Tolerance and Recovery of Kentucky Bluegrass Subjected to Seasonal Wear

Abstract

Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) is frequently established on sports fields that receive wear during one or more seasons. Differences exist among Kentucky bluegrass cultivars for seasonal performance characteristics such as spring green‐up and summer stress tolerance. The objective of this study was to determine whether the wear tolerance and recovery of Kentucky bluegrass cultivars were dependent on season. Twenty‐two Kentucky bluegrass cultivars, representing nine genetically diverse Kentucky bluegrass types, were established in September 2002 in North Brunswick, NJ on a loam. The effects of simulated wear were evaluated during spring, summer, and fall in 2004 and 2005. Generally, Kentucky bluegrass was more tolerant of wear during spring than summer or fall and recovery was more rapid after spring wear. The performance of many cultivars depended on season of wear; however, ‘Julia’ consistently exhibited the greatest wear tolerance as well as recovery. Compact‐Midnight Type cultivars (‘Midnight’, ‘Midnight II’, and ‘Liberator’) had good wear tolerance during fall wear, however were slow to recover after fall wear. ‘Cabernet’, ‘Lakeshore’, ‘Moon Shadow’, ‘Limousine’, and ‘Jefferson’ exhibited more rapid recovery from fall wear during the next spring. ‘Langara’, ‘Bedazzled’, and ‘Touchdown’ had poor wear tolerance and recovery during all seasons. The season(s) of play should be considered when selecting Kentucky bluegrass cultivars for sports fields.

Influence of management and environment on Australian wheat: information for sustainable intensification and closing yield gaps

“…However, the cost of inputs increases linearly with the application rate. This creates an agronomic optimum level of intensification where the marginal benefits of another kilogram of nitrogen equal the marginal costs (Park et al 2010). Yield at the agronomic optimum may well be less than the attainable yield and is likely to be significantly less than the biophysical maximum.…”

Anatomical and morphological factors affecting wear tolerance of turfgrass

“…This score is usually based on a nine-level scale (Martiniello, 2007) or 0-100% scale (Park et al, 2010). Although relevant information can be collected from these types of studies, the resultant data can be variable and difficult to reproduce by other investigators (Richardson et al, 2001).…”

“…This analysis is recognized as being more reproducible and less laboursome and time-consuming than traditional techniques of quantitative or subjective analysis (Ghalia et al, 2012;Richardson et al, 2001). The turf cover in wear tolerance experiments is usually presented as the absolute value of the trafficked plot (Thoms et al, 2011) or as the difference between trafficked vs. non-trafficked plots (Park et al, 2010). The authors propose new parameters expressing turf cover and quality.…”

A Review of Sports Turf Research Techniques Related to Playability and Safety Standards

“…St. Augustine grass [ Stenotaphrum secundatum (Walter) Kuntze] (62 N m) and seashore paspalum ( Paspalum vaginatum Sw.) (65 N m) had roughly the same traction readings between the highest and lowest traction groups cited above. Park et al (2010) assessed wear tolerance as the loss or recovery of canopy density and found seasonal differences for wear tolerance in Kentucky bluegrass. The greatest reduction in density occurred in the fall, whereas greater recovery potential was noticed during fall and spring.…”