Kentucky Bluegrass Characterization and Blending Strategies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 42
About This Presentation
Title:

Kentucky Bluegrass Characterization and Blending Strategies

Description:

Single genotype - other turfgrass species are mixture of genotypes ... Arrow Mallard. SR2394/Arcadia Kentucky. Shamrock Type. Moderate winter color ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:180
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 43
Provided by: far148
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Kentucky Bluegrass Characterization and Blending Strategies


1
Kentucky Bluegrass Characterization and
Blending Strategies
2
Leah A. Brilman, Ph.D.Research
DirectorSeed Research of Oregon
3
Why Blends and Mixtures
  • No perfect grass cultivar
  • Increased genetic diversity
  • Strengths and weaknesses matched
  • Natural selection for microenvironments
  • Insurance policy
  • Match color, growth form carefully
  • Price competiveness

4
Why Blends and Mixtures
  • Kentucky bluegrass apomictic
  • Single genotype - other turfgrass species are
    mixture of genotypes
  • Vegetative cultivars comparison
  • Vegetative bentgrasses
  • Vegetative bermudas, zoysias, St. Augustine
  • Merion Kentucky bluegrass - stripe smut
  • Not just for disease resistance

5
Why Blends and Mixtures
  • Sports Turf Needs
  • Rapid establishment
  • Strong lateral spread
  • High shoot density
  • High sod tensile-strengthRapid repair of wear
  • Late fall, winter and early spring growth
  • Shade tolerance
  • Abiotic and biotic stress resistance

6
Types of KentuckyBluegrasses
  • Compact Types CELA Type
  • Compact BVMG Type
  • Midnight Shamrock type
  • America Cheri Type
  • Aggressive Type Julia Type
  • Bellevue Type Common Type
  • Mid-Atlantic Type Other Type

7
Midnight Type Cultivars
Do not have blend of only this type Very dark
green color Low, compact growth High quality
turf 1/2 inch cutting height Excellent
resistance to leaf spot Long winter
dormancy Most do poor in the shade High heat
tolerance
8
Midnight Type Cultivars
Midnight Arcadia Liberator Odyssey NuGlade
Perfection Tsunami Chicago II Awesome Excursio
n Freedom II Barrister Beyond Rugby
II Impact Quantum Leap Absolute Award Total
Eclipse Midnight II
9
America Type Cultivars
Bright dark green color Low, compact
growth 1/2 inch cutting height Excellent
resistance to leaf spot, powdery mildew Finer
leaf, higher density Moderate winter
dormancy Moderate summer recovery High summer
patch resistance Good in shade
10
America Type Cultivars
America Showcase Apollo SR 2284 Unique SR
2394 Brilliant Langara Avalanche Blue
Ridge Glenmont Royale Lakeshore Goldstar Arrow
Mallard
11
SR2394/Arcadia Kentucky
12
Shamrock Type
Moderate winter color Good resistance to leaf
spot Good turf quality and sod strength Billbug
susceptible High seed yields Less stemmy than
BVMG types Summer performance variable This type
is an excellent substitute for BVMG type - Higher
quality with reduced costs Shamrock Type
Varieties Shamrock SR 2100 Champagne Atlantis
Parkland
13
BVMG Type Cultivars
High seed yields Medium-good turf Drought
tolerance Medium low growth Medium wide
leaves Very stemmy in spring Good resistance to
necrotic ring spot Often used to reduce costs,
can reduce quality
14
BVMG Type Cultivars
Baron Cannon Victa Merit Gnome Clearwater
Goldrush Dragon Abbey BlueStar Crest Nass
ua Raven Marquis BlueChip Fortuna Envicta Ba
ronette
15
Aggressive Type
Aggressive lateral growth High shoot
density Very wear tolerant Quickly knit sod and
repair May predominate in blend Variable in other
characteristics
16
Julia Type
High turf quality High density Good summer
performance Moderate winter performance Good leaf
spot, stripe smut resistance Susceptible to brown
patch and dollar spot High winter wear
tolerance Julia Type Varieties Julia SR
27832 Caliber Ikone
17
Bellevue Type
Medium growth and shoot density Medium wide
leaves Excellent winter color, early spring
green-up Stemmy in spring Moderate recovery from
summer Good leaf spot, stripe smut
resistance Susceptible to billbugs Bellevue Type
Varieties Bellevue Suffolk Georgetown Parade C
lassic Dawn
18
Mid-Atlantic Type
Deep extensive roots and rhizomes Vigorous turf
and medium-high density High summer stress
tolerance Early spring green-up Good winter
performance Rapid recovery from
disease Mid-Atlantic Type Varieties Monopoly SR
2000 Preakness Eagleton Livingston Plush Waba
sh
19
Common Type
Erect growth and narrow leaf blades Good summer
stress tolerance May go dormant in summer High
leaf spot susceptibility Poor winter color and
performance Early seed production, dryland Common
type Varieties South Dakota Kenblue Geary Park
S-21 Newport Alene Ginger Garfield Piedmon
t Huntsville
20
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Blending of resistant / susceptible varieties
  • Creeping bentgrass - dollar spot
  • (Abernathy, et al. 2001. Crop Sci. 41806-809.)
  • Crenshaw - susceptible, L-93 resistant, others
  • Blends of resistant and moderately resistant
    cultivars with Crenshaw reduced dollar spot from
    46 to 67 less infection centers and 71 to 91
    less blighted area
  • Benefit of including Crenshaw for heat tolerance

21
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Kentucky bluegrass
  • (Vargas and Turgeon, 1980. Proc. Third ITRC
    45-52.)
  • Melting-out resistance of blend of two
  • cultivars intermediate between same
  • cultivars in monostands
  • Inoculum from susceptible cultivar reduced
  • resistance of resistant cultivar
  • Blends of two cultivars generally show resistance
    intermediate between each alone

22
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Problems with disease resistance data
  • Disease organism not verified
  • Large CV in disease data - uneven in trial
  • Disease races
  • Different in different locations
  • Change over time
  • Stripe smut - Merion, Adelphi and BVMG
  • Dollar spot in bentgrasses
  • Summer patch

23
Summer patch
  • 96-00 NJ NTEP 91-95 MD NTEP
  • Summer Summer
  • Cultivar Patch Patch
  • SR 2000 6.8 8.5
  • Unique 8.2 7.8
  • Nustar 5.4 7.7
  • Eclipse 8.2 7.5
  • Midnight 7.3 7.5
  • SR 2100 7.8 7.5
  • Blacksburg 4.5 7.3
  • LSD_at_5 1.8 1.5

24
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Early blend analysis - Dr. Funk, Rutgers
  • Sprigged out plants to ID
  • Aggressive types dominated
  • Aggressive types based on invasion in plots
  • New DNA techniques allow blend analysis
  • (Lickfeldt et al, 2002. Crop Sci. 42842-847.)
  • 3-way blend - Unique, Midnight, Blacksburg
  • Different management, of each at seeding
  • Final composition, 40, 46, 14

25
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Stiers et al. 2003.
  • Most cool-season turf areas and athletic fields
    are mixtures of Poa pratensis and Lolium perenne
  • A 5050 sward is desirable for traction,
  • recovery, and disease resistance
  • L. perenne germinates quickly and can outcompete
    P. pratensis seedlings

26
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Main plot P. pratensisL. perenne
  • 955 9010 8515 7525
  • 6535 5050 2575
  • Sub-plot P. pratensis type
  • Aggressive Touchdown, Limousine, Fairfax
  • BVMG Victa, Merit, Cannon
  • Compact Midnight, Indigo, Alpine
  • Common Alene, Kenblue, Ronde

27
Composition of P. pratensis (PP) and L. perenne
(LP) Turf Stands with wear
28
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Turf quality occasionally better with primarily
  • Poa pratensis.
  • All types of P. pratensis provided similar
  • results except for common types
  • At least 85 P. pratensis needed in seed mixture
    to provide approximately 5050 PoaLolium turf
    sward
  • Fairfax predominated in Aggressive blend although
    classified as Other.

29
Science and nonscience of blends
  • How to determine which cultivar will
  • predominate in a blend?
  • How to predict aggressiveness?
  • Dependent on components
  • Dependent on environment
  • Competitive environment

30
Components of IL Blend
  • 1996 - 2000 NTEP
  • Cultivar Mean length/width UB Sod Strength
  • 7/97 11/98 MD NE Mean
  • Princeton 105 28.5 65.3 28.7 42.8 35.8
  • Unique 29.1 59.9 22.3 38.7 30.5
  • Midnight 26.0 56.4 21.0 37.7 29.3
  • Blacksburg 23.6 47.8 19.7 10.8 15.3
  • Limousine 22.9 36.6 15.7 21.0 18.3
  • LSD_at_5 4.7 8.0
    5.4 20.9 14.6

31
Components of IL Blend
  • 96-00 NTEP 91-95 NTEP
  • Leaf Seedling Leaf Seedling
  • Cultivar Spot Vigor Spot Vigor
  • Blacksburg 7.1 5.1 7.8 3.0
  • Midnight 6.8 5.1
    6.8 5.1
  • Unique 5.2 5.3
    6.8 5.2
  • LSD_at_5 0.2 0.3
    0.6 0.8

32
Components of IL Blend
  • Lickfeldt et al, 2002. Golf Course Management.
  • Third site reported, Univ. of IL
  • Managed as lawn, year after
  • establishment no irrigation or herbicides
  • Blacksburg 24, Unique 35,
  • Midnight 41.
  • Higher percentage Blacksburg.
  • Blacksburg good stress survival, dark color

33
Science and nonscience of blends
  • How to determine which cultivar will
  • predominate in a blend?
  • How to predict aggressiveness?
  • Further studies to compare competitiveness
  • within and between types
  • Compare in varying environments
  • Climatic zones, wear, shade, management
  • Coordinate with NTEP / Financing?

34
Science and nonscience of blends
  • How to determine which cultivar will
  • predominate in a blend?
  • Examination of blends with sports field
    management - Irrigated, nonirrigated
  • Look at blends after wear during different
    seasons
  • Management after wear
  • Sports managers work with universities to examine

35
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Why combine types in blends?
  • Each type has weakness as well as strengths
  • Single type has weaknesses
  • Midnight types - powdery mildew, winter color
  • America types - not as dark green
  • Aggressive - dominate in blends
  • Shamrock types - billbug susceptible
  • BVMG - Very stemmy turf, poor winter
    performance, stripe smut susceptible

36
Science and nonscience of blends
  • How to select best in type?
  • Ask breeders what varieties are in type
  • Visit local test sites
  • Review data from similar locations
  • Examine data for important characteristics
  • Data can be sorted by NTEP for special reports
  • Darkest in type
  • Establishment rate
  • Influenced by age of seed
  • Important diseases

37
Science and nonscience of blends
  • Cultivar availability
  • Seed availability and price
  • No production of low yielding varieties
  • Hard to determine yields outside fields
  • Seed quality - true sod quality
  • Previous agreements with other buyers
  • Blends by seed companies - each company only has
    access to certain varieties

38
Long Term Performance
  • Older cultivars may no longer be available
  • Looking at sod older than 6 years may find
    information not useful
  • Many varieties in 1990 to 1995 NTEP no
  • longer produced
  • Some types are seeing less varietal
  • development such as Bellevue or CELA types
  • Decisions on development often made first few
    years of trials

39
Conclusions
  • Blends do provide benefit
  • Best method and number of types uncertain
  • Kentucky bluegrasses difficult to breed
  • Multiple Julia hybrids - little improvement
  • Unique type hybrids - good potential
  • Mid-Atlantic types - difficult to obtain seed
  • Cooperative work breeders and NTEP to
  • define types and publish
  • Contributions to looking at competitiveness in
    different environments and management
  • Tall fescue/ bluegrass blends need to be examined

40
Texas x Kentucky bluegrass
Female P. arachnifera x P. pratensis Texas
bluegrass drought and heat tolerant Kentucky
bluegrass higher quality Combine attributes Can
be used with tall fescue Selection for improved
establishment Apomixis needs to be
restored Improved types Reveille - Dr. James
Reed, Texas AM Scotts Company - Thermal
Blue SRX 2TK95 in initial increase
41
Texas x Kentucky bluegrass
42
Texas x Kentucky bluegrass
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com