1. MATERIALS AND METHODS  Year 2002: anaerobically digested, lagoon-aged, air-dried, screened BS applied to a Markham silt loam (shaded and unshaded areas) at Hickory Hills golf course (HHGC). Rates: 0 (Control); 201 (LBS); 402 (HBS) Mg/ha.  BS incorporated to 0-15 cm depth with rototiller. Area allowed to equilibrate for approximately two weeks. Chemical analysis of BS included (Table 1).  Forty plots (each 0.91m x 1.51m) established in unshaded area, and 40 in shaded area. Split plot design  with BS rate as split treatment.  Each BS rate seeded to four individual turfgrasses: Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L. cvs Arcadia and SR 2100); perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. cv SR 4500); creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra L.).  Soil sampled and analyzed prior to BS application (Table 2). Soil and plant tissue sampled from each plot in 2003 and 2005. Chemical analysis (Methods of Soil Analysis); dry matter yields (quadrant 0.008m 2 used).  Soil compaction evaluated in 2005 by penetrometer measurements to determine any effect of BS on soil physical condition and turf establishment. ABSTRACT Biosolids Use as a Fertilizer for Turfgrasses under Shaded and Unshaded Conditions P.V. Lindo, A.E. Cox, and T.C. Granato A study was established on a golf course located in Hickory Hills, Illinois (Markham silt loam) to demonstrate the benefits of using biosolids (BS), generated by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, as a soil amendment and to evaluate the effects of shading on turfgrass performance in BS. A total of 40 plots was established on an area of the golf course shaded by trees (S) and 40 in an unshaded area (NS). The BS treatments consisted of an unamended control (C), and two rates of anaerobically digested, lagoon-aged, air-dried BS applied at a low (LBS) and a high (HBS) rate of 201 and 402 Mg ha -1, respectively, incorporated in the 0-15-cm depth of the soil. Each BS rate was seeded to four individual turfgrasses: perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. cv SR 4500), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L. cvs Arcadia and SR 2100), and creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra L.). The growth and performance of the turfgrass were evaluated both visually and experimentally. The results showed that the two Kentucky bluegrass cultivars performed best under no shade at the LBS rate, but Arcadia performed better than SR 2100 under both shaded and unshaded conditions at both LBS and HBS rates. The perennial ryegrass performed best at the LBS rate under unshaded conditions. The creeping red fescue performed best under no shade at the HBS rate, and fairly well in the shaded area at the HBS rate. Overall, turfgrass performance was better in all treatments receiving BS than in the unamended control, and in the unshaded rather than the shaded area. Compaction data also indicate some degree of improvement in the HBS plots, while correlation of soil and turf tissue concentrations may suggest soil nutrient concentrations at which turf growth may be suppressed. The results showed that BS are an effective and productive soil amendment when used for establishing and maintaining turfgrass, and can provide monetary savings to golf course operators. INTRODUCTION  The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (District) generates about 200,000 dry tons of BS annually. Over 40 percent of this amount is managed through land application.  The relatively high organic matter and nutrient content of BS help to improve both the physical and chemical properties of soils.  As a result, they have been historically proven as effective sources of nutrients for turf and other crops.  Within the last few decades, the District’s BS have been successfully utilized as both a topsoil and fertilizer substitute in the reconstruction and expansion of several golf courses, the establishment of athletic fields at several area high schools, the vegetation of medians along newly constructed highways, and in the reclamation of a highly acidic coal refuse site. OBJECTIVES 1. To evaluate the effect of various rates of BS on the establishment and performance of selected turf species at a golf course, under both shaded and unshaded conditions. 2. To identify the optimum BS treatment and shade combinations necessary for turf growth and establishment at the golf course. 3. To evaluate the supply of selected nutrients to turf by BS.. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  Staff of the District’s Soil Science Section and Analytical Laboratory Division. Special thanks and appreciation to Sanitary Chemis t Ms. Odona Dennison for all help rendered during this study.  District’s Biostatistician. BIOSOLIDS USE AS A FERTILIZER FOR TURFGRASSES UNDER SHADED AND UNSHADED CONDITIONS P.V. Lindo, A.E. Cox, and T.C. Granato METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT OF GREATER CHICAGO Protecting Our Water Environment RESULTS Statistical analysis (SAS, 2004 – MANOVA procedure used, p-values generated. If conditions of normal distribution of data and no correlation among variables failed, Bartlett’s test for equality of variances was performed)) of experimental data averaged for both shade (S) and no-shade (NS) areas indicate the following:  Comparing yields in shade vs no-shade area, all turf yields except those of KBG SR 2100 significantly diminished (p<0.001) by shade at all BS rates (Table 3).  Generally, applied BS effective in increasing dry matter yields over Control treatment.  Compaction data for 2005 suggest that shade and BS rates had no significant effect (p>0.05) on soil compaction, which in turn had no effect on growth and establishment of turf (Table 4).  Compaction in no-shade HBS plots lower than measures for Control and LBS plots, possibly suggesting that HBS could have improved soil compaction problem experienced at this site (as indicated by presence of ‘Crowfoot’ weed in rough areas).  Selected analytes (3 macronutrients, 1 micronutrient, 1 toxic metal) indicated that tissue concentrations listed (Table 5) generally increased with BS rate.  Shade also increased tissue concentrations, possibly due to slightly higher soil moisture content facilitating increased nutrient uptake.  Significant shade x rate interaction evident for tissue Ca and total P – both generally increased with rate and with diminishing light/increasing shade. RESULTS (continued)  Correlations suggest that Ca and Mg may suppress turf growth if soil concentrations exceed approximately 7,000 mg kg -1 for Ca and 1,300 mg kg -1 for Mg.  Soil P may limit turf growth at approximately 1,500 mg available P kg -1 soil.  Limitations probably induced by pH-related micronutrient deficiencies. REFERENCES Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3: Chemical Methods. 1994. SSSA Book Series 5. SSSA, Madison, WI. SAS. 2004. The SAS system for Windows. Release 8.2. SAS Institute, Cary, NC. CONCLUSIONS  Shade conditions were found to suppress the growth of creeping red fescue and perennial rye grown on a Markham silt loam treated with approx. 400 Mg ha -1 BS.  KBG cv Arcadia under shade was suppressed to a lesser extent on the same soil treated with approx. 200 Mg ha -1 BS.  Ca and Mg uptake from BS-treated Markham silt loam appeared to increase somewhat under shade.  BS are an inexpensive source of both macro- and micronutrients. Turf did not appear to experience any symptoms of nutrient imbalance.  Soil compaction in the HBS plots appeared to decrease slightly in relation to the untreated and LBS plots. This may be advantageous for rapid establishment of some species of turf.  BS may be a useful source of nutrients for other turf species on other soils Table 1. Chemical analysis of lagoon-aged, air-dried BS applied to plots at the Hickory Hills golf course, IL in 2002 Constituent Conc ConstituentConc mg kg -1 pH 6.2 a Cu431 TS 62.0 b Fe29,071 TVS 46.7 b Hg1.0 NH 3 -N 470 K2,904 TKN 17,428 Mg15,947 Total P 20,427 Mn641 As 12 Na856 Ca 52,446 Ni38 Cd 7.6 Pb178 Cr 110 Zn1,708 a pH units; b percentage on dry weight basis. Table 2. Chemical Analysis of Markham Silt Loam at the HHGC, Illinois before BS Application in September 2002 Constituent No ShadeShadeConstituentNo ShadeShade pH6.66.7 EC1.1 Total P a 8801,247 Avail P13143 OC (%)3.13.9 Av_Al386311 Tot-Ca6,30411,794 Av_Ca194366 Tot-Cu1115 Av_Cu0.771.0 Tot-Fe595883 Av_Fe408416 Tot-K360397 Av_K4749 Tot-Mg2,4994,330 Av_Mg142172 Tot-Mn370612 Av_Mn3023 Tot-Zn51110 Av_Zn3.85.1 Exch_Ca2,9204,073 Exch_K279337 Exch_Mg894836 Exch_Na5264 CEC b 23.0 28.5 a All metals and P in mg kg -1 ; b CEC in cmol kg -1. Table 6. Summary of BS x shade effects on 4 turf grasses grown on a Markham silt loam at HHGC, IL 2002-2005 TurfNo ShadeShade LBSHBSLBSHBS KBG cv Arcadia1221 KBG cv SR 21001111 Perennial rye SR 45002413 Creeping red fescue5215 Scale:1 (best performance) – 5 (worst); KBG–KY bluegrass. Table 3. Mean turf dry matter yields on a Markham silt loam as influenced by BS rate and shade at the Hickory Hills golf course, IL Turf No Shade p- Shade p- Rate (Mg ha -1 )0201402value0201402value ------ g plot -1 ----- KBG cv Arcadia1011341190.0072981210.00 KBG cv SR 21001091211160.2788961040.01 Per. Rye - SR 45001201651470.0172821010.00 Creeping red fescue1351211500.006181970.01 Plot size = 1.37 m 2. Yields significantly diminished by shade (p<0.001). Table 4. Effect of shade and rate of BS on compaction in a Markham silt loam seeded to 4 different turfgrasses at the HHGC, IL (2005) Turf No Shade p- Shade p- Rate (Mg ha -1 ) 0201402 value 0201402 value ----- pounds a ---- ----- pounds a ----- KBG cv Arcadia5053490.055147570.50 KBG cv SR 21005153460.235246580.40 Per. Rye - SR 45005059470.615446570.52 Creeping red fescue5054470.325448570.12 a Soil compaction measured by a penetrometer. Table 5. Selected analytes in turf tissue as influenced by shade and BS treatment applied to a Markham silt loam at the HHGC, IL (2002-2005) ShadeRateTurfTotal PCaMgFeMn Mg ha -1 ---------------- mg kg -1 ---------------- NS0K A3,8353,6432,79133446 NS0K 213,8583,4602,93414628 NS0R4,2144,6052,75213548 NS0F3,6623,4663,75012941 NS201K A4,3923,4322,56711640 NS201K 214,7173,3472,53511836 NS201R4,6645,5173,64414238 NS201F4,7083,7332,57011939 NS402K A4,7493,6392,57217365 NS402K 214,6863,3032,63615057 NS402R5,2615,2813,73415199 NS402F5,0073,7752,61214691 S0K A4,8245,0583,54627130 S0K 214,1204,1723,25425733 S0R4,0945,9404,27029441 S0F4,3524,7603,40434838 S201K A5,0565,3963,16113430 S201K 214,6594,9053,00518838 S201R4,6957,6214,09722850 S201F4,4325,8993,20819337 S402K A5,0205,3723,17631841 S402K 214,1924,4672,97820954 S402R5,1417,9154,09226096 S402F4,4995,7003,11325672 p-values Shade 0.210.010.030.000.11 Rate 0.00 0.040.00 SxR 0.020.040.050.810.45 y=3904+0.95x r 2 =0.85 Y=4169-0.061x r 2 =-0.094 Y=2426-0.479x r 2 =-0.124 (Linear regression equations shown only for positive correlations portion of each plot)