Increasing seeding or N rates provides negligible benefits in producing fine fescue sod.2. There are differences in sod strength and handling among fine fescue taxa.3. Strong creeping red fescue is a promising solution for low-input sod production.4. Higher N rates are required for Kentucky bluegrass compared to strong creeping red fescue.5. Tall fescue sod with no netting consistently provided poor sod strength and handling.
Research is required on sod to explore the differences in management and postharvest practices to help inform sod producers and reduce information inefficiencies that affect the supply and demand of cool-season turfgrass sod. Replicated field experiments were conducted in Indiana and Minnesota to quantify the effect of turfgrass species (strong creeping red fescue [Festuca rubra L. ssp. rubra Gaudin], Chewings fescue [F. rubra ssp. commutata Gaudin], tall fescue [F. arundinacea Schreb.], and Kentucky bluegrass [Poa pratensis L.]), seeding rate (1, 2, and 3 pure live seed (PLS) cm −2 ), and N fertilization (98, 196, and 294 kg N ha −1 yr −1 ) on growth rate and shelf-life storage. Turf height measurements occurred at multiple timings to calculate growth rates of treatments. Sod was harvested in the spring and autumn and stored on pallets for either 24 or 72 h and then reinstalled in its previous location and treatment effects were assessed. Seeding rate had no effect on growth rate or transplant success of sod. Differences in growth rates demonstrate potential savings for sod growers through less mowing requirement when producing fine fescue sod. Treatments did not influence internal heating of sod rolls, which were higher than, but similar to, diurnal fluctuations of air temperatures. There were minimal differences among turfgrass species and N rates, which indicates strong creeping red fescue, Chewings fescue, tall fescue, and Kentucky bluegrass sod stored for 24-72 h after a spring or autumn harvest in Indiana or Minnesota will not hinder transplant success.Abbreviations: DAI, days after installation; MAP, months after planting; PLS, pure live seedThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
Phosphorus enrichment of surface water is a concern in many urban watersheds. A 3-yr study on a silt loam soil with 5% slope and high soil test P (27 mg kg(-1) Bray P1) was conducted to evaluate P fertilization and clipping management effects on P runoff from turfgrass (Poa pratensis L.) under frozen and nonfrozen conditions. Four fertilizer treatments were compared: (i) no fertilizer, (ii) nitrogen (N)+potassium (K)+0xP, (iii) N+K+1xP, and (iv) N+K+3xP. Phosphorus rates were 21.3 and 63.9 kg ha(-1) yr(-1) the first year and 7.1 and 21.3 kg ha(-1) yr(-1) the following 2 yr. Each fertilizer treatment was evaluated with clippings removed or clippings recycled back to the turf. In the first year, P runoff increased with increasing P rate and P losses were greater in runoff from frozen than nonfrozen soil. In year 2, total P runoff from the no fertilizer treatment was greater than from treatments receiving fertilizer. This was because reduced turf quality resulted in greater runoff depth from the no fertilizer treatment. In year 3, total P runoff from frozen soil and cumulative total P runoff increased with increasing P rate. Clipping management was not an important factor in any year, indicating that returning clippings does not significantly increase P runoff from turf. In the presence of N and K, P fertilization did not improve turf growth or quality in any year. Phosphorus runoff can be reduced by not applying P to high testing soils and avoiding fall applications when P is needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.