Turfgrass producers, such as Biograss Sod Farm in Vernon, Utah, (shown in this photo) use the data from NTEP trials to select the cultivars they will grow to meet the needs of customers in their marketing area.


Our newest St. Augustinegrass trial includes three


standard entries (Floratam, Raleigh, and Palmetto) and twenty-four experimental entries, planted at ten locations. Turfgrass quality data from year one and two (2017 and 2018) showed several entries often outperforming the standard entries. In 2020, entry performance varied significantly by region. Similar to 2019, CitraBlue was the highest scoring entry at the two Florida locations, Fort Lauderdale and the western panhandle site at Jay, Florida. FSA 1610 and FSA 1606 were also good performers at both Florida sites. CitraBlue, FSA 1606, FSA 1605, FSA 1610, and Palmetto were particularly good in the Ft. Lauderdale, FL, ancillary trial location where plots are maintained with about one-half of the nitrogen level of the standard trial site. Te Dallas, TX, location had three Texas-bred


entries, DALSA 1502, DALSA 1618, and DALSA 1501 in the top statistical group, along with Palmetto. Results from our drought tolerance ancillary trial in


College Station, TX, showed only small statistical differences in 2020, but DALSA 1618, DALSA 1623, DALSA 1502, and FSA 1613 finished with the highest overall turf quality. Other entries, including Palmetto, Floratam, and UGA TX SA26 also performed well under drought in 2020. Tree southeastern U.S. locations collected data


that resulted in some consistent performances. FSA 1613, CitraBlue, and FSA 1608 were the only entries to finish in the top statistical group at Raleigh, NC, Mississippi State, MS, and Auburn, AL. Entries that performed well by landing in the top turf quality statistical group at two of the three sites include FSA 1614, Palmetto, USGA TX SA26, Raleigh, DALSA 1618, and DALSA 1501.


44 Fall color retention is an important characteristic,


particularly in southern regions where turfgrasses are expected to provide green turf for eight months or more. Locations from Auburn, AL, to the Panhandle of Florida ( Jay), to south Florida (Ft. Lauderdale) collected fall color retention in different months of the year in 2020. Overall, Florida-bred entries outperformed many other entries with superior fall color retention demonstrated by entries such as CitraBlue, FSA 1606, FSA 1605, FSA 1601, FSA 1610, and FSA 1604.


Seashore Paspalum Seashore paspalum is known for its salt tolerance,


however turfgrass managers are now considering paspalum for its unique turfgrass quality as well. NTEP initiated testing of seashore paspalum in 2007. Eight new entries plus two standards are included in the new seashore paspalum trial, planted at eight locations in 2016. Summarized turfgrass quality data from 2020 at


six locations again showed that good progress has been made by breeders as several new experimental entries are performing well. At most locations, small or little statistical significance of overall turf quality ratings was noted among entries. SeaStar did, however, finish at or near the top of turf quality average scores at four of the six locations. UGP 73 was consistently good at four locations as well. Te greatest performance difference was observed at Auburn, AL, with UGP 94, SeaStar, and UGA HYB2 alone in the top statistical group. No diseases were noted on this trial in 2020.


Fall color retention was rated by several locations but the results were somewhat inconsistent. At Stillwater, OK,


TPI Turf News July/August 2021


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