Comparison of Cultivation Methods Impact on Playability of Agrostis stolonifera Greens

Abstract

Creeping bentrgrass putting greens require intense management due to stoloniferous growth (thatch accumulation) and excessive wear and traffic by equipment and golfers. Increases in thatch and soil compaction are often managed with cultivation practices, which lead to downtime for golfers. Field research was conducted in Knoxville, TN, and Elizabethtown, KY, to compare new and traditional cultivation methods for their impact on playability on creeping bentgrass putting greens. Treatments included air injection, dry sand injection, solid tine cultivation topdressed with sand, hollow tine cultivation topdressed with sand, and non-treated control. Treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design replicated three times at two locations. As determined 15 minutes after treatments, air injection resulted in the least reduction of green turfgrass cover, no ball roll reduction from the control, and lower reductions in surface firmness compared to other methods tested. Hollow tine had the greatest reduction in green turfgrass cover, lowest ball roll distance, and greatest reductions in surface firmness. Air injection had a lower impact on surface characteristics than hollow or solid cultivation. Because turf cover, ball roll, and firmness can all affect putting green playability, these findings indicate that air injection cultivation has the smallest impact on golfers immediately after a cultivation event.

Short‐term effects of alternative cultivation practices on putting green infiltration rates

“…The slow recovery for HTC is unsurprising due to the larger surface area impacted compared to SIC. In a similar study, Dickson et al (2017) reported HTC resulted in a 16% reduction in green coverage, whereas SIC resulted in a 9% reduction in green coverage immediately after cultivation event.…”

“…Bunnell et al (2001) observed a reduction in surface firmness after core aerification compared to control and WIC in a creeping bentgrass green. Dickson et al (2017) reported a reduction in surface firmness immediately after AIC, SIC, HTC, and solid-tine cultivation events compared to control. Craft et al (2016) reported that HTC reduced the surface firmness up to 28 DACE compared to control, whereas SIC applied five times per year did not affect the surface firmness compared to the control.…”

“…Dickson et al (2015) reported AIC decreased bulk density of a compacted native soil bermudagrass athletic fields. Craft et al (2016) and Dickson et al (2017) reported no change in soil bulk density after cultivation events including HTC, SIC, or AIC. Murphy and Rieke (1994) reported a bulk density reduction after WIC and HTC.…”

“…The process was repeated until two consecutive readings were the same. Surface firmness was measured using a handheld firmness meter (Field Scout TruFirm; Spectrum Technologies) which records the penetration depth of a falling plunger as it hits a surface (Craft et al, 2016;Dickson et al, 2017). Firmness was measured following the single drop of the plunger on nine points across a grid and averaged within each plot for subsequent analyses.…”

“…Air-injection cultivation injects high pressurized compressed air to the depth of 15 to 30 cm using the Air2G2 (GT AIRINJECT Inc.). These alternative cultivation practices have been reported to increase infiltration and drainage or reduce soil compaction with minimal surface disruption (Craft et al, 2016;Dickson et al, 2017;Green et al, 2001). A considerable amount of research has been conducted to compare the effect of traditional cultivation practices on soil physical properties (Bunnell et al, 2001;McCarty et al, 2007;Rowland et al, 2009;Sorokovsky et al, 2007), whereas only a few studies have been conducted to evaluate the effect of alternative cultivation practices (e.g., AIC and SIC).…”