Golf course superintendents’ knowledge of variability within fairways: a tool for precision turfgrass management

  • Chase M. StrawEmail author
  • William S. Wardrop
  • Brian P. Horgan


Golf course superintendent’s knowledge of variability may be an overlooked and underutilized tool for precision turfgrass management (PTM). This case study used a qualitative GIS approach to explore 12 Minnesota golf course superintendent’s knowledge of soil moisture (percent volumetric water content) and turfgrass quality (normalized difference vegetation index) variability within fairways. Verbal responses and sketch maps from on-site initial interviews were used to gain understanding of participants’ spatial knowledge of both properties. Soil moisture and turfgrass quality were objectively measured from all fairways after initial interviews to generate interpolated maps via ordinary kriging, which were used later in follow-up interviews for each participant to verbally compare to their sketch maps. Questions about interpolated map value and barriers to adopting mapping technologies were also asked at that time. Follow-up interview transcripts underwent thematic analysis to identify reoccurring themes, and sketch maps were digitized into GIS for statistical comparison to interpolated maps. Golf course superintendents did have general knowledge of variability within their fairways that could be used for simplified PTM practices. Interpolated maps were valuable for identifying and quantifying small-scale variability for more exact PTM practices, confirming spatial knowledge, and providing detailed spatial information to new golf course superintendents or staff. Areas displaying variability in interpolated maps were not always important to golf course superintendents, so their spatial knowledge should be used with interpolated maps for further refinement of PTM practices. Barriers to adopting mapping technologies for PTM were mentioned, and several suggestions to increase adoption are provided.


Barriers to adoption Percent volumetric water content Precision turfgrass management Normalized difference vegetation index Qualitative GIS Spatial knowledge 



We extend our thanks to the Minnesota Golf Course Superintendents Association and all golf course superintendents who participated in this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Bell, G. E., Kruse, J. K., & Krum, J. M. (2013). The evolution of spectral sensing and advances in precision turfgrass management. In J. C. Stier, et al. (Eds.), Turfgrass: Biology, use, and management (pp. 1151–1188). Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, G. E., Martin, D. L., Koh, K., & Han, H. R. (2009). Comparison of turfgrass visual quality ratings with ratings determined using a handheld optical sensor. HortTechnology, 19(2), 309–316. Scholar
  3. Boschmann, E. E., & Cubbon, E. (2014). Sketch maps and qualitative GIS: Using cartographies of individual spatial narratives in geographic research. The Professional Geographer, 66(2), 236–248. Scholar
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Scholar
  5. Brennan-Horley, C., & Gibson, C. (2009). Where is creativity in the city? Integrating qualitative and GIS methods. Environment and Planning A, 41(11), 2595–2614. Scholar
  6. Carrow, R. N., Krum, J. M., Flitcroft, I., & Cline, V. (2010). Precision turfgrass management: Challenges and field applications for mapping turfgrass soil and stress. Precision Agriculture, 11(2), 115–134. Scholar
  7. Caturegli, L., Corniglia, M., Gaetani, M., Grossi, N., Magni, S., Migliazzi, M., et al. (2016). Unmanned aerial vehicle to estimate nitrogen status of turfgrasses. PLoS ONE, 11(6), e0158268. Scholar
  8. Cidell, J. (2010). Content clouds as exploratory qualitative data analysis. Area, 42(4), 514–523. Scholar
  9. Cope, M., & Elwood, S. (Eds.). (2009). Qualitative GIS: A mixed methods approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Cressie, N. (2015). Statistics for spatial data. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Elwood, S. (2010). Mixed methods: Thinking, doing, and asking in multiple ways. In D. Delyster, et al. (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in human geography (pp. 94–116). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elwood, S. A., & Martin, D. G. (2000). “Placing” interviews: Location and scales of power in qualitative research. The Professional Geographer, 52(4), 649–657. Scholar
  13. Fleming, K. L., Westfall, D. G., Wiens, D. W., & Brodahl, M. C. (2000). Evaluating farmer defined management zone maps for variable rate fertilizer application. Precision Agriculture, 2(2), 201–215. Scholar
  14. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. Scholar
  15. Hawthorne, T. L., Solís, P., Terry, B., Price, M., & Atchison, C. L. (2015). Critical reflection mapping as a hybrid methodology for examining sociospatial perceptions of new research sites. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 105(1), 22–47. Scholar
  16. Heijting, S., De Bruin, S., & Bregt, A. K. (2011). The arable farmer as the assessor of within-field soil variation. Precision Agriculture, 12(4), 488–507. Scholar
  17. Jung, J. K., & Elwood, S. (2010). Extending the qualitative capabilities of GIS: Computer-aided qualitative GIS. Transactions in GIS, 14(1), 63–87. Scholar
  18. Krum, J. M., Carrow, R. N., & Karnok, K. (2010). Spatial mapping of complex turfgrass sites: Site-specific management units and protocols. Crop Science, 50(1), 301–315. Scholar
  19. Moore-Cherry, N., Crossa, V., & O’Donnell, G. (2015). Investigating urban transformations: GIS, map-elicitation and the role of the state in regeneration. Urban Studies, 52(12), 2134–2150. Scholar
  20. Oliver, Y. M., Robertson, M. J., & Wong, M. T. F. (2010). Integrating farmer knowledge, precision agriculture tools, and crop simulation modelling to evaluate management options for poor-performing patches in cropping fields. European Journal of Agronomy, 32(1), 40–50. Scholar
  21. Robinson, D. A., Jones, S. B., Wraith, J. M., Or, D., & Friedman, S. P. (2003). A review of advances in dielectric and electrical conductivity measurement in soils using time domain reflectometry. Vadose Zone Journal, 2(4), 444–475. Scholar
  22. RStudio Team. (2015). RStudio: Integrated development for R. Retrieved December 12, 2018, from
  23. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 18(2), 179–183. Scholar
  25. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2003). Writing the proposal for a qualitative research methodology project. Qualitative Health Research, 13(6), 781–820. Scholar
  26. Straw, C. M., Grubbs, R. A., Tucker, K. A., & Henry, G. M. (2016). Handheld versus mobile data acquisitions for spatial analysis of natural turfgrass sports fields. HortScience, 51(9), 1176–1183. Scholar
  27. Straw, C. M., & Henry, G. M. (2018). Spatiotemporal variation of site-specific management units on natural turfgrass sports fields during dry down. Precision Agriculture, 19(3), 395–420. Scholar
  28. Winklerprins, A. M. G. A. (1999). Local soil knowledge: A tool for sustainable land management. Society & Natural Resources, 12(2), 151–161. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chase M. Straw
    • 1
    Email author
  • William S. Wardrop
    • 1
  • Brian P. Horgan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Horticultural ScienceUniversity of MinnesotaSaint PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations