Turfgrass establishment on sand-based rootzones is routinely accomplished by using sod produced on a fine-textured native soil. As a result, soil layering occurs, potentially causing initial reduction in water infiltration, rooting, aeration, and overall turfgrass quality. This research was aimed at determining the feasibility of applying sand over existing native soil to produce hybrid bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon [L.] Pers. x C. transvaalensis Burtt-Davy) sand-based sod. Factors evaluated were visual quality and scalping. Treatments were harvested and transplanted to a sand-based research green where handle-ability, tensile strength, and infiltration were also evaluated. Results indicate aerify and topdress treatments showed higher quality pre-harvest. Control and 25 mm treatments were best in terms of harvesting, handle-ability, and sod tensile strength. Infiltration data indicated no significant differences between treatments. These outcomes along with further analysis could provide sod producers with a valuable product for use on sand-based rootzones.

Traditional aerification programs can cause substantial damage to the playing surface resulting in prolonged recovery. A growing trend in the industry involves using aerification techniques that cause minimum surface disruption; however, despite growing interest in new and alternative aerification technology, there is a lack of information in the literature comparing new or alternative technology with traditional methods on warm season grasses. Therefore, the objective of this research was to determine the best combination of new dry-injection (DI) cultivation technology with modified traditional aerification programs to achieve minimal surface disruption without a compromise in soil physical properties. Research was conducted at the Mississippi State University golf course practice putting green and at the Mississippi State University practice football field during. Treatments compared different combinations of hollow tine (HT) aerification and DI from Jun to Aug in 2014 and 2015.

Physical and chemical properties of non-composted spent coffee (CF) and tea (T) suggest they may have applications as soil amendments for improving poor soils. Studies were conducted to determine 1) the effect of amendments on grass growth and soil properties, 2) the effect of incorporation versus surface application of amendments on soil properties, and 3) the effect of amendment application frequency on grass growth and soil properties. In the first study, amendments were mixed with sand and planted to bermudagrass. Treatments included CF, T, and peat moss (PM) mixed with sand, and 100% sand as a control. In the second study, amendments were topdressed onto a sand base with different timings. Pots were either aerified or not. Treatments included T, CF, PM, and a control. Nutrient contents and soil CEC and OM under CF and T treatments were equivalent to or greater than PM treatments. Tea showed comparable grass cover to the PM treatment, while CF showed an inhibitory effect to grass growth in the first year of the study. Aerification showed no benefit. Additionally, a field study was conducted to evaluate CF and T on surface hardness, VWC, and quality after trafficking. Differences were not observed among treatments.