Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Five reasons why you should measure the clipping volume

Five reasons why you should measure the clipping volume

Everyone checks the growth of the grass by counting basket empties or other more subjective evaluations of how rapidly the grass is growing. Measuring the volume of clippings mown from an area, and then reporting it as volume per area, is an exciting measurement that represents directly the overall objective of turfgrass management -- modifying the growth rate of the grass to create the desired playing surface.

I shared data and case studies from around the world to explain how this measurement works and why the simple measurement of clipping volume has so many exciting implications for golf course maintenance. These include improved management (or optimization) of surface consistency, green speed, topdressing, and more.

Micah Woods

April 23, 2018
Tweet

More Decks by Micah Woods

Other Decks in Education

Transcript

  1. Five reasons why you should measure the clipping volume Micah

    Woods April 23, 2018 Chief Scientist Asian Turfgrass Center www.asianturfgrass.com @asianturfgrass
  2. Five reasons why 1. Growth rate 2. Green speed 3.

    Nutrient use and supply 4. Consistency
  3. Five reasons why 1. Growth rate 2. Green speed 3.

    Nutrient use and supply 4. Consistency 5. Topdressing
  4. “I thought the grass performed and looked the best when

    clipping yield was between [30 to 40 mL/m2]” Evan Mascitti
  5. For bentgrass, with every 10 mL/m2, expect a dry matter

    harvest of 0.6 g/m2. Or, for every 83 mL/m2, expect a dry matter harvest of 1 lb/1000 ft2.
  6. Then resupply as desired For example, 83 mL/m2 of bentgrass

    ≈ 0.04 lbs N/1000 ft2. And 0.02 lbs K/1000 ft2. And so on.
  7. “41% of members and players complain that sanded greens play

    poorly, according to turf managers who participated in recent GCI research.” GCI Magazine—April 2018
  8. Table 1: Annual clipping volume at that location from 2013

    to 2016 Year Volume Estimated dry weight N applied L/m2 g/m2 lb/1000 ft2 2013 4.4 266 NA 2014 3.4 201 2.6 2015 2.9 172 2 2016 2.4 142 1.7
  9. 1. Growth rate 2. Green speed 3. Nutrient use and

    supply 4. Consistency 5. Topdressing