[ryeguy]

Title kind of sums it up. There are people in both camps. Some do it yearly while others never do it. Are there any controlled studies discussing this topic?

 

[HoosierLawnGnome]

I don't think there need to be "camps" on mechanical aeration.

The efficacy of aeration in trying to accomplish what? In what context?

It's a handy tool in the right scenario, can be bad in others. It's not some sort of lawn legalism.

I have an area that gets flooded 2-3 times a year with lots of roots and little water under a tree canopy adjacent to a creek. The stand thins out a lot in that area. I mow it every 2-3 days, and the kids play back there - lots of foot traffic. The soil is a clay heavy loam. I don't have weed pressure back there. Plus, I want to level it out over time.

All that adds up to a compressed soil which is thin in part due to lack of space in the soil where roots can grow into. Roots are constantly being suppressed due to water and compaction.

So, I'm thinking of starting a program of moderate core aeration and dragging / top dressing this spring. The idea is to loosen the soil up so the roots don't get drowned. Studies show that a few days of standing water can damage the turf. I get that a few times a year in those spots.

Good article in Sports Turf Magazine on that this spring. One way to help flooded turf areas is to core aerate.

I can deal with a few extra weeds.

ETA: Spring not fall

 

[Ridgerunner]

+1

 

[pennstater2005]

I have some folks in the neighborhood who core aerate and I've never seen a weed explosion from that. And even if there was don't we all an arsenal of herbicides to control that anyway?

Disclosure: I don't core aerate.

 

[HoosierLawnGnome]

Core aeration does a lot of things. It breaks up thatch on the surface. It creates space in the root zone, so roots can grow. It mixes up soil, so if you're top dressing, it can mix in new material on top in order to avoid creating soil horizons. It helps water drain. But it also brings up weed seeds that have been laying dormant underneath the soil, disrupts the root system that is there (which can be bad if done too heavily), and potentially damages tree roots or sprinkler systems.

Add it all up - is core aeration helpful in achieving your goal or fixing your problem? Is it a net positive? Are there other ways to accomplish the goal without the negative consequences?

There's no single answer or situation in my opinion, but every time people tell me they are getting their lawn aerated I ask "Why?" and they most often don't know.

I have heard thatch as a reason several times. In my opinion, thatch is normally created over time due to poor mowing practices. Sometimes it is the result of a fungus, grubs, irrigation, or some other problem that caused the turf to die in spots.

I *may* know a guy that accidentally dumped urea in a spot that killed the grass and created some thatch this spring. :roll: :mrgreen:

------

My plan right now this spring (subject to change on a whim!), is to core aerate right as we come out of dormancy, maybe top dress if I have budget in areas, drag out the dried cores, let it settle, then apply prodiamine at half annual rate. My goal is to level and increase turf density in flood-prone areas with a clay-based structure.

 

[g-man]

Below are some links I had saved in my bookmarks. One key thing that I recommend (it is in the clemson article), apply a PreM after the aeration. The aeration will break any barriers there plus the dissolved cores provide soil for weeds to grow.

I have some folks in the neighborhood who core aerate and I've never seen a weed explosion from that. And even if there

^Most folks in my neighborhood dont irrigate or apply the amount of nitrogen the lawn needs. Most of us maintain moisture charts and fertilizer logs, therefore we create an environment that promotes growth. In my opinion, we have a higher risk of weeds after aeration than most folks.

This report from Purdue has info on the reasons to do aeration and how (tine diameter, spacing). https://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/AY/AY-8-W.pdf and this old tip. https://turf.purdue.edu/tips/2004/aerif910.htm

And this one from clemson. http://www.clemson.edu/extension/hgic/plants/landscape/lawns/hgic1200.html

 

[GrassDaddy]

I've wondered the same. I've aerated our church lawn and 2 weeks later the holes all settled in. Seemed like a pointless endeavor. Most of the articles seem to be just repeating the same info but I've never seen a study.

 

[gatormac2112]

I don't have the answers, all I know is golf courses do it, sooooo

 

[Ridgerunner]

I've wondered the same. I've aerated our church lawn and 2 weeks later the holes all settled in. Seemed like a pointless endeavor. Most of the articles seem to be just repeating the same info but I've never seen a study.

A study of what, to wit:

The efficacy of aeration in trying to accomplish what? In what context?

 

[j4c11]

I don't have the answers, all I know is golf courses do it, sooooo

Golf courses do it to control organic matter. They need firm surfaces to play on so if the soil is soaking up a lot of water, that's not good. They basically remove the plugs and backfill with pure sand. In a home lawn situation, we want as much organic matter as possible.

This turfnet article seems to have some information on the efficiency of core aeration, based on a Clemson study(which can be found but is probably paywalled): https://www.turfnet.com/news.html/_/necessary-evil-r83

 

[pennstater2005]

I liked this article. It lists a few reasons you may want to aerate and a few reasons why not to aerate.

https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/430/430-002/430-002_pdf.pdf

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don't have the answers, all I know is golf courses do it, sooooo

Golf courses do it to control organic matter. They need firm surfaces to play on so if the soil is soaking up a lot of water, that's not good. They basically remove the plugs and backfill with pure sand. In a home lawn situation, we want as much organic matter as possible.

This turfnet article seems to have some information on the efficiency of core aeration, based on a Clemson study(which can be found but is probably paywalled): https://www.turfnet.com/news.html/_/necessary-evil-r83

Nice find. I hadn't seen that one before and actually based on a study. :thumbup:

 

[Pete1313]

I've aerated our church lawn and 2 weeks later the holes all settled in. Seemed like a pointless endeavor.

The holes will fill in but I don't believe what you did was a pointless endeavor. I'm assuming you core aerated, in which the cores will be brought to the surface to break down. The holes "settled in" not from being filled in from the top, but rather expanding from the sides. Because of those open holes, the same amount of soil can occupy a larger volume reducing its bulk density, which in your situation is what I believe you were trying to accomplish. Relieve compaction? If the holes stayed open and didn't close, the soil would still be compacted. It would just be compacted with a bunch of holes in it.

 

[GrassDaddy]

I've aerated our church lawn and 2 weeks later the holes all settled in. Seemed like a pointless endeavor.

The holes will fill in but I don't believe what you did was a pointless endeavor. I'm assuming you core aerated, in which the cores will be brought to the surface to break down. The holes "settled in" not from being filled in from the top, but rather expanding from the sides. Because of those open holes, the same amount of soil can occupy a larger volume reducing its bulk density, which in your situation is what I believe you were trying to accomplish. Relieve compaction? If the holes stayed open and didn't close, the soil would still be compacted. It would just be compacted with a bunch of holes in it.

Interesting thought!

 

[GrassDaddy]

I've wondered the same. I've aerated our church lawn and 2 weeks later the holes all settled in. Seemed like a pointless endeavor. Most of the articles seem to be just repeating the same info but I've never seen a study.

A study of what, to wit:

The efficacy of aeration in trying to accomplish what? In what context?

I haven't seen any in any context. Mulching leaves got what a decade long study so I'm surprised there isn't any on aeration.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I haven't seen any in any context. Mulching leaves got what a decade long study so I'm surprised there isn't any on aeration.

j4c11 has posted reference to one study that addresses a number of areas of turf and soil structure where aeration can be advantageous.
But, to clarify, regarding context: there have been studies regarding thatch where different methods where employed to reduce/cure thatch and their effectiveness measured and compared. So although not a study about aeration per say, the effectiveness of aeration in reducing thatch was studied, measured and reported.

 

[BXMurphy]

I think that before somebody studies the benefits of core aeration, the definition of "compaction" must be had.

 

[osuturfman]

I think that before somebody studies the benefits of core aeration, the definition of "compaction" must be had.

Great thought!

Here's a great primer on the definition and ways to measure compaction from Dr. Beth Guertal of Auburn.

http://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/updat/article/2013spr13.pdf

Bulk density is fairly true measure of compaction but, as noted in the piece, one sample won't produce a consistent number for the entire area.

 

[GrassDaddy]

It's not pushed just for compaction though, they also say the holes give the roots air, water, nutrients.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Actual studies are a bit hard to come across as j4c mentioned they quickly find their way behind paywalls.
Here are some articles I had bookmarked that are still active that discuss aeration (no studies) and some of those other factors GD.

https://u.osu.edu/athleticfieldmanagement/2016/07/20/managing-sports-fields-during-summer-heat-drought-stress/
https://ipm.missouri.edu/MEG/2012/3/Spring-Lawn-Care-Aeration-Fertility-and-Crabgrass-Control/
Edit: Link removed as duplicate of one posted by OSUturfman
http://sturf.lib.msu.edu/article/2000aug12.pdf