in the top statistical group at College Park, MD, Columbia, MO, and Manhattan, KS. Also finishing well at the three sites were KSUZ 1201, FAES 1312 and Zeon. Meyer did not perform well at College Park, MD, finished in the middle of the pack at Manhattan, KS, and was very good at Columbia, MO. As has been
consistent throughout each year of the trial, results from the southern locations show other experimental zoysiagrasses provide higher quality turf than Meyer and Zeon. FAES 1313 is the only entry to finish in the top statistical group at each southern location in 2017. Entries including FAES 1312, DALZ 1303, and FAES 1319 performed very well at several locations as well. Meyer did perform well at a few locations, such as Fayetteville, AR, but finished outside the top statistical group, and in the bottom third of all entries at most southern locations in 2017, like 2016. Zeon performed well at Fayetteville, AR, and Dallas, TX, consistently holding its own against the new experimentals at this and a few other locations. But like Meyer, Zeon also fell out of the top statistical group at most locations. Ancillary trials of traffic, drought and shade
tolerance yielded good data over the last few years of this trial. Te College Station, TX, site imposed significant drought stress on the entries over a three year period, rating turf quality and percent ground cover to measure drought tolerance. FAES 1305, Zeon, FAES 1329, A-1, FAES 1319 and DALZ 1301 rated the highest for turf quality in 2017 under drought conditions. Traffic was again imposed on the zoysia entries
at the Raleigh, NC, location. 09-TZ-54-9, FAES 1304, FAES 1312, DALZ 1302 and FAES 1315 (and five other entries) had the highest percentage cover ratings at the end of the traffic season. Shade tolerance was tested at Riverside, CA, with excellent separation among entries. Entries like 09-TZ-54-9, 09-TZ-53-20, DALZ 1303, FAES 1329, FAES 1309 and FAES 1322 finishing in the top statistical group. Diseases on zoysia are not as big a concern as
with some other species, however certain diseases can cause significant damage. Dollar spot and large patch
52
2013 NTEP Zoysiagrass Test at Tucson, AZ, showing winter color differences in February, 2018.
are two of the diseases that can infect zoysia, with data in 2017 from Raleigh, NC, and Citra, FL. 10-TX-12- 54, FAES 1319, FAES 1312 and 11-TZ-4321 had high dollar spot tolerance ratings at both locations in 2017. Large patch or zoysia patch (Rhizoctonia
solani) was noted at Fayetteville, AR, in 2017. Te entries with the least large patch damage in 2017 include FAES 1319, 09-TZ-54-9, FAES 1328, FAES 1315 and FAES 1317.
Warm-Season Putting Green In the late 1990s, NTEP and USGA
collaborated on a trial to evaluate creeping bentgrass and bermudagrass on putting greens situated at golf courses. Te purpose of that trial was to evaluate putting green cultivars under actual golf course putting green conditions. For bermudagrass, eight golf courses were chosen in locations as varied as Florida, California, Missouri and other sites. Data collected from that trial (
http://www.ntep.org/reports/bg98o/bg98o_02-10f/ bg98o_02-10f.htm) showed that bermudagrass could work well as a replacement for creeping bentgrass in the lower transition zone and southern U.S. Tat trial contained seven bermudagrasses, several of which have become well established in the golf turf industry. More recently, the USGA is interested in
identifying warm-season grasses that can provide acceptable putting surfaces where course owners want to save water, pesticide and fertilizer inputs. In addition, the USGA is interested in evaluating potential new putting green grasses that can be mowed higher, do not require as much cultivation and vertical mowing, but still provide a good quality playing surface. Hence, the idea for a new
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
