14
20
CONTENTS 10
22
• Winter 2011
UPCOMING EVENT
14
2011 MTC Turfgrass Conference & Tradeshow! January 12–13 — Education Program
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT How to Benefit from Conference Attendance
4
MTC TURF NEWS
TURF TALK
22
Dollar Spot Control with Alternative Products in Creeping Bentgrass Greens
20 12
26
TURF TIPS How to get a Real Deal on Turfgrass Seed!
APPLIED RESEARCH Maximize Fungicide Effectiveness with Proper Application
26
EQUIPMENT BASICS Select the Right Nozzle to Improve the Performance of Your Spray Applications
DEPARTMENTS 06 08 13 13 30 30
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT-ELECT NEWS FROM MTC MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION CALENDAR OF EVENTS ADVERTISERS INDEX
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
VOLUNTARY STEPS WE CAN TAKE TO HELP PROTECT THE BAY
M
aryland is known for its Chesapeake Bay region, the largest estuary in the United States. Five other states and the District of Columbia share the Chesapeake Bay watershed — New York, Pennsylvania’s Susquehanna basin, areas of Delaware, West Virginia’s eastern panhandle and most of Virginia. At this time the EPA has taken over efforts by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation to protect the bay under the Clean Water Act. The strategies imposed by the EPA are limited to nitrogen, phosphorus and sediments under the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or pollution diet. Most of the TMDLs are to be regulated at wastewater-treatment plants, as these are a point source that is easy to measure. Non-point sources such as agriculture and urban run-off are more difficult to track and may require nutrient-management plans to limit potential contaminant runoff on large sites. Strategies for limiting runoff on smaller lawns may be impossible to regulate because of the sheer volume of sites. Therefore, the turfgrass community should take voluntary actions to limit nutrients from entering the watershed. These actions should include: • Taking periodic soil tests and applying only what is needed to sustain lawns. • Removing fertilizers from hard surfaces after applications by blowing or sweeping. • Applying phosphorous only for seeding and sod establishment. • Not applying fertilizers to frozen soil. • Applying slow-release fertilizers. • Educating homeowners on proper applications of fertilizer. • Using non-chemical methods to improve lawns (i.e., aeration). • Remembering to promote turfgrass as nature’s best water filter. You see sedimentation runoff only where turfgrass is not in place properly. Our stormwater management systems were designed many years ago when the practice was to remove water from sites as quickly as possible. Updated and retro-fitted stormwater controls will be necessary to compensate for all the impervious surfaces we now have in Maryland. Turfgrass should be part of the solution and not a scapegoat for the problem. I’m looking forward to seeing everyone at the MTC 2011 Conference & Tradeshow, January 12–13, in College Park!
NICHOLAS GAMMILL President, Maryland Turfgrass Council
6
MTC TURF NEWS
FROM THE PRESIDENT-ELECT
WE ALL NEED THE MTC AND THE MTC NEEDS YOU
W
ow, where has time gone? It seems just like yesterday, when the Maryland Turfgrass Council (MTC) was organized in April 1972 and we were having our first turfgrass conference at the Sheraton Hotel in Lanham in January 1977. As an “umbrella” organization for all the turfgrass industries in Maryland, The MTC was formed to promote and build the Turfgrass Research Program at the University of Maryland. Over the years, the Council has also gotten involved in supporting our member associations in political fights when any one of us is being impacted by rumors or regulations. In addition, we continue to be involved in providing top-notch educational programs; we finance and distribute our Turfgrass Surveys each decade to demonstrate to the legislature and others that turfgrass is not only a multi-billion-dollar industry but also the #2 agricultural commodity within our state; and we fight to expand and support our Maryland Turfgrass Research Program and facilities. I have served with or on the MTC board of directors since 1975 as an advisor, as a board member and, currently, as vice president. It is my honor to have been nominated as president-elect. If I am elected, it is my goal to continue our support of research and our industry by continuing to provide education in different venues, such as our “new and improved” MTC Turf News. After considerable research, the board has decided to step up our publication, and we have contracted with Leading Edge Communications to publish our magazine. Stop by the Leading Edge booth at the Conference Tradeshow, and check out the opportunities to advertise your company. The MTC board is also working on updating our website — mdturfcouncil.org — to keep you updated on coming events, while also giving you opportunities to electronically register and pay for your events, providing electronic access to industry educational and research articles, and making other changes, including offering the electronic registration to all our member organizations for their use.
8
MTC TURF NEWS
It makes no difference if you are a sod grower, a golf course superintendent, a lawncare specialist, a sports field manager, an arborist, a hydro-seeder, a government agency employee or any other professional working in the turfgrass industry — you are eligible to be a member of the MTC. In these economic times and in Maryland’s challenging environment, we all need the MTC, and the MTC needs you. Until the economy improves, the board has decided to keep the yearly dues to just $15, so stop by the Conference registration desk and pay yours today. If you have any issues where you need a turfgrass unified voice, please contact any member of the board. The MTC board of directors is made up of representatives from all aspects of the turfgrass industry. We meet monthly to prepare education and take up all topics involving our industry. The meetings are open to any member of the MTC, so feel free to join us any time.
VERNON W. COOPER President-Elect
OFFICERS & DIRECTORS
MARYLAND TURFGRASS COUNCIL 12 Pressie Lane | Churchville, MD 21028 | (240) 413-4312 | www.mdturfcouncil.org MTC Turf News is published quarterly for the MTC by: Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge St. Franklin, TN 37064 615-790-3718 ( phone) 615-794-4524 (fax) info@leadingedge communications.com
2010 BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT Nick Gammill American University Hyattsville, MD 202-885-2340 (office) 202-498-8020 (cell) ngammill@american.edu
VICE PRESIDENT Vernon Cooper All States Turf Consultants St. Michaels, MD 443-742-6618 (cell) Vernon@ALLSTATESTURF.com
SECRETARY/TREASURER Cheryl A. Gaultney Churchville, MD 410-836-2876 (home) 410-322-8275 (cell) Sandqueen10@aol.com
PAST PRESIDENT Bob Shumate Calvert Co. Parks & Rec. Prince Frederick, MD 410-610-9007 (cell) 410-535-2233 (fax) shumatrr@co.cal.md.us
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Michelle LoConte Montgomery Village, MD 240-413-4312 (office) 240-597-1420 (fax) MdTurfCouncil@Verizon.net
THREE YEAR TERM Lester Dubs Pasadena, MD 443-623-1745 (cell) ldubs@verizon.net
Randall Pinckney Manor Country Club Rockville, MD 301-929-1707 (office) 240-286-1989 (cell) rpinckney@mail.manorcc.org Gregg Rosenthal Chesapeake Hills Golf Club Lusby, MD 410-326-4653 (office) rosentgi@co.cal.md.us
TWO YEAR TERM Rick LaNore MRW Lawns, Inc. LaPlata, MD 301-870-3411 (office) 301-609-1852 (cell) Rick127928@rocketmail.net Bill Patton, Sr. Turf Center Lawns Spencerville, MD 301-384-9300 (office) 301-980-3094 (cell) turfcenterlawns@yahoo.com
Kevin Monaco Turf Equipment & Supply Jessup, MD 410-799-5575 (work) 443-250-1182 (cell) kevinmonaco@ Turf-equipment.com
ONE-YEAR TERM Harry Kenney Agrium Advanced Technologies Ellicott City, MD 410-375-6148 (cell) 800-235-6138 hkenney@agriumat.com Bill Warpinski Central Sod Farms Centreville, MD 800-866-1387 410-827-5000 billw@centralsod.com Damian Varga Scientific Plant Service Sykesville, MD 410-321-0970 (office) 410-241-4623 (cell) spsdamian@juno.com
2010 ADVISORS Dr. Pete Dernoeden Dept. of Plant Science & LA University of Maryland Dr. Tom Turner Paint Branch Facility University of Maryland College Park, MD Dr. Mark Carroll Dept. of Plant Science & LA University of Maryland Dr. Kevin Mathias Institute of Applied Agriculture University of Maryland Mr. Dave Funk Paint Branch Turfgrass Research Facility University of Maryland Mr. Doug Lechlider Agricultural Commission Representative Maryland Dept. of Ag.
WINTER 2011
9
UPCOMING EVENT
— Join Us for the 2011 —
MTC TURFGRASS CONFERENCE & TRADESHOW! January 12–13 | Stamp Student Union, University of Maryland College Park, MD
EDUCATION PROGRAM Wednesday Morning, January 12 GCSAA Approved Educational Points Registration opens at 7:30 a.m. outside Grand Ballroom.
GENERAL SESSION / Hoff Theatre 9:00 a.m. Producing YouTube Videos to Support Turfgrass Extension, Instruction and Marketing Programs Dr. Kevin Mathias, University of Maryland 9:45 a.m. Research Update: Fertilization of Zoysiagrass Dr. Mark Carroll, University of Maryland 10:30 a.m. A Look at Alternative Species for Reduced Input Situations Mr. John Brader, Scott’s Professional Seed 11:15 a.m. Everything You Know About Drought Is Wrong! Dr. Doug Brede, Jacklin Seed by Simplot
GOLF COURSE SESSION / Colony Ballroom 9:00 a.m. Creeping Bentgrass Management for the Transition Zone (all-day seminar) Dr. Peter Dernoeden, University of Maryland Mr. Steve McDonald, Turfgrass Disease Solutions, LLC
10
MTC TURF NEWS
12:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. TRADE SHOW / Grand Ballroom Lunch provided on the Trade Show floor FREE of charge for all registered attendees from 11:45 a.m. to 1:15 p.m.
Wednesday Afternoon, January 12 LAWN & TURF MANAGEMENT / Hoff Theatre 1:00 p.m. Seeding into Existing Turf: New Machinery, Varieties and Techniques Dr. Doug Brede, Jacklin Seed by Simplot 1:45 p.m. Facts and Fiction: Lawn Fertilization & the Chesapeake Bay Dr. Tom Turner, University of Maryland 2:30 p.m. Testing Water Sources for Pesticide Application Efficacy — Why and How Dr. Dara Park, Clemson University 3:15 p.m. Managing Turf Diseases without Fungicides Dr. John Kaminski, Penn State University
ATHLETIC FIELD SESSION / Benjamin Banneker Room 1:00 p.m. Interpretation of Irrigation Water Test Reports Dr. Dara Park, Clemson University
1:45 p.m. Recognizing & Managing Diseases of Athletic Field Turf Dr. John Kaminski, Penn State University 2:30 p.m. Minimizing Pests & Maximizing Performance with Aggressive Turf Varieties Dr. Doug Brede, Jacklin Seed by Simplot 3:15 p.m. Weed Control for the Establishment and Management of Seeded Bermudagrasses Dr. Shawn Askew, Virginia Tech
GOLF COURSE SESSION / Colony Ballroom 1:00 p.m. Creeping Bentgrass Management for the Transition Zone (seminar continued from morning session) Dr. Peter Dernoeden, University of Maryland Mr. Steve McDonald, Turfgrass Disease Solutions, LLC
4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. SOCIAL Held on Trade Show Floor (Grand Ballroom) FREE of charge for all registered attendees.
Thursday Morning, January 13 Pesticide Re-Certification Day For Maryland, Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and District of Columbia applicators. Attendance is required at both morning and afternoon sessions to qualify.
Registration opens at 7:00 a.m., outside Grand Ballroom. Trade Show open 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Grand Ballroom.
LAWN & TURF MANAGEMENT / Hoff Theater 8:30 a.m. Maximizing Pesticide Efficacy and Minimizing Failures Dr. Mike Agnew, Syngenta Crop Protection 9:15 a.m. Sedge, Kyllinga and Japanese Stilt Grass Control in Lawns Dr. Shawn Askew, Virginia Tech 10:00 a.m. Understanding the Numbers of the Chesapeake Bay Dr. Gary Felton, University of Maryland
ORNAMENTAL MANAGEMENT / Benjamin Banneker Room 8:30 a.m. Ornamental Plant Diseases: The Year in Review and a Look at 2011 Dr. Karen Rane, University of Maryland 9:15 a.m. Ornamental Pests: Control through Management and Biologicals Mr. Chuck Schuster, University of Maryland Extension, Montgomery County 10:00 a.m. Thousand Canker Disease, Stink Bugs and Other Problems Mr. Stanton Gill, University of Maryland
10:45 a.m. Tree Damage: Diagnosing Its Causes and Taking Corrective Action Tim Zastrow, Bartlett Tree Experts
SOD PRODUCTION / Juan Ramon Jimenez Room 8:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. This session, sponsored by the Maryland Turfgrass Association, will present information on growing environmentally friendly sod and its marketing. 11:30 a.m. – 1:15 p.m. LUNCH Provided on the Trade Show floor FREE of charge for all registered attendees.
Continued on page 12 >>
10:45 a.m. The Art & Science of Crabgrass Control in a Difficult Year Dr. Peter Dernoeden, University of Maryland
GOLF COURSE SESSION / Colony Ballroom 8:30 a.m. A Stressful Year in Review Mr. Stanley Zontek, USGA Mid Atlantic Region 9:15 a.m. Management of Brown Ring Patch Dr. Frank Wong, University of California Riverside 10:00 a.m. Causes and Alleviation of Soil Water Repellency in Sand Based Greens and Fairways Dr. Dara Park, Clemson University 10:45 a.m. Exciting Experimental Options for Annual Bluegrass Control on Putting Greens & Other Turf Dr. Shawn Askew, Virginia Tech
WINTER 2011
11
UPCOMING EVENT • continued
Thursday Afternoon, January 13 Pesticide Re-Certification Session Colony Ballroom 1:00 p.m. Maryland Turfgrass Council Annual Meeting 1:15 p.m. Selection of Fungicides for the Management of Turf Diseases Dr. Frank Wong, Univ. of California Riverside
1:50 p.m. Suburban Subsoiling: Sustainable Landscaping for the Chesapeake Bay Dr. Stu Schwartz, Center for Urban Environmental Research, University of Maryland Baltimore County 2:30 p.m. Understanding the EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Initiative Mr. Kevin Morris, National Turfgrass Evaluation Program
3:10 p.m. Educating Environmental Decision-Makers: If You Tell Them, They Will Listen” Mr. Dean Graves, Chevy Chase Club 3:50 p.m. Maryland Pesticide Regulations Update Mr. Dennis Howard, Maryland Dept. of Agriculture
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
HOW TO BENEFIT FROM
CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE By Robert C. Harris, CAE
eminars and conferences are great opportunities for learning and networking. They offer information that is timely, while allowing you the opportunity to evaluate that information in terms of how it applies to you. Here are some guidelines to maximize the benefits of attending a seminar. Take these thoughts with you so you can walk away satisfied with your investment of time and money. • Since your objective is to learn and make yourself better, search for “ideagems.” Try to walk away with at least two new things you can use right away. If you do this, you can consider your attendance worthwhile. • As you listen, try to apply the speaker’s concepts and information to your personality, style and career. Find the “ah-ha’s,” and convert them to your needs. Think, “How will this work in my environment?” Try to apply the principle in your mind as soon as you hear it. • Recognize that all information won’t apply all the time. So what? Pick out what will work, and concentrate on that. Relax, listen and think at the seminar. • Lower your sensitivity meter — or better yet, turn it off. You’re here to get information, not to be offended by a remark or word. Don’t expect everything to be politically correct. • Don’t cut off the presenter’s thought too soon, even if you’ve already heard the information from somewhere else. Just listen with the intent to thoroughly understand and to reinforce what you may already know. • When you hear a familiar fact, don’t tell yourself, “I already know that.” Instead, ask yourself, “How good am I at that?” Self-evaluating is the only way to get better. • Write down questions as they occur to you, and ask them at the first appropriate moment. Question to learn, not to show-off in front of colleagues. • Take good notes. Too often, great ideas are forgotten in the great mass of information presented and are lost before they have a chance to be
S
12
MTC TURF NEWS
implemented. The ideas then fall victim to the busy work that awaits you after the event. • Write notes as if they will be read at your next staff meeting. Plan to share the “idea-gems” you learn with at least one other person at your organization. • Sit next to someone you don’t know. Stay away from the people you came with. Make new friends. Look for a potential mentor, customer or contact. At the breaks, make a point of meeting at least one new person. • Focus yourself. Many people are jealous or envious of the presenter and may try to distract you with their comments. Don’t worry about anyone else-just concentrate on becoming the best you can be for yourself. •
Robert C. Harris, CAE, is chairman of Harris Management Group and the Non Profit Resource Center based in Tallahassee, Florida, USA. Telephone 850/222-6000.
NEWS FROM MTC
WELCOME TO OUR NEW MTC TURF NEWS PUBLISHER, Leading Edge Communications ith this issue of MTC Turf News, we welcome our new publishing company, Leading Edge Communications. Based in Franklin, Tennessee, Leading Edge also publishes the Virginia Turfgrass Journal for the Virginia Turfgrass Council, OTF Turf News for the Ohio Turfgrass Foundation, Florida Turf Digest for the Florida Turfgrass Association, Tennessee Turfgrass for the Tennessee Turfgrass Association, North Carolina Turfgrass for the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina and Alabama Turf Times for the Alabama Turfgrass Association, as well as several more magazines for other trade organizations, including two nursery and landscape associations. In addition to custom publishing, Leading Edge Communications is a full-service marketing and advertising agency with many years of experience in the turfgrass and landscaping industries. Eddie Coutras is the owner and president of Leading Edge, and he will be happy to talk to any of our members who would like a fresh approach to their marketing programs. You may call Eddie at (615) 790-3718 or send him an email at ecoutras@leadingedge communications.com. We hope you will be generous with your advertising support, which will help cover the costs of the many upgrades Leading Edge is making to our magazine. For more information about advertising, you may call Leading Edge directly at (615) 790-3718. Both Eddie and Liz Nutter, managing editor with Leading Edge, will be attending our conference in January, so be sure to watch for them and introduce yourself. Welcome to our turf family, Leading Edge Communications, and thanks for an exciting new start for MTC Turf News! •
W
MTC Membership Application __________________________________________________________________ Name __________________________________________________________________ Title __________________________________________________________________ Address __________________________________________________________________ City, State, Zip Code __________________________________________________________________ E-Mail Address __________________________________________________________________ Company Affiliation __________________________________________________________________ Company Address __________________________________________________________________ Company City, State, Zip Code __________________________________________________________________ Business Phone __________________________________________________________________ Business Fax __________________________________________________________________ Cell Phone Member of: [ ] ESGCS [ ] MTA
[ ] MAGCS [ ] PGMS
[ ] MSA [ ] MSTA [ ] OTHER ________________________
I wish to also apply for membership for the following professional members of my crew, utilizing the company address listed above: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Please list additional names on a separate sheet & attach to this form or feel free to copy this form if you desire individuals to utilize their home addresses. ENCLOSED ARE: _______ MTC Membership Dues $15.00 per person $ __________________ _______ Donation to Turfgrass Survey $ ______________________________ _______ Donation to Turfgrass Endowment Fund $ ____________________ (tax deductible) Total Enclosed $ ___________________________________________________ Please make checks payable to: MTC or MARYLAND TURFGRASS COUNCIL
Thank You! WINTER 2011
13
TURF TALK
WITH ALTERNATIVE PRODUCTS ON A CREEPING BENTGRASS PUTTING GREEN By P. H. Dernoeden and C. P Ryan, Dept. Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland riven by environmental concerns and the high costs of conventional fungicides, golf course superintendents are looking for alternative products to combat turf diseases. This study evaluated such products for their ability to control dollar spot (Sclerotinia homoeocarpa) in creeping bentgrass (Agrositis stolonifera). In recent years, studies have reported very good dollar spot control with Civitas, a mineral-oil product developed by Petro-Canada. Since Civitas can yellow turf, however, it is mixed with a green colorant called Harmonizer to mask any potential discoloration. In our study, Civitas and Harmonizer were applied separately, as well as in a tank-mix combination as recommended by the manufacturer. In addition, Civitas and Harmonizer were tank-mixed with Curalan (vinclozolin) to determine any potential benefits of using this combination. The following products were also evaluated in this study: • DewCure, a wetting agent (marketed by Mitchell Products) reported to suppress dollar spot severity • Phosphite 30 (56% mono and di-potassium salts of phosphorus acid, marketed by Plant Food Co., Inc.), a fungicide that targets Pythium blight • Lesco’s 12-0-0 Plus Micronutrients product, commonly
D
Photos, top-to-bottom: Photo 1 – Dollar spot in creeping bentgrass. Photo 2 – Dollar spot infection center in creeping bentgrass. Photo 3 – Our research study area for alternative products for dollar spot control. Photo 4 – Top left: Curalan. Top right: Civitas. Bottom left: Harmonizer alone. Bottom right: Civitas + Harmonizer.
14
MTC TURF NEWS
used on golf courses in the MidAtlantic region, but has not been assessed for its potential to reduce dollar spot severity • Fore Rainshield (i.e., mancozeb, Dow AgroSciences), one of a few contact fungicides available for use on turf Among contact fungicides, only chlorothaonil (i.e., Daconil) is used extensively to target dollar spot, especially in resistance-management programs. The level of dollar spot control that can be achieved with Fore Rainshield has not been assessed in Maryland, but an assessment is warranted, given the need for more contact fungicides for use in S. homoeocarpa resistance-management programs. If Fore Rainshield can provide significant levels of dollar spot suppression, it may be useful as a potential replacement, or occasional substitute for, chlorothalonil in tank-mixes to sites with known resistance or reduced sensitivity issues. The same argument can be made for Civitas, DewCure, Lesco 12-0-0 and Phosphite 30, if they have good activity on S. homoeocarpa.
Research methods and materials This study was conducted at the University of Maryland Paint Branch Turfgrass Research Facility. Treatments were applied with a CO2 pressurized (35 psi) sprayer equipped with
an 8004E flat fan nozzle and calibrated to deliver 1.1 gallon of water per 1,000 ft2 (50 GPA). The turf was a mature stand of ‘Providence’ creeping bentgrass grown on a sand-based rootzone and maintained as a putting green. The turf was mowed 5 times weekly to a height of 0.150" using a triplex mower, and it received 2.0 lb. N/1,000 ft2 in autumn 2009 and 1.0 lb. N/ 1,000 ft2 in spring 2010. Except as noted below, no N was applied to the site during the study period. Dollar spot, which developed naturally and uniformly, was rated on a visual linear scale of 0% to 100%, where 0 = entire plot area was disease-free, and 100 = entire plot area was blighted. Treatments with rating exceeding 0.5% (i.e., one half of one percent of the plot area was blighted) plot area blighted by S. homoeocarpa were subjectively considered to be unacceptable or had reached the threshold for re-treatment.
Overall turfgrass quality was visually assessed on a 0 to 10 scale, where 0 = entire plot area was brown or dead; 8.0 = acceptable quality for a green; and 10 = optimum green color, uniformity and no disease. All treatments were initially applied on May 26, 2010, when trace amounts of dollar spot were evident. Due to a severe outbreak of dollar spot within 1 to 2 days of initiating the study, we decided to treat the entire study area on June 7 with Daconil Ultrex (3.2 oz./1,000 ft2) and urea (0.2 lb. N/1,000 ft2) to stop the epidemic and stimulate turf recovery. While trace amounts of dollar spot remained evident, the disease was stopped, and there was little or no new active dollar spot from June 15 to June 21. All treatments were reapplied on June 8, June 22, July 6 and July 19. Dollar spot generally was inactive from June 7 to June 22. New disease was evident on June 28 and inten-
sified to a moderately severe level in late June and then was severe by early August 2010.
Research results Dollar spot control As noted above, an early dollar spot outbreak at the time fungicides were applied initially on May 26 had to be stopped to ensure that our study’s treatments were applied preventively. Some of the early dollar spot damage did not recover in all plots, despite an application of N on June 7. Plots treated with the conventional S. homoeocarpa fungicides (i.e., Concert and Curalan) were disease-free on nearly all rating dates (Table 1). Due to little or no dollar spot activity between June 7 and June 21, there were no important dollar spot blight differences among the treatments. When new dollar spot injury was noted on June 28, it became evident
Table 1. Percent of plot area blighted by S. homoeocarpa in a Providence creeping bentgrass putting green treated with alternative products, 2010. % area blighted by S. homoeocarpa
Rate Treatment+
(oz./ 1,000 ft2)
June 15
June 21
June 28
July 6
July 12
July 19
July 26
Aug. 2
Aug. 12
Aug. 19
Concert 4.3SC
4.5
0.0e++
0.0c
0.0d
0.0d
0.0c
0.0d
0.0c
0.0e
0.0e
0.2c
Civitas
16.0
0.2cd
0.6ab
0.4bcd
0.3cd
0.7c
1.9d
1.8c
1.8de
10.5c
29.5bc
Harmonizer
1.0
0.4ab
0.4abc
0.8ab
2.5ab
3.8bc
10.0c
9.3b
19.0c
28.8b
33.8b
Civitas + Harmonizer
16.0+1.0
0.1de
0.4abc
0.1cd
0.2d
0.1c
1.3d
0.5c
0.9de
3.6cd
17.3d
Civitas + Harmonizer + Curalan
16.0+1.0 +1.0
0.0e
0.0c
0.0d
0.0d
0.0c
0.0d
0.0c
0.0e
0.1e
1.8e
Curalan 50EG
1.0
0.0e
0.0c
0.0d
0.0d
0.0c
0.0d
0.0c
0.0e
0.1e
2.6e
DewCure
1.5% vv
0.1de
0.2bc
0.1cd
0.3d
0.4c
2.1d
0.9c
1.8de
8.3cd
21.8cd
Phosphite 30 (0-30-20)
3.0
0.5a
0.4abc
0.6abc
2.3ab
6.0bc
10.5bc
10.3b
19.3c
33.8ab
52.5a
Fore Rainshield 80WP
6.0
0.05e
0.1bc
0.1cd
0.1d
0.3c
3.1d
0.9c
3.6d
12.5c
22.0cd
Lesco’s 12-0-0 + Fe
6.0
0.1de
0.9a
1.0a
4.3a
15.5a
18.5a
12.8b
28.3a
35.5a
46.5a
Untreated
—
0.3bc
0.4abc
1.2a
3.2ab
9.5ab
14.8ab
17.3a
23.8b
37.8a
47.5a
+Treatments were applied June 8, June 22, July 6 and July 19. ++Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Fisher’s LSD, P ≤ 0.05%.
WINTER 2011
15
that little or no control would be provided by Harmonizer alone, Phosphite 30 or Lescoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 12-0-0 Plus Micronutrients. During the period between July 6 and July 19, all treatments containing Civitas, DewCure and Fore Rainshield provided a level of dollar spot reduction statistically equivalent to the standard fungicide treatments (Concert and Curalan). All treatments were last applied on July 19, and the level of dollar spot fell in plots treated with Civitas + Harmonizer, DewCure and Fore Rainshield a week later on July 26. By August 2 (two weeks after the final product applications on July 19), dollar spot pressure rose to a severe level on the untreated control plot. At this time, plots treated with Civitas, Civitas + Harmonizer, Fore Rainshield and DewCure had levels of dollar spot control (86% to 90% control) statistically equivalent to the standard fungicides (100% control). From August 9 to August 19, dollar spot intensified to a very severe level. Only Concert and Curalan had provided a level of dollar spot control within the threshold (i.e., < 0.5% blighting) between July 12 and August 12 (i.e., 24 days after the last treatments). As late as August 19, Concert-treated plots remained almost dollar spot-free. Curalan continued to provide over 95% dollar spot control at the end of the study. Dollar spot was reduced significantly (54% to 65% control) in plots treated with DewCure, Fore Rainshield and Civitas + Harmonizer on the final rating date (i.e., 31 days after these materials were last applied), when compared to the control. There was no statistical benefit achieved by tank-mixing Curalan with Civitas + Harmonizer other than the Curalan ensured complete dollar spot control on all dates except August 19.
Brown patch control Following thunderstorms in July, brown patch (Rhizoctonia solani) became active in the study area and was evaluated visually using the pre-
16
MTC TURF NEWS
continued • TURF TALK
Table 2. Percent of plot area blighted by R. solani in a Providence creeping bentgrass putting green treated with alternative products, 2010. % area blighted by R. solani
Rate Treatment+
(oz./1,000 ft2)
July 12
July 16
July 19
July 26
Concert 4.3SC
4.5
0.0 b++
0.0 b
0.0 b
0.0 b
Civitas
16.0
0.6 b
4.5 ab
4.8 a
8.5 ab
Harmonizer
1.0
1.4 b
6.3 ab
7.6 a
7.8 ab
Civitas + Harmonizer
16.0 + 1.0
0.0 b
0.3 b
0.5 a
0.0 b
Civitas + Harmonizer + Curalan
16.0 + 1.0 + 1.0
0.0 b
1.5 ab
2.0 a
0.0 b
Curalan 50EG
1.0
0.0 b
1.0 ab
2.3 a
0.5 a
DewCure
1.5% vv
10.3 a
16.0 a
18.0 a
21.8 a
Phosphite 30 (0-30-20)
3.0
0.0 b
4.5 ab
10.5 a
7.8 ab
Fore Rainshield 80WP
6.0
0.0 b
1.0 ab
4.3 a
0.3 b
Lesco’s 12-0-0 + Fe
6.0
3.4 b
9.8 ab
10.8 a
14.3 ab
Untreated
—
3.1 b
5.8 ab
10.5 a
9.0 ab
+Treatments were applied June 8, June 22, July 6 and July 19. ++Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Fisher’s LSD, P ≤ 0.05%. Table 3. Turf color in a Providence creeping bentgrass putting green treated with alternative products, 2010. Rate
Turf color
Treatment+
(oz./1,000 ft2)
June 7
June 15
June 21
June 28
July 6
July 12
July 19
Aug. 2
Concert 4.3SC
4.5
7.3cd
7.4cde
7.1c
7.6cd
7.5def
7.7c
7.6bcd
6.9c
Civitas
16.0
6.9de
6.5f
7.1c
6.8e
6.4g
5.9f
6.8e
5.3f
Harmonizer
1.0
8.1ab
8.5b
8.0ab
8.6ab
8.4bc
8.6b
7.8bc
8.3ab
Civitas + Harmonizer
16.0 + 1.0
8.5ab
9.3a
8.1ab
9.3a
9.0ab
9.1a
8.2ab
8.8a
Civitas + Harmonizer + Curalan
16.0 + 1.0 + 1.0
8.8a
9.3a
8.7a
9.1a
9.1a
9.1a
9.0a
8.9a
Curalan 50EG
1.0
6.3e
7.6cd
7.5bc
7.7cd
7.2ef
7.6c
7.7bc
6.7cd
DewCure
1.5% vv
6.6de
6.8ef
6.9c
6.9e
6.1g
7.3de
6.9de
5.6ef
Phosphite 30 (0-30-20)
3.0
6.5e
7.0def
7.1c
7.2de
7.0f
7.1c
7.4cde
6.0def
Fore Rainshield 80WP
6.0
7.9bc
8.0bc
7.5bc
8.0c
7.7de
8.4b
7.8bc
7.8b
Lesco’s 12-0-0 + Fe
6.0
8.1ab
8.5b
8.1ab
8.1bc
8.0cd
8.6b
8.0bc
8.1ab
Untreated
—
6.6de
7.5cd
7.5bc
7.6cd
7.0f
7.6cd
7.5b-e
6.5cde
+Treatments were applied June 8, June 22, July 6 and July 19. ++Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Fisher’s LSD, P ≤ 0.05%.
viously described 0% to 100% rating scale. Due to great variability in blight ratings among treatments, no significant differences between treatments and the untreated control were observed (Table 2). Subjectively, however, data collected from July 16 to July 26 suggested that DewCure
had intensified brown patch, whereas no control was provided by Civitas or Harmonizer alone. Conversely, little or no brown patch was evident in plots treated with Civitas + Harmonizer, suggesting that the combination had provided control of the disease.
Turf color Harmonizer was found to provide a long-lasting and pleasing green “paint effect.” Plots treated with Harmonizer alone and Civitas + Harmonizer provided good (i.e., > 8.0) to excellent (i.e., > 9.0) turf color on all rating dates (Table 3). Fore Rainshield-
WINTER 2011
17
TURF TALK • continued
Table 4. Turf quality in a Providence creeping bentgrass putting green treated with alternative products, 2010. Rate
Overall quality
Treatment+
(oz./1,000 ft2)
June 7
June 15
July 26
Aug. 2
Concert 4.3SC
4.5
7.6b
7.8cd
7.5a
7.9ab
Civitas
16.0
6.5de
7.1de
5.3cd
5.8cde
Harmonizer
1.0
6.1e
7.9cd
5.7bc
5.4cde
Civitas + Harmonizer
16.0 + 1.0
7.3bc
9.0ab
8.0a
6.0cd
Civitas + Harmonizer + Curalan
16.0 + 1.0 + 1.0
8.6a
9.4a
8.3a
8.5a
Curalan 50EG
1.0
7.1bcd
8.1c
6.3b
7.1b
DewCure
1.5% vv
6.6cde
7.3de
5.0cd
5.8cde
Phosphite 30 (0-30-20)
3.0
5.9e
7.3de
5.0cd
5.0e
Fore Rainshield 80WP
6.0
7.0bcd
8.1c
6.3b
6.1c
Lesco’s 12-0-0 + Fe
6.0
6.0e
8.3bc
5.5bcd
5.1e
Untreated
—
6.2e
6.7e
4.8d
5.3de
+Treatments were applied June 8, June 22, July 6 and July 19. ++Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to Fisher’s LSD, P ≤ 0.05%.
treated plots had numerically higher color ratings (7.5 to 8.4) versus the control (6.5 to 7.6) on all dates, and significantly improved color on June 7, July 6, July 12 and August 2. Lesco’s 12-0-0 Plus Micronutrients improved color significantly (> 8.0), compared to the control on all dates. Civitas alone and DewCure elicited yellowing, which reduced turf color compared to the control on 5 and 3 out of 8 rating dates, respectively. Plots treated with Concert, Curalan and Phosphite 30 (except June 15) had color ratings equivalent to the control on all dates.
Treatments providing high levels of dollar spot control, however, did provide for improved quality. Only Civitas + Harmonizer + Curlan provided good to excellent quality on all dates (Table 4). On June 26 and August 2, when dollar spot pressure was moderate to severe, plots treated with Concert had improved quality, when compared to all other treatments except Civitas + Harmonizer + Curalan. Also, on the final rating date, Civitas + Harmonizer, Curalan alone and Fore Rainshield had improved quality compared to the control, but the level of quality was poor to fair (6.0 to 7.0).
Turf quality Turf-quality ratings take into consideration turf density and the presence or absence of disease, as well as turf color. Dollar spot impacted turf-quality ratings more than brown patch, since the latter disease was not severe enough to cause any turf thinning. Civitas alone, Harmonizer alone, DewCure, Phosphite and Lesco’s 121-0-0 Plus Micronutrients generally did not improve turf quality, when compared to the control.
18
MTC TURF NEWS
Conclusions The level of dollar spot control provided by Civitas alone, Civitas + Harmonizer, DewCure and Fore Rainshield was impressive. On most rating dates, dollar spot levels were below the threshold in plots treated with those products. However, there always was some dollar spot (trace levels in June) even in those plots. Current standards for most golf course greens is a threshold of less than that established here and, in reality, is zero
or near zero disease for most golf course superintendents. Furthermore, the yellowing sometimes observed in plots treated with DewCure and Civitas alone was objectionable. Tankmixing Harmonizer with Civitas, however, effectively masked the yellowing. The fact that some injury to putting-green-height creeping bentgrass occurs with DewCure and Civitas alone may be a concern for some golf course superintendents. Civitas + Harmonizer, DewCure and Fore Rainshield may not always serve as stand-alone products for managing dollar spot. These alternatives may best be used in a program that alternates Civitas + Harmonizer, DewCure or Fore Rainshield with standard fungicide(s) that target dollar spot. An alternation approach would ensure dollar spot-free turf and, at the same time, reduce fungicide inputs. It also may be better to use Civitas + Harmonizer and DewCure for early summer or autumn dollar spot outbreaks when high temperature stress is less likely. Finally, the aforementioned products may be useful in S. homoeocarpa resistancemanagement programs. •
continued â&#x20AC;¢ SECTION NAME
WINTER 2011
19
TURF TIPS
By Vernon W. Cooper, Agronomist, All States Turfgrass Consultants, LLC this day of uncertain economy, we must always watch for “deals” anywhere we can save a few dollars. When a project is already over budget, a real deal on the price of grass seed is a great find. BUT, is it really a deal or, instead, a catastrophe waiting to happen? When compared to all the costs of installing a lawn, an athletic field or even a golf course, seed is already the cheapest component. Compare seed cost to grading, irrigation, transportation, salaries, fertilizer and pesticides, and seed is almost always the least expense on that side of your ledger. So, when we get an offer for saving a few cents per pound by taking seed shipments direct from out of state, or when offers are made to save you money by buying a seed variety in plain bags, or when a salesman tells you that certification is just an added expense, are you really getting a deal? Remember, tags and labels can be printed by anyone with a computer and printer. Several things can go wrong with bargains! If the seed is a poor-quality variety or full of weed seeds, the best you can hope for is that the seed is dead and the germination is 0.00%. In this way, all you have lost is the time and expense of installation, starter fertilizer and, of course, the seed, plus the possibility of missing the planting season. If you aren’t so lucky to have just a germination problem, you get a seed lot that is contaminated!! You could get tall fescue with a little bentgrass, or Kentucky bluegrass with a touch of tall fescue or, heaven forbid, you get a real treat like Johnsongrass or quackgrass in your seed. Now, you have contaminants that you basically must kill with perhaps several applications of non-selective herbicides, plus all the other expenses being repeated above. So, your deal was not such a bargain, and now it has cost you considerably more than the few cents you originally saved on your cheap seed. Perhaps one of the worse things that is lost, though, is your good name and reputation as a turfgrass professional. Fortunately we have the good fortune to be working in one of the finest states in the U.S. for being able to buy quality seed, thanks to the dedication and expertise of the analysts, inspectors and agronomists of the Maryland Department of Agriculture — Turf & Seed Section. Since before many of us were born, the dedicated Turf & Seed Inspectors have been traveling all over Maryland, reviewing seed labeling and sampling different lots of grass seed
In
Above: Having your chosen seed tested can help you avoid costly and reputation-damaging mistakes.
20
MTC TURF NEWS
being offered for sale, both retail and wholesale. These samples are taken to the Maryland Seed Lab in Annapolis where the samples are prepared and tested to ensure that you are buying exactly what is represented on the seed tag. This first involves analysts examining each seed in the sample under magnification and separating their findings into the Pure Seed of the kind and variety desired, Other Crop Seed, Inert Matter and Weed Seeds, which may also include Noxious Weed Seeds or Undesirable Weed Seeds that cannot easily be controlled. Each of these groups is then identified, weighed and counted before the Pure Seed is then sent on for germination testing. The Maryland Seed Lab is one of the few labs that will identify all contaminants in a service sample. Other labs just report the percentage, and you cannot tell if that Other Crop Seed or Weeds Seed is insignificant or a real potential problem. The germination analyst then plants 400 seeds onto special pH-balanced media, which is placed into germinators that replicate the daylight and night cycles required for grass seed to germinate. After specified periods of time (defined in the standard rules for testing), the seeds on the media are
removed, and the analyst examines each of the seedlings for (1) normal seedlings with a good root and crown, (2) abnormal seedlings that are stunted or missing growing parts and usually never make it out of the soil and (3) dead seed. From this, the percentage of germination is calculated. All this information is checked against the labeled claims on the seed container, and determinations are made as to whether the seed can legally be sold as-is, or if it must be relabeled, or if the seed must be removed from sale and either sent out of state or destroyed.
How can you be certain that you are buying seed that has been tested? One method would be to purchase a Maryland Interagency Certified Blend or Mixture. Maryland’s sod industry has utilized this service for many years, resulting in some of the cleanest, mostviable seed in the sod industry. This process goes the next step after having the seed tested. Once you order seed from a Maryland seed company, a request to mix the varieties you have requested is sent to MDA-T&S. They review all tests of the lots of seed that the warehouse proposes using. Once MDA has approved the lots as meeting the required specification, a mixing date is scheduled. On the scheduled date, an MDAT&S inspector goes to the warehouse you have chosen. He or she opens and inspects all mixing and bagging equipment to verify that all equipment is empty and clean. The portions of the individual components to be used are then verified and sampled again before mixing. The seed is placed in the mixing equipment for a specified blending time and finally bagged in new clean bags with a blue Maryland Interagency Certification tag sewn right into the closing stitch of each seed container. The seed mixture or blend is then sampled again before it is ready for delivery to you.
The few cents per bag that the Certification requires is the cheapest insurance you can purchase. If anything should happen where problems arise due to contamination or germination, you now have official samples taken by the state to verify that the seed you used was not the issue. However, if you feel you don’t need (or can’t wait for) the certification process, you should — at the very least — request to see a copy of the Maryland Seed Test for your seed. If this is not available, your seed may still be OK, but to be sure to either contact the Maryland Seed Lab directly, or have your seed supplier contact the lab to have your seed sampled and tested. The cost is minimal, and you know what you are using. Remember to insist on a Maryland Seed Lab test, as the Noxious Weed/Undesirable
Grass Seeds lists can be different in different states. Johnsongrass is a major problem here, but in the Southwest, it is a primary forage. If you waited to the last minute to think about your seed and don’t have time to wait, stop a minute and have the seed sampled and the purity portion of the test completed before you use it. If the test later shows that the germination was bad, you have not caused any major damage, and you can then quickly re-seed with another lot. Remember, good seed is the best deal you can get. It may mean the difference of additional work or bankruptcy. The Maryland Department of Agriculture — Turf & Seed Section is here to help you. Utilize this resource, and start by contacting them at 410-841-5960. •
Germinating seedlings of perennial ryegrass and hard fescue.
WINTER 2011
21
APPLIED RESEARCH
with Proper Application to Strengthen Turfgrass Health By Wayne Ducote, Senior Sales Specialist, BASF Professional Turf & Ornamentals
or golf course superintendents, the battle against fungal diseases that attack and destroy turfgrass is never-ending. While today’s science has produced many fungicides designed to prevent and cure outbreaks of the most-damaging turf diseases, superintendents need to both properly choose the correct fungicide for a particular pathogen and then properly apply that fungicide. Superintendents with the healthiest, disease-free turfgrass are those who have developed a comprehensive strategy to protect their turf, including cultural controls, proper fertility and a fungicide application and rotation program to prevent disease resistance. Such a strategy increases the chances for successfully keeping disease outbreaks at bay and decreases the likelihood of future flare-ups.
F
Understand the challenges More than 20 known fungal diseases attack turf, degrading its density, color and overall health. Some of the most common — and toughest to control — turfgrass diseases include:
22
MTC TURF NEWS
• dollar spot • brown patch • Pythium blight • snow mold • gray leaf spot • anthracnose • take-all patch • summer patch Cultural controls and proper fungicide use are vital for helping maintain turf health and reducing plant stress. This well-rounded approach is critical for managing golf course turf, especially on greens. Greens are the areas most closely scrutinized and most susceptible to damage, primarily due to the diseasecausing challenges placed upon the turf by regular, short mowing heights (1/8" or less), heavy traffic and the low disease resistance of grass species adapted to the environment. Given these disease-favoring conditions, golf course superintendents who take the time to understand the conditions that lead to turf ailments and disease mode of action will have a greater chance at successfully preventing disease. With knowledge in hand, superintendents
can be better prepared to make superior choices when it comes to managing cultural controls, determining fungicide selection and calculating proper application timing and techniques.
Create a turfmanagement plan Any good turf-management plan for combating fungal diseases should include strategies that mix both chemical and cultural controls to help balance the effect on people, the environment and the turf. When developing a program, superintendents should consider their plan as a “work in progress,” using several different, varying methods to promote longterm health. Key strategies to consider include the following.
Develop a base of knowledge. Through building reference resources, superintendents will have a better understanding of key grasses, the pests that attack them and conditions that favor disease development. Common sources of knowledge might include fellow superintendents and university
researchers, professors and Extension specialists, as well product distributors and manufacturers, all of whom can provide a wealth of knowledge and background to help develop a successful strategy. Additionally, many university Extension offices, distributors and manufacturers have developed websites that house their many published research reports, informational articles, application guides and product labels.
Develop a plan. Create a written plan outlining key tasks, overall plan purpose and the seasonal timing for both chemical and cultural controls. Having a written plan can help superintendents and staff to identify priorities and concerns at distinct times, helping keep management efforts on track.
Rely on cultural practices. With rising disease resistance, ecological concerns and the need to manage time and money more effectively, the benefits from cultural practices to
develop healthy turf should always be considered as a key part of an overall disease program. While cultural practices are not a quick fix, the longterm benefits of proper cultural turf care can help keep devastating outbreaks at bay.
Regularly scout your turf. During daily course drives, pay particular attention to trouble areas, and monitor the environmental conditions that can lead to disease, so that disease onset can be predicted and managed before reaching an epidemic stage. Maintaining a course map or diagram annotated with problem-prone areas can help provide a visual reminder of symptoms and areas to monitor.
Maintain a log. Keeping a record of turf conditions, weather, course activity, disease occurrence, the actions taken and the results of those actions can assist in building a plan and furthering success in disease prevention.
Do your own research. Select locations on the golf course where you can make product comparisons and create your own test plots. Evaluate cultural practices such as removing dew before spraying versus not removing dew. Test other factors that may impact product performance.
Choosing the correct products and preventing resistance Choosing a fungicide that is effective against the fungus causing the disease in your turf is a critical first step, as products are not equally effective against all fungi. Knowing the benefits and effects of a diverse range of fungicide products is important, because relying on a single product or type of fungicide can spur the development of areas that resist fungicides, which is an increasingly common trait amongst fungal diseases. To maintain effectiveness, consider rotating fungicide products as part of an overall disease-control program.
WINTER 2011
23
APPLIED RESEARCH • continued
Additionally, it is very important to maintain a log of the effectiveness of fungicides for your particular turf against prevalent turf diseases in your region. Fungicides are characterized as contacts, local penetrants or systemics in the way they move about in the turfgrass. All three types have their advantages and disadvantages, and a balance of all three is needed for a comprehensive disease control program.
Brown Patch
Contact fungicides In order to protect turf, contact fungicides must cover the plant surfaces before fungi attack. If the target fungi attack the leaves, it is easy to apply a contact fungicide to the leaves; but as the leaves grow, new leaf tissue is exposed and unprotected. In order to maintain protection, frequent application is necessary. In the spring, this could be as often as every week. If the fungi attack the crown, rhizomes, stolons or roots, similar challenges are encountered, but they are further complicated by the fact that the soil and organic matter surrounding the plant will filter and bind many chemicals to their surfaces.
Local penetrant fungicides Local penetrants move into the plant, but they have limited movement once inside the plant. However, they are effective at providing protection to areas of the turf that are not sprayed.
Systemic fungicides Once applied to the turf, systemic fungicides are able to “move” within the plant. Because the application, delivery and incorporation of fungicides play a major part in ensuring proper coverage and protection, systemic fungicides have the added advantage of making themselves present throughout the plant.
Proper application is key Many times, the efficacy of a fungicide has more to do with the timing of its application than any other factor. As a general rule, preventive applications
24
MTC TURF NEWS
Summer Patch
of fungicides generally have the greatest success against turf loss. This rule is especially true for root and crown diseases such as brown patch and Pythium, where disease is not easily seen until foliage is affected by damage caused at the plant’s lower extremities. Preventive fungicide applications in the fall and spring can help reduce the amount of pathogens before the arrival of conditions favorable to the onset of such maladies. At the same time, seasonal applications of fungicide can help give the turf time to grow and become stronger. Applying fungicide before infection occurs is key because once a turf area is infected, it becomes stressed, meaning that some degree of loss will almost certainly occur, regardless of how quickly superintendents react to the outbreak. In addition to treating turf at the appropriate times, applying fungicide in correct quantities at the appropriate target location is also critical to success. Flat-fan nozzles spaced on 20" centers and placement of spray booms at 16" aboveground height have been
shown to help provide excellent coverage and overlap. The most common problem related to poor application is caused by improper spraynozzle selection. Selecting the proper nozzle type — which controls spray droplet size — is an important management decision, because the size of a spray droplet can have a direct influence on the efficacy of chemicals applied. As an example, if the average diameter of a droplet is reduced to half its original size, eight times as many droplets can be produced from the same flow, so a nozzle that produces small droplets can theoretically cover a greater area with a given flow. It is important to note, however, that extremely small droplets may not be able to deliver fungicides on target, because factors such as relative humidity and wind speed can affect the application accuracy of small droplets. As a general rule, flat-fan nozzles are the preferred nozzles for use when treating for foliar diseases (such as dollar spot) where the active ingredient
continued • APPLIED RESEARCH
should be concentrated at the turf canopy. When treating for diseases that attack the crowns and roots (such as summer patch, anthracnose and pythium), fungicide needs to be delivered below the turf’s foliage. While leaf wetness is less of a problem with systemic fungicides, efficacy is only possible with contact fungicides when the active ingredient comes in contact with the affected area. To help keep fungicides on target (especially contacts), applications should be made when the turf is dry, not dew-covered, and sprayer water volumes should be appropriate for the chemistry being applied. In areas where there is poor irrigation-water quality, the use of buffering agents may be necessary to correct extreme pH levels or water hardness to ensure that they do not hinder the active ingredient’s effectiveness. Before considering the addition of buffering agents, read the label and consult with your local manufacturer or dealer sales representative to understand how the current water quality and how changing that water quality will affect the product that you are applying.
Know your turf and its enemies There is no “universal program” available when it comes to preventing turf diseases and maximizing the effectiveness of fungicides. Therefore, superintendents need to consider many factors, including turfgrass species, disease type and persistence, cultural controls, fungicide spectrum of control, efficacy and length of control and environmental concerns. By understanding the challenges associated with turf diseases and how today’s modern chemistry helps support cultural control measures, superintendents will be able to best develop their individual, supporting fungicide program that considers the best products to use and the appropriate timing and application practices to ensure the greatest success in protecting turfgrass against fungal diseases. •
WINTER 2011
25
EQUIPMENT BASICS
By Dennis Shepard, Ph.D., formerly with Syngenta Professional Products
S
pray applications are often a key part of a turf-management program. Which products to apply (and when) can play an important role in how well the turf responds to an application. Over the past several years, sprayer technology has improved. Computerized systems now take the guesswork out of speed and spray-volume considerations. Chemical companies have developed products that are active at lower rates for longer periods and that are safer to the environment, with formulations that are easier to apply. Sprayer and chemical improvements, however, can be negated if the chemicals are not applied to the turf properly. Even though nozzles are a small part of the overall operation, they are the last piece of equipment that sprays must pass through before hitting the turf. Several nozzle types are available from various manufacturers, and choosing the right nozzle for various applications will improve product performance. No single nozzle will work for all applications. Different types of nozzles with various droplet sizes and volume output can be attached to the spray boom.
Nozzle basics The spray nozzle you select will determine the amount of product applied to an area, the uniformity and coverage of the target surface, and the amount of potential drift. Information about the spray output and spray angle is
26
MTC TURF NEWS
usually imprinted on the spray nozzle (Figure 1). The spray angle can range from 65º to 110º, depending on how the nozzle is manufactured. Nozzles can operate at different pressure ranges, but 30 to 60 PSI is the standard for turf applications. As pressure increases, spray droplets will be smaller, spray volume and drift potential will increase, and nozzles may wear sooner. An increase in pressure should be used only to make small increases in volume output. A doubling of pressure will not double the amount of output. In fact, the pressure must be increased 4X to double the output from a nozzle. Nozzles that apply a flat-fan pattern are the most common type for turf applications. The flat-fan spray nozzle forms a narrow, elliptical, inverted “V” pattern. Spray output is heaviest at the center of the pattern and dissipates toward the outer edge. For most flatfan spray patterns, a minimum 30% overlap between the nozzles is recommended. A decrease in pressure will decrease the overlap and coverage may decrease. In general, nozzles with 110º spray angles can be used at lower boom heights than 80º spray angles. Lower boom heights reduce drift and increase coverage.
Droplet size Nozzles produce a range of droplet sizes, and they are classified according to their volume mean diameter, or VMD (Table 1). Reducing a droplet
size by half will result in about eight times more droplets per unit area. Most nozzle manufacturers provide color-coded tables that indicate the droplet size for different nozzles at various pressures. Notice in Table 2 that the droplet size decreases as pressure increases. Keep in mind that the potential for drift increases as droplet size decreases. Select nozzles to achieve the droplet size and water volume that is needed.
Target organism or pathogen When coverage is critical, such as with postemergence contact applications, nozzles with fine to medium droplets should be used to ensure thorough coverage of the leaf surfaces. Nozzles that produce larger droplet sizes can be used for products that need to reach the lower turf canopy or the soil surface. These products are often wateredin for uptake by the roots and crowns of the turf. Nozzle manufacturers provide tables that list spray volumes per unit area for their nozzles at different pressures and speed (Table 3). A common application problem often occurs on golfcourse fairway applications. The applicator wants to spray the large area in as short of time as possible and will often use a nozzle that produces large droplets and a water volume of 0.50 to 1.0 gallons per 1,000 sq.ft. This results in poor coverage, which will reduce the effectiveness of the product applied.
At right, Photo A: Extended-range flat-fan nozzle. Photo B: Air-induction nozzle. Photo C: Pre-orifice flat-fan nozzle. Photo D: Turf-Jet nozzle. Photo E: Raindrop nozzle.
Figure 1. Spray angles can range from 65º to 110º, depending on how the nozzle is manufactured.
Nozzle Type
Brand Name
A
VisiFlo® Material 0.4 Gallon Per Minute nozzle capacity rated at 40 PSI
110º Spray Angle
B
Table 1: Droplet size categories Approximate VMD* (05) Category
Symbol
Color Code
(Microns)
Very Fine
VF
Red
<150
Fine
F
Yellow
150–250
Medium
M
Orange
250–350
Coarse
C
Teal
350–450
Very Coarse
VC
Green
450–550
Extremely Coarse
XC
White
>550
MD* (volume mean diameter) = droplet size where 1⁄2 of volume has droplets larger than the VMD, and 1⁄2 the volume has droplets smaller than the VMD.
C
Table 2: VF=Very Fine, F=Fine, M=Medium, C=Coarse, VC=Very Coarse XR
PSI
TeeJet
15
20
25
30
40
50
60
XR8001
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
XR80015
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
XR8002
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
XR8003
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
XR8004
C
C
M
M
M
M
M
XR8005
C
C
C
C
M
M
M
XR8006
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
XR8008
VC
VC
VC
C
C
C
C
XR11001
F
F
F
F
F
VF
VF
XR110015
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
XR11002
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
XR11003
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
XR11004
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
XR11005
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
XR11006
C
C
M
M
M
M
M
XR11008
C
C
C
C
C
M
M
D
E
WINTER 2011
27
EQUIPMENT BASICS • continued
Nozzle types
reduced. Better coverage is achieved at higher operating pressures. Producing a medium to coarse droplet size, these nozzles are excellent for contact fungicide applications.
Four basic nozzle types are used for most turf applications. Depending on the goal of the application, each type of nozzle has several options, including spray angles and ranges of volume output. Spray catalogs provide tables with the spray angle and volume output for each nozzle type.
ing a coarse to very coarse droplet size, air-induction flat-fan nozzles are excellent for contact and systemic applications and for drift reduction.
C. Pre-orifice flat-fan nozzles. B. Air-induction (AI) nozzles. These nozzles feature two orifices. A pre-orifice meters liquid flow, and a second orifice forms the spray pattern. A venturi (or air aspirator) between the two orifices draws air into the nozzle where it is mixed with the spray. The air bubbles in the droplets cause the droplets to shatter on impact and provide better coverage. Produc-
Photo A. Extended-range flat-fan nozzles. These are widely used because they provide excellent spray distribution over a wide range of pressures. When operated at lower pressures, drift is
These reduce the operating pressure internally and produce a larger droplet than conventional flat-fan nozzles. The nozzle’s pre-orifice restricts the amount of liquid entering the nozzle and creates a pressure through the tip. Compared to extended-range flat-fan nozzles, drift can be reduced by as much as 50%. These are good nozzles for postemergent applications.
D. The TurfJet / E. Raindrop nozzles. Table 3 PSI
20º
GPA 5 MPH
6 MPH
8 MPH
GALLONS PER 1000 SQ.FT.
10 MPH 12 MPH 15 MPH
20 MPH
2 MPH
3 MPH
4 MPH
5 MPH
AIC1 1005 (50 Mesh)
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.43 0.50 0.56 0.61 0.66 0.71 0.75 0.79
55 64 72 78 84 91 96 101
32 37 42 45 49 53 56 59
26 30 33 36 39 42 45 47
21 25 28 30 33 35 37 39
16.0 18.6 21 23 25 26 28 29
12.8 14.9 16.6 18.1 19.6 21 22 23
10.6 12.4 13.9 15.1 16.3 17.6 18.6 19.6
8.5 9.9 11.1 12.1 13.1 14.1 14.9 15.6
6.4 7.4 8.3 9.1 9.8 10.5 11.1 11.7
1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.7
0.97 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8
0.73 0.85 0.95 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3
0.58 0.68 0.76 0.83 0.90 0.97 1.0 1.1
AIC1 1006 (50 Mesh)
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.52 0.60 0.67 0.73 0.79 0.85 0.90 0.95
67 77 86 93 101 109 115 122
39 45 50 54 59 63 67 71
31 36 40 43 47 50 53 56
26 30 33 36 39 42 45 47
19.3 22 25 27 29 32 33 35
15.4 17.8 19.9 22 23 25 27 28
12.9 14.9 16.6 18.1 19.6 21 22 24
10.3 11.9 13.3 14.5 15.6 6.8 17.8 18.8
7.7 8.9 9.9 10.8 11.7 12.6 13.4 14.1
1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.2
1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.2
0.88 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
0.71 0.82 0.91 0.99 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3
AIC1 1008 (50 Mesh)
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.69 0.80 0.89 0.98 1.06 1.13 1.20 1.26
88 102 114 125 136 145 154 161
51 59 66 73 79 84 89 94
4 48 53 58 63 67 71 75
34 40 44 49 52 56 59 62
26 30 33 36 39 42 45 47
20 24 26 29 31 34 36 37
17.1 19.8 22 24 26 28 30 31
13.7 15.8 17.6 19.4 21 22 24 25
10.2 11.9 13.2 14.6 15.7 16.8 17.8 18.7
2.3 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.8 4.1 4.3
1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.9
1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1
0.94 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0.87 1.00 1.12 1.22 1.32 1.41 1.50 1.58
111 128 143 156 169 180 192 202
65 74 83 91 98 105 111 117
52 59 67 72 78 84 89 94
43 50 55 60 65 70 74 78
32 37 42 45 49 52 56 59
26 30 33 36 39 42 45 47
22 25 28 30 33 35 37 39
17.2 19.8 22 24 26 28 30 31
12.9 14.9 16.6 18.1 19.6 21 22 23
3.0 3.4 3.8 4.1 4.5 4.8 5.1 5.4
2.0 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6
1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.7
1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1
AIC1 1010
28
CAPACITY ONE CAPACITY NOZZLE ONE IN IN GPM OZ./MIN. 4 MPH
MTC TURF NEWS
Both of these nozzles produce very coarse to extremely coarse droplet sizes. They are good choices to reduce drift and for soil applications. These are not recommended, however, for applications where complete coverage of the turf is required.
Choosing your nozzle The first step is to determine what you want to achieve. Postemergent or curative applications are most effective with nozzles that produce smaller droplet sizes in the medium range for thorough coverage. For products that need to reach the soil surface (as is common with preemergent herbicides, grub control products and fungicides for soil-borne diseases), use nozzles that have a coarse to extremely coarse droplet size. Nozzles that output larger volumes generally have larger droplets, and this can help applications in the wind. It is important to also know the mode of action of the product being applied and whether it is taken up by the foliage or root system.
Steps for success 1. Know the product and its mode of action. 2. Know the recommended application volume per 1,000 sq. ft. or acre. 3. Determine the average MPH ground speed of the sprayer. 4. Select a nozzle that most closely fits the criteria of spray pressure,
ground speed and desired output volume (check the manufacturer’s catalog for information such as in Table 3). 5. Check the expected droplet size of the selected nozzle by referring to information as in Table 2. Most applications require 1–2 gallons per 1,000 sq. ft. Some products will be left on the foliage, while others will need additional irrigation to move the product through the foliage and to the soil. My experience with golf course visits and various research projects has shown that most applications can be achieved with three nozzle types. A TeeJet XR 8008 or XR 80010 produces small droplets, puts out 0.80 and 1.0 gallons per 1,000 sq. ft. respectively, and gives very good coverage for foliar applications. A drawback is applications made under windy conditions. XR TeeJet nozzles also come in different output volumes, but the 8008 and 80010 seem to be the most widely used. An excellent general-use nozzle is the air-induction nozzle. It comes in various output sizes and produces large droplets. Coverage is still excellent because air mixes with the spray, which increases coverage as the spray hits leaf surface. Ground speed and pressure can also be adjusted depending on the goal of the product being applied. TurfJet and Raindrop nozzles are great for soil applications and to reduce drift. They are not recommended for foliar applications where thorough coverage of the foliage is needed. Adapters for three or five nozzles can be attached to the boom, and the nozzle can be selected by rotating the adapter. This is much easier than having to change out nozzles each time you spray. Be aware that product formulations and the number of products being applied should be considered. Most superintendents apply multiple products, and the nozzle opening must be large enough to prevent clogging. •
WINTER 2011
29
TURF INDUSTRY CALENDAR OF EVENTS
January 3–6
January 12–13
January 31–February 4
Advanced Landscape Plant IPM PHC Short Course
34th Annual MTC Turfgrass Conference & Trade Show
TPI Midwinter Conference (Turfgrass Producers International)
University of Maryland College Park, MD
January 5–7
Adele H. Stamp Student Union University of Maryland College Park, MD
Mid-Atlantic Nursery Trade Show Baltimore Convention Center Baltimore, MD
January 11–15 STMA Annual Conference (Sports Turf Managers Assn.) Austin, TX
Orlando, FL
February 7–11 Golf Industry Show Orlando, Florida
January 17–20 VTC 51st Annual Turf & Landscape Conference and Trade Show Fredericksburg, VA
February 10–11 Chesapeake Green 2011 — A Horticulture Symposium MD Institute of Technology Linthicum, MD
January 26–29 ANLA Management Clinic (Amer. Nursery & Landscape Assn.) Louisville, KY
INDEX OF ADVERTISERS
Agrium Advanced Technologies.......................29 All States Turfgrass Consultants, LLC .............29 BASF .......................................Inside Back Cover www.basf.com
Capitol Sports Fields ......................................19 www.capitolsportsfields.com
Central Sod Farms of Maryland.......................23 www.centralsodmd.com
Collins Wharf Sod Farm...................................25 www.collinswharfsod.com
CoverSports USA.............................................25 www.coversports.com
Egypt Farms Inc. .............................................16
Quali-Pro ..........................................................7
www.egyptfarms.com
www.quali-pro.com
Ernst Conservation Seeds ...............................16
Syngenta Professional Products .....................19
www.ernstseed.com
The Turfgrass Group ................3 and Back Cover
Finch Services, Incorporated .............................5
www.theturfgrassgroup.com
Herod Seeds Inc......................Inside Front Cover
WinField Solutions, LLC...................................21
www.herodseeds.com
Humphries Turf Supply......................................6
Wood Bay Enterprises Inc. ................................9 www.woodbayturftech.com
www.humphriesturf.com
Mid-Atlantic Turf Equipment, LLC ...................11 www.midatlanticturfequipment.com
Oakwood Sod Farm, Inc. .................................25 www.oakwoodsod.com
MTC Turf News is the Maryland Turfgrass Council magazine. Subscriptions are complimentary to MTC members. The statements and opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the association, its staff, its board of directors, MTC Turf News, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or their identification as MTC members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in any issue of MTC Turf News. Copyright ©2010 by the Maryland Turfgrass Council. MTC Turf News is published quarterly. POSTMASTER: Send change of address notification to Maryland Turfgrass Council: 12 Pressie Lane, Churchville, MD 21028. Postage guaranteed. Presorted standard postage is paid at Nashville, TN. Printed in the U.S.A. Reprints and Submissions: MTC allows reprinting of material published here. Permission requests should be directed to MTC. We are not responsible for unsolicited freelance manuscripts and photographs. Contact the managing editor for contribution information. Advertising: For display and classified advertising rates and insertions, please contact Leading Edge Communications, LLC, 206 Bridge Street, Franklin, TN 37064, (615) 790-3718, Fax (615) 794-4524.
30
MTC TURF NEWS