USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD A Publication on Turf Management by the United States Golf Association USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD A Publication on Turf Management by the United States Golf Association ©1975 by United States Golf Association. Permission to reproduce articles or material in the USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD is granted to publishers of newspapers and periodicals (unless specifically noted other­ wise), provided credit is given the USGA and copyright protection is afforded. To reprint material in other media, written permission must be obtained from the USGA. In any case, neither articles nor other material may be copied or used for any advertising, promotion or commercial purposes. VOL. 13, No. 3 MAY 1975 Drainage: Why and How by Carl Schwartzkopf................................................................................. 1 You, Your Golf Course and the Federal Pesticide Act by Alexander M. Radko ............................................................................ 4 The Golf Shoe Spike—Things May Be Getting Better ................................... 6 Turfgrass Wear Tolerance Investigations by Dr. Robert C. Shearman and Dr. James B. Beard............................ 7 Field Notes For May.............................................................................................. 10 Texas A&M Laboratory Now Offers Green Section Soil Test Services................................................................................................... 12 The Turf grass Service of the USGA Green Section............................................13 Turf Twisters............................................................................................ Back Cover Published six times a year in January, March, May, July, September and November by the UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION, Golf House, Far Hills, N.J. 07931. Subscriptions: $2 a year. Single copies: 35c. Subscriptions and address changes should be sent to the above address. Articles, photo­ graphs, and correspondence relevant to published material should be addressed to: United States Golf Association Green Section, Suite 107, 222 Fashion Lane, Tustin, Calif. 92680. Second class postage paid at Far Hills, N.J. and other locations. Office of Publications, Golf House, Far Hills, N.J. 07931. not only detri­ mental to turf­ grass growth and interrupts play, but is also dam­ aging to equip­ ment. Editor: William H. Bengeyfield Managing Editor: Robert Sommers Art Editor: Miss Janet Seagle Green Section Committee Chairman: John L. Crist, Jr., 1850 E. Third St. (Box 4527) Charlotte, N.C. 28204 Green Section Agronomists and Offices EASTERN REGION P.O. Box 1 237 Highland Park, N.J. 08904 Alexander M. Radko, Director, Eastern Region and National Research Director William G. Buchanan, Eastern Agronomist Stanley J. Zontek, Eastern Agronomist (201)572-0440 SOUTHERN REGION P.O. Box 4213 Campus Station, Athens, Ga. 30601 James B. Moncrief, Director, Southern Region (404) LI 8-2741 MID-CONTINENT REGION P.O. Box 592, Crystal Lake, III. 60014 F. Lee Record, Director, Mid-Continent Region Carl Schwartzkopf, Mid-Continent Agronomist (815)459-3731 MID-ATLANTIC REGION P.O. Box5563 Barracks Road Center, Charlottesville, Va. 22903 Holman M. Griffin, Mid-Atlantic Director (804)973-8400 WESTERN REGION Suite 107 222 Fashion Lane Tustin, Calif. 92680 William H. Bengeyfield, Western Director and Publications Editor (714) 544-4411 Drainage: Why and How by CARL SCHWARTZKOPF, Agronomist, USGA Green Section “Good turf is rarely seen except on well drained soil.” From the book Turf For Golf Courses, Piper and Oakley, 1917. There are still a few things time cannot change and the need for good drainage in turfgrass management is one of them. On a golf course, excess water is a problem not only to the golfer but also to the grass plant as well. Much of it is removed naturally by surface runoff, deep seepage, evaporation and transpiration, but these processes are often too slow to pre­ vent grass plant damage and to satisfy the golfer’s desire to play immediately after a rainstorm. Drainage is the removal of excess water from the surface and subsurface so that the area be­ comes useful and capable of supporting turf­ grass growth. The two types of drainage are: 1) surface and 2) subsurface. Surface drainage is the easiest and quickest way to remove excess water. This is done by contouring the land so that the water will flow by gravity to a grass waterway, stream, pond, etc. The best time to accomplish this of course is when the golf course is being designed and constructed. In every instance it is easier and less expensive to incorporate proper surface drainage during construction than to undertake large and elaborate subsurface tile systems after the course is established and in play. In situa­ Removing the sod, digging the trench; the pieces of plywood allow golf cars to cross. tions where a periodic concentration of flowing water often occurs it may be possible to con­ struct a grass waterway. These waterways can be so constructed that they also add to the gentle rolling terrain and character of the golf course itself. The golf course architect should play an important role here. The removal of water that has already entered the soil profile is considered subsurface drainage. Essentially, any drainage problem must be considered as a combination of surface and subsurface water removal. Excess moisture in a soil affects plant growth in a number of ways. Soil aeration, soil temper­ ature, biological activity, structural stability of the soil and soil chemistry are just a few of them. In areas where drainage is a problem, one often sees a stunted, thin, weak turfgrass cover with yellowing leaves. If excess water remains for some time, depending upon species, the plants usually die. However, the adverse effects are not necessarily from the direct presence of the excess water. Death may be primarily the result of root damage caused by reduced oxy­ gen and excess carbon dioxide in the root zone. The relative submersion tolerance of turf­ grasses vary. Bermudagrass and creeping bent­ grass have excellent submersion tolerance, whereas red fescue has a poor tolerance to sub­ mersion. Poa annua and perennial ryegrass are MAY 1975 1 can be mowed and maintained with the usual fairway and rough mowing units. TILE DRAINAGE The alternate method of removing excessive water is with drainage tile. Drainage tile removes excess water from the soil through a continuous line of tile laid at a specified depth and grade. Free water enters through the tile joints, slits or holes and flows out by gravity. Tile drains properly planned and installed become a per­ manent improvement requiring little mainten­ ance. So that the best and most economical tile system is installed, it is important that careful planning and construction are considered. Such care is particularly essential because the tiles are hidden and causes of failure are difficult to find and costly to repair. For the efficient layout of laterals and mains an accurate survey of the area to be tiled is generally needed. The survey determines the grade of the main so that the size of the tile will be correct for the area to be drained. The tile system should be planned to handle-all of the wet areas that could eventually be drained into the main, even if only part of the area is to be tiled initially. A system of short mains with long laterals is most economical, because long mains require larger and more expensive tile. For uniform drainage, laterals should be parallel and the same distance apart. This provides for a uniform water table between the laterals across the slope rather than vertically. The topography of the land, source of water Figure 1. Gridiron considered fair and Kentucky bluegrass is medium. Soil areation is a function of the sizes of the soil particles, how they are arranged, the degree of saturation or the soil moisture content. If the larger pores are free of water so that the moisture level is below field capacity, gas diffu­ sion can proceed satisfactorily. However, when the soil profile becomes saturated, the rate of diffusion declines. As decomposition and other biotic activity continues to take place in the soil, the oxygen level drops and the carbon dioxide level builds up. The rate of change in the gaseous balance speeds up under higher soil temperatures be­ cause of the faster rate of biological activity. The effect of temperature explains why winter flooding often is less harmful than summer flooding. Poor aeration and high moisture content directly affect the occurence and severity of some plant diseases. The change in balance be­ tween oxygen and carbon dioxide affect the growth and longevity of the disease organism. Plants weakened by the soil condition of too much water are also more susceptible to in­ fection. Wet soils are slow to warm up. The heat required to raise one pound of water one de­ gree would produce a similar temperature rise in about five pounds of dry mineral soil or four pounds of organic soil. The effect that drainage has on spring warmup of soils and on the re­ lated soil temperatures, as they affect turfgrass growth, is thus apparent. SURFACE DRAINAGE The need for surface drainage depends largely on the slope of the area. If it is flat, the excess water moves too slowly. If the area has depres­ sions and barriers, the water will be impounded and often becomes stagnant. A cause of some pocketed surfaces is the failure to smooth the fairway and approach areas before establishing a turfgrass cover. Proper planning should produce a drainage system that will permit maximum effective water intake and storage in the soil. Excess rain water will be removed without erosion. This may be accomplished during initial construc­ tion by insisting that surface drainage receive top priority. The types of surfacedrainage to be constructed, such as grass waterways, creeks, etc., depends upon topography, the type of soil and the effect it will have on the golfer, such as losing the ball in a hazard. When planning a drainage program, thought should be given to the installation of a com­ plete system that will provide continuous drain­ ageways from all areas of the site. It is important that the slopes are such that they 2 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD to be removed and other field conditions de­ termine the right location of tile lines and the proper type of drainage system. Tile drainage systems can be classified into three general types: a parallel, a random or an intercepting system. The parallel line systems are used on poorly drained soils having little slope and fairly uni­ form soil texture. Variations of the parallel system are the gridiron and herringbone pat­ terns (Fig. 1 & 2). In parallel drainage systems, one main serves as many laterals as possible, thereby making this a fairly economical arrange­ ment. The herringbone system is useful in areas where the main lies in a narrow depression and the laterals enter from both sides. This arrange­ ment accounts for the double drainage where the laterals and mains join. Consequently, this system will provide better drainage at that point. The random system (Fig. 3) is used in rolling areas that have scattered wet areas somewhat isolated from each other. Tile lines are laid more or less at random to drain the wet places. In most instances, it is better to locate the main so as to follow natural drainageways rather than to make deep cuts through ridges to form straight tile lines. Sub-mains and laterals should be extended from the main to the individual wet areas. If the wet spots are large, the use of one or more of the parallel systems may be required to provide the proper drainage. The random system of drainage is the one most fre­ quently used on the golf course. Figure 2. Herringbone The intercepting system involves the inter­ ception of seepage water that follows an im­ pervious soil layer. It is possible to locate tile so that the seepage water will be intercepted and the wet condition relieved. Proper location of the tile for interception of seepage water is important. The tile lines should be placed at the surface of the impervious layer along which the seepage water travels. In planning a tile drainage system, the outlet should be the starting point. No matter how carefully the system is installed, it will not work properly if the outlet does not function well. Tile drains may outlet by gravity into streams, lakes, ponds, channels or existing tile mains. All are suitable if they are large enough to handle the capacity of water flow. When a gravity out­ let is not available or when it is important to improve the outlet, the possibilities of removing the water by pumping should be considered. For each tile installation, a map of the loca­ tion of all lines and depth should be prepared. This map will be useful* in locating lines for repair and also for determining the possibilities of adding to the present system. A map showing the location of tile lines is one of the most important records that can be kept on a golf course and passed on to future superintendents. An adequately planned and properly installed drainage system with periodic maintenance will insure improved conditions for the survival of the turfgrass plant as well as improved playing conditions for the golfer. MAY 1975 3 You, Your Golf Course and the Federal Pesticide Act by ALEXANDER M. RADKO, Eastern Director & Green Section Research Director Quietly and methodically, government offi­ cials have been working on a new law to regu­ late the use of pesticides. The purpose of this law is to regulate, in the public interest, the labeling, distribution, storage, transportation, use, application and disposal of pesticides. Its principal target is the development of regulations for safer use and application of chemicals that will be designated as restricted- use pesticides. A restricted-use pesticide is one —“that because of its persistance, its toxicity, or otherwise the pesticide is so hazardous or injurious to persons, pollinating insects, animals, crops, wildlife, lands or the environment that additional restrictions on its sale, purpose, use or possession is required," Some pesticides classified for restricted use are: Aldrin, DDD, DDT, Dieldrin, Lindane, En­ drin, Heptachlor, Toxaphene, mercury com­ poundsand 2,4,5-T. In the past, these pesticides have been freely used in weed, insect, mite and disease control by amateur as well as profes­ sional applicators. When this law is fully imple­ mented, only persons certified to use restricted pesticides will be allowed to purchase them for specific uses. In other words, every applicator will be held accountable for the precise use of each re­ stricted-use pesticide and to apply it only as prescribed on the label. If used otherwise, the offender is subject to fine, loss of certification or legal action. Indiscriminate use by amateurs, homeowners, and the average citizen will no longer be permitted. Restricted pesticides will no longer be available on shelves at the super­ market, the garden center, or at the discount store for any and all to purchase in any quan­ tity, for any purpose. , . * The new Federal law enacted in 1972 and known as the Environmental Pesticide Control Act requires in part that— (1) Each state provide for certification of pesticide applicators .under a program approved by the Administrator. Each state must submit its program on or be­ fore October, 1975, so that persons who so desire can be certified before Octo­ ber, 1976, the deadline set to enact every'provision of the Federal Environ­ mental Pesticide Control Act. (2) Pesticides be used only as prescribed on the label. (3) Pesticides be classified for general use, or restricted use. Restricted-use pesti­ cides may be used only by, or under the supervision of certified applicators. 4 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD (4) Establish pesticide packaging standards. (5) Regulate pesticide container disposal. In 1972, Federal EPA officials began setting standards and guidelines for states to follow. State EPA officials in turn have been working to establish regulations within their states. There may be minor differences between states, but in the main most regulations should prove to be fairly uniform. As of this date, state regu­ lations are in various stages of development and we can only say that every golf course superin­ tendent and anyone else who seeks certification as an applicator should be in touch with any or all of the following organizations in order to keep informed: 1) his local golf course superin­ tendents association; 2) the Golf Course Super­ intendents Association of America (this organi­ zation has been working very closely with the Federal EPA and is as well informed on happenings as anyone); 3) your State EPA office; 4) your state Pesticide Coordinator. Under the new law, all pesticides will be classified either for general use, or for restricted use. The latter will be available only to certified applicators and each restricted-use pesticide will have to be applied by, or under the direction of a certified applicator. To gain certification, the applicant will have to be versed in pest identifi­ cation, proper storage of pesticides, calibration of equipment used for applying chemicals, application rates, label comprehension, proper methods of disposing of containers and unused chemicals, the effect of pesticides on the en­ vironment, safety precautions in handling pesti­ cides, first aid care and a good knowledge of pesticides and pesticide use in general. There are two classifications for users of restricted-use pesticides: (1) Private applicators—Farmers, who apply restricted pesticides to their own land or land which they lease. To qualify, the individual will be required to prove com­ petence in the use of such pesticides by some type of examination, and will then be certified as a private applicator and assigned a number which he must pre­ sent to a dealer in order to purchase a pesticide. (2) Commercial applicators—Anyone who engages in the business of applying pesti­ cides classified for restricted use will be examined to prove competence in the specific category of commercial appli­ cators to which he belongs. Upon suc­ cessful completion of the examination, he will be certified and required to pay an annual license fee. He too will be issued a number which must be pre­ sented to the dealer in order to purchase restricted-use pesticides. Commercial ap­ plicators may be certified in more than one category; if so, one fee will cover all categories in which he is certified. It appears that golf course superintendents will be classified in all or most states as com­ mercial applicators. This law pertains to others also—to dealers who sell pesticides, to home­ owners who apply pesticides to their own lawns to those who demonstrate the use of pesticides, to consultants who recommend restricted pesti­ cides and to custom applicators. It would be well for persons involved in any way in the sale or use of pesticides to stay abreast of develop­ ments through the news media, turfgrass man­ agement publications and personal contacts in turfgrass organizations. In summary, if you have anything to do with restricted-use pesticides, you must: (1) Apply for certification. But don't wait, do it now! Find out what is required of you in your state now. Some states offer temporary certification at this time and will catch up with testing applicants later in 1975. October, 1976, is the deadline set by Federal regulation for certification. After that date, all regula­ tions will be enforced. (2) Contact your (a) local golf course super­ intendents association, or (b) national golf course superintendents association, or (c) write directly to the Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Pesticide Control, at your state capital or (d) to the Pesticide Coordinator at the College of Agriculture at your state university. (3) You will be required to pass a state EPA test before you are allowed to purchase or apply restricted-use pesticides. The annual certification fee will be in the area of $25. (4) Certified applicators will be accountable for all restricted pesticides that they use. Mis-useswill not be excused or tolerated. These regulations are designed as another step to make this a better world for all Amer­ icans. Golf course superintendents will go through a period of adjustment, but it should not be too difficult because a major part of their pesticide job is to plan and adjust and then plan and adjust some more. Regretfully, the change- over to pesticide programs acceptable to EPA will be costly and it couldn’t have come at a worse time in our economy. Golf course super­ intendents will have to find the right materials to substitute for some of the banned broad­ spectrum chemicals which formerly offered multi-purpose controls. As a result more fre­ quent sprays, each for specific targets, will be necessary and will therefore be more costly in labor and materials until each superintendent finds the program that he feels is right for his specific conditions. MAY 1975 5 THE GOLF SHOE SPIKE —Things May Be Getting Better— The USGA Green Section Staff The story may be old to some, but the prob­ lem is as modern as tomorrow! The conven­ tional golf shoe spike remains one of the main causes of turf injury and soil compaction on golf greens. It not only affects playability and course conditioning, but adds considerably to maintenance costs for correction of compac­ tion, turf wear and tear. Over the years the USGA Green Section has been concerned with traffic and wear problems. (See research report in this issue, “Turfgrass Wear Tolerance Investigations” by Drs. Robert C. Shearman and James B. Beard, Michigan State). The conventional golf shoe spike first came under suspicion in 1959 from a study conducted by Dr. Marvin H. Ferguson, then USGA Research Coordinator for the Green Section. He found serious turf bruising and long lasting soil structure and compaction problems resulted from the conventional golf shoe spike; i.e., one with a rounded shoulder at the base of the spike, overlaying the shoe sole. He likened such a spike (and there are usually 12 of them on each golf shoe) to a miniature sheep foot roller. He maintained that the weight of the golfer rests not on the sole of the shoe but on the shoulders of the spike itself. To overcome this problem, Dr. Ferguson proposed that a shoe be made with recessed spike shoulders and that only the spike should protrude from the base of the shoe. The GREEN SECTION RECORD has pub­ lished numerous articles on this important re­ search (July, 1959; September, 1959; May, 1963 and September, 1971). Progress has been made and shoes with recessed spike shoulders are available today. But even greater progress is needed and possible. More and more concerned golfers must be alerted and encouraged to buy and wear shoes of this type. The Green Section Staff unanimously endorses the use of golf shoes with recessed shoulders. We believe they will significantly reduce turf injury, soil compaction and improve putting qualities and smoothness around the cup. Their exclusive use would also reduce maintenance costs. The USGA Executive Committee has now recommended recessed spikes for golf shoes. To further the cause, the following letter has been sent to the 11 leading golf shoe manufacturers in the United States: January 12, 1975 Dear Sir: We call your attention to an article by the Green Section Staff that appeared in the May, 1974, issue of the USGA’s publica­ tion “The Golf Journal.” It deals with spike injury to golf turfgrasses, putting greens especially, and suggests that if golf spikes were recessed, we would have few­ er injury problems and better putting surfaces. We earnestly solicit your cooperation in moving in the direction of recessed spikes for golf shoes. We are certain that this step would be in the best interests of golf. Can we count on your cooperation? Sincerely, /S/ P.J. Boatwright, Jr. Executive Director 6 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD Turf grass Wear Tolerance Investigations by DR. ROBERT C. SHEARMAN and DR. JAMES S. BEARD1 lurfgrass wear injury results when the crush­ ing, tearing action of foot or vehicular traffic destroys the turfgrass leaf, stem, and crown tissues. The extent of this injury depends upon the (a) turfgrass species, (b) intensity of culture practiced, (c) environment, and (d) intensity and type of traffic. The most direct means of minimizing turfgrass wear injury is through manipulation of cultural practices such as cut­ ting height, nitrogen and potassium fertilization, irrigation, and traffic control. These are short­ term approaches that only partially alleviate the problem. An equally important and more long-term approach involves breeding cultivars that have improved wear tolerance characteristics. In this regard, there is essentially no basic understand­ ing of the plant characteristics that contribute to our turfgrass wear tolerance differentials. 1 Former Extension Associate, now Turfgrass Special­ ist, Dept, of Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska; and Professor, Dept, of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan If this information were available, it could be used in turfgrass breeding programs to develop cultivars with improved wear tolerance characteristics. A program of this nature would in turn result in turfgrasses better adapted for use on intensively trafficked areas, such as greens, tees, and fairways. The objectives of this investigation were: (1) to evaluate the anatomical, morphological, and physiological characteristics of turfgrasses that contribute to wear tolerance; and (2) to develop criteria that could be used as selection tools in a turfgrass breeding program designed to select wear tolerant cultivars. In doing this, a portable wear simulator was developed and the wear tolerance of seven cool-season turfgrasses was determined. Turfgrass Wear Simulator. Past investigations of traffic assessed the combined effects of turf­ grass wear injury and soil compaction. In this investigation, a simulator was designed and con­ structed to evaluate turfgrass wear injury inde­ pendent of soil compaction (Figure 1). The wear simulator was an electrically-powered, portable unit that could be used in a wide range of field conditions. It simulated both foot Figure 1. View of the wear simulator in operation. MAY 1975 7 and vehicular wear. The unit proved to be a rapid, flexible, and reliable method of evalua­ ting turfgrass wear tolerance differentials be­ tween turfgrass species and among management practices. Comparative Wear Tolerance Evaluations of Seven Cool Season Turfgrasses. The seven cool­ season turfgrass species evaluated were Cascade chewings fescue (Festuca follax var. Cascade), Italian ryegrass (Lolium muitifiorum), Ken­ tucky 31 tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea var. Kentucky 31), Manhattan perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne var. Manhattan), Merion Ken­ tucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis var. Merion), Pennlawn red fescue (Festuca rubra var. Penn­ lawn), and rough bluegrass (Poa trivialis). All seven species were established from seed one year prior to superimposing the wear treat­ ments. All were maintained at a cutting height of 1.5 inches, and were mowed twice weekly with the clippings returned. Irrigation was applied as needed to prevent visual wilt symp­ toms. Three quantitative measurements of wear injury were compared to a visual rating system. The three quantitative methods proved to be quite satisfactory for separating wear differen­ tials, even on very closely related species. All three methods were preferred to the visual rating system. The assessment of the per cent verdure (turf remaining under a specific mowing height) remaining after wear treatment relative to that quantity present before treatment proved to be the simplest and most reliable method tested. The comparative ranking of the seven cool­ season turfgrasses in terms of vehicular and foot simulated wear are summarized in Table 1. The superior ranking of Manhattan perennial rye­ grass compared to previous reports of the classical unimproved ryegrasses is particularly striking. Also of interest was Merion Kentucky bluegrass. It ranked comparably with Kentucky 31 tall fescue. These data suggest that a mixture of improved perennial ryegrass and Kentucky bluegrass might be effective in minimizing wear injury of intensively trafficked areas around the golf course. More work needs to be done to evaluate wear tolerance differentials between cultivars of improved perennial reygrass and Kentucky bluegrass, as well as among mixtures of these species. Anatomical, Morphological, and Physiolog­ ical Factors Contributing to Wear Tolerance. The comparative wear tolerance data was corre­ lated with 15 turfgrass characteristics that were subsequently evaluated to assess their associa­ tion with wear tolerance. The specific character­ istics evaluated included: (a) cellulose, hemicel­ lulose, lignocellulose, lignin, and total cell wall content; (b) verdure, shoot density, leaf width, load bearing capacity, and leaf tensile strength; and (c) the per cent moisture content, relative turgidity, and sclerenchyma tissue distribution in leaf sheaths and blades. The results of this investigation indicated that the cell wall constituents (i.e. cellulose, hemicellulose, lignocellulose, and lignin) ex­ pressed on a weight per unit area basis could be effectively used to express wear tolerance char­ acteristics of turfgrass species. Total cell wall content alone, expressed on a weight per unit area basis accounted for 78 per cent of the observed variation in wear tolerance. While, the combined effects of all the cell wall constitu­ ents accounted for over 90 per cent of the observed variation. Of the 15 turfgrass characteristics studied, five primary characteristics were best suited for selection purposes: (1) total cell wall content Table 1. Relative ranking of seven cool season turfgrasses according to wear tolerance and such predictive characters as total cell wall content, load bearing capacity, leaf tensile strength, and leaf width. Relative ranking with 1 best and 6 poorest Turfgrass Species Wear tolerance Vehicular type Foot type Total cell wall content Load bearing capacity Leaf tensile strength Leaf width Manhattan perennial ryegrass Merion Kentucky bluegrass Kentucky 31 tall fescue Italian ryegrass Pennlawn red fescue Cascade chewings fescue Rough bluegrass 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 2 1 3 4 4 4 6 2 2 1 3 3 4 5 2 4 1 3 5 5 5 2 2 1 1 4 5 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 Firgure2. View of two plots after wear treatment. (Right) Pennlawn red fescue, (Left) Man­ hattan perennial ryegrass. Association Green Section. Among these studies are (a) the assessment of wear tolerance differ­ entials of 24 Kentucky bluegrass and eight creeping bentgrass cultivars that are available for use on golf courses; (b) the effects of cultural practices such as mowing height, nitro­ gen and potassium fertilization, and irrigation on wear tolerance; and (c) anatomical, morpho­ logical, and physiological turfgrass characteris­ tics associated with intraspecies wear tolerance differentials. Results of these investigations will be reported in the Green Section Record when available. expressed on a weight per unit area basis, (2) leaf width, (3) leaf tensile strength, (4) lignin content and distribution, and (5) per cent sclerenchyma fibers and their distribution in the leaf sheath and blade. Of these characteris­ tics, total cell wall content was the best individ­ ual indicator of turfgrass wear tolerance. The determination of total cell wall content is a simple and direct method that could be effec­ tively incorporated into a breeding program designed to select wear tolerant cultivars. Investigations in Progress. Continuing re­ search on turfgrass wear tolerance aspects is being supported by the United States Golf ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr. Robert C. Shearman was appointed turf­ grass specialist and assistant professor of horti­ culture January 1, 1975. Prior to coming to the University of Nebraska- Lincoln, he was a research agronomist for O.M. Scott & Sons Co. in Oregon. Shearman received his Ph.D. (1973) and M.S. (1971) degrees in turfgrass physiology and management from Michigan State University. He did undergradu­ ate work at Oregon State University, where he received a bachelors degree in agronomy in 1967. Shearman wrote a classic thesis on wear mechanisms in turf while at Michigan State. He is a member of Sigma Xi, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society and associate member of the Nebraska Golf Course Super­ intendents Association. MAY 1975 9 *** Field Notes For May *** From A. M. Radko, Eastern Region: Research continues to play a vital role in golf course maintenance and management. One of the major sources of research revenue is derived from funds raised by National Golf Day. When asked, please support National Golf Day at your club. Funds raised benefit all of golf through the U.S.G.A. Green Section Research and Education Fund, Inc., a non-profit organi­ zation whose sole aim is to invest in research that is beneficial to golf. This year almost $40,000 is being invested through the U.S.G.A. Research and Education Fund at 19 universities in the interests of golf and golf course manage­ ment. Your participation in National Golf Day means golf will benefit. We hope we can count on your continued support. From Lee Record, Mid-Continent Region: State of Wisconsin 1975 Assembly Bill 347, “Bill prohibits the use of phenoxy herbicides for herbicidal purposes,” met much opposition on the March 19 hearing in the Assembly Chamber. Testimony presented in opposition to this bill was given by all agricultural related fields, including the testimony of William Eck­ ert, Golf Course Superintendent at Maple Bluff Country Club and Chairman of the Wisconsin Environment Committee. It is too early to predict the outcome of Assembly Bill 347, but all indications point to this bill's not passing. From Stan Zontek, Eastern Region: The Crop Science Society of America has announced publication of an important addition to your turfgrass library. Proceedings of the Second International Turfgrass Research Con­ ference is now available from the Society. Edited by Dr. Eliot C. Roberts of the University of Rhode Island, the Proceedings carries 628 pages in hard bound volume. Copies may be obtained from: Crop Science Society of America 677 South Segoe Road Madison, Wisconsin 53711 Alexander M. Radko presenting Green Sec­ tion research check to Dr. J. Gordon Futral of the Agricultural Engineering Department, University of Georgia. In the background is Dennis C. Davis (Left) a graduate student and Dr. B.P. Verna of the Department. From William H. Bengeyfield, Western Region: Dr. Charles Gould reports 156 varieties of bentgrasses are now being tested at the Western Washington Research Center, Puyallup, Wash., with support from the USGA Green Section. Among the common commercially available types, Penncross, Emerald and Exeter have been much more resistant to Fusarium Patch than Highland. Astoria, Holfior and Seaside were intermediate. In the bluegrasses, the two most rust resist­ ant of 127 varieties under test last year were Bonnieblue and Majestic. These varieties were also found to be “intermediate” in resistance to Heiminthosporium. From the University of Arizona, Dr. Bob Kneebone reports a remarkable response from rye and bentgrass to 0-46-0 on overseeded Tifgreen this winter. He is convinced that phos­ phorus is necessary on sandy soil mixes for good cold weather growth and color. Might file this away for next winter. 10 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD From Holman Griffin Mid-Atlantic Region: From Carl Schwartzkopf, Mid-Continent Region: Another fairly mild winter in the Mid­ Atlantic states has been favorable for warm and cool season turf. Bermudagrass use as a fairway turf, especially some of the winter hardy varieties now on the market, is gaining popular­ ity in the transition zone around Washington, D.C. An especially promising combination re­ sults from overseeding bermuda with perennial ryegrass for year round green color, as reported by George Thompson, Superintendent at Col­ umbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Md. Thompson's program of combination bermuda and perennial ryegrass began in 1968. From Monty Moncreif, Southern Region: How much are clubs cutting back on their budgets? Budgets in the Southern Region have been considered very carefully for 1975. Bud­ gets will range from as much as 20 per cent increases in some cases to a 30 per cent cut in others. The 30 percent will certainly result in personnel reduction, and it will be a time to make a definite decision on whether or not to retain the less competent employees. Time and motion studies throughout the golf course oper­ ation will enable better utilization of personnel. Dr. Glenn W. Burton (Right) receives the 1975 USGA Green Section research support check from James B. Moncrief, Southern Green Section Director. The 38th Midwest Regional Turfgrass Foun­ dation meeting was held at Purdue University in early March. Over 725 individuals registered and participated in the three-day educational meeting. From Billy Buchanan, Eastern Region: THOSE WERE THE GOOD OULD DAYS(?) Forty-five years ago, a list of equipment necessary to operate the maintenance depart­ ment of a 9-hole course contained the following items: 1 Agricultural harrow 1 Fairway mowing machine 1 Mower, 3-gang, with tractor hitch 1 Tractor 2 Greens mowers 1 Tee mower 1 Ordinary lawn mower 2 Wheelbarrows 1 Sod cutter and lifter 1 Hole cutter 9 Hole rims 9 Tee markers 9 Flags 1 Flexible steel mat 3 Ball washers 1 Compost mixer or screener 9 Sprinklers 1 Dump cart 1000 Feet hose Necessary rakes and shovels This list is cutting the corner close, but it means the difference between a cow pasture and a golf course in many cases. Counting the tractor in for around $700, the total cost of the above equipment would be in the neighbor­ hood of $2,200.” Where maintenance labor cost needed to be controlled, a club in North Dakota assigned two members to each green. The members were responsible for its care. In Kingfisher, Okla­ homa that same year, a club reported the good fortune in having a neighboring farmer who was an enthusiastic golfer. It cost the club between $40 and $50 a month to keep up the fairways and greens. The farmer-greenkeeper used his own tractor and power, the club owned the mowers. THOSE WERE THE GOOD OLD DAYS! 11 Texas A&M Laboratory Now Offers Green Section Soil Test Service ■ or the past 15 years, a soil testing laboratory has been supported by the USGA Green Section at one of the nation’s major universities. The continuing purpose is to make recommenda­ tions for putting green soil mixes based on the Green Section Specifications. We are pleased to announce that the Green Section has reached an agreement with Texas A&M University to continue this service to golf clubs, superinten- ents, and course architects. The Texas A&M laboratory will be able to furnish the latest testing and research information in putting green soils. What is Needed: A laboratory analysis will require a minimum of two gallons of sand and one gallon each of soil and organic matter avail­ able at your club. If there is a choice of sands, soils, and organic materials, send samples of each along with a note indicating your prefer­ ence, based on cost, easy accessibility, etc. The laboratory will attempt to use your preferred materials in the recommended mixture. All materials should be packaged separately and securely. Strong plastic bags inside card­ board cartons or metal cans are most satisfac­ tory. Do not put moist soil or sand in a paper bag—it rarely arrives intact. When materials arrive broken and mixed, the laboratory simply must request more material. This sort of delay can be inconvenient, aggravating and time consuming. Paper labels packaged with moist materials deteriorate very rapidly. It is a good idea to use plastic labels inside the package and also to mark the outside of the packages. The more information you can send, the better. How and Where to Send: Use United Parcel Service preferably; if within 500 miles of Texas A&M University, use the Greyhound bus system; if sent by mail, allow double the estimated time—experience shows it to be much slower than other choices listed. Address all materials to: Soil Physics Section Soil & Crop Sciences Department Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 77843 Attn: Dr. Kirk W. Brown Dr. Richard L. Duble Type of Analysis Price Complete soil analysis including analysis, total USGA testing procedure on one sand, one soil, and one organic matter1 $130.00 2) Mechanical analysis (particle size) of individual sand or soil sample 12.50 3) Assay of organic amendment sample, including ashing 12.50 4) Chemical analysis, pH, P, K, and total salts 2.00 5) Analysis of a soil mixture for particle size analysis and ash 6) Infiltration rate only of sub­ mitted mixture or a combined (laboratory blended) mixture 7) Moisture retention for 1/3, Vz, and 1 atmosphere 8) Analysis of a mixture for particle size, bulk density, pore distribution, infiltration rate, and 40 cm water retention 25.00 15.00 25.00 40.002 ^Customers submitting additional materials will be charged in accordance with the above schedule for individual items. p $40 for individual samples, $30 each for 2 to 10 samples, and $25 each for 11 or more samples. 12 USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD The Turf grass Service of the USGA Green Section The Turfgrass Service of the USGA Green Section again enjoyed an increase in total subscribers last year and looks forward to even greater membership support in 1975. It is the only non-profit advisory agency devoted solely to golf course turf, its playing conditions and its management. It has nothing to sell. The eight Green Section agronomists cover the nation and have made nearly 30,000 direct golf course visits to subscribing clubs in the past 23 years! Every USGA Member Club should subscribe to the Service. The cost is less than 1/3 of 1 per cent of most golf course maintenance budgets today. Why not put this highly trained team to work for your club this year? Turfgrass subscribers receive the following benefits yearly-. 1) Several direct conferences with a Green Section agronomist, in this manner: A) A scheduled half-day, on-the-course consultation, followed by a written report from the agronomist to the Course Superintendent and Green Committee Chairman or club representative. Second visits are available if needed at no additional charge and at the club’s request. B) Consultation with the agronomist at local group meetings and turf conferences. 2) Assistance by correspondence and telephone. 3) A subscription to the USGA Green Section Record, dealing with golf turf affairs, six times a year, addressed to the Golf Course Superintendent. (This is in addition to the subscription sent to the Green Committee Chairman in connection with USGA Membership.) 4) A voice in the direction of turf research whose results benefit golf courses. The subscription fee covers all services and expenses; there are no extra charges for travel. (The fee for the Green Section Turfgrass Service is additional to dues for USGA Membership). A list of regional Green Section offices can be found inside the front cover. APPLICATION FOR TURFGRASS SERVICE OF USGA GREEN SECTION (Open to USGA Members Only) Date, 19___ Full Name of Club or Course___________________________________________________ Permanent Mail Address (street or box)___________________________________________ Post office State Zip Application authorized by:Title Course Superintendent________________________________________________________ We hereby apply for the Turfgrass Service of the United States Golf Association Green Section and certify that we are eligible for the class checked below. We enclose the fee (see schedule below) for the current year ending December 31. The USGAGreen Section Record is to be addressed to our Golf Course Superintendent (this is in addition to the subscription sent to our Green Committee Chairman in connection with USGA Membership). This application is automatically continuous from year to year unless interrupted by advance resignation. Check Proper C/ass: Less than 18 holes ..................... $280 18 to 27 holes.............................................................$360 More than 27 holes: 36 holes ..................................................................... $385 Per regulation course in addition to 36 holes.................................................$ 75 Please send receipted invoice If a subscribing member feels it requires a second visit, or if the appropriate USGA agronomist feels a second visit is required, it will entail no additional charge. For each visit after the second, the fee will be $200. USGA GREEN SECTION RECORD MAY 1975 TURF TWISTERS THE MAN TO SEE Question: With all the confusion surrounding the upcoming pesticide certification exams, whom should I contact for more and current information on this subject? (New Jersey) Answer: In most all states your local county agent or the state extension personnel along with your local GCSAA Chapter should be able to help you keep informed. If you are not on their mailing lists, get on them. Keep informed. These tests are coming up in the relatively near future. FOR TWO ROWS Question: In a recent Turf Twister ("Two Rows That Fail”), you reported a two-row automatic irrigation system as inadequate because it heavily irrigates the center of fair­ ways while leaving the perimeters and rough areas relatively dry. To me, your answer is incorrect. It is the one-row system that does this foul deed. Would you comment further? (Ohio) Answer: Your point is well taken. A two-row automatic system does afford a bit better coverage, but it still, in our opinion, leaves much to be desired. For example, if irrigation heads are triangularly spaced 70 feet apart in a two-row layout, effective coverage (i.e., uniform precipitation rates) can only be achieved between the heads. This means approximately 70 feet of uniform coverage or a fairway about 23 yards wide. By most standards, this is not enough. However, a three-row system will give a fairway width of approxi­ mately 46 yards of uniform precipitation. Much better—don’t you agree? OF LITHIUM GREASE Question: While overhauling our equipment this winter, we decided to switch to a dripless lithium-based grease. Would you happen to know if this grease is compatible with regular petroleum-based greases? (Rhode Island) Answer: We checked into this question and quite frankly found conflicting answers. Some say yes they are, some say that mixing them tends to break them down more quickly so both drip (and lubricate less), and another says it depends on the greases involved. At this point we are somewhat confused, so perhaps the best answer to this question is to ask your respective machinery and grease suppliers. With the ever increasing dependence on machinery to do golf course work, topnotch maintenance is all-important in keeping the machinery running the entire season through. Proper lubrication is a big part of this, so don’t take an unnecessary chance. Use the lubricants recommended by the manufacturer for that piece of equipment. Perhaps saving a few dollars in grease could cost you much more in down time and perhaps even voided warranties. If you do change greases, we feel it would be wise to completely remove, clean, flush, etc., the old grease and simply not take the chance of mixing them and losing some lubrication properties.