investigation of soil amendments for use in usga putting greens t.w. shaddox
TRANSCRIPT
Investigation of Soil Investigation of Soil Amendments for Use in Amendments for Use in USGA Putting GreensUSGA Putting Greens
T.W. ShaddoxT.W. Shaddox
• Droughts from 1997 to 2000 have Droughts from 1997 to 2000 have brought about consumptive use permits brought about consumptive use permits for many superintendentsfor many superintendents
• Superintendents have less water to Superintendents have less water to maintain the same quality turfgrassmaintain the same quality turfgrass
Problem AssessmentProblem Assessment
Case StudyCase Study
• Colbert Hills GC – Manhattan, KS (Fry, 2002)
– 120 million gallons year-1 = 374 acre feet
– 374 / 365 days ≈ 1 acre foot day-1
– 1 acre foot / 150 acres =
0.08 inches day-
1 !!
• Greens receive 2-3 X more N than FairwaysGreens receive 2-3 X more N than Fairways
• Greens typically receive daily irrigationGreens typically receive daily irrigation
• Low nutrient retention in sand-based greensLow nutrient retention in sand-based greens– 27% of applied P may leach 27% of applied P may leach (Shuman, 2001)(Shuman, 2001)
– 56% of applied N may leach 56% of applied N may leach (Snyder, 1984)(Snyder, 1984)
Problem AssessmentProblem Assessment
Literature ReviewLiterature Review
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Ap
pli
ed
N L
ea
ch
ed
(%
)
Mancinoand Troll(1990)
Miltner etal. (1996)
Brown etal. (1982)
Brown etal. (1977)
Petrovic etal. (1986)
Snyder etal. (1984)
Nelson etal. (1980)
SurfactantSurfactant
• HDTMAHDTMA
CHCH33(CH(CH22))1515N(CHN(CH33))33
CH3
CH3
CH3 NCH3
Sorption ProcessSorption Process
26-28 26-28 ÅÅ
Objective:Objective:
To determine the influence of soil To determine the influence of soil amendments and incorporation method on amendments and incorporation method on water use efficiency (WUE) of Tifdwarf water use efficiency (WUE) of Tifdwarf bermudagrassbermudagrass
HHoo::
Soil amendments and incorporation method Soil amendments and incorporation method do not increase Tifdwarf WUE above do not increase Tifdwarf WUE above sand:peatsand:peat
Objective:Objective:
To determine the influence of surfactant-modified amendments (SMSAs) on N and P leaching in a simulated USGA putting green
HHoo::
SMSAs do not reduce N and P leaching in USGA putting greens
Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods
Water UseWater Use
MethodsMethods• All pots in each study were maintained at 90% pot All pots in each study were maintained at 90% pot
capacitycapacity
• Sprigged with TifdwarfSprigged with Tifdwarf• Pots were havested and weighed Pots were havested and weighed
weekly for 18 weeksweekly for 18 weeks•WUE = dry matter / applied WUE = dry matter / applied
water water•Turf Quality taken weekly (1 to 9)Turf Quality taken weekly (1 to 9)
•10 trts 4 reps RCBD10 trts 4 reps RCBD
•Duncans MRT Duncans MRT αα = 0.05 = 0.05
TreatmentsTreatments
TreatmentTreatment Rootzone MediaRootzone Media(85:15)(85:15)
ControlControl SandSand
OrganicOrganic Sand:PeatSand:Peat
OrganicOrganic Sand:Iron HumateSand:Iron Humate
ZeoliteZeolite Sand:EcosandSand:Ecosand
ZeoliteZeolite Sand:EcoliteSand:Ecolite
Diatomaceous EarthDiatomaceous Earth Sand:AxisSand:Axis
Diatomaceous EarthDiatomaceous Earth Sand:PSASand:PSA
Calcined ClayCalcined Clay Sand:ProfileSand:Profile
Calcined ClayCalcined Clay Sand:Soil Master PlusSand:Soil Master Plus
SmectiteSmectite Sand:SmectiteSand:Smectite
Incorporation MethodIncorporation Method
Mixed Profile Mixed Profile (85:15)(85:15)
Aerification Aerification (50:50)(50:50)
• 9 Cores9 Cores
• 4 Cores4 CoresSand + AmendmentSand + Amendment
Sand + PeatSand + Peat
Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods
N and P leachingN and P leaching
PUMPH2O
30 cm
5 cm
2.54 cm
Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods
PumpH2O
Treatment Layer
Sand/Peat
5 cm
30 cm
2.5 cm
• Columns Columns – PPbb = 1.5 g cm = 1.5 g cm-3-3
– pH = 7.1pH = 7.1
• Injection SolutionInjection Solution– pH = 2.5pH = 2.5
– NONO33-N = 2300 ppm-N = 2300 ppm
– NHNH44-N = 2480 ppm-N = 2480 ppm
– P = 4400 ppmP = 4400 ppm– 10 mL10 mL
Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods• Treatments:Treatments:
– SandSand– Sand/PeatSand/Peat– EcosandEcosand– Soil MasterSoil Master– ProfileProfile– HDTMA EcosandHDTMA Ecosand– HDTMA Soil MasterHDTMA Soil Master– HDTMA ProfileHDTMA Profile
• Treatment = 8Treatment = 8
• Rep = 3Rep = 3
• Duncans MRT Duncans MRT αα = 0.05 = 0.05
SMSA CharacteristicsSMSA Characteristics
Solid Solid PhasePhase
HDTMA HDTMA SorbedSorbed CECCEC ECECECEC EAECEAEC
g kgg kg-1-1 -- cmol (+) kg-- cmol (+) kg-1-1 -- -- cmol (-) kgcmol (-) kg-1-1
Soil MasterSoil Master 73.473.4 12.312.3 0.90.9 11.311.3
ProfileProfile 62.962.9 19.119.1 9.39.3 9.79.7
EcosandEcosand 27.127.1 93.593.5 89.389.3 4.14.1
ResultsResults
Water UseWater Use
Rootzone Chemical and Physical Rootzone Chemical and Physical CharacteristicsCharacteristics
TreatmentTreatment CECCEC TKNTKN PP FeFe FCFC PAWPAW cmol (+) cmol (+)
kgkg-1-1 %% -- mg kg-- mg kg-1-1 -- -- ------- % ------------ % -----
SandSand 0.70.7 0.000.00 3.23.2 3.43.4 7.77.7 7.37.3
PeatPeat 1.81.8 0.030.03 3.53.5 7.47.4 13.513.5 12.312.3
Soil MasterSoil Master 2.72.7 0.000.00 10.110.1 33.933.9 12.512.5 10.010.0
ProfileProfile 2.82.8 0.000.00 6.66.6 30.530.5 11.211.2 7.87.8
EcosandEcosand 25.725.7 0.000.00 5.75.7 6.36.3 15.615.6 12.112.1
EcoliteEcolite 16.016.0 0.000.00 15.715.7 4.54.5 13.713.7 11.611.6
AxisAxis 5.35.3 0.000.00 8.38.3 10.410.4 11.411.4 9.49.4
PSAPSA 1.21.2 0.000.00 3.93.9 22.522.5 10.910.9 9.39.3
SmectiteSmectite 1.31.3 0.000.00 126.8126.8 12.412.4 13.113.1 10.610.6
Iron HumateIron Humate 6.46.4 0.030.03 28.328.3 799.5799.5 15.515.5 14.114.1
ANOVA Turf QualityANOVA Turf Quality
Source of VariationSource of Variation dfdf Mean SquaresMean Squares F ValueF Value
BlockBlock 33 0.100.10 3.30*3.30*
Amendment (A)Amendment (A) 99 2.112.11 65.46***65.46***
Method (M)Method (M) 22 0.540.54 16.90***16.90***
A A × M× M 1818 0.400.40 12.45***12.45***
ErrorError 7777 0.030.03
TotalTotal 109109*, ***, Significant at 0.05, 0.001 probability levels, respectively*, ***, Significant at 0.05, 0.001 probability levels, respectively
Turf Quality Full IncorporationTurf Quality Full Incorporation
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8T
urf
Qu
alit
y
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
CV = 4.3CV = 4.3
a
cccc
b b
dd
e
minimum acceptable quality
Turf Quality 9 Tine AerificationTurf Quality 9 Tine Aerification
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8T
urf
Qu
alit
y
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
CV = 1.9CV = 1.9
a
de bcefcd bc b
de def
minimum acceptable quality
Turf Quality 4 Tine AerificationTurf Quality 4 Tine Aerification
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8T
urf
Qu
alit
y
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
CV = 1.8CV = 1.8
minimum acceptable quality a
d bcdbc
d
bc bd cdd
ANOVA Turf WUEANOVA Turf WUE
Source of VariationSource of Variation dfdf Mean SquaresMean Squares F ValueF Value
BlockBlock 33 0.0010.001 0.770.77
Amendment (A)Amendment (A) 99 0.2870.287 138.44***138.44***
Method (M)Method (M) 22 0.8570.857 411.40***411.40***
A A × M× M 1818 0.0840.084 40.80***40.80***
ErrorError 7777 0.0020.002
TotalTotal 109109*, ***, Significant at 0.05, 0.001 probability levels, respectively*, ***, Significant at 0.05, 0.001 probability levels, respectively
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
WU
E (
mg
g-1
)
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
WUE Full IncorporationWUE Full Incorporation
CV = 6.8CV = 6.8
aab
dc
bab
b
dc
a
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
WU
E (
mg
g-1
)
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
WUE 9 Tine AerificationWUE 9 Tine Aerification
CV = 8.3CV = 8.3
a
bbc
c
bcbc
bcbc
cbc
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
WU
E (
mg
g-1
)
Sand
Peat
Soil M
aste
r
Profile Axis PSA
Ecosa
nd
Ecolite
Smec
tite
Fe Hum
ate
WUE 4 Tine AerificationWUE 4 Tine Aerification
CV = 9.2CV = 9.2
ab
bb b
bb b
b b
WUE by Incorporation MethodWUE by Incorporation Method
0
0.5
1
1.5
WU
E (
mg
g-1
)
Full 9 Tine 4 Tine
a
b b
CV = 3.5CV = 3.5
WUE SummaryWUE Summary
• Only CCs and Fe Humate increased turf qualityOnly CCs and Fe Humate increased turf quality
• Individually, PAW and CEC are not good indicators of Individually, PAW and CEC are not good indicators of an amendment’s influence on WUEan amendment’s influence on WUE
• Fe Humate, CCs, and diatomaceous earths Fe Humate, CCs, and diatomaceous earths increased WUE above peatincreased WUE above peat
• Fe Humate produced the greatest increase in WUEFe Humate produced the greatest increase in WUE
• Amendment influence was decreased after Amendment influence was decreased after aerificationaerification
WUE ConclusionWUE Conclusion
• WUEWUE– Reject HReject Hoo and conclude: and conclude:
• Calcined clays, Diat. Earths, smectite, and Fe Humate Calcined clays, Diat. Earths, smectite, and Fe Humate increased Tifdwarf WUE above sand:peatincreased Tifdwarf WUE above sand:peat
• QualityQuality– Reject HReject Hoo and conclude: and conclude:
• Calcined clays and Fe Humate increased Tifdwarf quality Calcined clays and Fe Humate increased Tifdwarf quality above sand:peatabove sand:peat
Practical ImplicationsPractical Implications
• When WUE and turf quality are of When WUE and turf quality are of concern, calcined clays and fe humate concern, calcined clays and fe humate are plausible options to peatare plausible options to peat
ResultsResults
N and P LeachingN and P Leaching
Effluent Volume (Pore Volume)
0 1 2
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
C/C
o
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0 1 2
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
NONO33---N Breakthrough Curves-N Breakthrough Curves
SandSand/Peat
HDTMA-Soil MasterAEC = 11.3
HDTMA-ProfileAEC = 9.7
HDTMA-ClinoptiloliteAEC = 4.1
Soil Master
Profile
Clinoptilolite
Total NOTotal NO33-N Leached-N Leached
Columns with same letter are not significantly different according to DMRT > 0.05
0
5
10
15
20
25
NO
3-N
Lea
ched
(m
g)
Soil Master Profile Ecosand Sand Peat
Uncoated
Coated
aa
a a
b bb
a
CV = 9.8
0 1 2 3
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Effluent Volume (Pore Volume)
0 1 2 3
C/C
o
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
NHNH44++-N Breakthrough Curves-N Breakthrough Curves
SandSand/Peat
HDTMA-Soil MasterAEC = 11.3
HDTMA-ProfileAEC = 9.7
HDTMA-ClinoptiloliteAEC = 4.1
Soil Master
Profile
Clinoptilolite
Total NHTotal NH44-N Leached-N Leached
Columns with same letter are not significantly different according to DMRT > 0.05
0
5
10
15
20
25
NH
4-N
Lea
ched
(m
g)
Soil Master Profile Ecosand Sand Peat
Uncoated
Coated
a
b
c
dddd
a
CV = 12.9
Effluent Volume (Pore Volume)
0 1 2 3
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
C/C
o
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.150.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0 1 2 3
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
P Breakthrough CurvesP Breakthrough CurvesSandSand/Peat
HDTMA-Soil MasterAEC = 11.3
HDTMA-ProfileAEC = 9.7
HDTMA-ClinoptiloliteAEC = 4.1
Soil Master
Profile
Clinoptilolite
Total Phosphorous LeachedTotal Phosphorous Leached
Columns with same letter are not significantly different according to DMRT > 0.05
0
10
20
30
40
50
P L
each
ed (
mg
)
Soil Master Profile Ecosand Sand Peat
Uncoated
Coated
d
c
b
a a a a
e
CV = 6.9
Leaching SummaryLeaching Summary
• Uncoated amendments:Uncoated amendments:– did not retard or decrease NOdid not retard or decrease NO33
-- leaching leaching
– eliminated NHeliminated NH44++ leaching leaching
– retarded but did not decrease P leaching.retarded but did not decrease P leaching.
• SMSAs reduced NOSMSAs reduced NO33--, NH, NH44
++, and P , and P
leachingleaching
Leaching ConclusionLeaching Conclusion
• Reject HReject Hoo and conclude: and conclude:
– SMSAs reduce N and P leachingSMSAs reduce N and P leaching
Future ResearchFuture Research
• Long-term influence on leaching and Long-term influence on leaching and stabilitystability
• Microbial degradationMicrobial degradation
• Influence on turf growthInfluence on turf growth
AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments• CommitteeCommittee
– Jerry Sartain (Chair)Jerry Sartain (Chair)– Donald GraetzDonald Graetz– Peter Nkedi-KizzaPeter Nkedi-Kizza– James BonczekJames Bonczek– Grady MillerGrady Miller
• SWSD Grad StudentsSWSD Grad Students– E. Brown, R. Snyder, K. MakrisE. Brown, R. Snyder, K. Makris
• Lab PersonnelLab Personnel– Ed Hopwood, Nahid Varshovi, Shawron Ed Hopwood, Nahid Varshovi, Shawron
Weingarten, Brian Owens, Martin SandquistWeingarten, Brian Owens, Martin Sandquist• Florida Turfgrass AssociationFlorida Turfgrass Association
QuestionsQuestions