West Lafayette, IN, and Columbia, MO with turfgrass quality and percent cover ratings being affected by that injury. Meyer and KSUZ 1201 suffered only a small amount of winter kill at those locations (only 1.3 and 9.7 percent, respectively at Manhattan, KS). Te two winters damaged DALZ 1301 and FAES 1305 more, however, they recovered enough to provide quality almost equal to Meyer and KSUZ 1201 at the three northern locations. Results from the southern locations indicate that other

experimental zoysiagrasses have thus far, provided higher quality turf than Meyer and Zeon. 09-TZ-54-9 was one of the outstanding new entries in 2015 finishing in the top statistical group in seven of nine standard trial sites. Several other entries including DALZ 1303, FAES 1303, FAES 1305, A-1 and FAES 1319 performed very well at a few locations, but their performance was much more location dependent. In most cases, Meyer was in the bottom third of all entries with Meyer showing poorer performance in the more southern locations. Zeon more consistently held its own against the new experimentals, but it too fell out of the top statistical group at most locations. Ancillary trials of traffic, drought and shade tolerance

yielded their first data in 2015. College Station, TX, imposed significant drought stress on the entries, rating turf quality and percent ground cover to measure drought tolerance. Several entries, including Zeon, FAES 1313 and FAES 1305 rated high for turf quality as well as over 70 percent living ground cover at the end of the recovery period. Possibly due to the drought stress, large patch disease, also called zoysia patch (caused by Rhizoctonia sp.), was noted at the College Station location, with ten entries, including FAES 1307, FAES 1309, FAES 1310, FAES 1316 and FAES 1315 showing no damage. Traffic was imposed on the zoysia entries at

Fayetteville, AR, and Raleigh, NC. 09-TZ-54-9, FAES 1304 and FAES 1319 showed consistent results by being the only entries to finish in the top statistical group for turf quality at both locations. And shade tolerance was tested at two locations, Riverside, CA, (artificial shade) and Carbondale, IL, (natural shade). Results are not yet consistent among shade locations, therefore, additional test years are needed to identify shade tolerant entries.

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 now 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 collaborative trial, which 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 a 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 last year, despite the covers that were

Tis plot of ‘Yak’ yarrow (Achillea millefolium) is in the 2015 NTEP Cool-Season Low Input trial at St. Paul, MN.

40

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

TPI Turf News July/August 2016