A thletic field paints have increasingly become an integral part of sporting events worldwide with an ever-increasing desire to produce bright, distinct, and often-intricate logos and designs. While these products are specifically designed and labeled for use on athletic turf, repeated applications commonly result in declines in turfgrass quality, density, and performance. The underlying basis for this decline has been linked to reductions in photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) reaching the leaf surface due to absorption by paint pigments and is often color dependent (Reynolds et al., 2012(Reynolds et al., , 2013. However, Reynolds et al. (2013) also reported that the interception of PAR by paint pigments is likely not the only factor implicated in reductions of turfgrass quality in painted turfgrass canopies. For example, in that study white paint absorbed 0.0% of PAR yet still produced total canopy photosynthesis (TCP) rates in 'Tifway' hybrid bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. x C. transvaalensis Burtt-Davy] of only 78 and 83% of the nonpainted control in two separate experiments. Consequently, it is likely that other detrimental effects resulting from athletic field paint applications are contributing to turfgrass decline, in addition to the effects of shading.ABSTRACT Athletic field paints have varying impacts on turfgrass health that have been linked to their ability to alter photosynthetically active radiation and photosynthesis on the basis of color. It was further hypothesized they may also alter transpiration and canopy temperature by disrupting gas exchange at the leaf surface. Growth chamber experiments evaluated the effects of air temperature and six colors of paint on daily water loss and canopy temperature in 'Tifway' bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. x C. transvaalensis Burtt-Davy]. Daily water loss and canopy temperature were measured every 24 h using gravimetric techniques and an infrared digital thermometer, while lab experiments examined the thickness of white and black paint on the leaf surface. In nonpainted bermudagrass canopies, daily water loss increased (P £ 0.0001) with canopy temperature from 29 to 36°C, while in painted bermudagrass canopies it decreased (P £ 0.0001) as canopy temperature increased from 29 to 40°C. Yellow and white paint impacted transpiration and canopy temperature the least, while black and blue caused the greatest reductions in transpiration and highest increases in canopy temperature. Cross-sections of painted Tifway indicate that paint may limit evaporative cooling by clogging stomata. Increased absorption of radiant energy by paint coupled with limited evaporative cooling result in increased heat stress and decreased turfgrass performance in painted canopies. W.C. Reynolds, Soil and Crop Sciences Dep., Texas A&M University, TAMU 2474, College Station, TX 77843-2474; G.L. Miller and T.W. Rufty,