performance of bentgrass cultivars and selections in new ...a. capillaris l.), velvet bentgrass (a....
TRANSCRIPT
-
2004RUTGERS
Turfgrass Proceedings
THE NEW JERSEY TURFGRASS ASSOCIATIONIn Cooperation With
RUTGERS COOPERATIVE RESEARCH & EXTENSIONNEW JERSEY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONRUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY
NEW BRUNSWICK
Distributed in cooperation with U.S. Department of Agriculture in furtherance of the Acts of Congress on May 8 and June 30, 1914. Rutgers Co-operative Research & Extension works in agriculture, family and community health sciences, and 4-H youth development. Dr. karyn Malinowski,
Director of Extension. Rutgers Cooperative Research & Extension provides education and educational services to all people without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases
apply to all programs). Rutgers Cooperative Research & Extension is an Equal Opportunity Program Provider and Employer.
RutgersUniversity
-
i
2004 RUTGERS TURFGRASS PROCEEDINGS
of the
New Jersey Turfgrass ExpoDecember 7-9, 2004
Trump Taj MahalAtlantic City, New Jersey
The Rutgers Turfgrass Proceedings is publishedyearly by the Rutgers Center for Turfgrass Science,Rutgers Cooperative Extension, and the New JerseyAgricultural Experiment Station, Cook College,Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in coop-eration with the New Jersey Turfgrass Association.The purpose of this document is to provide a forumfor the dissemination of information and the exchangeof ideas and knowledge. The proceedings provideturfgrass managers, research scientists, extensionspecialists, and industry personnel with opportunitiesto communicate with co-workers. Through this fo-rum, these professionals also reach a more generalaudience, which includes the public.
This publication includes lecture notes of paperspresented at the 2004 New Jersey Turfgrass Expo.Publication of these lectures provides a readily avail-able source of information covering a wide range oftopics and includes technical and popular presenta-tions of importance to the turfgrass industry.
This proceedings also includes research papersthat contain original research findings and reviews ofselected subjects in turfgrass science. These papersare presented primarily to facilitate the timely dissemi-nation of original turfgrass research for use by theturfgrass industry.
Special thanks are given to those who have sub-mitted papers for this proceedings, to the New Jer-sey Turfgrass Association for financial assistance, andto those individuals who have provided support to theRutgers Turfgrass Research Program at Cook Col-lege, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
Dr. Ann Brooks Gould, EditorDr. Bruce B. Clarke, Coordinator
-
1
PERFORMANCE OF BENTGRASS CULTIVARS AND SELECTIONSIN NEW JERSEY TURF TRIALS
Eric N. Weibel, Stacy A. Bonos, William A. Meyer, James A. Murphy, Bruce B. Clarke,Dirk A. Smith, William K. Dickson, and Joseph B. Clark1
1Head Soils and Plants Technician, Assistant Professor, Professor, Associate Extension Specialist in Turfgrass Man-agement, Extension Specialist in Turfgrass Pathology, Principal Laboratory Technician, Turfgrass Research Farm Su-pervisor, and Head Soils and Plants Technician, respectively, New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Cook Col-lege, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8520.
Bentgrass species are known to form very dense,uniform, and fine textured surfaces under extremelylow height of cut. As a result, they are often used forspecialized, high maintenance areas such as golfcourse fairways, tees, and putting greens. Some ofthe more popular species used for turf include creep-ing bentgrass (Agrostis palustris Huds.; synonym =A. stolonifera L.), colonial bentgrass (A. tenuis L. orA. capillaris L.), velvet bentgrass (A. canina L.), andless frequently, highland or dryland bentgrass (A.castellana Boiss. & Reut.).
Creeping and velvet bentgrasses are best condi-tioned for the very low cutting heights necessary forgolf course greens in the United States and other re-gions of the world. Creeping bentgrasses spreadeasily through stolons and have a prostrate growthhabit, which permits the grass to persist under verylow mowing heights. Bentgrass is the most popularspecies for use on putting greens because it is highlyadapted to both the cool temperate and warm humidregions of the United States and has a highly aggres-sive, spreading growth habit. In 1954, H. B. Musserreleased Penncross, the first seeded variety of creep-ing bentgrass (Musser, 1959). Since that time, breed-ing efforts have markedly improved creeping bent-grass varieties to withstand the increasing demandsof the game of golf. Recent releases exhibit betterturf quality, higher shoot density, improved traffic, andbetter disease and stress tolerance than older variet-ies.
Colonial bentgrass, also referred to as browntop,has traditionally been used as a lawn grass in areasof northern Europe and New Zealand that have mild(cool and humid) summers. Colonial bentgrass hasa fine leaf texture and, compared to creeping
bentgrass, has a more upright and less aggressivespreading growth habit and is generally better adaptedfor fairway or tee use in the warmer summer climatesof the United States. Colonial bentgrass performsbest in New Jersey when mowed no lower than 3/8thof an inch. Compared to creeping bentgrass, colo-nial bentgrass typically has a brighter green color andbetter color retention during cool weather. In addi-tion, this group of grasses generally has better dollarspot resistance (caused by Sclerotinia homoeocarpa)and wear tolerance than creeping bentgrass. How-ever, colonial bentgrass varieties are much more sus-ceptible to brown patch (caused by Rhizoctoniasolani). While not lethal, the playability of golf coursesmay be affected if brown patch is not controlled oncolonial bentgrass. Current breeding efforts includeimproving brown patch disease tolerance of colonialbentgrasses.
Velvet bentgrass forms the finest-textured andmost dense turf of the bentgrasses and can nearlyresemble green velvet when managed properly. Itspreads mainly through profuse production of erecttillers with short stolons. This grass can tolerate veryclose mowing, heat, cold, and shade, and is one ofthe most drought resistant of the bentgrasses usedfor turf (Skogley, 1973). The spread of velvetbentgrass via stolons is more aggressive than colo-nial bentgrass, but not as strong as with creepingbentgrass. Velvet bentgrass can form excessivethatch, especially at higher fertility rates and highercutting heights, and can thus become problematic ifnot maintained properly. It is also susceptible to redthread (caused by Laetisaria fuciformis) and copperspot (caused by Gloeocercospora sorghi), but hasgood resistance to dollar spot and brown patch. Seed-lings of velvet bentgrasses are susceptible to Pythium
-
2
seedling rot during establishment. Velvet bentgrasshas not been used extensively for high maintenanceturf, largely because its range of adaptation has notbeen well recognized. Selections of velvet bentgrasshave persisted for many years in trials under NewJersey growing conditions. It is believed that the spe-cies may one day serve as a viable alternative tocreeping bentgrass for use on golf course greens, asrecent research at Rutgers indicates and culturalmanagement inputs become better known.
The New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Stationparticipates in the National Turfgrass Evaluation Pro-gram (NTEP), which evaluates many species of turf-grass including bentgrasses throughout the UnitedStates. The Rutgers turfgrass breeding program con-ducts extensive field evaluations of collections andnew material developed in the improvement program,many of which are a result of recent collection tripswithin the United States and throughout Europe andAsia. Collections from Norway, Spain, Portugal,France, Switzerland, Italy, Greece, Poland, Bulgaria,Romania, Croatia, China, and the Slovak Republic,which are the centers of origin for many turf speciesused in the United States, serve to enhance the ge-netic diversity of the germplasm used in this breed-ing program.
PROCEDURES
Bentgrass evaluation trials were established atthe Rutgers Horticultural Research Farm II in NorthBrunswick, NJ in the fall of 2001 (Tables 1 through3), 2002 (Tables 4 and 5), and 2003 (Tables 6 thru 9).Two of the trials planted in the fall of 2003 (Tables 6and 8) included all entries of the 2003 NationalBentgrass Test coordinated by NTEP. Trials wereestablished on a modified Nixon loam, except the2003 NTEP putting green trial (Table 6), which wasseeded on a sand-peat root zone. Plot size was 3 X5 ft for all trials, except the 2003 NTEP trials (greensand fairway/tee) which were 4 X 6 ft. Plots were hand-seeded at a rate of approximately 0.5 lb/1000 ft2. Alltests were arranged in a randomized complete blockdesign with three replications.
All sites were well drained and openly exposedto both sunlight and air circulation (with the exceptionof the 2003 NTEP putting green trial, which had en-closed air circulation). The annual rate of nitrogenapplied, mowing height, aerification/topdressing prac-tices, and pesticide applications for each test are pre-sented in Table 10. The putting green tests weremowed five to six times per week during periods of
active growth with a triplex or walk-behind reel mowerequipped to collect clippings. The fairway tests weremowed and clippings were removed three times perweek with a triplex reel mower during periods of ac-tive growth. Soil pH was maintained in the range of6.0 to 6.5 with agricultural limestone. All tests wereirrigated to avoid drought stress.
Plots were evaluated frequently during the grow-ing season for overall turf quality (i.e., turf density,texture, uniformity, color, growth habit, and presenceof damage due to diseases and insects). Turf qual-ity, spring green-up, color, density, and disease wererated on a 1 to 9 scale, where 9 represented the mostdesirable turf characteristic. Disease ratings includedbrown patch (Tables 1 and 4 to 9), dollar spot (Tables4 to 6, 8, and 9), copper spot (Tables 6, 8, and 9), andPythium blight (Table 9). All data were subjected toanalysis of variance. Means were separated usingFisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD)means separation test.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Turf Quality Evaluations
Entries in Tables 1 through 5 are ranked accord-ing to their overall multi-year quality average. Entriesin Tables 6 to 9 are ranked according to their turf qual-ity average in 2004. The best performing cultivars inthe 2001 putting green trial (Table 1) were two ex-perimental bentgrasses C953 and C952. Among vel-vet bentgrasses maintained under greens conditions(Table 2), the experimental cultivars PST EVU, EFD,CIS-AC1, and IVD comp, as well as the establishedvariety Greenwich, performed the best. SR 7200 didnot rank as high as the experimental selections un-der putting green mowing height (Table 2), but it wasthe top performer in the 2001 fairway trial, along withthe experimental colonial bentgrass selection SRX781-22 (Table 3). Older cultivars Penncross, Regent,Southshore, Providence, and Putter had the poorestturf quality in both the putting green (Table 1) andfairway (Table 3) trials.
In the 2002 putting green trial (Table 4), top rank-ing entries included the recently released creepingbentgrass cultivar Declaration, three experimentalvelvet bentgrasses (EFD, CIS-AC-1, and 00BAG), andthe experimental creeping bentgrasses 007, 235050,C952, and C953. Older standard varieties such asPenncross, Pennlinks, and Providence were amongthe poorest performing entries in this study, along withKromi and 18th Green. All velvet bentgrass selec-
-
3
tions were among the top ranking entries. The 2002fairway/tee trial (Table 5) had less separation amongentries than the previously mentioned tests. SR 7200and the experimental velvet bentgrass EFD toppedthe list of thirty entries that comprised the best per-forming group. Two creeping bentgrasses, 235050and C953, and the experimental colonial bentgrassHCG comp were also among the best cultivars, whileProvidence, Viper, Penncross, and 18th Green creep-ing bentgrasses ranked poorly in turf quality.
The best performing entries in the 2003 NTEPputting green trial included five velvet bentgrasses(Legendary, Greenwich, Vesper, and theexperimentals IS-AC 1 and EFD) (Table 6). The topranking creeping bentgrasses included the experi-mental selections SRX 1GPD, CY-2, and the culti-vars Declaration, Shark, and Penn G-2. In the 2003putting green trials (Tables 6, 7), Penncross, King Pin,Crenhsaw, and Southshore were among those en-tries that exhibited poor turf quality. Top ranking cul-tivars in the 2003 NTEP fairway trial (Table 8) includedSR 7200 velvet bentgrass and the creeping bentgrasscultivars Declaration, King Pin, and Benchmark DSR.Older creeping bentgrass cultivars Seaside,Crenshaw, and Penncross did not perform well. Thethree best ranking entries in the 2003 creepingbentgrass fairway/tee trial (Table 9) were Declaration,235050, and Greenwich velvet bentgrass; creepingbentgrasses Penncross, Trueline, Regent, PennLinksII, and Barbella velvet bentgrass exhibited poor turfquality.
Dollar Spot
While potentially one of the more damaging turfdiseases on golf courses in New Jersey, dollar spotcan be easily controlled with the use of fungicides;this can be expensive, however, because the diseaseoccurs frequently. In addition, resistance of the causalagent to fungicides is well documented. Breeding fordollar spot resistance in bentgrass is an importantobjective of the breeding program. Typically, velvetand colonial bentgrasses have better resistance todollar spot than creeping bentgrass, however the re-sults from recent trials indicate that improvements increeping bentgrass are being made. For example, inthe 2002 putting green trial (Table 4), velvet bent-grasses Greenwich, Vesper, and SR 7200, the ex-perimental selections EFD and CIS-AC-1, and TigerII colonial bentgrass had just as good resistance asthe creeping bentgrass selections HTL comp, Decla-ration, and King Pin which were selected for improvedresistance. Creeping bentgrasses 18th Green, Vi-
per, Penncross, and the experimental SRX 1G56exhibited poor dollar spot tolerance in 2002.
In the 2003 NTEP putting green trial (Table 6),the entries with the best dollar spot resistance includedvelvet bentgrasses (Legendary, Greenwich, SR 7200,EFD and IS-AC-1), Penn G-6, L-93, Pennlinks II, andKing Pin (creeping bentgrasses), and the experimentalcreeping bentgrasses IS-AP 9 and A03-EDI. The 2003NTEP fairway/tee trial (Table 8) consisted mainly ofcolonial and creeping bentgrass varieties. SR 7200,the only velvet bentgrass in the trial, maintained goodtolerance to dollar spot, along with the colonial bent-grass cultivars Tiger II, Revere, SR 7150, Bardot, andthe experimental selections IS-AT-7 and PST-9VN.Two creeping bentgrass cultivars, Declaration andPennlinks, also showed good dollar spot disease tol-erance. In both NTEP trials (Tables 6 and 8), thecreeping bentgrass cultivars Crenshaw and Indepen-dence exhibited weak dollar spot resistance. Manyof the entries that performed well in previous studiesalso performed well in the 2003 fairway/tee trial (Table9). Creeping bentgrasses cultivars Declaration, KingPin, Benchmark DSR, Sandhill, and experimentalsPST-OEX Bulk and PST-ORR Bulk as well as SR7200 velvet bentgrass and many experimental (PST-9IR, PST-Syn-9NT, PST-Syn-9LSD, PST-9R3, PST-Syn-9PIN, SRX 781-21, and SRX 7EE) and oldercolonial bentgrasses (Heriot and SR 7100) exhibitedhigh disease tolerance. The creeping bentgrass cul-tivar Penncross and experimental selections SRX1NJH and Bar AS2 were among the most dollar spot-susceptible entries.
Brown Patch
Velvet bentgrasses exhibit the greatest toleranceto brown patch of the bentgrass species used for turf.Creeping bentgrass is typically stronger than colonialbentgrass against this disease. Both the 2002 put-ting green and fairway/tee study (Tables 4 and 5, re-spectively) exemplify this. In both tests, the top en-tries were either velvet or creeping bentgrasses. Inboth tests, SR 7200 velvet bentgrass, the experimen-tal selection EFD velvet bentgrass, and the creepingbentgrasses Benchmark DSR and 235050 wereamong the top entries. Experimental selections PST-SynA1U and PST-9VL Bulk, and the cultivars Revereand Viter exhibited the greatest disease tolerance ofthe colonial bentgrass entries evaluated (Table 5).
Results from the 2003 NTEP putting green trial(Table 6) indicated that the velvet bentgrass Legend-ary, the experimental selections IS-AC 1 and EFD,
-
4
and one experimental creeping bentgrass, SRX1GPD, exhibited the highest levels of resistance tobrown patch. Penncross, Alpha, and Bengal showedlow levels of brown patch disease resistance. All en-tries in the 2003 putting green trial (Table 7) weremoderately tolerant of brown patch; Shark and Inde-pendence, however, performed the best. In the 2003NTEP fairway/tee trial (Table 8), no colonialbentgrasses exhibited acceptable levels of toleranceto brown patch. Many of the creeping bentgrasses(Declaration, Shark, 235050, and Penneagle II andthe experimental selections T-1, PST-OEB, SRXIPDH, and IS-AP-14), however, and the velvetbentgrass SR 7200 showed extremely high levels ofbrown patch resistance. Colonial bentgrass cultivarsTiger II (Tables 4, 5, and 8), Bardot, and SR 7150(Table 8), experimental colonial bentgrass selectionsSRX 781-21 and SRX 7MOBB (Tables 4 and 9), andcreeping bentgrass cultivars Regent (Tables 1 and9), Penncross (Tables 1 and 6), and Trueline (Tables4 and 9) were among those entries with poor resis-tance to this disease. It is interesting to note thatAlpha had exhibited poor brown patch resistance un-der putting green maintenance, but was one of themost resistance creeping bentgrass cultivars in thefairway trial.
Spring Green-Up
Spring green-up data was collected for all 2001and 2002 trials (Tables 1 to 5). In general, the colo-nial bentgrasses exhibit the best green-up qualitywhen compared to both creeping and velvetbentgrasses. There were several creeping bentgrassentries that possessed early green-up qualities; theseincluded cultivars Benchmark DSR (Tables 4, 5), Dec-laration (Table 4), 007 (Table 4), Penneagle andPennlinks (Table 1), and experimental creepingbentgrass entries C952 (Tables 1, 3), SRX R1E2, SRX1G44, SRX 1G32 (Table 1), and SRX 1GPinkD (Table4). Creeping bentgrass cultivars Trueline, Brighton,
and 18th Green (Tables 4, 5) were consistently poorranking entries, as were experimental selections MS6,MS7, MS4, 7CMS4, and 7RMS4 (Table 1). In the2001 fairway trial (Table 3), the experimental colonialbentgrass selections 9BNC-2001, 9ER Blk-5 Bulk,HCDR comp, and IBP comp exhibited the earliestgreen-up; and experimental colonial bentgrass selec-tions SRX IDIN, SRX 765-11, SRX 767-7, and culti-var SR 7150 were among entries in this test that werepoor in ranking. In the 2002 fairway trial (Table 5),the colonial bentgrass cultivar Glory and experimen-tal selections HCG comp, HCF comp, and PST-9BNCwere the top ranking entries. The best creepingbentgrasses in this trial were Benchmark DSR andKing Pin. In the velvet bentgrass putting green trial(Table 2), SR 7200 and CIS-AC1 exhibited strongspring green-up, while IVM comp and IVD compranked lowest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
New Jersey Experiment Station Publication No.E-12180-24-05. This work was conducted as part ofNJAES Project No. 12264, supported by the RutgersCenter for Turfgrass Science, the New Jersey Agri-cultural Experiment Station, State and Hatch Act funds,other grants and gifts. Additional support was receivedfrom the United States Golf Association-Golf CourseSuperintendents Association of America ResearchFund, New Jersey Turfgrass Association, the NewJersey Turfgrass Foundation and the National Turf-grass Evaluation Program.
REFERENCES
Skogley, C. R. 1973. Velvet bentgrass. University ofRhode Island Cooperative Extension Service Bul-letin Number 199.
Musser, H. B. 1959. Turf management: Grasses.USGA Journal and Turf Management 12(1):31-32.
-
5
Table 1. Performance of creeping bentgrass cultivars and selections in a putting green trial seeded inSeptember 2001 at North Brunswick, NJ.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
------------------Turf Quality1------------------ Spring Brown2002- Green-up2 Patch3
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 April JuneSelection Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
(Continued)
1 C953 6.6 7.6 5.4 6.7 6.0 8.72 C952 6.5 7.2 6.0 6.2 7.0 7.33 C954 5.8 6.1 5.6 5.7 6.3 5.74 PST OEB 5.6 6.3 5.6 4.9 2.3 7.35 Syn ORO 5.5 5.5 6.0 5.1 6.7 5.3
6 Penn A-1 5.5 5.7 5.6 5.2 3.0 5.77 PST-OPNB 5.3 5.9 5.5 4.5 4.7 5.78 Penn A-2 5.3 5.7 5.2 4.9 4.3 5.09 Penn G-1 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.4 4.3 6.0
10 Penn A-4 5.2 5.5 5.1 4.8 4.7 6.0
11 CIS-AP9 5.2 5.7 5.2 4.5 3.0 6.012 SRX 1R1V1 5.1 5.5 4.9 5.0 6.3 6.313 Bengal 5.1 5.8 5.0 4.4 7.0 6.014 Nu-Penn Blend 5.0 5.4 5.0 4.7 4.7 5.015 SRX R1E2 5.0 5.4 4.5 5.0 7.0 6.0
16 Penn G-6 4.9 4.7 5.1 5.0 5.0 6.017 Seaside II 4.9 4.0 5.5 5.2 6.3 5.018 ORU-2001 4.9 5.8 4.7 4.2 5.7 5.319 Penneagle II 4.9 5.7 4.4 4.5 5.0 5.320 SRX 1G32 4.9 5.6 4.5 4.5 7.0 7.0
21 SRX 146-12 4.9 5.2 4.5 4.9 6.0 6.322 L-93 4.9 4.7 5.3 4.5 5.0 3.723 SRX 1G222 4.8 6.3 4.1 4.1 6.0 8.024 SRX 1G68 4.7 5.9 4.2 4.1 5.7 7.725 SRX 1G46 4.7 5.8 3.8 4.5 4.7 8.0
26 SRX 1G54 4.7 6.2 3.9 3.9 5.7 7.027 SRX W1CR1 4.7 5.1 4.7 4.3 5.7 7.028 PST ORM-1 4.6 4.4 5.1 4.2 5.3 2.729 SRX 1H Blue 4.5 4.8 4.4 4.3 5.0 7.030 Penneagle 4.5 4.2 4.8 4.3 7.0 4.3
31 Pennlinks II 4.4 4.7 5.2 3.4 4.3 2.032 Independence 4.4 5.8 3.8 3.7 5.7 7.033 SRX 1G57 4.4 4.9 3.8 4.3 6.7 7.034 SRX 1W1CR2 4.4 4.9 4.4 3.8 3.0 6.035 SRX 1COCR 4.4 4.8 4.3 4.0 6.3 5.7
-
6
Table 1 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
------------------Turf Quality1------------------ Spring Brown2002- Green-up2 Patch3
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 April JuneSelection Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
36 SRX 1H Pink 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.1 6.3 6.037 SRX 1G44 4.3 5.5 3.3 4.1 7.0 6.338 Pennway Blend 4.3 4.3 4.7 3.8 5.7 3.339 SRX 1W1CR3 4.2 5.2 3.5 3.9 3.0 6.740 SRX 1G56 4.2 5.0 3.4 4.2 6.7 7.0
41 SRX 1D1N 4.2 4.9 4.0 3.7 2.3 3.042 SR 1119 4.2 4.7 4.5 3.3 3.0 4.743 SRX 1NJ H 4.2 4.4 4.7 3.4 5.7 3.744 Brighton 4.1 4.6 4.5 3.2 3.7 3.345 Pick 01-3CB 4.1 4.1 4.6 3.6 3.7 5.7
46 Pick ECB 4.1 4.8 3.9 3.6 5.7 4.747 Pennlinks 4.0 3.7 4.4 4.0 7.0 2.048 Pick Syn 96-2 4.0 5.2 3.5 3.2 4.3 6.049 Cato 4.0 3.5 4.3 4.0 4.3 4.050 Sandhill 3.9 4.7 3.9 3.1 5.7 4.3
51 Pick CB13.94.98 3.9 3.9 4.4 3.4 4.3 5.052 Southshore 3.9 4.0 4.1 3.6 4.3 3.753 SRX H Silver 3.9 4.2 4.2 3.2 2.7 3.354 PST-ORE1 3.8 3.8 4.3 3.3 5.0 4.355 Putter 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.4 4.7 2.7
56 C951 3.7 4.0 4.2 2.9 4.3 3.757 Providence 3.6 3.3 4.2 3.1 6.3 3.058 7RMS4 3.6 4.9 3.2 2.6 1.3 2.359 7CMS4 3.6 5.1 3.4 2.1 1.0 2.060 01-4CB 3.5 4.2 3.6 2.6 4.7 2.0
61 MS4 3.4 4.8 3.3 2.2 1.0 2.762 SRX MOCR1 3.4 4.4 2.9 2.9 3.0 2.063 Regent 3.3 3.3 3.8 2.9 3.7 1.764 MS7 3.3 4.1 3.8 2.1 1.0 2.365 Penn Trio Blend 3.3 3.0 3.7 3.2 4.7 2.0
66 Penncross 3.2 3.0 3.8 2.9 4.0 2.367 MS5 3.2 4.4 3.4 1.9 2.0 2.368 Pick CB 4.94.01 3.1 2.8 3.6 2.8 2.7 2.769 MS6 2.9 4.0 2.8 1.8 1.0 2.070 Pick CB 6.94.01 2.8 2.8 3.2 2.4 4.7 1.7
______________________________________________________________________________
(Continued)
-
7
Table 1 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
------------------Turf Quality1------------------ Spring Brown2002- Green-up2 Patch3
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 April JuneSelection Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.9 1.8_____________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = earliest spring green-up39 = least disease
-
8
Table 2. Performance of velvet bentgrass cultivars and selections in a turf trial seeded in September2001 at North Brunswick, NJ and maintained under putting green conditions.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
-----------------------Turf Quality1----------------------- Spring2002- Green-up2
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 AprilSelection Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1 PST EVU 6.1 6.1 5.9 6.3 5.02 EFD 6.1 6.1 6.4 5.7 5.73 Greenwich 5.7 6.2 6.0 4.9 4.34 CIS-AC1 5.7 5.8 6.1 5.3 6.35 IVD comp 5.5 5.9 5.9 4.8 3.7
6 IVM comp 5.4 5.7 5.8 4.6 2.37 ISC comp 5.3 5.8 5.2 4.7 5.08 IVC comp 5.0 5.0 5.1 4.7 4.79 SR 7200 4.7 5.5 4.9 3.8 7.3
______________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.8_____________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = earliest spring green-up
-
9
Table 3. Performance of bentgrass cultivars and selections in a fairway/tee trial seeded in September2001 at North Brunswick, NJ.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
--------------------Turf Quality1-------------------- Spring2002- Green-up2
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 AprilSelection Species Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1 SR 7200 Velvet 6.2 6.4 6.8 5.3 4.02 SRX 781-22 Colonial 5.9 6.2 5.7 5.8 5.73 9BNC-2001 Colonial 5.5 5.8 5.2 5.5 6.74 9ER Blk-5 Bulk Colonial 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.2 7.75 Revere Colonial 5.2 5.0 5.5 5.3 5.3
6 HCDR comp Colonial 5.2 4.8 5.6 5.1 6.07 Glory Colonial 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.78 Alister Colonial 4.9 5.3 4.9 4.6 4.39 Tiger II Colonial 4.9 6.1 4.7 4.0 3.3
10 SRX 7EE25 Colonial 4.9 5.1 5.1 4.4 5.3
11 SRX IG56 Creeping 4.9 6.0 3.9 4.8 3.012 SRX 7MOBB Colonial 4.8 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.713 SRX IG57 Creeping 4.8 5.8 4.6 4.1 3.314 SRX IG32 Creeping 4.8 5.6 4.0 4.8 4.315 SRX 7CRCO Colonial 4.8 6.2 4.6 3.5 5.3
16 SR 7150 Colonial 4.7 5.7 4.6 3.9 2.017 SRX IG44 Creeping 4.7 6.0 3.9 4.3 4.018 SRX IG222 Creeping 4.7 5.7 3.7 4.8 4.719 IBP comp Colonial 4.6 4.0 4.9 4.9 6.320 SRX IG46 Creeping 4.6 5.9 4.0 3.9 2.7
21 SRX 1G68 Creeping 4.6 5.6 3.8 4.3 4.022 SRX 781-13 Colonial 4.6 5.3 4.2 4.2 2.023 Bardot Colonial 4.5 4.5 4.9 4.2 4.324 SRX 7EE Colonial 4.5 5.1 4.6 3.7 4.025 SRX 7EE20 Colonial 4.5 4.6 4.9 3.8 3.7
26 SRX 781-3 Colonial 4.5 5.2 4.9 3.4 2.727 SRX 7EE4 Colonial 4.5 5.7 4.5 3.1 2.728 SRX ICOCR Creeping 4.5 5.6 3.9 3.8 3.329 Bengal Creeping 4.5 6.1 3.6 3.7 4.330 L-93 Creeping 4.5 4.9 4.8 3.7 3.0
31 Heriot Colonial 4.4 4.8 4.8 3.7 5.332 SRX IH Silver Creeping 4.4 5.0 4.6 3.7 2.333 SRX IG54 Creeping 4.4 5.5 3.8 4.0 3.334 Independence Creeping 4.4 6.2 3.6 3.4 3.035 SRX 7EE5 Colonial 4.4 5.7 4.4 3.0 4.7
(Continued)
-
10
Table 3 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
--------------------Turf Quality1-------------------- Spring2002- Green-up2
Cultivar or 2004 2002 2003 2004 AprilSelection Species Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
36 SRX 767-7 Colonial 4.4 5.3 4.6 3.2 1.737 SRX 780-19 Colonial 4.3 4.5 4.7 3.6 4.338 SRX 765-11 Colonial 4.3 4.6 4.7 3.6 2.039 SRX IH Blue Creeping 4.3 5.2 4.2 3.5 2.340 SR 7100 Colonial 4.2 5.1 4.0 3.6 3.0
41 SRX 786-6 Colonial 4.2 5.0 3.8 3.9 3.742 SRX IBPAA Creeping 4.2 4.9 4.3 3.4 3.043 SRX IH Pink Creeping 4.2 5.4 4.4 2.9 2.744 SRX IWJH Creeping 4.2 4.8 4.0 3.7 3.045 Brighton Creeping 4.1 4.9 4.2 3.3 2.0
46 SRX 765-5 Colonial 4.1 4.6 4.4 3.3 2.747 SRX 780-6 Colonial 4.1 4.6 4.4 3.4 4.048 SRX 146-12 Creeping 4.1 5.1 3.2 4.1 2.749 SR 1119 Creeping 4.1 5.4 3.8 3.1 3.050 Penn G-6 Creeping 4.1 4.6 4.3 3.4 3.7
51 SRX IDIN Creeping 4.0 5.0 3.2 3.8 1.352 Providence Creeping 4.0 4.7 4.1 3.1 2.353 Putter Creeping 3.9 4.3 3.9 3.5 3.054 Regent Creeping 3.9 4.5 4.1 3.1 3.355 SRX 781-21 Colonial 3.8 4.4 4.0 3.1 3.0
56 Southshore Creeping 3.7 4.6 3.5 2.9 2.057 SRX 765-3 Colonial 3.6 4.5 3.8 2.6 2.358 PST-9ED Colonial 3.0 2.5 3.5 3.1 4.059 AT-1 Colonial 3.0 2.6 3.4 3.0 2.3
______________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 2.3______________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = earliest spring green-up
-
11
Tabl
e 4.
Per
form
ance
of b
entg
rass
cul
tivar
s an
d se
lect
ions
in a
put
ting
gree
n tri
al s
eede
d in
Sep
tem
ber 2
002
at N
orth
Bru
nsw
ick,
NJ.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
----
----
----
--Tu
rf Q
ualit
y1--
----
----
----
Sprin
gBr
own
Dol
lar
2003
-G
reen
-up2
Patc
h3Sp
ot3
Dor
man
cy4
Cul
tivar
or
2004
2003
2004
April
June
Oct
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.Av
g.Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
(Con
tinue
d)
100
7C
reep
ing
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.3
7.7
5.0
2EF
DVe
lvet
6.6
6.8
6.5
5.3
9.0
9.0
3.3
3C
IS-A
C-1
Velv
et6.
66.
27.
05.
79.
09.
03.
74
2350
50C
reep
ing
6.6
6.7
6.4
6.3
6.7
8.3
6.7
500
BAG
Velv
et6.
66.
76.
44.
79.
08.
32.
3
6C
952
Cre
epin
g6.
56.
66.
47.
06.
08.
36.
37
C95
3C
reep
ing
6.5
6.4
6.6
7.3
7.3
6.7
7.0
8D
ecla
ratio
nC
reep
ing
6.4
6.8
5.9
7.7
6.7
8.7
5.7
9SR
X1G
DC
reep
ing
6.2
5.6
6.7
6.7
8.0
5.0
7.7
10SR
X1G
Pink
DC
reep
ing
6.2
6.0
6.4
7.3
7.7
5.0
7.0
11G
reen
wic
hVe
lvet
6.2
5.9
6.5
4.7
8.7
8.7
3.0
12Ve
sper
Velv
et6.
16.
06.
35.
39.
08.
72.
313
CIS
-AP-
9C
reep
ing
6.1
6.6
5.6
4.0
6.3
7.7
3.3
14H
TL C
omp
Cre
epin
g6.
16.
16.
07.
76.
09.
07.
315
SRXG
295D
Cre
epin
g6.
05.
66.
36.
78.
04.
07.
0
16B
ench
mar
k D
SR
Cre
epin
g5.
96.
35.
67.
07.
08.
36.
717
SRX1
9294
DC
reep
ing
5.9
5.8
5.9
6.7
8.0
4.3
7.3
18SR
720
0Ve
lvet
5.9
6.3
5.3
4.7
7.7
8.7
3.0
19SR
X1TR
3EC
reep
ing
5.7
5.6
5.8
5.7
6.7
4.3
5.0
20SR
X1SQ
ZGC
reep
ing
5.6
5.6
5.5
3.3
5.7
4.7
2.3
21C
IS-A
P-12
Cre
epin
g5.
65.
65.
56.
75.
36.
07.
022
SRXG
299D
Cre
epin
g5.
55.
25.
86.
06.
74.
07.
323
SRX1
BL2G
Cre
epin
g5.
55.
65.
43.
05.
35.
34.
324
King
Pin
Cre
epin
g5.
55.
65.
46.
35.
79.
06.
725
13M
Cre
epin
g5.
55.
55.
44.
75.
07.
76.
0
-
12
Tabl
e 4
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
----
----
----
--Tu
rf Q
ualit
y1--
----
----
----
Sprin
gBr
own
Dol
lar
2003
-G
reen
-up2
Patc
h3Sp
ot3
Dor
man
cy4
Cul
tivar
or
2004
2003
2004
April
June
Oct
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.Av
g.Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
26PS
T O
EBC
reep
ing
5.4
5.7
5.2
5.0
6.7
6.7
4.0
27SR
X1G
68C
reep
ing
5.4
6.0
4.9
5.7
7.3
3.0
2.0
28Pe
nn G
-2C
reep
ing
5.4
5.6
5.2
6.0
5.0
7.0
7.7
29Pe
nn A
-1C
reep
ing
5.3
5.7
4.9
5.0
4.3
6.0
3.0
30SR
X1PD
HC
reep
ing
5.2
5.4
5.2
4.3
7.0
6.3
3.7
31N
uPen
nC
reep
ing
5.2
5.5
5.0
4.3
4.3
6.3
3.0
32H
TM C
omp
Cre
epin
g5.
25.
45.
14.
76.
08.
34.
333
SR
X1T
RU
GC
reep
ing
5.2
5.3
5.1
5.7
5.0
4.0
4.3
34Pe
nn G
-6C
reep
ing
5.2
5.6
4.7
5.0
5.3
6.0
2.3
35SR
X1G
32C
reep
ing
5.1
5.5
4.8
5.0
6.7
4.3
4.7
36SR
X1G
57C
reep
ing
5.1
5.3
4.9
5.7
6.0
3.7
5.0
37Pe
nn G
-1C
reep
ing
5.1
5.2
5.1
4.3
4.7
6.3
4.0
38S
RX
1W1G
Cre
epin
g5.
15.
44.
84.
06.
04.
03.
339
SRX1
G49
Cre
epin
g5.
15.
05.
16.
06.
73.
76.
340
SRXG
222
Cre
epin
g5.
04.
95.
15.
06.
73.
35.
3
41SR
X1G
56C
reep
ing
5.0
5.2
4.8
5.7
7.0
2.7
5.3
42Pe
nn A
-2C
reep
ing
5.0
5.4
4.6
4.3
4.7
5.3
3.0
43C
IS-A
P-13
Cre
epin
g5.
04.
85.
16.
76.
74.
04.
744
SR
X1W
1CR
1GC
reep
ing
4.9
5.4
4.4
5.3
4.7
5.0
4.7
45Pe
nn A
-4C
reep
ing
4.9
4.9
4.8
4.3
3.7
6.7
4.7
46SR
X1H
Pink
Cre
epin
g4.
95.
44.
34.
34.
76.
73.
047
SRX1
HBl
ueC
reep
ing
4.9
5.1
4.6
4.3
5.3
6.3
4.0
48SR
X1BP
AAC
reep
ing
4.8
5.4
4.2
3.7
4.7
8.0
4.3
49P
ennl
inks
IIC
reep
ing
4.8
5.6
4.1
4.3
3.3
8.3
5.0
50Ba
r As2
Cre
epin
g4.
85.
24.
54.
74.
34.
77.
0 (Con
tinue
d)
-
13
Tabl
e 4
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
----
----
----
--Tu
rf Q
ualit
y1--
----
----
----
Sprin
gBr
own
Dol
lar
2003
-G
reen
-up2
Patc
h3Sp
ot3
Dor
man
cy4
Cul
tivar
or
2004
2003
2004
April
June
Oct
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.Av
g.Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
51SR
X146
-12
Cre
epin
g4.
84.
94.
74.
76.
03.
34.
752
Inde
pend
ence
Cre
epin
g4.
85.
34.
35.
06.
33.
35.
053
CBA
-98
Cre
epin
g4.
85.
44.
13.
05.
03.
72.
754
CIS
-AP-
10C
reep
ing
4.8
5.1
4.4
4.0
5.0
5.0
3.0
55SR
X1BL
3GC
reep
ing
4.7
5.1
4.3
3.7
5.3
3.0
3.3
56Pi
ck S
yn96
-2C
reep
ing
4.7
5.4
3.9
4.0
4.0
3.3
2.0
57PS
T Sy
nOR
OC
reep
ing
4.6
4.8
4.4
4.7
4.0
7.0
6.0
58SR
X1H
Silv
erC
reep
ing
4.6
5.1
4.0
2.3
5.0
6.3
1.3
59Pe
nnea
gle
Cre
epin
g4.
54.
84.
24.
74.
35.
34.
760
Beng
alC
reep
ing
4.5
4.7
4.3
4.0
4.3
5.0
6.0
61Pi
ck E
CB
Cre
epin
g4.
54.
94.
04.
74.
33.
75.
762
SR 1
119
Cre
epin
g4.
45.
03.
83.
33.
04.
33.
063
SRX1
R1G
1C
reep
ing
4.4
4.9
3.9
3.0
3.7
4.3
3.7
64PS
T Sy
n O
RM
6C
reep
ing
4.4
4.8
4.0
3.3
3.3
8.7
3.7
65So
uths
hore
Cre
epin
g4.
44.
64.
24.
34.
76.
33.
3
66Pe
nn A
-4C
reep
ing
4.3
4.7
4.0
2.7
2.3
4.3
4.7
67SR
X1LA
1GC
reep
ing
4.3
4.6
3.9
5.0
4.7
5.7
2.0
68S
easi
de II
Cre
epin
g4.
34.
44.
14.
33.
77.
73.
769
SRX1
KOP1
EC
reep
ing
4.2
4.3
4.1
3.3
5.0
2.7
4.7
70SR
X117
-23
Cre
epin
g4.
24.
63.
74.
02.
74.
74.
0
71C
ATO
Cre
epin
g4.
14.
83.
42.
73.
07.
03.
372
CBN
GS0
2C
reep
ing
4.1
4.6
3.6
3.7
4.3
5.0
2.3
73AZ
BCC
reep
ing
4.1
4.5
3.8
3.7
5.0
4.0
3.3
74PS
T O
X5Bu
lkC
reep
ing
4.0
4.2
3.8
3.7
3.3
5.7
6.0
75L-
93C
reep
ing
3.9
4.5
3.5
2.7
4.0
5.0
3.0 (C
ontin
ued)
-
14
Tabl
e 4
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
----
----
----
--Tu
rf Q
ualit
y1--
----
----
----
Sprin
gBr
own
Dol
lar
2003
-G
reen
-up2
Patc
h3Sp
ot3
Dor
man
cy4
Cul
tivar
or
2004
2003
2004
April
June
Oct
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.Av
g.Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
76Ba
cksp
inC
reep
ing
3.8
4.3
3.4
1.7
5.0
4.3
2.7
77BG
S94-
96-0
2C
reep
ing
3.7
4.5
3.0
3.3
3.0
3.7
1.7
78Pe
nnw
ayC
reep
ing
3.7
3.7
3.8
2.7
2.7
8.3
4.3
79M
BGC
-02
Cre
epin
g3.
74.
52.
93.
72.
77.
03.
380
Brig
hton
Cre
epin
g3.
74.
13.
21.
73.
06.
01.
7
81Ti
ger I
IC
olon
ial
3.6
4.6
2.6
3.0
1.0
9.0
2.0
82Pe
nnlin
ksC
reep
ing
3.6
4.0
3.2
3.0
3.3
8.3
5.0
83Pe
nn T
rioC
reep
ing
3.6
3.8
3.3
3.7
3.0
7.0
2.7
84Pe
nncr
oss
Cre
epin
g3.
54.
12.
92.
72.
77.
03.
785
Prov
iden
ceC
reep
ing
3.3
3.7
2.9
3.0
2.3
6.3
3.3
86C
BC-0
2C
reep
ing
3.2
3.4
3.0
3.7
4.7
7.7
4.0
87Vi
per
Cre
epin
g3.
23.
82.
71.
32.
05.
71.
788
True
line
Cre
epin
g3.
24.
12.
31.
71.
78.
71.
089
18th
Gre
enC
reep
ing
2.7
3.6
1.8
1.0
2.7
3.3
1.0
90Kr
omi
Cre
epin
g1.
72.
21.
21.
01.
38.
01.
0__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
LSD
at 5
% =
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.7
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
1 9 =
bes
t tur
f qua
lity
2 9 =
ear
liest
spr
ing
gree
n-up
3 9 =
leas
t dis
ease
4 9 =
less
dor
man
cy
-
15
Table 5. Performance of bentgrass cultivars and selections in a fairway/tee trial seeded in September2002 at North Brunswick, NJ.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
---------Turf Quality1--------- Spring Dollar2003- Green-up2 Spot3 Brown
Cultivar or 2004 2003 2004 April May Patch3Selection Species Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004 2004 Avg.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
(Continued)
1 SR 7200 Velvet 6.4 7.0 5.8 4.0 7.7 8.32 EFD Velvet 6.2 7.2 5.2 3.3 5.7 8.83 235050 Creeping 5.9 6.2 5.5 3.0 6.0 8.54 C953 Creeping 5.8 6.2 5.3 3.3 5.7 8.85 HCG Comp Colonial 5.8 5.8 5.7 7.0 5.7 5.7
6 C952 Creeping 5.6 6.1 5.0 3.7 7.0 7.87 Benchmark DSR Creeping 5.4 6.6 4.1 5.0 8.3 8.28 HCF Comp Colonial 5.3 5.0 5.6 6.0 5.0 5.39 Viter Colonial 5.3 4.9 5.8 3.0 4.7 6.3
10 SRX 7CRCO Colonial 5.2 5.6 4.8 4.7 9.0 5.0
11 PST-9BNC Colonial 5.2 5.1 5.3 6.3 5.0 5.012 CIS AT-7 Colonial 5.2 5.6 4.7 2.7 5.3 6.013 PST-Syn-9LN Colonial 5.1 5.3 5.1 5.3 7.7 4.814 SRX 7E Colonial 5.1 5.2 5.0 3.7 8.3 6.015 Revere Colonial 5.1 5.1 5.1 3.0 7.3 6.3
16 King Pin Creeping 5.0 5.7 4.3 5.3 7.7 8.017 Sandhill Creeping 5.0 5.4 4.6 2.3 7.3 7.518 PST-9VL Bulk Colonial 5.0 5.5 4.4 2.5 8.0 6.519 SRX 7EE Colonial 4.9 4.9 4.8 5.3 8.3 4.520 Glory Colonial 4.8 4.6 5.1 6.0 4.7 5.3
21 Alister Colonial 4.7 4.6 4.9 5.0 3.0 5.222 SRX 7EE4 Colonial 4.7 5.2 4.2 3.3 6.0 4.223 SRX 781-3 Colonial 4.7 4.9 4.4 3.0 6.7 4.024 PST-SynA1U Colonial 4.7 5.3 4.0 1.7 6.0 7.225 CIS AP-10 Creeping 4.6 5.2 4.1 4.3 3.3 8.0
26 Tiger II Colonial 4.6 5.0 4.3 2.3 4.0 4.227 CIS AT-6 Colonial 4.6 5.0 4.2 3.7 3.3 4.228 SRX 7MODD Colonial 4.6 5.0 4.2 3.0 6.7 5.029 CIS AP-12 Creeping 4.6 5.1 4.1 4.0 4.7 8.030 SRX 7EE5 Colonial 4.6 5.0 4.2 4.7 7.0 5.2
31 PST-9VN Bulk Colonial 4.5 4.6 4.3 2.0 7.7 6.832 SRX 1H Silver Creeping 4.4 5.3 3.7 2.3 6.7 6.233 SRX 1G 57 Creeping 4.4 4.9 3.9 4.7 4.7 7.734 PST-Syn-9PY Colonial 4.4 4.5 4.2 4.7 8.7 4.835 SRX 1G 32 Creeping 4.3 4.6 4.1 4.0 4.7 7.7
-
16
Table 5 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
---------Turf Quality1--------- Spring Dollar2003- Green-up2 Spot3 Brown
Cultivar or 2004 2003 2004 April May Patch3Selection Species Avg. Avg. Avg. 2004 2004 Avg.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
36 Penn A-4 Creeping 4.3 4.9 3.7 4.3 5.0 7.737 Trueline Creeping 4.3 5.0 3.6 1.3 7.0 4.238 SRX 7MOBB Colonial 4.3 4.7 3.9 3.7 6.0 3.339 SRX 1 Pink Creeping 4.2 5.0 3.4 4.0 4.7 7.540 SRX 1G 56 Creeping 4.2 4.8 3.6 5.0 2.7 7.7
41 SRX 780-19 Colonial 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.3 7.0 4.042 SRX 1W1CR1G Creeping 4.1 4.5 3.7 3.7 6.0 7.043 SRX 1G 49 Creeping 4.1 4.7 3.5 4.7 4.3 7.244 SRX 1G 68 Creeping 4.0 5.2 2.9 3.7 2.7 6.745 Brighton Creeping 3.9 4.5 3.4 2.0 3.0 5.8
46 SR 1119 Creeping 3.9 4.7 3.1 4.0 4.7 7.047 SRX 117-23 Creeping 3.9 4.3 3.6 3.3 5.3 6.748 SRX 146-12 Creeping 3.8 4.5 3.2 2.7 2.7 7.349 Independence Creeping 3.8 4.9 2.7 5.3 4.0 7.550 Providence Creeping 3.8 4.2 3.4 3.0 4.3 6.7
51 Viper Creeping 3.8 4.5 3.0 2.7 3.7 5.252 Backspin Creeping 3.7 4.3 3.2 5.3 2.7 7.053 SRX 1H Blue Creeping 3.7 4.7 2.8 4.0 3.7 7.754 SRX 781-21 Colonial 3.7 4.1 3.3 5.0 7.3 2.355 Penncross Creeping 3.5 3.7 3.3 3.3 4.7 5.8
56 18th Green Creeping 2.7 3.6 1.9 2.0 1.0 6.857 PST-Syn-9NE Colonial 2.6 2.6 2.7 3.3 5.7 5.2
______________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 1.9 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.4 0.6_____________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = earliest spring green-up39 = least disease
-
17
Tabl
e 6.
Per
form
ance
of b
entg
rass
cul
tivar
s an
d se
lect
ions
in a
put
ting
gree
n tri
al s
eede
d in
Sep
tem
ber 2
003
at N
orth
Bru
nsw
ick,
NJ.
(In
clud
esal
l ent
ries
of th
e N
atio
nal B
entg
rass
Put
ting
Gre
en T
est -
NTE
P.)
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Turf
Turf
Cov
erC
oppe
rBr
own
Dol
lar
Gen
etic
Leaf
Qua
lity1
(%)
Spot
2Pa
tch2
Spot
2C
olor
3D
ensi
ty4
Text
ure5
Cul
tivar
or
2004
Oct
.Au
g.Au
g.O
ct.
Nov
.N
ov.
Nov
.Se
lect
ion
Spec
ies
Avg.
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
(Con
tinue
d)
1IS
-AC
1Ve
lvet
7.9
70.0
5.3
7.3
9.0
8.0
6.7
9.0
2Le
gend
ary
Velv
et7.
771
.75.
37.
78.
37.
34.
38.
03
Gre
enw
ich
Velv
et7.
468
.33.
76.
08.
37.
34.
77.
34
Vesp
erVe
lvet
7.3
61.7
3.3
5.3
7.3
6.0
5.3
8.7
5EF
DVe
lvet
7.2
58.3
4.3
7.7
9.0
8.0
4.0
7.7
6SR
X 1G
PDC
reep
ing
7.2
55.0
7.3
8.7
5.0
6.0
8.0
7.3
7C
Y-2
Cre
epin
g6.
763
.35.
07.
05.
34.
76.
75.
08
Dec
lara
tion
Cre
epin
g6.
766
.75.
76.
37.
35.
76.
06.
09
Shar
kC
reep
ing
6.7
63.3
4.7
6.7
4.0
4.3
6.0
4.7
10Pe
nn G
-2C
reep
ing
6.7
58.3
7.0
6.0
7.0
5.0
6.3
6.3
1123
5050
Cre
epin
g6.
560
.06.
76.
36.
04.
73.
75.
712
Penn
G-6
Cre
epin
g6.
470
.06.
37.
07.
75.
35.
05.
013
Inde
pend
ence
Cre
epin
g6.
463
.36.
76.
34.
74.
04.
34.
014
SRX
1GPD
Cre
epin
g6.
355
.05.
76.
76.
04.
76.
37.
015
LS-4
4C
reep
ing
6.2
60.0
6.0
5.7
5.3
2.7
4.7
5.0
16Pe
nn A
-1C
reep
ing
6.1
66.7
6.3
5.7
5.7
5.3
5.7
5.3
17Pe
nn A
-2C
reep
ing
6.1
68.3
6.3
5.7
6.0
5.3
5.3
6.7
18T-
1C
reep
ing
6.1
63.3
4.7
6.0
5.0
3.3
4.7
5.3
19SR
720
0Ve
lvet
6.0
38.3
3.0
6.0
9.0
7.0
5.3
7.3
20D
SBC
reep
ing
5.9
60.0
6.0
6.3
5.7
5.3
5.0
6.3
21Pe
nn A
-4C
reep
ing
5.8
71.7
6.3
5.7
6.3
5.3
5.7
5.0
22IS
-AP
9C
reep
ing
5.6
56.7
6.0
6.0
8.0
3.7
3.3
4.3
23A0
3-ED
IC
reep
ing
5.5
61.7
5.0
4.7
8.3
3.3
4.3
3.7
24Be
ngal
Cre
epin
g5.
565
.04.
03.
75.
33.
05.
34.
325
Cen
tury
Cre
epin
g5.
471
.75.
05.
04.
75.
74.
36.
0
-
18
Tabl
e 6
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Turf
Turf
Cov
erC
oppe
rBr
own
Dol
lar
Gen
etic
Leaf
Qua
lity1
(%)
Spot
2Pa
tch2
Spot
2C
olor
3D
ensi
ty4
Text
ure5
Cul
tivar
or
2004
Oct
.Au
g.Au
g.O
ct.
Nov
.N
ov.
Nov
.Se
lect
ion
Spec
ies
Avg.
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
2004
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
26SR
111
9C
reep
ing
5.4
70.0
5.7
4.7
5.7
3.3
2.7
3.7
27Al
pha
Cre
epin
g5.
365
.03.
32.
74.
31.
32.
03.
728
Sout
hsho
reC
reep
ing
5.2
58.3
5.0
4.3
5.7
5.0
3.7
4.7
2913
-MC
reep
ing
5.2
61.7
4.7
5.3
7.7
4.3
4.0
3.3
30H
TM c
omp
Cre
epin
g5.
255
.06.
35.
37.
74.
34.
76.
0
31L-
93C
reep
ing
5.0
70.0
5.7
5.0
8.3
5.3
6.7
4.7
32P
ennl
inks
IIC
reep
ing
4.9
63.3
5.7
5.3
8.3
2.3
2.0
2.3
33Im
peria
lC
reep
ing
4.9
71.7
5.0
5.3
5.3
3.0
3.0
3.3
34Pe
nnea
gle
Cre
epin
g4.
868
.36.
04.
75.
33.
32.
74.
035
Cre
nsha
wC
reep
ing
4.6
58.3
5.7
5.7
3.0
5.0
4.0
3.3
36Ki
ng P
inC
reep
ing
4.6
48.3
5.3
6.0
8.0
1.7
2.7
4.0
37Be
nchm
ark
DSR
Cre
epin
g4.
248
.33.
74.
07.
02.
31.
73.
338
Penn
cros
sC
reep
ing
3.4
66.7
3.7
3.0
7.3
1.7
1.0
1.7
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
LSD
at 5
% =
0.7
6.8
1.5
1.6
1.6
2.0
2.2
2.1
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
1 9 =
bes
t tur
f qua
lity
2 9 =
leas
t dis
ease
3 9 =
dar
kest
gre
en c
olor
4 9 =
hig
hest
sho
ot d
ensi
ty5 9
= fi
nest
leaf
text
ure
-
19
Table 7. Performance of creeping bentgrass cultivars and selections in a putting green trial seeded inOctober 2003 at North Brunswick, NJ.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Turf Quality1 Establishment2 Brown Patch3Cultivar or 2004 Oct. 2004Selection Avg. 2004 Avg.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1 Declaration 6.4 7.0 6.02 Shark 6.1 6.3 6.73 235050 5.6 5.7 5.84 Independence 5.3 6.7 6.25 Penn A-4 5.3 6.7 4.2
6 L-93 5.1 7.0 4.57 Southshore 4.1 5.7 3.58 Crenshaw 3.8 6.0 4.79 SR 1119 3.8 6.7 4.0
10 King Pin 3.4 5.3 4.2______________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 0.7 0.9 1.4______________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = quickest establishment39 = least disease
-
20
Tabl
e 8.
Per
form
ance
of b
entg
rass
cul
tivar
s an
d se
lect
ions
in a
fairw
ay/te
e tri
al s
eede
d in
Sep
tem
ber 2
003
at N
orth
Bru
nsw
ick,
NJ.
(In
clud
esal
l ent
ries
of th
e 20
03 N
atio
nal B
entg
rass
Fai
rway
Tes
t - N
TEP.
)__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
Turf
Turf
Cov
erBr
own
Dol
lar
Cop
per
Gen
etic
Leaf
Qua
lity1
(%)
Patc
h2Sp
ot2
Spot
2C
olor
3D
ensi
ty4
Text
ure5
Cul
tivar
or
2004
Oct
.Ju
ne20
04Au
g.N
ov.
Nov
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.20
0320
04Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
(Con
tinue
d)
1SR
720
0Ve
lvet
7.7
98.0
8.0
8.0
5.0
8.0
8.0
9.0
2D
ecla
ratio
nC
reep
ing
7.5
91.0
9.0
9.0
5.0
8.0
8.0
7.3
3Ki
ng P
inC
reep
ing
6.9
61.7
8.7
7.9
6.7
7.7
7.7
7.3
4B
ench
mar
k D
SR
Cre
epin
g6.
976
.78.
78.
05.
07.
78.
08.
05
13-M
Cre
epin
g6.
588
.37.
38.
15.
07.
07.
77.
3
623
5050
Cre
epin
g6.
585
.09.
06.
32.
77.
05.
36.
77
IS-A
T-7
Col
onia
l6.
595
.33.
78.
89.
06.
76.
36.
08
T-1
Cre
epin
g6.
476
.79.
05.
38.
07.
06.
36.
39
PS
T-O
EB
Cre
epin
g6.
295
.09.
07.
14.
77.
07.
06.
710
SRX
IGPD
Cre
epin
g6.
271
.78.
76.
06.
37.
06.
07.
0
11LS
-44
Cre
epin
g6.
285
.07.
76.
25.
36.
35.
76.
312
Penn
links
Cre
epin
g6.
295
.38.
08.
65.
07.
06.
76.
313
Alph
aC
reep
ing
6.2
78.3
9.0
4.4
5.0
7.0
6.0
6.3
14PS
T-9V
NC
olon
ial
6.1
93.3
4.3
8.6
9.0
6.3
6.0
6.3
15Sh
ark
Cre
epin
g6.
188
.39.
06.
04.
06.
35.
06.
3
16Ti
ger I
IC
olon
ial
6.1
81.7
2.7
8.8
9.0
6.3
7.0
6.0
17P
ST-
9BN
CC
olon
ial
6.1
90.0
3.7
8.1
9.0
6.3
6.0
6.0
18Pe
nnea
gle
IIC
reep
ing
6.1
91.7
9.0
6.0
6.3
6.3
6.0
6.7
19R
ever
eC
olon
ial
6.1
71.7
3.3
8.8
9.0
6.3
7.0
6.3
20SR
111
9C
reep
ing
6.0
51.7
7.7
4.4
6.7
6.3
4.7
6.0
21SR
X IP
DH
Cre
epin
g6.
081
.79.
06.
15.
06.
35.
36.
722
Alph
aC
reep
ing
6.0
70.0
9.0
5.0
5.7
6.3
6.0
5.7
23SR
715
0C
olon
ial
5.9
94.3
1.3
8.8
9.0
6.7
6.0
5.7
24IS
-AP-
14C
reep
ing
5.9
83.3
9.0
4.9
3.7
6.7
5.3
6.3
25L-
93C
reep
ing
5.8
81.7
5.7
7.1
6.7
7.0
7.0
6.3
-
21
Tabl
e 8
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
Turf
Turf
Cov
erBr
own
Dol
lar
Cop
per
Gen
etic
Leaf
Qua
lity1
(%)
Patc
h2Sp
ot2
Spot
2C
olor
3D
ensi
ty4
Text
ure5
Cul
tivar
or
2004
Oct
.Ju
ne20
04Au
g.N
ov.
Nov
.N
ov.
Sele
ctio
nSp
ecie
sAv
g.20
0320
04Av
g.20
0420
0420
0420
04__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
26Ba
rdot
Col
onia
l5.
855
.03.
38.
89.
06.
36.
36.
727
Beng
alC
reep
ing
5.7
60.0
7.7
5.1
5.0
5.7
5.3
6.3
28In
depe
nden
ceC
reep
ing
5.6
86.0
8.3
3.6
2.7
6.0
5.3
6.7
29So
uths
hore
Cre
epin
g5.
346
.77.
74.
15.
36.
05.
76.
330
Impe
rial
Cre
epin
g4.
696
.04.
73.
86.
35.
74.
75.
7
31Pr
ince
ville
Cre
epin
g4.
498
.05.
75.
74.
76.
05.
35.
732
Cre
nsha
wC
reep
ing
4.4
53.3
6.0
3.3
5.3
5.3
4.7
5.7
33Pe
nncr
oss
Cre
epin
g4.
094
.36.
06.
28.
75.
05.
05.
734
Seas
ide
Cre
epin
g2.
494
.33.
07.
69.
04.
74.
04.
0__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
LSD
at 5
% =
0.6
14.3
1.4
1.3
2.6
0.9
1.2
0.9
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
__
1 9 =
bes
t tur
f qua
lity
2 9 =
leas
t dis
ease
3 9 =
opt
imal
turf
colo
r4 9
= h
ighe
st s
hoot
den
sity
5 9 =
fine
st le
af te
xtur
e
-
22
Table 9. Performance of bentgrass cultivars and selections in a fairway/tee trial seeded in October2003 at North Brunswick, NJ.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Turf Establish- Brown Dollar CopperQuality1 ment2 Pythium3 Patch3 Spot3 Spot3
Cultivar or 2004 Oct. 2003 June Avg. Aug.Selection Species Avg. 2003 Avg. 2004 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
(Continued)
1 Declaration Creeping 7.3 7.3 4.5 8.7 8.7 5.02 235050 Creeping 6.6 7.0 4.5 8.3 7.1 4.03 Greenwich Velvet 6.5 8.7 4.5 8.0 7.1 4.34 IS-AP Creeping 6.4 7.7 4.5 7.3 6.8 4.05 SR 7200 Velvet 6.1 8.0 4.5 7.3 7.6 4.7
6 Shark Creeping 6.1 5.7 4.5 8.3 6.2 5.07 King Pin Creeping 6.1 5.7 4.5 8.0 7.8 6.38 PST-Syn-9BC3 Colonial 5.8 4.7 4.3 6.3 5.7 9.09 VE 3 Comp Velvet 5.8 5.3 4.2 8.3 8.0 4.3
10 Penneagle II Creeping 5.7 7.3 4.8 7.7 5.3 5.3
11 Benchmark DSR Creeping 5.6 6.0 4.5 6.7 7.5 5.712 Penn A-1 Creeping 5.6 7.0 4.5 5.7 5.4 6.313 Penn G-6 Creeping 5.6 7.7 4.3 6.7 6.8 5.014 PST-OEB Creeping 5.5 8.3 5.0 8.7 6.0 6.015 PST-Syn-9NCG Colonial 5.5 4.0 4.2 7.7 6.8 8.7
16 SRX IGD Creeping 5.5 5.0 4.0 8.3 5.6 5.717 SRX 7CRCO Colonial 5.5 6.3 4.3 5.0 8.2 8.318 SRX IG68 Creeping 5.5 8.0 4.5 8.7 5.2 5.319 ORU Creeping 5.4 7.7 4.5 7.3 5.5 3.720 IS-AP-14 Creeping 5.4 7.7 4.5 7.3 4.6 5.3
21 Sandhill Creeping 5.4 7.0 4.5 5.7 7.7 5.722 PST-9NG-Bulk Colonial 5.3 3.0 4.2 7.0 5.7 8.723 PST-VGG Bulk Velvet 5.2 3.3 4.3 7.3 7.2 5.324 Penn A-2 Creeping 5.2 7.3 4.3 6.7 5.4 5.325 Penn G-1 Creeping 5.1 7.3 4.5 7.3 5.1 5.3
26 L-93 Creeping 5.1 7.3 4.7 4.7 6.1 6.327 SRX IPDH Creeping 5.1 5.3 4.5 8.0 6.0 6.728 Alister Colonial 5.1 8.3 4.8 4.0 7.0 7.329 SRX IG57 Creeping 5.1 7.3 4.8 8.0 4.8 5.330 SRX WICRIG Creeping 5.0 7.7 5.5 6.3 5.0 6.7
31 Glory Colonial 5.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 7.4 9.032 SRX ITR3E Creeping 5.0 6.7 4.3 4.0 6.0 5.733 PST-020 Bulk Creeping 5.0 5.3 4.3 6.3 7.3 6.034 SRX 7EE5 Colonial 5.0 6.0 4.5 4.7 7.8 8.735 SRX 1H Blue Creeping 5.0 6.7 4.0 7.3 5.2 6.3
-
23
Table 9 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
Turf Establish- Brown Dollar CopperQuality1 ment2 Pythium3 Patch3 Spot3 Spot3
Cultivar or 2004 Oct. 2003 June Avg. Aug.Selection Species Avg. 2003 Avg. 2004 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
36 SRX 7MOBB Colonial 4.9 5.3 3.8 1.7 7.2 8.337 Penn A-4 Creeping 4.9 7.0 4.5 5.7 5.1 6.038 PST-9VN Colonial 4.9 4.7 4.5 5.7 7.7 9.039 PST-OSF Bulk Creeping 4.9 3.7 4.2 7.7 6.9 6.340 IS-AP-10 Creeping 4.8 7.7 4.5 5.7 5.9 6.0
41 PST-9R3 Colonial 4.8 4.7 4.8 2.7 8.2 8.742 Penneagle Creeping 4.8 7.0 4.5 6.7 5.5 6.343 Independence Creeping 4.8 7.0 4.7 7.3 3.7 5.344 SRX ISQ2G Creeping 4.7 6.3 5.0 7.7 4.7 4.745 PST-OEX Bulk Creeping 4.7 3.3 4.3 5.7 7.8 4.7
46 PST-Syn-9PIN Colonial 4.6 3.0 4.2 6.7 8.0 8.747 SRX 7EE4 Colonial 4.6 5.7 4.5 3.0 7.4 8.748 SR 1119 Creeping 4.6 7.7 4.5 6.0 5.9 5.749 SRX 1NJH Creeping 4.6 5.0 4.8 7.0 4.0 6.350 Bengal Creeping 4.5 8.0 5.2 5.0 4.8 5.0
51 SRX 7EE Colonial 4.5 5.7 4.3 2.0 8.1 8.352 PST-9x3 Bulk Colonial 4.4 2.3 4.3 4.3 7.8 8.753 SR 7100 Colonial 4.4 6.3 4.0 3.0 7.8 8.354 Bar AS 2 Creeping 4.4 5.7 4.0 5.0 4.6 4.355 Southshore Creeping 4.3 4.3 4.3 5.7 7.2 6.0
56 SRX 1HSilver Creeping 4.3 3.3 3.7 6.0 6.2 7.757 Brighton Creeping 4.2 3.3 4.3 6.3 5.8 4.058 Providence Creeping 4.2 7.7 4.7 4.0 6.0 6.059 Seaside II Creeping 4.1 7.3 4.5 3.3 6.8 5.760 PST-Syn-9NT Colonial 4.0 2.7 4.0 4.0 7.9 8.3
61 Imperial Creeping 4.0 7.7 4.8 5.3 5.8 5.762 SRX 1H Pink Creeping 4.0 3.3 4.2 6.7 5.7 6.763 ORF-03 Creeping 4.0 6.7 4.7 2.0 5.9 5.064 PST-Syn-9LSD Colonial 3.9 2.0 4.3 7.0 8.7 8.765 Crenshaw Creeping 3.8 4.3 4.3 5.3 5.0 6.3
66 Century Creeping 3.8 8.0 4.7 4.7 5.4 5.367 PennLinks II Creeping 3.8 8.3 5.3 4.0 5.8 6.368 Regent Creeping 3.8 8.3 5.0 2.3 7.2 6.369 Bardot Colonial 3.7 5.7 3.7 3.0 8.0 8.770 PST-ORF Creeping 3.7 7.0 4.0 2.3 6.7 4.0
(Continued)
-
24
Table 9 (continued)._____________________________________________________________________________________
Turf Establish- Brown Dollar CopperQuality1 ment2 Pythium3 Patch3 Spot3 Spot3
Cultivar or 2004 Oct. 2003 June Avg. Aug.Selection Species Avg. 2003 Avg. 2004 2004 2004
_____________________________________________________________________________________
71 PST-VE52 Bulk Velvet 3.5 3.0 4.5 2.7 8.0 4.372 PST-9IR Colonial 3.5 5.3 3.0 2.0 8.6 9.073 PST-ORR Bulk Creeping 3.5 2.0 4.5 3.7 7.8 6.774 Heriot Colonial 3.5 1.7 3.8 3.0 8.2 9.075 PST-OGE Bulk Creeping 3.5 2.3 4.5 5.7 5.4 5.3
76 PST-9GBS-Bulk Colonial 3.3 2.0 4.2 3.7 7.8 8.377 Barifera Creeping 3.2 3.7 3.7 2.7 4.9 6.078 SRX 781-21 Colonial 3.1 6.7 3.8 1.0 8.3 8.079 Trueline Creeping 3.0 7.3 4.3 1.0 7.0 4.780 Penncross Creeping 3.0 8.3 4.7 3.0 4.0 5.7
81 Barbella Velvet 2.6 1.0 4.5 3.3 7.8 3.7______________________________________________________________________________
LSD at 5% = 0.8 1.5 0.7 1.7 1.4 1.9_____________________________________________________________________________________
19 = best turf quality29 = quickest establishment39 = least disease
-
25
Tabl
e 10
.M
aint
enan
ce p
ract
ices
per
form
ed in
200
4 on
ben
tgra
ss tr
ials
at N
orth
Bru
nsw
ick,
NJ.
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
Mow
ing
Hei
ght
Tabl
e/Te
stFe
rtilit
y1(in
ches
)A
erifi
catio
n/To
p D
ress
Fung
icid
esIn
sect
icid
esH
erbi
cide
s__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
120
01 G
reen
s...
......
......
2.54
1/8
Mar
ch/J
une/
Oct
.: 5/
16-in
ch s
olid
May
: Ban
ner M
axx
July
: Dur
sban
Pro
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
Etin
eJu
ne: C
hipc
o 26
GT
(for a
nts/
earth
wor
ms)
(pre
-em
erge
nce)
Mar
ch to
Aug
./Oct
.: to
pdre
ssed
July
: Ban
ner +
Her
itage
July
: Mer
it 75
WP
(for
wee
ds)
sand
Aug
.: D
acon
il U
ltrex
grub
s)S
ept.:
Dac
onil
+ B
anne
r
220
01 V
elve
t Gre
ens
....2
.54
1/8
Mar
ch/J
une/
Oct
.: 5/
16-in
ch s
olid
May
: Ban
ner M
axx
July
: Dur
sban
Pro
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
Etin
eJu
ne: C
hipc
o 26
GT
(for a
nts/
earth
wor
ms)
(pre
-em
erge
nce
Mar
ch to
Aug
./Oct
.: to
pdre
ssed
July
: Ban
ner +
Her
itage
July
: Mer
it 75
WP
(for
wee
ds)
sand
Aug
.: D
acon
il U
ltrex
grub
s)S
ept.:
Dac
onil
+ B
anne
r
320
01 F
airw
ay...
......
.....
2.04
3/8
Non
eM
ay: D
acon
il U
ltrex
July
: Mer
it 75
WP
(for
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
ES
ept.:
Dac
onil
+ B
anne
rgr
ubs)
(pre
-em
erge
nce
wee
ds)
Nov
.: Tr
imec
Ben
t(b
road
leaf
wee
ds)
420
02 G
reen
s...
......
......
1.62
1/8
June
: mic
rotin
e ae
rifie
dM
ay to
Aug
: Cur
alan
EG
July
: Dur
sban
Pro
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
EM
arch
to A
ug./O
ct: t
opdr
esse
dJu
ne to
Aug
: Pro
Star
70W
P(fo
r ant
s/ea
rthw
orm
s)(p
re-e
mer
genc
esa
ndJu
ly: M
erit
75W
P (f
orw
eeds
)gr
ubs)
520
02 F
airw
ay/T
ee...
....1
.51
3/8
June
: mic
rotin
ed a
erifi
edJu
ne: D
acon
il (E
cho
990)
July
: Mer
it 75
WP
(for
Apr
il: L
ontre
l (cl
over
)gr
ubs)
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
E(p
re-e
mer
genc
ew
eeds
)
620
03 N
TEP
Gre
ens
....2
.47
1/8
Mar
ch to
Aug
./Oct
: top
dres
sed
May
/Sep
t./O
ct.:
Ban
ner
May
: Dur
sban
Pro
Non
esa
ndM
axx
(for a
nts/
earth
wor
ms)
June
: Chi
pco
26G
TJu
ly: M
erit
75W
P (f
orJu
ly/S
ept./
Oct
.: D
acon
il(g
rubs
)S
ept.:
Pro
Star
70W
PN
ov.:
Junc
tion
(Con
tinue
d)
-
26
Tabl
e 10
(con
tinue
d).
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
Mow
ing
Hei
ght
Tabl
e/Te
stFe
rtilit
y1(in
ches
)A
erifi
catio
n/To
p D
ress
Fung
icid
esIn
sect
icid
esH
erbi
cide
s__
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
___
720
03 G
reen
s...
......
......
2.47
1/8
Mar
ch to
Aug
./Oct
: top
dres
sed
Sep
t.: P
roSt
ar 7
0WP
May
: Dur
sban
Pro
Non
esa
ndS
ept./
Oct
.: D
acon
il U
ltrex
/(fo
r ant
s/ea
rthw
orm
s)B
anne
r Max
xJu
ly: M
erit
75W
P (f
orN
ov.:
Junc
tion
grub
s)
820
03 N
TEP
Fai
rway
....1
.60
3/8
Non
eJu
ne: C
hipc
o 26
GT
July
: Mer
it 75
WP
(for
May
: Dim
ensi
on 1
EJu
ly: P
roSt
ar 7
0WP
grub
s)(p
re-e
mer
genc
eA
ug./S
ept.:
Dac
onil
Ultr
exw
eeds
)N
ov.:
Trim
ec B
ent
(bro
adle
af w
eeds
)
920
03 F
airw
ay/T
ee...
....2
.06
3/8
Non
eS
ept.:
Dac
onil
Ultr
exJu
ly: M
erit
75W
P (f
orM
ay: D
imen
son
1Egr
ubs)
(pre
-em
erg.
wee
ds)
Nov
.: Tr
imec
Ben
t(b
road
leaf
wee
ds)
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
____
_
1 Ann
ual n
itrog
en a
pplie
d (lb
/100
0 ft2
)