2016 NTEP St. Augustinegrass Trial in Griffin, GA. Note the variability in rate of spread and color among the entries.
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 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 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, not a great 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. MSB-264 and MSB-285, experimentals from
Mississippi State University continued to perform well, finishing in the top statistical group for turf quality at
46
five and six (of nine) locations, respectively. 11-T-861 also performed well, finishing in the top statistical group at five locations, but only the southern sites. Other experimentals such as 08-T-18, OKC-13-78-5 and JK 110521 demonstrated good turf quality at several locations, with top statistical group performance at four sites. Significant differences in genetic color, density, leaf texture and fall color retention were noted among entries, which largely led to the quality ratings separation. 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 in 2015, showed consistent performance in 2016 with top statistical group finishes in eight of nine trial locations. DALZ 1306 and DALZ 1307 also performed well with top statistical groupings at eight and seven locations, respectively. Performing well enough to gain the top statistical group at five locations in 2016 include DALZ 1309, DALZ 1304 and ZOYSIU. Te two seashore paspalum entries again showed
excellent establishment and reasonable quality. As in 2015, UGS 143 and the standard entry SeaDwarf performed very similarly at almost locations in 2016. Also, as expected, both seashore paspalum entries died at the northern locations of Lexington, KY and Bloomington, IN. Ball roll measurements were collected at several
locations in 2016. However, 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). Mississippi State, MS was the only location to achieve ball roll distances on bermuda of at least 100 inches on any rating date. Te bermuda entries Tifeagle, FAES 1302, Mini-Verde, Tifdwarf and CTF-B10 delivered 100-inch ball rolls on both rating dates.
TPI Turf News July/August 2017
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