4/1/2023 0 Comments Eximo turf![]() This trial has provided some very useful information that superintendents can put to use immediately. The values shown represent the number of trials in which each product caused significantly reduced turf quality (based on analysis of variance) when compared to the non-treated control. However, in a few cases, turf quality was reduced. ![]() In most cases, wetting agents caused either no reduction in quality or even improved turf quality. ![]() (Number of times in top performing group) The values shown represent the number of experiments in which each product was in the top performance group based upon analysis of variance. Ability of wetting agents to reduce soil hydrophobicity. As luck would have it, these products were among the group that had the least potential for reducing turf quality as well. Products that consistently peformed poorly in reducing hydrophobicity included Naiad, Respond 2 and Surfside 37. And in most cases, it is likely that the benefits of reduced water repellency will outweigh the potential for turf damage. However, this decrease in quality was seen in a maximum of two out of nine locations. Products that consistently did the best job of reducing hydrophobicity also unfortunately had potential (though limited potential) to cause some reduction in turf quality (Table 2). The ranking of these products is shown in more detail in Table 1. The products that most consistently reduced hydrophobicity (soil water repellency) were Aqueduct, Brilliance, Cascade Plus, HydroWet, Primer Select and TriCure. ![]() With the August, 2005 publication of updated and corrected data from the GCSAA-USGA wetting agent evaluation, we wanted to provide you with our conclusions from this important study. Conclusions from the GCSAA-USGA wetting agent study: September, 2005 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |