letter are not statistically different. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PD B20 B100 % relative green cover Week 1 Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Creeping bentgrass Bermudagrass Zoysiagrass a a a b a a b a a b a a a b c a b c a b c a b c a a a a a a a a a a a a 20-milliliter applications

- GCM_COV1.pdf
- GCM_COV2.pdf
- GCM_1.pdf
- GCM_2.pdf
- GCM_3.pdf
- GCM_4.pdf
- GCM_5.pdf
- GCM_6.pdf
- GCM_7.pdf
- GCM_8.pdf
- GCM_9.pdf
- GCM_10.pdf
- GCM_11.pdf
- GCM_12.pdf
- GCM_13.pdf
- GCM_14.pdf
- GCM_15.pdf
- GCM_16.pdf
- GCM_17.pdf
- GCM_18.pdf
- GCM_19.pdf
- GCM_20.pdf
- GCM_21.pdf
- GCM_22.pdf
- GCM_23.pdf
- GCM_24.pdf
- GCM_25.pdf
- GCM_26.pdf
- GCM_27.pdf
- GCM_28.pdf
- GCM_29.pdf
- GCM_30.pdf
- GCM_31.pdf
- GCM_32.pdf
- GCM_33(A).pdf
- GCM_34.pdf
- GCM_35(A).pdf
- GCM_36.pdf
- GCM_37(A).pdf
- GCM_38.pdf
- GCM_39.pdf
- GCM_40.pdf
- GCM_41(A).pdf
- GCM_42.pdf
- GCM_43.pdf
- GCM_44.pdf
- GCM_45.pdf
- GCM_46.pdf
- GCM_47.pdf
- GCM_48.pdf
- GCM_SGI1.pdf
- GCM_SGI2.pdf
- GCM_SGI3.pdf
- GCM_SGI4.pdf
- GCM_49.pdf
- GCM_50.pdf
- GCM_51.pdf
- GCM_52.pdf
- GCM_53.pdf
- GCM_54.pdf
- GCM_55.pdf
- GCM_56.pdf
- GCM_57.pdf
- GCM_58.pdf
- GCM_59.pdf
- GCM_60.pdf
- GCM_61.pdf
- GCM_62.pdf
- GCM_63.pdf
- GCM_64.pdf
- GCM_GSI1.pdf
- GCM_GSI2.pdf
- GCM_65.pdf
- GCM_66.pdf
- GCM_67.pdf
- GCM_68.pdf
- GCM_69.pdf
- GCM_70.pdf
- GCM_71.pdf
- GCM_72.pdf
- GCM_73.pdf
- GCM_74.pdf
- GCM_75.pdf
- GCM_76.pdf
- GCM_77.pdf
- GCM_78.pdf
- GCM_79.pdf
- GCM_80.pdf
- GCM_TI1.pdf
- GCM_TI2.pdf
- GCM_TI3.pdf
- GCM_TI4.pdf
- GCM_81.pdf
- GCM_82.pdf
- GCM_83.pdf
- GCM_84.pdf
- GCM_85.pdf
- GCM_86.pdf
- GCM_87.pdf
- GCM_88.pdf
- GCM_89.pdf
- GCM_90.pdf
- GCM_91.pdf
- GCM_92.pdf
- GCM_93.pdf
- GCM_94.pdf
- GCM_95.pdf
- GCM_96.pdf
- GCM_97.pdf
- GCM_98.pdf
- GCM_99.pdf
- GCM_100.pdf
- GCM_101.pdf
- GCM_102.pdf
- GCM_103.pdf
- GCM_104.pdf
- GCM_105.pdf
- GCM_106.pdf
- GCM_107.pdf
- GCM_108.pdf
- GCM_109.pdf
- GCM_110.pdf
- GCM_111.pdf
- GCM_112.pdf
- GCM_113.pdf
- GCM_114.pdf
- GCM_115.pdf
- GCM_116.pdf
- GCM_117.pdf
- GCM_118.pdf
- GCM_119.pdf
- GCM_120.pdf
- GCM_COV3.pdf
- GCM_COV4.pdf