Transition Zone locations often provide the


most environmental stress on Kentucky bluegrass entries. Over the testing period, the five trial locations certainly delivered on this promise. SRX 466, Skye, Barvette HGT, Barserati, A06-46, and Keeneland had the highest quality ratings, followed by Blue Note, Pick 033 and Bluebank. Top performers at the Guelph, Ontario, Canada


site (managed using ‘organic’ methods) from 2012-2016 included some older cultivars such as Midnight and Award, new experimentals like SRX 466 and J-1770, and some new commercial cultivars (Barvette HGT and Barserati). Data from our two western U.S. locations (Puyallup, WA, and Logan, UT) showed excellent performance from Pick 4340, Keeneland and A00-2882 at both sites, with J-1136, A01-1106, Mazama and A06- 46 also performing well over the five years. Data analyzed by management schedule revelaed


some interesting differences among top performers under each schedule. Schedule “A” replicated a good quality home lawn in most regions (1.5-2.5” mowing height, 3-4 lbs./N/1000 sq. ft., irrigation to prevent stress or dormancy) while Schedule “B” approximated a lower input turf area (3+” mowing height, 0-2 lbs./N/1000 sq. ft., no irrigation after establishment). Entries that performed very well in both Schedule “A” and “B” include Blue Note, A06-46, Bluebank, J-1770 and Keeneland. Te 2011 Kentucky bluegrass trial consists of


several ancillary locations testing for tolerance to various stresses. For example, since 2012, shade tolerance has been evaluated at Carbondale, IL, with five years of data showing Keeneland, Mazama, BAR 8PP 504, Barvette HGT, PST-K9-99, Barsahara, Burl 3-51 and Kenblue with the best shade tolerance. Traffic tolerance was evaluated at Amherst, MA,


E. Lansing, MI, North Brunswick, NJ, Madison, WI, and Knoxville, TN, for at least three years. At Amherst, Rubix, Blue Note, A06-47 and SRX 4338 top the quality ratings, while Rubix had the highest wear tolerance over three ratings. In Knoxville, Barvette HGT, BAR VV 118352 and Bluebank had the highest quality ratings over the four year test period. Barvette HGT, Rubix and Aramintha were the most consistent entries over the four years of data collection at North Brunswick, NJ. Te results from Madison revealed Barvette HGT, A05-360 and Zinger in the top spots, followed by nine entries. And in East Lansing, no statistical differences were noted among entries. Data on various diseases such as summer patch


(Magnaporthe poae), dollar spot (Sclerotinia homeocarpa) and stem rust (Puccinia graminis) were reported over the five years of this trial. Data on summer patch, one of the most devastating diseases on Kentucky bluegrass, was collected at several locations and reported during several years of the trial. Summer patch damage at Raleigh, NC, seemed to be the most consistent with Barvette HGT, Barserati,


44


J-1770, Pick 033 and SRX 466 showing the least disease. Summer patch ratings collected at seven additional locations showed less consistency, however, Barvette HGT, SRX 466 and Pick 033 had some of the best tolerance ratings, along with Blue Note and Bluebank. Te differences in tolerance among these locations may indicate variation in the disease-causing organisms. Dollar spot ratings were collected at five locations


but only the entries in the bottom 10 percent showed significant susceptibility to the disease. Stem rust ratings collected at several locations showed Barvette HGT, Bolt, Pick TD8, PST-T10-18, A06-46, Burl 06-11 and RAD- 849 with the most consistently high tolerance ratings. Other ratings of interest during the test period


include data such as thatch measurements and drought tolerance. Tatch accumulation was measured at Madison, WI, with Barvette HGT, J-1770, Nu Chicago, Bolt and Barserati finishing with the least thatch. And drought tolerance ratings collected in W. Lafayette, IN, had A05- TB-382, RAD-849, A06-26, among nine other entries, with the best tolerance of drought dormancy.


Tall Fescue Tis report utilizes the fifth and final of this trial,


planted in 2012. Te trial contains 116 entries, of which many are still experimental. Year one data typically reflects establishment rate, year two data usually reflects broader cultivar performance, while years three through five allow us to determine if trends seen in year two are still viable. A final summary brings all the years together and is the best measure of long-term performance. Turfgrass quality ratings in 2017 again varied


by region and even by management regime. Schedule “A” maintenance, which approximates a high quality home lawn in many regions (1.5-3” mowing height, 3-4 lbs./N/1000 sq. ft., irrigation to prevent stress), showed the most entry separation with only nine entries in the top statistical grouping, led by 4th Millennium SRP and Regenerate. MET 1 had the highest turf quality rating under Schedule “B” (2.5-3.5” mowing height, 1-2 lbs./N/1000 sq. ft., irrigation to prevent dormancy). Entries that finished in the top statistical group under both management regimes include 4th Millennium SRP, Regenerate, Raptor II, MET 1, F711, Amity and Tor. When comparing regional data analyses, the


largest separation in performance was noted in the six transition zone locations, such as College Park, MD, Columbia, MO, Lexington, KY, and Raleigh, NC. Traverse 2 SRP, Raptor III, MET 1, and 4th Millennium SRP among others performed very well at this regional analysis in 2017, often besting the top performers from the previous trial, Faith and Catalyst. Data from the Northeast was collected at


Storrs, CT, and two New Jersey locations. Entries like Regenerate, Reflection, 4th Millennium SRP and MET 1 again generally performed well in the Northeast where


TPI Turf News July/August 2018


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84