Golf Course Management

MAY 2014

Golf Course Management magazine is dedicated to advancing the golf course superintendent profession and helping GCSAA members achieve career success.

Issue link: http://gcmdigital.gcsaa.org/i/302556

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 83 of 155

05.14 GOLF COURSE MANAGEMENT 77 comparing groups). Also, because visual quality was of interest, cultivars were selected based on performance in National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) trials. The plots were maintained and well wa - tered until the study began each year. There- after, water was withheld until 50% or more of a plot displayed drought stress. One inch (2.54 centimeters) of water was then applied by hand to the individual plots. Turfgrass quality and drought stress symptoms were evaluated daily. This process continued until the end of the study, after which all plots were re-watered and allowed to recover. Plots were mowed weekly at 3 inches (7.62 centimeters). Turfgrass quality evaluations, based on color, density and uniformity of the cano - pies, were made using a visual rating scale of 1 to 9, where 1 = brown turf, 6 = minimally acceptable turf or a home lawn or golf course rough and 9 = optimal turf. Drought stress was defned as the turf displaying wilting, failure of the canopy to remain upright after foot traffc and a general darkening color of the turf. Because drought stress sometimes changed rapidly from day to day, particularly under high temperatures, it was not unusual for irrigation to be applied when more than 50% of a plot (for example, up to 70% or 80%) displayed drought stress. Results Total water applied and days to wilt between irrigation cycles Water applications, averaged over the ap - proximately 3.5-month period in each year of the study, ranged widely from 9.17 inches (23.3 centimeters) [mean = 0.086 inch (2.2 millimeters)/day)] in Bedazzled to 17.67 inches (44.9 centimeters) [0.165 inch (4.2 millimeters)/day)] in Kenblue (Figure 1). In Bedazzled, Apollo, Cabernet and Unique, 9.84 inches (25.0 centimeters) [0.090 inch (2.3 millimeters)/day] or less of water was ap - plied, which was signifcantly less than that applied to Kenblue, Blue Knight, Welling - ton, Moonlight, Baron, Diva, Midnight II, Touchdown, Shamrock and Blue Velvet. In the latter 10 cultivars, 13.81 inches (35.1 cen - timeters) [0.129 inch (3.3 millimeters)/day) or more of water was applied. However, there were no statistical differences among the 15 cultivars that received the least amount of water (Figure 1, Bedazzled through Skye). Days to wilt between irrigations, which was roughly inverse to the amount of water Group † Cultivar Aggressive Limousine Touchdown BVMG ‡ Baron Envicta Abbey Common Kenblue Wellington Park Compact Diva Skye Moonlight Compact America Langara Bedazzled Apollo Unique Kingfisher Compact Midnight Midnight Midnight II Blue Velvet Nu Destiny Award European § Blue Knight Bartitia Hybrid bluegrasses Thermal Blue Blaze Longhorn Julia Julia Mid-Atlantic Eagleton Preakness Cabernet Shamrock Shamrock † Kentucky bluegrass classification groups as described by Bonos et al. (1). ‡ BVMG, Baron, Victa, Merit and Gnome. § Blue Knight and Bartitia have since been reclassified as "other type." Table 1. Phenotypic groups and cultivars of Kentucky bluegrasses and hybrid bluegrasses in this study. Hybrid and Kentucky bluegrass phenotypic groups and cultivars 076-087_May14_TechwellCuttingEdge.indd 77 4/16/14 2:53 PM

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Golf Course Management - MAY 2014