Drought Response of Fine Fescue Mixtures Maintained as a Golf Course Fairway

Abstract

Fine fescues (Festuca spp.) may provide acceptable turf quality and playability on golf course fairways with lower irrigation inputs. Information on fine fescue fairways is limited and these species are not widely used as fairway turfgrass in the United States. The objective of this project was to evaluate the green cover of fine fescue species as fairway turfgrass under an acute drought and access their ability to recover. Twenty‐five mixtures were developed with a simplex‐centroid design using ‘Treazure II’ Chewings fescue [Festuca rubra ssp. commutata (Thuill.) Nyman], ‘Beacon’ hard fescue [Festuca trachyphylla (Hack.) Krajina], ‘Navigator II’ strong creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra ssp. rubra Gaudin), ‘Shoreline’ slender creeping red fescue [Festuca rubra ssp. litoralis (G.F.W. Meyer) Auquier], and ‘Quatro’ sheep fescue (Festuca ovina L.). Experiments were seeded in fall 2014 at both St. Paul, MN, and Madison, WI. After 10 mo of establishment, rainout shelters were used to employ a 60‐d drought on each trial during summer 2015. Plots were not trafficked. Data collected included percentage green cover as determined by digital image analysis. Analysis of variance indicated significant differences in mixture treatments, but means separation with Fisher's protected LSD showed that many monocultures performed generally similar to seed mixtures. A marginal effects summary revealed no differences among individual species, with one exception. Sheep fescue and slender creeping red fescue, when in the same mixture, had a negative interaction effect for recovery after drought. This interaction was significantly lower than the all five species coefficients included in the model, based on a 90% confidence interval. Overall, this study found that fine fescues are able to survive a 60‐d drought period under North Central US summer conditions.

Fine fescues: A review of the species, their improvement, production, establishment, and management

“…Reiter et al. (2017) reported all five fine fescue taxa, maintained at golf course fairway height, were able to survive to a 60‐d drought in Minnesota and Wisconsin; however, results indicated there were no clear trends in the drought response differences among the five taxa. When fine fescues were subjected to summer drought conditions in Colorado, hard fescue and Chewings fescue were more drought tolerant than strong creeping red fescue (Minner & Butler, 1985).…”

“…Chewings fescue generally performed best at a 20‐mm mowing height among fine fescue taxa in Japan (Razmjoo, Imada, Hirano, & Kaneko, 1993), while cultivars of slender creeping red fescue and Chewings fescue were among the top performers in England followed by strong creeping red fescue at 13‐mm mowing height and subjected to wear stress (Newell & Wood, 2003). All five fine fescues, in monocultures or mixtures, produced high turf quality at a 25 mm fairway mowing height over 3 yr at three locations in Minnesota and also survived a 60‐d drought in Minnesota and Wisconsin at 13‐mm mowing height (Reiter, 2016; Reiter et al., 2017). One major disadvantage of fine fescues for fairway use is poor divot recovery from tillering or rhizomes (Reiter, 2016); therefore, the best divot recovery strategy is generally seeding the divots.…”

“…Because of their ability to tolerate a wide range of mowing heights, fine fescues are quite versatile and can be used in a variety of management situations including putting green and tennis courts with mowing heights of 4–9.4 mm (Aamlid & Molteberg, 2011; Aamlid et al., 2012; Horgan et al., 2012; Newell, Crossley, & Jones, 1996); golf course fairways and cricket pitches with mowing height of 12.7–25.4 mm (Newell & Wood, 2003; Newell, Wood, & Hart‐woods, 2005; Reiter et al., 2017; Watkins et al., 2010, 2012); and home lawns, parks, and golf course roughs with mowing heights of 35 to ≥102 mm (DeBels et al., 2012; Diesburg et al., 1997; Hugie & Watkins, 2016; Meyer & Pedersen, 2000; Watkins et al., 2011). Fine fescues can also thrive under minimal mow (e.g., roadsides or steep‐sloped areas) (80–152 mm) to no‐mow (i.e., tall grass native rough areas) management situations [152–915 mm culm heights, which includes the inflorescence (19–152 mm)] (Cavanaugh et al., 2011; Darbyshire & Pavlick, 2007; Dernoeden et al., 1994; Friell et al., 2015; Hollman et al., 2018; Miller et al., 2013; Watkins et al., 2011).…”

“…Fine fescues are known for their shade, drought, salt, and cold tolerance, along with adaptation to infertile and acidic soils (pH 4.5–6.5) (Beard, 1973; Carroll, 1943; Dernoeden, Carrol, & Krouse, 1994; Friell, Watkins, & Horgan, 2013; Gardner & Taylor, 2002; Hanson, Juska, & Burton, 1969; Reiter, Friell, Horgan, Soldat, & Watkins, 2017). Specific cultivars and taxa within the fine fescues vary in their environmental and management limitations.…”

Building a Reference Transcriptome for the Hexaploid Hard Fescue Turfgrass (Festuca brevipila) Using a Combination of PacBio Isoseq and Illumina Sequencing

“…Several species in this genus have been used as ground cover turfgrass: (1) broader-leaf fescues that includes tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) and meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis) and 2ne-leaf fescues (Wilkinson and Stace, 1991). Five ne-leaved fescue taxa are of particular interest to turfgrass breeders because of their performance in shade, drought tolerance, and adaptation to low fertility and acidic soils (Carroll, 1943;Hanson and Juska, 1969;Reiter et al, 2017). These ve ne fescue taxa include hard fescue (Festuca brevipila Tracey, 2n=6x=42), sheep fescue (Festuca ovina, 2n=4x=28), both of which belong to the Festuca ovina complex; and the Festuca rubra complex that includes strong creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra subsp.…”