collaborative trial that we established in 2013. A new twist on this trial is that we have


included not only bermudagrass, but also zoysiagrass and seashore paspalum. Seashore paspalum has been utilized on putting greens for the last decade or so, but zoysiagrass has almost no history as a putting green surface in the U.S. (zoysia has been a mainstay of ‘summer’ putting greens in Japan for decades). Including three different species in one trial offered challenges, particularly in management specifics that may differ from one species to another. However, eleven trial cooperators (seven at university sites, four on golf courses) felt up to the challenge and the trial was born. One of the goals of the trial is to maintain


consistent putting green speeds of at least 9 feet on the stimpmeter. Tis speed is adequate for most mid-level public and private courses where reduced maintenance inputs and costs are necessary for the course to be profitable. How to maintain that speed is up to the site manager (or golf course superintendent), but a set of guidelines were developed to help manage the trial. In addition, it was determined that since some locations could suffer winter kill each year, turf covers would be provided to those locations and would be used as standard maintenance practice (adopting what a mid- level golf course may do to protect their investment). Te use of covers came into focus the first winter, with the severe cold temperatures. As explained over the last few updates, despite


the covers that were used at several locations, winter injury from 2013-14 was significant at some locations. Tis winter injury caused NTEP to replant some or all entries at four locations in summer 2014. Terefore, establishment data collected during the trials’ first year (2013), was collected again at several locations in 2014. And several trial locations did not establish properly, or were set back by the winter of 2013, therefore, only a small amount of quality, density, disease and ball roll data could be collected during the first two years. Te winter of 2014-15 was also colder than normal in some locations, which delayed some entry development and hence, collection of some of the more advanced data parameters. Also, various issues led to the unfortunate abandonment of the trial at Tequesta, FL. In this final year of the trial, MSB-264


continued its top performance by finishing in the top statistical group for turf quality at all eight locations submitting data. 08-T-18 and MSB-265 finished in the top statistical group at seven locations. OKC-13- 78-5 also demonstrated good turf quality at several locations, with top statistical group performance at five sites. Significant differences in appearance ratings such as genetic color, density and leaf texture were noted among entries, which largely led to the quality ratings separation. Interestingly, fall color retention ratings showed significant differences, but they varied by


TPI Turf News July/August 2018


location. In other words, an entry may exhibit good late fall, or even winter growth at one location, but not at another location. Generally, less separation was noted among


zoysia entries, than their bermuda counterparts. For zoysia in 2016, several experimental entries, particularly from the Texas A&M-Dallas (DALZ) University research program, produced turf quality that rivaled many of the bermudagrasses. DALZ 1308, one of the best zoysia entries the first four years, showed consistent performance in 2017 with top statistical group finishes at several locations. DALZ 1306 and DALZ 1307 also performed well overall. Many of these entries performed as well or better than Diamond, the original zoysia putting green cultivar. Te two seashore paspalum entries showed


reasonable quality throughout the trial period. Both UGA 143 and the standard entry SeaDwarf performed very similarly at most locations in 2017 with no statistical difference for turf quality among the entries. Also, as expected, both seashore paspalum entries died at the northern locations of Lexington, KY, and Bloomington, IN, and did not perform well at the Richmond, VA, location. Ball roll measurements were collected at six


locations in 2017. As in past years, most locations did not record ball roll distances that met our minimum threshold of about 100 inches of roll (250 cm) using the stimpmeter (on at least one rating date). Tucson, AZ, and Mississippi State, MS, were the only locations to achieve ball roll distances on bermuda of at least 100 inches on any rating date. Te bermuda entries FAES 1302 and CTF-B10 delivered 100-inch ball rolls on five of six rating dates. In the first few years, none of the zoysia or


seashore paspalum entries rolled at least 100 inches, however, that changed in 2016. In 2017, a few zoysia entries had 100+ inch ball roll ratings on one date at Tucson, AZ, while DALZ 1308 had showed ball roll distances of 100 inches on two rating dates in Tucson. No other zoysia or seashore paspalum entry had a 100 inch or greater ball roll at any location in 2017. St. Augustinegrass and seashore paspalum


cultivar development was fairly limited in the U.S. for a long while. Te situation changed in the early to mid- 2000s when new plant breeders were hired at southern universities like Texas A&M, University of Florida and North Carolina State University. Now, with those folks in place and with a major federal (USDA) grant from the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI), an increase in breeding of these two species, along with bermuda and zoysia, is occurring across the southern U.S. Within a few years, growers and consumers will see new cultivars of St. Augustinegrass and seashore paspalum in the marketplace. Tese new cultivars will have improved drought and salt tolerance, as well as


53


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