Magazine - The Revolution of Turf Care
SEARCH
POPULAR ARTICLES
NEWS ALERTS
Want to get news alerts delivered direct to your inbox?
Edit your email preferences.
RECENT COMMENTS
By Andrew Turnbull BSc (Hons) in General Sports on 9th Dec 2010 7:00
The Journey Begins…
This natural turf care revolution began in 1964, when Ian MacMillan was first introduced to feeding grass with agricultural molasses. An agronomist had advised the golf club at which Ian was a 15 year old greenkeeper to withhold all NPK on the greens. It was then that Ian was introduced to using a thick treacle-like molasses to improve the quality of the greens.
Intrigued, Ian studied the properties of sugars and, over the following 40 years, experimented with a wide range of sugar solutions. One notable success was when, soon after starting as Course Manager at Murrays Hall, Perthshire, a leading turfgrass agronomist made a visit and commented on one green that could not seem to grow grass. "Come back in six weeks", Ian said, "and I will have grass on that green". Collecting the slops from the bar, he sprayed a mix of beers onto the troubled area. On returning to the course six weeks later, the agronomist was amazed to see a healthy cover of turf.
Despite this successful use of beers, Ian discovered that the crucial property of sugars used for turfgrass growth is actually the six carbon sugar produced by photosynthesis.
It all starts with photosynthesis…
Most turf managers understand that nutrients from fertilisers are required by plants for healthy growth and development, but may not realise that fertilisers are not really plant food. Plants make their own food through photosynthesis, a chemical reaction in leaves involving water, carbon dioxide (CO2) and light energy.
Photosynthesis is a complex series of chemical reactions involving a transition in forms of energy. The process uses light energy to make food and is a process by which plants make organic compounds from simple inorganic compounds using energy from the sun.
CO2 enters the plant via cells called stomata, located in grass leaves, and reacts with ribulose biphosphate (RuBP), a reaction that is catalyzed by an enzyme called ribulose 1,5-biphosphate, or RUBISCO. Up to 50% of nitrogen within turf is contained within this enzyme. The carbon and oxygen are combined with hydrogen to form carbohydrates. The end product is a hexose sugar; a carbohydrate.
Carbohydrates have three main uses:
- Drive all the processes that result in increased growth
- Energy storage, for use when the grass cannot photosynthesise, for example under environmental stress or excessive use
- Feeding soil microbes by excretion through the plant leaf and roots
It can therefore be concluded that healthy growth is not possible without photosynthesis and carbohydrate production. The rate of natural photosynthesis is affected by:
- Light: limited light, often found in modern stadia and golf courses, slows the rate of photosynthesis
- Temperature: extended heat causes a condition called photo-respiration, where the leaf stomata close and prevent the entry of carbon and the exit of oxygen from the leaf, while freezing temperatures damage tissues and cells
- Turf maintenance practices: physical processes such as mowing and scarifying, and chemical practices involving the application of fertilisers and pesticides interfere in the natural photosynthetic process
These interruptions resultsin limited photosynthesis and reduced carbohydrate production which leads to slow growing and weak turf.
The innovation is born
It was not until 2007, when Ian got together with grass scientist Andrew Turnbull, that they began to refine and cultivate a high quality, manageable form of molasses which formed the basis of a range of natural turf care products. At the time, Andrew was based at Taylor Farm Supplies, moving there after a career as a Golf Course Manager and a five year spell as a college lecturer. There he learned that farmers had previously used molasses based liquids for grass and animal health until the arrival of urea based, granular fertilizers.
Following three years of testing and plot trials, the men developed a range of natural products to feed soil microbes and improve grass health. The natural solutions proved to yield high quality, vigorous turfgrass surfaces with increased resistance to environmental stress and disease, without the use of any synthetic chemicals as used in traditional practices. This approach also provided freedom from health risks to equipment operators and offered a revolutionary environmentally friendly solution to turf care.
New Beginnings
In March 2010, the pair set up The Great Lawn Company Ltd, pioneering the use of their natural lawn care products in order to provide safe and natural lawns for their own families. "Why do we think it is a good idea to spread fertilizers and weed killer onto our lawns, and then allow our children and pets to roll around in it?" explains Ian.
The franchise operation began trading in March 2010 when the pair went into partnership with Operations Director Ian Morrison, responsible for designing, implementing and managing the business strategy. Ian's dedicated marketing team helped to launch and manage the new brand, beginning with nine Associates servicing domestic lawns in territories across central Scotland. The natural products and excellent service levels proved a hit with homeowners, enabling the new business to challenge established lawn care giants for customers.
The outstanding success experienced in the domestic market soon caused a stir in the lawn and turf care industry, which previously relied upon applications of synthetic chemical fertilisers and pesticides. This created a great amount of interest within the commercial marketplace, particularly from golf courses, in which the pair have an impressive background. Creating The Great Turf Company Ltd, and bringing the whole operation of development, manufacturing and marketing under one roof, enabled Ian and Andrew to provide natural products, expert consultancy, quality training and professional services for golf and sport turf surfaces.
Causing a Revolution
The basis of The Great Turf Company is the unique Activated Microbial Turf Management system, a chemical free approach to turfgrass management which involves restoring and maintaining turfgrass and soil biology.
This system restores the natural balance missing in modern turf management practices by applying natural products which fulfill four basic principles:
The product programme ensures each step is fulfilled to result in a naturally healthy soil which produces a strong and resistant grass plant.
Rehabilitate your soil
The first step involves flooding the soil and grass with microbes by using The Varietas System. Using soil from on site, trillions of soil microbes are brewed and sprayed onto the turf coating the leaf tissue, forming a protective layer against pathogen attack. The liquid also flows down the leaf onto the crown of the grass plant, and then into the soil. The Varietas System has proved extremely effective, most popular with golf courses which are pursuing affordable and eco-friendly solutions to turfgrass management.
Provide the right nutrients
The second stage is a combination of feeding the microbes and also the grass plant. The Great Turf Company's famous MolTurf product is a unique blend of carbohydrates derived from cane sugar that has been fermented to form a very soluble liquid that can be sprayed using conventional crop sprayers. When applied onto the turfgrass surfaces, the microbes on the leaf and in the soil break down the carbohydrates for the carbon; a food source that causes them to multiply massively. MolTurf is also taken in by the grass plant and used to drive metabolic processes, eg amino acid and protein production. The carbohydrates produced by the grass by photosynthesis are then left in reserve for use during stress periods.
Newly launched MolTurf Stadia, a version of MolTurf specifically formulated for professional stadium pitches, is now being used by a number of clients including Manchester City F.C, to increase resistance to the severe environmental and physical stresses these pitches are under.
Correct the hormonal balance
Whilst necessary for the preparation of playing surfaces, soluble synthetic fertilisers cause turf to take in nutrients whether they need them or not. This causes a disruption to normal growth and upsets the balanced hormone and enzyme activity that moves and processes nutrients. To correct this, Goëmar Turf, a unique liquid seaweed spray is applied to turf.
Unlike other processed seaweed, Goëmar Turf retains all the properties of seaweed that makes it useful for turfgrass health. "We do not add other elements such as iron, which makes seaweed an expensive way to green up your turf. By keeping it pure, all the beneficial effects of seaweed are retained; nutrient demand signalling and movement, environmental stress relief and resistance, and activation of plant pathogen defence mechanisms" explains Andrew.
Control pests and disease
Despite best efforts to optimise turf and soil health, it is inevitable there will be times when a mix of environmental conditions and playing pressure on the turf will result in an outbreak of disease or pest attack. By using garlic derived product, Aston Turf, two ideals are met; the pest is controlled without environmental damage, and the operator is not at risk.
Unlike other turf nutrition companies, The Great Turf Company does not dictate strict nutrition programmes to turf managers. Ian remarks, "We believe that the best person to decide on the amount of required nutrition is the guy who observes the turf on a daily basis. We recommend using organic sources of minerals due to the disruption from synthetic fertilisers to plant hormones that regulate nutrition".
Proven Success
The overall results of using this holistic chemical free system include:
- Playing surface speeds up due to upright in growth caused by the leaf being filled with sugar instead of water
- Fungicide use becomes minimal or even eliminated, with associated cost savings
- Exposure to harmful chemicals by grounds staff are greatly reduce
- Employers are able to reduce risk to their employees and the environment
This natural approach has proved invaluable to a number of Premiership football grounds, world leading golf courses and five star hotels across the UK. Thanks to these high profile clients, and following an outstanding debut at IOG Scotsturf 2010, a large number of Varietas System orders have already been placed for next spring, indicating the number of golf courses and sports pitches taking the bold decision to follow in the footsteps of organisations like the UK's first chemical free golf course, New Malton, and 'go green', abandoning the use of chemicals on their turf surfaces.
The innovative products and unique company ethos have been recognized by the Fife Business Awards as well as the Digital Entrepreneur Awards, for the company's contribution to environmental management and improving the sustainability of greenkeeping practices.
Future Aspirations
The Great Lawn and The Great Turf Company have enjoyed an incredible first year of business thanks to the innovative chemical free approach to lawn and turf care and holistic method of turfgrass management. This success is predicted to escalate in 2011 and beyond, due to the impending EU legislation which will directly or indirectly cause the withdrawal of certain chemicals in turf care.
The costs of justifying the manufacture of pesticides is predicted to cause chemical companies to stop issuing many pesticides, while increased costs of maintaining spraying 
equipment, and the requirement to keep sprayer operator licenses up to date will all have an effect on the use of pesticides in the very near future. "The future predicted by many is now here" warn Andrew and Ian. "You can negate these expensive requirements by using treatments that produce vigorous and healthy turf and also enhance the natural pathogen defences, processes that have been around for millions of years".
In revolutionising the world of turf care and improving the sustainability of turf management, in 2011 The Great Turf Company will provide Lantra and City & Guilds based training courses in turf care practices and in the concept of natural turf care, aiming to change the mindset of the industry from the source.
For more information on chemical free turf management and the unique Activated Microbial Turf Management System, visit www.greatturfcompany.com or call 0800 157 7227.
Read more articles in General Sports,
by Andrew Turnbull BSc (Hons)
or from December 2010.
There are 42 comments on this article
8 Dec 2010 by Philip Harrison
Wow. Really puts that Isle of Man article into perspective. Very interesting, and worth following up. Thanks
8 Dec 2010 by IGS
A great read and very informative.
Not too sure about anything being revolutionary bit though! but certainly getting back to basics of factual agronomy instead of the chemical experiment that has been forced on everyone since the world war two munitions manufacturers converted / renamed 'explosives' into fertilisers!!!
let’s hope that this gets some recognition from some of the Sponsored Turf Research Institutes and the like and get away from some of the ill practices that are branded about on the back of a getting a sale....!
8 Dec 2010 by ian macmillan
Philip Harrison
Hi Philip, I have tried to return your mail but just keeps bouncing back. Would you give me a call on 07934111518/ 01337857294
9 Dec 2010 by zoid
I may be missing something but I didn't notice a single testimonial or piece of relevent research?
To claim a revolution, shouldn't you provide examples of the battles won?
<i>This natural approach has proved invaluable to a number of Premiership football grounds, world leading golf courses and five star hotels across the UK.</i>
OK..... So which one's? What did you achieve? Where are the delighted groundsman positively perspiring in their efforts to provide you with effusive praise?
Or are you just saying that a few well known sports venues have, at one time or another and to no particular definable purpose, chucked a bit of sugar on their soils?
9 Dec 2010 by ian macmillan
Good morning Zoid, whilst there may be a value of pertinence within your questions I would aver to the prudence of a definitive answer to it's content. Do we as a company not have a duty to our clients not to advantage marketing at their expense without their express permission? I think so!. However, be assured, as an Award Winning company (chamber of Commerce Appointed) we do have a very substantial customer data base f rom Premier Division Football clubs, Championship and Members Golf, Bowling clubs and Luxurious Hotels. Tie this up with Schools with substantial sports facilities gives us one hell of a customer data base. Now, you may hypothesis your own conclusions to my answer? but that's all you get. I wish you well Zoid. Ian Mac.
9 Dec 2010 by MrC
I especially like how the chemical free method involves using fungicides, that's a revolution!
You could adopt a new slogan, chemical free where we can, chemicals applied when we have to, oh, isn't that what most people do...
If you claim to be chemical free, then be chemical free.
Good luck in your nearly chemical free venture
9 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
MrC
We have had to confirm our claims on being chemical (ie synthetic pesticide) free during our ISO14001 accreditation. No more needs to be said.
Zoid - As Ian indicates, we cannot publicly say who is using our products and services unless we have express permission. Perhaps you could reveal who you are - or do you not have permission? We would be delighted to have a phone call - 07900 692052.
Many thanks to all for your interest in us.
Best regards
Andy Turnbull
9 Dec 2010 by MrC
aturnbull
ISO 14001 is for all organisations large or small and covers all sectors, including charities and the voluntary sector. It will help you to be more environmentally friendly, show you how to measure your consumption and reduce waste. Once you see how you can effectively reduce, re-use and recycle, you will benefit by making tangible cost savings, reduce your environmental impact and enhance your environmental credentials. ISO 14001 certification is also a proven business winner with most certified organisations qualifying for more tenders and winning more orders!
taken from the british assessment bureau.
•Fungicide use becomes minimal or even eliminated, with associated cost savings
taken from the article above.
now what is it, do you use fungicides or don't you, it's your article
MrC
9 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
MrC
We do not use synthetic fungicides in our lawn care business. We do not use fungicides in our commercial business, we do not manufacture or supply them. How more explicit do you want me to be?
What about weed kiilers? The picture shows a corner of our trial plots - does clover grow around corners? I think not.
Best regards
Andy Turnbull
9 Dec 2010 by MrC
aturnbull
I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm simply quoting your article back at you, where it says, very explicit, fungicide use becomes minimal. It doesn't say, we don't use it. Now it may be that somebody else does, eg the groundsman.
In my experience, customers like honesty and clarity, that maybe why we are doing so well.
Regards
MrC
9 Dec 2010 by Barry Pace
Hhhhmmmm...
Where is Harry Hill when you need him...
''Now.. I wonder.... which is better.... there's only one way to find out........... FFFIIIIGGGGHHHHTTTTT!!!!!''
ROFL...
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
9 Dec 2010 by Philip Harrison
To all the sceptics.
As is mentioned in this article with regards to nutrition, fungicide use is something that only the turf managers can decide on.
Some will apply at the first sight of disease other will hang fire and see if the grass plants natural defences can combat the infection.
What this program is sugesting is that if you improve the overall health of the plant and soil then the grass is in a much better position to fight off infection, with the help of the Garlic based Aston and good maintenance (reduced thatch levels, good aeration, dryer surfaces, lower nurient input, etc.).
Common sense really.
Any change of program like this takes time to see the benefits. No-one is suggesting that this will solve all your problems overnight.
Having worked in Norway for 10 years where the pesticide restrictions are much stronger than in the UK. We had to find other ways to combat disease on fine turf. In the last few years i reduced pesticides to 1 preventitive application before the winter (unually 3-4 months snow cover). Of course this is not chemical free BUT it is a lot better than the 4 or 5 applications per year that are common place in the UK. And the reflex application common place at many sites
I myself inherited a course in the UK with a hugh thatch and disease problem, and had 4 pesticide applications between May and November. A real wake up call, and totally unsustainable in the long term.
What will we do when there are only 1 or 2 products approved for use on fine turf in the UK, as in Norway and other countries?
What will we do if there is a blanket ban on the use of pesticide for fine turf in the UK as in Holland?
We will be forced to think more about plant health and our maintenance practices.
I, for one, would like to be prepared for that.
9 Dec 2010 by MrC
Barry Pace.
Brilliant post. I love it.
Philip Harrison
Makes complete sense to me, and honest
MrC
9 Dec 2010 by Poa7
Interesting article, it's good to know that we are thinking alternatively.
However, I would suggest that we also focus our thoughts on good and correct 'cultural' practices in the fight against using minimal pesticides and over-judicious applications of fertilisers.
At the end of the day, surely this is one of our best defenses?
Keep up the good work, at the end of the day, we all only want what is best for our turf :)
Some smaller more detailed articles on specific studies would not go a miss Andy and Ian - if they are already out there, how about a few links?
All the best with your venture - if you fancy sending some to Azerbaijan, I'll trial and document for you too!
Phil - A pitchcare member since it began :)
9 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
Philip, Zoid, IGS, MrC, Barry and Poa 7.
To you all I thank you for your interest in our wee company. We were holding a distributor training day today and this little debate provided a great source of subject matter.
Mr Sharples - I take on board what you have said and will seriously look at your suggestion.
Best regards
Andy Turnbull
9 Dec 2010 by Leeboy
We used one of the products from this company as we had nematodes. The chemical, Molturf, is not a nematicide however it was recommended based on it's ability to strengthen the plant using the sugar contained in it making it stronger in terms of nematode resistance. Incorporating it into our fertiliser program, our nematode index number dropped from 1.2 to 0.2, we have also only sprayed fungicides at 6 week intervals since using it, compared to every 3-4 weeks before we started using Molturf. I don't think the above is down to Molturf alone, though I may be wrong, however it is something we will be continuing to use based on what we have seen so far.
9 Dec 2010 by MrC
Mr aturnbull
You are most welcome for my interest in your wee company. Something else you can add to your little debate.
The vast majority of domestic customers are not bothered by organic treatments. Just in the same way that they know you can have a water free, chemical free toilet in their home, as long as you don't use paper or flush, or mind the odour. Just add the fresh waste to the old waste [make your own pyramid] and bacteria will break it down. Provided you dig a big enough hole and wait long enough.
Those that want organic can get it from the same company that gives the customer what they want, Where is your gap in the market? What is your USP? [especially given that you advocate the use of fungicides, see article above]
Best regards
MrC
9 Dec 2010 by Barry Pace
Mr C....in serious mode... now you just starting to risk sounding silly... Regardless of appropriate business plans, competition, markets etc etc whatever.. whatever.. anyone with ANY common can see it is the way forward and not neccasarily by choice... we are in the EU lets face it.... anything that reduces nasty inputs and optimizes this immense unchartered machine beneath the surface is good IMHO...
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
10 Dec 2010 by Duncan Peddie
for or not i no longer carry chemical home to my family. becoming a associate of this company has given me a positive life. barry you are right as the time for that change is right now
10 Dec 2010 by MrC
Barry, Philip
It wasn't meant to be serious. Is humour banned on here now. It was pointing out that domestic customers just don't care. There isn't a market there.
As for the EU moving to ban everything and make us all speak german, you're probably correct. But that's a different argument.[source: Jeremy Clarkson]
The article could have started, due to the EU interfering with everything, you'd better get used to treating lawns with beer as the brewing industry won't be allowed to sell beer for consumption by humans as there is a risk they might start enjoying themselves. And due to the EU stopping the sugar beet crop in the UK any molasses production will need to be directed to the normal sugar trade.
But..the article pours out "we hate chemicals" and then goes onto say except fungicides.
MrC
10 Dec 2010 by Barry Pace
Mr C...
No I like humour if you hadn't noticed its probably behind the majority of my posts... well as far as my sad sense of it goes anyways..
Just starting to sound...petty maybe.. It is like the domestic lawn market with seed/turf/artificial.. most dont have the patience for seed, want cheap instant turf and only some will go for artificial lawns... each to there own and budget. With the domestic lawncare business the vast majority will bualk at paying for weed and feed let alone moss treatment, aeration, christmas week scarification, but enough do apparently... why should this be any different to a holistic environmentally led approach? There are enough people out there who care enough, is there enough who will pay for it, who knows thats business..
The other side of the potential work though is immense, we all, including lowly constructors like myself, are opening our eyes and minds to the important bit of what actually grows the surfaces we all slave over..
Good luck to them...
What 'market' are you in by the way???
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
10 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
Hi MrC
I take your point regarding home owners (i.e. you and I included) not caring that much about the use of organic products in the home. However, we have built a nine van franchise operation because people actually do care. They care about their children and pets rolling around in synthetic chemical fertiliser covered lawns, they care about coming in in weedkiller soaked clothing. Why is it that a leading lawn care company recommend that no children or pets should be allowed on a weedkiller treated lawn if it was harmless?
No market for it? Our business activity and customer numbers would say otherwise. Would you care to come and have a chat about joining us? Our door is open.
A couple of corrections are in order
1.Not sure where we say we like fungicides. I would refer my answer to you earlier in this thread. If turf managers choose to use a fungicide then that is their prerogative. It is not our aim to dictate to anyone how they manage turf, just provide an alternative to current practices.
2. We don't use sugar beet but expressly state on our label that we source from cane sugar.
Again, MrC, many thanks for your interest in us.
Andy Turnbull
10 Dec 2010 by mark@soilharmony.co.uk
Please do not use the term 'organic'
This word has been corrupted by so many ‘wannabe eco-warriors, save the planet, let’s all eat nuts & berries’ folk.
Turfgrass / horticulture / agricultural lawn management / production is all about BIOLOGY and chemically processed ‘fertilisers’ and more so Pesticides are not conducive to a healthy soil or plant.
There is a better way than the ‘chemical experiment’ that we have all been exposed to / dare I say “brain washed” into promoting, selling, applying, etc. – I certainly was during me years as a arable agronomist in the mid eighties and shudder to think what devastation I coursed to earn my wage and in the mean time help famers produce an ‘Empty Harvest’ contaminated with organophosphates (still included in many pesticides today) and other poisons.
No wonder the whole population is sick!!!
Ever wondered why the ameicans have the ‘Best health Service / medical capabilities? This should be written as being the best medical facilities for ill people. It is so big for the obvious reason.
As hidden files are slowly becoming exposed to the public domain through various media outlets, have a look at the number of people dying every month in South america from glyphosate poisoning – that is Round-Up, you know the user friendly ‘herbicide’ (I once heard a sales man say that it is so safe you can drink it” – he didn’t of course!)
I for one am totally behind the same / similar agronomic practices as Ian and Andrew as everyone can benefit.
But if you do get some disease then you may still have to ‘kill it’ if you job is on the line, make sure that you detoxify the soil and plant afterwards and always ask WHY and HOW did this pathogenic fungi have the chance to infect and destroy the growing plant? Instead of rushing to the ‘Health Service’ for the poison bottle...
Have a great weekend
- Now where are those nut crackers?
10 Dec 2010 by jlawrence
Firstly I'm all in favour of reducing pesticide/fungicide use.
But 'Chemical' free ?
If someone is going to bandy that phrase about then I for one will switch off 100%. I seriously doubt there is a turf manager anywhere who is chemical free.
We all apply water and guess what ? that happens to be made up of chemicals - at least it was when I went to school.
I hate to be pedantic, but you're not chemical free - end of story.
And fyi, I do follow a similar ethos to Mark, Andy et al. I will apply pesticide/fungicide when needed but as a last resort.
I'm not aware of such a thing as synthetic chemicals - synthetic compounds perhaps, but they're made up of basic chemicals. As far as I'm aware mankind hasn't actually invented any new chemicals.
Of course there's no bounce, bend your back and put some bloody effort in.
10 Dec 2010 by ian macmillan
Hi llawrence
It's good that you demonstrate a clear understanding and definition of chemical. Our message relates to the use of the harmful and distinct compounds. It is encouraging that you use the aforementioned as a last resort as at least you mitigate such usage. Hopefully, one day, you will nullify this usage? After all ! Never say Never. Best, Ian Mac
10 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
Hi All
I think it is very interesting that the discussion has developed into a debate about the use of pesticides. Why is it that such strong emotions are expressed against the reduction/elimination of pesticides? Fear? Lack of knowledge about biology? Commercial involvement?
The article is mostly about carbohydrate nutrition, with the reduction/elimination of pesticides as a consequence of putting right the plant and soil biology. It is not the products that affect the reduction of pathogens - it is the strong biology of the soil and plant that deals with pests. The products, along with sensible turf management practices, just help to put the biology right.
Our view is that if you are relying on synthetic products to treat turf then you are missing out on the benefits of millions of years of biological interaction between the soil and plant. The problems started when we broke that relationship by depending on synthetic chemical concoctions. We advocate treatments that restore the natural balance and let biology carry out its function. The pathogen control aspect is just one outcome of using these methods. Mostly it is about providing a great playing surface by creating a strong plant and soil biology that withstands the rigours of turf management practices and harsh playing conditions. And that all starts with photosynthesis, i.e. the production of carbohydrates.
Andy Turnbull
10 Dec 2010 by Mike
Interesting debate
I always appreciate it when someone challenges 'the establishment'.
Do the above theories and associated products work - I don't know as i've never used them, and would never take someone else's word for the effectiveness of them without seeing the results first hand. Some scientific studies will say such things do work, some will say they don't - scientific studies have a place, but should not be relied upon as the answer to everything - use scientific evidence, visual evidence, records of results, use knowledge of one's site - combine everything and formulate your own conclusions using every type of evidence available. If interested in this path, trial it, compare it to more 'traditional' methods, compare cost effectiveness etc, but if you are happy with your lot, stick with that.
What I would say is this - there is increasing governance surrounding what we can and can't apply, and this trend is set to continue. There are pressures on many of us from our employers to be more environmentally friendly, there is pressure on many of us to be more cost effective etc. Solutions to ever more imposing frameworks make all of our lives increasingly difficult, and alternative solutions will have to be found, be it now or in the future. This path may be one solution, but there may also be others, and it would be ignorant to not explore every such avenue - move's away from sand dominated constructions which require high nutrient inputs would be one possibility, reduced inputs in general are another as the industry has built 'parameters' which generally lead to overapplications of fertilisers (I have been advised that perennial rye requires 300kg of N per ha - how can anyone generalise like that?), and subsequently increase the reliance on fungicides, more resistant or less 'hungry' grass species, improved education leading to better understanding and implementation of correct cultural practices is another option There are many such avenues if we look hard enough, and it is my belief that by using all of the above, improvements will be made without having to completely 'jump ship' and completely disregard the last 50 years of turf research, of which there has been much poor, but also, good information out there.
One point of note - in over 8 years, not once have I applied a fungicide. I haven't been reliant on synthetic feeds during that time (but have used them on occasion), but nor have I been reliant on carbohydrate, compost tea, or any other product, organic or not. The grass still grows, games still go ahead, it is more cost effective than any programme as all products cost something. Ours is a back to basics view to managing our playing fields - yes, the results aren't always as pretty as some other venues, but nor do we have unrealistic expectations, be it financially, aesthetically or for any other reason, and as a result, there is no need to rely on anything but the for the groundsmen to turn in and get the cultural practices right, so perhaps the ultimate solution may be to temper the aspirations and expectations placed upon the turf in the first place, and give it a real chance to thrive of it's own accord.
11 Dec 2010 by Duncan Peddie
micka working for myself and not using chem has givenme a good customer base in my first year and it has been with my extra training that has helped me understand all this,not new to green keeping, i am new to this type and way of feeding so your bit about improved education is the only way us guys can get away from destroyin the soil. this is a good debate with great postings well done for not having to use fungicide you must be one of a few.
11 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
Hi Mike
A very balanced comment on the subject. Just a note on research. The vast majority of turfgrass research comes from the supposition that the best growth is brought about by the correct balance of nutrients. This is known as the Leiburg Theory promoted by Justus von Liebig, a famous agricultural chemist, credited with having first published (1840) the concept of the Law of the Minimum. From this has spawned the huge agricultural fertiliser industry we know today.
There is no doubt that fertilisers produce food in far greater quantities than by purely organic methods, but at a recognised cost to the soil. So why should we bring agricultural methods into turf management? We are not producing a crop but a playing surface. Fertilisers have a role to play, but let's make sure we are not damaging the biology at the same time.
There is some excellent research on carbohydrates carried out by Allan Gange of Royal Holloway College, available through the STRI and TGIF records. The USGA list a number of works published at http://http://usgatero.msu.edu/currentpastissues.htm
Other samples are:
The importance of carbon balance and root activity in creeping bentgrass tolerance to summer stress Huang, Bingru; Liu, Xiaozhong; Xu, Qingzhang. 2005. USGA Turfgrass and Environmental Research Online. December 15. 4(24): p. [1-5].
Carbohydrate metabolism in creeping bentgrass as influenced by two summer irrigation practices Fu, Jinmin; Dernoeden, Peter H. 2008. USGA Turfgrass and Environmental Research Online. November 15. 7(22): p. [1-9].
Carbohydrate metabolism in creeping bentgrass as influenced by spring and summer coring Fu, Jinmin; Dernoeden, Peter H. 2009. USGA Turfgrass and Environmental Research Online. March 15. 8(6): p. [1-10].
Frankemberger W.T. and Arshad M 1995. Phytohormones in Soils. Marcell Dekker, Inc New York, Basel, Hong Kong.
Fry J. and Huang B. 2004. Applied Turfgrass Science and Physiology.J. Wiley & Sons. New Jersey.
Green D.G. and Beard J.B. 1969. Seasonal relationship between nitrogen and soluble carbohydrates in leaves of Agrostis palustris Huds. and Poa Pratensis L. Agronmy Journal 61: 107-111
Hull R.J. 1992. Energy relationships and carbohydrate partitioning in turfgrasses. In Waddington D.V., Carrow R.N. and Shearman R.C. (eds) Turfgrass Agronomy Monograph No 32. American Society of Agronomy, p. 175-205.
Sun H., Schmidt R.E. and Eisenback J.D. 1997. The effect of seaweed concentrate on the growth of nematode infected bent grown under low soil moisture. In Martin P.M. and Bauman (Eds) International Turfgras Society Research Journal. 8: 1336-1342.
Zhang X. and Schmidt R.E. 1999. Antioxidant response to hormone containing products in Kentucky bluegrass subjected to drought. Crop Science 39: 545-551
Zhang X. and Schmidt R.E. 2000. Hormone containing products impact on oxidant status of tall fescue and creeping bentgrass subjected to drought. Crop Science 40: 1344-1348
Zhang X. Ervin E.H. and Schmidt R.E. 2003 Physiological effects of liquid applications of a seaweed extract and a humic acid on Creeping Bentgrass. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 128: 452-620
Zhang X. and Ervin E.H. 2004. Cytokinin-Containing Seaweed and Humic Acid Extracts Associated with Creeping Bentgrass Leaf Cytokinins and Drought Resistance. Crop Sci. 44:1737-1745 (2004).
Just a taste of the available information. Have fun searching.
Andy Turnbull
11 Dec 2010 by mark@soilharmony.co.uk
It is not just about carbohydrates it is also about mineral management, aeration, natural biotic conditions, climate which are all affected by the physical in puts from the turfgrass manager and of course the effect from players, etc.
the issue and downfall of Leiburg is that in his day only the element content N, P, K and maybe others were noted as these are in the highest number. But what about calcium, sulphur, cobalt, silica, iodine. so we can see where that theory falls down.
Being a Yorkshire lad as so permitted to say this 'You don't get ought form nought' so if there is nothing there in the soil the plant cannot get it out.
A reason why organic growers cannot grow nutrient loaded food on soils that are depleted. No amount of compost will provide what is needed and too much is not a good thing either..
It is well noted that some sports soils / rootzone perform almost unbelievably excellent with 2 - 4 applications / annum of a balanced non NPK nutriment, whilst others need 8 - 12 application / annum, such is the complexities of soil / plant management.
As Andy states, we are not producing crops for yield but we do need to provide or make available all that is required.
Agriculture is years ahead of our industry and there is much that can be integrated. It would be interesting to be able to plough up the football / rugby pitches every year - the ultimate in aeration – address deficiencies / excesses sow and then play the sport. But, now we have sports fields that may receive some type of aeration, if they are lucky to have this task undertaken when soil / climate / time of year is the effective.
The purveyors of biological turfgrass management have a long way to go. The synthetic chemical methods would appear that reinventing / wanting to rewrite the periodic table every year with a new formulation of NPK or how a revamped pesticide will control this or that.
Managing your soil in harmony with all and everything is how nature works and has evolved over the last few million years (at least more than 400 million or so on the last count).
So let’s keep moving forward, even if it means returning to older methods
11 Dec 2010 by Mike
Hi Andy
Thanks for the links, but I have read them already, and many more on the subject.
I do have issue with this however. Much of the above research is positive, but there is also some that is contradictory out there. I always take scientific research which has been pointed to by a supplier with a pinch of salt. This isn't a dig at you, but just a general point about relying on scientific evidence that 'favours' sales - I would say the same thing about any supplier selling any product. As a mentioned above, a balanced viewpoint encompassing more than scientific research which often has little reference to each individual site must be taken by the individual before proceeding down any new path.
11 Dec 2010 by ian macmillan
This article has become a valid platform for highly informative authors promoting articulated conclusion. Mark, you rightly espouse natures course by demonstrating that there is more to this than carbohydrates, and of course you are right. That is why we at TGTC look to biology to enable our principles in partnership, with good sound cultural practices from our practitioners. Our products are merely a representation of what we can offer the practitioner in order to work to a more conclusive and natural "objective" within a safer prescription. Thank you all for affording us your much appreciated information. Ian Mac
11 Dec 2010 by Barry Pace
Random ramblings .....
I use my eyes, a little of the work faddled brain, and try and make common sense of it all....
With more I see it seems that it is ALL about the bit beneath the surface, this allows you to get above right.
Why does grass green up after snow... is it the elements carried/dropped or is it the warm blanket effect on the soil.
Why does grass sometimes grow thicker, greener and healthier just because of a puff of air or tine in the ground and others not.
New constructions of any surface and most soils are sterile, not in a 'clean' soil way but in an inability to hold or release to plants what they need, plant looks weak and stressed, desease can take hold, trickle feeding is the way but no one seems to be able to do it.
Bugs and seaweed and everything else are great, but you can't bung this stuff on soil that does not drain or is too droughty or is missing something elemental or compact or have the structure to be healthy.
If soils have 'issues' then the whole picture needs addressing, removing one problem by doing one thing is only a short term solution because inavariable that problem is actually there because of a lack of at least 2 other things...
I was told once and have never been brave enough to have it tested properly because of the implicatons, that most older sport surfaces, in the 'rootzone', are so contaminated by leads, arsenics and cyanides and just about every other nasty thrown on them in the last 40 odd years that only one or two tips in the country could actually take the material... anything that gets away from this is good.......
The more fungicide you use the more you need... I knew of one major club who used to apply 26!!! 26!! applications of fungicide to the greens... a year! thats some bill eh...
Now most are prudent but many applied a preventative just before the snow, thankfully in most cases, but wouldn't it be good to hear from those that didnt.. but were doing other things .. and dont have issues.. there will be plenty wishing they had I am sure, but they would probably get fuzzed out anyways..
Now in the real world most of this 'ideal' is not possible, yet, it is a case of making the best of a bad soil situation, but if slowly soil health/balance is realised then the potential to have far better surfaces is not too far away...
Like I said random ramblings...
Plastic.... it's The End I tell you... THE END!!!!
11 Dec 2010 by Mike
Now most are prudent but many applied a preventative just before the snow, thankfully in most cases, but wouldn't it be good to hear from those that didnt
We didn't apply anything, Barry. Slight infestation of red thread noticed over the last couple of days, which will sort itself out, no fuzz, no other problems that I can see. Just used a bit of common sense really, ensured playing areas were rotated frequently, didn't cut too short, made sure adequate aeration took place before the frosts - i'm happy with the results.
11 Dec 2010 by Duncan Peddie
micka andrew is like you and interested in our education he is also a ex lecturer ex h greenkeeper but still very much a current teacher. if he has directed you to info then its for your good and he should never be taken as a pinch of salt its very good that you have come out of snow with no fuzz as most of our customers including golf and bowling have the rest are still under and i will let you know when all melted with none on fungicide.
11 Dec 2010 by Mike
Duncan - like I said, nothing was directed at Andrew, but a general point where whereby everyone should go with caution before applying anything - that goes for chemical based products, organic products, or even taking a pee on the compost heap.
I thanked Andy for taking the time to post the links, and appreciate it, but what would you say if someone pointed out several studies which outline the benefits of fungicides, chemical based feeds (of which there are many) etc by a supplier, irrespective of their history or education - you would owe it to yourself to take the information on board, but also look at all of the other research before making a judgement (hence my comment re 'a pinch of salt') before coming to a well informed conclusion on the subject matter. As I always advocate, the very best scientific study I have access to is my site, your site is the best lab you will have access to, as is everyone else's respective site's. Scientific study should have a place in all of our decisions, but there is that much contradicting information out there, it cannot be solely relied upon, hence my theory that trialling products is the single best practice that any of us can undertake.
11 Dec 2010 by Duncan Peddie
fair play micka i have been greenkeeping for thirty years and the last two in golf i used sugars with a lot of good results including not using fungicides
12 Dec 2010 by MrC
i'm sorry, but it has taken the author nearly 50 years to come up with this wonderful and fantastic solution. Yet he comes up with flowery words to hide his findings. And after 50 years he cannot say look at this it is the dogs....
how much research is needed, not 50 years with no concise answer
It sounds like smoke and mirrors and jumping on the EU, we going to ban everything bandwagon, granted, manufactured chemicals in the 60's were said to be the way to go and were not, but this is getting a little bit holier than though.
I suspect the middle ground is more realistic, embracing nature with a little help, which seems to be what most people are doing.
The future may be with huge restrictions from the EU, but be honest about it. The path you take is commercially advantageous to yourselves.
Alternatively, the EU could go tits up in the next year. we have got used to a huge government making decisions for us and treating us like idiots.
This whole sugars thing is down to:-
Proposed EU legislation, everybody running scared
Green tax/brain washing, it being unacceptable to go against current dogma
Save the planet. look at china, india, the americas, what we are doing makes zero difference
save the planet. the planet will be here long after us
nearly 50 years of research [source: article above], with no clear winner [apart from the authors].
Fifty years of research [article above opens with the revolution began in 1964], if you cannot prove something in 50 years, I suggest you give up, it ain't working.
For all those looking to invest in this business, make sure it pays with money, and not in the long term, but now. For all those looking to learn lessons from it and apply them to everyday working, be careful that 50 years of research has been lost.
For all those worried about the EU, vote them out.
For all those wanting to work with nature, put some clothes on before you face the public.
Please don't treat us as idiots. Most of us use so called chemicals only, when needed, as you do [source: your article, using fungicides less, still using them though]
MrC
12 Dec 2010 by ian macmillan
Good morning MrC.
I't a shame you appear to hold so much animosity? however that is your perogative. You finish with our usage of fungicides? we DO NOT USE fungicides and rely on natures own. You state that we treat you as idiots? we never compromise people in our profession or indeed, any other profession, EVER. You state that it has taken the author fifty years to come up with our solution The author is my partner Andrew and has only been in the job for thirty years, on the other hand I have been in the job for forty six years and first observed Carbohydrate inclusion in1964.
Procrastination being a human weakness, yes, it has taken a while to finaly put it to use but let's consider the usage of antibiotics and in particular "Penicillian"a soil derivative, and from the the compound;chrysogenum. This took a while, did it not MrC? Especially when you consider it was first brought to light in 189 something by a French chap called Duchesne, then (procrastination again) it was not highlighted again until 1928 by Fleming, this time a Scot (proud to say) So come on MrC can we agree to disagree and concentrate on bringing Biology back to our soils? Please give me a call if you fancy a wee chat. Best Regards, Ian Mac
12 Dec 2010 by Poa7
Is it just me or is anyone else getting a tad bored of all this now?
12 Dec 2010 by aturnbull
Hi Poa7
I'm just amazed it went on for so long. Seems that some just can't help themselves having a go when Ian and I put our heads above the parapet.
Another piece of research for you;
Parent, T. 1996. "Exploring the Use of Carbohydrates on Golf Course Turf." Golf Course Management. March 1996. pp. 49-52
F.B. Hol 1998. "Life in the underworld. Roots and Microbes"
GreenMaster June/July 1998. pp. 21-23.
Both can be found through Google Scholar.
Andy Turnbull
Want to post a comment in response to this article?
Login now, or register if you are not a Pitchcare member.
The Journey Begins…
It all starts with photosynthesis…
Unlike other turf nutrition companies, The Great Turf Company does not dictate strict nutrition programmes to turf managers. Ian remarks, "We believe that the best person to decide on the amount of required nutrition is the guy who observes the turf on a daily basis. We recommend using organic sources of minerals due to the disruption from synthetic fertilisers to plant hormones that regulate nutrition".
equipment, and the requirement to keep sprayer operator licenses up to date will all have an effect on the use of pesticides in the very near future. "The future predicted by many is now here" warn Andrew and Ian. "You can negate these expensive requirements by using treatments that produce vigorous and healthy turf and also enhance the natural pathogen defences, processes that have been around for millions of years".
