Full TGIF Record # 310325
Item 1 of 1
Web URL(s):https://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2019am/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/122738
    Last checked: 02/05/2020
    Requires: JavaScript
Publication Type:
Content Type:Abstract or Summary only
Author(s):Thoms, Adam; Lindsey, Alex; Pease, Benjamin; Christians, Nick E.
Author Affiliation:Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Title:Evaluating the use of soil surfactants on baseball infield skins
Section:C05 turfgrass science
Other records with the "C05 turfgrass science" Section

Turfgrass science poster
Other records with the "Turfgrass science poster" Section
Meeting Info.:San Antonio, Texas: November 10-13, 2019
Source:ASA, CSSA and SSSA International Annual Meetings. 2019, p. 122738.
Publishing Information:[Madison, Wisconsin]: [American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America]
# of Pages:1
Keywords:TIC Keywords: Baseball fields; Skinned areas; Softball fields; Soil moisture; Sports turf maintenance; Surface hardness; Surfactants; Water holding capacity; Wetting agent evaluation; Wetting agents
Trade Names:Vivax; Magnus; Cascade; Vivax Tab; Precision EZ Tab
Abstract/Contents:"The non-turf area's (skin) of baseball and softball fields require the greatest amount of maintenance, especially with additions of soil moisture, by field managers. These fields see multiple events per day, and there often isn't adequate time allotted between events to apply enough water to the skin. Soil surfactants have demonstrated the ability improve water infiltration and water holding capacity in soils. A field study was conducted on the Iowa State University Club Softball field in 2018 to determine if the addition of soil surfactants can improve the water holding capacity of the softball infield. Seven soil surfactants treatments (Magnus at 15.9 L ha-1 and 31.82 L ha-1, Vivax at 15.91 L ha-1, Cascade at 25.46 L ha-1 and at 50.91 L ha-1, Vivax Tab at 3.26 L water m-2, and Precision EZ Tab at 3.26 L water m-2), as well as an untreated control (UTC) were applied to the infield. Linear regression analysis for soil moisture readings resulted in the Vivax Tab having the highest water loss (-0.44% h-1) along with the UTC (-0.41% h-1). Contrast statements were tested to compare the UTC to soil surfactants, only the high rate of Magnus offered a lower water loss over time than UTC. The high rate of Magnus also provided a harder surface than the UTC immediately after watering, and a lower surface hardness than all other treatments after 4 hours. It appears that all treatment affects are no longer present after 4 h, future research should focus on increased rates of soil surfactants for infield skins."
Note:This item is an abstract only!
"Poster #1574"
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Thoms, A., A. Lindsey, B. Pease, and N. E. Christians. 2019. Evaluating the use of soil surfactants on baseball infield skins. Agron. Abr. p. 122738.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=310325
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 310325.
Choices for finding the above item:
Web URL(s):
    Last checked: 02/05/2020
    Requires: JavaScript
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)