SportsTurf

August 2014

SportsTurf provides current, practical and technical content on issues relevant to sports turf managers, including facilities managers. Most readers are athletic field managers from the professional level through parks and recreation, universities.

Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/356087

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 23 of 52

24 SportsTurf | August 2014 www.sportsturfonline.com Field Science | By Natasha Restuccia W hile most turf managers would prefer having a sand-based field, a University of Missouri survey found around 80% of sports fields are native soil based com- pared to 20% being sand-based. Sand-based fields can have many benefits but unfortunately the cost of instal- lation can be prohibitive. Regardless of the soil type, it is important to know what you are working with and how it will affect the way the field is managed. First, let's look at what native soil and sand-based systems are and what makes them different. A native system is an unaltered soil that was at the site before the field was built. It is usually a mixture of silt, clay, and sand. A sand-based system is typically 80-100% pure sand. The difference in soil particle sizes can cause native systems to be more prone to compaction, while sand-based systems have better resistance to compaction. Due to having higher nutrient and water holding capacity, native systems might have inadequate drainage while sand-based systems, with their higher infiltration rates, provide adequate drainage. Florida/Georgia football game on sand- based system at Everbank Field. Image courtesy of Natasha Restuccia. Maintenance of naTive Soil compared to Sand-baSed FieldS

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of SportsTurf - August 2014