In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I review and respond to comments, emails, and TikTok messages I’ve received throughout 2025 related to turfgrass science, soil fertility, nutrient management, and common turf industry claims.

From thoughtful questions to recurring misconceptions, this video highlights what turf managers, lawn care professionals, golfers, and homeowners are asking—and where confusion often arises when science meets social media. I address trends I’ve seen across platforms, clarify misunderstandings, and explain why certain claims persist despite decades of research.

Topics discussed include:

This episode is not about calling people out—it’s about slowing down, adding context, and explaining how we know what we know in turfgrass science. Whether you’re a golf course superintendent, lawn care operator, researcher, or homeowner trying to make better management decisions, this discussion is designed to help you separate evidence from noise.

If you’ve emailed me, commented on YouTube, or left a TikTok comment in 2025, there’s a good chance your question—or one just like it—is addressed here.

🔔 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

In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I sit down with Dr. John Inguagiato to discuss his peer-reviewed research on phosphite use for suppressing cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) on putting greens. Together, we break down the science behind phosphite chemistry, application rates, turf safety, and what the data actually say—beyond marketing claims.

Dr. Inguagiato’s 2017 Crop Science paper, “Effect of Phosphite Rate and Source on Cyanobacteria Colonization of Putting Green Turf,” is one of the most frequently cited studies on this topic. In this conversation, we explore how phosphite differs from phosphate, why cyanobacteria respond differently to these compounds, and how phosphite applications can reduce algal crusting without relying solely on traditional fungicides 

This discussion covers:

If you manage putting greens, work in turfgrass research, or want an evidence-based explanation of phosphite products that cuts through anecdote and advertising, this episode provides critical context straight from the study’s lead author.

📄 Research discussed:

🔔 Subscribe for more science-driven turfgrass discussions, paper reviews with authors, and critical analysis of common turf management claims.

#TurfgrassScience #GolfCourseManagement #Phosphite #Cyanobacteria #PuttingGreens #TurfgrassResearch #SoilScience #EvidenceBasedTurf #TurfgrassEpistemology

📌 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

In this video I take a close, critical look at "Data-Drive Lawn Care" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjRXNcIi3Hk) and share my honest thoughts on what works — and what doesn’t. I break down the arguments, highlight where I think the logic falls short, and offer my own perspective on the topic.

🔎 What I cover:

Key claims made by the original creator

Moments where I agree — and moments where I respectfully disagree

💡 Why this matters:

👇 Join the conversation:

🔔 Don’t forget to like, subscribe, and turn on notifications if you want more content like this.

🎓 Turfgrass Epistemology — How do we know what we know?

📌 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

In this video, I review and break down one of the most referenced articles in cool-season turfgrass pathology: “Severity of Gray Leaf Spot in Perennial Ryegrass as Influenced by Mowing Height and Nitrogen Level” by Williams, Burrus, and Vincelli (2001).

This study investigated how two major management practices—mowing height and nitrogen rate—affect the intensity of gray leaf spot (Pyricularia grisea) epidemics in perennial ryegrass managed under golf-course conditions.

I walk through the methods, results, and implications of the research, and I discuss how the findings align—or don’t align—with common industry assumptions twenty years later.

🔬 Topics I cover in the review:

The study design and why the researchers chose fairway- and rough-height mowing

💡 Why this article matters today:

👇 Join the discussion:

Do you agree with how the authors interpreted their data?

Share your thoughts in the comments. Critical evaluation of research—new and old—is how we advance turfgrass science and avoid assumptions that fail in the field.

If you enjoy evidence-based turfgrass breakdowns, hit LIKE and SUBSCRIBE.

Become a member of Turfgrass Epistemology and support turfgrass research:

Voicemail:

Apple Podcast

Spotify Podcast

iHeart Radio Podcast

Podbean

Online consulting

Twitter

Email

Turfgrass Programs and Extension Service Information:

In this video, I provide an in-depth, evidence-based critique of the nitrogen-efficiency product RDX-N and the claims made in the promotional video circulating online. If you’ve ever wondered whether biostimulants, nitrogen enhancers, or “metabolic activators” actually work in real-world turfgrass or crop management, this breakdown is for you. I review the product’s marketing claims, examine the data presented in the official RDX-N brochure, and explain what the science really says about nitrogen uptake, nitrogen metabolism, and plant physiology.

But this video is more than a review of one product—it's a lesson in how to evaluate agronomic claims using critical thinking and epistemology.

In turfgrass, agriculture, and lawn care, new products appear constantly—each claiming to increase yields, improve nitrogen efficiency, reduce inputs, or boost plant health. Without strong critical thinking skills, it’s easy to be misled. Epistemology—the study of how we know what we know—helps protect you when you’re confronted with products, technologies, or scientific claims you’ve never heard of.

By the end of this video, you’ll understand:

If you’re a turfgrass manager, agronomist, sports field manager, lawn care professional, or scientifically curious homeowner, this channel will help you make smarter, evidence-driven decisions.

Subscribe to Turfgrass Epistemology for more videos on turfgrass science, nitrogen management, soil fertility, agronomy, and the critical thinking skills needed to navigate misinformation in the industry.

🎓 Turfgrass Epistemology — How do we know what we know?

📌 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

In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I sit down with Dr. Lee Miller of Purdue University, one of the leading experts in turfgrass pathology, to break down everything you need to know about turfgrass disease resistance, fungicide rotations, and accurate turf disease identification. Whether you manage golf course greens, sports fields, or home lawns, this conversation gives you the practical, science-based guidance needed to protect your turf from common and emerging diseases.

We explore what disease resistance in turfgrass truly means, why resistance develops, and how environmental conditions and management practices influence disease pressure. Dr. Miller explains how to design effective fungicide rotation programs, how to avoid resistance through proper FRAC group management, and how to choose the right mode of action at the right time of year.

If you’re looking for evidence-based turfgrass management, best practices for fungicide use, or expert insights into turf disease diagnostics, this video delivers the tools you need.

Subscribe for more science-driven conversations on turfgrass health, management, and critical thinking.

🎓 Turfgrass Epistemology — How do we know what we know?

📌 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

In this video, I analyze the 2025 Zhang et al. study on how fungicide scheduling and bentgrass cultivar resistance interact to influence dollar spot control. This research provides some of the strongest evidence to date that curative, damage-threshold-based fungicide programs can dramatically reduce inputs—up to 78 percent in certain cases—when paired with disease-resistant bentgrass cultivars. I explain how the researchers designed the field trials, what the low damage threshold means in practice, how 24-hour and next-application-day schedules performed differently, and why resistant cultivars such as Declaration produced such large savings without sacrificing control. I also discuss how inoculation affected disease pressure, why susceptible cultivars behaved differently, and what this means for superintendents trying to reduce fungicide use while maintaining high-quality fairways. If you want a clear, evidence-based explanation of how timing, cultivar resistance, and disease pressure shape fungicide performance, this video brings the science into focus.

🎓 Turfgrass Epistemology — How do we know what we know?

📌 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

In this video, I break down one of the most influential papers ever written on turfgrass pathology: Walsh, Ikeda, and Boland’s 1999 review on the biology and management of dollar spot. This paper remains a foundational resource for understanding how the pathogen operates, why the disease is so persistent on cool-season turf, and which management strategies are supported by evidence rather than tradition. I walk through the key sections of the paper, including the pathogen’s life cycle, the environmental conditions that drive epidemics, the role of cultural practices, and the strengths and weaknesses of common fungicide approaches. I also explain how the scientific understanding of dollar spot has progressed since 1999 and why many of the insights in this article still guide modern management decisions. If you work in turf management or simply want to understand the science behind one of the most costly diseases in the industry, this video will help you separate evidence from assumption and improve your decision-making.

🔬 Keywords: Dollar Spot, Bentgrass, Dew Removal, Nitrogen, Turfgrass Disease, Integrated Management

Become a member of Turfgrass Epistemology and support turfgrass research:

Voicemail:

Apple Podcast

Spotify Podcast

iHeart Radio Podcast

Podbean

Online consulting

Twitter

Email

Turfgrass Programs and Extension Service Information:

In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I review a popular lawn-care website article and an accompanying YouTube video that teach homeowners how to interpret a soil test that is, in reality, scientifically invalid for making nutrient decisions. These resources look polished and authoritative, but the advice they provide is fundamentally flawed — and following it can lead to unnecessary product applications, wasted money, and incorrect assumptions about soil health.

I’ll walk through both the website and the video step-by-step and explain:

Why the soil test they promote is not valid for nutrient recommendations

The goal of this video isn’t to criticize people — it’s to highlight why bad testing leads to bad decisions, and how to empower homeowners with the ability to recognize valid, science-based soil information.

If you’ve ever wondered whether the soil advice you see online is trustworthy, or how to distinguish real science from clever marketing, this episode will give you a clear, reliable framework for making informed choices.

🔬 Keywords: Dollar Spot, Bentgrass, Dew Removal, Nitrogen, Turfgrass Disease, Integrated Management

Become a member of Turfgrass Epistemology and support turfgrass research:

Voicemail:

Apple Podcast

Spotify Podcast

iHeart Radio Podcast

Podbean

Online consulting

Twitter

Email

Turfgrass Programs and Extension Service Information:

Not all scientific journals are created equal. Some exist to advance knowledge — others exist to collect publishing fees. In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, we explore how to tell the difference.

I’ll walk through the refereed process and explain how it differs from standard peer review, why that distinction matters, and how the structure of editorial oversight determines the credibility of the science that reaches the public. We’ll also take a close look at predatory journals — publications that mimic legitimate science while bypassing or corrupting the review process in exchange for author fees.

But the story isn’t as simple as “good” versus “bad.” Even in a predatory journal, a paper may contain sound science — the key is learning how to weigh the evidence and evaluate quality for yourself. We’ll discuss:

What defines a refereed journal versus a peer-reviewed one.

How to spot red flags in a publication or website.

By the end, you’ll have a framework for evaluating whether a journal’s claims deserve your trust — and how to apply critical thinking before citing, sharing, or believing “published” results.

If you care about how we know what we know, and why evidence must be judged as well as gathered, this episode is for you.

🎓 Turfgrass Epistemology — How do we know what we know?

📌 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