T. E. Durborow, N. L. Barnes, S. Z. Cohen, G. L. Horst, and A. E. SmithACS Symposium Series 743 Fate and Management of Turfgrass ChemicalsChapter 12, pp. 195-227©American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 2000
Computer models that simulate pesticide leaching and runoff were originally developed with a focus on agriculture. Due to distinct botanical and agronomic differences, there are questions about the applications of these models to turf. We evaluated the U.S. EPA's PRZM model (v. 2.0, 2.3, 3.0 and 3.12) and the USDA's GLEAMS model using data from turf test plot studies funded by the U.S. Golf Association. The plots simulated golf greens and fairways in Georgia, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania. The GLEAMS model performed surprisingly well in the Georgia evaluation: 11 of 12 runoff events were predicted moderately to very well for hydrology and pesticides. The PRZM 3.0 evaluation of the Penn State study produced less favorable results, but the differences may be more related to the nature of the field study and not the model's performance. The PRZM 2.3 and 3.12 predictions of percolate volumes ranged from poor to fair for the Georgia study and very good for the Nebraska study, and predictions of pesticide leachate ranged from poor to good, but PRZM generally tended to over predict pesticide mass.