2002
Iowa Turfgrass Research Report

. . . and justice for all
The Iow a Cooperative E xtension S ervice’s programs and policies are consistent with pertinent federal and state
law s and regulations on nondiscrim ination. M any materials can be m ade available in alternative formats for
A D A clients.
Issued in furtherance o f Cooperative Extension work, A cts o f M ay 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation w ith the
U .S . Department o f Agriculture. Stanley R. Johnson, director, C ooperative Extension Service, Iow a State
U niversity o f Scien ce and T echnology, A m es, Iowa.

1

o

O
U>
O

&
Ui

Ö
1

o
I

Ö
r*

L,
oo
S
c

vo
4^
Ul

O
Ul

5* 3

g- r po
S § S

W
►fi

*~

ä .
3

jf

£r

ö
ora
o

Q °o

a
13

S a

1 1

p r

Ö Ü Ö Ö

0000
85 85 85 85
3 3 3 3

ÖO

Ö
r*

§
5
cp * $

I 3

vo 00 00 ON

U>
o

M
U2

n

o

3

§
o

S2 n 3
“
® «
SP 3 3.
I * Ig s
«
i

cd

3.
T5

io

3
cd

^-1
t

Û
5
^

O
»

o
3
n

CD

3

%

1

a

?

9 3

3.

3 ?
3 CD3

gl o. Xi

q-

2

&

cd

HP33M

§

0
Ä » 5
C 1 W1 c

g o
Ä X
“

3 S. a f

°3 §3

§ 7

cd

CA

a
3
o

0 » i

CD

o

§••5- a

3

a

»

a

1 « Ä

§ 9

o"
§

l £

2

O3
^ 5Tï3- a §•
>5 . .

on

V
g

v ;

V
3-

O
"■h

3

2

o

Ï
5*
CTQ

3
3

ö

1

?
*

£

£ .

; o^

S g.

ö

CC
TQ
D

60

3

§ f

cd

**

*

S
a

2.

rî

m
M

ö

£ .
13

cd

3

3 5'
fie
— *

3

£

2 .

^

°

^

M

2 fc> '

3

O

3

35

“

a
3

o 85
g

7?

e

3
3
CD

O

äT g
Z
tn

s- 1

vT*

3

^ S ts
a ’ <

CTQ

<

00

L ,

3 cd | S ” S

q
S/5 P|*T
3~ c

1o cd3

! ï ®

Ö
51
1 O
«

§ *

3 §nT C«TQ
^

i? ^

? g:

^

^ EL

3
%
h
p
a
.
§
P
P *.

O

g- ^

On H
3
3.

«
^

^
h
a.
g3
c- e<
r> S a. 3.
ri

p “

£T

w

b

o
S
ft.

g .

«

Ö
1

r

cd

5
&î

w

q

8 i «S- SS

3 a- ^
^

o

a

a.

6s

5 f

2 .

a
ö
p

a

^

5
^ s
a §•
3 <D

o
M
3

H £

i

Ö

œ
«
p

3 §

«

7
s O

Í

«
83
s

5* &

2 &°

Jl

© H
S 3 .®

g. o - S
'

r^o*
“

sâ - "^ C/3
1

H

s s

Pp

J ö r

2
i

n

05

ap
Ö
r«

3 .
^

1O CD
3

ero

CA

o
c

2

CD
as 5
CD O
CD
a
p

§ §p
2.

C
TQ
ü .

w
US

S

l 'S

cT
§

3
«

2?

*

Si

85
O

1 »1

g5 co
M

n

3

NH

Ö

ni
n

Ö
'S

Ö
'S

»

Ö

Ö

g

» I

“A

I§ I?

0

a
Z . 5 ‘ 3

2

S
Ï . 5:
3 C! o.
* g 55

a

"

^

CD

a
B
c
p

ora

N
P

3
1

S .S -

H

H

sr
c

N

CA

a

«r c

£> 3

Id1I.
c
3
*» O)

»

<Z>
2

i «1 3

ge*

p

3 c? & 7
1 I2.

2

cd

1D 1Q C
Í? 3 '
>j ora

9 -8 »

s
5
^

^

cd

°

^

3

5

H

%

3*

2 5*

3

30O
Q

Ho

2 £öL

cd

cd

1

ca

oS

\m

^

I ja

s

w

f*
s

*<

M

3

O

1

C

a

CD

3 o 3

Í

»

PH

^

a a 3

00

ft»

V*
Ö

«i

S

O

1 113

* 8 .8 S
foZ l l
g

? u

2s . H^Q c fî
J
»

i*

§•

o o ^ 5 ‘

§ !

rV

CL

CD

I«

§

?

I 2
§ p§
2.

0>

oj

5

3

t>5
CD

ora

S'

o

3

CD

fl

oo

s 5
1

1

^

51

§
* .

^

Ö

C»1 bü

§ 2
a
K

3
3

I ’

^§
S" o
3 .

»

i

CD
CD

§ g.

sS 23 3
CL
3
s

t

5

m

i t

? 5

I §
t

CD

CA

? 7-

_

^

2
3

3
3
&

CD

K>
O
K>

Introduction
Nick E. Christians , David D. Minner, and Shui-Zhang Fei
The following research report is the 23nd yearly publication of the results of turfgrass research
projects performed at Iowa State University. This is the fifth year that the entire report is
available on the Internet. This report and the previous years' reports can be accessed at:
http://turfgrass.hort.iastate.edu/
Several new projects were started in the 2001 season. Many of these are part of Dr. Fei's
breeding related work. They include Round-up ready bentgrasses, perennial ryegrass cold
hardiness screening trials, and Poa species phylogenetic studies. Dr. Fei also established a new
Tall Fescue turfgrass evaluation trial in the fall of 2001.
We would like to acknowledge Will Emley, superintendent of the ISU Horticulture Research
Station; Rod St. John, manager of the turf research area; Barbara Bingaman, Postdoctoral
researcher; Federico Valverde, research associate; Dr. Young Joo, visiting scientist; Deying Li,
Postdoctoral researcher; Mark Howieson, Troy Oster, Natalie Canier, Robert Wieners, Yanwen
Xiong, S.K. Lee, and Jason Kruse, graduate students; and all others employed at the field
research area in the past year for their efforts in building the turf program.
Special thanks to Zachary P. Kotlarek and Liying Li for helping to prepare this publication.
Edited by Nick Christians, David Minner and Shui-Zhang Fei, Iowa State University,
Department of Horticulture, Ames, IA 50011-1100.

Dr. Nick Christians
Phone: 515/294-0036
Fax: 515/294-0730
E-mail: nchris@iastate.edu

Dr. David Minner
Phone: 515/294-5726
Fax: 515/294-0730
E-mail: dminner@iastate.edu

IV

Dr. Shui-Zhang Fei
Phone: 515/294-5119
Fax: 515/294-0730
E-mail: sfei@iastate.edu

Environmental D ata...................................................................................
1
Species and Cultivar Trials
Results of Regional Kentucky Bluegrass Cultivar Trials................................................................ 3
Fairway Height Bluegrass Trial........................................................................................................... 8
Perennial Ryegrass Studies...................................................................................................................9
National Tall Fescue Cultivar Evaluation........................................................................................ 13
Regional Fine Fescue Cultivar Trial................................................................................................. 15
Fairway Height Bentgrass Cultivar Trials........................................................................................ 18
Green Height Bentgrass Cultivar Trials........................................................................................... 19
Shade Adaptation Study..................................................................................................................... 21
Ornamental Grasses Project.........................................................................................................
23
Herbicide and Growth Regulator Studies
Preemergence Annual Grass Control Study.................................................................................... 25
Postemergence Broadleaf (Violet) Study.........................................................................................31
Dimension Safety on Bentgrass/Poa annua Greens........................................................................35
Dimension + Turf Enhancer/TGR Safety on Bentgrass/Poa annua Greens Study.................... 45
Field Evaluation of Roundup Ready® Creeping Bentgrass..........................................................49
Corsair Perennial Ryegrass Control Study...................................................................................... 50
Ronstar: Demonstration of Efficacy of Various Granular Formulations...................................54
Effects of Application Timing with ZPP1560 on Spectrum of Weed Control in Turf..............59
Monsanto 78365 Demonstration for Summer Fastbum Symptomology in Turfgrass...............63
Broadleaf Herbicide Study.................................................................................................................66
Fertilizer Trials
Fine Tuning Calcium Chloride - Urea Ratios for De-Icer Purposes...........................................69
Turfgrass Disease Research
Brown Patch Fungicide Trial............................................................................................................. 72
Dollar Spot Fungicide Trial............................................................................................................... 73
Traffic Tolerance Research
Bermuda Species Traffic Study.........................................................................................................74
Kentucky Bluegrass Traffic Study.................................................................................................... 77
Species Traffic Study..........................................................................................................................79
Environm ental R esearch
1991 Com Gluten Meal Crabgrass Control Study - Year 11 ...................................................... 81
1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study - Year 7 ........................................................88
Soil M odification and Sand-based Systems
Anti-Desiccant Winter Protection of Creeping Bentgrass Putting Greens..................................96
Direct Heat Stress Effects on Creeping Bentgrass..........................................................................98
Sand-Based Sport Field Stability Study......................................................................................... 100
Introducing
Iowa State University Personnel Affiliated with the Turfgrass Research Program................. 104
Companies and OrganizationThat Made Donations or Supplied Products to the Iowa State
University Turfgrass Research Program.............................................................................................105

v

_k __
KO
) K
K4) K
) LKA
) K
) K
) tO
LO
00) ^
OS
K) K
—
o S
b> K
O) so 00 -J os LA b

lo

lo

>

© ^OOO-vlONU^WtO-

K)

“O

CD

P
<—
►
D-

CD

OOo o o o o o o o OO© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
I—
*
LA
la © © ©
b O
© ©
© ©
©) ©
© ©
00s to
b Ö
OÖ
o Ö
o Ö
o Ö
o Ö
o Ö
o b
o o
K) O
LA ©
K) O
S © la
© ©
© K
bS LbO ©
© © ©

^ B
5' £
3>
—

■fD3g ^
2
3 *
§“3

0 00 K1) os o
o
s 00 -s"J
LO 00
la O
s 0
LA
SO
S LLA
■O O
A
OS O
s -j
so
o0
oss 'J soo
LO
A©
OS
0O
©0 -O OS la
© b <
S L0A
toS L©
SO
KS
) OS O
©
b 00 © la b to U) bs b © © to bs la © 00 b b b k) b b b b b b b b

ôI

■1
O
P
P

o•1’
rr
CD

o
3
p
00
<
-+
P
CD

G
p.
<’
CD

LA P
LO L1
O
LA LbA LUA
U) p
to 00
to 0
to
LO ©
b -b
b LhA
bS lo
4—U
O
b O
) sbo so
p
—
1P
O LpA LbO p
0 U
—LA
LO LbO LbO 0
-P)* LyO
0 to) L-J
* 00 b
b» © U) b 00 b 00 b b
b 00 00 b b b
to b to b 00 b b bs b

»

LO sto
U) ©
to -0to O
10 to to to to to to
o 00
S to i b LO to
© 3

00

© SO 00

~o OS LA b LO to

•0

23
0
*<

os LA b LO to

© © © © © © © P © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
b to
b
bs ©
b sto
A©
© ©
© ©
b ©
b ©
b b
to <b1
b L©
© to
LA ©
to LbO b
b ©
© o
ob b
© b
tos so
© b
© ©
b b
© ©
b b
b to b b
© ©

&3
0
5’ 5'
£
0

LA to
os ~
os ©
to i
to i to i
Ol "O
os LO
os toosi -J
-o 0
0 y00i 00 o
00 LA o
s 0
00
0 -0LA 00
os 'O
OS P
LA to
OS ©
-o 00
LA
bo 00
to i 'O
to
p
—
to
1 001 so
s so ps soo
to LO
b b b b 00 b b b LA b bs LA b 00 bs b b bs b
to © b © bs b bs b b *— b

3
3
3
3 g
3

S3
a X
0
0

to i
1—1
©

b1 LO
b tobi 0
b0 LoA
LA L©A 00
s LO
S "©4 LbA L©A LO
A LA LLOA ©LA LO
LA yLAi
b ©LA LA LO
b LLA
to
A
s L00A LA o
b
©
b b b bs 00 b b y * b b b 00 bs b 00 b LA b
©
b
b b 00 LA
to i

to i
0

"

3
"p
n> 2
3
&3 3
3
G
1
3
"3
0

LO
to
tos totoi b
to LO
to to
to to ©
to s
to
0<
sto
o0
©
1o

00

'O OS LA b

LO

to

=

© so

00

"0 os LA b

LO

© 0 © © © © © © © © 0 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
b b © b © b b b © © b ©
b ©
© 0Ö ©
© ©
b ©
b ©
b ©
b b
b ©
b b ©
© © ©
©
© ©
to ©
© b to
© SO © © ©
SO © O
b
1—1 © to

00s 00
0 s00o s0o
0o
00 -o -J -o <
spo o
00 00 so 00 00 -0 -4 ^4 O
1 00 00 00 'O
s o
s O
os 0
OS
b L0A
s 'O LO Os P1 L<O
p LA 1
—
l OS ■ 0 yi
LO
toS y
to b p LO so LA LO LO
* b0s
b LA b b b 00 b b b b b b b bs LA bs 00 b b bo b to b b bs b b b

os o
s LoO
s sO
A Lto
A LbA LbA L0A
s o
OS L0A
OS L0A
AO
s LLA
A
A
LA b
bO L©
LA
tos LLO
oS "4
0p
to o
0o
LO
© soo
0 so
bs -o
A LLA
bs sO
os o
to
JS
©s L—
b b to © bs to to
00 to 00 LA bs b 1-1 bs b LA b b b LA b b to b bs L£A b to

00

<—1

to

§
0

/—
s B7ü
5’ 3’
£
3
XJ

I:r

oo
r—►
S

o
3
>
"O
U)
00
CD
CD

j-,
g

b totoi 0
b0 totoi
to i
b b
©

CD
C/3
CD

^

S
o sr
3 S
? 3

II

3
»1
U)
O
CT
CD

K)

O
O

NO 00 -0 On

NO NO
LO
so Ko

OO 0 0
NO OO
LAl o
k
ON
NO NO k L o

OO
00
Ö

OO
ON
ON

^1 -0 'O 00 OO
-O
OO
ON NO
Ko 0 0 NO NO kl

NO
1—k
Ö

OO
00

00
LO

lo

on

o
Ö
o

o
Ö
o

o
Ö
o

o
Ö
o

00
k
NO

LO I— 1 o0 0 ^0 01
k k k k

00

OO

O o
Ö
Ö
o o

00
P

O o
Ö
o o

Ö

O P o
la i
Ö
Ö
o On o

00
00
00

OO
LO
k l

NO
K)
Ko

o
Ö
o

lai

k LO N) -

o
Ö
o

O o
Ö
Ö
o

OO
p

00

la i

Ö

00
00

Lo

OO
P
H” k

Ö

o
o

Ö

O
4^

~*4
4^
On

^4
O
L ai

'O ^1 LAi ON ON ON ON
^4
--4 ON ON LAl LAI ON LAI ON ON ON '-J N LAI ON ON LAI LAI
-0 <1
P p p OO LO U» -J pOn p ^i
o
p o >-* LO ON LO OO OO LO 00 p ON NO LAI O
O 4^ LO <1 k -J
Lo 00
kl kl Lo l—* lai ki y*
NO k kl Lai k 00 ON NO SD
ON kl 00 Ko 00 Ko k k O

O O O o
kl b b b
o o o

o
b
o

NO 00 'O ON LAI 4^ LO to

o
b
o

o o o
b b b
o o o

O O O O O O
b b b LAI bAl b
o o o LAl L
o

'O OO 00 00 00 OO OO -0 00 00 00 ^1 ■O ~-4 OO -J as -O ^4 00 OO ^1 00 00 NO NO NO 00 00 00 NO
On 4^ -o LO
Os o to k to LAI 00 ON LO p LO ■o 4^ OO -0 o k p NO LO LO
P LAl NO LA|
to b k b to LO LO *■* Ko LAl kj ON ON LO LAl SD k ON kl b SD k LO kl b 00 LAi LO 00 k SD

LAl ON ON LAI ON LAI ON ON On ON ON LAI LAI On LAI LAI LAI LAI LAI ON LAI LAI ON ON ^1
<iO ON On -o
P p LO LAI N
* LAI LO LAI p LO ON
“‘ NO k NO ^4 P LO 4^ ON p p 00 00 1—
LO L
P NO
OO
LAl LO LAl H“à k kl ON Ko k LAI k Ko b LAI bo On SO bo k kl k k* Ko LO 00 Ko NO — kl Ko 00

—

o
b
o

o p LO H- O o o
b LO LO k b
o LAI LO NO O ob ob

o
b
o

o
b
o

o
b
o

k

ON ~o
OOn LAI ON -4 ^1 -4 ■o ON ON ON ON LAI ON OO OO -4 On ON -4 -4 00 00 00 00 <1
LO p'O 'O
00
p L
NO 4^ ON
LAI o o NO LO ON ON ON 4^ 1—k LAI -4 p LAI OS to to ON
'O
b LO 00 LO LAI Ko ÒN kl SO LAI b ON k 00 LO Ko b kl b k k LAI ON LO ÒN ÒN k k ÒN

o
b
o

o
b
o

o
b
o

o
b
o

o
b
o

o
b
o

LO 4^ 4^ LO LO LO LO 4^ 4^ LAI
OO LO p 00 4^ p p
00 O
b b k 00 b OO OO to LO 00

o o
bto b
o

LAI
p

LAI
LO

00

LO

o O p o
bAI b 00 b
L
NO o o

LAI
p
LAI

o O o
b4^ b b
o o

LAI
■o

LAI
LO

LAI
LO

LAI
to

LO

ÒN

ÒN

k

LAI
4^

Ko

o
b
o

LAI
ON

LAI
ON

ÒN

k

o
b
o

o
b
o

LAI
LAI
LAI
ON ON LAI LAI LAI LAI LAI
O P LAI p 00 00 O NO NO O
b k SO k b ÒN LAI LAI k k

Maximum
Minimum
temperature (F°) temperature (F°)

o
b
o

Rainfall
(in)

^ O O vJ ( ^ ( 7 , 4 1 W K ) -

O \ ^ ^ W K ) h- O ' O 0 0 nJ 0

n

Ui ^ W M

q

v1

September

L O t O t O t O t O t O t O t O t O t O t O

O ^ 0 0

Maximum
Minimum
temperature (F°) temperature (F°)

K)

Rainfall
(in)

o O o
OO
N b b
O
o

o

August

22

23

24

25

26

o
b

27

o
b
o

28

O o o o o o p p o o o
LO k Ö Ö b
Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö
to o to o
O o o o o oÖ

29

NO 00 ^1 as LAI S LO to

30

to

20

LO

Maximum
Minimum
temperature (F°) temperature (F°)

p o
U)
NO o

LO ¡3

Rainfall
(in)

O O O O O o O O o P O o
Ö
Ö
o k
Ö
Ö
Ö
Ö
Ö
k K
O O O O O
K) ON Öo oÖ
O O

O NO 00 -J ON

s

LAl

July

K)

20

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

LO

Results o f Regional Kentucky Bluegrass Cultivar Trials
Rodney A. St. John an d N ick E. C hristians
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has sponsored several regional Kentucky bluegrass cultivar trials
conducted at most of the northern agricultural experiment stations. The trial was established in the fall of 2000. The area
received 4 lb N/1000 ft2/yr, and was irrigated as needed. The objective of this study is to investigate cultivar performance under
a cultural regime similar to that used on irrigated home lawns in Iowa.
The values listed under each month in Table 1 are the averages of visual quality ratings made on three replicated plots. Visual
quality was based on a scale of 9 to 1: 9 = best quality, 6 = lowest acceptable quality, and 1 = worst quality. Yearly means of
monthly data were taken and are listed in the last column (Mean). The first cultivar received the highest average rating for the
entire 2001 season. The cultivars are listed in descending order of mean quality. The last row list the LSD (least significant
difference), which is a statistical measurement of how widely the means must vary before they are considered to be different
from one another.
Data for genetic color (Gcol) and leaf texture (Leafte) also are included. Genetic color was rated using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 =
dark and 1 = light green. Leaf texture was assessed with a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = fine and 1 = coarse texture. Grcovsp and grcovfa
are measurements of ground cover in spring and fall of 2001 and are measured in % of the ground with grass cover. Pctesta is an
estimation of the relative establishment rates of the cultivars and again is measured on a % ground cover basis.

Table 1. 2001 visual quality and other ratings for the High-maintenance Kentucky Bluegrass Trial.
________ QUALITY RATINGS_______
NAME___________________GCOLOl LEAFTE GRCOVSP GRCOVFA PCTESTA MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT MEAN
_____________________________________________ %________ %________ %____________ 9 to 1; 9 = high rating________
MIDNIGHT

8.0

8.3

73.3

93.0

53.3

8.7

8.0 8.7

9.0

8.3 8.3

8.5

A98-739

8.7

8.3

70.0

99.0

53.3

8.0

8.3 8.0

8.7

8.7 8.7

8.4

J-2487

8.7

8.7

70.0

96.0

56.7

8.0

8.3 8.3

8.3

8.7 8.7

8.4

J-2561

8.3

8.3

66.7

99.0

53.3

8.0

7.0 9.0

9.0

8.7 8.7

8.4

A97-1432

9.0

8.0

70.0

96.0

60.0

8.0

8.0 8.3

8.7

8.7 8.3

8.3

ASCOT

8.0

8.0

66.7

96.0

53.3

7.7

8.0 8.7

8.7

8.3 8.7

8.3

BAR PP 0566

8.3

8.0

66.7

96.0

60.0

7.7

7.7 8.7

8.3

8.7 8.7

8.3

J-1368

8.3

8.3

76.7

96.0

66.7

8.0

7.3 8.3

8.7

8.7 8.7

8.3

H92-558

8.3

8.0

70.0

96.0

66.7

7.3

8.3 9.0

8.3

7.7 8.3

8.2

J-2890

8.3

8.3

63.3

96.0

50.0

7.3

7.0 9.0

8.7

8.3 8.7

8.2

RUGBY II

8.0

8.0

60.0

99.0

53.3

7.0

7.3 9.0

8.7

8.3 9.0

8.2

SHOWCASE

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

56.7

8.3

8.3 8.3

8.0

8.0 8.0

8.2

SRX 2284

8.0

8.0

63.3

96.0

60.0

6.7

8.0 9.0

8.3

8.3 8.7

8.2

UNKNOWN

8.7

8.3

66.7

92.7

56.7

7.7

7.7 8.7

8.3

8.3 8.3

8.2

A97-1409

8.0

8.0

66.7

93.0

63.3

7.7

8.3 8.7

7.7

8.3

8.0

8.1

ALLURE

8.0

7.7

66.7

96.0

50.0

7.7

8.0 8.0

7.7

8.3 8.7

8.1

ARCADIA

8.0

8.0

63.3

93.0

56.7

7.3

7.7 8.3

8.3

8.3 8.3

8.1

BA 81-058

8.0

8.0

70.0

89.7

66.7

7.3

7.7 8.3

8.3

8.3

8.7

8.1

BA 82-288

8.0

8.0

70.0

99.0

60.0

7.7

8.0 8.3

8.3

8.3

8.0

8.1

BA 83-113

8.0

7.7

56.7

99.0

50.0

7.0

7.7 9.0

8.0

8.3

8.7

8.1

BAR PP 0573

8.0

8.0

70.0

99.0

63.3

7.7

8.0 7.3

8.0

8.7 8.7

8.1

3

BLACKSTONE

8.3

8.3

70.0

96.0

63.3

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.7

8.3

8.3

8.1

BOOMERANG

8.3

8.3

63.3

93.0

56.7

7.0

7.7 8.7

8.7

8.0 8.3

8.1

J-1838

8.0

8.0

66.7

63.0

56.7

7.3

7.3 8.3

8.7

8.7 8.3

8.1

J-2695

8.7

8.7

66.7

90.0

56.7

7.7

7.7 8.3

8.3

8.0 8.3

8.1

LANGARA

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

63.3

8.0

8.0 8.0

7.7

8.3

8.3

8.1

LIBERATOR

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

63.3

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.7

8.3

8.3

8.1

PST-1BMY

8.0

8.0

70.0

96.0

66.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

8.0

8.3

8.7

8.1

PST-731

8.3

8.0

66.7

96.0

56.7

7.7

8.0 8.3

8.3

8.3

8.0

8.1

QUANTUM LEAP

8.3

8.0

63.3

93.0

50.0

7.3

7.0 8.7

8.7

8.3

8.3

8.1

RITA

8.3

8.0

76.7

90.0

70.0

6.7

8.3 8.0

8.7

8.3

8.3

8.1

A96-427

7.7

8.0

66.7

96.0

60.0

7.3

8.0 7.3

8.0

8.7 8.7

8.0

IMPACT

8.0

8.3

73.3

96.0

63.3

7.7

7.7 8.0

8.7

7.7 8.3

8.0

NUGLADE

8.0

8.3

73.3

86.3

56.7

8.3

8.0 8.0

8.3

8.0 7.3

8.0

PST-161

8.0

8.0

63.3

96.0

53.3

7.3

7.7 8.0

8.7

8.0 8.3

8.0

SI A96-386

8.0

8.0

66.7

90.0

53.3

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.7

8.0 8.3

8.0

99AN-53

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

66.7

7.7

8.3 7.7

7.7

8.0 8.0

7.9

A97-1567

8.0

8.0

76.7

96.0

66.7

8.0

8.0 8.0

8.0

7.7 8.0

7.9

A98-183

8.0

8.0

66.7

86.7

50.0

7.7

7.7 7.7

7.7

8.0 8.7

7.9

A98-881

7.3

8.0

70.0

96.0

56.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.7

8.3 8.0

7.9

BEDAZZLED

7.3

8.0

60.0

96.0

56.7

6.7

7.3 8.3

8.3

8.3

8.3

7.9

BLUE RIDGE (A97-1449)

8.0

7.7

73.3

89.7

60.0

8.0

8.0 7.7

8.3

8.0 7.7

7.9

CABERNET

8.0

8.0

73.3

96.0

60.0

8.3

8.0 7.3

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.9

J-1513

8.7

9.0

70.0

93.0

50.0

7.7

7.7 8.3

8.0

8.0 7.7

7.9

J-1655

8.3

8.0

63.3

89.7

56.7

7.3

7.7 7.7

8.3

8.3

8.3

7.9

J-2885

8.0

8.0

66.7

86.3

50.0

7.7

7.7 8.7

8.0

8.0 7.7

7.9

MALLARD (A97-1439)

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

63.3

7.3

7.7 8.7

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.9

MONTE CARLO (A96-402)

8.0

8.0

66.7

93.0

60.0

7.3

7.3 8.7

8.0

8.0 8.0

7.9

PICK 113-3

8.7

8.0

70.0

96.0

60.0

7.3

8.0 8.3

7.3

8.3

8.3

7.9

TOTAL ECLIPSE

8.0

8.3

70.0

92.7

56.7

8.0

7.7 7.7

8.0

8.3 8.0

7.9

A93-200

7.3

8.0

70.0

93.0

60.0

8.0

7.7 7.7

7.7

7.7 8.0

7.8

A97-1715

8.0

8.3

70.0

86.7

63.3

8.0

8.7 7.3

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.8

A98-139

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

66.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.3

8.0 8.3

7.8

A98-365

8.0

8.0

56.7

93.0

46.7

7.0

7.3 9.0

8.3

7.7 7.3

7.8

AWARD

8.3

8.3

63.3

93.0

56.7

7.3

7.3 8.3

8.0

7.7 8.0

7.8

B3-171

8.0

8.0

66.7

92.7

56.7

7.7

7.7 8.7

8.0

7.0 8.0

7.8

B5-144

8.0

8.0

60.0

89.7

50.0

7.0

7.7 8.3

7.7

7.7 8.3

7.8

BA 00-6001

8.3

8.0

56,7

96.0

46.7

6.7

7.7 8.7

8.0

8.0 7.7

7.8

BH 00-6003

8.0

7.3

60.0

96.0

46.7

6.7

7.3 8.7

8.3

8.0 8.0

7.8

BODACIOUS

8.0

8.0

60.0

86.7

50.0

7.0

8.0 8.0

8.0

7.7 8.0

7.8

BOUTIQUE

8.3

8.0

66.7

96.0

63.3

7.0

7.3 8.7

7.3

8.3

7.8

4

8.0

BROOKLAWN

7.3

8.0

66.7

89.7

53.3

7.7

8.3 8.0

7.3

7.3

8.0

7.8

CHAMPAGNE

7.0

7.7

66.7

93.0

56.7

8.0

8.0 8.3

7.3

7.3

7.7

7.8

EVEREST

8.0

8.3

66.7

96.0

53.3

7.7

7.3 6.7

8.3

8.3

8.7

7.8

FREEDOM II

8.3

8.3

63.3

96.0

53.3

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.7

8.0 8.0

7.8

H94-293

8.0

8.0

70.0

90.0

56.7

8.0

8.0 8.3

7.7

7.3

7.3

7.8

HALLMARK

8.0

8.0

76.7

92.7

70.0

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.7

7.7 7.7

7.8

J-1420

8.3

8.0

56.7

93.0

50.0

6.7

7.3 8.0

8.0

8.3

8.3

7.8

J-1880

8.0

8.0

66.7

96.0

56.7

7.7

7.3 7.0

8.3

8.3

8.3

7.8

ODYSSEY

8.3

8.3

66.7

93.0

56.7

7.7

7.3 8.0

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.8

PICK 453

8.0

8.0

70.0

90.0

63.3

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.7

8.0

8.0

7.8

PST-B5-125

8.0

8.0

70.0

96.0

63.3

7.7

8.0 8.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.8

SERENE

7.7

8.0

73.3

93.0

70.0

8.3

8.0 7.3

7.7

7.0

8.3

7.8

A98-296

8.0

8.0

70.0

86.7

66.7

7.3

7.7 8.3

8.0

7.7 7.3

7.7

ABBEY

7.7

8.0

66.7

89.3

63.3

7.3

7.7 8.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

B3-185

8.0

8.0

63.3

86.7

53.3

7.3

7.3 8.7

7.7

7.7

7.3

7.7

HV 140

8.0

8.0

70.0

93.0

63.3

7.7

7.7 8.0

7.7

7.7 7.7

7.7

J-1515

8.3

8.0

66.7

90.0

53.3

7.3

7.7 6.7

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.7

J-1648

8.0

8.0

73.3

92.7

56.7

7.3

7.3 7.3

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.7

MISTY

7.7

8.0

66.7

93.0

63.3

7.3

7.7 7.7

8.0

7.3

8.3

7.7

PICK 417

8.0

7.7

63.3

93.0

53.3

7.3

8.0 8.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

PICK-232

8.0

8.0

63.3

90.0

60.0

7.3

7.7 7.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.7

PST-108-79

8.0

8.0

63.3

93.0

53.3

7.3

8.0 7.0

8.0

7.7

8.0

7.7

PST-1701

7.3

8.3

70.0

90.0

56.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

8.0

7.3

7.3

7.7

PST-B5-89

8.3

8.0

66.7

89.7

53.3

7.3

7.7 8.3

7.0

8.0 8.0

7.7

RAMBO

7.3

8.0

70.0

99.0

60.0

7.7

7.7 8.0

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.7

SHAMROCK

7.0

8.0

63.3

93.0

56.7

7.3

7.3 7.3

7.7

8.0 8.3

7.7

SONOMA

8.0

8.0

63.3

89.7

53.3

7.0

7.3 8.0

8.0

8.0 8.0

7.7

WILDWOOD

8.0

8.3

73.3

96.0

70.0

7.7

8.0 7.0

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.7

BARZAN

7.0

8.0

60.0

96.0

43.3

7.0

7.3 7.7

8.0

7.3

8.0

7.6

COVENTRY

7.3

8.0

66.7

96.0

60.0

7.3

8.0 7.0

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.6

EVERGLADE

8.0

8.0

66.7

90.0

56.7

7.0

7.3 7.0

8.0

8.0

8.0

7.6

FAIRFAX

7.7

8.0

70.0

93.0

53.3

7.7

7.7 7.7

7.7

7.7 7.3

7.6

HV 238

8.0

7.3

70.0

96.0

53.3

8.0

7.7 7.7

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.6

MARQUIS

8.0

8.0

63.3

90.0

60.0

7.0

7.3 8.3

8.0

7.0 7.7

7.6

MOONLIGHT

8.0

8.0

70.0

90.0

60.0

7.0

7.3 8.0

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.6

PP H 7832

8.3

8.0

60.0

93.0

50.0

7.3

7.7 7.3

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.6

PP H 7907

8.0

8.0

63.3

90.0

53.3

7.3

7.7 8.0

8.0

7.0

7.3

7.6

PRINCETON 105

8.0

8.0

70.0

86.7

60.0

7.7

7.7 6.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.6

PRO SEEDS - 453

8.0

8.0

66.7

90.0

53.3

7.3

7.7 7.3

7.7

7.3

8.0

7.6

PST-1804

7.3

8.0

66.7

93.0

63.3

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.0

8.0 7.7

7.6

5

PST-604

8.0

8.3

66.7

86.7

60.0

7.3

7.7 7.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

7.6

SRX 26351

8.0

8.7

70.0

93.0

56.7

7.7

7.3 7.7

8.3

7.3

7.3

7.6

WELLINGTON

7.3

9.0

73.3

99.0

60.0

8.3

8.0 7.7

7.3

7.0

7.0

7.6

A96-739

8.0

8.3

70.0

90.0

60.0

8.0

8.0 7.7

6.7

7.3

7.3

7.5

A97-1330

8.0

8.3

70.0

93.0

66.7

7.3

7.3 8.0

7.7

7.3

7.3

7.5

A97-857

8.0

8.7

66.7

96.0

56.7

7.7

7.3 6.7

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.5

A98-407

8.0

8.0

53.3

80.0

43.3

6.3

7.7 8.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.5

B5-43

8.0

8.0

63.3

93.0

56.7

6.7

7.3 7.3

8.0

7.3

8.3

7.5

BAR PP 0468

7.7

8.0

60.0

90.0

53.3

6.7

7.0 9.0

8.0

7.0 7.3

7.5

BARIRIS

8.0

8.0

73.3

93.0

60.0

7.7

8.0 6.3

7.7

7.3

8.0

7.5

BARON

7.7

8.0

66.7

86.3

60.0

7.0

7.0 8.3

8.0

7.3

7.3

7.5

BARTITIA

8.0

8.0

73.3

90.0

66.7

7.7

7.7 7.3

7.7

7.3

7.3

7.5

BORDEAUX

8.0

8.0

66.7

89.7

53.3

7.3

7.0 8.7

7.7

7.3

7.0

7.5

ENVICTA

7.7

8.0

70.0

86.7

66.7

7.3

8.0 7.7

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.5

JEWEL

7.7

8.0

70.0

86.3

56.7

7.7

8.0 7.0

7.7

7.3

7.3

7.5

PST-1QG-27

8.0

8.0

73.3

89.7

66.7

7.7

7.3 8.0

7.0

7.7

7.3

7.5

PST-H5-35

8.0

8.0

70.0

90.0

60.0

7.3

7.3 7.0

7.7

8.0 7.7

7.5

PST-H6-150

7.7

8.0

63.3

90.0

53.3

7.3

7.7 7.7

7.3

7.3

7.7

7.5

PST-YORK HARBOR 4

8.3

8.0

70.0

90.0

63.3

7.7

8.3 6.3

7.3

7.7 7.7

7.5

SRX 2394

8.0

8.0

66.7

89.7

60.0

7.0

7.3 7.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.5

A98-1028

7.3

8.0

66.7

90.0

50.0

7.7

7.7 7.3

6.7

7.7

7.3

7.4

ALPINE

8.0

8.0

60.0

90.0

53.3

6.7

7.7 7.7

7.7

7.7

7.0

7.4

BRILLIANT

7.7

8.0

66.7

83.0

60.0

7.3

8.0 8.0

6.7

7.0 7.3

7.4

CHATEAU

8.0

7.3

66.7

89.7

46.7

7.3

8.0 6.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.4

CHELSEA

7.7

8.0

66.7

86.7

56.7

7.7

8.0 7.3

7.7

7.0

6.7

7.4

CHICAGO II

8.3

8.0

60.0

86.7

53.3

7.0

7.7 7.7

7.3

7.3

7.7

7.4

EAGLETON

7.0

8.0

73.3

93.0

66.7

8.0

7.7 7.0

7.0

7.3

7.3

7.4

GOLDRUSH

8.0

8.0

70.0

86.7

63.3

7.3

7.0 7.7

8.0

7.3

7.3

7.4

JEFFERSON

7.3

8.3

70.0

93.0

63.3

7.7

7.7 7.0

7.0

7.3

7.7

7.4

LIMOUSINE

8.0

8.0

80.0

86.7

63.3

8.3

8.0 6.3

7.7

7.0 7.3

7.4

PP H 6370

8.0

8.0

63.3

86.7

53.3

7.3

7.7 7.3

7.7

7.3

7.3

7.4

PST-222

8.0

7.7

56.7

83.3

50.0

6.0

7.0 8.3

8.0

7.7

7.3

7.4

PST-B3-170

8.0

8.0

66.7

90.0

56.7

7.0

7.3 8.0

7.3

7.7

7.3

7.4

PST-B4-246

8.0

8.0

63.3

83.0

53.3

7.0

7.7 7.3

7.3

7.3

7.7

7.4

RAVEN

7.7

7.7

73.3

86.7

70.0

7.7

7.7 7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.4

ROYALE (A97-1336)

7.7

8.0

63.3

90.0

60.0

7.0

7.3 7.7

8.0

7.3

7.3

7.4

SRX 2114

8.0

8.3

70.0

90.0

60.0

7.3

7.7 7.0

7.0

8.0 7.7

7.4

A98-304

8.0

8.3

66.7

83.3

60.0

7.7

7.7 7.3

7.3

7.0

7.0

7.3

B5-45

7.7

8.0

56.7

86.3

46.7

6.7

7.3 7.0

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.3

BAR PP 0471

8.0

8.0

63.3

83.0

53.3

7.3

7.3 7.7

7.0

7.0 7.7

7.3

6

BARONIE

7.0

7.7

70.0

89.7

73.3

7.0

7.3 7.3

7.0

7.7 7.3

7.3

DLF 76-9036

7.7

8.0

63.3

90.0

60.0

7.3

7.3 7.3

7.7

7.0 7.0

7.3

IB7-308

8.3

8.0

53.3

86.7

40.0

6.7

7.7 7.7

7.0

7.3 7.7

7.3

JULIA

8.0

8.0

66.7

89.7

63.3

7.7

8.3 6.7

7.0

7.0 7.3

7.3

KENBLUE

7.3

9.0

76.7

93.0

70.0

8.3

7.7 7.7

6.7

7.0 6.7

7.3

LILY

7.7

8.0

70.0

96.0

66.7

7.0

7.3 6.7

7.7

7.3 7.7

7.3

LIMERICK

7.7

8.3

70.0

86.7

60.0

8.0

8.0 7.0

7.0

7.0 6.7

7.3

SRX OG245

7.7

8.7

70.0

80.0

56.7

8.0

7.3 8.0

6.7

7.0 7.0

7.3

UNIQUE

7.3

8.0

63.3

90.0

60.0

7.0

6.7 7.7

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.3

A98-1275

8.0

8.0

63.3

90.0

46.7

6.7

7.3 6.7

7.3

7.7 7.3

7.2

APOLLO

7.7

8.7

66.7

83.3

66.7

7.3

7.0 7.3

7.3

7.0 7.0

7.2

BARITONE

8.0

8.0

70.0

53.3

66.7

7.7

8.3 6.3

6.7

7.0 7.3

7.2

DLF 76-9037

7.7

8.0

66.7

86.7

63.3

7.0

7.0 7.7

7.3

7.0 7.3

7.2

H92-203

7.7

8.3

63.3

90.0

50.0

7.3

7.0 7.7

7.3

7.0 7.0

7.2

NA-K991

8.0

8.0

63.3

76.7

46.7

7.3

8.0 7.3

6.7

7.0 7.0

7.2

NORTH STAR

7.7

8.0

63.3

86.3

60.0

6.3

6.7 7.3

7.7

7.7 7.3

7.2

PP H 7929

8.0

8.0

63.3

86.7

53.3

6.7

7.0 7.3

7.3

7.3 7.3

7.2

A96-451

8.0

8.0

63.3

80.0

56.7

7.0

7.3 7.7

7.0

6.3

7.3

7.1

DLF 76-9032

8.0

8.0

63.3

83.3

53.3

6.7

7.0 8.0

7.7

7.0 6.3

7.1

SRX 27921

8.3

8.3

63.3

80.0

53.3

7.0

7.3 7.0

7.0

7.0 7.0

7.1

WASHINGTON

7.0

9.0

80.0

96.0

76.7

8.3

8.0 5.7

6.3

7.0 7.0

7.1

BH 00-6002

7.0

7.7

66.7

83.3

56.7

7.7

7.3 6.3

7.0

6.7 7.0

7.0

B4-128A

7.3

8.0

66.7

80.0

60.0

7.0

7.0 7.3

7.3

6.7 6.3

6.9

A96-742

7.0

8.7

56.7

80.0

46.7

7.0

7.3 7.0

6.0

6.7 7.0

6.8

BLUE KNIGHT

8.3

8.0

63.3

83.3

53.3

6.7

7.7 5.3

7.0

6.7 7.7

6.8

GO-9LM9

6.7

9.0

73.3

80.0

66.7

8.3

7.0 5.3

6.7

7.0 6.7

6.8

PP H 6366

8.0

8.0

66.7

86.3

56.7

6.7

7.3 7.3

6.3

7.0 6.3

6.8

BA 84-140

8.7

7.7

70.0

73.3

56.7

7.0

7.3 7.7

5.3

6.3

6.3

6.7

DLF 76-9034

7.0

7.7

60.0

83.3

50.0

6.7

7.0 7.0

5.7

6.7 7.0

6.7

NA-K992

8.0

8.3

76.7

73.3

56.7

8.0

8.7 5.7

6.3

5.7 5.7

6.7

JULIUS

8.0

8.0

66.7

83.3

56.7

6.7

7.3 6.7

6.3

6.3 6.0

6.6

CVB-20631

8.0

8.0

53.3

73.3

46.7

5.3

7.0 6.3

6.3

7.0 6.3

6.4

LSD (0.05)

0.6

0.6

16.6

19.8

18.9

2.1

1.9 2.2

1.3

1.1

0.8

7

1.2

Fairway Height Bluegrass Trial
N ick C hristians an dD eyin g L i
The fairway height Kentucky bluegrass trial was established in Sept. 1999 to evaluate a number of the new ‘low mow’
bluegrasses at a 0.5 inch mowing height under non-irrigated conditions. The area receives 3 lbs. N/1000 ft2/year and is treated
with preemergence herbicides in the spring and broadleaf weed controls in the fall. No fungicides were used on the area.
Table 1. Visual quality1 for cultivars in the 2001 non-irrigated fairway high Kentucky bluegrass cultivar trial.
Visual quality
Cultivar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Total Eclipse

3.3

5.0

6.7

3.0

4.0

5.3

6.7

Mean
6.8
6.5

Sure Shot Mix2

4.0

4.7

6.3

3.0

4.0

5.3

6.3

SodGrower II Mix3

4.3

4.3

5.7

3.0

4.0

5.0

5.7

Rugby II

3.3

4.7

5.7

3.0

3.3

5.0

6.0

Nuglade

4.0

4.7

6.3

3.3

3.7

5.3

6.7

5.6

6.0
5.9

Rambo

4.0

4.0

6.0

3.0

4.0

4.7

5.7

5.6

Midnight

4.3

5.0

5.3

3.7

4.7

6.0

7.0

5.4

Park

3.7

3.3

5.0

3.3

5.3

5.0

5.3

5.3

Nublue

3.7

3.7

5.3

3.3

4.7

5.0

4.7

4.8

Kenblue

5.3

3.7

5.0

3.0

5.3

5.3

5.3

4.5

Limosine

4.7

4.3

5.7

3.0

3.0

4.3

4.3

4.2

Bluemoon

4.3

4.3

6.0

3.3

4.0

4.7

5.7

4.2

Award

3.3

4.3

5.3

3.0

4.0

5.3

6.3

4.1

Bluechip

3.3

3.0

6.0

3.3

4.3

5.3

5.3

4.0

Absolute

4.3

5.0

6.3

3.3

4.3

5.3

6.3

3.9

NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
1.0
NS
LSD o.o5
1 Visual quality was assessed using a scale of 9 to 1 with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst turf quality.
2 Includes Nuglade, Bluemoon, Award, Rugby II, and Rambo
3 Includes Bluechip, Nustar, Rambo, and Rugby II

8

0.5

Perennial Ryegrass Studies
R. A. St. John an d N. E. C hristians
This was the second year of the trial that began in the fall of 1999 with the establishment of 134 cultivars of perennial ryegrass at
the Iowa State University Horticulture Research Station. The study was established on an irrigated area that was maintained at a
2-inch mowing height and fertilized with 3 to 4 lb N/1000 ft2/yr. The area received herbicide treatments as required.
Cultivars were evaluated for turf quality May through October of 2001. Visual quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 =
best, 6 = lowest acceptabe, and 1 = worst quality. The values listed under each month in Table 1 are the averages of ratings made
on three replicated plots for the three studies. Yearly means of data from each month are listed in the last column. The cultivars
are listed in descending order of average quality. The last row list the LSD (least significant difference), which is a statistical
measurement of how widely the means must vary before they are considered to be different from one another.
Data for genetic color (Gencol), spring greenup (Gnup), and leaf texture (Ltex) also are included. The cultivars were rated for
genetic color in July and the values were made using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = dark and 1 = light green. Spring greenup data were
taken in April and were estimated using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = green and 1 = dormant turf. Leaf texture was rated on the same
scale with 9=fmest texture.
Table 1. The 2001 visual quality and other ratings for the 1999 National Perennial Ryegrass Study
Quality
CULTIVAR

GENCOL GNUP

LTEX

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

MEAN

9 to 1; 9 = high rating
ALL STAR2 (CIS-PR-78)

8.0

5.7

8.0

5.0

7.7

8.3

9.0

8.7

8.0

7.8

PINNACLE II (BAR 9 B2)

9.0

6.0

8.3

5.0

8.7

7.7

9.0

8.7

8.0

7.8

APR 1232

7.7

5.0

8.0

5.3

8.7

7.7

8.0

8.0

8.0

7.6

ROBERTS-627

8.0

6.0

8.0

5.3

8.0

8.3

8.3

8.0

7.3

7.6

WILMINGTON

8.7

5.3

8.0

5.0

8.3

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.7

7.6

MONTEREY II (JR-187)

7.7

5.0

8.0

5.0

8.3

7.7

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.5

ALLSPORT

7.0

4.7

8.0

5.3

8.0

7.0

8.0

8.0

8.0

7.4

AMAZING (B l)

8.3

5.7

8.0

5.0

8.3

7.7

7.7

8.3

7.3

7.4

BRIGHTSTAR SLT (PST-2A6B)

7.0

5.3

8.0

5.3

7.3

7.3

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.4

CAS-LP84

8.0

5.0

8.0

4.3

8.0

7.3

8.3

8.3

8.0

7.4

CUTTER II (PICK RC2)

8.3

5.7

8.3

5.7

8.7

7.7

8.0

7.3

7.0

7.4

EXACTA

8.0

6.0

8.0

5.3

8.3

7.3

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.4

GATOR 3 (CIS-PR-85)

8.3

5.7

8.0

5.3

7.3

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.7

7.4

MB 414 (ABT-99-4.903)

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.7

8.3

7.0

8.3

8.7

7.3

7.4

PENNANT II

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.7

8.3

7.0

8.3

8.0

8.0

7.4

PICK MDR

9.0

6.0

8.0

5.0

8.7

7.0

8.3

8.0

7.7

7.4

PROMISE

8.3

5.3

8.0

5.0

8.0

7.7

7.7

8.3

7.7

7.4

PST-2LA

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.3

8.0

8.3

8.0

8.0

8.0

7.4

R8000

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.3

8.0

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.4

RADIANT

8.7

6.3

8.0

5.0

8.3

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.3

7.4

ABT-99-4.560

8.0

5.3

8.3

4.7

7.7

7.3

8.3

8.3

7.7

7.3

ABT-99-4.834

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.3

7.3

8.0

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.3

BARLENNIUM

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.7

7.3

7.3

CABO (CIS-PR-80)

8.7

5.7

8.0

4.3

8.3

7.3

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.3

CHARISMATIC (LTP 98-501)

8.3

5.7

8.3

4.7

8.7

7.3

7.3

8.3

7.7

7.3

CIS-PR-75

8.3

5.0

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.3

7.3

KOKOMO (CIS-PR-69)

8.3

5.7

8.7

4.7

8.3

7.3

8.0

7.7

7.7

7.3

9

LTP-ME

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.3

8.0

7.7

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.3

MANHATTAN (PST-2CRL)

8.0

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.3

7.7

8.3

8.0

8.0

7.3

PARADIGM (APR 1236)

8.3

5.3

8.0

5.0

8.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

8.0

7.3

PARAGON

7.3

5.3

8.0

4.3

8.3

7.3

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.3

PICK PR QH-97

8.0

5.7

8.3

5.7

8.0

6.7

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.3

PIZZAZZ

8.3

5.3

8.0

4.3

7.3

7.0

9.0

8.7

7.7

7.3

PST-2CRR

8.0

6.0

8.0

5.7

8.0

6.3

8.3

8.0

7.7

7.3

SRX 4801

7.3

5.0

8.3

4.3

8.0

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.3

7.3

ABT-99-4.464

7.0

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.7

6.7

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.2

ABT-99-4.815

7.0

5.0

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.7

7.2

ABT-99-4.965

8.7

4.7

8.0

3.7

7.7

7.7

8.3

8.3

7.3

7.2

CATALINA

7.3

5.0

8.0

4.3

7.3

7.3

7.7

8.7

7.7

7.2

CHARGER II

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

8.0

7.3

7.2

DIVINE

7.7

5.3

8.0

4.3

8.3

7.0

8.0

7.7

7.7

7.2

DLF-LDD

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.3

7.2

MEPY

7.3

5.7

8.0

5.0

7.3

7.3

7.7

8.3

7.7

7.2

MP88

8.0

5.0

8.0

4.0

7.3

7.3

8.0

8.7

8.0

7.2

PACESETTER (6011)

8.0

4.0

8.0

4.3

8.0

7.7

7.3

8.3

7.7

7.2

PANTHER

7.0

4.7

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.3

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.2

PROSPORT (AG-P981)

7.7

4.7

8.7

4.0

7.7

7.7

8.0

8.0

7.7

7.2

PST-2RT

7.7

5.3

8.0

4.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.2

SRX 4RHT

8.3

5.7

8.0

4.7

8.3

7.0

8.0

8.0

7.3

7.2

UT-1000 (ABT-99-4.709)

7.7

5.0

8.0

4.0

7.3

7.7

8.3

8.0

8.0

7.2

ABT-99-4.115

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.0

7.7

7.0

7.7

8.3

7.7

7.1

ABT-99-4.721

8.0

5.7

8.0

4.3

8.0

7.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.1

8.0

8.0

7.3

7.1

7.7

7.7

7.3

7.1

APPLAUD (PENNINGTON-11301)

8.0

4.3

8.3

3.7

7.3

8.0

APR 1233

7.3

4.3

8.0

3.7

8.0

8.0

ASCEND

9.0

5.3

8.0

4.0

8.3

6.7

8.0

7.7

8.0

7.1

CALYPSO II

7.3

5.3

8.0

4.7

8.3

6.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.1

7.7

7.1

CHURCHILL

8.3

5.0

8.0

3.3

8.0

7.7

7.7

8.0

CIS-PR-84

8.0

4.0

8.0

3.3

7.3

7.3

8.3

8.3 ' 7.7

7.1

EPD

7.0

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.3

7.1

JET

8.0

4.7

8.0

3.7

7.7

7.0

8.0

8.3

8.0

7.1

MAJESTY

7.7

4.3

8.3

4.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.1

MANHATTAN 3

7.3

4.3

8.0

4.0

8.0

7.3

8.0

7.3

7.7

7.1

MB 411 (ABT-99-4.753)

8.0

4.7

8.0

3.7

8.0

6.3

8.0

8.3

8.3

7.1

NEXUS

8.7

4.3

8.3

3.7

7.7

8.0

8.3

8.0

7.0

7.1

PHANTOM

8.3

4.3

8.0

3.7

8.0

7.3

7.7

8.3

7.7

7.1

PICK PRNGS

7.7

4.7

8.0

4.3

8.0

6.7

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.1

PST-2BR

8.3

4.0

8.0

3.3

7.0

8.3

8.0

8.3

7.7

7.1

4.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

8.3

7.3

7.1

6.7

7.7

8.3

8.0

7.1

PST-2SBE

7.7

4.3

8.0

SALINAS (PST-2SLX)

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.3

7.3

A5C (ABT-99-4.960)

8.0

4.3

8.0

4.3

7.3

8.0

7.7

8.0

6.7

7.0

ABT-99-4.339

8.0

4.7

8.0

5.3

8.0

7.0

8.0

5.7

8.0

7.0

ADMIRE (JR-151)

7.7

4.3

8.0

4.3

8.3

8.0

7.0

7.3

7.0

7.0

APR 1237

7.3

4.0

8.0

4.7

8.0

6.3

7.7

8.0

7.3

7.0

10

BRIGHTSTAR II

7.3

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.3

7.3

MB 412 (ABT-99-4.461)

8.7

4.7

8.0

3.3

7.3

8.0

7.7

MP103

7.5

5.5

8.0

4.0

7.5

6.5

8.0

SEVILLE II

8.0

4.0

8.0

3.7

7.7

7.0

8.0

SKYHAWK

7.7

4.3

8.0

4.0

7.3

7.7

7.7

STELLAR (CIS-PR-72)

8.0

4.7

8.0

3.3

7.3

7.7

8.0

8.0

7.7

7.0

AFFIRMED

7.7

5.0

8.0

4.3

8.3

6.3

7.3

8.0

7.3

6.9

7.7

8.0

7.7

7.0

8.3

7.3

7.0

8.0

8.0

7.0

8.0

7.7

7.0

7.7

7.7

7.0

FIESTA 3

8.0

3.3

8.0

3.7

8.0

6.7

8.0

8.0

7.3

6.9

GALAXY (JR-128)

7.3

4.0

8.0

4.3

7.3

6.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

6.9

LPR 98-143

7.3

4.7

8.0

4.3

8.3

7.0

7.0

7.7

7.3

6.9

MB 410 (ABT-99-4.629)

8.3

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.7

6.3

8.0

8.3

7.3

6.9

MP107

8.0

4.7

8.0

3.0

7.7

7.0

7.7

8.3

8.0

6.9

PICK PR B-97

8.0

5.0

8.0

3.7

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

7.3

6.9

PLEASURE XL

7.0

4.0

8.0

3.7

7.3

6.7

8.0

8.3

7.3

6.9

PST-2JH

7.0

4.0

8.3

3.7

7.3

7.7

7.7

8.0

7.3

6.9

PST-2L96

8.0

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.3

8.0

7.3

7.7

7.3

6.9

SRX4120

7.7

5.0

7.7

5.0

7.7

6.3

7.3

7.7

7.7

6.9

SUPERSTAR (EP57)

7.7

4.7

8.0

3.3

8.0

6.3

7.7

8.3

7.7

6.9

ABT-99-4.600

7.0

3.7

8.0

3.0

7.3

7.0

8.0

7.3

8.0

6.8

ABT-99-4.625

8.0

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.0

8.3

7.3

7.7

6.7

6.8

ABT-99-4.724

7.0

4.3

8.0

4.3

7.3

6.7

8.0

7.7

7.0

6.8

ELFKIN

7.0

4.3

8.3

4.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

7.7

7.3

6.8

MB 413 (ABT-99-4.633)

8.3

5.0

8.0

3.3

7.3

6.7

8.0

8.0

7.3

6.8

MDP

8.0

5.3

8.0

4.0

7.0

7.0

7.3

8.0

7.3

6.8

NJ-6401

8.0

3.7

8.0

3.0

8.0

6.3

8.7

7.3

7.3

6.8

PROWLER (APR 777)

7.0

4.0

8.0

4.3

7.3

7.0

7.3

7.7

7.3

6.8

PST-CATS

8.0

4.0

8.0

2.3

7.3

6.3

8.3

8.3

8.0

6.8

RACER

8.0

4.7

8.0

4.0

7.7

6.3

8.0

7.3

7.3

6.8

SR 4500

7.3

4.7

8.0

4.3

7.3

7.0

7.3

7.3

7.3

6.8

SRX 4820

8.0

4.3

8.3

4.0

7.7

6.7

7.7

8.0

7.0

6.8

WVPB-R-82

6.0

4.3

8.3

4.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

7.7

7.0

6.8

APR 776

7.0

4.3

8.3

3.7

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.3

6.7

KOOS R-71

6.3

4.0

8.0

4.0

7.0

7.0

7.0

7.3

7.7

6.7

PALMER III

7.3

4.0

8.0

3.3

7.7

7.0

7.3

7.7

7.3

6.7

PASSPORT

7.0

4.0

8.0

4.7

7.3

6.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

6.7

PST-2M4

8.0

3.0

8.0

2.7

7.7

7.3

8.0

7.7

7.0

6.7

APR 1231

7.3

3.7

8.0

3.7

7.7

5.7

7.7

7.3

7.7

6.6

APR 1235

8.0

4.0

7.7

3.3

8.0

7.0

7.0

7.3

6.7

6.6

CATHEDRAL II

8.0

4.3

8.3

4.0

7.7

6.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

6.6

EDGE

6.7

4.0

7.7

3.3

7.7

7.3

6.3

7.0

7.7

6.6

EP53

7.7

4.3

8.0

3.0

7.0

6.7

7.7

8.0

7.0

6.6

EXTREME (JR-317)

7.0

3.7

8.0

3.3

7.3

7.0

7.0

7.7

7.3

6.6

HEADSTART

7.3

4.3

8.0

3.7

7.7

7.0

6.7

7.3

7.0

6.6

LINE DRIVE

8.0

4.3

8.0

3.3

7.3

7.3

7.0

7.3

7.3

6.6

PICK EX2

6.7

4.3

8.0

4.3

7.7

6.3

6.7

7.7

7.0

6.6

PREMIER

6.7

3.0

8.0

3.7

7.0

7.0

7.0

7.7

7.3

6.6

11

PREMIER II

7.7

3.7

SECRETARIAT

7.0

APR 1234

7.3

DP LP-1
LPR 98-144
PICK PR 1-94

8.3

BUCCANEER

6.0

BY-100
WVPB-R-84

8.0

3.3

6.7

7.3

7.7

7.3

6.6

4.0

8.0

4.7

3.0

7.7

3.0

7.3

6.3

6.7

7.0

7.7

6.6

7.7

6.7

7.3

7.0

7.0

6.4

6.3

4.7

7.3

3.7

7.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

7.0

7.0

6.7

7.0

7.3

6.4

7.0

6.0

7.3

7.3

7.0

6.4

4.3

8.3

3.3

7.3

3.7

8.0

3.7

7.3

6.3

7.3

7.7

6.7

6.4

6.3

6.3

7.0

7.3

6.3

6.7

4.0

8.0

4.0

7.3

5.7

6.7

7.0

7.0

6.3

6.3

3.3

8.0

3.0

7.3

6.7

6.0

7.3

7.3

6.3

7.3

DP 17-9069

6.3

4.0

8.3

3.3

7.0

6.7

6.0

7.0

7.3

6.2

YATSUGREEN

6.3

3.7

7.3

3.0

7.3

7.3

6.0

7.0

6.3

6.2

AFFINITY

7.0

3.3

8.0

3.0

7.3

5.3

6.7

7.0

6.7

6.0

DP 17-9391

6.7

3.0

7.7

2.7

7.0

6.3

5.7

7.3

6.3

5.9

DP 17-9496

6.0

3.0

6.7

2.0

6.3

6.7

5.0

6.3

6.0

5.4

LINN

6.0

2.3

7.0

1.7

5.3

5.7

4.3

6.3

5.7

4.8

LSD (0.05)

1.1

1.9

0.6

3.8

3.1

2.5

1.1

1.5

1.7

1.0

12

National Tall Fescue Cultivar Evaluation
Shui-zhang F ei and Rodney S
.At. John
This tall fescue trial was established in September, 2001 and is part of the National Turfgrass Evaluation Program(NTEP).
Similar trials are being conducted at many different locations around the US. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the regional
adaptation of 163 tall fescue cultivars under non-irrigated conditions with 2 lbs N /1000 ft2 per year and a mowing height of 2.53.5”.
This is the first year of the trial and the only data that is available at this time is the percentage cover which was taken one month
after sowing the seeds.
Entry

Name

Ground Cover %

1

Ky-31 E

40.0

2

Elisa

35.0

Entry

Name

Ground Cover %

37

Kitty Hawk 2000

43.3

38

ATF 802

35.0

3

RB2-01

46.7

39

Rendition

35.0

4

F-4

50.0

40

Titan Ltd.

43.3

5

LTP-7801

48.3

41

Biltmore

40.0

6

18

55.0

42

NA-TDD

38.3

7

R-4

46.7

43

Bravo

40.0

8

Roberts-LIZ

38.3

44

Lancer E

55.0

9

Pick-OD3-01

46.7

45

OD-4

35.0

10

Plantation

45.0

46

NJ-4

40.0

11

Signia

38.3

47

Stetson

41.7

12

Rebel Exeda

41.7

48

T991

30.0

13

Prospect

41.7

49

Laramie

38.3

14

Rebel Sentry

36.7

50

Mustung 3

38.3

15

Finesse II

46.7

51

Dynasty

31.7

16

Millennium

46.7

52

Watchdog

36.7

17

BE-2

35.0

53

CIS-TF-65

38.3

18

Dominion

56.7

54

CIS-TF-64

33.3

19

Focus

45.0

55

CIS-TF-33

38.3

20

2nd Mellennium

46.7

56

CIS-TF-67

41.7

21

JT-99

53.3

57

CIS-TF-60

45.0

22

TF-66

38.3

58

CIS-TF-77

36.7

23

Barlexas

41.7

59

Bingo

41.7

24

Tracer

36.7

60

B-7001

45.0

25

Barrera

35.0

61

DLSD

35.0

26

Barrington

36.7

62

SBM

48.3

27

Barlexas II

46.7

63

ATF-593

46.7

28

Scorpion

45.0

64

Cayenne

40.0

29

MCN-RC

45.0

65

Pick-00-AFA

43.3

30

ATF 706

38.3

66

Pick TF H-97

45.0

31

ATF 702

38.3

67

Roberts SM 4

36.7

32

ATF 707

40.0

68

JTTFF-2000

30.0

33

ATF 806

33.3

69

P-58

36.7

34

ATF 799

35.0

70

BAR Fa 1003

36.7

35

ATF 704

41.7

71

BAR Fa 1005

31.7

36

ATF 586

36.7

72

Jaguar 3

38.3

13

Entry

Name

Ground Cover %

Entry

Name

Ground Cover %

73

Roberts DOL

33.3

117

PST-5TUO

36.7

74

Pick ZMG

41.7

118

BAR Fa 1CR7

33.3

75

PST-5NAS

38.3

119

MA 138

41.7

76

PST-5T1

43.3

120

MA 158

41.7

77

PST-5KU

53.3

121

UT-155

41.7

78

PST-57E

51.7

122

CAS-157

31.7

79

PST-5JM

26.7

123

CAS-MC1

38.3

80

PST-5S12

46.7

124

CAS-ED

38.3

81

PST-5A1

41.7

125

MA 127

41.7

82

PST-5BZ

43.3

126

EA 163

35.0

83

PST-DDL

38.3

127

Grande II

41.7

84

PST-5TR1

40.0

128

SR 8250

53.3

85

PST-578

45.0

129

SR 8600

43.3

86

PST-5K1

36.7

130

SRX 805

51.7

87

PST-5FZD

43.3

131

SRX 8BE4

35.0

88

PST-5LO

41.7

132

Picasso

36.7

89

PST-5ASR

38.3

133

Masterpiece

41.7

90

PST-53T

36.7

134

Rembrandt

33.3

91

Endeavor

43.3

135

Legitimate

48.3

92

Matador

36.7

136

ProSeeds 5301

45.0

93

Olympic Gold

50.0

137

Falcon II

46.7

94

Tar Heel

50.0

138

GO-OD2

35.0

95

Wolfpack

46.7

139

GO-FL3

56.7

96

Tomahawk RT

43.3

140

GO-RD4

40.0

97

Pure Gold

40.0

141

GO-SIU2

43.3

98

JT-6

35.0

142

Karahari

40.0

99

JT-13

40.0

143

UT-RB3

41.7

100

JT-18

31.7

144

Southern Choice II

40.0

101

JT-12

36.7

145

MRF 22

41.7

102

JT-15

23.3

146

MRF 23

35.0

103

JT-9

33.3

147

MRF 24

35.0

104

Quest

50.0

148

MRF 25

48.3

105

K01-8015

35.0

149

MRF 26

36.7

106

Coyote

33.3

150

MRF 27

43.3

107

Wyatt

45.0

151

MRF 28

36.7

108

K01-E03

30.0

152

MRF 29

33.3

109

K01-E09

38.3

153

MRF 210

38.3

110

K01-WAF

48.3

154

MRF 211

45.0

111

01-TFOR3

41.7

155

KOI-8007

50.0

112

01-ORU1

40.0

156

DP50-9082

45.0

113

01-RUTOR2

40.0

157

DP50-9226

41.7

114

BE1

38.3

158

ATF-800

40.0

115

DLF-J210

41.7

159

ATF-803

38.3

116

PST-5BAB

35.0

160

Bonsai

38.3

14

Regional Fine Fescue Cultivar Trial
Nick. E. C hristians an d Rodney A. St. John
This was the fourth year of data from the 1998 Fineleaf Fescue National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) trial. It is being
conducted at many locations around the U.S. The purpose of the trial is to study the regional adaptation of 79 fineleaf fescue
selections. Cultivars are evaluated for quality each month of the growing season through October. The study is conducted in full
sun. Three replications of the 3 x 5 ft (15 ft2) plots were established for each cultivar in October 1998. The trial has been
maintained at a 2-inch mowing height, fertilized with 3.5 lbs N/1000 ft2 during the growing season, and has been irrigated when
needed to prevent drought. Preemergence herbicide was applied once in the spring.
Visual quality was evaluated monthly in 1999 from May through October (Table 1). Quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 with 9
= b e st, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality. The values listed under each month in Table 1 are the averages of visual
quality ratings made on three replicated plots for the three studies. Yearly means of monthly data were taken and are listed in the
last column. The first cultivar received the highest average rating for the entire 1999 season. The cultivars are listed in
descending order of average quality. The last row list the LSD (least significant difference), which is a statistical measurement of
how widely the means must vary before they are considered to be different from one another.
Data for genetic color (Genco), spring greenup (Gm), and leaf texture (Leaf) also are included for the high-maintenance, irrigated
and for the low-maintenance trials. Genetic color was rated using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = dark and 1 = light green. Spring
greenup was estimated using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = green and 1 = dormant turf. Leaf texture was assessed with a 9 to 1 scale
with 9 = fine and 1 = coarse texture.

Table 1. The 2001 visual quality and other turf attribute ratings for cultivars in the 1998 Fineleaf Fescue Cultivar Trial.
Quality
NAME

4001

GENCO

GRN

LEAF

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

MEAN

7.7

5.0

7.7

6.3

5.7

7.7

7.0

6.0

7.3

6.7

PST-4HM

7.3

4.7

7.0

5.0

7.0

7.0

6.3

7.3

7.7

6.7

ABT-HF-3

5.7

5.0

6.3

6.7

6.0

7.0

6.3

7.0

6.7

6.6

SRX 3961

6.7

5.0

8.0

6.0

6.0

7.3

7.0

6.3

7.0

6.6

CHARIOT (ISI FL 12)

6.0

4.3

7.0

5.7

5.7

7.0

6.7

7.0

7.0

6.5

NORDIC (E)

7.0

5.0

7.3

6.3

6.0

7.7

6.7

6.0

6.3

6.5

ABT-HF-2

7.0

5.0

7.3

6.3

6.0

7.0

7.7

5.3

6.0

6.4

ABT-HF-4

5.7

3.3

6.3

5.7

6.0

7.0

7.7

6.0

6.0

6.4

ABT-HF1

6.3

5.7

7.0

6.3

5.7

6.7

7.7

6.0

6.3

6.4

SRX 52961

8.0

3.7

6.3

5.3

7.3

7.3

5.3

6.0

7.0

6.4

PICK FF A-97

6.3

4.0

6.7

5.7

5.7

6.7

6.7

6.7

6.7

6.3

MINOTAUR

6.0

4.7

6.0

5.7

6.0

6.7

7.0

5.7

6.3

6.2

PST-4MB

6.0

3.3

6.0

6.3

6.0

6.7

6.0

6.0

6.3

6.2

SALSA

7.3

4.0

6.7

4.3

6.0

7.0

6.0

7.3

6.3

6.2

CINDY LOU (ISI FRR 7)

7.7

4.7

6.7

6.0

7.0

6.3

5.0

5.3

6.7

6.1

JASPER II

7.7

3.0

7.0

5.3

6.7

6.3

5.7

6.3

6.0

6.1

MB-63

7.0

5.3

6.7

6.0

7.0

6.0

6.0

5.3

6.3

6.1

PST-EFL

8.0

3.3

6.0

4.3

7.0

7.3

6.0

5.3

6.7

6.1

SCALDIS II (AHF 008)

6.0

4.0

7.3

5.3

5.7

6.3

6.7

5.7

6.7

6.1

ABT-CHW-3

7.0

4.7

7.3

5.3

6.7

6.3

6.0

5.7

6.0

6.0

ABT-CR-3

7.7

3.7

6.7

5.7

6.7

6.3

5.3

5.3

6.7

6.0

BIGHORN

6.0

4.0

6.3

6.0

6.3

6.0

6.0

5.7

6.0

6.0

BRIDGEPORT

6.3

5.0

6.7

5.7

6.7

5.3

5.7

6.3

6.3

6.0

15

5.3

6.0

6.0

5.0

5.3

5.9

6.3

6.3

5.9

5.7

6.7

5.9

5.7

6.7

5.9

5.3

6.0

5.9

6.0

6.0

5.9

5.3

6.0

5.9

5.7

5.7

6.7

5.9

6.0

6.3

6.0

5.9

5.7

5.3

5.7

6.3

5.9

6.0

5.3

5.7

5.7

6.7

5.8

6.3

5.0

6.0

6.0

5.8

6.0

5.7

5.8

6.7

5.7

7.3

6.0

6.3

5.0

6.0

4.7

7.7

7.0

6.0

4.3

7.0

5.7

5.0

6.0

6.0

6.3

5.3

5.3

6.7

6.0

7.0

4.7

5.7

6.7

6.0

7.3

5.3

6.7

5.7

6.3

7.7

5.7

5.3

5.7

6.7

7.3

5.7

5.3

6.7

6.3

5.7

6.3

4.7

6.3

6.3

4.7

7.0

5.3

5.3

6.7

5.3

7.3

5.7

7.0

4.7

7.3

5.7

LONGFELLOW II

6.7

BOREAL

7.3

EUREKA II (ISI FL 11)

6.0

HARDTOP (BAR HF 8 FUS)

5.3

4.7

OXFORD

7.0

3.7

PICK FRC A-93

7.3

3.3

QUATRO

6.0

3.7

RELIANT II

6.7

4.0

SHADEMARK

7.0

STONEHENGE (AHF 009)

6.0

TIFFANY

6.3

ABT-CHW-1

7.0

5.3

ABT-CHW-2

6.3

4.3

7.7

5.3

6.0

ABT-CR-2

8.0

3.3

6.3

4.7

6.3

6.3

5.7

AMBASSADOR

6.7

5.0

7.0

4.7

6.3

5.7

6.0

5.7

6.7

5.8

BRITTANY

7.7

5.0

7.0

4.3

7.3

5.0

5.7

6.0

6.7

5.8

CULOMBRA

6.7

4.0

7.3

5.3

6.7

5.7

5.3

5.7

6.0

5.8

SHADOW II

7.0

4.7

7.7

5.0

6.0

6.3

6.0

6.3

5.0

5.8

BAR CF8FUS1

7.3

4.0

6.7

4.3

6.3

5.7

6.0

6.3

5.7

5.7

PST-4FR

7.3

4.7

7.0

5.0

6.0

6.7

6.0

5.0

5.7

5.7

RESCUE 911

6.7

2.3

6.7

5.0

5.3

5.7

6.7

5.7

6.0

5.7

ATTILA E

5.7

5.0

6.7

4.3

4.7

6.3

6.7

5.7

6.0

5.6

INTRIGUE

7.0

3.3

6.7

4.7

6.0

6.0

5.3

5.0

6.3

5.6

MB-82

6.3

3.7

7.3

5.0

5.3

6.0

6.3

5.7

5.0

5.6

SCALDIS

5.7

3.7

6.7

5.0

5.0

6.0

5.7

5.0

7.0

5.6

TREAZURE (E)

6.3

4.0

7.3

5.3

6.0

5.3

6.0

5.0

5.7

5.6

BAR CHF 8 FUS2

6.7

3.7

7.3

4.7

5.7

5.0

6.0

5.3

6.3

5.5

COMMON CREEPING RED

7.0

3.7

6.7

4.3

6.7

6.0

5.0

5.7

5.3

5.5

DISCOVERY

6.0

3.7

7.7

4.3

5.3

6.3

6.0

5.0

6.0

5.5

FLORENTINE

8.0

2.7

7.0

4.0

6.3

6.0

5.3

5.7

5.7

5.5

SR 3200

6.0

3.3

6.0

5.0

6.0

5.3

5.7

5.3

5.7

5.5

BANNER III

7.3

3.7

6.7

5.0

6.0

5.7

5.7

5.0

5.0

5.4

DGSC 94

7.7

4.7

7.3

5.3

5.7

6.3

5.3

5.7

4.3

5.4

JAMESTOWN II

5.7

4.7

7.3

5.0

5.7

5.3

5.3

5.7

5.7

5.4

OSPREY

6.3

3.7

6.7

5.0

6.0

6.3

5.3

5.0

5.0

5.4

SANDPIPER

6.3

4.3

7.0

4.7

5.3

5.3

6.0

5.7

5.3

5.4

ACF 083

7.3

4.7

8.0

3.7

5.3

5.7

5.7

5.0

6.3

5.3

ASC 082

7.3

3.7

7.0

4.7

6.0

4.7

5.3

5.3

5.7

5.3

ASR 049

7.0

3.0

6.7

4.3

5.0

6.0

6.3

5.0

5.3

5.3

DEFIANT

7.0

4.0

7.3

4.3

4.7

6.0

5.7

6.0

5.3

5.3

HERON

5.3

5.0

7.0

4.3

4.7

5.3

5.0

6.3

6.0

5.3

NAVIGATOR (ISI FRR 5)

7.3

3.0

6.3

4.0

5.7

5.7

5.3

6.0

5.3

5.3

WRIGLEY (ACF 092)

6.7

4.3

7.3

4.3

5.3

5.0

5.0

5.3

6.7

5.3

ASC 172

7.7

4.3

6.7

4.7

5.0

5.0

5.7

5.7

5.3

5.2

BAR SCF 8 FUS3

7.0

3.7

7.0

4.3

5.0

5.3

5.3

5.3

6.0

5.2

MAGIC

6.3

3.7

7.3

4.7

5.7

4.7

5.7

5.7

5.0

5.2

16

PST-47TCR

7.7

3.3

6.7

4.0

6.0

5.3

5.0

5.0

6.0

5.2

SILHOUETTE (PICK FRC 4-92)

7.0

3.7

7.3

4.7

6.0

4.7

5.3

5.7

5.0

5.2

SR 5100

5.3

3.7

7.0

4.3

5.0

5.0

6.0

5.7

5.3

5.2

SR 5210 (SRX 52LAV)

7.3

3.3

7.0

4.0

5.3

5.7

5.3

5.7

4.7

5.1

PATHFINDER

7.7

4.0

6.3

4.0

5.7

4.7

5.0

5.3

5.3

5.0

SEABREEZE

6.3

3.7

6.7

3.7

4.3

4.7

5.7

5.3

6.0

4.9

SHADEMASTER II

7.3

3.0

6.3

3.0

4.7

5.3

5.3

5.7

5.3

4.9

DAWSON E+

6.7

2.0

6.7

3.3

4.3

4.7

5.7

5.3

5.3

4.8

ROSE (ASC 087)

7.0

4.0

6.3

4.0

5.0

4.3

5.0

5.7

4.7

4.8

SR 6000

6.3

3.7

4.7

4.3

6.0

4.0

5.3

5.0

4.3

4.8

LSD (0.05)

1.5

2.8

1.2

1.7

1.6

1.3

2.1

5.6

2.0

0.9

17

Fairway Height Bentgrass Cultivar Trials
N. E. C hristians an d R. A. St. John
This is the fourth year of data from the Fairway Height Bentgrass Cultivar trial established in the fall of 1998. The area was
maintained at a 0.5 in. mowing height. This is a National Turfgrass Evaluation (NTEP) trial and is being conducted at several
research stations in the U.S. It contains 26 of the newest seeded cultivars and a number of experimentáis. The cultivars are
maintained with 4 lbs of N/1000 ft2/growing season. Fungicides are used as needed in a preventative program. Herbicides and
insecticides also are applied as needed.
Visual quality ratings were taken from May through October 2001 (Table 1). Visual quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale
with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality. Spring greenup (Green) was evaluated in April 2000 using a 9 to 1
scale with 9 = best and 1 = worst greenup. Genetic color (Color) and spring density (dens) were evaluated in June 2001. Genetic
color was based on a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = dark green and 1 = light green. Density (Dens) was also evaluated on a scale of 9 to 1,
where 9 = greatest density.
Table 1. The 2001 Visual turf quality and other physical ratings for cultivars in the 1998 Fairway Height Bentgrass Trial.
QUALITY
COLOR

GREEN

DENS

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

MEAN

BACKSPIN

7.3

6.0

7.7

7.3

7.0

8.3

8.3

6.3

7.0

7.4

7.3

7.0

8.0

7.7

7.0

7.3

7.4

7.3

6.7

7.3

7.4

6.7

7.0

7.3

NAME

BRIGHTON (SRX 1120)

8.0

7.0

7.7

IMPERIAL

8.0

6.3

8.0

7.7

7.3

8.3

L-93

7.0

6.7

7.7

8.0

7.0

7.3

8.0

SEASIDE II

6.7

6.3

7.0

7.7

6.0

7.0

6.7

7.3

7.7

7.1

CENTURY

7.0

6.3

7.7

6.0

7.3

7.7

7.3

6.7

7.0

7.0

6.3

6.7

7.7

7.0

7.3

6.9

7.0

7.0

7.0

6.3

7.0

6.8

PST-0VN

7.7

6.7

6.3

6.3

GRAND PRIX

6.7

6.0

7.3

6.3

PENN G-6

7.0

6.3

7.3

7.0

7.0

6.7

7.3

6.3

6.3

6.8

SR 1119

7.3

6.7

6.0

6.7

6.0

7.3

7.0

6.7

6.3

6.7

PROVIDENCE

6.7

6.3

6.0

6.3

6.3

6.7

7.0

6.7

6.3

6.6

SRX 1BPAA

6.7

6.7

7.0

6.3

6.3

7.3

7.3

6.7

5.7

6.6

TRUELINE

7.0

7.0

6.0

6.3

6.0

6.0

7.7

6.0

6.3

6.4

PRINCEVILLE

7.0

6.7

5.7

5.3

6.0

6.3

6.3

6.3

6.0

6.1

PENNCROSS

7.0

6.0

6.3

5.0

6.3

6.0

5.7

5.7

6.3

5.8

PENNEAGLE

6.7

6.3

5.3

4.7

5.0

6.3

6.7

6.0

5.7

5.7

PST-9PM

6.0

5.7

4.7

5.3

5.0

4.7

4.7

5.3

5.3

5.1

RADIANCE (PST-9HG)

6.0

6.3

5.7

4.7

5.3

4.7

5.0

5.0

5.0

4.9

SRX 7MOBB

5.3

6.0

6.7

4.7

5.0

4.7

5.3

4.3

4.7

4.8

ABT-COL-2

6.0

6.0

6.0

5.0

4.7

4.7

4.7

5.0

4.3

4.7

TIGER

6.0

6.0

5.0

5.0

4.0

4.7

5.0

5.0

4.3

4.7

ISI AT-5

5.7

5.0

6.0

4.7

5.3

4.0

4.7

4.3

4.7

4.6

SR 7100

6.0

6.0

5.3

4.7

4.7

4.3

4.7

4.3

4.7

4.6

GOLFSTAR

6.0

5.0

4.0

4.0

4.3

4.3

4.7

4.3

5.3

4.5

SEASIDE

6.0

5.7

4.0

3.3

4.3

5.0

4.7

4.3

4.3

4.3

SRX 7MODD

5.7

6.0

6.3

4.3

4.3

3.7

4.7

4.3

4.3

4.3

LSD (0.05)

1.0

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.1

0.9

1.1

1.0

1.0

0.6

18

Green Height Bentgrass Cultivar Trials
N. E. C hristians an d R. A. St. John
This is the fourth year of data from the Green Height Bentgrass Cultivar trial established in the fall of 1998. The area is
maintained at a 3/16-inch mowing height. This is a National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) trial and is being conducted
at several research stations in the U.S. It contains 29 seeded cultivars, including a number of experimentáis. Most are creeping
bentgrass and two, Pick MVB and Bavaria are velvet bentgrasses.
The cultivars are maintained with a fertilizer program of 1/4 lb N applied at 14-day intervals with a total of 4 lbs of N /1000
ft2/growing season. Fungicides are used as needed in a preventive program. Herbicides and insecticides are applied as needed.
Visual quality ratings were taken from May through October 1999 (Table 1). Visual quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale
with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality. Spring greenup (Green) was evaluated in April 2001 using a 9 to 1
scale with 9 = best and 1 = worst greenup. Genetic color (Gene) and leaf texture (Leaf) were evaluated in June 1999. Genetic
color was based on a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = dark green and 1 = light green. Spring density values represent the percentage area per
plot covered by bentgrass.

19

Table 1. The 2001 visual turf quality and other physical ratings for cultivars in the 1998 Green Height Bentgrass Trial.
QUALITY
NAME
SYN 96-1

GENC

GREEN

LEAF

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

MEAN

7.3

6.7

8.0

7.7

7.7

8.7

7.7

7.0

7.3

7.7

CRENSHAW

7.3

6.0

6.7

7.0

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.0

7.4

SYN 96-2

7.3

6.7

7.7

8.0

8.0

7.7

6.3

6.7

8.0

7.4

L-93

6.7

6.3

7.7

7.7

7.0

6.3

7.7

7.3

7.7

7.3

IMPERIAL

7.0

5.3

7.3

6.7

7.7

7.3

7.3

6.7

7.3

7.2

SYN 96-3

7.3

6.3

8.0

7.0

8.0

8.0

7.7

5.7

6.7

7.2

BENGAL (BAR AS 8FUS2)

6.7

5.7

6.7

7.3

6.0

7.7

7.7

6.3

7.3

7.1

PENN A-4

6.7

5.7

7.7

6.7

6.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

7.7

7.1

PENN G-l

7.0

5.7

7.0

6.7

6.7

7.0

7.3

7.0

6.7

6.9

PST-A2E

6.7

5.3

7.0

7.7

6.7

7.3

7.0

6.3

6.7

6.9

CENTURY

7.0

6.0

8.0

7.0

7.0

7.0

6.3

6.0

7.3

6.8

ABT-CRB-1

7.0

6.0

7.0

7.3

7.3

6.3

6.7

6.0

6.3

6.7

PENN A-2

6.7

6.0

7.0

5.7

6.3

7.0

6.7

7.0

7.0

6.6

BAR CB 8US3

6.3

5.3

6.3

6.3

6.3

6.3

7.0

6.3

6.7

6.5

PENN A-l

6.3

5.3

7.3

6.0

5.7

7.0

7.0

6.7

6.0

6.4

SRX 1NJH

6.7

5.3

6.3

6.0

6.0

6.3

6.3

6.7

7.0

6.4

ISI AP-5

6.3

5.7

6.3

6.7

6.7

6.3

6.0

5.7

6.7

6.3

PICK CB 13-94

6.0

5.7

5.7

6.7

5.7

6.0

6.7

6.7

6.3

6.3

5.7

6.0

6.7

7.0

6.3

5.7

6.2

6.0

6.7

5.3

6.0

6.3

6.7

6.2

BACKSPIN

6.3

4.7

7.0

PENN G-6

7.0

6.3

6.3

SR 1119

6.7

5.3

6.0

5.7

5.7

6.3

7.3

5.7

6.3

6.2

SRX 1BPAA

6.7

4.7

5.7

5.7

6.0

6.3

6.7

6.0

5.7

6.1

5.3

6.3

5.7

5.7

6.3

6.7

6.0

6.0

6.0

5.3

6.0

6.3

6.0

5.9

PROVIDENCE

6.3

5.7

6.0

BRIGHTON (SRX 1120)

6.7

5.7

6.0

PENNLINKS

6.0

4.0

5.0

5.0

4.7

5.3

5.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

PENNCROSS

5.7

4.3

5.7

5.0

4.0

5.3

5.0

4.7

5.0

4.8

VESPER (PICK MVB) *

6.7

5.0

7.7

5.0

4.7

4.3

4.0

4.7

5.0

4.6

BAVARIA *

5.7

4.3

5.3

4.0

4.3

4.7

4.3

5.0

4.7

4.5

SR 7200

6.3

4.3

7.3

4.3

4.3

4.0

4.3

4.7

5.3

4.5

LSD (0.05)
Velvet bentgrass

1.6

1.2

0.8

0.9

1.1

1.1

1.5

1.2

1.3

0.7

20

Shade Adaptation Study
C hristians and

N ickE .

The shade adaptation study was established in the fall of 1987 to evaluate the performance of 35 species and cultivars of grasses.
The species include chewings fescue (C.F.), creeping red fescue (C.R.F.), hard fescue (H.F.), tall fescue (T.F.), Kentucky
bluegrass (KBG), and rough bluegrass (Poa trivialis).
The trials are located under the canopy of a mature stand of Siberian elm trees (Ulmus pumila) at the Iowa State University
Horticulture Research Station north of Ames, Iowa. Grasses are mowed at a 2-inch height and receive 2 lb N/1000ft2/year. No
weed control has been required on the area, but the grass has been irrigated during extended droughts.
Monthly quality data are collected from April through October (Table 1). Visual quality is based on a scale of 9 to 1: 9 = best
quality, 6 = lowest acceptable quality, and 1 = worst quality.

21

Table 1.2001 visual quality1 data for cultivars in the 1987 Shade Trial in descending order for mean quality.
QUALITY
Cultivar2

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Mean

Jamestown (C.F.)

6.0

6.7

6.7

6.0

6.0

6.0

7.7

6.2

Victor (C.F.)

4.3

5.0

7.0

6.7

6.7

6.7

7.0

5.9

Waldina (H.F.)

4.7

5.3

5.7

6.3

6.3

6.0

7.0

5.9

Shadow (C.F.)

5.0

5.0

5.7

5.7

5.7

6.0

6.3

5.8

Banner (C.F.)

4.7

5.7

6.3

5.7

5.7

6.0

6.7

5.8

Atlanta (C.F.)

4.7

5.0

6.0

5.3

5.3

6.0

6.3

5.6

Ensylva (C.R.F.)

4.0

4.7

6.0

5.7

5.7

6.0

6.0

5.5

St-2(SR3000) (H.F.)

4.7

4.7

5.3

5.3

6.0

6.0

6.3

5.5

Agram ((C.F.)

4.7

4.0

5.7

5.3

5.7

6.3

6.3

5.3

Mary (C.F.)

4.3

4.3

6.0

5.7

4.3

6.3

7.3

5.3

BAR Fo 81-225 (H.F.)

4.7

4.7

4.7

6.0

6.0

5.7

6.3

5.2

Estica (C.R.F.)

4.0

4.3

5.0

5.0

4.7

4.7

5.7

5.2

Reliant (H.F.)

4.3

4.7

4.3

5.7

5.7

5.7

5.7

5.1

Rebel II (T.F.)

3.7

5.0

5.0

4.3

4.7

6.0

4.7

5.0

Koket (C.F.)

4.7

5.3

5.3

4.3

5.0

5.3

6.3

5.0
4.9

Waldorf (C.F.)

3.3

3.7

5.7

5.0

4.7

6.0

6.3

Pennlawn (C.R.F.)

3.7

4.3

6.0

5.0

4.0

5.7

6.0

4.8

Highlight (C.F.)

4.0

4.3

4.3

4.0

4.0

4.7

5.0

4.8

Biljart (H.F.)

4.0

4.0

5.0

5.7

5.3

5.3

5.3

4.6

Apache (T.F.)

4.0

4.7

4.3

3.0

4.0

4.0

3.7

4.2

Wintergreen (C.F.)

3.7

4.3

5.0

5.0

4.7

5.0

5.0

4.2

5.0

4.2

Scaldis (H.F.)

4.3

3.7

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.7

Rebl (T.F.)

3.0

3.0

3.7

4.0

4.0

5.0

5.0

4.0

Falcon (T.F.)

4.0

4.7

4.0

3.3

3.7

5.3

4.0

4.0

Spartan (H.F.)

3.3

3.7

3.3

4.3

4.0

5.0

4.7

3.9

Arid (T.F.)

3.3

3.3

3.3

3.3

3.7

4.3

4.7

3.8

Bonanza (T.F.)

2.0

2.3

4.0

3.3

3.0

4.0

4.3

3.5

Midnight (KGB)

3.7

4.0

2.3

3.0

2.3

2.7

2.0

3.1

Nassau (KGB)

3.0

3.3

2.3

2.7

2.3

2.0

2.0

2.7

Ram I (KGB)

2.3

2.0

3.0

2.0

2.3

3.0

2.7

2.4

Coventry (KGB)

3.3

2.7

2.3

2.3

2.0

3.0

2.3

2.4

Chateau (KGB)

2.7

2.7

2.0

1.3

2.3

2.3

2.0

2.3

Sabre (Poa trivialis)

1.7

2.0

2.3

2.3

2.3

2.3

2.0

2.2

Glade (KGB)

2.3

2.3

1.7

2.3

2.0

2.0

1.7

2.0

Bristol (KGB)

2.0

2.0

2.3

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

LSD o.o5

NS

2.3

1.4

1.6

1.5

1.5

1.6

0.8

1 Visual quality was assessed using a scale of 9 to 1 with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst turf quality.
2 C.F. = chewings fescue, C.R.F. = creeping red fescue, H.F. = hard fescue, KGB = Kentucky blue grass, T.F. = tall fescue.

Ornamental Grasses Project 2000-2002
M ark Helgeson, H eatherMcDorman, and N ick Christians
Purpose:
The purpose of the ornamental grass project is to evaluate 34 ornamental grasses for their adaptation to Iowa conditions. The
study is located south of the turfgrass research building. Grasses 1 and 2 were established in 1989. Grasses 3-5, 11-15, 17-18,
20-21, and 33 were established in 2000. The remaining grasses were established in June of 2001.
Each plot on this site has a four by five foot spacing. The grasses descend in height from number one in the center, to 34 on each
of the ends. The 34 grasses are replicated twice on the two sides of the arc.
Choosing the species:
Ornamental grasses have numerous characteristics, each that could make a difference in which species is chosen for a particular
landscape. For the plots at the Horticulture Research Station, the new species have general characteristics of being bunch type,
non-aggressive, varying in color, form and shape, in addition to being able to grow in the zones 4 and/or 5.
The grasses will remain in this location for several years. They will be evaluated on their winter survival and overall adaptation
to local conditions.

23

m ■ «n - Tt i i i vo T*
< i tti o co
«m

r-~ oo f - «
t" O

m n 't

>n ■vt n

r- m

•>

co co
(S î
i ^
(N■ vo
O
C■S <N
^i ^i O
00

a2lx
2

a

o
o

*T3

a
<Z
2Oa
_ 2 2
O fc
2
2
>
G
f
l
C
«
W
>
,.
e
g
0
0
0
—
t
C
~
l
g
aU- a a a $ & oo g 2 2 on g ^ S u ’S « i Ígi , 5â «i aï« ^a3 iO2! 3« i-s
a>a a a go S fe .t¡ .t¡ .t¡ ¿2
S 2 s s -sÍ s8 (DI ,|Æ 1iC14= § .9 I § C/5 O£O•I ? TK3 TX3 J s
cd cd cd cd (D
.SH o S S 5 îg ‘S 1
M

O
O

H

n

vi

Vi tO O
O O

t- H

M Ifl U

m

Vh
O
O

H

lx
O

T3 >
<U 3=

5
1/5 /5 /5

1/5

lx
<D

5

tu
G

g*

7

1

<
L> <D

U. .

3

o

& 1^ ^

^

Q« 12

<D
~

O
yO

su

u

►2ooooc/5>2£cQC*Sc*íceíQ¿ c/5 cyô >

U
<G
G
*-j H

s
g

(U
_
0) U
<s
3
« .3 .a
H ffl < h C Q CO

T3

2

«S. 2
-2 -CJD le
■ “ s I §■
S -3 “
ts r g
“ - œo Pg
— Ü •£ M s g
1 1
•

Ö

&

-3

-

B

- 3 -§

S

S -

eu G

>£ ï2 «3 S0

eu e u .u

S •S

-a
3 1
2 «P
2
<B
60 «
O

M 0)
B í .& fl
3 3 M t -2 3 .fl fl o
?o .isopO O cc3?

fs

00 C

3

g1° «

I

2

eu eu 00 ffl ^

S B —
B
•£ 13)'
rrt 3

.E

« § S. J 1
0

2

tî .s 2
c/5 Q

=O I19 -

<U <
L> S ^
ï £
^

û

U
tu C

M » a O ^x M
O (^ N
N n( vNt (i fNì '(ONM( X
O (v N
O -nC^SnnnTrt)'
x xf ixì T
x }x ' xi rx' ùxhxO^Ot SO (vN
N !N

CM

Preem ergence Annual Grass Control Study
B.R. Bingam an

aE. C hristians

This trial was conducted to evaluate the level of crabgrass control with several Pendulum formulations and compare Pendulum to
other preemergence products. It was located at the Horticulture Research Station north of Ames, IA. The plot was established in
'common' Kentucky bluegrass with a history of crabgrass infestations. The soil was a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic
Hapludoll) with 3.0% organic matter, 112 ppm K, 6 ppm P, and a pH of 7.05. The experimental design was a randomized
complete block. Three replications were conducted and individual plot size was 5 x 5 ft. Irrigation was used to supplement
rainfall and to maintain the turf in good growing condition.
The commonly-used herbicides Dimension 1EC and Pendimethalin 60WDG were included for comparisons in this trial that
included numerous experimental formulations and herbicide plus fertilizer materials (Table 1). Preemergent applications were
made on April 27 before crabgrass germination and the sequential application of treatment 22 was made on June 29. Granular
materials were applied to dry foliage using 'shaker dispensers' to ensure uniform application. Sprayables were applied using a
carbon dioxide backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a spray pressure of 30-40 psi. Liquid formulations were
mixed with water to a volume equivalent to 3 gal/1000 ft2. All preemergent materials were 'watered in'.
Turf quality data were taken weekly from May 9 through September 13 (Tables 1 and 2). Quality was assessed using a 9 to 1
scale with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality. Crabgrass infestation data were taken beginning July 25 and
ending on September 13 (Table 3). Crabgrass populations were estimated as the percentage area per plot covered by crabgrass.
Crabgrass control was determined by converting the population data to percentage reductions as compared to the untreated
control (Table 4). In addition, the study was evaluated for phytotoxicity data during the entire duration. Phytotoxicity was
assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = no damage, 5 = uniform damage with some brown turf, and 1 = dead turf (Table 5).
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA) procedure. Treatment effects on weed populations and turf quality were tested using Fisher's Least Significant
Difference (LSD) test.
On May 9 through May 22, quality was significantly better for turf treated with the experimental formulations with a nitrogen
component (treatments 10-18) than for turf treated with other herbicides and the control (Table 1). After June 1, the nitrogen
response began to fade and by June 27 there were no quality differences among the treatments.
Crabgrass was first detected in the untreated turf on July 12 but was not large enough to be assessed until July 25. Crabgrass
populations in treated turf were significantly lower than the untreated control through August 28 (Table 3). Mean reduction data
show that all materials except BAS 656 (treatment 8) provided > 82% crabgrass control and fourteen materials resulted in > 90%
control (Table 4). The preemergence application of an experimental from Gowan (treatment 21) was more effective in
controlling crabgrass than the same level of the material in split applications (treatment 22).
Discoloration and burning of the leaf blades were observed on turf treated with BAS 656 (treatment 8). After June 1, the
phytotoxic symptoms were no longer present and the turf had recovered to a quality level similar to the untreated controls (Table
5).

25

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

c r-

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
wSvS»/SvSuS^nvS*n«/"ivn«nw’,i vS»o«/S»/SuS*o«ri‘/Suri i n

c o

o o rn o o o o fo o o c n t^ r^ o o r^ m r^ o o o o
v o ' o ^ o ^ 5 ' o ^ > v o ^ o ' o \ o y o ^ o t v' K r ^ ^ o ' o v o ' 0 ' o ^ o v o

ro

o o rn o c o o o o o c o o o o r^ r^ r^ o o m o o o

oo

Visual quality1 of Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Preemergence Annual Grass study (data through July 11).

3

CM

^ ' ¿ ^ ^ v o ' o \ o v o \ o ' o t ^ t ^ o o v o r ^ v o ' £ ) ' r s>
’ '0'0'0'o

coroOfor^r^OOroOror^OcnrnrOfor^-fnOrnt^
v o v o ' Ov o v o v o v o v o v o r ^ o o o o o N o o o o t ^ r ^ r ^ ' o v o v o ' O

<D

C_

a
•5

cm

CM

r^r^ooofooocor^r^or^r^m cor-oor^roo
vdvovovovovovowSvoKoocsoor^oor^Koor^vovovo

t^o o rn r^o o rn o o rn o o o o o r^r^t^o r^rvor^^K 'ot^K'nr^oóoóo\a\ooo\oooo^^t^^^

o c ^ o o o o o f o r ^ o o o o r ^ o m o o r ^ o o o
S v o K ^ s o ^ K v o s o o \ o \ o \ 0 \ o o o \ o o o \ 0 \ ,o K ^ ^

ac
B
X
c§

Os

03
C*

*

CM

<r
O
_O O M ^ 0 0 Vi M ^ 00 1 0 O
—¡CM^CM* — CM*^ — O O O O O O O O

7 0
<0

0

0

0

0

o o <%

0

£
Uh
'
15oo 00
<
" ffl
■o*-* ¿3
Uh

On -o
«bo g«

O
Q

C CD

2CJO
< g
£ £
o o
q a
U
U
fo
Uh ,U0h
T<D
3 *0
<W
cC
cD
D<
h

h

C
DQ
>

yO yO /-- >.

3c3
s

\ oN oN v?

Ctf)
.c
*s

1 é éé é éé ^ J g tìw tì

SO U'i'tOOMONO\000.2” ~ ~
<
*> C c c
so S comCMCMCMCMOOO
O O O O O O — — O C 03 03 C
3
^ - o o o o o o o o o o

D 0-,
Table 1.

o

*—
iffM
(N<'M
Cci cC
r—
cm"T
rnOM
^

ì x o h Cu c u Dh PQGh X

«

£

S2 2

JQ
J QJ
—Q

X X X X X X X X Q

cqcqcq

— C M m ^ ^ v c t ^ o o o O — cMcc T f w ^ v o r ^ o o o N O —'<N
~

~ 1 —< —

—

— • CM <N CN

bo bo

C fi
"S '5
X)
X X
<n *
203
uoC3 o
u>
C
3 *e+*
M WO
.23 .2
o
§< : ‘u
0) "C
o ^—
fl y
S £ g
o w
O i;
o
w
a> <u C
u
H É—
■o

Initial applications were made on April 27, 2001 and the sequential application of treatment #22 on June 29, 2001.

3 <N

v q v o v q v o v o v q v o i o r ^ O N ^ c o ^ '- ^ c N O O ^ v o v o r ^ v o

vovovovovovovovovovoSr^r^r^t^Kr^r^vovovovo

O
hC
*~)
<L>

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q

^oo

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q

00

O s

O s

O

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O

O s

cn

o’

O s

O s

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q

Table 2.

Visual quality1 of Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Preemergence Annual Grass study (data through September 13).

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

O s

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q

GO

3
~

<

O s

5 os

oooofxitxiooooooixiodooooooooodoooooooooooooooo

©
©

'OVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVOVO

CN
ON
CN

<D

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

C

o
CN
CN

=tfc
C
<D
«O
CN

3

B

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q

q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q
Tf Tf rt rf rf
Tf Tt Tt rr
Tf ^ Tf Tf Ti-' rf TJ-* Tf
Tt Tf

CQ

&

£
o

-c

0$
O s

CN

>7 © © © O O © o O o o * n o o » o o o i n o o » r > o < r > © ©
^ vr> o m o «cn o v i n - < N « - < ( N ^ ( N - ( N » n c s ( N n
- ¡{ N -itN -rj^ ^ d o o d d d o d ^ d o N ^

-O
o
£

o lit
13 oo
o <
c/a

< §
£
o o£
q a

o .o
*-* «4-1
O n ^3

.2

‘C
C
ca

6
G0
OC
c3

a
a
V
V«O\°
o'v\°
0s \°
0s-\°
0s" \e
0s ^ £

^ Co
o

*§ © © © © © ©w
so .£

Tf
CO

©

^
ON ON V O
T f OO OO O
ON © © ON
CO CN CN CN CN © © ©
—' ©
© © © ©
© ©

©© © ©

© -H

GO

a
u
^ W

c w W UJ
_0
N- N*C33 cCd cCd Cd
c
C/3 C
/2 C
c(I) fl
co
rt/5

C

cd J

C

cd

GO

2

©©
00 "O ©
Cfl - rl - rX,rXi <^Uf^ < ! £ Uh Uh tU E-Lh Uh
Uh
U- . 5 o w u
D a,G,2fl-DHOHfflcuXXXXX
X
X Q CQ CQ CQ

£ .2
po £5

- c N r i T f i n v o K o o o N O - c Nc o ^ v o ' o r ^ o o o N©- - HCN

§ E
cr m
«4¡ Q-1 «<L>« rv oOn
3 JS N j=
H
H
° H

©
©
CN

rCN

a>
2

'^Or^OOTfrnOOOCNmt^OO<N<rjOV)asTf*-<

§ "2

oot^r^r^fnor^r^cnr^r^or^r^r^copr^rocno
vSovOfnvorò^^rnrnvovocvi'OfnoóooON'.ovoowS

< ™

3 00

o o o ro o o cn r^r-o o p r-r^r^ o o r-r-m r^ o
wSr ^»A<N<Nr ^<N'
o
vo
moc5‘O T f u S o vo r o r ^ < N o o r n c N o —

00
< «

o o o rn r-rn ro r^ o o o p o r-r-rn o o r-m t^ o

N"

r^r^r^or^r^oor^or^pr^r^r^ooor-m r^m
^ n n d n rio iò ò '- n ^ o io n 'tc i^ ò tN O o o
^

00

CN

r^c^ococnr^r^cncococncoor^cnoor'-cor-r-o
o o o ò r^ c N in ò n n ^ fN n ò o O 'o

oo
Xca
o
>%

jo

o
m r- o © m
>o
m rn n 6 (N ^ o

3 <N

o r^ o o rn o m o m o ro m o m
d o ^ f s o ^ r j r f o ^ r i o d r i

cncorocnr^r^-r^mmc^r^roor^cor-t^t^oocoo
O —« O O O i/~>
roOO O O OO w ^O OO O O -^O

ON
d

;

x © © © o ©
4+ m o m © *r>
CN

< CN

CN

© o c v - > o o » /'s o o m o o m © « /i© ©

- r N^ ( N^ ( N^ < NWOCNCNc n
^ O O O O O O O O —OOsK

o
r—
Vv°
/-W^
N.O
o' N=>
VcO ^r - r^- ^— ^— ^r ^ r^- £ £ S: o
c
•
O O■« s
o
*2 o o o o o o
O n O n NO c w w w
vo
OO 00 ON O n O O Os O T j - T j - T f
vn ^g ^. . rTfo CN
CN CN CN O O O '55 c e c
a/2 aC/3
vo .£ o o o o o o — — O c cs
C/3 C
00 •o o o o o o o p o p O
C O ««
5 <N (N < N ..................
Uh Uh Uh
Uh Uh U- — o o O
— —1 (N cn m m
D cua<SS£Effl(2R xK SSSxxX Q (Sfflffl

—• cn

co

<o

s o

oo o s ©

— c N c n T f i O N o r ^ o o o N O —I cn

—CNCNCN

£
««
£
x
o
K
0)
*y
ca/}
>
00
>> .
-O [in
<
s
*3 c/o
£o £o
o <
•i ffl
Qa
O'h—
i
T<3D
a) T3
•a c<t>
C
cC 5<D
00
c

Initial applications were made on April 27, 2001 and the sequential application of treatment #22 on June 29, 2001.

Table 3.

Percentage crabgrass cover1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Preemergence Annual Grass study.

00

CN

co X)
m Jc
<L>
C
00 03
X
«5
| Ì
2o 3C < -2 .2 o
<
u
<D « io
O3 £ S
2 2 £ -O £ £ T3
4)
O
tfl Q, 7) tfl
<U Oh
NX p
N
° H H o

_

0 Tp CN OS r- so CN 0 Os COOs SOv> 00 OS 00 CO00 O __ Os
OS CN v> cn 00 VS 00 so CO0 00 Os CO00 Tp Tp so Os CN
0 00
Os Os Os 00 Os Tp os Os os Os Os 00 OS 00 Os 00 Os os Os 00

CN
ON
C

O, ro
C/D

0 so r- Tp vs vs vs Tp Os
OS r- Tp CNCN r- 00 vs os
',p O
OOO
s Tps 00
Os Os 00 0 Tp* Tp Os Ov so Os Tp* so VOOs Os so
0 00
c- OS CN Os Os OOOOOS 00 Os 00 00 OOOOos OS p^

CN
Tt
CN

?<
M

O CNc*s Os CN so 0 cn 00 OOO r- rp CN os p- TP ^p vs so
Os CNso so Os SOcn os CN CO Os Os Tp Os VOVOTP so OS Tp
OO
OOs Os Os OOOs Os OS Os Os Os OOOS 00 OS 00 OS OS OS 00

r0
CN

O COos 00 COCO 00 TP CN CN COCNos COc^- ^p COCO 00 00 00
OK
Oso
00 0
Os vs
Os C
OO0
S OS vs
os CN O
OO
s 00
Os C
ON
S0
Os 00
Os 00 C
OOV
S 00
OS 00 C
OOvs
s Os 0
O0
S 00

CO
C
CN
N

0 —*
—* —
- CNso Os —Hso so os 1—1^p cn so O so CN
vss CN O
NO
CN
vss O
0 C
00 00
CN
vsS O
OOO
s 00s V
CN
as
SO
SO
Os CN
s0
VS 00s Os O
0 Os 00 C
ON
s OS O
OS
s0
O0
SO
O

CN
OO

2
<

bo

Table 4.

Percentage crabgrass reductions1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Preemergence Annual Grass study.

<

b£).
O )0_
< ^

o

bO
<

bo
<

0 CN CN^P TP CNTP 0 CN ^P TP CN0 CN O ^p CNCNCN Tp ^p O
VS
TP O
TP ^1* 00 so Os Tp TP 0
cn' 0 vs
0 OS O
Oss OO 00 OO
sO
s S Os O
s vs OS Os Os 00 0 Os os
Os OS Os O
Os Os 00

CN
CN

O vs vs cn p 0 so 0
cn O p cn p O O cn 0 0 V)
s 0 00 Tp" 00 OS 0 00 TP OS00 cn 00 Os d cn Os d d
OO
OOO
s OS Os OOOs TP 0 Os Os Os Os 00 Os 00 Os 00 Os Os 0 Os

Tp
Tp*
CN

O p SOso
OOO00
OO
OS Os os
Os OS Os

p p
p O 00 p 00 00 O O p p
00 00
00 C
CN
00 00
Os Os Os O
OOd
s0 O
SO
S ON
s Os C
ON
Sd
0 d
0 Os c-

o
C
N
OS
CN

CN
CN
3fc

Os

Tp
CN
K

—;

<

£
JO
3

00 v> 00 V 00 vs 00 »0 0 vs so0 soO
OO
OO
O n 0
Vi O
p O
p >—1 CN
O
CN CN*—
' CN p CNCNcn
CN CN CN CM d d d O d d d d —- d as

JO

(N (N (N
(N (N r^i ro

D Ox cu a. a- a- cu

o
s
a"
a>

03

-o

C

o
P
>
o
°Vi rjr>
Vi
P
ec <!
bb CQ
’S u*
2 c
2
° ^

O
Q
>
C
O

a
a.

.g 13

rr'O'TT
'O'*

c r - r - ----- c- r- •
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^

c22 o§
&

•2

rj
. os
<n w

o
o

CN
CN
o— o.<ui oJ~
V
ac« ooo

bo bO

c w w w
-S
w w w w w w os oOs so
(DTprpOOOOOSOSO
os O ^ rf
S
C
O
C
O
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
O
o
o
2 C c c
c
d a e
o o o o o o
—o c —
- -o
^ o o o o o o o o 9 9 O
c « ca b
U U- Uu Uh Ui Cu Uh Uh .S O O o
<D U- U

X X X X X X X X X Q CQ CQ CQ

.S .£
*S ‘S

jo jo
2^-*
d2 rt
^
W B3 O
d
d
o
o- Su.<O'
k
O O2

tiCu C
CJZL3
f—

O
o
C3
£
2a>
£
Vi
e
#o
to
o
T3

O
2S 203 3o a
£ £ -O &
83
8
oV V
o Q
c . oc
o dc/>3 o *7

T3 E

~ - c N c n T p v s s o t ^ o o o s O ’' -«cNcnT3-tr>soc>' Ooaso~*cN
—

—

C NC NCN

, .2
u r~
JoOJ<C
N <D <D O
tN .pi
X .

_

H H ° H H o c

ON
<N

Table 5.

Phytotoxicity1 of Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Preemergence Annual Grass study.

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

Untreated control
P I2
P I2

p22

P22
P32
P32
BAS 6562
Pendimethalin 60WDG
XF-0034 (0.17%)4
XF-0034 (0.17%)4
XF-0028 (0.11%)4
XF-0028 (0.11%)4
XF-0029 (0.17%)4
XF-0029 (0.17%)4
XF-01009 ((0.15%)4
XF-01009 ((0.15%)4
XF-00096 (1.29%)4
Dimension 1EC
Betasan 4E5
Betasan 4E5
Betasan 4E5

Rate
lb a.i./A

May
21

June 1

NA
1.50
2.00
1.50
2.00
1.50
2.00
21 oz/A2
1.50
0.18
0.25
0.18
0.25
0.18
0.25
0.18
0.25
1.50
0.25
9.205
7.305
4.4 & 2.9s

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
5
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

9
9
9
9
9
9
9
5
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9

__
..
LSD qqj
1Phytotoxicity was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = no damage, 5 = uniform damage with some brown
turf, and 1 = dead turf.
2These materials are being screened for BASF.
3 oz product/A
4These materials are being screened for Dow Agrosciences (Rohm & Haas).
5These materials are being screened for Gowan
6oz product/1000 ft2.
Initial applications were made on April 27, 2001 and the sequential application of treatment #22 on June 29, 2001.

30

Postemergence Broadleaf (Violet) Study
B. R. B ingam an a n d N E. C hristians
The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of three experimental 'NB' herbicide formulations against violets, a 'hard-tocontrol' broadleaf weed species in turfgrass. The trial was conducted in an established area of'common' Kentucky bluegrass at the Ames
Public Cemetery on South Dakota Street in Ames, IA. The experimental design was a split plot with herbicide as the main plot treatment
and number of applications as the subplot factor. Individual plot size was 5 x 10 ft with three replications. The 5 x 10 ft main plots were
split into 2 - 5 x 5 ft subplots. Herbicide treatments and number of applications were randomly assigned to main and subplots,
respectively. The experimental area was laid out so that each 5 x 10 ft plot had approximately 30-35% violet cover pre-treatment.
Three experimental formulations from PBI Gordon - EH1381, EH 1382, and EH 1383 were screened in single and sequential applications
(21 days apart) with Trimec Classic, Millenium Ultra, and an untreated control. Initial applications were made on June 7 to the main 5 x
10 ft plot. Twenty one days later on June 28, the materials were re-applied at the same rate to one 5 x 5 ft subplot for each main plot.
The treatments were applied using a carbon dioxide backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a spray pressure of 30-40
psi. The formulations were mixed with water to a volume equivalent to 3 gal/1000 ft2.
Evaluations of violet damage were made from June 11 through July 18 (Table 1). Damage was assessed using a scale from 9 to 1 with 9
= no damage, 8 = slight discoloration, leaf cupping, and/or stem curling, 7 = more uniform symptoms from #8, 6 = all symptoms of #7
plus leaf mottling, 5 = all symptoms of #6 plus browning on leaves, 4 = all symptoms of #5 plus some dead leaves, 3 = more uniform
symptoms of #4 with more dead leaves, 2 = all symptoms of #3 plus some dead plants, and 1 = all violets dead within the plot. After July
18, all remaining violets were assumed to have survived treatment and violet populations were assessed for each subplot. The number of
violets per plot was counted on July 24, August 3, August 9, August 14, August 24 and August 31 (Table 2). The study was monitored
for possible bluegrass phytotoxicity and turf quality for the duration of the study. No phytotoxicity was detected and turf quality was
similar for all plots.
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on weed populations and visual quality were tested using Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD) test.
In addition, orthogonal contrasts were conducted using the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure to test for differences between
individual treatments (Tables 3).
All herbicides caused significant levels of damage to violets from June 11 through July 11 (Table 1). The three 'EH' formulations
provided higher levels of damage than Trimec Classic or Millenium Ultra on June 11, four days after the initial treatments were applied.
By June 18, all treated violets expressed similar damage. On July 18, the violets in the untreated turf were beginning to succumb to the
high temperatures and dry conditions so the damage levels caused by the treatments were not significant. However, there were
differences in damage levels recorded between subplots (P > F = 0.0377). Those violets receiving the sequential treatment on June 28
recorded higher levels of damage than those treated only once on June 7.
There were no statistical reductions in the number of violets in the treated turf as compared with the untreated turf (Table 2). There were
numerical differences between the violet counts among the main and subplot treatments but they were not statistically significant. By
August 3, violets in the untreated areas were dying because of the high temperatures and low rainfall. As a result, treatment effects are
hard to interpret from the data (Table 3). Mean counts show that there were numerical reductions as compared with the untreated
controls but the differences are not statistically significant.

31

Table 1.

Violet damage1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 PBI Gordon Postemergence violet study.

Material

1.
Is.
2.
2s.
3.
3s.
4.
4s.
5.
5s.
6.
6s.

Untreated control
Untreated control
EH 1382
EH 1382
EH 1381
EH 1381
EH 1383
EH 1383
Trimec Classic
Trimec Classic
Millenium Ultra
Millenium Ultra

Rate
pts/A

Number of
applications

June
11

June
18

June
21

July
3

July
11

July
18

Mean

NA
NA
5.5
5.5
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
2.5
2.5

NA
NA
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

9.0
9.0
4.7
4.7
5.0
5.0
4.7
4.7
7.0
7.0
6.3
6.3

9.0
9.0
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.3
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.7
5.0
5.0

9.0
9.0
5.7
5.7
5.3
5.3
5.7
5.7
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3

8.0
8.0
4.3
3.7
4.0
4.7
3.0
3.3
4.7
4.0
3.7
3.7

9.0
9.0
6.3
5.0
4.3
5.3
5.7
6.3
6.3
5.0
5.0
4.3

5.3
4.7
6.3
6.0
6.0
3.7
5.7
3.7
6.0
3.7
5.0
2.7

8.2
8.1
5.4
5.1
5.0
4.9
5.1
4.9
6.0
5.3
5.2
4.7

2.2
2.4
1.2
2.6
1.6
NS
0.9
LSD0.05
1Damage was assessed using a scale from 9 to 1 with 9 = no damage, 8 = slight discoloration, leaf cupping, and/or stem curling, 7 = more
uniform symptoms from #8, 6 = all symptoms of #7 plus leaf mottling, 5 = all symptoms of #6 plus browning on leaves, 4 = all
symptoms of #5 plus some dead leaves, 3 = more uniform symptoms of #4 with more dead leaves, 2 = all symptoms of #3 plus some
dead plants, and 1 = all violets dead within the plot.
The initial applications were made on June 7 to the entire 5 x 10 ft plot. The sequential applications applied 21 days later on June 28
were made to a 5 x 5 ft subplot.
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

32

Table 2.

Violet counts by subplot treatment1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 PBI Gordon Postemergence violet study.

Material

1.
Is.
2.
2s.
3.
3s.
4.
4s.
5.
5s.
6.
6s.

Untreated control
Untreated control
EH 1382
EH 1382
EH 1381
EH 1381
EH 1383
EH 1383
Trimec Classic
Trimec Classic
Millenium Ultra
Millenium Ultra

Rate
pts/A

Number of
applications

July
24

August
3

NA
NA
5.5
5.5
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
2.5
2.5

NA
NA
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

32.7
36.7
24.0
17.3
21.0
23.7
22.0
13.0
20.0
20.3
17.3
8.7

19.7
24.7
14.7
12.3
14.0
13.0
13.3
10.0
13.3
9.7
10.3
6.0

August
9
13.0
18.0
12.7
12.7
12.7
10.3
11.7
8.7
9.0
8.3
8.7
5.3

August
14
10.0
15.0
11.3
13.7
10.3
8.7
10.7
4.7
5.3
7.0
7.0
4.7

August
24
14.7
18.3
8.0
11.0
10.7
9.0
12.0
7.3
12.0
7.0
9.7
2.7

August
31
8.7
10.0
7.7
10.3
10.3
8.7
8.0
8.7
8.0
8.3
9.3
3.7

NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
LSD0.05
1These figures represent the number of violets per subplot.
The initial applications made on June 7 were to the entire 5 x 10 ft plot. The sequential applications applied 21 days later on
June 28 were made to a 5 x 5 ft subplot.
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

33

Mean

16.4
20.6
13.1
12.9
13.2
12.2
12.9
8.7
11.3
10.1
10.4
5.2
NS

Table 3.

Violet counts by main plot treatment1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 PBI Gordon Postemergence violet study.

Material

Rate
pts/A

July
24

August
3

NA
5.5
5.0
4.0
4.0
2.5

34.7
20.7
22.3
17.5
20.2
13.0

22.2
13.5
13.5
11.7
11.5
8.2

August
9

August
14

August
24

August
31

Mean

15.5
12.7
11.5
10.2
8.7
7.0

12.8
12.5
9.5
7.7
6.2
5.8

16.5
9.5
9.8
9.7
9.5
6.2

9.3
9.0
9.5
8.3
8.2
6.5

18.5
13.0
12.7
10.8
10.7
7.8

NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
L S D q.05
1These figures represent the number of violets per main plot.
The initial applications made on June 7 were to the entire 5 x 10 ft plot. The sequential applications applied 21
days later on June 28 were made to a 5 x 5 ft subplot.
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

NS

NS

1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Untreated control
EH 1382
EH 1381
EH 1383
Trimec Classic
Millenium Ultra

34
-

Dimension Safety on Bentgrass

a n n u a Greens
B.R. Bingaman, T. R. O ster, and N. E. C hristians

These field trials were designed to measure the quality of creeping bentgrass on sand and soil-based greens following treatment with
dithiopyr at three different rates. Two studies were conducted at Veenker Golf Course in Ames, IA on creeping bentgrass practice greens
infested with Poa annua. One study was established on a sand-based and another on a soil-based green. Individual plot size was 5 x 5 ft
and three replications were run. For both studies, Dimension (Dithiopyr) was applied at 0.25, 0.50 and 1.00 lb a.i./A on May 1, 2001.
The material was applied using a 'shaker dispenser' to ensure uniform coverage.
The studies were monitored for turf quality and phytotoxicity from May 15 through September 5 (Tables 1 and 2). Turf quality was
assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable and 1 = worst quality. No phytotoxicity was observed. Control of P oa
annuawas recorded from May 15 through September 5 (Tables 3 and 4). Populations were determined by estimating the percentage of
area per plot covered by Poa annua. The small population on the soil-based green died out and/or was overgrown by bentgrass
beginning mid July. Some regrowth was observed on September 5.
To quantify possible treatment effects on Poa annua seedhead formation, differences in the percentage of Poa annua seed head
formation per plot were noted for the sand-based green study on May 15, June 15, July 11, and July 24 (Table 5). The Poa annua on the
soil-based green did not produce seed heads.
The soil-based green was core aerified on August 15 and large cores (approximately 3/4" diameter) were removed. There were obvious
differences in recovery from the aerification and these were noted on August 24 and August 28 (Table 6). Recovery was assessed using a
9 to 1 scale with 9 = 100% recovery, 5 = 50% recovery, and 1 = 0% recovery.
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on Poa annua populations and visual quality were tested using Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD)
means comparison test. In addition, orthogonal contrasts were conducted using the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure to provide
means comparisons among individual treatments (Tables 7-10).
Sand-based Green:
No phytotoxicity was observed on the treated bentgrass. Enhanced turf quality was observed in bentgrass treated with Dimension at 0.25
lb a.i./A on May 15 and May 23 as compared with the other treated and untreated bentgrass (Table 1). On June 6, bentgrass treated with
either Dimension at 0.50 or at 1.00 lb a.i./A had better quality than the other treated and untreated turf. After June 6, quality was similar
for all treated and untreated bentgrass.
There were numerical reductions in Poa annua cover among the treated and untreated plots, but the differences were statistically
significant for only June 6 and August 15 (Table 3). On these dates, Dimension at 1.00 lb a.i./A provided the best numerical control but
the level of control was not different from that caused by the other Dimension treatments.
There were significant differences in percentage Poa annua seedhead formation for June 15, July 11, and July 24 (Table 5). On June 15
and July 11, there were less seedheads in bentgrass treated with Dimension at 0.25 lb a.i./A but there were more in bentgrass treated with
Dimension at 0.50 and 1.00 lb a.i./A as compared with the untreated controls. Mean data show that there was significantly more
seedhead formation in bentgrass treated with Dimension at 0.50 or 1.00 lb a.i./A than in bentgrass treated at 0.25 lb a.i./A or untreated.
The orthogonal contrasts provide additional information on statistical differences in Poa annuacover by giving probabilities of > T
values for pairwise comparisons among the treatments (Table 7). On June 1, June 15, August 15, and August 24 the differences between
percentage cover in untreated bentgrass were statistically different than in bentgrass treated with Dimension at 1.00 lb a.i./A.
Soil-based Green:
No phytotoxicity was observed on the treated bentgrass. Numerical improvements in turf quality were recorded through September 5 but
these differences were statistically significant for only June 1, June 6, and June 15 (Table 2). On these dates, turf quality was best for
bentgrass treated with Dimension at 1.00 lb a.i./A as compared with the other treated and untreated areas.
There were reductions in Poa annua cover in treated bentgrass as compared to untreated but the differences were not statistically
significant (Table 4). The Poa annua population on this green was rather sporadic and appeared to die out by early August. In addition,
the population within the experimental area and surrounding it did not form seedheads.
Core aerification performed on August 15 resulted in significant differences in recovery rates (Table 6). On August 24, bentgrass treated
with either Dimension at 0.50 or 1.00 lb a.i./A had significantly less recovery from aerification By August 28, the cores were still only
75% regrown in bentgrass treated with Dimension at 1.00 lb a.i./A. The cores in all other treated and untreated areas had completely
recovered.

35

Table 1.

Turf quality1 of creeping bentgrass on a sand-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension Safety study.

3 ’

p o o p
Q\ On On

3 ^

o m ^ n
oo
oc

C
oj3Uvn
C
Y1

C
P-N
3 <

o m
K h h oo

£?°0
< «

C

O cn o o
On On

3

pppp

rn p
r-;
vo vo vo

oc _
S3
< ~

p o o p
OO* 00 0 0 oo

3 2

p o o p
00 00 00 00

oc

< m

p o o p
00* OO* OO 00*

X1Tt
3 <N

ro ro r-;
OO 00* OO* 00

•T s

oo On On 00

<D

»an

Table 2.

Turf quality1 of creeping bentgrass on a soil-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension Safety study.

S3 —

p n Is;
vo

^ <N

oo

p o o p
vo oo oo ov

pppp

00 00 On

s ~

p o o p
£ -

rjA &

00

OO

O n O n

*T) O O
s <N »an o

JD

ON
K

IO

OO

OO

!> ;

P

oo’ 00 OO On

co © co ©

00 00 00 00

00 00 OO 00

<

m

p©

nan o

cO

•

(N

IA

O
C

Od *°
JO

5^3 ¿3
—
CO
IANT3
© <D
O s
<U-C

N
s° s=>
ox° ox
Tf Tf 0sTf
VC VO VO

S°
0s- N°
cN

TT Tt Tt
VO vo VO

cO

(N

CO

•s

o o o
_H I

■ I
Oi rni m
t—
i im

° o ''c o'

32 *.2Cfl 3.2 *5«
.2
8 g g g
§ e a e

*c
6
CO

2

co co co

i i i
o o o

.2
C
/2.2C
/3.2C
/5
g g g

aaa

5 5 5

5 5 5

— <N co rT

- (N fC Tf

d

c 3
,<u >
S o
C
oc o So <U
c o C «*
•S <N co eg
,2 ^
<u
§>
C/3

-ri

S3 §
2«j2 .2
^
? 3
£ &
CO C/5
§ •1
•c §

p

03

1 1
|CO oE
Cfl O

<L>

3 <

CO CO CO O
co’ 00 CO O
(N M COCO

© VO OV VO
CO (N fS (N

<GD0\
G CM

co p co
co O co i—
'
co co co co

wo vo

4>
cG _o-CM

r* c- o r-

OO W
O

00

< ™

O’ m O' m

©© ©wo vo

Percentage Poa annua cover1 in creeping bentgrass on a sand-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension Safety study.

w~i co O' co

©00

oo

CO ^
Tt
© ©.
wo’ © VO 00 U h co

©

§ VO

o r- r- o o' t-"

a

<N — —

A —

II —'
't co n u.
rn

WO —‘ VO o

a

A

G
O~
G5

p co p co
wo C
Om
OC
co
’
O'
cn
M

00
< m

S' CO

*5 CM

co co p
oo co —I ©
CO CO O' O'
GO
CM

~

S' vn
£ ~

©

©

W
O«
vo
CM
>
C
O
NV
CO
MC

P CO CO r*;
CO CMCMCO
© ’ 00 00 vo

C00O CCO
O
O ©C©O C00
CMCO
CO
O O h; Cl

O
Co’MC©O C—O’ CCO
e3
(V

■

.O
«5

00
m

r—© © co

woMoWOoO
s C

I
§
I

Xio

4)
03

c*

S
oo>
o
a

T3

4>

©

©

C3

•C8
s
c3

03

N
® oNx=> N
oN
ox=
Tf
Tf Tf

N
NxO S
oxO o
oxO
0- 0 - 0 -

VO VO VO

VO vo VO

© © ©
/—“v
/—S

o o o
I I I
CO
I CIO C
IO
o o o

O w' >>-✓
ii G C G

’g .9 .2 .2

B B

Table 3.

vo

W
O © © VO

G

§2

p

© © ©

< "

iri ur> ‘

00

©

©

©

/«“*S✓—V/—
■
s
© © ©

_ I I I
O co co co
Vi I I I

0o
-G
a>

c © © ©

o
o
o
c
G c
mo _ o o
"cfl ’cfl S5
03 c
C C
4> 4) a>
1 E e 6

5 3 3 3

d

3 3 3

<—<CMCO O'

—

CM co O"

pG
j£
*3
Vi

C3
4>

BC oX

4> ©
~
OfN
C
to _r 8

S «
- S

ICfl

O
4) E4)G
a- c3
CCa./33 <CCZ3i
.2 B4)
u03 I
2 on
2

p p p O

c/3

n n n o

cn

(N <N CN —'

3

CN CN CN ^

p p p q

Table 4.

Percentage Poa annu a zo \zxx in creeping bentgrass on a soil-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension Safety study.

O uS vo 2
iri

— vo m o

<D
I -

Z

Z

z

vq rf oo rt

c/o

^

Z

Tf n

on

<D»O

O q h; q
(N ri (N

£?00
< «

o o o o
d o d o

< ^

o Tj-

o o o o
d o d o

60
_
03 O

m m o o

c/3
Z

^

d ddd

pppq

vo oo »ri

m m o o

d ddd
o' m

p Op p
O Tf »ri ffj

^ Tf
3 <n
^ «o
£ ~

pppp

t"* cn Tf *-«

ppop
cn cn

r t cn

On
cn

cn

Z

qppp

un vo vo un

CO _
ck 03

§

^ (N
^ oIT) O
o

§

C
0

o o
< vn
(N IT) O

i
x>
h- BC
—
O
wnT3
p 0
o w
« -C

_ CO

5

V
ox© s©
ox sP
ox
^VO VO V
TfO

o
3
£

N
ox©N
ox©N
ox®
i

Tf
^ ^
VO vo VO

C
0
s
O rn cn cn

£
C
o
-2 c« 73 c«

p o o o
§ O O C
c c c
o
*8
_ -2tfl .2w tfl

Q Q

d' B B B
D Q Q Q

8 §§S

cn

m

*— cn m Tf

I ,u >
• fc 3
I^ ^ c
¡0 ^ 2
!1 ®,, C
g 7£3
i r rtO fi
to
& s .§>
1
rr* O
§ z t
•O c §,
E
& =a g
o
Oh 7630 O
CO c O)

“ 2S

•S E |
« II E
«5 !/3

11

2 Z I

Table 5.

Percentage Poa annua seedhead formation1 in creeping bentgrass on a sand-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension
Safety study.

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.

Untreated control
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.

Rate
lb a.i./A

May
15

June
15

July
11

July
24

Mean

NA
0.25
0.50
1.00

36.7
20.0
31.7
38.3

25.0
10.0
46.7
35.0

0.0
3.3
20.0
50.0

6.7
18.3
18.3
26.7

17.1
12.9
29.2
37.5

9.6

14.2

12.0

NS
5.8
LSDo.o5
1These data represent the percentage of Poa annua^XavAs per plot that were forming seedheads.
Materials applied on May 1, 2001
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

Table 6.

Recovery from core aerification1 in creeping bentgrass on a soil-based green treated for the 2001 Dimension Safety study.

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.

Untreated control
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.
Dimension (10-3-10) 0.164% a.i.

Rate
lb a.i./A

August
24

August
28

Mean

NA
0.25
0.50
1.00

8.0
7.3
7.0
3.3

9.0
9.0
9.0
7.3

8.5
8.2
8.0
5.3

0.6
0.9
L S D 0 .o5
^ h e recovery from aerification was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = full recovery, 5 = 50% recovery, 1 = no recovery.
Materials applied on May 1, 2001

40

0.6

.

Table 7.

Probabilities for > T comparing percentage Poaannuacoszx in creeping bentgrass on a sand-based green treated for the
2001 Andersons Dimension Safety Study.

Material

Untreated control vs treatments
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A

May
15

May
23

June
1

June
6

June
15

June
24

June
29

July
3

July
11

0.1851

0.9983

0.0486

0.0610

0.0915

0.2731

0.8425

0.1009

0.0883

0.8376

06140

0.1961

0.5102

0.1085

0.2231

0.7463

0.3153

0..0252

0.1377

0.7351

0.1107

0.1308

0.4796

0.8284

1.0000

0.0710

0.1485

0.0761

0.8652

0.0355

0.0198

0.0645

0.2231

0.8710

0.1944

0.1070

0.1145

0.4186

0.9242

0.2896

0.3293

0.3529

0.7422

0.8841

0.7879

0.1024

0.4096

0.6922

03343

0.3014

0.3007

0.7463

0.3153

0.8207

0.1024

0.4096

0.6922

0.3343

0.3014

0.3007

0.7463

0.3153

0.8207

0.0567

0.5050

0.2590

0.0498

0.7193

1.0000

0.8710

0.7275

0.6525

0.2438

0.5860

0.5845

0.6031

0.4650

0.4344

0.8425

0.1537

0.5296

0.1377

0.7351

0.1107

0.1308

0.4796

0.8244

1.0000

0.0710

0.1485

0.1024

0.4096

0.6922

0.3343

0.3014

0.3007

0.7463

0.3153

0.8207

0.6836

0.8652

0.4378

0.2111

0.1824

0.3007

0.8710

0.4927

0.8207

0.0931

0.7857

0.1002

0.0293

0.1412

0.3468

0.9460

0.6796

0.3318

0.0761

0.8652

0.0355

0.0198

0.0645

0.2231

0.8710

0.1944

0.1070

0.0567

0.5050

0.2590

0.0498

0.7193

1.0000

0.8710

0.7275

0.6525

0.6836

0.8652

0.4378

0.2111

0.1824

0.3007

0.8710

0.4927

0.8207

41

Table 8.

Probabilities for > T comparing percentage Poa annua cover in creeping bentgrass on a sand-based green treated for the
2001 Andersons Dimension Safety Study.

Material

Untreated control vs treatments
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A

July
24

Aug
3

Aug
10

Aug
15

Aug
24

Aug
28

Sept
5

Mean

0.2798

0.8115

0.3158

0.0245

0.1388

0.1509

0.7773

0.4979

0.4198

0.7811

0.5087

0.0340

0.1880

0.3153

0.8349

0.4486

0.7825

0.7811

0.5087

0.1795

0.5742

0.3153

0.7814

0.8483

0.1340

0.2891

0.2530

0.0229

0.0828

0.1177

0.8349

0.4807

0.8311

0.4970

. 0.9618

0.1920

0.5026

0.8943

0.9551

0.5712

0.5847

1.0000

1.0000

0.2699

0.4072

1.0000

0.9445

0.5638

0.5847

1.0000

1.0000

0.2699

0.4072

1.0000

0.9445

0.5638

0.4198

0.1963

0.5945

0.7715

0.5742

0.4927

1.0000

0.9551

0.4999

0.4970

0.9618

0.6284

0.4881

0.8943

0.8655

0.7058

0.7825

0.7811

0.5087

0.1795

0.5742

0.3153

0.7814

0.8483

0.5847

1.0000

1.0000

0.2699

0.7072

1.0000

0.9445

0.5638

0.1990

0.1963

0.5945

0.1795

0.1880

0.4927

0.9445

0.6009

0.1498

0.1474

0.3685

0.0946

0.1402

0.2296

0.9558

0.6283

0.1340

0.2891

0.2530

0.0229

0.0828

0.1177

0.8349

0.4807

0.4198

0.1963

0.5945

0.7715

0.5742

0.4927

1.0000

0.9551

0.1990

0.1963

0.5945

0.1795

0.1880

0.4927

0.9445

0.6009

42

Table 9.

Probabilities for > T comparing percentage Poa annua cover in creeping bentgrass on a soil-based green treated
for the 2001 Andersons Dimension Safety Study.

Material

Untreated control vs treatments
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A

May
15

May
23

June
1

June
6

June
15

July
3

July
11

July
16

0.2398

0.2773

0.2612

0.6623

0.5676

0.7454

0.7454

0.4825

0.3190

0.3351

0.3517

0.2948

0.6721

1.0000

1.0000

0.3903

0.4962

0.4694

0.5260

0.7152

0.5748

1.0000

1.0000

0.3903

0.2180

0.3123

0.2270

0.7152

0.6721

04454

04454

1.0000

0.6585

0.6270

0.7003

0.2082

0.9085

0.7454

0.7454

0.4762

0.7297

0.7920

0.7480

0.4732

0.8870

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.7297

0.7920

0.7480

0.4732

0.8870

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.7818

0.9578

0.7480

0.1768

1.0000

0.4454

0.4454

0.3903

0.9046

0.9520

0.8900

0.8751

0.7302

0.7454

0.7454

0.4762

0.4962

0.4694

0.5260

0.7152

0.5748

1.0000

1.0000

0.3903

0.7297

0.7920

0.7480

0.4732

0.8870

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.5387

0.7520

0.5260

0.4732

0.8870

0.4454

0.4454

0.3903

0.3813

0.5668

0.3741

0.3169

0.9099

0.3559

0.3559

0.4762

0.2180

0.3123

0.2270

0.7152

0.6721

0.4454

0.4454

1.0000

0.7818

0.9578

0.7480

0.1768

1.0000

0.4454

0.4454

0.3903

0.5387

0.7520

0.5260

0.4732

0.8870

0.4454

0.4454

0.3903

43

Table 10.

Probabilities for > T comparing percentage Poaannuacowc in creeping bentgrass on a soil-based green treated
for the 2001 Andersons Dimension Safety Study.

Material

Untreated control vs treatments
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Untreated control vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated & other treatments
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
untreated control
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.25 lb a.i./A
Dimension @1.00 lb a.i./A vs
Dimension @0.50 lb a.i./A

July
24

Aug
3

Aug
10

0.6505

0.4762

0.4762

1.0000

1.0000

1.0000

0.5419

0.3903

0.3903

0.6236

0.3903

0.3903

0.6505

0.4762

0.4762

0.5419

0.3903

0.5419

Sept
5

Mean

0.2743

0.8327

—

0.4881

0.9249

—

0.1901

0.9474

—

—

0.4881

0.6341

—

—

1.0000

0.9537

0.3903

0.4881

0.8728

0.3903

0.3903

0.4881

0.8728

0.6236

0.3903

0.3903

1.0000

0.7010

0.5854

0.4825

0.4825

0.2743

0.7507

0.5419

0.3903

0.3903

0.1901

0.9474

0.5419

0.3903

0.3903

0.4881

0.8728

0.9014

1.0000

1.0000

0.4881

0.5894

0.7282

0.4825

0.4825

0.9931

0.5688

0.6236

0.3903

0.3903

0.4881

0.6341

0.6236

0.3903

0.3903

1.0000

0.7010

0.9014

1.0000

1.0000

0.4881

0.5894

44

Aug
24

—

Aug
28

—

—

—

Dimension + Turf Enhancer/TGR Safety on Bentgrass/P^a annua Greens Study
B. R. Bingaman, T. R. Oster, and N. E. Christians
This study was designed to measure turf quality and Poa annua population reductions on Bentgrass/Poa annua greens treated with
paclobutrazole and dithiopyr concurrently. This study was conducted at Veenker Golf Course in Ames, IA on a sand-based practice
green heavily infested with Poa annua. In the study area, the percentage cover of Poa annua was approximately 60%. Individual plot
size was 5 x 5 ft and three replications were run.
Two fertilizer/herbicide treatments and an untreated control were included. One treatment consisted of Dimension 0.164% (10-3-10)
applied concurrently with Turf Enhancer 0.13% (14-0-28) on May 1 and Turf Enhancer applied alone at 28 day intervals on June 8 and
June 28, 2001. For the second treatment Dimension 0.164% (10-3-10) was combined with TGR 0.34% (15-0-29) on May 1, 2001 and
TGR was applied alone eight weeks later on June 28, 2001. All granular materials were applied using a 'shaker dispenser1to ensure
uniform coverage.
Turf quality was monitored from May 10 through September 5 (Table 1). Quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best, 6 =
lowest acceptable and 1 = worst quality. Poa annua control was recorded from May 10 through September 5 (Table 2). Poa annua
populations were determined by estimating the percentage area per plot covered by Poa annua. In addition, differences in the percentage
of Poa annua seedhead production per plot were noted for May 15 and July 24 (Table 3).
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on Poa annua populations and visual quality were tested using Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD)
means comparison test. In addition, Poa annua percentage cover means were compared using orthogonal contrasts in the General Linear
Model (GLM) procedure (Table 4).
There was significant improvement in treated bentgrass quality on May 10, July 3, August 10, and August 15 as compared with the
untreated control (Table 1). On other dates, numerical increases in quality ratings were noted but these were not statistically different.
Treatment with TGR produced a definite color response in the bentgrass but not the Poa annua. The dark green bentgrass was in stark
contrast to the lime green of the Poa annua and produced 'mottled or spotted' plots as compared to the untreated control and bentgrass
treated with Turf Enhancer. Quality ratings on June 6 and June 15 reflect the distinct differences among the treatments but they are not
statistically significant.
Populations of Poa annua were reduced in treated bentgrass from June 1 through July 3 as compared with the untreated control but the
reductions were not statistically significant on all dates (Table 2). After July 3, Poa annua die-back resulted in greatly reduced
populations in treated and untreated bentgrass and treatment effects are not significant.
Percentage Poa annua seedhead production data were taken when there was a large amount of seedhead formation on the practice green.
On May 15, there were no statistical differences among the treated and untreated bentgrass (Table 3). On July 24, there were more
seedheads in bentgrass treated with Dimension + Turf Enhancer than in bentgrass treated with Dimension + TGR or untreated.
The orthogonal contrasts show that on some collection dates Poa annua populations in treated bentgrass plots were significantly different
when compared individually with the untreated bentgrass or the other treatment (Table 4).

45

or-;
oo oo

e os

Visual quality1 o f creeping bentgrass on a sand based green treated for the 2001 Dimension + TGR/Turf Enhancer Safety Study.

3

04

©
K

cn ro

SO 0 4

K 00

oo

<75

o- r-

o
00

00
< ^

o

3 ^
< "

p

oo

p

Os

r^
0 0 00

00

o o

o

Os Os

Os

p
fO
0 0 00

o
o

04

o o

o

oo

60

Os

ro o-

o
Os

< ~

o
o

04

Cd

p rn

§>©

oo

S' cn
^ <N

co p

60

p

VO 00

00

o o-

<D

00 £

O
OS

c B
.'S' o
1 %
a* ^5
E ^
o
? § «a

r-

r- r-

<SN

6X)
<D

-C
^
*T3
<D *=
CO

C

—r ca <U
2n
O

o

p

vri os

3

04

$
ZL

p
p
O s OO

C

© r-

p

3

00

oo

-

o o

£ £
cA £
so £ §

o

Os Os

ta>f .0
"g p2
*52 m
o o

<* £ O
Q o£
zr ^
cd
V»
0s-

^2

cd

*6
B
£

Cd

B

VO <N 2:
’-1

^ oI
o

o m <u
o

-H
I

w §
o 13
•s ffl '

c I h . £I H
H 9
30 +5 +

o ,.2
a,
eo .ts
c
cd 7 3

■Hfi o©• «Q
o o
“

Sg J

5 1

ri

© ^
4 ©

O
Os
04

ed

© \0

QJ

73

00
0
4 VO

/---S

8
c

* *

- >*.5
15 Q
o '£ J C

no

~ rn

g 'S

-O
03
H

Oh
QJ VO

oo

04
00

§ w
■§ §

o
Os
04

.2
00

g

■

cd

<N &

£
S ^ s
f2. E 2 Q
+ Q + I—I u £ vs

w -a

2

1

•3 g O

I I

VO

Percentage Poa annua cover1 in creeping bentgrass on a sand based green treated for the 2001 Dimension + TGR/Turf Enhancer Safety Study.
Table 2.

vo ©

m

£

<D
C OS
P <N

p r»n VO
(N

r-H

^fr
T*
1

cP CM

00

§ 40

oTf fN
m

c __
p

p p
iri ©
m (N

a m
s M

cn o
cd ©
m m

VO

00
Z

£ -

o ^
Tt

VO

oo
Z

VO

^

(N —

t/5

z

n°
• 0ms- •-

CQ
•C

d_ ^O s*o
^J. ^00 3 - Cd
^

VO <N VO

o

^ 9
o
o ^
"T O "T 0
1 n
^
n
r
.i O1 D
1 r;
o O <N
* CO

iLU

H
+

'

* S
2H 00
D
+ l-J

Table 3.

Percentage Poa annua seedhead production1 in creeping bentgrass on a sand based green treated for the 2001 Dimension +
TGR/Turf Enhancer Safety Study.

Material

1.
2.
3.

May
15

Untreated control
Dimension (10-3-10). 164% a.i.
+ Turf Enhancer (14-0-28) 0.13%
Dimension ( 10-3-10). 164% a.i.
+ TGR (15-0-29) 0.34% a.i.

Mean

July
24

17.0
18.3

4.0
50.0

10.5
34.2

26.7

13.3

20.0

16.0
NS
17.9
___________LSP0.05________________________________________________________________________
1These figures represent the percentage of Poaannua^ox plot forming seedheads.
Turf enhancer (14-0-28) was applied initially with Dimension (10-3-10) on May 1 and then by itself on June 8 and June 28, 2001.
TGR (15-0-29) was applied initially with Dimension (10-3-10) on May 1 by itself eight weeks later on June 28, 2001.

Table 4.

Probabilities for > T1 comparing percentage Poa annua cower in turf treated for the 2001 Anderson's
Dimension/TGR/Turf Enhancer Safety Study.

Material

Dimension + Turf Enhancer
vs untreated control
Dimension + Turf Enhancer
vs Dimension + TGR
Dimension + TGR
vs untreated control

Material

May
15

May
23

June
1

June
6

June
15

June
21

June
29

July
3

0.9056

0.6213

0.0213

0.0535

0.0872

0.0036

0.0241

0.2746

0.3191

0.0557

0.2879

0.3099

0.2475

0.0705

0.3892

0.5614

0.2751

0.0993

0.0080

0.0179

0.4181

0.0213

0.0618

0.5614

Aug
31

Sept
5

July
11

July
24

Aug
2

Aug
10

Aug
15

Dimension + Turf Enhancer
0.8185
0.1401
0.0816
0.6433
0.4818
1.000
0.5823
vs untreated control
Dimension + Turf Enhancer
0.5032
0.0816
0.2005
0.1161
0.0808
0.4818
0.6575
vs Dimension + TGR
0.0668
0.4818
1.0000
0.1963
0.9106
Dimension + TGR
0.6499
0.7747
vs untreated control
1These figures represent the probabilities that a greater value for T would occur by chance alone and were produced using the General
Linear Model procedure and orthogonal contrasts.
Turf enhancer (14-0-28) was applied initially with Dimension (10-3-10) on May 1 and then by itself on June 8 and June 28, 2001.
TGR (15-0-29) was applied initially with Dimension (10-3-10) on May 1 and by itself eight weeks later on June 28, 2001.

48

Field Evaluation of Roundup Ready® Creeping Bentgrass
Shui-zhang Fei and Rodney A. St. John
Roundup Ready creeping bentgrass offers great promise for the golf industry because it will allow for more selective, effective and thus,
simplified control of aggressive annual and perennial weeds in golf course turf. Weeds that can be easily controlled with Roundup®
brand herbicides include annual bluegrass, roughstalk bluegrass, bermudagrass and many other grassy and broadleaf weeds. A
greenhouse study of Roundup Ready creeping bentgrass at Iowa State University has demonstrated that key morphological data and
pollen longevity of Roundup Ready creeping bentgrass are essentially the same as its conventional counterpart except the roundup ready
phenotype.
The purpose of this research was to evaluate the performance of Roundup Ready creeping bentgrass under field conditions. This research
was established on September 13, 2001 with three replications of 5x5 ft (25 ft2) plots for each cultivar. A 2 feet border area between plots
was seeded with perennial ryegrass. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with split plot. Seven conventional
cultivars of Crenshaw, Penncross, Penneagle, Providence, Backspin, A4 and L93 were used along with two leading Roundup Ready
creeping bentgrass lines ASR 333 and ASR368. The trial was fertilized with 1 lb N/1000 ft2 and 1 lb P/1000 ft2 during the establishment.
Three weeks after seedling emergence, half of each plot received roundup application at a rate of 32 oz /acre. Data on turf quality, weed
development and other morphological characteristics after the roundup application are not available at this time.

49

Corsair Perennial Ryegrass Control Study
B.R. Bingaman, T. R. O ster,

N. E. C hristians

The objective of this study was to screen Corsair for removal of perennial ryegrass from a ryegrass/creeping bentgrass area maintained at
fairway height. This study was conducted at Veenker Golf Course in Ames, IA on the border area between a bentgrass fairway and the
adjacent ryegrass/Kentucky bluegrass rough. The bluegrass rough contained approximately 50% ryegrass. The experimental design was
a randomized complete block and three replications were conducted. Individual plot size was 5 x 5 ft. The plots were arranged so one
half of the plot was covered by bentgrass and the other by bluegrass/ryegrass turf.
Corsair was applied at 1, 2, and 3 oz/A on August 8 using a carbon dioxide backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a
spray pressure of 30-40 psi. The herbicide was mixed with water to a volume equivalent to 3 gal/1000 ft2.
Ryegrass damage was recorded on August 10, August 16 and August 23. Damage was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = no damage,
5 = 50% ryegrass mortality, and 1 = 100% ryegrass mortality (Table 1). Phytotoxicity on bentgrass was rated using a 9 to 1 scale with 9
= no damage, 5 = 50% bentgrass damaged, and 1 = 100% bentgrass damaged. Bentgrass damage data were taken from August 10
through October 19 (Table 2). Kentucky bluegrass quality was monitored for possible phytotoxicity from August 10 through October 19
(Table 3). Turf quality was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality.
Ryegrass control was determined by estimating the percentage cover per individual plot (Table 4). These data were taken initially on
August 23 to assess the amount of ryegrass killed. Subsequent cover data were taken to monitor if there was any regrowth.
Percentage cover data were taken for bentgrass to reflect the amount of mortality in the treated plots (Table 5). These data were taken
from August 10 through September 19.
The percentage bluegrass/ryegrass cover also was monitored from August 10 through October 19 (Table 6). These figures reflect the
spread of bluegrass throughout the areas devoid of ryegrass in the treated plots.
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis o f Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on turf populations and turf quality were examined using Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD) test.
There was no damage on ryegrass until approximately 12 days post treatment (Table 1). Yellowing was beginning on August 20 and by
August 23, the treated ryegrass was 'brown' and dead. The bluegrass/ryegrass areas of each treated plot were monitored through October
19 and there was no regrowth of ryegrass (Table 4). There were no phytotoxic symptoms on the treated bluegrass (Table 3). Bluegrass
spread into the bare areas of the treated plots and by September 28, plots treated with Corsair at 1.0 and 2.0 oz/A were similar to the
untreated controls in turfgrass percentage cover (Table 6).
On August 23, significant levels of damage were observed on the treated bentgrass (Table 2). Damage was not significant on bentgrass
treated with Corsair at 1 oz/A on August 23 and August 30 as compared with the untreated controls. However, bentgrass treated at 2.0
and 3.0 oz/A exhibited significant levels of damage as compared with the untreated controls on August 23 through September 6. As
much as 50% of the bentgrass treated with Corsair at 3.0 oz/A was damaged and suffered severe browning and some mortality. By
September 21, the effects of Corsair on percentage cover and bentgrass quality were no longer recorded (Tables 2 and 5). Bentgrass had
moved into the bare areas of the treated plots and some of the damaged bentgrass had regrown from the crowns.
This study will be monitored through the spring and summer o f 2002 for possible regrowth of perennial ryegrass.

50

cd

On Vi ; ON CN
oo oo oo ©

0>
2

ON VO vo so Z
O

CO CO CO c/3

p © © p

x /i

ON ON ON ON Z

p p p p 00
O n On O n on

o

Z

O O O O C/5

p
do
p

OS —' ^ —* Z

p

<

p

p

p

00

On On On On Z

’O

y

£ ~
« CM
(L
d>

o
p

Damage on perennial ryegrass1 treated for the 2001 Riverdale Corsair Ryegrass Control Study.

o

p

OO

On On On On Z

00
P
<

Table 1.

p

£

OO

§)
d>

-O

<
Z)
C
/3

£

o
o

p o p p w

On On On ON Z
&

•o'
5
00
G
o
U

6£ <
»
H,
<u

o h h o ai

5 vo

o

ON OO OO 00 Z

C/3

p co

vo* © *d
d>

on

p

p

P

d>
C*

CZ)

ON ON On On Z

P

00

co p

&
£

o

U

d>

o

< o o o

Z ^ ' <N CO

Ip :

CO p CO r^; <N
oo oo no »n (N

<

in >ri r j

o
oN
C

<L>

§13

-C

S
p )^2
<

&
00
c

Cd

^

oo

o

- ^

co o

P *

dfi

d>b
d

a

m

dO

db

p

d>
dfl

*£
B

M=
<
P ^

P P O O &0
O

n

ON ON ON Z

o
©
d>

p
O

n

p
O

n

p
O 00
ON ON

Z

£ Id
c

2 £

05

o *5

3 <
Od

o

< © © ©
Z ^ <N CO

od

On Z*
«* £

J fl
&

O

ta
S
U -fa
cfl .is
cS.fa
R! o
C O O O C/3
D U U U J

Cd

cd

Q

<N

C

•o
0
1

q 8
c; t/3
£ £ £ Q Cd
O O O co £^

.P -P -P
cd cd cd

U U U J

CJ
—

<N CO T f

JD
03
H

— <N

Tf

2
^
W3
S
cd

d) d)
dfi ^
cd

£

ii

Mean

O

O

O

O

CO

on on on on Z

October

p p p p co
ON On On O'n Z

October

C"- O O O
oo © © © cn

O'nOn On O'nZ

p p p p

in

P © © © On
— O O O rsi
Td-

September

£

I

O O O O OO

September

On On On On Z

¿3
§
u

O O p O 00

September
September

co

p

p

p

oo

co

©

©

©

»n

c*
o
U

O O O O 00

(N

$
o
o

On On On On Z

p O p p !/)
On ^ n On On Z

00
CN
6

S
o
o
<N

X)
80)
a

r- o o o on

—‘ © © © <N
m

so
0sO
o

On On On On Z

CN
IT)

T3

CO p

p

p

00

Id

co

o

©

»n

j

13
o
m

August

August

y

I

O O O O 00
On On ON On Z

S>

O p O O CO
On ON ON On Z

&
<u
£

August
August

cd
p p p p CO o r:
On On On ON Z

O

O

O

O
0)h

GO

&
a>
£
O
co

p

p

p

00

co

©

©

©

in

3.
<

m

CO

3 Ta
K
O

< © © ©
Z
(N n

in
II
in

<lT

GO
cd
£
•8

Ic

On On On On Z

O

©

§§

jS

>
oo
&

Rate

-5
o

< © © ©
z
<N rn

ON

Material

I

fn

o

cd O
co C
cd u

•'SJs3 -E
a^ .S
i d o * S3

00

0)
G
cdO
u
Oh

£* §
c o o o co -3 cd
D U U U J 5

e
3
3

cd

*C
o
«
2

T3
O
cd
0 "3 '3
13 e i
C o o

^

cn

m Tt

*t: I
H -7

©
*3
d
8
Q
O CO

D U U O J

cr S

QJ

s
H

cd

1

-O
cd
H

cd

£
0)

oo
Cd
E

cd

cn

m

Q
—

Mean
October

o o o o
o© o© o©o©f Zj

October

CN Tf CO oo p
o© SO ©
vs
OS OS OS 00

©

p

©

os p p os p
cn —’ © s o
Os OO 00 X
1

§
<L>
£

’o

^S

•S'

2

©

O
00 o o
O OS © o

</a
£

September

©

© © r - os

©
O

© © SO (N
O O OS

Sn
C*
Vn

September

’cd

O P

1
0
U

p OS

<D

© SO CN
O ©O O
OS

10)
>
2

©
©

p
r- p
c n so 00
OS 00

©
©
©

© © © x
© vs vs vs
00 00 X CN

r -

©
vs
r -

©

o

c
O
U

P
©

© r- r- c^- go
©
so SO so Z
O oo
00 h

«-H
a>
X
£ 00
2 CN
Oh
o
c/a

u
X)
e 2 <N
6Ph

SO
OS

p

p

00 00

vs
CN

r -

vs

P

©

©

oo

r -

cn
r -

vs
vs

CN
CN

September

C/a

©

©

© cn cn p
Os so SC X
OS OS OS os

CN
<L>
U

September

a
^3

X
i s
o0>

p
so
OS

1- H

GO

P

© © r-' © p
OS © SO v s v s
OS OS

2
Vi
2
Dh

CO

6

UO

X

§

X

August

O
h
<U

August
August

Oh

fl

T3

2
S) O
<

00

p © p ©
vn X
cn
OS vs vs ©
cn

©

£
© © © ©
o s Os OS OS
OS OS OS OS

p oo
00
cn (N

c/a

cn r - p r - ©
SO SO cri SO cn
Os OO t"- v s CN

© © p p cn
© v s oo cn SO
Os o s v s X cn

p p ©
00 oo ©
oo X X

o
<

§ op
0 o
0,-5

©

©

©

© © © ©
© © © ©

^

August

V- H_,
«

© © © ©
OS Os OS Os
OS Os OS Os

Cd

2 8

© ©

§ )£
<

©
©

©
©

©
©
© ©

Rate

CJ M-h
o

1 £
o C

o o
—: CN

0)
3 ^O
K

< p

z ~

© ©
cn

cn

fe o

<u *""
.§>

X

Material

Vi

X
cd
H

O
c
cd

cd

•S
cd

o
d

§

fS
C e q
o o O GO
U U U nJ ■S 8
« 2
S ii
— <N cn

Z

•22
cd

£

<L>
<D
H

cd
SO

cd
Vi

cd
vi

c o o o
D U UU
-

(N

m

UH z

Ronstar: Demonstration of Efficacy of Various Granular Formulations
B.R. Bingaman and N. E. Christians
This preemergent study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of commercial granular Ronstar formulations, new Ronstar prototypes and
comparable rates of Ronstar on fertilizer carriers. The research was conducted at the Horticulture Research Station north of Ames, IA in
established 'common' Kentucky bluegrass with a history of crabgrass infestations. The soil was a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic
Aquic Hapludoll) with 2.5% organic matter, 66 ppm K, 9 ppm P, and a pH of 7.6.The design was a randomized complete block. Three
replications were conducted and individual plot size was 5 x 5 ft. Irrigation was used to supplement rainfall and to maintain the turf in
good growing condition. Experimental formulations and commercial products containing Ronstar were screened with an untreated
control. Pendimethalin 60WDG was included as a treated control for comparisons (Table 1).
Early preemergence materials were applied on April 27 and 'normal' preemergence materials were applied on May 25. The Lesco
fertilizer formulation with Ronstar did not arrive until May 4. The early application of this material (treatment #3) was made on May 4.
The 'normal' application was made with the other treatments on May 25. All applications were made before crabgrass germination and
were 'watered in'. Granular materials were applied using 'shaker dispensers' to ensure uniform application. Sprayables were applied
using a carbon dioxide backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a spray pressure of 30-40 psi. Liquid formulations were
mixed with water to a volume equivalent to 3 gal/1000 ft2.
Crabgrass germination in the untreated controls was noted on July 11 but the plants were not large enough to assess. Crabgrass
infestation data were taken beginning July 25 and ending on August 28 (Table 3). Populations were estimated as the percentage coverage
per plot. These data were converted to express crabgrass control as compared with the untreated controls (Table 5). Turf quality was
monitored throughout the season and data were taken weekly from May 9 through August 28 (Tables 1 and 2). Quality was assessed
using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best, 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst quality. There was no phytotoxicity on the bluegrass.
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on weed populations and visual quality were tested using Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD) test.
Ronstar formulations with fertilizer improved turf quality as compared to the other treated and untreated turf in May and June (Tables 1
and 2). These differences were significant for all weeks except May 1 and June 6. After June 27, the nitrogen response was gone and
turf quality was similar for all treated and untreated turf.
All herbicide formulations reduced crabgrass populations significantly as compared with the untreated control (Tables 3 and 4).
Crabgrass control levels were similar in all treated plots except on August 28 when significant differences among the treatments were
recorded. There was significantly less crabgrass in turf treated with either Lesco fertilizer + Ronstar or TADS 14596 as compared with
Pendimethalin 60WDG and the untreated control. Mean population values were similar for all treatments and were significantly lower
than the untreated control. The best numerical control was provided by Lesco fertilizer + Ronstar but this level was not different from
that produced by the other herbicides.

54

p p p p p p o q p
SDSOSDSDSOSDSQSDSD

<D
c rS3 <N

p

p

r ^

p

p

p

p

o p

p

p

r ^

p

p

p

p

o p

in tn v o r ^ in iriin iriin

<D
c m

o o p o o m o o o
VOVOOOO'N'OVOVOVOVO

Turf quality of Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Aventis Preemergence Annual Grass Study (May 1-July 3).

co
a
o*

Table 1.

p p r ^ p p p p o p
vovovooovovovovovo

<L>
e ^
3

S' <N
"5 <N

c

o

q

q

q

q

q

q

q

q

VDv^ oOOn VOV.DV.OvovO

p o p o p o p o o
.& s

CO *T)

r n c o q q q q q q q
vovoooosvovovovdvd

© q r ^ q q q q q q
VOVOVOONVOVOVOVOVO

o o o o o o o o o

a> <
o'co co

CO
'G

< o o o o o o o in
Z w n rn fn rn n w -'

cO
: tfl
C
CO O
no C*
ox _
& ^
o _•
fcd
<u ^
a
N CO• I:
. O ■JZ
CO
S
O
S
O
*£ ^ ^ ox o-x |
NdO %^ c£ cm o p °. vo
CM
b o 0cm ToSx) ^*n CM
so pO ON os as
O <N .S
— 91 a:
^ ^•n 2m
- d o t : 1 — rt
C3 ?0 ^
?0 GO CO CO
IC “ Q Q Q
i» oo o <C
< <
I co
H H H
— c N m ^ tin ic r - o o o N

m
m

% *
•2 c

¡3 I
£ 2
o c

^ 8
CO CM
G *oT
O <N
C ^cO
CN CO
% ©
< ®
’§ £
«j S'

Pc

c
p °
£ I
CD Qco oCO
"£ ^
» 8 =«=
« & s

3 to
D, cc
cr

CO cG

WO

O sosvq^-H ooosovosoo
VO VO h“ 00 vo so vc vo

§>00
<

p p p p p p p p p
OVOVOsO^OsOVOVOVOV

00

p p p p p p p p p

< ™

OSOsOVOSOSOSOVOsOS

00 ^

p p p p p p p p p
OSOSCsOvasOSOsOsOS

Table 2.

Turf quality of Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Aventis Preemergence Annual Grass Study (July 11 - August 28).

2

scr

VO

60

p p p p p p p p p

< ^

00

00 00

00 00 00 00 00 OO 00

p o o p p o p o o

00 OO 00 OO OO 00 00 00 00

3 CN

tE :

p p p p p p p o o

p p p p p p p o o

VO
ir>
p p p p p p p p p

3

3 ^

-D

<pppppppin
Z

n

r i ffi rn r i r i r i

<3 ]3

^ to
*5
C
eS O
so
0s - U_
£
©,

a
*C

OS

a
c6
ed d Q
S=> s o
oX
£ £ OS
O p

s i
. o
—
o

«* ^
SO ^

o 13 (N CN
c © « rM
bOsn vo
8 N l o ■ C<*u os
sn as
so
^^ T
TiO t J Z
Zfrh ZP3 GO GO
a a
oo oc <
<
&o & H H

o

(Nm^tunvor^ocas

a 5

i-iSl

g
<
D
s

£?00
M
< C

N
t vq N
t 00 oo 00 os O p
C
M
*
cn <
N Tf cn

p
rn

p O cn p p O p r- o
»n in <N»n 00* in (NV
D©
m
,"H

(
vo

Ofl

< s
h O n q rn O h h h ;
iri ri ri <n Tf rn vo n
<N

00

<

00

<N

Table 3.

Percentage crabgrass cover1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Aventis Preemergence Annual Grass Study.

3 *

»ri (N (N >ri Tt rj \o ffi

q q q q t ^ q q q ^
iri d (N -- m" <N <n cn —'

00

< ”

P

<N

r"-pppppopp

VOOOOOOO<NO
o
o

3 -

i n o o o o o o o o

>>—
3 —

03

(N
in
(N

o o o o o o o o o

•

x>

o o o o o o o o o
O o o o o o o o o

rm

1
£

<qqqqqqq«n

^fnrnrifnfnn^^

u
op
<u
I
T3 O 2T
E
k So
a> —
> cd (N
o c
O F m
| i " rt
p c 5
w ts *
o< ~ -a
2 is §
« T o
a) ex, §

cs
\=
ox PL_,
in

a
*2
3

o

3V i
.s a
C
. o s o « cd c3- Q
so
S
O
‘
©O
N£
NN
t: ^ 0OX O
<N O O §
nd® £
rsi
<
N
rs
o u
mv vo
<N £
O
Ov O
Vsi«
ctf
O H
to
C
o
C*

(N
— § tr
8 5
C/3 Od

in in m S3

2
on
Q
<
H

2 2 w
on
Q
<
H

g §
a *9
«i
B
Oh g
U G

j:

^
&
»8
^
C

u o

2 fc 3
£ £
o<
— £<
O
aJ
2 S3

l l
( Nc n ^ t i n ' s Dr - o c o s

t |

w C

Table 4.

Percentage crabgrass control1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated for the 2001 Aventis Preemergence Annual Grass Study.

Effects of Application Timing with ZPP1560 on Spectrum of Weed Control in Turf
B. R. Bingaman and N E. Christians
This study was designed to evaluate the spectrum of weed control provided by ZPP1560 as compared with Roundup RTU and to
determine the effect of weed height (timing of application) on weed control. It was conducted at the Horticulture Research Station north
of Ames, IA in old planting beds consisting o f ’common’ Kentucky bluegrass infested with a variety of broadleaf weed species. The soil
was a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Hapludoll) with 3.2% organic matter, 71 ppm K, 22 ppm P, and a pH of 7.95. Among
the plots, there was a uniform distribution o f weed species that covered approximately 20% of the area in each plot. The predominate
species were dandelion and clover.
The experimental design was a randomized complete block. Three replications were conducted and individual plot size was 5 x 10 ft.
An experimental formulation ZPP1560 RTU from Syngenta was screened with Roundup RTU (Table 1).
The first applications were made on May 18 when the weeds were 3 - 5 inches in height. The second applications were made on July 27
when the dandelions and clover were approximately 7- 9 inches in size. The treatments were 'ready to use' formulations and were not
diluted for applications. They were applied using a carbon dioxide backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a spray
pressure of 30-40 psi.
The efficacy of the materials was measured by estimating the percentage area per plot covered by dead plants. The first data were taken
on May 22, four days following the initial applications (Table 1). Once regrowth had begun in the treated plots, the percentage of weed
cover also was recorded. For these data, estimations were made of the total area per plot covered by green weeds (Table 2). Crabgrass
infestations were determined by estimating the percentage of crabgrass cover per plot (Table 3). Weed and crabgrass cover data were
taken from June 28 through September 13. In addition, weed populations were recorded by species at the end of the season by estimating
the percentage cover per plot (Table 4). Dandelion and clover were the predominate broadleaf species. Redroot pigweed, black medic,
and spurge plants were found in two of the fifteen individual plots but the populations were less than 1% of the area.
Data were analyzed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 1989-1996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
procedure. Treatment effects on percentage dead area and weed coverage were compared using Fisher's Least Significant Difference
(LSD) means comparison test.
First application:
When applied to 3 - 5" weeds, Roundup produced faster 'kill' than ZPP1560. On May 22 (four days post treatment), there was a
significantly larger area of dead plants in plots treated with Roundup than in either those treated with ZPP1560 or in untreated (Table 1).
By May 29, there was total 'kill' of plant material in plots treated with the herbicides.
Weeds began to grow in the treated plots approximately four weeks post treatment and on June 21 there were significantly more weeds in
the plots treated with Roundup as compared with plots treated with ZPP1560 and plots untreated. Weed coverage was similar for both
herbicides after June 28 and the percentage weed cover was > 97% for July 11 through September 13. The predominate weed species
covering the previously treated plots was crabgrass. Percentage crabgrass cover was similar in treated plots but was significantly higher
than in untreated plots (Table 3). There were no differences in dandelion numbers on September 13 among the treated and untreated
plots (Table 4). There was no clover in the previously treated plots on September 13.
Second application:
When larger weeds (7-9") were treated, similar levels of plant death at four days post treatment were produced for the herbicides. Total
'kill' of all plant material in these plots was recorded on August 9.
Live weeds were first noted in the treated plots on August 21 and by September 13, there were similar levels of weed cover in the treated
plots (Table 2). Percentage weed cover was 26.7% for ZPP1560 and 20.0% for Roundup. Crabgrass and dandelion populations also
were similar in the treated plots on September 13 (Tables 3 and 4).

59

Table 1.

Percentage dead area1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 Syngenta Weed Control Study.

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Weed height at
application
NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

0.0
41.7
75.0
0.0
0.0
15.5

LSDo.os

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

May
22

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Weed height at
application
NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

July
30
0.0
0.0
0.0
85.0
80.0

May
29

June
8

June
15

0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0

—

—

—

Aug
9

Aug
16

Aug
21

0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0

June
21
0.0
60.0
71.7
0.0
0.0
11.4

Aug
28
0.0
0.0
13.3
90.0
91.3

—
—
—
13.8
20.7
LSDo.os
1These data represent the percentage area in each plot covered by dead plants.
*Ready to use formulation applied at 100 gallons/A to provide 'too wet' coverage.
First applications (3-5" weed height) were made on May 18 and second applications (7-9" weed height) on July 27, 2001
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

60

July
11
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

July
17
1.7
1.3
2.7
0.0
0.0

—

NS

Sept
13

Mean

0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
80.0

0.0
31.0
35.6
41.8
42.7

20.2

2.2

Table 2.

Percentage weed cover in turfgrass treated for the 2001 Syngenta Weed Control Study.

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Weed height at
application

June
28

NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

30.0
70.0
66.7
50.0
28.3
34.0

LSDq.06

July
3

July
11

July
17

July
25

Aug
9

33.3
70.0
66.7
51.7
28.3

36.7
100.0
100.0
31.7
28.3

38.3
98.7
97.3
38.3
35.7

61.7
100.0
100.0
60.0
63.3

61.7
100.0 ,
100.0
0.0
0.0

32.6

19.3

23.6

24.2

10.6

Aug
28

Sept
13

Mean

50.0
100.0
100.0
10.0
8.7

53.3
100.0
100.0
26.7
20.0

48.8
93.9
93.1
26.9
21.4

6.4
10.6
10.6
12.9
L S D 0.05
‘These data represent the percentage area in each plot covered by green, healthy weeds.
*Ready to use formulation applied at 100 gallons/A to provide 'too wet' coverage.
First applications (3-5" weed height) were made on May 18 and second applications (7-9" weed height) on July 27, 2001

9.9

Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Weed height at
application

Aug
16

NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

61.7
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0

61

Aug
21
61.7
100.0
100.0
1.0
1.0

Table 3.

Percentage crabgrass cover1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 Syngenta Weed Control Study.

Material

Weed height at
application

June
28

NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

28.3
65.0
63.3
26.7
25.0

July
3

July
25

16.7
85.0
85.0
5.0
3.7

25.8
79.6
78.3
25.8
21.3

20.3
33.2
11.4
17.1
LSD 0.05
These data represent the percentage area in each plot covered by crabgrass.
*Ready to use formulation applied at 100 gallons/A to provide 'too wet' coverage.
First applications (3-5" weed height) were made on May 18 and second applications (7-9" weed height) on July 27, 2001

15.0

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Table 4.

25.0
98.3
98.3
43.3
31.7

Percentage dandelion and clover cover on September 13 in turfgrass treated for the 2001, Syngenta Weed Control Study.
Material

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

33.3
70.0
66.7
28.3
25.0

Mean

Sept
13

Untreated control
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.
ZPP1560
Roundup 0.96% a.i.

Weed height at
application

Dandelion

NA
3-5"
3-5"
7-9"
7-9"

15.0
16.7
15.0
13.3
11.7

Clover

16.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7

NS
6.3
LSDo.os
1These data represent the percentage area in each plot covered by either dandelion or clover.
*Ready to use formulation applied at 100 gallons/A to provide 'too wet' coverage.
First applications (3-5" weed height) were made on May 18 and second applications (7-9" weed height) on July 27, 2001.
NS = means are not significantly different at the 0.05 level.

62

Monsanto 78365 Demonstration for Summer Fastburn Symptomology in Turfgrass
B.R. Bingaman and N. E. Christians
This study was designed to demonstrate at the 2001 Turf Field Day the fastburn symptomology capability of MON 78265 at one, two,
three and seven days post treatment and to compare this symptomology to that of Roundup Pro Dry.
This study was conducted at the Horticulture Research Station north of Ames, IA. The plot was in established area of premium Kentucky
bluegrass sod mix. The soil was a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Hapludoll) with 4.1% organic matter, 93 ppm K, 11 ppm P,
and a pH of 6.75. The experimental design was a randomized complete block. Three replications were conducted and individual plot
size was 5 x 5 ft.
Experimental MON 78365, Roundup Pro Dry, and Roundup Pro Dry + Scythe 1EC were applied at various intervals before ISU
Turfgrass Field Day on August 2 (Table 1). The 14 day before field day treatments were made on July 19, 7 days before on July 26, 3
days before on July 30, 2 days before on July 31, and 1 day before on August 1. All materials were applied using a carbon dioxide
backpack sprayer equipped with TeeJet #8006 nozzles at a spray pressure of 30-40 psi. Liquid formulations were mixed with water to a
volume equivalent to 3 gal/1000 ft2.
Efficacy of the formulations was assessed by estimating the amount of'brown' (dead and dying) plant material per plot. These
percentage data were taken from July 24 through September 26 (Table 1). The Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., 19891996) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) procedure were used to analyze the data. Treatment effects were examined with Fisher's
Least Significant Difference (LSD) means comparison test.
By July 30, turf areas treated with Roundup Pro Dry at 14 days before field day were totally brown and turf treated with MON 78365 on
July 26 was 81.7% brown (Table 2). Turf treated with Roundup Pro Dry alone or Roundup Pro Dry plus Scythe on July 26 had 76.7 and
56.7% brown area, respectively.
There were significant differences in brown areas among the treatments on August 3, one day after field day. Dead areas were similar for
the treatments applied seven days before field day. The three days before field day treatments also were similar with 78.3% brown area
for MON 78365 and 68.3% for Roundup Pro Dry plus Scythe. The symptomology on turf treated two days before field day showed
distinct differences. Treatment with MON 78365 resulted in 76.7% brown area and Roundup Pro Dry plus Scythe produced 61.7%
brown-out. However, turf treated with Roundup Pro Dry alone had only 16.7% brown area. Percentage brown areas in turf treated with
the one day before field day applications were 66.7 and 43.3% for MON 78365 and Roundup Pro Dry plus Scythe, respectively.
From August 9 through August 28, there was 100% brown-out in all treated turf. Regrowth of plant material was noted on September 13
but by September 26, brown areas in treated turf were still greater than 91% for all materials.

63

Table 1.

Timing and rates of application for nonselective herbicides used in the 2001 Monsanto 78365 Demonstration Study.
Timing of application
(days prior to Field Day- Aug 2)

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Material

Rate
a.i./A

14 days
July 19

Untreated control
MON 78365 66.6%
MON 78365 66.6%
MON 78365 66.6%
MON 78365 66.6%
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
+ Scythe 1EC
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
+ Scythe 1EC
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
+ Scythe 1EC
Roundup Pro Dry 64.9%
+ Scythe 1EC

NA
61b
61b
61b
61b
61b
61b
61b
61b
12 qts
61b
12 qts
61b
12 qts
61b
12 qts

NA

7 days
July 26

3 days
July 30

2 days
July 31

NA

NA

NA

1 day
Aug 1 .
NA

XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
xx x x x
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxxxx
XXXXX

64

O co o

§
<L>
£

©

CO

in
CN

CO
CN

o

Os
Tf

Tf
OS

os

so
OS

OS

Os
OS

O
©

OhO

o o co o o CO o

o

o

co

©

Os
OS

os
os

OS
OS

OhCO
CD

?S

SP cs.

5

<

<,

S

T—*

OX)
p
ns
<

OX)
3

co

<

J^T* c o

n g 'r t
5

r-o s OS OS Os s o Os s o
OS OS OS OS Os OS OS Os

o co
©

co co r -

O

ros in
Os Os OS OS s o
OS OS OS OS OS OS OS Os

«

<D
«<D§ Q
1
-a

O

CO

co
OS
OS

o

rOs
OS

o

Tf-

CO
o
o

CN

os
OS

o

CO

d oo d
d o dd d
o o o o o oo o

d
o

d
o

d
o

d od d
o o d d d o
o o o o o

o o o o o o o o o

o
d
o

o
d
o

o
d
o

1
1

o o o o o o o o o
d od oo d
ddddd
o o o o o o

o
o
o

o
d
o

o
d
o

!

o o o o o o
o o d o d d
o o © o
©

o
d
o

CO

CO

CN

OS
OS

oo
OS

CN

CO

CO

©

§>vo

-H f-

Q

ro rr- o
i> Os OS
Os
o s OS OS o s o s o s Os OS

o o o o o o o o

W)
3

Percentage dead area1 in turfgrass treated for the 2001 Monsanto 78365 Demonstration Study.

CO

p
in

in

os

OhVO
CUD CN

r<
/L
\> VfNl
N
C/J

Table 2.

,

co in

00
Os
VO in 0 0 0 0 0 0 s o
OS
OS Os OS Os OS OS oo OS

©

,—i

o co CO
00 00
o OS

o

d

o

d

r** t SO s o
r - so

o co
o co s o
o OS
o
d
o

00

i
i
i
i

i
i
i
i

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

i
i

i
i
•
i

CO
1
1 CO
1 r -

_ ^tj-

<
Z

r - CO CO
OS 0 0 0 0
OS OS OS

f -

CO

so

oo

00

so

so

CO
Tf

1
1
1

1

1
1
1
1

■

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

J

in
vo

r—

so
r -

i

1
1

1
1
1

so
<n

i
i

1

(N r-

D ^

3
2

OS
SO

ON

as

in

2

2

2

N
®
ox

tt
so
so
SO so SO so
e*
so so so SO
a
so so so SO Q Q Q Q
u o U &
o U
in m m in oJ~ oU o>-! o U
ng
PQ
so SO so so O
h Oh CU Oh ~
£ £ s Oh tz:
CO co CO
co
O U Oh
00 oo oo 00 Oh Oh P.
O
h <D
a
>
3 T3
3 .C
3 i f -C hO
r- r» r- r- T3 X) T3
t- T3
Z Z Z Z C3 C3 cos c3
c3 o § *Q• §S
o o o o O O O O ^ O c/> g ^ g
£ s £ C* 0^ £* Cd + 04 + C* + Ofii

N
° N®
ox ox

*C

N
®
SO
Q \ ON o \
os as OS os
N
O Tf
SOSOSOSO
ox

CN

CO

K OO 0\

>?

CD

Broadleaf Herbicide Study “Lontrel & Confront”
F. Valverde andD .D . M inner
Introduction
Weeds cause problems is general appearance and visual quality of lawns. A single weed in a lawn may be considered a problem
for the intended use of that area. Thus it becomes obvious that any method that helps to eliminate or decrease the population of
weeds is a point of interest and it requires attention.
Due to the perennial crop cycle in most turf grasses, herbicides that are selective to different weed species are necessary. Lontrel
and Confront are selective herbicides in turf species aimed to control several broad leave species. The objective of this study is to
test the effectiveness of these two products controlling some broadleaves and to observe their effects on the crop itself.
Materials and Methods
This herbicide study was conducted on a mature stand of common Kentucky bluegrass at the Horticulture farm of Iowa State
University from May to August of 2001. The site was located 6 miles north of Ames, Iowa.
Two different herbicides, Confront and Lontrel at two different concentrations were applied over Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa
pratensij) plots. The study followed a complete randomized block design with 5 treatments including control and 4 replications.
Each replication had 5 plots of 5x5 ft. separated by a 2 ft. border between them. Replications were separated by 2 ft. The area had
a very uniform and dense population of White Clover (Trifolium repens) and Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Other weeds
were present in the surrounding area but in a very limited number and not evenly distributed. Black Medic (M edicago lupulina)
also appeared inside the study area but in such scarce level that no statistical analysis was performed; however data is shown at
the end.
Treatments were applied using a backpack CO2 sprayer on May 15. Lontrel was applied at 0.5 and 1.0 PT PR/A, Confront was
applied at 1.0 and 2.0 PT PR/A. Control plots only received a water spray.
Visual assessment of turf and weeds was conducted at 2, 4, 6 and 10 weeks after treatment application. The variables recorded
were % cover of each of the present weed species and also the turf crop. An injury index was established and recorded for the
same species. This index ranged from 0 (no injury) to 10 (dead but still present).
Percent weed control was calculated using the percent cover of each of the weeds in each treatment-plot compared to the controlplot in its respective replication at the time of evaluation.
Analysis of variance and LSD were calculated for each the recorded variables. Raw data and statistical tests appear in the
appendix tables at the end of this report.
Results
Crop Injury
Kentucky bluegrass in the study area remained actively growing during the entire study with no evidence of turf injury by
treatments or environmental conditions.
White Clover
The percent control of White Clover appears in table 1. Both Lontrel and Confront provided good control of white clover. Two
weeks after the application of herbicides there was already 50-70% reduction on weed populations. Their effects increased during
the 4 and 6 week after application surpassing the 90% of control. By the 10th week new plants of white clover appeared although
in very limited numbers. There was a significant difference between control and herbicides along the duration of the trial. But
there were only significant differences between herbicides on the last two readings for Lontrel 0.5 compared to the other
treatments. Lontrel 0.5 showed a lower degree of control.

66

Table 1.

Percent of control (*) on White Clover (Trifolium repens) and Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale') observed in
Kentucky Bluegrass (Poapratensià) plots on 4 different dates after herbicide application.
Number of weeks after application
4
2
6
4
6
10
Dandelion % Control
White Clover % Control

10

Treatments

2

Lontrel 0.5 PT PR/A

72.0

93.3

88.8

80.0

40.0

56.7

75.0

-20.0

Lontrel 1.0 PT PR/A

54.0

96.9

94.2

91.7

37.5

74.5

94.4

100.0

93.6

6.3

65.6

85.0

72.5

12.5

84.4

95.7

90.0

Confront 1.0 PT PR/A

57.1

95.0

95.6

Confront 2.0 PT PR/A

62.5

97.8

96.9

87.9

Control

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0001

0.0000

0.0000

Prob

0.0033

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.2302

LSD 0.05
C.V. %

32.39

5.40

4.16

8.48

44.31

22.04

5.81

23.83

33.40

6.76

1.20

7.13

9.57
10.23
0.80
1.74
(*) Percent control based on percentage of species in treated plots vs. control plots.

Dandelion
In contrast as shown in table 1, the effect of treatments on Dandelion were evident only after the 4th week. Even though there are
some evidence of effect by the 2nd week, this was not significantly different from the control as indicated by the anova. Four
weeks after application herbicides showed between 55 and 85 % of control compared to the non-treated plots and they were
significantly different against control but not among them. The effect of herbicides are more clear by the 6th week where they not
only show significant differences against control but also between chemicals and their rates of application.
At the lowest rate applied Confront gave better control of dandelion than Lontrel. At the highest rate Confront and Lontrel
provided similar dandelion control and both resulted in about 95% of the control.
By the last reading date, Lontrel 0.5 was not significantly different than the control, however Lontrel 1.0 showed a perfect
(100%) control of dandelion. Confront at both rates showed a very similar behavior as the previous reading date. However, there
were already indications of new plants of dandelion growing at this time.
Total W eed Control
As it can be observed in table 2, weed populations were dense at the starting point. More than 50% of the plots were covered with
weeds at the onset of the trial. Four weeks after treatment application on control plots, in average weed populations had over 80%
of the area covered. This makes even more dramatic the observed effect of herbicides. The analysis of variance showed
significant differences between treated and non treated plots at all four reading dates, being the difference much clearer at 6
weeks after treatment application.

Table 2.

Percent of total weed cover observed in Kentucky Bluegrass (Poapratensis) plots on 4 different dates after
herbicide application.

Weeds % Coverage

2 weeks after applic.

4 weeks after applic.

6 weeks after applic. 10 weeks after applic.

Lontrel 0.5 PT PR/A

22.0

15.0

7.3

10.0

Lontrel 1.0 PT PR/A

30.3

14.0

4.3

4.3

Confront 1.0 PT PR/A

33.8

16.3

6.3

9.8

Confront 2.0 PT PR/A

28.8

7.3

2.8

6.8

Control

52.5

81.3

65.0

57.0

Prob.

0.0030

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

LSD 0.05
C.V. %

12.97

12.04

11.19

15.24

5.63

6.53

9.50

12.60

67

There were significant differences between herbicides-rates during the 2 first readings but not at 6 or 10 weeks after treatment
application. In the first reading Lontrel 0.5 showed the best control with only a 22% cover of weeds in average. Four weeks after
treatment Confront 2.0 is significantly better than the rest of treatments with only 7% of weed cover. Although there are no
significant differences among herbicides 6 weeks after application, Confront 2.0 showed the minimum percent cover of weeds
during the whole trial. Control plots also showed a decrease in the percent cover of weeds after the 2 reading, maybe as a product
of the dry conditions that were present during most of June and July.
Conclusions
Two major points can be extracted from this trial.
First is the effective control of dandelion and white clover by Lontrel and Confront without any injury to Kentucky bluegrass.
Second, although not statistally significant, the high rate of Confront gave the greatest level of weed control
Also it was observed that white clover was affected by herbicides some time sooner than dandelion. Dandelion was harder to
eliminate and new plants were coming back at week 10. A second application later during the summer season may be considered.

68

Fine Tuning Calcium Chloride - Urea Ratios for De-Icer Purposes
F.J. Valverde; D.D. M inner
Introduction
In areas where winters are characterized by the large amount of snowfall, it is a common practice to use “de-icers” as a mean to
clear pathways, sidewalks and streets. The nature and characteristics of these products vary widely. However it is a common
effect among all of them the damage they cause to turf areas due to the increased salinity in the surroundings of the treated area.
Previous trials have defined a mixture of calcium chloride and urea as one of the most effective de-icers with minimum damage
to turf species. Nevertheless this does not mean that areas treated with this product are exempt of injury.
It has brought to attention that varying the ratio between urea and calcium chloride could possibly decrease the negative effect on
turf without decreasing considerably the melting capabilities of the de-icer.
The objective of this study is to compare the effect that different mixtures of calcium chloride and urea applied on winter can
have on turf quality and appearance during spring time.
Materials and Methods
This de-icer study was conducted at the Horticulture farm of Iowa State University from December 2000 until June 2001. The
site was located 6 miles north of Ames, Iowa.
Different mixtures of calcium chloride and urea were applied over Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensfy plots. The study followed
a complete randomized block design with 8 treatments (Table 1) including control and 3 replications. Each replication had 8 plots
of 4x2 ft. separated by a 1 ft. border between them. Replications were separated by 2 ft.
Each treatment was applied weekly during 9 weeks starting on December 15. To reach a concentration of 2.5% W/V (Brine
solution), 2 liters of water was used in each application. This simulated a 1/10 inch water film over the grass.
Treatments were initially applied using a backpack C 0 2 sprayer, however due to the extreme cold conditions a hand sprayer was
used in the last 6 applications. Control plots only received a water spray. Also it must be noted that due to the particularity of the
site and weather conditions it was required to remove the snow from the treated plots in the first 3 applications. The
accumulation of snow at that point reached over 12 inches, which would not allow a uniform application of treatments. A snow
blower and a brush were used for this purpose.
Table 1.

Total amount and ratio of calcium chloride and urea applied over 8 ft2 in each of the 9 applications.
Treatment

Urea

CaCl2
%

gr/plot

%

gr/plot

30

15.0

1

70

35.0

2

75

37.5

25

12.5

3

80

40.0

20

10.0

4

85

42.5

15

7.5

5

90

45.0

10

5.0

6

95

47.5

5

2.5

7

100

50.0

0

0

0

0

0

0

8

Treatments were evaluated on 4 different dates, March 26, April 14, May 9 and June 1. The variables recorded were color,
percentage coverage of turf plants coverage and % coverage of turf plants with seed heads. The index of color was based on a
scale of 1 to 10 where 1 refers to total brown or white color and 10 dark even green; 6 is considered the least acceptable green.
The other 2 indexes are referred on a percentage basis.
Analysis of variance and LSD were calculated for each of the recorded variables. In June 1 plant samples were collected for total
nitrogen. Results of those test will be submitted at a later date of this report.

69

Results
To better understand the results shown in this report, it is necessary to consider that the winter of 2000-2001 in the Ames area
had over 100 days with permanent snow cover. The surrounding area where the treatments were applied maintained over 6 inches
of snow since early December until late March. Temperatures were very low for a long period of time.
The readings of turf color appear in table 2. As expected after a long cold winter, the first reading indicated that most of the
plants were completely brown,. At this moment plots that received a larger amount of urea were significantly different to those
with very little or none urea applied. Also it can be noted that control plots had statically better appearance than the treated ones.
Near 3 weeks later in a second reading , the results have varied very little. Due to the still cold temperatures, no new growth was
expected. Results are very similar to the previous date. Control plots are still statically with better color than the treated ones.
Table 2. Observed color in CaCl2-Urea plots at 4 different dates during spring of 2001.

CaCl2/Urea ratio

March 26

April 14

May 9

June 1

70/30

1.00

1.00

3.00

9.67

75/25

1.67

1.00

2.33

8.67

80/20

1.33

1.67

2.67

8.33

85/15

2.00

1.67

2.00

7.00

90/10

2.00

7.33

1.67

1.33

95/5

2.00

2.00

2.33

6.00

100/0

2.00

1.67

2.00

4.00

Control

3.00

3.00

6.00

6.00

Prob.

0.0007

0.0013

0.0000

0.0001

LSD 0.05

0.648

0.752

0.926

1.6157

In May 9, during the third reading it can be appreciated that plants already started to grow and new green tissue is already
present. Again there were significant differences between the treatment with the largest amount of urea and the one with 100%
CaCl2, however the relationship is inverse to the 2 previous readings. In this case the treatment with the larger amount of urea
show a better color than any other treatment (excluding control). Although the increment on the 70/30 treatment is higher
enough to be the best treatment in this reading, the increment in the control plots are far better. Two major points can be
extracted from this observation. The first is that the availability of extra nitrogen in the high urea treatments may be already
stimulating new growth. However the damage inflicted by the de-icer is still greater than the benefit obtained at this point.
In the last reading, after a considerable improvement in growing conditions, treatments with at least 20% of urea had significantly
better color than the control. Treatments with 15,10 and 5 % of urea improved considerably from last reading however they were
not significantly different than the control. Control plots did not show an improvement from previous readings, which may be
attributed to low levels of nitrogen available in the soil. Treatments with no nitrogen added and high calcium chloride are
statically with worse color than any other treatment.
It is clear at this point that supplemental nitrogen in the de-icer mix has overcome the damage inflicted previously. Due to the
lack of color development in the last period of time by the control plots it is believed that the area in which the trial was applied
has a very limited source of nitrogen. Other areas with higher levels of nitrogen may not have shown differences between control
and de-icer applications.
Other variables recorded were percentage of coverage and percentage o f area cover with seed heads (table 3). In May 9, the
percent coverage followed the same pattern observed in color for the same date. The tendency (excluding control) showed a
better coverage in plots with higher ratio of urea; although there were no significant differences between treatments that
contained urea. The only significant difference appears between the treatment with 100% CaCl2 and all the others.

70

Table 3. Percentage turf coverage and percentage of area cover with seed heads.

CaCl2/Urea ratio

% Turf Coverage
May 9

% Coverage Seed heads June 1
28.33

70/30

96.67

75/25

91.67

11.67

80/20

90.00

18.33

85/15

91.67

16.67

90/10

85.00

10.00

95/5

86.67

13.33

100/0

60.00

10.00

Control

100.00

88.33

Prob.

0.0006

0.0000

LSD 0.05

13.26

14.32

Control plots showed a 100% coverage at this time, indicating again that even the safest mixture of CaCl2 and urea had a
detrimental effect on the plants.
A very interesting phenomenon occurred in the treated area and surroundings. Towards the end of May the turf started to produce
seed heads in a very dense fashion. Some differential effect on the treatments was observed and this variable was recorded and
shown in table 3.
Before looking at the numbers it was believed that areas with low nitrogen could be the ones having the largest amount of seed
heads due to a stressed condition. After looking at the analysis of variance this idea was not clear any more. Results indicate that
the largest amount of seed heads appeared in control plots, however within treatments the one with higher ratio of urea showed
the highest number of seed heads.
It is still possible that the low available nitrogen has triggered the higher amount of seed heads in the control plots. In the case of
de-icer treatments differences may be due to the differential damage observed in previous dates and not directly to nitrogen
availability. This point will be cleared when results from total nitrogen come from the laboratory.
As an extra note, during the first readings, it was appreciated that even the control plots of the study were in a worse state of color
and quality that the area next to them, where no snow was removed. Its is believed that the long and cold winter affected
extensively the treated area. The layer of snow that remained around the study could have protected the turf, therefore its greener
color and denser condition.
Conclusions
There are significant differences even between small variations in the ratios of urea and CaCl2.
Under the conditions of this study the mixture of 30% urea and 70% CaCl2 seems to be the least damaging of the options. Also
this ratio seems to be the one with higher benefits and better color development.
Benefits if there are, are not expected to be evident until late spring.

71

Brown Patch Fungicide Trial
M ark L
.Gleason,

Stephen N
.Wegulo, SaraJ. Helland, and John P. Newton

Trials were conducted at Veenker Golf Course on the campus of Iowa State University. Fungicides, selected for activity against
brown patch, were applied to creeping bentgrass maintained at 0.16-inch cutting height, using a modified bicycle sprayer at 30
psi and a dilution rate of 5 gal per 1,000 sq ft. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with four replications.
All plots measured 4 ft x 5 ft. Fungicide treatments were all applied on 21 Jun, then re-applied at recommended intervals on 2, 5,
12, and 20 Jul.
Brown patch symptoms were first observed on 27 Jun. Most products suppressed brown patch and dollar spot significantly in
comparison to the unsprayed control on 6 Aug. No phytotoxicity symptoms were observed during the trial.
Fungicide products, application rates and intervals, and brown patch and dollar spot severity at the Veenker Golf Course, 2001

Product and rate per 1,000 sq ft

Interval
(days)

Unsprayed check................................. —
Eagle G (XF-00023) 4.0z.................... 14
Eagle G (XF-00023) 8.0z.................... 28
Eagle G (XF-00024) 2.5z................... . 14
Eagle G (XF-00024) 5.0z.................... 28
Eagle/Daconil (XF-00044) 3.5 oz...... 14
Eagle/Daconil (XF-00044) 7.0 oz...... 28
Golden Eagle 4.0 oz........................... 14
Golden Eagle 4.0 oz........................... 28
14
Banner MAXX 2.0 oz
Bayleton 0.5G 1.5 oz.......................... 14
Daconil 82.5 WDG 3.2 oz................. . 14
Confidential 2.0 fl oz.......................... . 7
Confidential 4.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 2.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 4.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 2.0 fl oz.......................... . 7
Confidential 4.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 2.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 4.0 fl oz.......................... ..7
Confidential 2.0 fl oz......................... . 7
Confidential 4.0 fl oz......................... ..7
Daconil Ultrex 82.5 WDG 3.2 oz..... .14
+Primo MAXX 1 MEC 0.15 fl oz
Daconil Ultrex 82.5 WDG 3.2 oz..... ,. 14
+Banner MAXX 1.3 MEC 0.5 fl oz
+Primo MAXX 1 MEC 0.15 fl oz
Heritage 50WG 0.2 oz....................... ..14
+Banner MAXX 1.3 MEC 0.5 fl oz
+Primo MAXX 1 MEC 0.15 fl oz
Banner MAXX 1.3 MEC l.O flo z ... ..14
+Primo MAXX 1 MEC 0.2 fl oz
Heritage 50WG 0.2 oz....................... . 14
^Banner MAXX 1.3 MEC 0.5 fl oz

Brown
Patch*
6/27/01

Brown
Patch
7/11/01

Brown
patch
7/24/01

Brown
patch
8/6/01

Dollar
Spot**
6/27/01

Dollar
spot
7/11/01

Dollar
spot
7/24/01

Dollar
spot
8/6/01

1.3
1.0
2.3
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.3
2.0
1.3
0.5
1.5
1.8
1.3
1.3
1.3
2.8
1.0

3.5
2.3
1.5
1.0
1.8
3.3
2.0
1.3
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
2.0
2.3
2.3
1.8
1.3
2.0
3.3
2.3
1.3
0.3

3.8
3.8
2.5
2.3
2.5
3.3
1.5
2.3
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.3
4.5
2.3
2.3
1.3
2.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
2.5
0.0

3.8
0.8
2.5
1.3
0.5
3.5
0.5
1.5
2.3
0.0
0.5
1.0
0.3
2.0
1.5
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.3
1.5
2.0
1.0

3.3
12.5
4.0
8.0
7.4
11.5
10.3
10.0
2.5
3.4
8.9
4.5
15.0
4.8
4.8
0.8
19.3
9.5
3.5
8.8
8.8
10.8
10.0

10.3
20.1
6.0
15.1
14.0
20.5
16.3
10.5
7.5
0.4
1.2
2.3
7.5
8.5
11.3
3.1
25.8
10.5
11.0
13.0
17.5
17.5
2.3

9.3
14.0
7.4
14.0
9.9
21.5
5.1
11.9
8.1
1.7
0.0
0.8
1.3
9.0
11.5
1.5
17.0
11.0
10.8
12.0
10.5
16.5
0.3

16.5
1.0
5.5
9.8
5.0
20.0
10.1
4.8
9.6
0.0
0.0
1.8
4.5
9.0
0.0
4.0
1.8
23.8
11.3
13.8
13.8
4.5
2.3

0.8

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.6

0.1

0.4

0.0

0.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

3.8

0.6

0.1

0.3

1.3

0.0

0.3

0.0

6.1

1.3

0.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

4.3

0.8

0.2

0.5

2.4
MSD (K=100)***
2.8
4.0
2.1
17.9
12.2
14.5
20.6
*Mean disease severity rating; 0= no disease, 1= 1-5%, 2= 6-10%, 3= 11-25%, 4= 26-50%, 5= >50% of plot symptomatic n= 4
**% of plot symptomatic. n= 4.
♦♦♦Minimum significant difference from the Waller-Duncan k-ratio test (K = 100).

72

Dollar Spot Fungicide Trial
M ark L. Gleason, Stephen N Wegulo, S a ra J Heiland, and John P. Newton
Trials were conducted at the Iowa State University Horticulture Station near Gilbert. Fungicides were applied to creeping
bentgrass maintained at 0.16-inch cutting height, using a modified bicycle sprayer at 30 psi and a dilution rate of 5 gal per 1,000
sq ft. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with four replications. All plots measured 4 ft x 5 ft. The
entire plot was inoculated with pathogen-infested rye grain on 8 Jun. Spray applications were initiated on 15 Jun in all subplots,
then re-applied at recommended intervals on 5 and 13 Jul. The spray regime was suspended on 13 Jul because of absence of
dollar spot symptoms. The entire plot was inoculated again on 14 Aug. All subplots were sprayed on this date and on 28 Aug.
Dollar spot symptoms were first observed on 27 Jun. Most products suppressed dollar spot significantly in comparison to the
unsprayed control on 27 Jun and on 23 and 31 Aug. No phytotoxicity symptoms were observed during the trial.
Fungicide products, application rates and intervals, and dollar spot severity at the ISU Horticulture Station, 2001

Product and rate per 1,000 sq ft
Unsprayed check
Eagle G (XF-00023) 4.0 oz
Eagle G (XF-00023) 8.0 oz
Eagle G (XF-00024) 2.5 oz
Eagle G (XF-00024) 5.0 oz
Golden Eagle 4.0 oz
Golden Eagle 8.0 oz
Banner MAXX 2.0 oz
Bayleton 0.5G 1.5 oz
Daconil 82.5WDG 3.2 oz
Chipco Triton 1.67SC 0.75 fl oz
Chipco Triton 1.67SC 1.0 fl oz
Chipco Triton 1.67SC 2.0 fl oz

Severity (%)

Interval
(days)
—

14
28
14
28
14
28
14
14
14
14
14
14

LSD(0.05)

73

6/27/01
1.88
0.25
0.58
0.38
0.53
0.10
0.65
1.00
0.43
0.58
0.40
0.90
0.18

8/23/01
5.50
3.63
2.80
2.38
2.25
2.75
2.13
0.43
0.43
1.03
1.25
0.40
0.35

8/31/01
5.88
7.75
4.75
5.75
6.50
4.88
3.80
0.15
0.05
0.50
0.65
0.23
0.08

1.19

2.03

5.40

Bermuda Species Traffic Study
D.D. M inner andF.J. Valverde
Introduction
Seeded bermudagrass has been used in northern climates to repair worn athletic fields during the summer (Gaussion et al., 2001).
The basic idea is to produce a fast crop of biomass on exposed-bare-soil areas of an athletic field. Football practice fields re­
established this way during the summer are superior to weedy and sparsely covered fields by the end of August or start of the fall
football season . The bermuda may die in the winter, but there is a net gain of biomass cover. The following study continues
these philosophy by evaluating bermudagrass varieties and mixtures with cool season grasses.
Objective
To evaluate seeded and sprigged bermudagrass varieties to repair intensively trafficked areas of northern athletic fields.
To evaluate mixtures of cool and warm season grasses.
M ethods
This study was established at the Horticulture Research Farm in Ames Iowa on 11 July 2001. The trial combined 12
combinations of grass species and 2 levels of traffic, for a total of 24 treatments. The experimental design was a randomized
complete block with split-plot arrangement. Whole plots consisted of grass species and split plots were traffic levels. There were
3 replications for a total of 72 sample units of 2 ft x 12 ft. The species or combinations of species and the establishment method
used appear in table 1.
Table 1. Description of species and cultivars and establishment method.
Species B

Planting time

Treat.

Species A

Planting time

1

Yukon

Jul-11

—

—

—

—

Establishment method
Seed

2

Primo

Jul-11

3

Primo

Jul-11

Perennial Rye

Jul-11

Seed

4

Primo

Jul-11

Creeping Bentgrass

Jul-11

Seed

5

Primo

Jul-11

Kentucky Bluegrass

Jul-11

Seed

6

Primo

Jul-11

Perennial Rye

Aug-21

7

Zoysia

Jul-11

—

——

8

Westwood

Jul-11

_______

__ ____

Sprigging

9

Quickstand

Jul-11

—

—

Sprigging

10

Creeping Bentgrass

Jul-11

—

—

Seed

11

Perennial Rye

Jul-11

—

—

Seed

12

Kentucky Bluegrass

Jul-11

—

—

Seed

Seed

Seed
Seed

Traffic treatments were applied with a GA-SWC traffic simulator (Cairow et al., 2001) on 11 September with 2 and 4 passes each
Monday, Wednesday and Friday during the first month. From October 8 to November 1, traffic simulation was increased from
2/4 passes to 3/6 passes each day.
The variables measured were % turf cover, turf color and turf quality. Data was collected monthly, from 23 July to 2 November
2001. Plant samples were collected on 4 November to measure biomass.

74

Results
Table 2. Percent turf cover for various grass combinations and two levels of traffic. Traffic was applied from 11 Sepetember to 1
November 2001.
Species

Traffic Ley

7/23/2001

8/21/2001

9/11/2001

9/24/2001

10/8/2001

11/2/2001

----------------------------------------- % cover -------------------------------------------Yukon
Primo

23

85

88

97

98

90

27

100

100

100

100

100

Primo + PRl

50

98

100

100

100

98

Primo + CB

35

100

100

100

100

93

Primo + KB

22

100

100

100

100

100

Primo + PR2

22

100

100

100

100

97

5

0

33

0

0

0

2x

Zoysia
Westwood

38

98

100

100

100

100

Quickstand

43

100

100

100

100

100

Creeping B.

30

27

58

77

78

48

Perennial R.

47

62

82

93

95

97

Kentucky B.

22

0

8

0

0

15

Yukon

23

85

88

100

98

90

Primo

27

100

100

98

100

88

Primo + PRl

50

98

100

98

98

87

Primo + CB

35

100

100

98

98

77

Primo + KB

22

100

100

100

98

80

Primo + PR2

22

100

100

98

97

78

4x

Zoysia

5

0

33

0

0

0

Westwood

38

98

100

100

100

87

Quickstand

43

100

100

100

100

92

Creeping B.

30

27

58

58

45

15

Perennial R.

47

62

82

87

92

78

Kentucky B.

22

0

8

0

0

2

75

Table 3. Turf color* observed in different species under traffic stress.

8/21/2001

9/24/2001

10/8/2001

11/2/2001

Yukon

8.3

8.5

5.6

1.7

Primo

7.0

7.5

4.8

1.0

Primo + PR1

7.5

8.7

6.8

6.4

Species

Primo + CB

7.0

7.6

4.8

1.3

Primo + KB

7.0

7.7

4.8

1.3

Primo + PR2

7.3

8.2

5.3

2.3

Zoysia

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Westwood

8.2

8.0

4.8

1.3

Quickstand

8.2

7.4

4.7

1.0

Creeping B.

2.5

7.8

6.7

5.8

Perennial R.

9.0

9.3

8.7

8.3

Kentucky B.
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
*Color ratings based on a scale of 1-10, where 10 is the most desirable green and 6 the least acceptable; 1 is completely
discolorated grass
Literature cited
Carrow, R.N., R.R. Duncan, J.E. Worley and R.C. Shearman. 2001. Turfgrass traffic (soil compactation plus wear) simulator
response of Paspalum vaginatum and Cynodon spp. p. 253-258. In K. Carey (ed.). Int. Turf. Soc. Research J. Vol. 9.
Gaussoin, R.E., D.D. Minner, S. Keeley, and M. Vaitkus. 2001. Annual seeding of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. For improved
performance of heavily trafficked athletic fields in temperate climates p. 865-869. In K. Carey (ed.). Int. Turf. Soc.
Research J. Vol. 9.

76

Kentucky Bluegrass Traffic Study
M inner and V
.JF alverde

D.D.
Objective

To determine the effect that different traffic schedules have on Kentucky bluegrass performance. Specifically we were interested
in determining if the same amount of traffic caused more injury if it was applied all-at-once (one day per week) or spread out
over time (a little each day).
Methods
The study was conducted at the Horticulture Research Farm in Ames Iowa during summer and fall of 2001. Six different traffic
regimes were applied to Kentucky Bluegrass (Table 1) with a GA-SWC Traffic simulator (Carrow et al., 2001). The experimental
design was a randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 3 replications. Each small plot was 2 ft x 12 ft. Traffic simulation
started on 1 August and ended on 7 November, 2001.
Table 1. Traffic schedule followed on Kentucky bluegrass during fall 2001.
Number of passes per day

Number of passes/week
Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

5 dispersed

1

1

1

1

1

10 dispersed

2

2

2

2

2

15 dispersed

3

3

3

3

3

5 concentrated

0

0

0

0

5

10 concentrated

0

0

0

0

10

15 concentrated

0

0

0

0

15

Control

0

0

0

0

0

Percent turf cover and quality were evaluated monthly. Sometimes conditions were too wet to operate the traffic simulator.
Traffic not done during those days accumulated to the next available day.
Results
Table 2. Kentucky bluegrass cover as affected by traffic schedule

Traffic schedule

8/28/01

9/11/01

9/24/01

10/8/01

11/21/01

Overall

% Turf cover
Control

100

100

100

100

100

100.0

5 dispersed

93

93

95

96

92

93.8

10 dispersed

73

73

75

83

63

73.7

15 dispersed

57

52

63

57

35

52.7

5 concentrated

98

96

97

95

95

96.1

10 concentrated

93

88

77

85

85

85.7

15 concentrated

63

62

50

50

55

56.0

Prob.

0.0000

LSD 0.05

2.83

77

Table 3. Kentucky bluegrass quality as affected by traffic schedule

Traffic schedule

8/21/01

8/28/01

9/11/01

9/24/01

10/8/01

11/21/01

Overall

9.2

9.3

9.8

Quality
Control

10.0

10.0

5 dispersed

8.3

8.3

8.0

8.7

7.7

6.8

8.0

10 dispersed

6.7

7.0

6.3

6.0

6.0

4.0

6.0

15 dispersed

6.7

5.7

4.7

5.7

3.7

2.3

4.8

10.0

10.0

5 concentrated

8.7

8.7

8.3

8.3

7.2

7.5

8.1

10 concentrated

8.0

7.7

7.3

6.7

6.3

6.3

7.1

15 concentrated

6.0

5.8

5.3

4.7

3.3

Quality 1-10(10 most desirable situation, 1 not suitable for sport)

3.3

4.8

Prob

0.0000

LSD o.o5

0.336

Turf cover decreased as the amount of traffic increased. At 10 and 15 passes per week more turf cover occurred with
concentrated traffic compared to disperse traffic (table 2). Similar situation occurs on turf quality (table 3). Although this is not
evident in the data, there may have been a complicating factor caused by the unpredictable rainfall events. Traffic treatments
applied during wetter conditions may have caused more damage. In 2001 we will conduct the same levels of traffic under wet vs.
dry conditions by controlling rainfall with tarps.
Literature cited
Carrow, R.N., R.R. Duncan, J.E. Worley and R.C. Shearman. 2001. Turfgrass traffic (soil compaction plus wear) simulator
response of Paspalum vaginatum and Cynodon spp. p. 253-258. In K. Carey (ed.). Int. Turf. Soc. Research J. vol. 9.

78

Species Traffic Study
F.J. Valverde and D.D. M inner
Introduction
Turfgrass species are often ranked according to their wear resistance from high to low: tall fescue > perennial rye > Kentucky
bluegrass > fíne fescue > creeping bentgrass > colonial bentgrass > rough bluegrass. However recuperative capacity from high to
low may rank: creeping bentgrass > Kentucky bluegrass > rough bluegrass > tall fescue > perennial rye > fíne fescue>colonial
bentgrass (Turgeon, 2002).
In practice however athletic fields are a system of management techniques and reestablishment by seeding or sodding. Instead of
evaluating the rate at which an established species declines or recovers during traffic, we are interested in evaluating how the
whole grass system, seeding included, responds to traffic. Basically, what is the net performance of a species when continual
attempts at reseeding are considered.
Objective
To study the interaction between overseeding and traffic stress on established species.
Methods
The study was conducted at the Horticulture Research Farm in Ames Iowa. Seeded in September of 2000 this study consisted in
establishing 6 different species before the end of the spring. After species were succesfully established, they received traffic
stress with a GA-SWC Traffic simulator (Carrow et al., 2001). Each species received two different regimes of traffic, 2 and 4
passes 3 days per week. The trial followed a complete randomized block design for a total of 12 treatments and 4 replications.
Each small plot has 2 ft x 15 ft. Traffic simulation started on 20 April and ended 15 May. Plots were reseeded after this traffic
period. Traffic reinitiated 2 weeks later, stopped on 15 June and were reseeded again. Percent turf cover and turf color were
evaluated on 28 June 2001.
Table 1. Treatment description and seed rate
Species

Traffic level

Seed rate lb/1000 sq.ft

Unique Kentucky Bluegrass

2/4 passes 3 times per week

3

Catalina Perennial Rye

2/4 passes 3 times per week

10

Millenium Tall fescue

2/4 passes 3 times per week

10

Cindy Fine Fescue

2/4 passes 3 times per week

5

Poa Supina

2/4 passes 3 times per week

3

Penncross Creeping Bentgrass

2/4 passes 3 times per week

2

79

Results
The preliminary data of 2001 appear in table 2. The study will be continued and a final report will be made in 2002.

Table 2. Percent turf cover and turf color measured on 28 June 2001 after repeated traffic.
% cover

Color

Species

Unique Kentucky bluegrass.

Traffic levels
2x

4x

2x

4x

94

84

8.6

8.4

Catalina Perennial Rye

84

74

8.9

8.9

Millenium Tall fescue

85

78

8.3

8.0

Cindy Red Fescue

81

74

8.0

7.5

Poa Supina

98

89

8.1

7.9

Penncross Creeping bentgrass.
70
8.0
81
7.8
*Color ratings based on a scale of 1-10, where 10 is the most desirable green and 6 the least acceptable; 1 is completely
discolorated grass

L iteratu re cited
Turgeon, A.J. 2002. Turfgrass management, 6th ed. New Jersey. Prentice Hall. 400 p.
Carrow, R.N., R.R. Duncan, J.E. Worley and R.C. Shearman. 2001. Turfgrass traffic (soil compactation plus wear) simulator
response of Paspalum vaginatum and Cynodon spp. p. 253-258. In K. Carey (ed.). Int. Turf. Soc. Research J. voi. 9.

80

1991 Corn Gluten Meal Crabgrass Control Study - Year 11
B. R. Bingaman an d N. E. Christians
Com gluten meal (CGM) has been screened for efficacy as a natural product herbicide and fertilizer in turf on the same plot since 1991.
The study is being conducted at the Iowa State University Research Station north of Ames, IA in an area of'Parade' Kentucky bluegrass.
The soil in this experimental area is a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Hapludoll) with an organic matter content of 4.6%, a pH
of 6.45, 3 ppm P, and 144 ppm K.
Individual experimental plots are 5 x 5 ft and there are 5 treatments with 3 replications. The experimental design is a randomized
complete block. Com gluten meal is applied each year to the same plots at 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, and 120 lbs/1000 ft2 (Table 1).
Because com gluten meal is 10% N, these rates are equivalent to 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 lb N/1000 ft2. The CGM is applied each year in
a single early-spring preemergence application using 'shaker dispensers'. The materials are watered-in with the irrigation system.
Supplemental irrigation is used to provide adequate moisture to maintain the grass in good growing condition. In 2001, applications were
made on April 26.
Turf quality was monitored from May 8 through September 13 (Tables 1 and 2). It was assessed using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best, 6 =
lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst turf quality. Weed populations were measured by either counting the number of plants or estimating the
percentage area coverage per individual plot. Crabgrass infestations were determined by counting the number of plants per individual
plot. Plants in the 1 to 3 leaf stage were found in June 12 but the growth rate was very slow because of the high temperatures and low
rainfall. The crabgrass plants were large enough to count by July 27 and subsequent data were taken on August 9, August 16, August 28,
and September 13. Dandelion populations were assessed by counting the number of plants per individual plot. Clover populations were
determined by estimating the percentage area of each plot covered by clover. Dandelion and cover data were taken from May 8 through
September 13 (Tables 4 and 6).
Data were analyzed with the Statistical Analysis System (SAS , Version 6.12) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) procedure.
Effects of CGM on turf quality and weed control were examined using Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) means comparison
tests. To better express weed control, weed population data were converted to percentage reductions as compared to the untreated
controls.
At spring greenup in May, there were differences between treated and untreated turf and by mid May, the differences were more
pronounced (Table 1). Quality differences between CGM treated turf and untreated turf were significantly different for the entire season
but on some dates, the quality of turf treated at various CGM levels was not different from the untreated control. By mid to late August,
turf quality deteriorated because of low rainfall amounts. Some rainfall improved turf quality by early September.
Treatment with CGM resulted in numeric reductions in crabgrass populations for the entire season. The differences were not statistically
significant because there were large variations in counts among the replications for the treatments (Tables 2 and 3). There was no
crabgrass in turf treated at 40 lb/1000 ft2 and greater for the entire season (Table 2). In 2002, crabgrass control was equal to or better
than in previous years at all CGM levels except at 20 lb/1000 ft2 (Table 8).
Dandelion counts were significantly reduced by CGM for the entire season as compared to the untreated controls (Tables 4 and 5). Mean
reductions were at least 92.3% for CGM at 40 lb/1000 ft2 and higher and greater than 96% for CGM at 60 lb/1000 ft2 and higher. In
2002, CGM at 20 and 40 lb/1000 ft2 reduced dandelion populations more than in 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000 (Table 9). Dandelion
control at the other CGM rates was equal to or greater than in previous years.
Percentage clover cover was significantly reduced in turf treated with CGM as compared with the untreated controls for the entire 2002
season (Tables 6 and 7). Mean reductions in clover cover were > 77% as compared with the untreated controls in turf treated with CGM
at all levels except 20 and 40 lb/1000 ft2. Clover control in 2001 was similar to that in previous years except at 40 lb/1000 ft2 (Table 10).
Control at this CGM level was not as good as in 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000.

81

üC _ en en o p en ro en
G <N VO ^
^
00 oo

fo n m o ^ o o

»ri so i> oo oo os Os

q q q O O O O
»ri vo i> oo as as on

h

o n o q q

»ri vo

<u
C ^
3

•è*

ins

oo oo oo

p «> i>
»ri

t-^ o© oo oo oo

^«N ^ O h O Is; h rn
oo

<N

oo oo

o

U

rn r-r-o rn o rS ^

»ri vo

as oo

oo

O
o

E
O

U

^ O
£ o

o

o

O

<N

o

o en

h

T t

oc oo

VO

00

O

<N

&

s

ta>
J3
S
£o
B
c<D

S *cK
O o
U o O O O O O O O
o
(N
}1 \ C O O O
(N
t

O
03

cr
13
p!Z3
>

Z

03

H

03

'C
jg
os

p 13 13 13 13 13 13
¿3 <u 0) <D <u <D o
0g E E E E £ E
o c c g G c c
oo
»0 U B U
o J3 JS JS

B B B
B
B

03

ÛÛ Ûû ÖX)0Û 0Û

D

UU UU U

0Û

IC oEE
e E E£
o o o o o

-—

(N

ro

t

)-

i/ î

vc

U

h

oo
OO <n

o

p

o

o

o vo o o o o o
o o © o © © o
Tf o o o o o

p

cn oo o o o o o

00
2

-D

I:

-4ai-» =
© r- © © © © ©
u
00
o —
—* o o o o o
(N

Is

Table 2.

Crabgrass counts1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated in the 1991 Com Gluten Meal Weed Control Study.

<

3
<

o

G
d>h

00

©* P © © © © ©
rr

©

©

©

© ©

3§>2S © r - © © © © ©
<
© P © © © © ©

o o o o o

©
k o o d o o
rN

~

O t"» o o o o o

© © © © ©

a
00
o
£c
o
u
3
<

o o o o o o

© o o o o o

©

oo ©

©

©

Tt

©

c

©

<N ©

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

a
£
o
O

3

oo os
<

OS

G\

ro ro O O O O O

o
tS

Tt O O O O O

oo
0 0 OS

3
<

©VO © © © © ©
© © ’ © © '© © ©
©

©

©

©

©

00 ©

©

©

©

©

£
r3 <N

&
a>
p
3
£o

in '

ro ro © © © © ©
oo ro o © o o o

o
’cL
<L> <D

u 8

Vi O

o (N
o Tf
o o oo
o oo M
o

3 m
o
*Gh©

3

<N

©

©‘ Os ©
© ©
© ©
©‘ ©
©'
© ©

I
3

s

g
U!

p

^ P
O
U oo

VI fl)
Vi J h

ea "5

VI O

>

JU

5 £
£^ ©
©
©©©©©©©
(N

T t VO OO ©

CN

1

3
3O P
Vh
O
jg
^ p
doo
> ^^
a ^
S I
£ 3
a s
3 .1
£ 5
£ 3
G- 3

ffi

fg

cd

*£
s
to

p
O

C3

|

£ £ £ £ £ £

£

C3

cG

<L> <L> <L>

cC

<L> d>

c3

0>

I

I|

S o3 o3 3o o3 o3 3o
C3 'o b o o *00 o o

oo

M

n

h

a« a<D 15<D 0a) 15Q 15<D
g B E £ £ £ £
3
3 3
o
§ I 3 3 I 3 £3 £3
*3 ___
3f i

3 00 00 M M M M

oo

|

£3 £o o£ o£ o£ o£ £o
D UUO U UU
-

a
j§
s

££ £ £ £ £

3 00 0 0 0 0
D UU U U U U

-Cci

H

— <n m Tt to vo r-

Vi

c3

M|

<VI>D 3§I,

<D II
£ 00
£

§o

O O CO o o in Ttn vo ON
CN vo
© X
vo O
N ON ON On O
N

N
Tf

p

-»—
>
C
a>Lcn o p O o o O O
V
VO vo IN 00 ON
o »o O
N ON ON ON ON

CN
CN

n-

bX)
<

28

•n

o On p ON o N ON
vn 00
o'
CN oo
m ON ON oo ON ON

in
TO
B
v
3
da
o
O
T6O
<u
£
<u
s
c<L>
3
O
E
o
U
On
ON
<D

bX)
O ON o p cn O O O o
<
Nd o O d
© C
VN
OO
OO
o o O o

r** o -H
ON 00 00 o
3•—
5 CN © vn
vo ON oo
ON On ON od

June
27

3*—
>

.c
TO
O
13
p
d
CZ3
sCO
bb
<u
X

0)
§
•—
»

£

CO
J
o
*§
8
oo

May

3
f

8 s

CO o

X

r- •n o
o IN r-»
d
d <o
vo
m ON ON ON ON oo

o r- CN CN VO oo o
d vo O
dN O
dN Tf IN d
ON ON o

o CN Tf CN Tf Tf o
CN VO OO vo VO o
d N
O ON ON On On o
*“*

oo o ON m CO ro CN *—
i
d d d O
d X rT N
ON N ON ON ON

o o o o 00
o o O
CN "'fr vo
o CN

o
13

TO
c
8
TO
OJ
bX)
eo
C
CJ
p
o
eu

IN
vn
VO

IN
cn
tT

00

O
cn
in d
5
oo
T<O
U
3<U
ON dH
dvn ^3
a>
3
o
T<O
u
tj- &
fH £
in o
o
03
3
3.
V
h
0)
oo a,
vn
d
Jg
3
c
o
3
O
*-< Tr*
N M
Tf -§
C+H
o

£ 8
-3 (U
OO g ^
d
vn ^ o
.£ w
03 3
c ^
O CCS
l !
obo X^
3 ^
c os
G
o8 ! »S
o

c

Table 5.

Table 4.

Dandelion counts1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated in the 1991 Com Gluten Meal Weed Control Study.

bfi VO
o
— Tfr O
o ON O
<
N d r-* X d
© O
n - ON ON ON On o

00

03
‘C
1

%

, __
_<
P C3 C3 «J
d <D 0 QJ
co £ 6 6
o c c c
TSO 3U 3u 3G
3<d 3) bX) 3)
d E E E
c o o o
D O O u

1 .

cs C3 co
a> <D B
E E £
c c c
G G
3 3 3
3) 3o 3)
E E E
o o o
u u U

^ CN co rf >n vo N

(U x
Oh-S
3 &
«n 'S

O- co
© Ui cd
© §H C
g
Q pcd
O
V > c(U
nJ U £
S ii
£ ^
-H z
8

E a>

00

p oo p ©

' O rn

C/3

p
X

©
iri

©
o '

p
-

p
ffi

p

p

in

c n

d
^

rn
^

d

v i

o

-h '

GO _
-j 00
X
(N

vq
T f

ca3
<D

vq
©
1— 1

3 VC © p p p p p p
< ~ in h oo / i o o d

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
< * 9iri oo
n ri o o o

f

~S3 Cr-N p*» p

c
o
U
*0
o<D
>

On
rT
c
n

G
o C
N
O o O
O
33OO
Nd C
d d 00 00 d d
< C
NOn
NVOvo OnO

p
cd
vo

Oo
p60V
o

Tf
d
V
O

K
i
a>

<

60
<

8

<u

27

cd CN ro in o CN CN
cn T“"'

§5
'—

co
»n
,—l

p p CO CO r- p o
ud in CO oo d 00 CN
CN f""'

8s

0> <U
>
o >
<u

o o o o o o o
CN Tf VO 00 o M

x c

•C
6

3

c3

c

GO GO

GO

E E £

GO

GO

c

II
ijS
8.-3

E E E

D U U UU U U
cn

cn Tf m vo r-

•&oo

o

Oo p Op O p
d ^}- d cd
N in
oo o O
VOvo
NO

§ 1

Is

1

C S)
£ '5

2 o
ex c

8 £CG
ca

J

£

5 §
<L> G
0> II
£ cz>

-H Z

<D
6$0
R

jU
X
as
H

in
oo

•0*-*
Ta>
3
c
1

O
o
C
RA
S
O

<Uin
33j
i—

NCNVOp CN
o o C
V
d C
NO
rt- On

00 OnO
NO
N

00

> >
g

d o
C
O

11
d
o
o

3

‘C
<D
<D
&h

5
3

o
r- r- o p O P 3 <
r*"N do p
c3 C
N CN
in d ndOnO
vo in C
N
S
nooOn C
vo O

pp
N
COof VOO
Nvo O

00 C
N
00 do Pin C
NTf’

•6
o
>
O
0
V-

GO

o o o o o o

Z' r-H
3
*“> d

¡2

« >>

3<u 3a> 3<D3<L> 3<D3<D
£ £ £ £ £ £
c uc «e 6c «c jjc
D
3 3
3 J3 3

*5

X)
£

c
oo
T3

p c2
inOX<D
V

! §

O
§

S '* -

O O O
Z ' r- o
3
CN d N
00 d 00 V
O
O
O
" co vo O
00 O
O
Vvo

1<L>

oo in X <n ©

p O p p t- p o
CO in cd 00 o 00 CN
CN

p
m

d

a
£
o
U

c
T3
B
3<1>
X
C
A
CA

c «n p p p p © p p
3—
^

O
OP p
ov od pTt- pin p
inNO
in
r- O
nO
N
^t in

3

May

3 3 p p CO CO o CO O

p p r- p P 00
c
d f- V
vo »n in K
Nrm O
OOnO

o

CNO oVOo00

o o

o o
o C
N

1

3*~ 3<L> 3<u 30> 3<D 3<D 3o

c £ £ £ £ £ £
oo uc c0) e0> G
c B
G
(D B
Tl
w
u 3 3 3 3 3 3
3(U 3 ) 3 ) 3 ) 3 ) 3 ) 3 )
1~
E
£
c oE oE E
o o oE o
D U U u u u u
-

CNCO in VOr-

SN

Percentage clover cover1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated in the 1991 Com Gluten Meal W eed Control Study.

ON
d

s

|

T able 6.

O o O <NC
Np
X
CNO
n00 ^t
VOvo
O
N
r-

o

00

GO

p CO r- CO O
VO 00 X in d CN CN

On
m

O
dJhCOo

go

—5

N
p 1—1■^r p O
O
K
oo C
d vo in rN
On00
m vo
O
n

X Vh
£ £
S )^
g

p

£

l

au> 5ro
8!
a
« id
g £

2Oh G
o
P fli
o X c
o
o RJ 8
00 >
p
X <U G

O

o
Tí- o

o
o

o
o

o
o

o
o

O
o
o
CN

m o o oo ov o
VO O O Os Os o

o

^

cn vo r - vo o s
O s Os O s O s Os

en
en

o vo vo r - o s
O s O s Os O s Os

J

o
o
0

Os
Os

CN

’S)
5

Os

Tf

o o o v o v m v o t^ -

1

O s O s OS O s OS

•s*

I
ê
o

"S'
a
C/3

O « h (N Tt h o

§

C"-

u

*-« cn so en vo
ov os in oo r">

Os O s O s Os

0)
0>

£

è

c

o

O O ON (N Tt 0 \ (N
r - oo in
oc

ü

n (N n - o\ h

O
<L>

r -

£

oo

ov

oo

ov

o

a
0)

£

o

r-io o r-r-

3

OS

5
£
o

O

OO vo oo Os

O Tf- vo tJ- e n oo r»
M r* oo ov oo o s
o

U

oo m io »o Tt
en oo os r oo

so

ê
G
O

<u

a
c

o

o
r-

oo

os os

O

vo oo
oo oo o s

<d

en
en

io O v m vo o
r- o os os o

O
vo

ZS

3
>v

£

G

M

fe

o

y

ja

*-< oo

0\

en

m

*T)

<L>

o

OV ON O

U

O

G

3
£
m oo oo n Tf o
00 Ov Ov ov ov o

r-

Os

oo

VO OO o
os os o

G

0

o

Os

Ti-

fe

1

ex
o

#o
o

£

o

*s

O

o
o
O oo VO h M J \ h
>n oo o \ oo

a
T3
<D

fe
’S

3 l‘<£¡
O
O oo

oÜ2

*n

cd

ex
£
o

O

o

c» O
X

o

CN

o

T f-

o

vo

o

00

o

©

o

CN

3,

o CoN no- voo 0o0 oo CoN

g
’O

ö

05
a
«5 *¿3
2 +fe &

8 §

MO
X C

a2 *<1>

-o

C
° Jw

a fe
t/3 *3

§ *
3

3i~
‘C G
a O
a o
s T3
o

3 3<u 3<D 3<D 3(U
Ü
£ E £ £ £
c c c c G
G +O->
J
a a a M
a

a

a

S3 3

cd Ö 0 b D b ú Ö0 OX) OO

¿
c E
OE
OE
O EOEOEO

£ O O U U O O
00

JU
3

oo o
o

os

ex <D

o
£
a>
a
g

o
o

CX <D
§ £

a

cd

o
o

O
3 ^
V- o
ü >

—< o
o o

a

C 015
£

«

_ o
ex c
»

g

a S
cd cd
> g
4> C

-

M n

i - i n vo h

-S
o

1 1
•6
O C«+H

£ oa
-H 3

P

E

*c

E E E E E

a a
a
a
a 3a 3)
I £ £

-rt

o
U

cd cd cd cd cd cd
<L
> flJ O O O 1)

a
a 3a 3a 3)
a
3)
E E £ £

c o o o o o o
D UU U U U U

Q
cn
J

Ov
J»

3

— cN m Tt vn vo r-

X

h-

Table 10.

Comparisons of the mean percentage clover cover reductions1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated in the 1991 Com Gluten Meal Weed Control Study for 1994 through 2000.

o
o

<N

O
o
o

CN

Os
O

o

©v
ov
vo
o t-r- v
m
oo
so
o©
om
os

o VO
os o
s os Tt
o rs
t"" t
Os Os Os

O

O CN <N CS O OO
T t OO OO Os Os OO

00
O
Os

COs
Os

o vmo OO
r- OiT)S Ov~)S v
om
t-» O s

VO
Os
Os

O

—

rsi m o
(N m
O O O S O S OS OS

ov
o tj
m
vo- m
os r- Tf
oom
os

r00

£
<D
c3
G h
£
o
o
jd
G

h

sJ-H

OS
Os

o

^
o
oo o
OO OS OS O

Tf o
OS OS

GO Vh
z 0>

Gh

N
I s
o o
« <u
jp -s

U o

«5 O
X> C *

’ aj
c
a>
td

2

o

o
o
o
o
o
(N
Tt
so
O
Ooo (N

’ o "3 Id Id
J- <L> <L> <D
£
£
£
o
c
G
D
u
«
*o

c

ed

<u

"ed I d
<u
«

£
E E
c
G
G G
0
a> s
_ _ 5 ^ ^ _
OX) OX) M

|c oe oe

0 0 ’OX) OX)

o oe oe e
o
D U U O UU U

S to
o S
^ &
_c
52 *3
o
T3
%
Oi G
-h
£
gG h cO
2 P

b

—rN po Tt i/s vo

cd
>

J3
«

CO

1995 Corn Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study - Year 7
B.R. Bingaman and N. E. Christians
Com gluten meal (CGM) is being screened for efficacy as a natural product herbicide in turf. This long-term study was begun in 1995 at
the Iowa State University Horticulture Research Station north of Ames, IA. The experimental plot is in established 'Ram 1' Kentucky
bluegrass. The soil is a Nicollet (fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Hapludoll) with an organic matter content of 4.8%, a pH of 7.1, 6 ppm
P, and 170 ppm K. Prior to treatment in 1995, the percentage broadleaf weed cover within the study perimeter exceeded 50%.
The experimental design is a randomized complete block design. Individual experimental plots are 10 x 10 ft with three replications.
Each year com gluten meal is applied to the same plots at a yearly rate of 40 lb CGM/1000 ft2 (equivalent to 4 lb N/1000 ft2) using four
different regimes of single and split applications for a total of five treatments (Table 1). Four applications of 10 lb/1000 ft2, split
applications of 20 lb/1000 ft2, an initial application of 30 lb plus a sequential o f 10 lb/1000 ft2, and a single application of 40 lb/1000 ft2
are included with an untreated control.
Initial applications for 2001 were made on April 26 before crabgrass germination. It was 80° F and sunny with a slight wind. The second
application of treatment 2 was made on June 25 under cloudy skies with a high temperature of 83° and a slight S wind. The third
application of treatment 2 and the second of treatments 3 and 4 were made on August 6. It was 86° and sunny with a 10 mph wind from
the south. There was no rain until August 4 and only 2.43" of rainfall for the entire month of August. The final application of treatment
2 was made on September 12. It was 75 deg and sunny with a southerly wind at 15-20 mph. Temperatures remained above normal for
the entire spring and summer and rainfall amounts were below normal.
The experimental plot was checked for phytotoxicity after each treatment. Turf quality data were taken weekly from spring greenup on
May 8 through September 13. Visual quality was measured using a 9 to 1 scale with 9 = best and 6 = lowest acceptable, and 1 = worst
quality (Table 1).
Crabgrass was first observed on June 12 but because of the hot temperatures and low rainfall, the growth rate was very slow. Population
assessments could not be made until July 27. Subsequent data were recorded on August 9, August 16, August 28, and September 13
(Table 2).
Broadleaf data were taken from May 8 through September 13. Dandelion and clover were the predominate broadleaf weed species
within the experimental plot. Dandelion populations were measured by counting the number of plants per plot (Tables 4). Clover
infestations were estimated by determining the percentage area in each individual plot covered by clover (Tables 6).
Data were analyzed with the Statistical Analysis System (SAS, Version 6.12) and the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) procedure. Means
comparisons were made with Fisher’s Least Significant Difference test (LSD). Crabgrass, clover, and dandelion population data were
converted to percentage reductions as compared with the untreated controls (Table 3,5, and 7).
The 2001 growing season was hot and extremely dry. As a result there was less response to the nitrogen in the com gluten meal than in
previous years. Supplemental irrigation was used as required to keep the bluegrass from entering dormancy. In spite of the growing
conditions, turf quality was significantly better in bluegrass treated with CGM than in the untreated control for most of the season (Table
1). By September 5, the turf was dormant but rainfall in late October resulted in significant greening so additional data were taken on
October 27. On this date, turfgrass that received sequential applications (treatments 2, 3, and 4) had better quality than the untreated
control and treated turf that received only an initial CGM treatment. Mean visual quality of bluegrass treated with CGM was better than
the untreated controls.
Crabgrass populations were reduced by CGM at all application rates as compared with the untreated controls (Table 2). The best
crabgrass control was in turf treated with split applications of 20 lb CGM but this level of control was not statistically different from the
other CGM treatments and the untreated control. Mean reductions in crabgrass counts were > 94% in turf treated with 2 applications of
20 lb CGM or 30 lb followed by 10 lb CGM as compared with the untreated control (Table 3).
The level of crabgrass control was lower at 10 lb CGM (four applications) than in 2001 (Tables 8 and 9). Split applications of 20 lb
CGM provided 100% crabgrass reductions in 2001 and 2000 as compared to 45, 33, 50, 86, and 95% in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, and
1999, respectively. A single 40 lb CGM application decreased crabgrass counts by 94% in 2001.
Dandelion numbers were significantly lower in all CGM treated turf as compared with the untreated controls for the entire 2001 season
(Table 4). The best dandelion control was in turf treated with split applications of 20 lb CGM but this level was not different from the
other CGM treatments. Dandelion reductions were similar for all CGM treatments and ranged from mean reductions ranged from 72.5 to
83.4% (Table 5).
Dandelion control was slightly lower in 2001 than in 2000 (Table 10). Split applications of 20 lb CGM provided 83% control in 2001 but
the level was 85 and 88% in 1999 and 2000, respectively.

88

Clover cover was significantly lower throughout the season in all CGM treated bluegrass as compared with the untreated controls.
Clover populations were significantly lower in all CGM treated turf than in untreated on all data collection dates (Table 6). Mean
reductions for all CGM treatments were >91% and all were statistically different from the untreated controls (Table 7).
Clover control in 2001 was approximately equal to the level of control recorded in 2000 and 1999 (Table 11). At all CGM treatment
levels, clover populations were lower than in treated bluegrass for 1996 through 1998.

89

o o o n w
oo oo oo

p p p o p

Table 1.

Turf quality1 of Kentucky bluegrass treated with com gluten meal for the 1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study.

vo

oo oo oo

<D
cp rs

© p o o p
VO 00 00 00

c3 (N

vo

a <n
P —

u
§

pqqqp
K

oo oo

©©©q p
»n

oo oo oo

© q q q p

VO

OO00

©p©©p

vo

<N
"S <N

oo ON oo

ppppp

vo >

oo oo

p p p r- o
vo h

«3 c

T3

25-1

x>

oo oo on

ppppp
vo oo oo

oo

o
¡o
©
© —
©
^-(N
-O X ) O
z xa> Pi
^
© o
©n m
©
¿2
o

pc
au <
ad <
aus
<d
u <
g- £ 6- B

3to

s

C
O
O
-a
£

~
C
33 3 3
J* £ J*

c3'ob 'ob ’ob

|c

oo

B
oB
o B
o oB
D UU U U
- fN m

in

Crabgrass counts1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated with com gluten meal in the 1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study.

C
o
O
X

m © c-" m

Jj cL
5
cn

|s
<

OO O

—’ T f

cS

p rn © p p
© oc o ' ^ rn

m

a

§
o
s

© Tf;
C N |p
© 00 On Tf VO*
VO O n On OO

p
rn
00

Lh
<L>
X)
§J ^
Q
r—,
CL
<u
CZ)

© <N © oo x>
© Tf © Tf‘ vo
t— © Os oo
’—i

3
5o oo
G ^
<

© On © p —;
O r i O ^ oo
h O On 00

rn
vo
O

+-»
t/2
G
G
<

© Tt © © un
© in <©
oo
VO © O n 00

©
oo
00

m
oo

i

i

o

M 'S
G ~
<

© ©
vo O

p rn ©
C> <N rn

CM

o>
»
§> O
G

<

p

p

o

00

rn ©

rf in o o

eoo

cn

G
00 On
3
<

p p © p
© o ©
in
m o On oo

p
rn
vo

3 <N

TO
a

m m m c^*
® w d o o
"Ou
0) a)
o

x

■g s
•6
o

o

o

o

2:

G©
in
o, cd

jg

O
O

o

©
—

o

^
o

cn

C
fl gj
C/3

o

rj O

1

S) ~

X ^
2 g

o
m

0 p

X

CL
X

&
<
D
o
3
i?
0

©

2 §
<u -5

o
©

CL

O
3

’B

> > cG> CN
*—

O t"-; p p rn
© vo VO vo rn
vo O O OO

z

X
©
^
X)
===
©
—
X
©

©
©
Tf

•§ «

©
©
©
©
aj ,--1
JS O
* •§
o
I
-O

O

©
CN
X)
=
©

©

3
U
g
G
ID
«
3
3b
E
O
U

3
H)
£
G
O
4
3
3)
£
O
U

X ©
== ^t
©
cn m

1 £

g §
3
‘C
to

cd

3 c0 3
a> <u w
E E
a
G c c
aj a <u
a a
a <—
-—
00 W) b D

3
<L>
6
c
0)
a
00

c &>
8«
2 o

CO
•c
o
to

CL C

m w cfl

E E E E

c o o o o
DU U UU
— <n m

tj-

un

m
QJ
3

9 3
¿3 (D
|
6
O G
(U
v «
0 3
td 3 )
<U _
£ E
G o
D U
-

G
O
c
3
3)
_
E
O
U

(N m Tf n

!t=

a

3
U
a

«n

•-G <
o=>.
§ ji
Gu ©
^
G co
T<O
+> B
LLh
(L>
D JrJ
oo<£
is £
G
a> ©
^
a «
<
D
C
C l c0
o £
x

o
£
c
o
©
a>
■*
->
|

Table 2.

£
a
CZ>

00 00 FH Tt
oc iri 6 - cn

<D
£

* g
P <l>

CL G
q
o
Q 3
CZ) £
J

G
S

czi
2

Table 4.

Dandelion counts1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated with com gluten meal in the 1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study.

00

£?oc
< "

1 =

00
3 s*

P <N

>>T
3 Z-i

<N

<u
S

I 00

o
o
o

3 S

Ph
-D
2

•c6aj

s3

§
<d

p

s

oo

CN

in

CO

T f*

in

§
(D

o

r -

o

CO

o

N -

x T
a

in
m

CO

CN

in

in

CN
CN

C/3

o

in

CN

o

vo
Os

Os

CO
CO

o
o

OS

00

CN
CN
Os

CN
OS

CO

N -

CO

OS

00

VO
OS

d
os

o
OS

d

CN

p

3
f i
c
p

CO

in

in
CN

6
o>
CD

2 8

CO CO
C N CO

A u g

2 8

A u g

p
vo
>n

0 1

o

CN

as

d

oo
as

in
OS

n *
os

OS

CN

p

00
OS

VO
OS

VO
OS

CN
T f

OS

CD

co
CO

GO

o

P>

cm '

©

t>

o

m

3

CN

<N
CN

&

m

<

00 v_

3
CD

2
<

S

o

CN

d

vo
Os

2
r -

o

00

co

•n

r -

©

O

o

in

00

00
I

2
<

<

o

O)

in

CO

p

o

d

rP
OS

00
os

vo
OS

00
00

d
N -

o

o

p

Os

os

o o OS
r t CO
oo O s

o

E

r -

o
¿3

,— i

>n
>n

^

CO c o
o o CO

o
u

co
00

—

r -

o

m
OS
OS

1

P

co
CO

0

y—*
CD

i3

i

r r -.
VO

p
3
00
•—>

»n
t j

o

r -

CO

r -

o

csl

o '

in

vo

in

C
1

l
CCS
CD
£

o

00

OS

3

»—i

d

vo
OS

00
OS

o

vq

p

3

cn

d

in
OS

in
OS

o

OO O )

C
o

o

p

p

o

CN

CN

CN

in

-

©

i-3

rt
w-1

CN

CN

as

OS
00

CN

p
in
OS

OS'

p

00
00

CN
CN

1o

o
*0
3
3
£

§

ON

3 )

E
c
3
CN
•—>

p

o

p

in

©

CN

t > co
CO c o

o
o

m
vo

-C

1

CD
c
P
CN

o

CD

o

p

r -

as

CN
Os

CO

o

' I

o

OS

vo

§a

’O
fi

‘o

co

r -

o

©

©

CO
CO

p

00

CN

in
i—*

r r

>—»

3
»
¿3

00

t—

co

r -*

p

O

o

vo
<N

©

©

CO

in

os

x>

3

<£

o
o
o
«

o

o o

O

£

£>

£>

O
CN

<n

CN

<
z

* - §
o
c
P h

o

-C
i
CD
<+H
O

o

CD

00

o

i3
42
§

p
CD
p
CD
-C

3

_
o
¿3
s
o
o

s

id

3

1
CD
2
G

3 )

D

u

u

CN

CO

ecS
•c
o

i
CCS
a>

CCS
4>

6 6

£

B

c
u

c
B

c
<d

__
CCS
<d

,
a
<d

c

3

5
5

3 3 3
3 b

3 )

©
©

3 )

E E E E
o o o o
u

2
s

u

in

Q

1
&
u
t-l
to
CD

Ip

J

CD
t/2
CD
jq

P

p

p

vo

00
OS

OS

in
Os

CO

o

p

in

CO CO

00

oo

d

00
OS

r Os

vo
oo

CO
CO

2
c
6

00

Os

3

O
P i

_c

p3
_o

OJ

o
o
o

£

o
c
o .

6
V-I

»-1

3
o
oo

2c
CD

3

<D
CU

•

QJ

CCS
‘C
2

3
s

O
CN
£>

o

O
CN

o
£

o

cn

o

2

p

CCS
CD

CCS
(D

CCS
CD

CCS
CD

3
o

£

E

E

£

c

G
CD

o

-a
2

3

<D
2
G
D

c
CD
3
3

2

c

2

3 3 3
13

3

3

E E E E
o o o o
o

o

CN

co

u

u

3
«
H

|
Q
s
T3

£

JO

CD
>
O
o
Ih
CD
>

o
jO

l

0
1

00

m

p

OS
OS

5 *
o

3

o

Jp

£>

3

o

CN

d

3 )
CD
2

3

<L>
K
CL)
>
O
o

o
^

i/J
M
n

Vh
B
>
O

2

§

40

CD
g

o

NA

Percentage clover cover1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated with com gluten meal in the 1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study.

C/3

Table 6.

p

00

m

o
o

o
cn

a

hJ

-c

H

Os

o

o oo o Tt- r-

Os

VO O

O

OO

âû
O
O
m

Os
Os

o »o o en «s
oo o o o

o (N m

O
O
O

•ë*
3

bß

t/3

£2

ê
§
U

VO

o

O

o r- wn vo o
VO O 00 O

C/3
Z

TC
3D

CD

£CD

■è*
I
B
c

03
ai
o ~ en

O

O (N o oc n
Tt oo r» «ri

<Z)
Z

©

C/3

o

U
T3

0<d)

OO ©
^

a

£O

*— O
ve

2

i

03

u
«n

voovooTfrr-~
m
— m

OÍ

o
o

£
T3

On

S

j3

2o

o
e
n
03

T3
6
03

O
2
O

O OO ITI Tt Tf
<N Tf T}- 1rs

U

vo

2bû
CD

o

O
0)
-5

O
S

c

0CD3

43
x/i
t/3

I
CD

so

o

C
o
O
O

£

CD «D

II
*1
g
(X

jç3 O
Cu Ö

o O o

^N en
£

O

Si

CD

0¿

2 2

2

1CO «Cc3

S)
IO

c
1
2
D-

4b3o

2

^ SS S S
? 2 2 2 2
'S'öb "öb ’ab ’Hb

S)
“
o
C

- (N n

lO

O
£

o
o
o

2 S

52 So
*•§
2p-l
£

|¡ >
g .2

2

tT)

.s ©
c« ©

Oc
©n en
©
£

O

©

O
T3

ôû<2
5 S
c -o

g èc

S

P, 03

D

CD D ”c<3L>
£ £
c c c c
2 2 2 2
B 3 3 J3

”03 13 ”03
0
2 2

DU

z

303

-

H

U

(N rc

U

S
"

&
“

c3

03

g o
ta c
D CD

bû

Ic o2 o2 o2 2
o

o

jj

r

03
^

(D C
'
2

c3bû bû bû

D OO O O

£!
S3

o

<D

Ic o2 o2 o2 o2

H

c
o

>«
i g
o ¿2
2?S
(D T3
O

g

B
c

a. >

o O o

^C N ~

£

U

O
U

U

in

a
C/3
J

>
g
D fc
£ c/3

Percentage dandelion count reductions1 in Kentucky bluegrass treated in the 1995 Com Gluten Meal Rate Weed Control Study for 1996 through 2001.
Table 10.

o
o
(N

|
VO

© O
r-n O
«>s o
Onn *Oh
n

a

o r- r- in in

On
Os

o 00 00 O On

C
/5

t"* oo oo

On On On On

£

§

u

TO3

<D
£
acd
C*

o o in vo o
O OO t—t'"-

©

VO O O ©
Os O n Os ©

I
«
a
o

© tJ- (N
tj- rn
r- vo
On

o

E

o

o o

o
U
in
O
s
o

oo oo

in so (N

©

in

VO

00
(N

(N

in
On

a

m

O s OO

’5
T3

IQ,
I
O

TD
3
03

o tj
oo- oin (N
oo o>n

o
x>
©

© ©
<
N
§
|
£ =2 £ §
&
© <
©
o
n m
£
l
X>
o

Id
1cd
2

c
O
U —’
T3
c «>
S «
T3
_ to
.£ p
mO
1 1
o ^
-§
<
u 2p
»-H
« h
gps
S*
p

© m o © <n
^ vo o o

ac

J

jd

*0.
u

£b
<
L>
22
S

ifo

00

On

©

o
o
© © ©
o
a<3 ^y 5 a £ £ §
© © ©
" |
X <N m
gcl| JD
x>
©

> >
0 g
e p10
.£
in ©
J ii

1

« is

IO ^s®
a

p
is
co
o
To3

«
E
cp
a

CO
M

Id
<u Id
<D Id
d>
a B £
cc c c
a a
^3 a a

60 (50

C S)
s ’®
£a, oc

cL>
<

g

cu

DO

|

c E
o oE oB E
o
DO U U U

cd cd
> a

- (N n t}- in

£ ^

cd

•8 | B S s
td

*60 0 0 OX)

00

|

c E
o oE oE oE
D UU U U
£03
H

- (N m d >n

s

c §b

O
i3
ocd ocd ocd ocd
f EE £ E

Q
C/3
hJ

Anti-Desiccant Winter Protection of Creeping Bentgrass Putting Greens
D.D. M inner a n d F .J Valverde
Introduction
The three major types of winter turf injury are direct low temperature stress, winter desiccation, and low temperature
fungi. Frozen conditions in the absence of snow cover can cause a slow but constant lost of moisture. This type of
winter injury known as desiccation is especially damaging during sunny and windy conditions. It is known that
artificial barriers between the grass and the environment can positively decrease the physiological damage. Protective
covers or tarps are often placed over the turf just prior to ground freeze and are not removed in the spring until the
surface thaws. For most winter conditions turf covers speed spring green-up and reduce winter injury.
An alternative to using plastic or any other kind of covers in turfgrass is the use of anti-desiccants. These substances
decrease the rate at which plant tissue would lose water.
The objective of this study was to determine the effect that anti-desiccants applied before winter would have on the
quality of turfgrass at springtime.
Materials and Methods
The study was initiated November 15, 2001 at the Horticulture Research Station on a USGA sand based putting green
containing a mature stand of ‘Penncross’ creeping bentgrass. The trial had eight treatments (Table 1) and 3
replications. Each treatment was applied using a C 0 2 sprayer on an area of 5 x 5 ft2. The Evergreen Turf Cover was
placed on the same day that anti-desiccant treatments were applied.
Table 1. Description of products and application rates.
Treatments

Rate (oz/1000ft2)

Treatments

Rate (oz/1000ft2)

1

GLAD

42

5

Transfi lm

8

2

GLAD

17

6

Wilt-Pruf

42

3

GLAD

11

7

Cover Evergreen

~

4

GLAD

8

8

Control

~

No other practice or treatment was applied to the trial. A foot of snow was on top of the trial for about 90 days. The
first rating of the trial was done the 26 of March, and every ten days after that, for a total of 4 ratings. Turf color was
visually evaluated using a scale from 1-10, where 1 is white-brown color and 10 dark green.
Results
The winter of 2000 - 2001 produced record snow cover with just over 90 days of snow cover between December and
March. The extensive snow cover eliminated any chance of injury from winter desiccation. Grey Snow Mold was
generally extensive throughout the state, but there was only minimal injury on this particular bentgrass research site.
Table 1 shows the summary of four evaluation dates in the spring. Turf color was used to evaluate the amount of
winter injury as well as the rate of spring green-up. Normal spring green-up began during the first week of April. The
untreated control and the Evergreen cover were used for comparison with the anti-desiccant materials. The Evergreen
cover provided better turf color than the non-treated control. Lower turf color ratings for the anti-desiccant materials
seemed to be associated with a lighter tan color of the turfgrass blades. There was no rate effect among the GLAD
treatments.

96

Table 2. Turf quality for various anti-desiccant treatments. Higher values represent less winter injury.
Turf Quality at each given date
Treatm ent
GLAD
GLAD
GLAD
GLAD
Transfilm
Wilt-Pruf
Evergreen cover
Control
LSD o.o5

Rate oz/sqft
42
17
11
8
8
42
—
—

3/26
2.3
3.7
2.3
3.3
2.3
3.3
7.0
4.0
IS

4/4
2.7
3.0
2.3
3.3
2.3
2.7
7.0
4.0
2.3

4/14
4.3
4.3
3.7
5.0
3.7
4.7
7.0
5.0
2.2

4/24
5.0
4.7
4.7
5.7
4.3
5.7
8.0
5.0
1.7

Avg
3.5
4.2
3.2
4.3
3.3
4.1
7.2
4.6
1.7

While there were no significant differences between the control and any of the anti-desiccant materials, there appeared
to be a non-statistical trend. This trend indicated that the anti-desiccant materials resulted in lower turf color ratings
than the non-treated control. By 4 May all of the grass treated with anti-desiccants had recovered to a level equal to the
non-treated control and the trend ceased to exist.
The anti-desiccant materials used in this trial did not improve the spring performance of putting green turf following
the winter. The winter of 2000-2001 did not produce winter desiccation conditions.

97

Direct Heat Stress Effects on Creeping Bentgrass
D eying Li, D a vid D. Minner,

Christians

While direct high temperature damage is often suspected in the loss of creeping bentgrass on golf course greens in the
summer, little data is available on this subject. It is known that as supraoptimal temperatures are reached, grasses
become more susceptible to biotic- or abiotic- stresses. High soil temperatures inhibit many physiological activities of
roots cells and disturb the normal functions of roots such as water uptake, nutrients uptake, hormonal transportation,
and photosynthates distribution. High temperatures also cause leaf injuries and accelerate leaf senescence (DiPaola &
Beard 1992; Huang, et al., 2000, 2001).
Sometimes, soil temperatures can be so high that direct injury occurs to the plant. This type of injury is classified as
"direct heat stress" ( Minner, 1981; Wehner & Watschke, 1981).
The exact scenario under which direct heat stress happens is not clear. It has been documented that a temperature
gradient can be established above a turfgrass cover and that the surface temperature of the mat can be significantly
higher than the air temperature just above the surface (Waterhouse, 1950). The objectives of this study were to
investigate whether "direct heat stress" occurs on creeping bentgrass maintained under green conditions in central Iowa,
to identify the forms of damage that occur, and to describe quantitatively the conditions that lead to the damage.
Materials and Methods
The experiment was conducted at the horticultural research station north of Ames, IA. "Crenshaw" creeping bentgrass
was established at a rate of 2 lbs seed/1000ft2 on Sept. 14, 2000, on a sand-based green constructed with 30 cm of sand
on top of a 10 cm gravel layer. The green has a drainage system consisting of 10-cm-diam. drainage pipes placed at 10
m intervals. Starter fertilizer 1, 0.5, and 0.5 lbs/1000 ft2 of N, P2 O 5 , and K2 0 , respectively, was applied at the time of
seeding.
At the time of seeding, six 5’ by 5’ plots were established on the area by topdressing a 0.5-cm layer of Profile, Quick
dry; Zeolite, Axis, mason sand, and a mixture of sand and peat (90% /10% v/v) over the surface. This was done to
create conditions of different thermal properties on the surface of the green. The experiment was a randomized
complete block design with three replications. Temperatures at three locations in each plot were measured at 0, 1 and
inches with thermal couples every 15 minutes for three consecutive days (Aug 11 to Aug 15). Water content was
measured with a time domain refelectometer (TDR) in the top 5 cm of the soil media.

6

Results and Discussion
Mat temperature was 23.4 to 27.5 °F higher than the air temperature (Table 1). When the air temperature reached 86.9
°F°, the mat temperature reached 115 °F. We closely observed the creeping bentgrass shoots that were directly in
contact with the soil surface and found that a banding of injured tissue occurred to many of the plants at this
temperature. We refer to this phenomenon as "heat girdling". Some of this type of heat stress penetrated through
surrounding leaves and sheaths, deeper into the center of the shoots and when the new leaf emerged, the girdling was
observed on the emerging leaf blades (Fig. 1).
Further investigation on turf plugs taken from these field plots and maintained in the greenhouse showed that heat
girdling generally happens when soil mat temperature reached 118 °F (48 °C). Exact air temperature at which such soil
mat temperature happens depends on the soil water content and soil thermal diffusivity. However, once the soil mat
temperature gets to the threshold temperature, it takes less than one hour to cause heat girdling to the bentgrass shoots.
Further research is needed to correlate air temperature and soil temperature for different root zone materials with
different thermal properties and water holding capacities in order to predict threshold air temperatures and the amount
of time required for direct heat stress. At this point we may conclude that direct heat stress such as heat girdling could
occur during high temperature periods in central Iowa. We also believe that soil properties can affect the degree of
injury. In the next phase of this work, we will address practical measures that can be taken to reduce heat stress
damage on greens.

98

Table 1. Root-zone surface temperatures observed when air temperature reached 86.9 °F (30.5 °C) on August 12,
2001 .

Sand
10% Peat/90% sand (v/v)
Profile
Axis
Zeolite

o

'n

o

Maximum mat temperature
✓— \
O

Treatment

110.3(43.5)
112.1(44.5)
110.8(43.8)
114.4(45.8)
110.8(43.8)

Volumetric Water content @ 5
cm
%
12.6
16.4
15.1
12.9
14.6

Fig. Heat girdled band on youngest leaf shown 3 days after injury occurred on Axis treatment. Leaf continued to grow
and injured area became visible.

Sand-Based Sport Field Stability Study
D eying Li, D.D. Minner, a n d N E Christians
Sports turf is an important area of turfgrass application. Unlike golf courses, most of the sports turf fields require more
stable playing surface to support the activities of players and facilities, and to provide protection against sports injuries.
The quality of playing surface is a function of turfgrass and soil media (Canaway and Baker, 1993). Surface quality is
usually expressed as friction, traction, stiffness, and resilience when the interaction between the surface and player is
the main concern. It also can be evaluated from the ball bounce resilience and rolling resistance or ball speed when
information about the behavior of sport facilities on a playing surface is needed (Bell et al., 1985; Baker et al., 1988;
McClements and Baker, 1994). O f all the qualities of playing surface, perhaps the safety of the players is the most
important consideration when constructing and evaluating a sports field. Many sports injuries are related to varying
degree of surface stability (Valiant, 1988; Powell and Schootman, 1993; Waddington and McNitt, 1995). To assess the
risk requires knowledge from many disciplines including the sports ground mechanics, which is not well understood
because of very limited research. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative importance of sand particle
size, particle-size distribution, particle shape and roundness, plant roots and root-zone water content in the stability of a
sand-based sport field surface.
Materials and Methods
The study was established on an existing sand-based sport turf area at the Horticultural Research Station. The root
zones were excaved to form 5 X 10 ft plots 6 inches deep. Five treatments, Hallet mason sand, Hallet concrete sand,
Sidlley Proangle sand, Bunker white sand, and Hallet mason sand + 15% soil (v/v) were filled in the plots and
compacted with a Whacker vibrating compactor for ten passes. The experiment design is a randomized complete
block, with three replications.
Sand angle at repose, particle-size distribution, particle shape/roundness (Li, 2001) was analyzed before loading
materials to the plots (Table 1). On June 25 2001, half of each plot was planted with washed sod and half seeded with
Kentucky bluegrass 'Unique'. The turf has been mowed once a week at 5 cm. The turf received 159 kg ha'1N, 35 kg
ha'1P, and 96 kg ha'1K in three months period after sodding. Water content was measured by TDR each time surface
stability was evaluated. Playing surface parameters were evaluated both before and after turf establishment. The
playing surface was evaluated by measuring the penetration with a penetrometer, surface hardness with a B&K 2500
vibration analyzer (Rogers and Waddington, 1990) and traction with a cleated torque wrench device (Canaway and
Bell, 1986). Bulk density also was measured to determine the compaction status. Two month into the turf
establishment grass root and thatch dry mass was quantified in addition to other measurements.
Preliminary Results
Adding soil to Hallet mason sand did not increase penetration resistance. Penetration resistance increased after sodding
for all materials except silica sand (Table 2).
On 27 July 2001 (32 days after sodding) there was a noticeable increase in GmaxA. Thereafter, GmaxA decreased with no
explanation (Tablé 2).
Hallet mason sand had significantly greater traction than Hallet concrete or silica sand. Adding soil to mason sand did
not increase traction (Table 3).
For each sand material there was an optimum water content that maximized penetration resistance. Sand source
(angularity) played a more important role in maximizing penetration resistance than adding 15% soil to mason sand.
Two months after sodding traction, measured by the torque wrench method, did not correlate with many of the plant
mass or sand property measurements in this study (Table 3).

100

© © © © ^
©

©

©

©

c>

—
©

o

in
©

—' ©

rn on © m
X fOvo *—
« 00

VO
in

©

vo
©
<N

in Tf tt

Tf

’

— OC Tf Tf —<

VO

in
<N
©

in ©

n m in © © ~

o
o

in
,“H
.
©

©

VO
On

© Tf

fN(N m m
VD h ;

ooX <n os

— —<cs

X

: cn in 00 in <n
(N
: t-* vo co
m

s©
^
:
:

OS
c4
m

OS
in

_
rn
<N 00
CM <N

in in
in m
m

-T3
o

in
rn
r-

oo in
© oo
(N

2
Sb
<0
15
i?
o
5
c<L>

a
I
u
c
o

Z fs| ^ r-

T3

vo r~~
© VO in
£

Table 1. Particle size analysis of the sand sources used in the study.

os oo ’— © m

C
<u
E
pC
t/3

>
ts

2
©

vo ©

©

©

<ets3

a>
>
O
i>
oCfl
vP

c
o

03

E
^

T3
1
0)
2
co
JL>

.
60
i
2
cu

is 13 rs

DC X oo

60

2o
>
<

(U
Xo
cL
o

-o
C
cd

0> 260

©
a
H

2
_o
15
ao>
-O
2

NxO
o
'O
§
««

o
^
P C|
o cu
~ z
^ 1
jd jd
g jd
^ 13 3 ~ "5
DC DCc/3 c/o DC

Q
oo
J

Table 3. Correlation coefficients between sand properties, plant mass, and playing surface parameters measured on 25 Aug. 2001, two months after sodding.

Conclusions
At this point it appears that multiple parameters, as opposed to a single type of measurement, will be required to accurately assess
the stability of sand-based sport fields.
References
Baker, S.W., A.R. Cole, and S.L. Thornton. 1988. Performance standards and the interpretation of playing quality for soccer in
relation to rootzone composition. J. Sports Turf Res. Inst. 64:120-132.
Bell, M.J., S.W. Baker, and P.M. Canaway. 1985. Playing quality of sports surfaces: a review. J.Sports Turf Res.Inst. 61:26-45.
Canaway, P.M. and S.W. Baker. 1993. Soil and turf properties governing play. International Turfgrass Society Research Journal.
7:192-200.
McClements, I. and S.W. Baker. 1994. The playing quality of rugby pitches. Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute. 70:2943.
Powell, J.W. and M. Schootman. 1993. A multivariate risk analysis of natural grass and astroturf playing surfaces in the National
Football League 1980-1989. International Turfgrass Society Research Journal. 7:201-211.
Valiant, G.A. 1988. Ground reaction forces developed on artificial turf. Science and football, p. 406-415. In: Reilly, T., Lees A.,
Davids, K. and Murphy, W.J. (ed). First world congress of science and football, Liverpool, 13-17 April 1987.
E.&.F.M.Spon Ltd. 12 New Fetter Land, London EC4P 4EE; E. & F.M. Spon, 29 West 35th Street, New York,
N Y 10001.
Waddington, D.V.and A.S. McNitt. 1995. Penn State Research on surface characteristics of playing fields. The Keynoter.
23(2):5-7.

103

Iowa State University Personnel Affiliated with the Turfgrass Research Program
Barbara Bingaman, Ph.D.

Postdoctoral Research Associate, Horticulture Dept.

Natalie Canier

Graduate Student, M.S. (Minner)

Nick Christians, Ph.D.

Professor, Turfgrass Science Research and Teaching, Horticulture Dept.

Lucas Dant

Field Technician, Horticulture Dept.

Will Emley

Superintendent, Horticulture Research Station

Shui-Zhang Fei, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Turfgrass Science Research (Plant Breeding), Horticulture Dept.

Mark Gleason, Ph.D.

Professor, Extension Plant Pathologist, Plant Pathology Dept.

MarkHelgeson

Field Technician, Horticulture Dept.

Mark Howieson

Graduate Student, Ph.D. (Christians)

Jeff lies, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Extension, Nursery Crops/Omamentals, Horticulture Dept.

Young K. Joo, Ph.D.

Visiting Scientist from Korea

Jason Kruse

Graduate Student, Ph.D. (Christians and Chaplin - starting Fall 2001)

Donald Lewis, Ph.D.

Professor, Extension Entomologist, Entomology Dept.

Deying Li, Ph.D.

Postdoctoral Research Associate (Christians and Minner)

David Minner, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Turfgrass Science Research and Extension, Horticulture Dept.

Hugh O’Donnell

Field Research Technician

Daniel Oschner

Field Technician, Horticulture Dept.

Troy Oster

Graduate Student, M.S. (Christians)

Rodney St. John

Superintendent, Turfgrass Research Station, Horticulture Dept.

Joe Stoeffler

Field Technician, Horticulture Dept.

Federico Valverde

Research Associate, Horticulture Dept.

104

Companies and Organizations That Made Donations or Supplied Products to the Iowa
State University Turfgrass Research Program
Special thanks are expressed to the Big Bear Turf Equipment Company and Textron for
providing a Cushman Turfgrass Truckster, and Ryan GA30 aerifier; to Tri-State Turf and
Irrigation for providing a Greensmaster 3100 Triplex Greensmower and a Groundsmaster 345
rotary mower; and, to Great American Outdoor for providing a John Deere 2500 Triplex
Greensmower for use at the research area.

M icro F lo
M ilorganite
M onsanto Company
O ssian Lnc.
PBL/Gordon C orporation
P ickseed W est Lncorporated
P ro file P roducts
R ainbird Lrrigation Company
Rhone-Poulenc C hem ical Company
R iverdale C hem ical Company
Rohm a n d H aas Co.
The Scotts Company
Seeds W est Lnc.
Standard G o lfCompany
SubAir
Syngenta
Tee J e t Spray P roducts
Terra C hem ical C orporation
Textron
The Toro Company
T ri S tate T u rf& Lrrigation Co.
True Pitch, Lnc.
T u rfSeed, Lnc.
U nited H orticultural Supply
U nited Seeds Lnc.
W eatherm atic C orporation
W illiam s Lawn Seed Company

A iken P ea t
A ndersons Law n Tech
A vends
BASF
B ecker U nderw ood
B ig B ear T u rfE quipm ent Com pany
C hem ical Services Labs
D & K T u rfP roducts
D ow A grosciences
G ardens A live
G o lfC ourse Superintendents
A ssociation o f Am erica
G reat A m erican O utdoor
G reen a n d B io Tech, Lnc.
H eatw ay
H unter Lndustries, Lnc.
Lowa G o lfC ourse Superintendents
A ssociation
Lowa P ro fessio n a l Law n Care
A ssociation
Lowa S ports T u rfM anagers
A ssociation
Lowa Turfgrass Lnstitute
Jacklin S eed
L E SC O Lncorporated

105