Wetting agents to promote F&F

[TEPaul]

My super says his continual use of wetting agents in the irrigation system has done a fantastic job of promoting firmer conditions more efficiently on the greens and "through the green". He says there's a ton of wetting agent products out there. He mentioned the product he uses but of course I forgot the name.

Who's using wetting agents in their "F&F" maintenance programs and what's the feedback on them?

[James Bennett]

Tom

the critical thing with wetting agents is it increases the effectiveness of the irrigation, as more water 'sticks' to the soil particles.  There is less run-off.  And less flow through to sub-soils.  Hence more firm and fast because the desired turf health has been achieved with less water.

The wetting agent can be applied to specific turf areas which are repelling water (eg hydrophobic spots on greens, tees and surrounds).  It can also be added at a low rate into the general irrigation system to increase the effectiveness of the broad-acre watering system.

I don't know what the product name is, but I understand it is essentially a detergent-type product.

James B

[Mark_Fine]

Wetting agent use is a very common practice along with growth regulators.  Lehigh has been using them for many years.  Like James says, they work great.  

[TEPaul]

Mark:

Not to take this subject OT immediately but you mentioned growth regulators.

Seriously, what's going on with American agronomy? Over irrigation, OVER fertilization and then GROWTH regulators to stop that aforementioned process??

Why doesn't American agronomy just get used to leaving grass alone to do what it does natrually instead of whipping it into one thing and the other artificially?

I'll tell you why---the US agronomic industry is a billion dollar behemoth! And essentially it doesn't have to be this way to produce acceptable, playable turf for golf!

But wetting agents? It seems to me they work because they make irrigation so much more effective with less water.

[Craig Sweet]

TomPaul...my sense is the trends have been LESS fertilizer, "just enough" irrigation, and growth regulators...and many supers use the GR's not so much to slow plant growth, but to grow a better quality plant and knock down poa.

[Craig Sweet]

Oh, and using wetting agents doesn't necessarily mean LESS irrigation...more efficent...maybe...I have always thought of wetting agents as amendments for soil...to improve soil that isn't functioning like it should.

[Brad Klein]

TEP,

growth regulators are extremely effective for reducing growth of Poa annua, regardless of (over)irrigation. Plants pick up a lot of moisture from dew and the air, esp. in springtime, which yields a lot of seed heads. Growth regulators slow this down.

[TEPaul]

Craig and Brad:

Thanks for the posts on GRs. Glad to hear it if it promotes firmer courses. Any enemy of poa is a friend of mine.

[John Gosselin]

Be careful not to lump all wetting agents or all growth regulators in one category.

Some wetting agents are designed to hold water in the soil profile and others are designed to move the water through the soil profile. The ones that move the water through the soil profile would be beneficial in getting heavier soils dryer faster, but the other type would just hold the water in the top two to three inches of the profile thus creating the opposite affect of what you are trying to achieve.

Wetting agents don't cause the water to stick to the soil particle. They actually reduce the angle of the water molecule which makes the water more ready available to the plant.

There are also very specific growth regulators depending on what you are trying to achieve. Some stop all cell division and others may only stop cell elongation. If you don't have a good understanding of what your actually doing to the plant you could get the opposite reaction you were looking for with these also.

Tom P,

Both growth regulators and wetting agents are very expensive !!!!  

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

   Wetting agents do work and there are many different tools in that box. You can customize wetting agent use for your situation and the season. The use of wetting agents varies greatly from course to course.
 
   Growth regulators are one of the biggest advancements in course maintenance in the last 20 years. Not only do PGR's help in the fight against Poa annua but they do many wonderful things for the desired turfgrass. You can grow a healthier stand of turf that has improved wear tolerance, disease resistance, greater drought tolerance and use less fertilizer. PGR's have allowed for closer mowing with reduced clipping yield. This has allowed for the successful use of lighter weight mowers to become the standard for fairway maintenace.

As for this question:

Why doesn't American agronomy just get used to leaving grass alone to do what it does natrually instead of whipping it into one thing and the other artificially?

  Since the time the first mower was used to help create the playing gound the golf course has become an artifical playing surface. We need to maintain and manipulate the playing areas or they wouldn't be there. I agree that we should do with as little fertilizer and chemical inputs as possible but it was very well recognized even in the "golden age" that the playing surfaces required quite alot of manipulation by man. From Dr. MacKenzie's Golf Architecture, " The green-keeper should have sufficient knowledge of chemistry and botany to be able to tell exactly what form of treatment is most likely to benefit his greens."

   Getting back to F & F and what can be done to provide these ideal conditions. Many of the higher budget courses are adding sand to all playing areas at an increasing high rate.  Sand filled channels for quick drainage, Dry-Ject applications for getting sand into the root zone and sand topdressing to build a layer of sand on top of heavy native soils. All of this adds up to a quicker dry down following rain and the ability for F & F conditions to take place on a more regular basis.

 

[wsmorrison]

Sean, John, etc.,

I guess it depends upon the course, but once you start on a program of adding sand to a golf course, is this something that you have to do every year (or several times a year in the cases of high budget clubs) or do you eventually get to the point where it is done infrequently?  From a playability standpoint, I see huge benefits to adding sand to the soil profile in our area.  I just wonder if it gets to the point where the soil is improved to the point where there is a fairly stable result with less frequency of application required.

[Dave Swift]

"Why doesn't American agronomy just get used to leaving grass alone to do what it does natrually instead of whipping it into one thing and the other artificially?"

Most Superintendents in the States end up making their decisions based on the goals/expectations of the Americans who sign their paycheck.  Great turf conditions aren't free or 100% natural, just a moment in time...

[Sean Remington (SBR)]

Wayne,

  In my opinion, once you enter into a  sand topdressing program for fairways you cannot go back. Over time you may be able to reduce the amount and frequency of the applications but this would be several years into a successful program. You need to have several inches of accumulation. Enough so that shallow core aeration will not bring up the native soil. The reason you cannot stop is you are committed to ammending the thatch and organic mater with the sand. If you don't maintain the program you risk the development of a layer of thatch. If you return to traditional aeration that brings up native soil on top of a shallow sand layer you will make a layer cake. Layers are never good.  If you can afford it and stick to it I think a fairway topdress program will be very beneficial in the long run.

[Tags:]

Tags: