search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
None of the treatments tested in this experiment enhanced regrowth of the harvested area. Sod tensile strength was difficult to accurately measure due to the time sod was stacked and the resulting decay. Furthermore, treatments failed to affect internal sod mass temperature during storage. In fact, none of the sod ensiled or reached critically high temperatures—an indication that further research is needed to characterize sod mass heating. Te small pallet size used in this experiment may have limited ensilation; however, size restraints were intended to limit variability between treatments. Also, the relatively wet conditions during the experiment may have negated any effects of soil surfactants on installation success. Despite these shortcomings, first year results from MSU suggest that Lexicon enhances establishment of sod that has been stacked and stored.


Tis field research is being repeated this summer, and it will be on display along with other research pertaining to sod production at the August 20, 2019, MSU Research Field Day in Starkville. For more information about the event, go to: pss.msstate.edu/workshops/turf/. A greenhouse trial will also be conducted to characterize the effects of Lexicon on storage and establishment of sprigged ultradwarf bermudagrass. Te authors thank TLI and BASF for their support of this novel research.


USGA/NTEP Cool-Season and Warm-Season Water Use Trials (Cool-season Trials, $15,000 2016-19;


Warm-season Trials $30,000, 2018-21) As discussed at previous TPI Lawn Institute Research Committee meetings, the United States Golf Association (USGA) budgeted considerable funding to conduct a national water use and drought tolerance trial, utilizing the National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) as its evaluation organization. USGA funded the building of rainout shelters and irrigation infrastructure at several locations, and is working with NTEP in determining testing protocols, data collection methods, etc. Besides data collection on water use and drought resistance parameters, the goal of this effort is for the EPA Water Sense program to adopt these (or similar methods) and to agree to certify the first plant species with the Water Sense label. USGA has become a Water Sense partner and we have talked to the Water Sense staff about certi- fying grasses. EPA is very interested in the concept (they have never certified a plant or plants as water saving) as USGA Green Section Research Director Dr. Mike Kenna and NTEP’s Kevin Morris have met with them to discuss collaborative efforts. However, EPA needs to see more about the methods and tests as well as some successful trials.


14


Te first data from the cool-season trial was collected in 2017 at six of the ten locations. Four locations (Approach 1, shelter) collected data during a 100-day induced drought period, and in some cases, large differences were noted in the amount of water used by entries, however very little statistical differences were noted among entries. For 2018, NTEP changed the re-watering procedures threshold to 65 percent green cover, as well as expanded the statistical analysis for all sites to include separate Kentucky bluegrass and tall fescue tables. In 2018, all ten sites collected data.


Approach 1, Rainout Shelters Rain exclusion shelters are being used to simulate 100-day drought periods in higher rainfall regions. Under the rain exclusion shelters, the amount of water needed to maintain 65 percent green cover (changed from 50 percent in 2017) was measured, and turfgrass quality as well as recovery from drought were evaluated when irrigation resumed. Irrigation amounts needed to maintain 65 percent green cover varied significantly among entries, and in some cases was more than double the best entry. However, the changes made to the re- watering threshold, as well as the statistical analysis, resulted in virtually no statistical differences at Griffin, GA; Amherst, MA; and Fayetteville, AR; even though in some instances large differences in amounts of water used were evident (range = 4.3 to 72 mm). At College Park, MD, statistical differences were noted, mainly among the Kentucky bluegrass entries, with ‘BAR PP 110358’, ‘PST-KS-13-141’, Blue Devil’, ‘NAI-13-14’ and ‘NAI-13-132’ the top entries. ‘BAR PP 110258’ used less water than many of the tall fescue entries (169.3 mm). Tall fescues using the least water at College Park, MD, (156.7 – 169.3 mm) include ‘RS4’, ‘Catalyst’, ‘Monet’, ‘LTP-SYN-A3’ and ‘Titanium LS’.


Te greatest entry separation in any Approach 1 (shelter) site was noted at West Lafayette, IN. Like most sites, the tall fescues, in general, needed less water to remain green than most bluegrasses. However, at West Lafayette, there is a great range of performance, from 161 – 317.7 mm for tall fescue entries, 216 – 313.7 mm for Kentucky bluegrass. Tall fescues with the least water required at this site in 2018 include ‘DLFPS-321/3678’ (161 mm), ‘DLFPS-321/3677’ (173.7 mm) and ‘RS4’ (175.7 mm). For bluegrass at West Lafayette, ‘Barrari’ (216 mm), ‘NAI-13-132’ (216.3 mm) and ‘NAI-13-14’ (228.7 mm) used the least water in 2018.


Approach 2, Evapotranspiration (ET) Replacement Te drier climate ETo


-based sites evaluate performance


at three deficit irrigation levels for 100- to 120-day periods. Data recorded includes percent green cover over time, turfgrass quality and recovery rate after complete


TPI Turf News September/October 2019


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