{"id":1986,"date":"2021-09-23T21:57:58","date_gmt":"2021-09-24T03:57:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/azomite.com\/?page_id=1986"},"modified":"2021-10-26T16:59:43","modified_gmt":"2021-10-26T22:59:43","slug":"turf-study","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/azomite.com\/turf-study\/","title":{"rendered":"Turf Study"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

A REPLICATED<\/strong> Completely Randomized Block Design (CRBD) research study was conducted by Dr. Joey Young, assistant professor of turfgrass science at Texas Tech University on The Rawls Golf Course in Lubbock, TX in 2016 on an established \u201cTifSport\u201d hybrid bermudagrass fairway. All plots received soluble fertilizer (20-5-25) at 1 lb\/1,000 square feet and PolyonTM (CR 20-0-20) at 1 lb\/1,000 square feet in early spring. The control plots received no other fertilizer through the growing season. The fertilizer-only plots received Contec DGTM (18-9-18) at 1 lb\/1,000 square feet in early June, and the AZOMITE\u00ae plots got the same rate of Contec DG plus 1.2 lb\/1,000 square feet of AZOMITE\u00ae or 2.4 lb\/1,000 square feet of AZOMITE\u00ae applied at the same time. Soil tests and clipping analysis were con- ducted several times during the season. Visual turf ratings, light box digital imagery, and NDVI instrument readings were used to produce ratio vegetation index (RVI) and spectral reflectance data. At the end of the season, root cores were taken from each plot, then washed, dried, and longest root measurements and root mass were recorded.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Percent green cover from digital image analysis.<\/h4>\n

The higher green cover ratings at the end of the season can equate to longer play plus improved turf health and vigor later in the season.
\nError bars are provided for dates that had significant differences at a P-value \u2264 0.20. Means further apart than the error bars are significantly different at the lowest \u03b1 possible.<\/em>
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Visual turf quality rated on NTEP
\n1-9 scale (9 = best; 1 = poorest; 6 minimum acceptability)<\/h4>\n

On several dates, the AZOMITE\u00ae treatments showed improved turf quality ratings, which were significantly improved over the control, and also better than the fertilizer-only treatments on the September and final readings.
\nError bars are provided for dates that had significant differences at a P-value \u2264 0.20. Means further apart than the error bars are significantly different at the lowest \u03b1 possible.<\/em>
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

BENEFITS OF AZOMITE\u00ae<\/h4>\n