Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Industrial Crops & Products

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/indcrop

Biochar-organic amendment mixtures added to simulated golf greens under T

reduced chemical fertilization increase creeping bentgrass growth☆
⁎
Steven F. Vaughna, , F. Dan Dinellib, Michael A. Jacksonc, Martha M. Vaughand,
Steven C. Petersone
a
USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Functional Foods Research, National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, 1815 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61604, USA
b
North Shore Country Club, 1340 Glenview Road, Glenview, IL 60025, USA
c
USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Renewable Product Technology Research, National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, 1815 N. University St., Peoria, IL
61604, USA
d
USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Mycotoxin Prevention and Applied Microbiology Research, National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, 1815 N.
University St., Peoria, IL 61604, USA
e
USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Plant Polymer Research, National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, 1815 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61604, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Simulated golf greens were used to test the growth of creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L. ‘007′) receiving
Biochar suboptimal chemical fertilization in sand based substrates amended with 15% peat (control), a commercial
Composts biochar, a commercial biochar-compost mixture (CarbonizPN-Soil), or seven formulated biochar-compost mix-
Creeping bentgrass tures. Physical and chemical properties including pH, bulk density, pore space, compaction distance, nutrient
Sand-based root zones
content and water/nutrient retention capacity varied among the mixtures. The heights, root lengths, and fresh
and dry weights of creeping bentgrass plants grown in polyvinyl chloride tubes containing the different substrate
mixtures mimicking a United States Golf Association root zone were evaluated and compared. Forty days after
seeding, plants grown in 5% biochar and 10% Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago
biosolids had significantly greater fresh weights, dry weights, and shoot heights than the control. Dry weights
and shoot heights were also higher than the control in bentgrass grown in the 15% CarbonizPN-Soil mixture.
Based on these results the addition of these two biochar-organic amendment mixtures would improve overall
plant growth in sand-based root zones under reduced chemical fertilization.

1. Introduction
Modern golf putting green root zones are constructed using sand to
provide a smooth putting surface, prevent compaction, and promote
rapid water drainage. Because sand has inherently poor water and
nutrient retention properties, organic matter such as sphagnum peat is
typically included in the construction of new golf greens (USGA, 2004;
McCoy, 2013). However, after peat is harvested, the cutover peatlands
are a large and persistent source of atmospheric CO2, primarily due to
increased soil organic matter decomposition and reduced carbon fixa-
tion from new vegetative growth (Petrone et al., 2003; Waddington
et al., 2010). Other organic amendments, including various composts
and municipal biosolids, have also been examined as more carbon-
neutral replacements for peat, with the additional benefit of supplying
nutrients (Kaminski et al., 2004; Tian et al., 2008; Aamlid and Hanslin,
2009; Moody et al., 2009; McCoy, 2013; Aaamlid et al., 2014).
Nevertheless, as putting greens age, these organic amendments de-
compose, and most of the remaining organic material from grass de-
composition accumulates near the surface (Murphy et al., 1993; Habeck
and Christians, 2000; Curtis and Pulis, 2001; McClellan et al., 2009;
Lewis et al., 2010). This causes water and nutrients to be retained in
this area, resulting in shallow-rooted plants which are much more
susceptible to episodes of drought. Inorganic amendments that resist
degradation and have high water and nutrient retention, including
diatomaceous earth, porous clays, zeolites and volcanic pumice, have
also been examined as peat replacements (Bigelow et al., 2001; Ok
et al., 2003; Waltz et al., 2003; Bigelow et al., 2004; Volterrani and
Magni, 2012).
The addition of charcoal to new golf greens for improving porosity
and overall properties was first suggested over 85 years ago (Morley,

☆
Mention of trade names or commercial products in this article is solely for the purpose of providing scientific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Steven.Vaughn@ars.usda.gov (S.F. Vaughn).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.11.036
Received 8 May 2017; Received in revised form 5 October 2017; Accepted 19 November 2017
Available online 27 November 2017
0926-6690/ Published by Elsevier B.V.
S.F. Vaughn et al.
1929). Several recent studies have examined biochar (agricultural
charcoal) as an amendment to golf greens (Brockhoff et al., 2010; Carey
et al., 2015; Vaughn et al., 2015a). Unlike other organic amendments,
biochar is highly resistant to microbial decomposition and therefore
would be expected to have great longevity in root zones (Laird, 2008;
Sohi, 2012). Furthermore, application of biochar to soils has been
shown to improve runoff water quality and retention of nutrients (Beck
et al., 2011; Knowles et al., 2011; Uzoma et al., 2011; Bruun et al.,
2014). Because sand-based root zones require high fertilizer and pes-
ticide inputs, leaching of these compounds into groundwater is of ser-
ious concern (Aamlid, 2005; Larsbo et al., 2008; Głąb et al., 2016).
Leaching of excess fertilizer into bodies of water can lead to eu-
trophication, such as is occurring in the Gulf of Mexico and the Great
Lakes. Because of this, several U.S. states are enacting legislation re-
stricting the application of fertilizer to non-agricultural lands, with
special restrictions concerning nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer ap-
plications. As an example, the Fertilizer Use Act of 2011 enacted by the
state of Maryland prohibits the application of phosphorus fertilizers to
non-agricultural land (this includes private lawns, golf courses, public
parks, athletic fields and cemeteries) unless a soil test result indicates it
is needed, while also greatly restricting amounts of nitrogen fertilizer
applied (http://mda.maryland.gov/resource_conservation/Documents/
fertilizerwebpage.pdf). A major objective of our research is to find root
zone amendments which would allow reduced rates of fertilizer while
still allowing optimal turfgrass growth. Preliminary greenhouse studies
found little or no differences in the growth of creeping bentgrass growth
when different root zone organic amendments were employed and
chemical fertilizers were used at recommended rates. Therefore for the
research presented in this paper a reduced level of chemical fertilizer
was used.
In this study we compare the growth of creeping bentgrass (Agrostis
stolonifera L. ‘007′) in 85% sand-based root zones that have been
amended with mixtures of peat, peat/biochar, biochar, and biochar/
composts under reduced chemical fertilization. Chemical and physical
properties of the biochars, sand, and sand biochar mixtures (bulk
densities, % pore space, pH, inherent nutrient content, water and nu-
trient retention, and resistance to compaction) were also examined.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Creeping bentgrass ‘007′ seed was obtained from Seed Research of
Oregon, (Tangent, OR, USA). Biochar produced by pyrolysis of
Southern yellow pine at 400 °C was supplied by Mirimichi Green
Express (Castle Hayne, NC, USA), and sphagnum peat moss was pur-
chased from SunGro® Horticulture, (Agawam, MA, USA). Calcareous
sand with a pH of 8.1 and particle size distribution meeting USGA
standards (USGA, 2004) was purchased (Galena Road Gravel, Chilli-
cothe, IL, USA) and used in treatment mixtures. Sand was passed
through a series of sieves to determine the particle size distribution of
1.5% very coarse, 54.6% coarse, 39.4% medium, 3.3% fine, 1.1% very
fine and 0.1% silt and clay by weight. Pea gravel meeting USGA stan-
dards was obtained from Kickapoo Sand & Gravel, Princeville, IL, USA.
Organic composts tested were: anaerobic biosolids (MWRD biosolids)
and anaerobic biosolids mixed with yard-waste compost [MWRD
compost; both obtained from the Metropolitan Water Reclamation
District (MWRD) of Greater Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA]; Humus com-
post (The Humus Compost Company LLC, Harrisonburg, VA, USA);
worm castings (Wiggle Worm Soil Builder, UNCO Industries, Inc.,
Union Grove, WI, USA); vermicompost (TerraVesco, Sonoma, CA, USA);
Organimix compost (Midwest Organics Recycling LLC, McHenry, IL,
USA); and CabonizPN-Soil (a mixture of 50% biochar and 50% com-
posted swine manure; Mirimichi Green Express).
668
Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672
2.2. Chemical and physical properties of the substrates and substrate
components
Chemical analyses of the biochar, peat and composts were con-
ducted using the saturated media extract method with triplicate sam-
ples (Warncke, 1998). Elemental composition data of the biochars
(using approximately 2 mg of biochar for each measurement) for per-
cent carbon, hydrogen, sulfur, nitrogen and oxygen were obtained using
a Perkin Elmer 2400 CHNSO series II Analyzer (Norwalk, CT), with
cysteine as the standard. Ash content was determined using a Q2950
(TA Instruments, New Castle, DE) thermogravimetric analyzer by
heating to 1000 °C at 10 °C min−1 under an air atmosphere. Surface
area measurements were performed on a Quantachrome ASiQ (Quan-
tachrome Instruments, Boynton Beach, FL, USA). Samples were de-
gassed at 200 °C for 10 h prior to analysis. Surface areas were de-
termined at −196 °C using N2 as the analytical gas in a relative
pressure range of 0.01–0.30 using the BET method for total surface area
calculations. The pressure range used in the calculation for each sample
was chosen based on the best linear fit for points in the 0.025–0.30
range (Brunauer et al., 1938). Micropore surface areas were determined
using the t-method over a relative pressure range of 0.15–0.30. The data
were analyzed using the de Boer model for the layer thickness equation.
(Lippens and de Boer, 1965). Bulk density and total porosity were de-
termined by standard test methods as previously described (Vaughn
et al., 2015a), while pH values of sand, sand/biochar and sand/peat
mixtures were evaluated by the methods of Torres et al. (2010) em-
ploying an AB 15 pH meter (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA,
USA). All of these values were obtained on oven-dried material before
application of fertilizer solution.
Compaction of the root zone mixtures were carried out at 10%
moisture content to simulate field conditions and water retention ca-
pacity of each substrate was determined as described in Vaughn et al.
(2015a). The substrate inherent nutrient content and retention capacity
was indirectly estimated from the quantity of nutrient leaching
(Lehmann and Schroth, 2003). The amount of nutrients within each
effluent solution was estimated by measuring the conductivity of the
solution using a MultiLab 4010-1c conductivity meter (YSI, Yellow
Springs, OH, USA). To initially determine the differences in inherent
nutrient content due to the variable compost amendments, 50 mL of
deionized (DI) water 0 μS cm−1 was allowed to percolate through
20 mL of substrate and the conductivity of the effluent was measured.
Hoagland’s solution (25 mL) was then passed through the substrate
column and the effluent conductivity was measured. Measurements
were taken in triplicate from independent preparations of substrate
mixes. The conductivity of Hoagland’s solution (650 μS cm−1) and the
conductivity of the effluent from DI water were summed, to estimate
the maximum total amount of nutrients (both inherent amounts and
added by the nutrient solution) within the substrate. The change in
conductivity due to nutrient retention was then calculated by sub-
tracting the conductivity measurement of the effluent from the Hoag-
land’s solution which percolated through the substrate from the esti-
mated total.
2.3. Plant experiments
Polyvinyl chloride tubes (71.1 cm height × 11.2 cm outside dia-
meter × 9.9 cm inside diameter) were filled 30 cm deep (2.5 L volume)
with 1 cm diameter pea gravel to mimic a United States Golf
Association root zone (Brockhoff et al., 2010). Over this 30 cm (2.5 L)
of mixtures of 85% sand (v/v) uniformly mixed with 15% (v/v) of the
organic amendments. These organic amendments were as follows: 15%
peat (control); 15% biochar; 5% biochar/10% peat; 5% biochar/10
MWRD biosolids; 5% biochar/10% MWRD compost; 5% biochar/10%
vermicompost; 5% biochar/10% Organimix; 5% biochar/10% Humus;
5% biochar/10% worm castings; 15% CarbonizPN-Soil. Mixtures were
prepared using a cement mixer, with the combined materials wetted
S.F. Vaughn et al.
lightly with deionized water during blending to assist in even dis-
tribution with the sand. Seven hundred and fifty mL of DI water con-
taining 0.736 g L−1 of a complete hydroponic fertilizer (16-4-17 Hy-
droponic Fertilizer, Oasis Grower Solutions, Kelowna, British Columbia,
Canada) was poured into each tube, for a rate of 10.6 g N m−2. This
amount was sufficient to saturate all of the treatments with liquid as
well as preconditioning the columns with some nutrients, although
much less than is recommended by the fertilizer manufacturer for op-
timal growth of hydroponically-grown plants. Forty-seven mg
(6 mg m−2) of creeping bentgrass seed was applied to the surface of the
sand or sand-biochar mixtures and covered with 4 g (approximately
1 cm thickness) of a commercial hydromulch (HydroStraw® Original
Formulation, HydroStraw LLC, Manteno, IL) as previously reported
(Vaughn et al., 2015a). Deionized water (100 mL) was applied after 4 h,
and thereafter 100 mL of deionized water was applied every other day
for the duration of the experiment, except at days 10, 20 and 30 when
hydroponic solution was substituted for the deionized water. Four re-
plicates of each treatment were evaluated in a completely randomized
design in a greenhouse with an average light intensity of
700 μmol m−2 s−1. After 5 weeks of growth, the entire plant mass was
removed from the substrates, and maximum shoot heights and root
lengths were recorded after rinsing the plants with deionized water
over a 3.35 mm mesh opening screen to remove residual sand and/or
organic amendments. The maximum shoot and root lengths were
measured and the fresh weights were recorded after wicking off the
rinse water with paper towels. Plants were then dried for 72 h at 40 °C
and dry weights were recorded. Results presented are the mean of two
separate experiments.
2.4. Statistical design and analyses
A single-factor mixed model replicated experiment analysis of var-
iance was used to analyze treatment differences for all variables.
ANOVA treatment differences were considered to be significant at
p < 0.05. Differences of least squares means using a Bonferroni ad-
justment to compensate for the number of pairwise comparisons was
conducted at p < 0.05 following a significant F-test from the ANOVA.
Levene’s homogeneity of variance test was applied to determine
transformation necessity. All analyses were performed on transformed
data where necessary, but raw data means are presented for ease of
interpretation. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS
Version 9.2.2 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Chemical characteristics of the biochar, peat and composts
The chemical properties of the biochar, peat and composts are
shown in Table 1.
The Mirimichi biochar had a pH of 6.0, which is quite low compared
to biochars that we have previously tested (Vaughn et al., 2013; Vaughn
et al., 2015b). As expected, the peat was the most acidic organic ma-
terial tested, and was more acidic than previously reported (pH values
from 5.2–5.5; Nelson, 2011). The pH values of the composts varied
considerably, and ranged from mildly acidic with the worm castings to
slightly basic for the Humus compost. EC values indicate dissolvable
solutes and hence fertilizer content, with the CarbonizPN-Soil having
the highest value and peat the lowest. Although soluble salt levels
greater than 4.0 dS m−1 are often injurious to turfgrasses, these salts
are diluted when mixed with sand and are rapidly leached from the root
zone with irrigation and rainfall during turfgrass establishment
(McCoy, 2013). Nitrogen values varied greatly, with the CarbonizPN-
Soil being ten-fold higher than Humus compost. Phosphorus levels also
varied widely, with the CarbonizPN-Soil having a value of 435 mg kg−1
while the worm castings contained 1 mg kg−1. Potassium values for
Organimix compost and CarbonizPN-Soil were over 20-fold higher than
669
Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672
found in the worm castings. However, while the worm casting compost
had the least amounts of phosphorus and potassium, it was highest in
calcium and iron content. Notably the MWRD biosolids contained high
levels of copper, presumably due to from leaching from copper pipes
(Singh and Agrawal, 2008).
3.2. Physical and chemical characteristics of the sand-organic material
mixtures
The CHNSO analysis of the biochar found 64.4% C, 1.9% H, 0.5% N,
0.56% S and 26.0% O, with an ash content of 6.6%. The density of the
biochar was 1.81 g cm−3, and the surface area of the biochar was
402 m2 g−1, with 334 m2 g−1 present as micropores. The biochar used
in this study had greater micropore surface area than biochars produced
from seven-year-old coppiced shoots of fourteen different tree species,
although three of these coppiced shoot biochars had higher surface
areas (Vaughn et al., 2015b). In general, the total surface area of bio-
char increases with pyrolysis temperature (Beesley et al., 2010; Ahmed
et al., 2016). Using the guidelines for O/C, H/C, and surface area, the
biochar used in this study met requirements for soil amendment es-
tablished by Schimmelpfennig and Glaser (2012), whose guidelines
determined that biochar is suitable for soil amendment if the O/C
ratio < 0.4, an H/C ratio of < 0.6, and has a surface area > 100
m2 g−1.
Root zone mixture bulk densities, percent pore spaces and com-
paction distances are shown in Table 2.
Bulk densities varied among the different mixtures, with the 15%
CarbonizPN-Soil having the highest bulk density, with 15% peat and
5%biochar/10% peat having the lowest values. Bulk densities of the
root zone have been shown to decrease over time due to accumulation
of root-derived organic matter (Samaranayake et al., 2008). Percent
pore space values were generally inverse to bulk density values, with
the two mixtures containing peat having the largest percent pore space
values while mixtures containing a compost were generally lower.
USGA recommendations for golf greens are 1.2–1.6 kg m−3 for bulk
density and 35%–55% for percent pore space (USGA, 2004). Only the
bulk density of the 15% CarbonizPN-Soil exceeded these re-
commendations, while all mixtures were in the recommended range for
percent pore space. There were significant differences found for com-
pacted height, with the highest values (higher resistance to compac-
tion) found with several of the biochar-compost mixtures. However, the
absolute values of compaction found were very similar, with only a
variance of 0.7 mm between the treatments, indicating that all of the
treatments should be acceptable, although at this time there are no
USGA recommendations for this variable. Although compaction is less
of a problem on golf greens typically than for other areas of golf
courses, creeping bentgrass is relatively intolerant of compaction
(Samaranayake et al., 2008; Christians, 2011).
Both mixtures containing peat had the highest pH values, which is
somewhat surprising due to the acidic nature of sphagnum peat (pH of
the material tested in this study was 4.0), which is lower than any of
these composts (Table 3).
Chong (2005) reported that sphagnum peat typically has a pH value
of 4.0, while composts derived from leaf/yard waste, household wastes,
turkey litter and spent mushroom media all had pH values above 8.0.
Water retention was highly variable, with the 5% biochar/10% peat
mixture retaining more water than peat alone, with the 5% biochar/
10% Humus compost mixture retaining the least. Peat has been shown
to have greater water retention than various composts (Chong, 2005).
Inherent nutrient content of the mixtures varied considerably, with the
15% peat, 15% biochar and 5% biochar/10% peat having values ap-
proximately an order of magnitude less than the 15% CarbonizPN-Soil,
the latter also having the greatest nutrient retention of all the mixtures.
S.F. Vaughn et al. Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672

Table 1
Chemical properties of the biochar, peat and composts.

Properties Unit BCa SPM CPN MWB MWC VC WC OM HS

pH SU 6.0 4.0 5.6 6.0 6.2 6.5 5.0 7.8 8.0

EC dS−1 14.0 0.4 18.9 12.2 7.1 14.0 7.9 12.9 8.1
Nitrate N mg kg−1 1375 1.0 2173 1733 547 1293 974 744 267
Phosphorus mg kg−1 318 4 435 36 9 74 1 9 3
Potassium mg kg−1 2884 5 5065 257 699 4372 231 5075 2111
Calcium mg kg−1 641 27 900 948 718 370 1350 335 483
Magnesium mg kg−1 1226 25 1963 1520 591 243 464 243 237
Sulfate S mg kg−1 820 230 2200 701 1603 259 488 460 593
Chloride mg kg−1 512 2 923 545 290 1562 141 2480 1284
Sodium mg kg−1 298 4 693 324 230 1186 30 633 255
Iron mg kg−1 5.0 47.5 8.5 24.5 30.5 13.0 60.0 25.0 19.8
Zinc mg kg−1 83.1 0.3 65.0 15.8 33.8 25.3 0.2 13.5 7.3
Manganese mg kg−1 0.5 0.3 4.5 3.5 2.5 13.3 1.3 12.8 14.3
Copper mg kg−1 16.0 0.2 73 195 12.5 0.5 0.1 1.8 0.8
Boron mg kg−1 1.4 1.1 6.8 7.0 2.4 4.0 1.2 3.9 1.7

a
Abbreviations: BC, biochar; SPM, sphagnum peat moss; CPN, CarbonizPN-Soil; MWB, Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) biosolids; MWC, MWRD compost; VC,
vermicompost; WC, worm castings; OM, Organimix compost; HS, Humus compost.

Table 2 among the treatment mixtures, with the 5% biochar/10% MWRD bio-
Physical properties of sand-organic material mixtures. solids and the 15% CarbonizPN-soil mixtures being the tallest. Root
lengths of the 5% biochar/10% MWRD biosolids mixture were greater
Mixturea Bulk density Pore space Compacted height
(kg m−3)b (%) (mm) than 15% biochar, 5% biochar/10% peat and 5% biochar/10%
Organimix mixtures. The shorter root lengths found in the 5% biochar/
15% peat 1.47 e 44.7 ab 8.5 a 10% Organimix mixture seemed to contradict our previous finding of a
15% biochar 1.56 bcd 41.2 cde 8.0 cd positive relationship between potassium levels and root growth
5% biochar/10% peat 1.44 c 45.5 a 7.9 cd
5% biochar/10% MWRD 1.51 d 42.9 bc 8.0 cd
(Vaughn et al., 2015a). Plant growth did not appear to be positively
biosolids correlated to any particular chemical or physical attribute of the or-
5% biochar/10% MWRD 1.52 d 42.8 c 7.9 cd ganic amendments, with the possible exception of nitrate nitrogen
compost which was highest in the CarbonizPN-Soil and the MWRD biosolids,
5% biochar/10% 1.59 bc 40.1 def 8.3 ab
which also had the highest growth. Nitrate concentrations were found
vermicompost
5% biochar/10% 1.59 bc 39.9 ef 8.0 cd to be higher in golf green root zones amended with biosolids than either
Organimix reed-sedge peat or yard-waste compost (Tian et al., 2008).
5% biochar/10% Humus 1.54 cd 42.0 cd 7.9 cd Of particular interest from the results of this study is the efficacy of
5% biochar/10% worm 1.55 bcd 41.7 cde 8.1 bcd the biochar/MWRD biosolids mixture in promoting creeping bentgrass
castings
15% CarbonizPN-Soil 1.64 a 38.3 f 7.8 d
growth. Finding suitable uses for biosolids is becoming increasingly
important worldwide, as in 2008 global production of biosolids ex-
a
All treatments consisted of 85% sand. ceeded 10 M t/yr, or an average of 27 kg of dry biosolids per person per
b
Means within a column followed by the same letters are not significantly different year (Bradley, 2008). Disposal of these biosolids is a problem inter-
based on differences of least square means at p ≤ 0.05. nationally, and incineration or incorporation into landfill is often re-
stricted (Joo et al., 2015). A recent study found that mixtures of several
3.3. Plant growth experiments turfgrasses grown in soil amended with MWRD biosolids on a former
steel mill brownfield site had levels of heavy metals similar to grass
Values for fresh and dry weights, plant heights and root lengths of grown on soil without biosolids (Brose et al., 2016). Biosolids applied to
creeping bentgrass plants are shown in Table 4. a mixed Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.)/perennial ryegrass (Lo-
Only the 5% biochar/10% biosolids mixture had fresh weights sig- lium perenne L.) lawn enhanced grass growth and establishment while
nificantly greater than the 15% peat control. Dry weights of both the additionally suppressing Puccinia leaf rust (Loschinkohl and Boehm,
5% biochar/10% MWRD biosolids and the 15% CarbonizPN-Soil mix- 2001). Forage maize (Zea mays L.) yields were similar with application
ture were greater than the control. Shoot heights were quite different of biosolids, chemical fertilizers, or manure as compared to control

Table 3
Chemical properties of sand sand/biochar and sand/peat mixtures.

Mixturea pHb Water retention (μL water g−1 substrate) Inherent nutrient content (μS cm−1) Nutrient retention (μS cm−1)

15% peat 7.7 a 68.9 bcde 232 e 196 cd

15% biochar 7.3 b 80.1 abc 238 e 239 cd
5% biochar/10% peat 7.6 a 115.5 a 180 e 203 cd
5% biochar/10% MWRD biosolids 6.9 cd 55.3 bcde 429 d 357 bc
5% biochar/10% MWRD compost 7.3 b 48.3 de 1228 b 528 b
5% biochar/10% vermicompost 7.0 c 40.7 e 1053 b 554 b
5% biochar/10% Organimix 6.8 cd 86.6 ab 700 c 527 b
5% biochar/10% Humus 7.0 c 18.2 f 272 de 183 d
5% biochar/10% worm castings 6.7 d 52.4 cde 291 de 255 cd
15% CarbonizPN-Soil 6.2 e 76.0 bcd 2007 a 999 a

a
All treatments consisted of 85% sand.
b
Means within a column followed by the same letters are not significantly different based on differences of least square means at p ≤ 0.05.

670
S.F. Vaughn et al. Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672

Table 4
Creeping bentgrass fresh and dry weights, plant heights and root lengths 40 days after seeding.

Mixturea Fresh weight/tube (g)b Dry weight/ tube (g) Shoot height (mm) Root length (mm)

15% peat 2.39 b 0.81 c 75 c 279 ab

15% biochar 2.70 b 0.80 c 88 c 247 b
5% biochar/10% peat 2.23 b 0.60 c 80 c 268 b
5% biochar/10% MWRD biosolids 17.36 a 4.62 a 248 a 358 a
5% biochar/10% MWRD compost 5.42 ab 1.55 bc 135 bc 269 ab
5% biochar/10% vermicompost 2.70 ab 0.82 c 91 c 288 ab
5% biochar/10% Organimix 3.31 ab 0.99 c 113 c 250 b
5% biochar/10% Humus 4.89 ab 1.42 bc 120 c 293 ab
5% biochar/10% worm castings 3.80 ab 1.09 bc 107 c 270 ab
15% CarbonizPN-Soil 11.04 ab 3.31 ab 209 ab 334 ab

a
All treatments consisted of 85% sand.
b
Means within a column followed by the same letters are not significantly different based on differences of least square means at p ≤ 0.05.

plots (Athamenh et al., 2015). biochar. Agron. J. 102, 1627–1631.

4. Conclusions
Mixtures of sand and organic amendments were examined for their
effect on the growth of creeping bentgrass in simulated golf greens.
Physical and chemical properties including pH, bulk density, pore
space, compaction distance, and water/nutrient content varied sig-
nificantly among the mixtures. Bentgrass plant heights, root lengths,
and fresh and dry weights were evaluated in mixtures grown in tubes
mimicking a United States Golf Association root zone. Forty days after
seeding, plants grown in 85% sand, 5% biochar and 10% MWRD bio-
solids had significantly greater fresh weights, dry weights, and shoot
heights than the control. Dry weights and shoot heights were also
higher than the control in bentgrass grown in the 85% sand, 15%
CarbonizPN-Soil mixture. Replicated field trials are currently being
conducted at North Shore Country Club in Glenview, Illinois, USA to
support the findings of this study.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance of Ray
Holloway and AJ Thomas, and to Deb Palmquist for statistical analyses.
References
Aaamlid, T.S., Andersen, T.E., Kvalbein, A., Pettersen, T., Jensen, A.D., 2014. Composted
garden waste as organic amendment to the USGA-rootzone and topdressing sand on
red fescue (Festuca rubra) greens. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci. 79, 87–96.
Aamlid, T.S., Hanslin, H.M., 2009. Evaluation of organic fertilizers and biostimulants on
sand-based golf greens and football pitches under Scandinavian climate conditions.
Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 11, 919–931.
Aamlid, T.S., 2005. Organic amendments of sand-based golf greens: effects on estab-
lishment rate, root development, disease occurrence and nutrient leakage during the
first year after sowing. Int. Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 10, 83–84 (Annex).
Ahmed, M.B., Zhou, J.L., Ngo, H.H., Guo, W., 2016. Insight into biochar properties and its
cost analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 84, 76–86.
Athamenh, B.M., Salem, N.M., El-Zuraiqi, S.M., Suleiman, W., Rusan, M.J., 2015.
Combined land application of treated wastewater and biosolids enhances crop pro-
ductivity and soil fertility. Desalin. Water Treat. 53, 3283–3294.
Beck, D.A., Johnson, G.R., Spolek, G.A., 2011. Amending greenroof soil with biochar to
affect runoff water quantity and quality. Environ. Pollut. 159, 2111–2118.
Beesley, L., Moreno-Jiménez, E., Gomez-Eyles, J.L., Harris, E., Robinson, B., Sizmur, T.,
2010. A review of biochars’ potential role in the remediation, revegetation and re-
storation of contaminated soils. Environ. Pollut. 159, 3269–3282.
Bigelow, C.A., Bowman, D.C., Cassel, D.K., Rufty Jr., T.W., 2001. Creeping bentgrass
response to inorganic soil amendments and mechanically induced subsurface drai-
nage and aeration. Crop Sci. 41, 797–805.
Bigelow, C.A., Bowman, D.C., Cassel, D.K., 2004. Physical properties of three sand size
classes amended with inorganic materilas or sphagnum peat moss for putting green
rootzones. Crop Sci. 44, 900–907.
Bradley, J., 2008. New Zealand. In: LeBlanc, R.J., Matthews, P., Richard, R.P. (Eds.),
Global Atlas of Excreta, Wastewater Sludge, and Biosolids Management: Moving
Forward the Sustainable and Welcome Uses of a Global Resource. United
NationsHuman Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT), pp. 447–454.
Brockhoff, S.R., Christians, N.E., Killorn, R.J., Horton, R., Davis, D.D., 2010. Physical and
mineral-nutrition properties of sand-based turfgrass root zones amended with
Brose, D.A., Hundal, L.S., Oladeji, O.O., Kumar, K., Granato, T.C., Cox, A., Abedin, Z.,
2016. Greening a steel mill slag brownfield with biosolids and sediments: a case
study. J. Environ. Qual. 45, 53–61.
Brunauer, S., Emmett, P.H., Teller, E., 1938. Adsorption of gases in multimolecular layers.
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 60, 309–319.
Bruun, E.W., Petersen, C.T., Hansen, E., Holm, J.K., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., 2014. Biochar
amendment to coarse sandy subsoil improves root growth and increases water re-
tention. Soil Use Manage. 30, 109–118.
Carey, D.E., McNamara, P.J., Zitomer, D.H., 2015. Biochar from pyrolysis of biosolids for
nutrient adsorption and turfgrass cultivation. Water Environ. Res. 87, 2098–2106.
Chong, C., 2005. Experiences with wastes and composts in nursery substrates.
HortTechnology 15, 739–747.
Christians, N.E., 2011. Fundamentals of Turfgrass Management, fourth ed. John Wiley &
Sons, New York.
Curtis, A., Pulis, M., 2001. Evolution of a sand-based root zone. Golf Course Manage. 69,
53–56.
Głąb, T., Palmowska, J., Zaleski, T., Gondek, K., 2016. Effect of biochar application on
soil hydrological properties and physical quality of sandy soil. Geoderma 281, 11–20.
Habeck, J., Christians, N., 2000. Time alters greens’ key characteristics. Golf Course
Manage. 68, 54–60.
Joo, S.H., Monaco, F.D., Antmann, E., Chorath, P., 2015. Sustainable approaches for
minimizing biosolids production and maximizing reuse options in sludge manage-
ment: a review. J. Environ. Manage. 158, 133–145.
Kaminski, J.E., Doerneden, P.H., Bigelow, C.A., 2004. Soil amendments and fertilizer
source effects on creeping bentgrass establishment, soil microbial activity, thatch,
and disease. HortScience 39, 620–626.
Knowles, O.A., Robinson, B.H., Contangelo, A., Clucas, L., 2011. Biochar for the mitiga-
tion of nitrate leaching from soil amended with biosolids. Sci. Total Environ. 409,
3206–3210.
Laird, D., 2008. The charcoal vision A win–win scenario for simultaneously producing
bioenergy, permanently sequestering carbon, and improving soil and water quality.
Agron. J. 100, 178–181.
Larsbo, M., Aamlid, T.S., Persson, L., Jarvis, N., 2008. Fungicide leaching from golf
greens: effefts of root zone composition and surfactant use. J. Environ. Qual. 37,
1527–1535.
Lehmann, J., Schroth, G., 2003. Nutrient leaching. In: Schroth, G., Sinclair, E.L. (Eds.),
Trees, Crops and Soil Fertility: Concepts and Research Methods. CAB International,
Wallingford, UK, pp. 151–166.
Lewis, J.D., Gaussoin, R.E., Shearman, R.C., Mamo, M., Wortmann, C.S., 2010. Soil
physical properties of aging golf course putting greens. Crop Sci. 50, 2084–2091.
Lippens, B.C., de Boer, J.H., 1965. Studies on pore systems in catalysts: v. The t method.
Catalysis 4, 319–323.
Loschinkohl, C., Boehm, M.J., 2001. Composted biosolids incorporation improves turf-
grass establishment on disturbed urban soil and reduces leaf rust severity.
HortScience 36, 790–794.
McClellan, T.A., Gaussoin, R.E., Shearman, R.C., Wortmann, C.S., Mamo, M., Horst, G.L.,
2009. Nutrient and chemical properties of aging golf course putting greens as im-
pacted by soil depth and mat development. Hortscience 44, 452–458.
McCoy, E.L., 2013. Commercial amendments for sand-based root zones: review and in-
terpretation. HortTechnology 23, 803–813.
Moody, D.R., Schlossberg, M.J., Archibald, D.D., McNitt, A.S., Fidanza, M.A., 2009. Soil
water repellency development in amended sand rootzones. Crop Sci. 49, 1885–1892.
Morley, J., 1929. Compost and Charcoal. The National Greenskeeper (September 8, 1929,
8, 10–11, 26).
Murphy, J.W., Field, T.R.O., Hickey, M.J., 1993. Age development in sand-based turf. Int.
Turfgrass Soc. Res. J. 7, 464–468.
Nelson, P.V., 2011. Greenhouse Operation & Management, seventh ed. Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 607.
Ok, C.-H., Anderson, S.H., Ervin, E.H., 2003. Amendments and construction systems for
improving the performance of sand-based putting greens. Agron. J. 95, 1583–1590.
Petrone, R.M., Waddington, J.M., Price, J.S., 2003. Ecosystem-scale flux of CO2 from a
restored vacuum harvested peatland. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 11, 419–432.
Samaranayake, H., Lawson, T.J., Murphy, J.A., 2008. Traffic stress effects on bentgrass
putting green and fairway turf. Crop Sci. 48, 1193–1202.

671
S.F. Vaughn et al.
Schimmelpfennig, S., Glaser, B., 2012. One step forward toward characterization: some
important material properties to distinguish biochars. J. Environ. Qual. 41,
1001–1013.
Singh, R.P., Agrawal, M., 2008. Potential benefits and risks of land application of sewage
sludge. Waste Manage. 28, 347–358.
Sohi, S., 2012. Carbon storage with benefits. Science 338, 1034–1035.
Tian, G., Granato, T.C., Dinelli, F.D., Cox, A.E., 2008. Effectiveness of biosolids in en-
hancing soil microbial populations and N mineralization in golf course putting
greens. Appl. Soil Ecol. 40, 381–386.
Torres, A.P., Mickelbart, M.V., Lopez, R.G., 2010. Leachate volume effects on pH and
electrical conductivity measurements in containers obtained using the pour-through
method. HortTechnology 20, 608–611.
United States Golf Association (USGA), 2004. USGA Recommendations for a Method of
Putting Green Construction. Green Section Staff, USGA. http://usga.org/course_
care/articles/construction/greens/Green-Section- Recommendations-For-A-Method-
Of Putting-Green-Construction/.
Uzoma, K.C., Inoue, M., Andry, H., Zahoor, A., Nishihara, E., 2011. Influence of biochar
application on sandy soil hydraulic properties and nutrient retention. J. Food Agric.
Environ. 9, 1137–1143.
Vaughn, S.F., Kenar, J.A., Thompson, A.R., Peterson, S.C., 2013. Comparison of biochars
derived from wood pellets and pelletized wheat straw as replacements for peat in
672
Industrial Crops & Products 111 (2018) 667–672
potting substrates. Ind. Crops Prod. 51, 437–443.
Vaughn, S.F., Dinelli, F.D., Tisserat, B., Joshee, N., Vaughan, M.M., Peterson, S.C., 2015a.
Creeping bentgrass growth in sand-based root zones with or without biochar. Sci.
Hortic. 197, 592–596.
Vaughn, S.F., Kenar, J.A., Eller, F.J., Moser, B.R., Jackson, M.A., Peterson, S.C., 2015b.
Physical and chemical characterization of biochars produced from coppiced wood of
thirteen tree species for use in horticultural substrates. Ind. Crops Prod. 66, 44–51.
Volterrani, M., Magni, S., 2012. Hydrological characteristics of some volcanic materials as
affected by particle size distribution and internal porosity. Acta Agr. Scand. B.- S. P.
62, 150–154.
Waddington, J.M., Strack, M., Greenwood, M.J., 2010. Toward restoring the net carbon
sink function in degraded peatlands: short-term response in CO2 exchange to eco-
system-scale restoration. J. Geophys. Res. 155, G01008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2009JG001090.
Waltz Jr., F.C., Quiseberry, V.L., McCarty, L.B., 2003. Physical and hydraulic properties of
rootzone mixes amended with inorganics for golf putting greens. Agron. J. 95,
395–404.
Warncke, D., 1998. Greenhouse root media. In: Brown, J.R. (Ed.), Recommended
Chemical Soil Test Procedures for the North Central Region, NCR Publication No.
221 (revised). Missouri Agr. Exp. Sta. SB 1001. Columbia, Missouri, pp. 61–64.