In this episode of Turfgrass Epistemology, I discuss and interpret the peer-reviewed article “Influence of Ferrous Sulfate and Its Elemental Components on Dollar Spot Suppression” by McCall et al. (2016), published in Crop Science. This paper is foundational to many modern discussions about using iron—specifically ferrous sulfate—as a tool for managing dollar spot on creeping bentgrass putting greens.
The study evaluates whether ferrous sulfate itself, or its individual components iron and sulfur, are responsible for observed dollar spot suppression. Using both field trials on USGA-spec creeping bentgrass greens and controlled in-vitro assays, the authors show that ferrous sulfate consistently reduced dollar spot severity, while elemental sulfur had no effect and chelated iron produced inconsistent results across years.
In this video, I walk through the experimental design, disease response data, and turf quality results, with particular emphasis on what actually drives suppression. The findings demonstrate that ferrous sulfate behaves differently than iron chelates and sulfur, and that the disease response cannot be explained simply by nutrient sufficiency, sulfur acidification, or color response. Instead, the evidence points toward a direct fungistatic or fungitoxic effect of ferrous sulfate on the dollar spot pathogen at sufficiently high concentrations.
I also explain why the in-vitro results matter for interpreting field performance. The paper shows that low iron concentrations can actually stimulate fungal growth, while very high concentrations suppress mycelial development across a range of pH levels. This nuance is critical, because it explains why iron programs can sometimes appear inconsistent or even counterproductive when rates, formulations, or application frequency are poorly understood.
Throughout the discussion, I place this study in the broader context of dollar spot management, fungicide resistance, and integrated pest management. Ferrous sulfate is not presented as a replacement for fungicides, nor as a fertility shortcut, but as a biologically active compound that can partially suppress disease under specific conditions—while also carrying real risks if misused.
This episode is especially relevant for golf course superintendents, turfgrass researchers, and advanced turf managers who are considering iron-based programs for dollar spot suppression and want to understand what the science actually supports, what it does not, and why oversimplified interpretations can lead to poor decisions.
Subscribe for more long-form turfgrass science discussions, peer-reviewed paper breakdowns, and clear explanations focused on how we know what we know in turfgrass management.
Don’t forget to like, share, and subscribe to stay updated on more science-driven insights!
Become a member of Turfgrass Epistemology and support turfgrass research: www.youtube.com/@TurfgrassEpistemology/join
Voicemail: 859-444-4234
Apple Podcast https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/turfgrass-epistemology/id1717271379
Spotify Podcast https://open.spotify.com/show/1cTpdrChToeEFAOX9wkXFI
iHeart Radio Podcast https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1323-turfgrass-epistemology-129043524/
Podbean https://turfgrassepistemology.podbean.com/
Online consulting Calendly.com/TravisShaddox
Twitter Twitter.com/TravisShaddox
Email TravisShaddox@gmail.com
Turfgrass Programs and Extension Service Information: https://www.usna.usda.gov/assets/images/as_pdf_image/LandGrantColleges.pdf
Feb 26 20261 h et 2 min