Extractable Soil Phosphorus Concentrations and Creeping Bentgrass Response on Sand Greens

Few studies have directly related turfgrass growth and quality responses to extractable soil P concentrations in sand greens. A 3-yr field experiment was conducted on a sand-based putting green to determine creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) growth and quality responses to extractable soil P. Extractable soil P concentrations were obtained by using the modified-Morgan, Mehlich-1, and Bray-1 extractants. Critical extractable P concentrations (above which there is a low probability of response to increasing soil P concentrations) for shoot counts, thatch thickness, relative clipping yields, quality ratings, P deficiency ratings, tissue P concentrations, and root weights were determined using Cate-Nelson (CN) and quadratic response and plateau (QRP) models. Both models fit the data relatively well in most cases (R2 values from 0.12 to 0.89), and critical concentrations for the QRP models were always greater than the CN models. Critical extractable P concentrations were lowest for the modified-Morgan extractant (1.4 to 12.0 mg kg(-1)) and greatest for the Mehlich-1 extractant (14.1 to 63.6 mg kg(-1)). Application of estimated critical extractable P concentrations in this study could be used to substantiate observed responses or explain lack of responses in other previously reported creeping bentgrass P studies. We found better model fits with modified-Morgan extractable P for bentgrass quality ratings, deficiency ratings, and tissue P concentrations than with P extracted by the Mehlich or Bray methods. This suggests that the modified-Morgan extractant may have advantages over stronger-acid extractants when used on sand-based media. The results can be used to revise or update existing P fertilization recommendations for bent-grass grown on sand-based media.

Online Format vs. Live Mode of Instruction: Do Human Capital Differences or Differences in Returns to Human Capital Explain the Differences in Outcomes?

Our paper asks the question: Does mode of instruction format (live or online format) effect test scores in the principles of macroeconomics classes? Our data are from several sections of principles of macroeconomics, some in live format, some in online format, and all taught by the same instructor. We find that test scores for the online format, when corrected for sample selection bias, are four points higher than for the live format, and the difference is statistically significant. One possible explanation for this is that there was slightly higher human capital in the classes that had the online format. A Oaxaca decomposition of this difference in grades was conducted to see how much was due to human capital and how much was due to the differences in the rates of return to human capital. This analysis reveals that 25% of the difference was due to the higher human capital with the remaining 75% due to differences in the returns to human capital. It is possible that for the relatively older student with the appropriate online learning skill set, and with schedule constrains created by family and job, the online format provides them with a more productive learning environment than does the alternative traditional live class format. Also, because our data are limited to the student s academic transcript, we recommend future research include data on learning style characteristics, and the constraints formed by family and job choices.