In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I critically examine and respond to two popular soil fertility videos that promote base saturation theory and a simplified soil pH–nutrient availability diagram, and I explain why both should be treated with extreme skepticism—or ignored entirely—when making turfgrass management decisions.

Much of the base saturation messaging presented in these videos relies on the idea that soils must be managed toward specific “ideal” cation percentage ratios to achieve productivity. In this video, I explain why base saturation is not a causal driver of turfgrass performance, why the concept persists despite decades of contradictory evidence, and how it functions more as a marketing narrative than a scientifically defensible soil fertility framework in turf systems. I also discuss how focusing on cation ratios distracts from the variables that actually matter, such as nutrient sufficiency, cation exchange capacity, soil texture, and plant demand.

I also critique the soil pH diagram used in these videos, which is frequently circulated across agriculture and lawn care media. I explain why this diagram is oversimplified, misleading, and biologically inaccurate, and why it should not be used to diagnose nutrient deficiencies or guide fertilizer decisions. Rather than nutrients abruptly “locking up” outside narrow pH bands, I explain how nutrient availability is continuous, soil-specific, and governed by chemistry, mineralogy, and management history—not cartoon gradients.

Throughout the video, I walk through why these ideas are especially problematic in turfgrass systems, where soils are often sand-based, heavily modified, intensively managed, and fundamentally different from agronomic field soils. I explain how misuse of base saturation theory and pH diagrams leads to unnecessary amendments, wasted money, and false confidence—while offering no predictive power for turf response.

This episode is intended for golf course superintendents, turfgrass scientists, lawn care professionals, and homeowners who want evidence-based soil fertility interpretation rather than tradition, authority, or marketing-driven dogma. The goal is not to argue opinions, but to explain why certain ideas fail scientifically, why they continue to spread, and how to replace them with better reasoning.

If you’ve ever been told your soil is “out of balance,” that your calcium-to-magnesium ratio is wrong, or that nutrients are “locked up” based on a single pH chart, this video will help you understand why those claims persist—and why they don’t hold up under scrutiny.

Subscribe for long-form turfgrass science discussions, critical analysis of common soil fertility claims, and clear explanations focused on how we know what we know in turfgrass management.

🔔 Subscribe for more evidence-based turfgrass content, scientific paper discussions, and long-form explanations that go beyond social media soundbites.

#Turfgrass #SoilScience #LawnCare #GolfCourseManagement #TurfgrassScience #SoilFertility #CriticalThinking #TurfTok #TurfgrassEpistemology #EvidenceBased #LawnCareTips

📌 https://www.gofundme.com/f/TurfgrassEpistemology

Thank you for being part of this community and for supporting evidence-based turfgrass science.

Join Turfgrass Epistemology to get access to perks:

Voicemail:

Apple Podcast

Spotify Podcast

iHeart Radio Podcast

Podbean

Online consulting

Twitter

Email

Turfgrass Programs and Extension Service Information:

Diagnostic Criteria for Turfgrass Bullshit Disorder:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y_GeVPQ237pzm0ImTP4eVij6I9D0PHPn/view