R E S E A R C H. Cornell #5 Program: Plant Food 1. The Liquid Fertilizer Experts

Transcription

1 Cornell Update 2003 performance summary of competitive liquid programs Mixed stand of creeping bentgrass (Penn G-2) and annual bluegrass Subjected to 30,000 rounds of simulated non-metal spike traffic Plant Food programs are top performers in Turf Quality ratings Review the complete Cornell study for additional information 2003 R E S E A R C H Turf quality ratings collected throughout the 2003 season. Rating scale from 1 to 9 with 1 being poor quality, 9 exceptional quality and 6 is considered the lowest acceptable. Trt# Product Line 15-Jun 22-Jun 12-Jul 25-Jul 5-Aug 17-Aug 27-Aug 12-Sep 26-Sep 14-Oct 30-Oct 7-Nov 21-Nov 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus Standard plus Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) Cornell #5 Program: Plant Food 1 Rate per 1,000 sq. ft. Gallons per Acre Green-T with Micronutrients 12 oz 4.0 Gal Green-T Micro Mix 3 oz 1.0 Gal AdamsEarth Biostimulant 6 oz 2.0 Gal Green-T Sugar Cal Calcium 4 oz 1.4 Gal Flo Thru 2403 Soil Penetrant 2 oz 0.7 Gal Green-T N-28, oz 2.0 Gal Foliar, Crown & Root Nutrition Multiple Nitrogen Sources: 60% Controlled Release Nitrogen (from Green-T & ) Quick release nitrogen for immediate response Triazone controlled release nitrogen for extended nutrient response Three families of chelates for extended micronutrient release Sorbitol chelate (Green-T Sugar Cal) for response in less than 12 hours Glucoheptonate chelate (Green-T Micro Mix) for response in 12 hours 3 days EDTA chelate (Green-T ) for response 3-5 days Biostimulants from AdamsEarth: Contains L-amino acids, humic acid, carbohydrates, North Atlantic kelp extract, natural sugars, vitamins and micronutrients North Atlantic kelp extract contains auxin, cytokinin and gibberellen hormones which improves turf rooting. The Liquid Fertilizer Experts CORNEL0908

2 2003 Cornell University Fertilizer study comparing various products and the effect on putting green performance and more. Read the study and see how well Plant Food Company s products performed, specifically: Plot #5: Plant Food I Green-T Green-T Micro Mix Adams Earth Green-T Sugar Cal Flo Thru Soil Penetrant Green-T Page 1 of 12

3 Tri-State Turfgrass Research Project Summary Title: Influence of Microbial and Organic-based Products on Putting Green Performance. Principal Investigator: Frank S. Rossi, Ph.D. Cornell University Statement of the Problem Golf turf managers are regularly inundated with a variety of microbial or organic based products that are touted as providing enhanced performance, i.e., more roots, less disease, stress tolerance, improved quality, etc. In some cases the manufacturer provides independent research data taken out of context to position a product as filling an important niche. However, upon closer examination of these products, it appears that small amounts of nutritional supplements included in the formulation produce a visual response that can be provided with a less expensive nutritional source. In addition, manufacturers have been reluctant to fund meaningful research that compares their products against other similar products and traditional nutrient sources. Objective The objective of this study is to critically evaluate commercially available microbial and organic based products and compare to traditional nutrient sources for effect on putting green performance. Methodology Products from a variety of companies were compared to traditional liquid and granular nutrient management programs in a completely randomized experiment with three replications. Treatments were applied to mixed stand of creeping bentgrass (penn G-2) and annual bluegrass growing on a sand-based green (ph 7.8) constructed to California specifications and subjected to 30,000 rounds of simulated non-metal spike traffic. Applications commenced June 10, Liquid sprays were applied weekly on Wednesdays and granular and drench treatments were applied on Fridays, throughout the season. A CO 2 backpack sprayer fitted with TeeJet XR8015 nozzles was calibrated to deliver 2 gallons of water per 1000 square feet. Plots were maintained to championship conditions including mowing seven days a week at 0.100" with a grooved roller. The green was irrigated to 80% ET on an as needed basis to avoid localized dry spot. Straight sand topdressing was applied every three weeks. Products were sampled and analyzed by the Cornell University Analytical Laboratory according to Infant Formula protocol as published in the Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1990: ). Data was collected for quality, shoot density, rooting, clipping production, tissue nutrient content, and ball roll distance. In addition, disease incidence and insect activity, were monitored. Page 2 of 12

4 Figure 1a. Treatment application regimes Trt# Product Rate/1000 Interval 1 Urea 0.1 lb N 7d MAP 0.05 lb P KSO4 0.1 lb K Iron 4 oz 2 Stndrd Fert EcoGuard 20 oz 7 d 3 Stndrd Fert Turf Shield 0.3 oz R % v/v 14d 4 HM oz 14d HM oz HM oz June,Sept,Oct HM oz July, August 5 Plant Food I 14d oz Green T Micro Mix 3 oz Adams Earth 6 oz Sugar Cal 4 oz Flo Thru 2 oz oz 6 Plant Food II 14d oz Green T Micro Mix 3 oz Adams Earth 3 oz Sugar Cal 4 oz Flo Thru 2 oz MKP 0.2 lbs 7 Stndrd Fert plus 14 d Nutramax Program MacroSorb foliar 2 oz Quelant Ca 2 oz Quelant Minors 1.5 oz 8 Half Rate Stndrd Fert plus 1/2 rate 14 d Nutramax Program MacroSorb foliar 2 oz Quelant Ca 2 oz Quelant Minors 1.5 oz Page 3 of 12

5 Figure 1b. Treatment application regimes 9 Griggs Bros I 14 d Gary's Green 4 oz Sili Kal B 3 oz Tuff Turf 3 oz Ultra Plex 1.5 oz 10 Griggs Bros II 14 d Gary's Green 6 oz P K Plus 6 oz Ultra Plex 1.5 oz 11 Emerald Isle I 14 d oz oz oz oz 12 Emerald Isle II 14 d oz oz oz oz oz 13 Sustane lb N 4 wk Bolster 3 oz 14 d BioGroundskeeper 4 oz 21 d 14 Stdrd fert plus Super Bio Soil Life (Liq) 6 oz Initial App 3 oz 21 d 15 Organic Gem 3 oz 21 d 16 Floratine Astron 1 Foliar Spray ProteSyn 1.5 FG-20 (0-0-20) 3 Perk-up 0.75 Knife 1 Renaissance 0.5 PhlexMag 0.5 Floradox 0.8 CalpHlex 4 Soil Spray Maxiplex 2 weeks Phlex Man 1 GrowFax 2 Microlime 48 Granulars Pro Mag 36 8 K2SO4 16 Page 4 of 12

6 Figure 2. Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium application rates associated with application regimes. lbs. actual /1000 sq ft. Trt# Product Line N P K 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine Results Product Analysis Processing products for analysis with the ICP instrument is orders of magnitude more sensitive than would be required for standard product labeling required by law. As a result, we have found significantly more nutrients in many cases than what is reported by manufacturers. However, we are not able to assess the level of available nutrients with this process, nor additional chelating agents such as amino acids, humates, etc. The product analysis results reveal the variety and levels of nutrients found in the products (Figure 3a through d). The nitrogen levels are mostly consistent with those reported by manufacturers, however, there are substantial differences among levels we report and current labels. Potassium, iron and calcium tend to be exceedingly high in many products most likely related to the reported benefits these nutrients are thought to afford for color and stress tolerance. Of particular concern are several products with very high levels of sodium. Several of these products are produced from ocean-derived materials such as seaweed and fish waste. Page 5 of 12

7 Figure 3a. Results from laboratory product analysis. Sample Name %N P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Na S Al Mo Cu Zn Ecoguard <.0000 Trichoderma Helena HM < Helena HM < Helena HM Plant Food Plant Food Green T Micro Mix Plant Food Adams Earth Plant Food Sugar Cal Plant Food FloThru Plant Food MKP Plant Food Emerald Isle Emerald Isle Emerald Isle Emerald Isle S< < Emerald Isle Nutramax Macrosorb Foliar Nutramax Macrosorb Radicular Nutramax Quelant K Nutramax Quelant Ca Figure 3b. Results from laboratory product analysis. Sample Name %N P K Ca Mg Fe Mn Na S Al Mo Cu Zn Gary's Green Griggs SiliKal B < Griggs Tuff Turf Griggs Ultraplex Griggs Maxiplex Griggs PK Plus Floratine < Floratine < < Floratine Astron Floratine Calphlex < Floratine Dermaplex <.0000 < Floratine Floradox < Floratine Phlexman 0.00 < ^ Floratine Perk Up Floratine Protosyn Floratine Grofax Floratine P Floratine Renaissance 0.34 < Floratine K2N < < <.0000 Floratine Knife < ^ Organic Gem Figure 3c. Results from laboratory product analysis. Sample Name As B Cd Co Cr Li Ni Pb Se Sr Ti V Y Ecoguard < < Trichoderma < < Helena HM9716 < < < Helena HM9754 < < < Helena HM < < Plant Food < Plant Food Green T Micro Mix < Plant Food Adams Earth < Plant Food Sugar Cal < Plant Food FloThru < Plant Food MKP < Plant Food < Emerald Isle < < Emerald Isle < < < Emerald Isle < Emerald Isle < < Emerald Isle Nutramax Macrosorb Foliar < <.0000 < Nutramax Macrosorb Radicular < < < Nutramax Quelant K < < < Nutramax Quelant Ca < <.0000 < <.0000 < < Page 6 of 12

8 Figure 3d. Results from laboratory product analysis. Sample Name As B Cd Co Cr Li Ni Pb Se Sr Ti V Y Gary's Green < < Griggs SiliKal B < < < Griggs Tuff Turf < Griggs Ultraplex < Griggs Maxiplex < < Griggs PK Plus < Floratine < < < Floratine < < < Floratine Astron < < <.0000 < Floratine Calphlex < < <.0000 < < < Floratine Dermaplex < < <.0000 < Floratine Floradox < < < Floratine Phlexman < < Floratine Perk Up < < < < <.0000 < Floratine Protosyn < Floratine Grofax < Floratine P < < Floratine Renaissance < < Floratine K2N03 < < < < Floratine Knife < Organic Gem Results (continued) Turf Quality Turf quality ratings were excellent (>7.0) for most treatments except for the Organic Gem product (Figure 4). In general, turf quality ratings were correlated to nitrogen rates. Pearson correlation coefficients were as high as 90% when turf quality was analyzed against nitrogen rates. Interestingly there were some products that did provide a high level of turf quality that were not entirely correlated with nitrogen rates. Specifically, the Plant Food programs and the Advanced Microbial Systems (AMS) product Super Bio Life in combination with the standard fertility treatment. The AMS treatment in combination with standard fertility was consistently one or quality points above the standard fertility treatments alone. The Emerald Isle program did not always provide the highest turf quality ratings but were rarely different from the Standard fertility program. This was significant in that the nutrient levels were 20 to 40 % below that provided for other programs. It is likely that the high iron levels in the Plant Food products resulted in significantly higher quality ratings than other products. However, there were several programs with high iron levels such as Griggs Brothers products that were not rated as high as the Plant Food products. The 2003 growing season in Ithaca, NY was warm and wet. Temperatures were slightly above normal for the season and rainfall was well above (>8 above normal). Oddly, there were no significant pest outbreaks and it is worth noting that every treatment did provide turf quality acceptable to the most discriminating clients. Growth Response An ideal product would produce high turf quality (color, density, uniformity) with minimal clipping production and adequate root growth. Growth responses were similar to turf quality ratings in that they were well correlated with nitrogen rates. However, there were some instances where clipping production was almost twice the amount of the Standard fertility (Figure 5). In contrast, there were some treatments with high levels of nitrogen that did not result in significant growth surges. This might be related to the timing of clipping collection that was performed when treatments may have been in a down cycle. Page 7 of 12

9 The Standard fertility treatment did produce a relatively consistent growth rate throughout the season while programs from Helena Chemical and Floratine fluctuated from 0.5 to 0.8 grams over the season. Figure 4. Turf quality ratings collected throughout the 2003 season. Rating scale from 1 to 9 with 1 being poor quality, 9 is exceptional quality and 6 is considered the lowest acceptable. Trt# Product Line 15-Jun 22-Jun 12-Jul 25-Jul 5-Aug 17-Aug 27-Aug 12-Sep 26-Sep 14-Oct 30-Oct 7-Nov 21-Nov 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) Figure 5. Clipping weights (grams) produced during the 2003 growing season in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line 22-Jun 25-Jul 17-Aug 12-Sep 14-Oct 7-Nov 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Standard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) In contrast to clipping production, rooting did not appear to be influenced by nitrogen rate. In fact, there were little significant differences except for the increased rooting in response to Trichoderma applications and low rooting levels from the Organic Gem product. Few products produced any significant rooting below 6cm and there were no significant differences among the products at these depths (Figure 6). Figure 6. Root weights (grams) produced during the 2003 growing season in response to product regimes. Page 8 of 12

10 22-Jul 30-Oct Trt# Depth (cm) >6 Total >6 Total 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS 0.4 Tissue Nutrient Content Tissue nutrient levels fluctuated significantly throughout the season making interpretation very difficult (Figure 7-12). In general, tissue nitrogen and iron levels were consistent with application amounts. However, this was not always consistent with turf quality ratings. There were several dates when potassium levels were significantly different and consistent with potassium application rates. This was true for phosphorus and manganese but surprisingly not significant on any date for calcium. This could be related to the calcareous nature of the growing medium and demonstrates further that if a nutrient is available in adequate amounts, supplying additional nutrients does not increase tissue levels. The most consistent and concerning response evident were the sodium levels. This was consistent for the ocean-derived products notably Emerald Isle, Organic Gem and Floratine. Page 9 of 12

11 Figure 7. Tissue nutrient levels from June, 2003 in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Figure 8. Tissue nutrient levels from July, 2003 in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Figure 9. Tissue nutrient levels from August, 2003 in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) 0.39 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Page 10 of 12

12 Figure 10. Tissue nutrient levels from September, 2003 in response to product regimes. Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Figure 11. Tissue nutrient levels from October, 2003 in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Figure 12. Tissue nutrient levels from November, 2003 in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line N (%) K (%) P (%) Ca (%) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Fe (ppm) Cu (ppm) B (ppm) Zn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Al (ppm) Na (ppm) 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II Standard plus Nutramax /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Page 11 of 12

13 Ball Roll An important functional performance measure is ball roll as measured by a stimpmeter. Data presented to this point regarding turf quality and clipping weights might be expected to produce an effect on ball roll. However, there were no significant differences among treatments for ball roll on the four dates in 2003 (Figure 13). It is possible that with the number of variable involved in ball roll differences any potential differences were not discernable. The close mowing height (0.100 ) conducted daily during the season produced ball roll distances above 10.5 feet. It is significant that some treatments with large clipping weights did not result in reduced ball roll distances. Figure 13. Ball roll distances in feet in response to product regimes. Trt# Product Line 20-Jun 27-Jul 22-Aug 15-Sep 1 Standard Standard plus EcoGuard Standard plus Trichoderma Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food II /2 ratestandard plus Nutramax Standard plus Nutramax Griggs I Griggs II Emerald Isle I Emerald Isle II Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS Summary It is hard to draw significant conclusions from one years data yet some important trends have emerged. It appears that nitrogen exerts a dominating effect on turf quality and growth. The products contain a variety of nutrients most of which do not appear to be absorbed in significant amounts by the plant except for N, Fe, K and Na. There were no meaningful differences for rooting or ball roll. It is possible that the lack of significant environmental stress does not allow for subtle differences to be detected. This was evident by the overall lack of pest pressure noted on the plots. The study is expected to continue for two more seasons that might allow for more significant trends to emerge. Page 12 of 12

14 In Search of the Silver Bullet The influence of microbial and organic-based products on putting green performance. BY FRANK S. ROSSI TUrfgrass research is a burgeoning scientific discipline and is investigating the most important challenges facing golf course superintendents. A growing number of scientists are interested in the basic aspects of heat stress, winter injury, lethal diseases, and soil nutrient management. Often, the science has implications that might elude the practical golf turf industry. Science does not always take a direct path from A to B. In every scientific endeavor there is a question to be asked and answered through trial and error. The challenge for today's "want the answer now" world is patience. Not every study has a practical application, but often it is a piece of a more complex puzzle. The fact is, we know preciously little about the dynamic nature of the golf ecosystem. Much of our current thinking is derived from practical problem solving research (e.g., product evaluation studies). Getting to the underlying biological mechanism is tedious, expensive, and time consuming. As a result, long-term needs are sacrificed for solving immediate problems. As the scientist strives to understand, the superintendent seeks to solve. Superintendents function in a "what did you do for me today?" environment created by overzealous golfers and owners. Pressure for perfection in turf under severe conditions breeds desperation. There is no time to understand the problem; superintendents need solutions and they seek a silver bullet. Ironically, turfgrass product manufacturers claim to have the solutions. I am regularly baffled by testimonials The objective of this research is to critically evaluate commercially available microbial- and organic-based products and compare them to traditional nutrient sources for effect on putting green performance. from superintendents and well-meaning sales staff who try to explain how certain products solve problems. Of course, it is entirely reasonable that some products can solve specific problems. Pesticides are developed to control specific pests, and certain fertilizers may provide a more desirable response for a specific turf and soil type. In every case, however, they provide only short-term solutions. In doing so, they can distract superintendents from long-term thinking. Golf turf managers are regularly inundated with a variety of microbialor organic-based products that are touted as providing enhanced performance, i.e., more roots, less disease, stress tolerance, improved quality, ete. In some cases the manufacturer provides independent research data taken out of context to position a product as filling an important niche. However, upon closer examination of these products, it appears that small amounts of nutritional supplements included in the formulation produce a visual response that can be provided with a less expensive nutritional source. In addition, manufacturers have been reluctant to fund meaningful research that compares their products against other similar products and traditional nutrient sources. The objective of this study is to critically evaluate commercially available microbial- and organic-based products and compare them to traditional nutrient sources for effect on putting green performance. 16 GREEN SECTION RECORD

15 METHODOLOGY Products from a variety of companies were compared to traditional liquid and granular nutrient management programs in a completely randomized experiment with three replications. Treatments were applied to a mixed stand of creeping bentgrass (Penn G-2) and annual bluegrass growing on a sand-based green (PH 7.8) constructed to California specifications and subjected to 30,000 rounds of simulated non-metal spike traffic. Applications commenced on June 10,2003. Liquid sprays were applied weekly on Wednesdays, and granular and drench treatments were applied on Fridays throughout the season. A C02 backpack sprayer fitted with TeeJet XR8015 nozzles was calibrated to deliver 2 gallons of water per 1,000 square feet. Plot maintenance included mowing seven days a week at inch with a grooved roller. The green was irrigated to 80% ET on an as-needed basis to avoid localized dry spots. Straight sand topdressing was applied every three weeks. Products were sampled and analyzed by the Cornell University Analytical Laboratory according to Infant Formula protocol as published in the Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1990: ). Data were collected for quality, shoot density, rooting, clipping production, tissue nutrient content, and ball roll distance. In addition, disease incidence and insect activity were monitored. RESULTS: PRODUCT ANALYSIS Processing products for analysis with the ICP instrument is orders of magnitude more sensitive than would be required for standard product labeling required by law. As a result, we have found significantly more nutrients in many cases than what is reported by manufacturers. However, with this process we are not able to assess the level of available nutrients or additional chelating humates, agents such as amino acids, etc. When using any product it is important to assess the impact of fertilizer in the product and its subsequent impact of turf visual quality.these two treatment plots show how different nitrogen and iron levels contained in the treatments altered turfgrass quality. The product analysis results reveal the variety and levels of nutrients found in the products. The nitrogen (N) levels are mostly consistent with those reported by manufacturers; however, there are substantial differences among levels we report and current labels. That is to say,what they report on the label is not consistent with the amounts of nutrients found in our analysis. Potassium (K), iron (Fe), and calcium (Ca) tend to be exceedingly high in many products, and this most likely relates to the reported benefits these nutrients are thought to afford for color and stress tolerance. Of particular concern are several products with very high levels of sodium. Several of these products are produced from ocean-derived materials such as seaweed and fish waste. TURF QUALITY CORRELATION Turf quality ratings were excellent (>7.0) for most treatments, except for the Organic Gem product. In general, turf quality ratings were correlated to nitrogen rates. Pearson correlation coefficients were as high as 90% when turf quality was analyzed against nitrogen rates. Interestingly, there were some products that did provide a high level of turf quality that were not entirely correlated with nitrogen rates, specifically the Plant Food programs and the Advanced Microbial Solutions (AMS) product Super Bio Life in combination with the standard fertility treatment. The AMS treatment in combination with standard fertility was consistently above the standard fertility treatments alone. The Emerald Isle program did not always provide the highest turf quality ratings, but were rarely different from the standard fertility program. This was significant in that the nutrient levels applied to the turf were a fraction of those provided for other programs. It is likely that the high iron levels in the Plant Food products resulted in significantly higher quality ratings than other products. However, there were several programs with high iron levels, such as Griggs Brothers products, that were not rated as high as the Plant Food products. The 2003 growing season in Ithaca, N.Y, was warm and wet. Temperatures were slightly above normal for the season, and rainfall was well above (2:: 8 inches) normal. Oddly, there were no significant pest outbreaks, and it is SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER

16 worth noting that every treatment did provide turf quality acceptable to the most discriminating clients. GROWTH RESPONSE An ideal product would produce high turf quality (color, density, and uniformity) with minimal clipping production and adequate root growth. Growth responses were similar to turf quality ratings in that they were well correlated with nitrogen rates. However, there were some instances where clipping production was almost twice the amount of the standard fertility (data not shown). In contrast, there were some treatments with high levels of nitrogen that did not result in significant growth surges. This might be related to the timing of clipping collection that was performed when treatments may have been in a down cycle. The standard fertility treatment produced a relatively consistent rate throughout growth the season, while programs from Helena Chemical and Floratine fluctuated over the season. In contrast to clipping production, rooting did not appear to be ill luenced by nitrogen rate. In fact, there were little significant differences except for the increased rooting in response to Trichoderma applications and low rooting levels from the Organic Gem product. Few products produced any significant rooting below 6 cm, and there were no significant differences among the products at these depths. shown). In general, tissue nitrogen and iron levels were consistent with application amounts. However, this was not always consistent with turf quality ratings. There were several dates when potassium levels were significantly different and consistent with potassium application rates. This was true for phosphorus and manganese, but sur- "- Golf course superintendents are regularly inundated with a variety of microbial- and organic-based products that are touted as providing enhanced performance. The key is evaluating these products to see if their value is truly cost-effective. prisingly not significant on any date for calcium. This could be related to the calcareous nature of the growing medium and demonstrates further that if a nutrient is available in adequate amounts, supplying additional nutrients does not increase tissue levels. The most consistent and concerning response evident was the high sodium (Na) levels found in the tissue following product application. This was consistent for the ocean-derived products, notably Emerald Isle, Organic Gem, and Floratine. ping weights might be expected to produce an effect on ball roll. However, there were no significant differences among treatments for ball roll on the four dates in It is possible that with the number of variables involved in ball roll, any potential differences were not discernable. The close mowing height (0.100 inch) conducted daily during the season produced ball roll distances greater than 10.5 feet. It is significant that some treatments SUMMARY It is hard to draw significant conclusions from one year's data, yet some important trends have emerged. It appears that nitrogen exerts a dominating effect on turf quality and growth. The products contain a variety of nutrients, most of which do not appear to be absorbed in significant amounts by the plant except for N, Fe, K, and Na. There were no meaningful differences for rooting or ball roll. It is possible that the lack of significant environmental stress does not allow for subtle differences to be detected. This was evident by the overall lack of pest pressure noted on the plots. The study is expected to continue for two more seasons, and that might allow fot more significant trends to emerge. with large clipping weights did not result in reduced ball roll distances. TISSUE NUTRIENT CONTENT Tissue nutrient levels fluctuated significantly throughout the season, making interpretation very difficult (data not BALL ROLL An important functional performance measure is ball roll as measured by a Stimpmeter. Data presented to this point regarding turf quality and clip- IMPLICATIONS I understand the impulse to seek the silver bullet. Often, superintendents address a problem on the golf course with at least one hand tied behind their 18 GREEN SECTION RECORD

17 backs. Superintendents know that golfers will not accept a disruptive longterm solution. They cannot always rebuild a green, regrass a fairway, or remove unneeded trees and underbrush. I am often asked to speak at meetings of club managers, golf professionals, and avid golfers. I admit that I do "dummy down" my talks. Golfer expectations are pushing the limits of biology. There are no simple solutions to the challenges we face as an industry, so we must work together. Not all my scientific colleagues share my opinion. Some scientists feel that if we simplify the information, golfers will think there are simple solutions. Others recognize that a tsunami of data frustrates golfers and complicates superintendents' efforts to communicate with members and management. It is critical for superintendents to work with scientists in developing a concise message for golfers. At the same time, golf course superintendents need to spend more time learning basic science. Most superintendents come through college programs that stress the technical aspects of golf turf management but not the science. We need superintendents who understand basic soil chemistry. The challenges we face as an industry require serious people thinking broadly for solutions. The answers are not simple and require all the interested parties to work together. If one partner is more interested in selling than helping, the whole industry loses. When Greg Norman signed on to the GCSAA's Environmental Institute for Golf, I became hopeful that he would be a strong advocate for superintendents. Support from recognized and respected figures is critical to creating the demand for long-term solutions to managing championship turf on a daily basis. Scientists must conduct research that seeks meaningful answers, not just short-term problem solving, and they must communicate the information concisely. Manufacturers need to recognize and discuss the limitations as well as the benefits of their products. Superintendents must look beyond immediate problems and end their search for the silver bullet. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Funding for this research was provided by the GCSAA Environmental Institute for Golf, the TriState Turfgrass Research Foundation, the Hudson Valley Golf Course Superintendents Association, the Adirondack Golf Course Superintendents Association, and the New York State Turfgrass Association. Special thanks to the USGA Green Section Research Program for helping start this research in FRANK ROSSI, PH.D., is associate pr<ifessor <iftuifgrass science at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY " ' 1.'. Table 'the Influence of Microbial andorpnic-based I.' '.. '.. n ' ;'.' Products on Putting Gfeen Performance!! Root depth after tn!atment with a variety of microbial and"organic-based products,. Trt# Treatment 0-3,~ Standard Standard plus'ecoguard Stand;lrd plus Trichoderma 1.6 1'14 Helena Chemical Plant Food I Plant Food,ll Standard plus Nutramax 'Half-rate Standard plus Nutl1Ullax "GriggSl 1.2 to Iil Griggs II Emerald Isle I <! Emerald Isle II, Sustane plus BioGK Standard plus SuperBioLife Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine 1.5 LSD' (0.05) 0.3 I' Depth (em) on July 22,, i 3.6 > "' ,; ,I ' ill 1:".6: ii, ' ~ , NS 0.6 Depth (em) on OCltober " 3..6,:,.m :> 6 Total ' ,.2 2;2 'Q '" , ;0 '0.0,1.6 0;2 1.9 Q.O' 2.1''' ,0 1.6 \lit 0,t2 2.5 NSiH ~.,~ Il< II ;! SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER

18 2003 Cornell Summary Sodium Tissue Levels 2003 performance summary of competitive liquid programs Mixed stand of creeping bentgrass (Penn G-2) and annual bluegrass Results of Sodium (Na) levels from monthly tissue testing Sodium (Na) levels with Plant Food products DECREASED through 2003 Sodium (Na) levels with ocean-derived products INCREASED through 2003 R Sodium (Na) Levels from 2003 Cornell Trial E S E Parts Per Million Organic Gem 16 Standard plus Floratine 12 Emerald Isle II 11 Emerald Isle I 6 Plant Food II 5 Plant Food I A R 0.00 June July August September October November 15 Organic Gem Standard plus Floratine Emerald Isle II Emerald Isle I Plant Food II Plant Food I C H The Liquid Fertilizer Experts SODCOR0908

19

20

21

22

23

24 Proven Turf Programs Plant Food Company s Produced outstanding turf quality in Cornell Trials Cornell #5 Program , 50% SRN & Micronutrients 12 oz / 1,000 sq. ft. Green-T Micro Mix 3 oz / 1,000 sq. ft. AdamsEarth Biostimulant 6 oz / 1,000 sq. ft. Green-T Sugar Cal Calcium 4 oz / 1,000 sq. ft. Flo Thru Soil Penetrant 2 oz / 1,000 sq.ft. Green-T N-28, oz / 1,000 sq. ft. 50% Slow Release Nitrogen from Triazone Triple Chelation Technology Provides nutrient uptake foliar and by roots Apply every 14 days Flo Thru provides even foliar action, and even, consistent uptake by roots