North Carolina Turfgrass - September/October 2017

September/October 2017

A Publication of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina

Commercial Turf Insect Control,

Top-Performing Tall Fescue, Kentucky Bluegrass and Fine Fescue Cultivars for North Carolina

Part 2

Strategies for Improving the Safety and Performance of Athletic Fields

26 16 32 table of contents September/October 2017

16 cover story

26 green light on sports

Commercial Turf Insect Control, Part 2

Strategies for Improving the Safety and Performance of Athletic Fields

22 green light on lawns Top-Performing Tall Fescue, Kentucky Bluegrass and Fine Fescue Cultivars for North Carolina

32 green light on water Support Biological Lake and Pond Management with “Probiotics”

From the President, Damon Dean Calendar of Events

6 7

Welcome, New TCNC Members and NCCTP

8

TCNC Corporate and Deluxe Members TCNC Career Hub

9 10

TCNC Membership Application

13 NC State Turf Team 34 Index of Advertisers 34 The Turfgrass Council of North Carolina (TCNC) serves its members in the industry through education, promotion and representation. The statements and opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the association, its staff, or its board of directors, North Carolina Turfgrass, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or TCNC members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this bimonthly publication. Copyright © 2017 by the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina. North Carolina Turfgrass is published bi-monthly. Subscriptions are complimentary to members of TCNC. Presorted standard postage is paid at Nashville, TN. Printed in the U.S.A. Reprints and Submissions: North Carolina Turfgrass allows reprinting of material published here. Permission requests should be directed to TCNC. 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.

4

N o rth Car olina Tur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg ra ss. or g

■

September/October 2017

from the president

KNOWLEDGE I

am writing this letter after the NC State Turfgrass Field Day that was held on August 9. This was another great event, and the faculty and staff never disappoint.

They even provided wonderful weather and cooler temperatures. We all need to learn how they did that. For those who were able to attend, there was a lot of information and knowledge obtained from all the research that was conducted over the year. Personally, I learn something new every year that I attend.

Gaining knowledge from continuing education is so important in our industry. It makes us better turf managers and makes us more valuable to our companies. The information given in the presentations relates to all aspects of the turf industry, so everyone will get knowledge to take back to their job. One value of your membership is that you could have attended this great event for only five dollars! This is a small price to pay

6

N o rth Car olina Tur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg ra ss. or g

■

for the information that you can receive from the NC State Field Day. Next year, make an effort to attend, and you will not regret it.

Another opportunity for education and networking will be at the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina’s annual conference. This event is scheduled for Tuesday, January 30, 2018, and it will be held at Providence Country Club in Charlotte, NC. This conference will have pesticide credits, great speakers and some good food. That right there is enough for me to attend.

I hope everyone had a good summer without any problems. The fall season is upon us, and before you know it, winter will be here. Take time to recharge, and spend some time with friends and family. Remember the reasons why we get up and go to work every day.

Damon Dean, CGCS 2017–2018 TCNC President

September/October 2017

calendar of events

November 13–15 Carolinas GCSA Annual Conference & Show Myrtle Beach Convention Center Myrtle Beach, SC

December 14 NC State Turfgrass Research Symposium NC State University Club Raleigh, NC

January 15–19, 2018 Green & Growin’ Show (NC Nursery & Landscape Assn.)

Sheraton Four Seasons Hotel and Greensboro Coliseum Greensboro, NC

January 16–19, 2018 STMA Conference and Exhibition Fort Worth Convention Center Fort Worth, TX

January 30, 2018 TCNC Annual Meeting & Educational Conference Providence Country Club Charlotte, NC

February 3–8, 2018 Golf Industry Show Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center San Antonio, TX

February 12–15, 2018 TPI International Education Conference & Field Day (Turfgrass Producers Intl.)

Westin LA Paloma Resort Tucson, AZ A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f No r t h Ca r o lina 7

New TCNC Members

Welcome, NEW TCNC MEMBERS! Reginald Andrews

Eric Hammond

Brock Patterson

RCG Turf Farms, Inc. Council, NC

Salisbury, NC

McConnell Golf, LLC Raleigh, NC

Jake Best

Country Boy Landscaping Harmony, NC

Hannah Harrell

Kinston Country Club Kinston, NC

Seth Hathcock

Ryan Bowles The Club at Longview Weddington, NC

Diamond Creek Golf Club Banner Elk, NC

Ben Marshall

Jason Cloninger The Club at Longview Weddington, NC

McConnell Golf, LLC Raleigh, NC

Bryan Dawson

Brad McCurry

Kinston Country Club Kinston, NC

McConnell Golf, LLC Raleigh, NC

N o rth Car olina Tur fg r a ss

McConnell Golf, LLC Raleigh, NC

Wilson Sutton Kinston Country Club Kinston, NC

Johnathan Holmes

Vance Brinson Statesville Ag & Turf Statesville, NC

8

Country Boy Landscaping Harmony, NC

Joshua Stephenson

■

Congratulations, NEW NCCTP! Thomas Best, NCCTP

www. n c t urfg ra ss. or g

■

September/October 2017

NCSU Landscape Construction Services Raleigh, NC

TCNC Corporate & Deluxe Members

Thank You to Our DELUXE MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS

Thank You to Our CORPORATE MEMBERS

North Carolina Turfgrass is the official publication of the Turfgrass Council of North Carolina 110 Horizon Drive Suite 210 Raleigh, NC 27615 (919) 459-2070 fax (919) 459-2075 www.ncturfgrass.org

ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE American Turf Grass Corp.

Barefoot & Associates, Inc. BASF Corporation Buy Sod, Inc.

TCNC’s membership level for companies that wish to provide more support by adding ten or more employees to their membership has attracted five Corporate Members —

Carolina Green Corp.

City of Brevard City of Raleigh P&R Country Boy Landscaping

PRESIDENT

Duke University

Damon Dean Keith Hills Country Club West End, NC (910) 893-1372

Fairway Green Fayetteville Tech Community College

VICE PRESIDENT

JRM, Inc.

Gene Queen Nature’s Select Premium Turf Services Winston-Salem, NC (336) 768-7999

Keith Hills Country Club Leap Frog Landcare, Inc. Myatt Landscaping Concepts, Inc.

PAST PRESIDENT

Nature’s Select Premium Turf Services

Billy Cole Raleigh Country Club Raleigh, NC (919) 427-0312

NC A&T State University NCSU Landscape Construction Services

DIRECTORS H. Dean Baker Kinston Country Club Kinston, NC

Pennington Seed – ProTurf Division SAS Institute Landscaping Dept.

SiteOne Landscape Supply Smith Turf & Irrigation Sod Solutions, Inc. Southern Ag Southern Seeds, Inc. The Club at Longview Town of Cary Public Works Town of Southern Pines Turf Mountain Sod, Inc.

Published by: Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street Franklin, TN 37064 (615) 790-3718 fax (615) 794-4524 info@leadingedge communications.com

TCNC OFFICERS

Diamond Creek Golf Club

Quality Turf

Lee Campbell IMI Association Executives leec@imiae.com (919) 459-6087

The Corporate Level of membership receives extra benefits, including a listing in each issue of the magazine. As we begin offering sponsorship opportunities, they will be given first opportunity to sponsor; additionally, you may see banner ads for these companies on the website in the future. All ten members under the corporate membership receive full membership, with voting rights and their own subscription to the magazine.

If you would like YOUR company to upgrade to a Corporate Level of membership, please contact the office to see how easy it can be! Just email info@ncturfgrass.org.

James (Bo) Barefoot, NCCTP Precision Labs Raleigh, NC David Bradley, NCCTP Turf Mountain Sod, Inc. Hendersonville, NC Kevin Herrmann Fairway Green, Inc. Raleigh, NC Michael Hrivnak, NCCTP Canopy Lawn Care Raleigh, NC Jonathan Richardson, NCCTP Coastal Floratine Dunn, NC

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f No r t h Ca r o lina 9

10

No rth Car olina Tur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg ra ss. o r g

■

September/October 2017

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 11

Page 1 o f 2

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 13

14

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017

Pa g e 2 o f 2

cover story

Commercial Turf

INSECT CONTROL PART 2

By Rick L. Brandenburg, Entomology Extension, NC State University Note from editor: The following is republished from the NC State University Extension publication titled 2017 Pest Control for Professional Turfgrass Managers (AG-408), which is directly downloadable from the TurfFiles website (www.turffiles.ncsu.edu).

It supplies up-to-date information on pesticides used to control pests in turfgrasses. This is part two of two articles that detail information on commercial insect control (part one ran in the May/June 2017 issue of North Carolina Turfgrass). The 2018 insecticide guidelines will be available as a download on TurfFiles early next year.

Use

pesticides safely to protect people and the environment. Begin by properly diagnosing your pest problem. If a pesticide is needed, select the proper one. Always follow all label directions, and obey all federal, state and local laws and regulations concerning pesticides.

Recommendations of specific chemicals are based on information on the manufacturer’s label and performance in a limited number of trials. Because environmental conditions and methods of application by growers may vary widely, performance of the chemical will not always conform to the safety and pest control standards indicated by experimental data. Recommendations

16

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

for the use of agricultural chemicals are included in this article as a convenience to the reader. The use of brand names and any mention or listing of commercial products or services does not imply endorsement by North Carolina State University or discrimination against similar products or services not mentioned. Individuals who use agricultural chemicals are responsible for ensuring that the intended use complies with current regulations and conforms to the product label. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations, and examine a current product label before applying any chemical.

North Carolina Cooperative Extension agents may also be of assistance.

September/October 2017

Pest / Insecticide and Formulation

Amount Per 1,000 ft2

Precautions and Comments

IMPORTED FIRE ANTS acephate1 (Lesco-Fate)

See label.

1 to 2 tsp./mound

Distribute uniformly over mound. For best results, apply in early morning or late afternoon.

5 to 7 tbsp./mound

Distribute uniformly 5 to 7 level tablespoons of bait, 3 to 4 feet around the base of each mound.

bifenthrin1 (Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available

See label.

Follow label directions.

chlorpyrifos1 (Dursban) 4 E

See label.

(Orthene, T, T&O) 75 S

avermectin/B1

(Affirm) 0.011% bait

chlothianidin + bifenthrin (Aloft)

0.27 to 0.44 fl. oz.

LC SC

0.27 to 0.54 fl. oz.

GC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

LC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G fenoxycarb (Award)1 B

Pest / Insecticide and Formulation

Amount Per 1,000 ft2

Precautions and Comments

See label.

GC SC

2 to 3 lb./1,000 ft2 1 to 3 level tbsp.

Single mound treatment.

1 to 1.5 lb./acre

Apply uniformly with ground equipment.

fipronil (Top Choice, Fipronil, others) 0.0143

2 lb.

Apply as a broadcast.

fipronil + bifenthrin + lambdacyhalothrin (Taurus Trio G)

2 lb.

Apply as a broadcast. Irrigate prior to treatment.

hydramethylnon1 (Amdro) 0.88% bait (Maxforce G)

See label.

Uniformly broadcast 1 to 1.5 lbs. of bait per acre with ground equipment on lawns, range grasses, pastures and non-agricultural lands.

Or distribute uniformly 5 level tablespoons of bait, 3 to 4 feet around the base of each mound.

Do not exceed 1.5 lbs. per acre.

imidacloprid + bifenthrin (Allectus, Atera)

See label.

Rate varies with pest.

Different formulations for different sites.

indoxacarb (Advion) bait

1.5 lb./acre

ANTS (ALSO SEE IMPORTED FIRE ANTS) bifenthrin1

(Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available

0.5 to 1 fl. oz.

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

carbaryl1 (Sevin) 80 WSP

1 to 1.5 oz.

chlorpyrifos1 (Dursban) 4E, 3G, 50 WP, Pro

See label.

For use on golf courses.

eta-cypermethrin, birenthrin and imidacloprid (Triple Crown)

20 to 35 fl. oz./acre

See new label.

chlothianidin + bifenthrin (Aloft) GC SC

0.27 to 0.54 fl. oz.

LC SC

0.27 to 0.54 fl. oz.

GC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

LC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

cyfluthrin (Tempo 2)

0.143 fl. oz.

cypermethrin1 (Demon) TC

See label.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G

2 to 3 lb./1,000 ft2

fipronil 0.0143 G (Top Choice, Taurus G)

2 lb.

hydramethylnon1 (Maxforce G, Amdro)

See label.

lambda-cyhalothrin (Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara)

See label.

pyriproxyfen (Distance Fire Ant Bait)

See label.

spinosad (Justice bait)

See label.

spinosad A + D (Conserve SC)

0.1 fl. oz./gal./mound

Home lawns only.

Do not make applications within 20 feet of any body of water.

No reentry until spray has dried.

lambda-cyhalothrin (Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara)

See label.

metaflumizone (Siesta) bait

1.0 to 1.5 lb./acre 2 to 4 tbsp./mound

methoprene (Extinguish) 0.5% bait

1.5 lb./acre

methoprene + hydromethylnon (Extinguish Plus)

1.5 lb./acre

pyriproxyfen (Distance Fire Ant Bait)

See label.

spinosad (Justice bait)

See label.

Bait formulation

Do not exceed 4 applications.

Mound or broadcast.

Mound or broadcast.

Mound or broadcast. spinosad A + D (Conserve SC) Dilute 0.1 fluid ounce in 1

0.1 fl. oz./gal./mound

Dilute 0.1 fluid ounce in 1

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 17

cover story | continued

Pest / Insecticide and Formulation

Amount Per 1,000 ft2

Precautions and Comments

Pest / Insecticide and Formulation

LEAFHOPPERS, SPITTLE BUGS (Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available carbaryl1 (Sevin) 80 WSP

1 oz.

0.25 to 0.5 fl. oz.

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

0.75 to 1.5 oz.

chlorpyrifos1 (Dursban) 4 E, 50 WSP, Pro

See label.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G

2 to 3 lb.

For use on golf courses.

MILLIPEDES bifenthrin1 (Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available

Precautions and Comments

acephate1 (Orthene, T, T&O, Lesco-Fate)

1 to 1.9 oz.

Water soil before application. Do not water in.

bifenthrin1 (Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available

0.5 to 1 fl. oz.

MOLE CRICKETS

acephate1 (Orthene, T, T&O) 75 S bifenthrin1

Amount Per 1,000 ft2

0.25 to 0.5 fl. oz.

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

carbaryl1 (Sevin) baits

See label.

cyfluthrin (Tempo 2, Tempo Ultra)

0.2 fl. oz.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G

2 to 3 lb.

entomogenous nematodes

See label.

carbaryl1 (Sevimol)

1.5 to 3 oz.

(Sevin) 80 WSP chlorpyrifos1

See label.

cypermethrin (Demon) TC

For use on golf courses.

See new label.

See label.

lambda-cyhalothrin (Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara)

See label.

(Chipco Choice, others) 0.1 G (Top Choice, Fipronil, others) 0.0143

Do not make applications within 20 feet of any body of water. No reentry until spray has dried.

75 WSP 0.5 G

indoxacarb (Provaunt)

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

â–

4 level tsp.

Apply while crickets are less than one-half inch long (June, early July).

1.8 lb.

50 to 200 lb./acre

Not for use on sod farms. Do not water in after application.

0.275 fl. oz.

Two applications, 2 to 4 weeks apart work best, following egg hatch.

propoxur (Baygon) B

See label.

September/October 2017

Use slit placement equipment.

Apply as a broadcast.

See label.

zeta-cypermethrin, bifenthrin and imidacloprid (Triple Crown)

â–

Various formulations now available. Adequate soil moisture critical for good control.

2 lb./acre

lambda-cyhalothrin1 (Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara)

dinotefuran (Zylam) 20 SG

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

12.5 to 25 lb./acre

imidacloprid (Merit)

indoxacarb (Advion) Insect G

18

Home lawns only.

fipronil

0.75 to 1.5 oz.

(Dursban) 2 E, Pro

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

1 oz./1,000 ft2 20 to 35 fl. oz./acre

Do not make applications within 20 feet of any body of water.

No reentry until spray has dried.

Apply at egg hatch.

cover story | continued

Pest / Insecticide and Formulation

Amount Per 1,000 ft2

Precautions and Comments

Mesurol 2 B

1 lb.

Apply late in afternoon.

metaldehyde

See label.

SLUGS, SNAILS

SOD WEBWORMS acephate1 (Lesco-Fate, Orthene T, T&O)

0.5 to 1 oz.

(Precise 4G)

2.8 lb.

azadirachtin1 (Azatrol, Neemix, Turplex)

0.5 fl. oz.

Bacillus thuringiensis, various brands

1 to 2 lb./acre

bifenthrin1 (Menace, Talstar, others) F, GC; G form also available

0.18 to 0.25 fl. oz.

carbaryl1 (Sevin) 80 WSP chlorantraniliprole (Acelepryn)

Home lawns only.

Irrigate immediately.

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

2.5 to 3 oz.

0.046 to 0.092 fl. oz.

chlorpyrifos1 (Dursban) 4 E, 2 E, 5 G, Pro

See label.

For use on golf courses.

See new label.

chlothianidin (Arena) .5G

14 to 22 oz.

50WDG

0.15 to 0.22 oz.

chlothianidin + bifenthrin (Aloft)

See label.

GCSC

0.27 to 0.54 fl. oz.

LC SC

0.27 to 0.54 fl. oz.

GC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

LC G

1.8 to 3.6 lb.

cyfluthrin (Tempo 2, Tempo Ultra)

0.143 fl. oz.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G

2 to 3 lb.

indoxacarb (Provaunt) SC

0.0625 to 0.25 fl. oz.

lambda-cyhalothrin1 (Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara) permethrin1 (Astro)

See label.

Not labeled for use on sod farms.

Do not make applications within 20 feet of any body of water.

No reentry until spray has dried.

0.4 to 0.8 fl. oz.

spinosad A + D (Conserve) SC

1.25 fl. oz.

trichlorfon1 (Dylox, Proxol) 80 SP dinotefuran (Zylam) 20SG

Irrigate immediately after application. Do not apply to newly seeded stands or to bentgrass.

Rate varies with size and species.

1.5 to 3 oz.

1 oz./1,000 ft2

SNOWBUGS, PILLBUGS bifenthrin1 (Talstar) F, GC; G form also available

0.25 to 0.5 fl. oz.

carbaryl1 (Sevin) 80 WSP

0.75 to 1.5 oz.

cypermethrin1 (Demon) TC

See label.

deltamethrin (Deltagard) G

2 to 3 lb.

lambda-cyhalothrin1

See label.

(Battle, Scimitar, Cyonara)

1

20

Use GC formulation for golf courses.

Do not make applications within 20 feet of any body of water. No reentry until spray has dried.

Several trade names available. Check label for active ingredient.

Always follow label instructions.

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

â–

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

â–

September/October 2017

green light on lawns

TOP-

PERFORMING

Tall Fescue, Kentucky Bluegrass and Fine Fescue Cultivars for North Carolina

By Grady Miller, Ph.D., Extension Turfgrass Specialist, NC State University

In

North Carolina, a great number of tall fescue and bluegrass cultivars have been tested that provide excellent performance based on cultivar trials.

The 2014 and 2016 Recommended Tall Fescue and Kentucky Bluegrass Cultivar lists contain many great cultivars that still should perform well in NC. These lists are still available at www.turffiles.ncsu.edu.

Many of these cultivars are still being sold in grass seed products and would be expected to perform very well in NC,

22

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

â–

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

â–

September/October 2017

green light on lawns | continued

TABLE

1

07 Dust

Diablo

Hover

Rockwell

07 Walk

DTT 43

IS-TF 311

Saltillo

4th Millennium SRP

Dynamite SLS QS

Kingdom

Screamer LS

Amity

Embrace

Leonardo

Supersonic

Aquaduct

Escalade

Maestro

Swagger

AST 5112

Falcon V

Memphis

Tara

AST 1736

Faith

Meridian

Technique

ATF 1612

Fayette

Michelangelo

Temple

ATF 1704

Fesnova

Mustang

Temptation

Avenger II

Firebird 2

Paramount

Terrano

Bizem

Firecracker SLS

Rain Dance

Thor

Black Tail

Firewall

Reflection

Thunderstruck

Bloodhound

Foxhound

Raptor III

Titanium 2LS

Bullseye

Golconda

Rebel IV

Tonto

Caesar

Grande 3

Rebounder

Traverse 2 SRP

Catalyst

GTO

Regenerate

Turfway

Crossfire 4

Hemi

Rhambler 2 SRP

Valkyrie LS

Dakota

Hot Rod

Rhizing Moon

Wichita

Da Vinci

Houndog8

Rowdy

Xtender

TABLE

2

TABLE

3

24

The following tall fescue cultivars performed well in tests conducted between 2013 and 2016. These tests included the current NTEP study, a regional trial, A-LIST trials and a sponsored trial. Not all of these cultivars were available commercially in 2017.

The following Kentucky bluegrass cultivars performed well in tests conducted between 2012 and 2016, with particular attention to 2016 data. Not all of these cultivars were commercially available in 2017.

Aramintha

Blackjack

Legend

Skye

Avid

Bluebank

Mazama

Sudden Impact

Award

Blue Note

Merlot

Thermal Blue

Baron

Cabernet

Midnight

Zedor

Barvette HGT

Keeneland

NuChicago

The following fine fescue cultivars performed well in full-sun tests conducted between 2014 and 2016, with particular attention to 2016 data. Not all of these cultivars were commercially available in 2017.

Cascade

Marvel

Navigator II

RAD-FC44

Kent

Minimus

Radar

RAD-FR47

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

â–

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

â–

September/October 2017

assuming they are properly established and maintained. The lists are long, but that makes it easier for users to find goodperforming tall fescue and bluegrass cultivars across the state.

While Kentucky bluegrass cultivars do not enjoy the same level of success in North Carolina as they do further north, there are still some great cultivars that can be managed as a nice turf, either as a mono-stand or planted as a mixture with tall fescue cultivars. Also, the Kentucky bluegrasses generally perform better in western NC than they do on the Piedmont.

None of the tall fescue cultivars in our tests have been completely resistant to brown patch (Rhizoctonia spp.). Using appropriate management practices remains the primary means of reducing injury from this disease. Generally, Kentucky bluegrass cultivars are susceptible to summer patch when grown in Raleigh, which can be difficult to manage most years without the use of fungicides.

Keep in mind that companies often blend multiple cultivars together for sale in the retail market but use a simple name-brand cultivar to enhance brand recognition. The combination of grasses is often recommended, since there is no single grass that will perform well under all conditions. So, when shopping for tall fescue seed, the name on the front of the bag may not represent or identify the cultivars that make up the product.

To add to the confusion, the cultivars and/or the percentage of each cultivar within the bag of a name brand may change from year to year, but the name brand often remains unchanged. Again, this is done for brand recognition.

Under close inspection, however, the bags are required to list the cultivar(s) and the percentage of each cultivar by weight within the bag. Customers often ask about matching our recommended cultivars to those listed on the bag seed label. Unfortunately, it may not be easy to find a bag that contains only cultivars from our recommended lists. It is suggested, however, that at least 50% of the contents consist of NCSU’s high-performing cultivars. The higher the percentage, the greater the chances of obtaining/maintaining a quality turf.

The approach for this year’s list was to highlight the great cultivars we tested the last few years in NTEP, A-LIST, regional and sponsored trials.

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 25

green light on sports

STRATEGIES for IMPROVING

SAFETY AND PERFORMANCE THE

of ATHLETIC

FIELDS

By Kyley Dickson, Graduate Student, University of Tennessee

26

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017

The

characteristics of a good athletic field include adequate traction, surface hardness and turfgrass cover, while also being consistent and safe. Field managers strive to provide optimal athletic fields for athletes; however, some issues still must be battled due to the nature of sporting events.

Soil compaction One of the most common problems on athletic fields is that traffic events (games and practices) lead to soil compaction.

As compaction increases over time, it creates problems. Some of the negative effects of soil compaction are increased soil bulk density, decreased water-infiltration rates and decreased air-filled space.

As compaction increases and turf cover is reduced, the potential for athlete injury rises. Due to the negative impacts of compaction on soils, cultural practices are often needed to alleviate this problem.

Traditionally, core cultivation is utilized to reduce soil compaction.

Several cultivation methods can be used to reduce compaction of athletic fields. Typically, core cultivation physically removes a core of soil, leaving a hole that is then back-filled with sand. An increase in drainage and dilution of organic matter are two of the benefits of sand topdressing. Some techniques utilize water, sand, air or other soil amendments to reduce compaction.

The HydroJect, introduced by the Toro Company, is an example of highpressure water injection into the soil. Previous studies have shown the HydroJect to reduce soil compaction in compacted turfgrass rootzones. Additionally, drymaterial injection is another technique that is utilized to reduce compaction.

The Dryject utilizes high-pressure water to insert dry material (sand, calcined clay, etc.) into the surface.

While high-pressure water and drymaterial injection have been used for years, a new high-pressure, air-injection system has recently been introduced.

Many field managers are using these different strategies to manage high-use areas.

The air-injection system injects high volumes of compressed air into the rootzone through a series of porous soil probes. Airinjection systems use similar principles as the water-injection system, but they utilize lower pressures than water systems.

PHOTO 1: Air2G2 on an athletic field in Knoxville, TN.

FIGURE 1: Surface hardness (Gmax) values taken with the Clegg hammer for both locations immediately after air-injection applications. Data was collected from July 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; August 15, 2014, in Knoxville, TN. Errors bars represent Fisherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s LSD values at P < 0.05

Two studies are discussed below, with the first looking at air injection and the second investigating some of the differences between different cultivation techniques. The goal of Study I was to determine changes in surface hardness and soil physical properties in response to air injection on two compacted, silt-loam athletic fields. The goal of Study II was to compare the impact of surface disruption and surface hardness of different cultivation techniques.

Study I The Air2G2 machine, manufactured

by GT AirInject, was used to apply airinjection treatments for this study. The Air2G2 utilizes a self-contained air compressor to inject air at the desired pressure below the soil surface. The Air2G2 has a three-wheeled configuration design that is easily maneuvered across a desired area (Photo 1).

The air-injection system contains three probes that simultaneously penetrate into

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 27

green light on sports | continued

FIGURE 2: Soil bulk density (g cm-3) of native-soil athletic fields subjected to airinjection treatments for two locations at the conclusion of the study on August 15, 2014, Knoxville, TN. Errors bars represent Fisher’s LSD values at P < 0.05.

FIGURE 3: Green turfgrass cover for various cultivation treatments in Knoxville, TN, on April 1, 2015. Means pooled across locations. Error bars represent Fisher’s LSD values at P < 0.05.

the soil profile. These probes then release compressed bursts of air at a desired depth. For this study, the probes were 7" long on 18" spacing. The air pressure range can be set from 0 to 150 psi. Different pressure settings are recommended depending on soil type (i.e., sand versus finer-textured native soils) to maximize the impact. For this study, the pressure setting was 130 psi.

Research was conducted at the University of Tennessee from July 1 through August 30, 2014. The study was conducted on two compacted (high-use municipal) native-soil (silt loam) athletic fields.

Two application frequencies were used — once every 15 days and once every 30 days — and were compared to a nontreated control. Data collection included soil moisture, surface hardness, total soil porosity, soil bulk density and digitalimage analysis for percent green cover.

Every 30 days, soil cores were extracted for analysis to determine soil bulk densities and total soil porosities. Surfacehardness measurements were collected with the Clegg impact soil tester using a five-pound missile. Surface hardness was collected before and after the application of air injection. Time Domain Reflectometry (Spectrum Technologies) with three in tines was used to measure percent volumetric soil water content. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design with three replications. Differences among treatments were determined using statistical software.

Results A 21% reduction in surface hardness was detected immediately after treatment application (Figure 1). Soil moisture content at each location accounted for the differences in surface hardness at each location on all data collection dates (data not shown). A 15% reduction in soil bulk density was detected in the top 2" of the soil for both air-injection application timings (Figure 2). A 17% Increase in total soil porosity was observed in the top 2" of the soil, while the untreated control had no change (data not shown).

This study demonstrates that an air-injection system increases total soil porosity and decreases soil bulk density on compacted, native-soil (silt loam) athletic fields. Surface hardness reductions were found immediately after treatment application.

28

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017

No differences were detected in percent green cover for this study. Due to the minimally invasive nature of the airinjection system, play could take place immediately following application. Therefore, the air-injection system is a way to reduce surface hardness on compacted athletic fields immediately before an event, with limited surface disruption.

Future studies are needed to determine the long-term impacts of air injection aeration on athletic fields.

Study II The goal of this study was to compare the impact on surface disruption and surface hardness of different cultivation techniques. Research was conducted at the University of Tennessee on a sand rootzone. Cultivation treatments for Study II consisted of: Dryject (DJ), Air2G2 (AI), hollow tine with sand topdressing (HT), solid tine with sand topdressing (ST) and an untreated control. The Dryject treatment injected sand into the surface at the manufacturerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommended pressure and spacing. The Air2G2 also used the manufacturerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommended pressures.

The hollow-tine cultivation treatment used 0.5" tines, while 0.25" were used for solid-tine treatments. Plots with sand topdressing applications received equal amounts and were brushed in using a push broom.

Fifteen minutes after treatment application, data was collected. Data collection included surface firmness, digitalimage analysis for percent green turfgrass cover (GTC), soil moisture and soil bulk density. Surface firmness measurements were collected with the True Firmness Meter (Plainfield, IL); the greater the depth of the missile, the softer the surface. The GTC of each plot was quantified after mowing and 15 minutes after treatment application using digital-image analysis. Time Domain Reflectometry (Spectrum Technologies) with 3" tines was used to measure percent volumetric soil water content. Soil cores were extracted for bulk density measurements.

Differences among treatments means were determined using statistical software.

Results The AI and untreated control did not have significantly different GTC values (Figure 3). The HT treatment resulted in the largest reduction (16%) in GTC

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 29

green light on sports | continued

FIGURE 4: Surface firmness as measured by the TrueFirm for various cultivation methods in Knoxville, TN, on April 1, 2015. Means pooled across locations. Error bars represent Fisher’s LSD values at P < 0.05.

compared to the control, while DJ (9%) and ST (8%) treatments had intermediate reductions in GTC. These results are similar to previous findings that describe the impact of HT cultivation (Schmid et al., 2013). All cultivation methods reduced surface firmness at 15 minutes after treatment application compared to the control (Figure 4).

Hollow-tine aerification produced the softest surface (-0.56") among all treatments. The AI-treated plots had the firmest surface (-0.52") among all the cultivation plots; as expected, the non-treated plots had the greatest firmness (-0.49").

The firmness of the surface and GTC had a positive correlation 0.97 across both locations, indicating that lower GTC (more surface disruption) after cultivation leads to a softer surface. Hollow-tine cultivation is known to immediately reduce surface firmness after application and becomes firmer over time. No changes were observed in volumetric soil water content and soil bulk density measurements.

The results showed that AI cultivation resulted in less surface disruption, which would allow a quicker return to highquality playing conditions compared to other cultivation methods. Positive correlations between GTC and surface firmness 15 minutes after treatment application indicate that cultivation practices with lower surface disruption will have a smaller impact on surface hardness.

These findings suggest that air and drymaterial injection have less of an impact on the surface than hollow- and solidtine cultivation. Long-term changes in soil physical properties in combination with surface measurements would give the full scope of how AI and DJ methods impact the rootzone, which is beyond the scope of this study.

Take-home message These studies cover strategies that can be implemented to improve athletic fields by reducing compaction. Traditional hollowtine cultivation with sand topdressing is still an important cultivation practice that should be used. The new strategies can be added into a cultivation program.

As more strategies become available, field managers have more options for different situations, including a need to cultivate with minimal surface disruption.

30

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017

green light on water

Support Biological Lake and Pond Management with “Probiotics”

By Erin Stewart, Aquatic Biologist, SOLitude Lake Management

T

here are many sustainable options for the management of lakes and ponds, so it can be difficult to determine which direction to turn when a water-quality issue occurs. This is especially true for waterbodies used for irrigation, stormwater runoff and/or recreational activity — or any location where pesticides or other traditional management methods may be less desirable or restricted. However, all water-bodies can benefit from proactive applications of natural and biological products. Beneficial bacteriabased products can be used as a pesticide alternative or used in conjunction with other products and methods to enhance the efficiency of the treatment.

Bacteria may sound like a bad word in some situations, but these organisms are the foundation of most biological processes within a waterbody. Think of them as probiotics or yogurt for your lake or pond; they are responsible for breaking down and processing organic material in a process called biological augmentation.

When properly introduced, biological augmentation can help limit the impact of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous, which tend to enter waterbodies through runoff that contains fertilizers, animal waste and other organic materials. Without proper management, these materials may accumulate as sludge at the Beneficial bacteria act much like a natural probiotic for your lake or pond, aiding with the efficient decomposition of organic materials and excessive nutrients, which can help prevent the development of nuisance algae and vegetation and facilitate the growth of healthy organisms.

32

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017

bottom of your waterbody, causing noxious odors, promoting nuisance algae and weed growth and expediting the waterbody’s rate of aging. Over time, costly dredging will be required to restore the health and overall volume of the aquatic resource. When beneficial bacteria are in place, they convert nutrients to forms that cannot fuel nuisance plant growth; they also promote efficient decomposition and prevent the accumulation of organic materials. This, in turn, can help diversify the biological community structure by facilitating the development of “good” algae, diatoms, zooplankton and healthy fish.

Regular applications of these biologicals can be incredibly favorable and help keep beneficial bacteria concentrations and activity high throughout the year.

Depending on the particular water-quality or vegetation issues within your waterbody, a professional may recommend different forms of probiotic bacteria, including liquid, pellet or powdered applications.

Liquid bacteria blends are considered high performance due to their ability to rapidly neutralize excessive nutrients that are located within the water column. Liquid blends can help to quickly enhance water clarity and quality. Pellet or granular beneficial bacteria applications contain bacteria that naturally settle to the bottom of a lake or pond to reduce organic materials that cause bottom sludge.

In moderate or warm climates, the resulting reduction in accumulated sediment can be significant.

Beneficial bacteria are an excellent

Over time, organic runoff builds up as muck at the bottom of lakes and ponds. As part of a proactive management plan, biological augmentation can be used to naturally and sustainably limit the accumulation of materials while improving the water quality and beauty of the waterbody.

solution for the reduction of excessive, nutrient-rich organic matter that causes bottom sludge and nuisance vegetation, but they don’t have to be utilized independently. When applied by a licensed professional, some biological products can also be used in conjunction with herbicides to aid in the decomposition process of submerged and emergent vegetation.

A professional will determine the rate and frequency of beneficial bacteria and/ or herbicide applications by conducting water chemistry tests or considering the targeted issue. However, the best way to achieve your overall lake or pond goals is to ensure that the proper products are being utilized. Many selections are available on the market, so it is very impor-

tant to choose a quality option with field data and science supporting the claims.

Always rely on your lake and pond management company for beneficial bacteria recommendations, as well as guidance on strategies to improve aeration, beneficial buffers, water quality and native wildlife populations. Your water will thank you.

Erin Stewart is an experienced aquatic biologist with SOLitude Lake Management, an environmental firm providing a full array of lake, pond, wetland and fisheries management services and solutions.

She can be reached through the website at www.solitudelakemanagement.com.

DIGITAL MARKETPLACE Scan the QR code: Download your favorite QR reader to your phone, and scan the code to learn more about this company.

A P u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e T u r f g r a s s C o u n c i l o f Nor t h Ca r o lina 33

nc state turf team

index of advertisers Amick’s Superstore ..................................21 www.amickssuperstore.com

CROP AND SOIL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT Daniel C. Bowman, Ph.D. Professor (919) 515-2085 dan_bowman@ncsu.edu Arthur H. Bruneau, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus (919) 515-5855 art_bruneau@ncsu.edu Richard J. Cooper, Ph.D. Professor, Turfgrass Management Specialist (919) 515-7600 rich_cooper@ncsu.edu Emily Erickson CENTERE Assoc. Director (919) 513-2034 emily_erickson@ncsu.edu Travis Gannon, Ph.D. Assistant Professor (919) 513-4655 travis_gannon@ncsu.edu

Matthew C. Martin Extension Associate (910) 675-2314 matthew_martin@ncsu.edu

Rongda Qu, Ph.D. Professor (919) 515-7616 rongda_qu@ncsu.edu

Susana Milla-Lewis, Ph.D. Associate Professor (919) 515-3196 susana_milla@ncsu.edu

Rob Richardson, Ph.D. Professor, Extension Specialist (919) 515-5653 rob_richardson@ncsu.edu

Grady Miller, Ph.D. Professor & Ext. Specialist (919) 515-5656 grady_miller@ncsu.edu

Thomas Rufty, Ph.D. CENTERE Co-Director Professor (919) 515-3660 tom_rufty@ncsu.edu

Charles Peacock, Ph.D. Professor & Ext. Specialist (919) 515-7615 charles_peacock@ ncsu.edu

Wei Shi (919) 513-4641 wei_shi@ncsu.edu Fred H. Yelverton, Ph.D. CENTERE Co-Director Professor, Ext. Specialist (919) 515-5639 fred_yelverton@ncsu.edu

Marty Parish Superintendent Lake Wheeler Turf Field Lab (919) 498-4808 mbparish@ncsu.edu

ENTOMOLOGY AND PLANT PATHOLOGY DEPARTMENT

HORTICULTURE SCIENCE DEPARTMENT

Rick Brandenburg, Ph.D. Professor (919) 515-8876 rick_brandenburg@ ncsu.edu

Joe Neal, Ph.D. Professor, Ext. Specialist (919) 805-1707 joe_neal@ncsu.edu Danesha Seth Carley, Ph.D. NC IPM Coordinator (919) 513-2717 danesha_carley@ncsu.edu

Jim Kerns, Ph.D. Associate Professor & Extension Specialist (919) 515-4820 jpkerns@ncsu.edu

SANDHILLS RESEARCH STATION

Lee Butler Extension Coordinator Turf Diagnostic Lab (919) 513-3878 lee_butler@ncsu.edu

Jeremy R. Martin Research Operations Manager (910) 974-4673 jeremy_martin@ncsu.edu John Michael Phillips II Turfgrass Unit Manager (910) 974-4673 johnmichael_phillips@ ncsu.edu

Barenbrug USA ........................................12 www.barusa.com Brouwer Kesmac ......................................19 www.kesmac.com Buy Sod .......................... Inside Back Cover www.buysod.com Camp Chemical Corp...............................30 Carolina Green Corp................................33 www.cgcfields.com Carolina Turf Farms, Inc...........................29 www.carolinaturffarms.com Divots, Inc. ...............................................33 www.divotssand.com Ewing Irrigation & Landscape Supply .....31 www.ewing1.com FMC Professional Solutions........................ Inside Front Cover www.fmcprosolutions.com Golf Agronomics Supply & Handling ......25 www.golfag.com Green Resource ........................ Back Cover www.green-resource.com Leading Edge Communications...............15 www.LeadingEdgeCommunications.com Mid-Atlantic STIHL, Inc. .............................5 www.stihldealers.com Modern Turf, Inc. .....................................25 www.modernturf.com Morgan Sand Co. .......................................7 NC Sod Producers Association ...............11 www.ncsod.org PBI Gordon Corporation .........................23 www.pbigordon.com Progressive Turf Equipment, Inc. ............11 www.progressiveturfequip.com Southern Seeds, Inc. ..................................7 www.southernseedsinc.com Southern Specialty Equipment ................25 www.ssequip.net Super-Sod...................................................3 www.supersod.com Turf Mountain Sod ...................................29 www.turfmountain.com Vandemark Farms ......................................8 www.vandemarkfarms.com

34

No rth Car olina T ur fg r a ss

■

www. n c t urfg rass. o r g

■

September/October 2017