TURF MANKIND AND LANDSCAPE
José A. Monteiro1
1 Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia & Centro de Estudos em Património, Paisagem e Construção. Campus de Gambelas. Universidade do Algarve, Faro, Portugal
Turf is an important component of the urban and rural landscape. It is hard to imagine our urban gardens and parks without turf, the same way as the countryside without pastures and meadows. In geobotany herbaceous plants make most of the pioneer stages in ecological succession1. In natural landscapes, grass also appears in the clearings in the middle of the woods or as the lower strata in sparse woods. Plant formations/biomes turf mimics are the tropical savanna, the temperate grasslands (steppe and the prairies) and the tundra. In tundra, trees and tall plants are excluded because of low temperature or short growing season. In the tropical savanna it is the long dry season that benefits grasses leaving trees small and spaced out. The temperate grasslands appear in temperate, seasonal, dry climates and have a lack of trees (deep organic soils develop and organic matter accumulates)2. In many of these biomes, at least the above ground part of the plants, if not the entire plant, dies in the unfavorable season (due either to drought or cold) and re-sprout or germinate from seed when climate becomes favorable.
Gardens and parks, in which turf is included, provide many functionalities/benefits, being them of environmental, aesthetic, recreational, economic, sociologic and psychological/physiological nature, as have been reviewed3,4. Among these benefits/functionalities some are only fully achieved if turf is present, which, most probably, is the reason for turf immense popularity in private, as well as in public gardens or parks. Aesthetics are the paramount factor in landscaping decisions, environmental and other interests come after5. Signs that the landscape has been taken care of, like orderly plantings and well-kept lawns, are highly valued by residents although these signs may depend on culture5. Turf has an important aesthetic value, as the simple background for all the other items of the landscape, it becomes the frame that enhances/highlights other features (like the house). It sets the ground level for the height. It reveals the land shape as a tight garment. It gives the tidy look which is important in many cultures. Recent inquiries (as of 2013) in the U.S.6 revealed that for the lawn owners the main turf benefits were, first the enhanced property aesthetics, second the increment in property value and third the provision of a recreation area. Also, the people’s perception is that “healthy, green landscaping” improves their quality of life, enhances public safety, and reduces crime. Recreationally, turf allows for the permeable, non-heatable, injury protecting, impact cushioning, cheap, open space surface, needed for many sports/games. Sociologically/culturally turf can become a symbol of wealth and power, and/or the mirror of the lawn-owner character: a badly kept turf meaning a careless owner. This popularity of turf, and the competition among lawn-owners, has probably lead to some exaggeration on the way turf is maintained and on what one expects from a lawn.
As a consequence, turf has come under criticism. The main points being high water consumption, decreased biodiversity, high fossil energy use (a bad carbon footprint) and, incorrect use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, leading to important environmental problems7.
In some European areas, the use of drinking water for garden irrigation increased more than 400% between the mid-1970s and the mid-1990s8. The importance of adequate turf irrigation has been frequently emphasized and water conservation is a complete set of strategies, not a single factor decision. Nevertheless if irrigation is
1 Wang, K., Shao, R., Shangguan, Z. 2010. Changes in species richness and community productivity during succession on the Loess plateau (China). Pol. J. Ecol. 58: 549–558.
2 Colinvaux, P. 1986. Ecology. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., NY, USA. 725 pp
3 Brethour, C., Watson, G., Sparling, B., Bucknell, D., Moore, T. 2007. Literature review of documented health and environmental benefits derived from ornamental horticulture products. George Morris Center. Available online at https://www.agrireseau.net/horticulture- arbresdenoel/documents/Reports_Ornamentals_Health_Benefits.pdf Viewed January 2010.
4 Cameron, R.W.F., Blanusa, T., Taylor, J.E., Salisbury, A., Halstead, A.J., Henricot, B., Thompson, K. 2012. The domestic garden – Its contribution to urban green infrastructure. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11: 129–137.
5 Hayden, L., Cadenasso, M.L., Haver, D., Oki, L.R. 2015. Residential landscape aesthetics and water conservation best management practices: Homeowner perceptions and preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning 144: 1–9.
6 Khachatryan, H., Rihn, A., Dukes, M. 2014. Consumer lawn care and fertilizer use in the united states. IFAS, Univ. of Florida. Available online at http://gardeningsolutions.ifas.ufl.edu/clce/faculty/pdf/pubs/clce_fertilizer_report_dec1214.pdf Viewed March 2016.
7 Helfand, G.E., Park, J.S., Nassauer, J.I., Kosek, S. 2006. The economics of native plants in residential landscape designs. Landscape and Urban Planning 78: 229–240.
8 Krinner, W., Lallana, C., Estrela, T. Nixon, S., Zabel, T., Laffon, L., Rees, G., Cole, G. 1999. Sustainable water use in Europe. Part 1: Sectoral use of Water, Environmental assessment report No 1. European Environment Agency.
significantly reduced, the benefits of turf may be reduced or invalidated. Also, instead of yes or no options some compromises can be taken and intermediate solutions can be achieved. Mimicking nature may offer some solutions. In some climates, like the Mediterranean, the natural summer landscape is composed of brown turf that greens up in fall: of course brown turf is not so appealing, does not cool the ambience, does not recuperates from damage, may create a fire hazard, among others, but may be an appropriate choice where irrigation is not feasible. It brings with a dynamic look, with well differentiated seasons, allows for most of the recreational activities, and still provides a regular green turf for most of the year. Breeders may then look for non-traditional species and features like greening up capacity and earliness, traffic resistance while dormant (i.e. underground resistant structures), or capacity to re-seed below mowing height. Definitely, for some sports, like golf, baseball, soccer or American football, if quality is important, in the playable areas turf is mandatory. Nevertheless, public education is paramount: as presented for Canada9, a low-maintenance-lawn may use less water than a Xeriscape. Also, even synthetic, artificial grass for sports, needs to be watered, at least in hot days, so that the players do not get dehydrated and suffer sunstrokes from the increased temperature. Synthetic turf has also maintenance requirements such as vacuum cleaning, algae and moss treatments depending on the climate, brushing and even irrigating (to subsidize the topdressing materials). And this leads us to think about turf substitutes.
Bare ground does not prevent erosion, does not cool off the environment, increases water runoff, does not purify water or air, and does not increase biodiversity. Paving results in permanently impervious surfaces, does not help on biodiversity, does not purify water or air, warms up on hot days and does not store carbon. Wood chip or pebbles ground cover in conjunction with a few drought resistant shrubs, does not help biodiversity, nor cools off the environment and may warm up, nor helps storing carbon, nor allows recreational activities. Woody ground covers store as much carbon per square meter as a Kentucky bluegrass lawn and do not provide a recreational area. A mix of shrubs and trees without a turf area, does not provide a recreational surface, although may use less water and provide for an increased biodiversity, as well as a good carbon storage. Carbon footprint has been considered positive in properly managed lawns. For standard managed home lawns in the U.S., with clippings retuned, accumulation of organic carbon in the soil will proceed for a period of 66 to 199 years depending on soil and climatic conditions before it reaches equilibrium10. Practices that decrease soil organic matter may decrease or nullify this positive effect, as in athletic fields11. The best estimates produced, consider that clippings should be returned to the lawn, and permitted to decompose, so that a higher plant growth is achieved without exaggerated N fertilization10. But this is a process with a low efficiency since most of the carbon is respired back to the atmosphere. It seems that research, as well as public education, should be done on lawns with a mix of grasses and legumes: the presence of legumes may avoid N fertilization12 and, may allow for clippings removal and usage as biofuel, while keeping the soil accumulation of carbon. Grain production straw has been considered for biofuel and the annual yield of lawn clippings by hectare is similar to that of cereal’s straw: this way, lawns would not only sequester carbon but would also assist on reducing emissions of fossil carbon.
Addition of some trees and shrubs to the landscape, as it already happens in several circumstances, leaving some areas without being mowed, allowing appropriate native plants to get in, refraining from the use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, would add vertical and horizontal structure, provide habitat diversity, as well as food and shelter, and, a healthier environment.
9 CMHC. 2000. Definitely in my backyard: making the best choices for you and the environment. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publications/ en/definitely. Viewed 2008.
10 Selhorst, A., Lal, R. 2013. Net carbon sequestration potential and emissions in home lawn turfgrasses of the United States. Environ. Managmt. 51:198–208.
11 Townsend-Small, A., Czimczik, C.I. 2010. Carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emissions in urban turf. Geophysical Res. Letters, 37: L02707.
12 Kryževičienė, A., Jasinskas, A., Gulbinas, A. 2008. Perennial grasses as a source of bioenergy in Lithuania. Agronomy Res. 6 (Special issue): 229–239.
COMPARING FOUR BERMUDAGRASS AND FIVE ZOYSIAGRASS CULTIVARS UNDER HEAVY USE AT KINDERGARTENS
Yoshiaki Ikemura1 and Masayoshi Hatsukade1
1Shizuoka Prefectural Research Institute of Agriculture and Forestry
Introduction
In urban cities of Japan, land space is limited. Because of that, the area of many kindergartens’ playgrounds is small which is sometimes less than 5 m2 per child. Maintaining healthy turf in such heavily used area is challenging1. Thus, most of playgrounds are left as bare ground. Since 1973, the Japanese government of Ministry of Education, Science and Culture had supported projects for promoting greening at schools. After that, some schools have tried to convert bare ground to turf. This effort was accelerated recently due to the movement of attracting Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2020. However only few schools have succeeded for maintaining turf in adequate quality, possibly due to lack of maintenance skills and inappropriate selection of turfgrass species and cultivars. In the past, schools unsuccessfully utilized cool season grasses. Currently most schools use warm season turfgrasses and mainly bermudagrasss (Cynodon spp.) and zoysiagrass [Zoysia spp. (willd.)]. The use of warm season turfgrasses, enabled schools to successfully maintain the turfed areas, even though some of them still confront difficulties. Due to lack of research it is hard to identify successful methods of maintaining turfgrasses of acceptable quality at kindergarten’s playgrounds.
The objectives of this study were to: (i) evaluate turfgrass establishment methods and (ii) evaluate bermudagrass and zoysiagrass cultivars with same management theme under heavily used kindergartens’ playgrounds.
Methods
The field studies were conducted at two kindergartens in Shizuoka prefecture during 2013-2015 under normal use of the playgrounds. The two kindergartens were Kounotori Toyoda Hoikuen (KTH), Iwata-shi, Shizuoka and Yuho No Oka Hoikuen (YNOH), Hamamatsu-shi, Shizuoka. The soil at KTH was coarse sandy loam with a pH of 6.4, while the soil type at YNOH was sandy loam with a pH of 5.3. Size of playground of KTH was 638 m2 and 120 children were attended which made 4.7m2 of playground available for each child, and that of YNOH was 322 m2 and 107 children which made 2.3m2 of playground available per child. Before the establishment, plots were broadcasted with 4 kg m-2 of compost rotor tilled at a depth of 10 cm. During the first year, N, P, and K fertilizers were applied at a rate of 151, 237, and 30 g m-2, respectively including the nutrients contained in the compost. In the second year, 60 g N m-2 were applied while P, K, and other nutrients were maintained at sufficient levels according to soil tests. Plots were maintained at a cutting height of 5.0 cm. At KTH turf was mowed daily with robotic lawn mower (Husqvarna Zenoah, Kawagoe, Saitama), and at YNOH turf was mowed with walk behind rotary mower (Honda, Minato-ku, Tokyo) in approximately twice a week. Clipping were returned at the both sites. Throughout the studies, plots were maintained by the kindergartens teachers. Because of that, irrigation was applied as needed to prevent drought, however at YNOH, plots were more frequently irrigated compare to KTH.
Plots measuring 2.0 m by 2.0 m were established in July 2013 using three hybrid bermudagrass cultivars (Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. X C. transvaalensis Burtt Davy): Tif419, Tifway(J)2 and Musashi, two common bermudagrass cultivars (C. dactylon (L.) Pers. var. dactylon): Yukon and Riviera, and five zoysiagrass cultivars (Zoysia japonica Steud.): Fuji compact, Himeno, Asagake, Asamoe, and Zenith. Cultivars were established either by sod, seed, or plugs depending on their commercial establishment methodology. Tif419, Fuji compact, Himeno, Asagake, and Asamoe were sodded, Yukon, Riviela, and Zenith were seeded, and Tifway(J) and Musashi were plugged. Seeding rates of Yukon and Riviera were 15 g m-2, and Zenith was 20 g m-2. Seeded plots were planted under geotextile fabrics to enhance germination which were removed after gemination. Plugging was accomplished using 5 x 5 x 5 cm plugs spaced at 25 cm intervals and at a depth of 5 cm. During the 2 months’ establishment period, traffic was limited. Utilization of the playgrounds occurred after the collection of the first data set.
1 Organization for Landscape and Urban Green Infrastructure. 2013. Kouteishibafuka no Q&A. Kashima, Tokyo, p 24-25.
Percent green cover and turfgrass quality were visually estimated at monthly intervals. Percent green cover was estimated 0 to 100 scale, in which 0 indicate bare soil or there was no designated cultivar present and 100 indicates complete cover with designated cultivar.
The experimental area was designed following the randomized complete block design separated into four blocks with four replications for both sites. Data were analyzed using JMP. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for analysis and Fisher’s Protected LSD test was used to separate main effect means. Results and Discussion
There was a kindergarten X cultivar interaction for percent green cover, so cultivar differences in percent green cover were presented within kindergarten (Table 1). At the establishment of KTH, plugging and sodding had better green coverage than seeding. At YNOH, plugging and sodding didn’t have a significant difference, however sodding had better green coverage than seeding. At the end of two years of studies only Tifway(J), Tif419 and Riviera had acceptable turf quality for both kindergartens (Data not shown). At KTH, Tifway(J) had best green coverage among all cultivars (Table 1). At YNOH, Tifway(J), Tif419, and Riviera had better green coverage than other cultivars. The results conflict with some of the previous reports which traffic tolerance of zoysiagrass have similar to superior to bermuagrass3,4. This might be due to zoysiagrass has slow rate of growth5. In our experiments, the experimental fields had heavy traffic and turf were considerably damaged. Also, zoysiagrass showed significantly slower spring green up. This might be a suggestion of traffic tolerance under spring green up period differ between bermudagrass and zoysiagrass. Combined with establishment results, we conclude establish from seed was difficult especially when a playground was maintained by the kindergarten’s teachers. We recommend Tifway(J), Tif419, or Riviera bermudagrass for intensively used kindergarten’s playground. Riviera is mainly distributed by seed in Japan, however it would be better to obtain either plug or sod for the establishment. Results and recommendations would likely vary under different climatic zones, soil types, management regimes, or frequencies and amount of playground use. Also, the size of playground compare to the number of children can only be used as an estimate of playground use. Further research is needed specially to quantify amount of playground use.
Table 1 Percent of green coverage of various bermudagrass and zoysiagrass grown in kindergartens.
3 Trappe, J. M., Karcher, D. E., Richardson, M. D., and Patton, A. J. 2011. Shade and traffic tolerance varies for bermudagrass and zoysiagrass cultivars. Crop Sci. 51:870-877.
4 Youngner, V.B. 1961. Accelerated wear tests on turfgrasses. Agron. J. 53:217-218.
5 Beard, J. B. 1973. Turfgrass science and culture. Prentice-Hall. Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. p.143.
Cultivar Speciesǂ Establishment After 2 years Establishment After 2 years
Tifway(J) CDCT 99 a₴ 98 a 99 a 100 a Tif419 CDCT 100 a 70 b 100 a 100 a Riviera CD 59 c 63 b 95 a b 98 a Musashi CDCT 99 a 28 c 100 a 73 b Himeno ZJ 100 a 13 c 100 a 13 c d Fuji compact ZJ 100 a 13 c 100 a 28 c Zenith ZJ 13 d 10 c 75 b 0 d Yukon CD 60 c 10 c 98 a 0 d Asamoe ZJ 84 a b 6 c 100 a 13 c d Asagake ZJ 74 b c 6 c 99 a 0 d Plug 99 a 99 a b Sod 92 a 100 a Seed 44 b 89 b ---%--- KTHƗ YNOH
ƗIWA =Iwata-shi Hoikuen; HMA = Hamamatsu-shi Hoikuen.
ǂCD = Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.; CDCT =C. dactylon (L.) Pers. X C. transvaalensis Burtt Davy; ZJ = Zoysia japonica. ₴Value within columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different from another (LSD, a = 0.05).
SHADE RESPONSE OF BERMUDAGRASS ACCESSIONS UNDER VARYING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Jeffrey C. Dunne1, W. Casey Reynolds2, Consuelo Arellano3, Grady L. Miller1, and Susana R. Milla-Lewis1 1 Department of Crop Science, Box 7620, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, USA
2 Texas A&M Soil & Crop Sciences, TAMU 2474, College Station, USA 3 Department of Statistics, Box 8203, N.C. State Univ., Raleigh, USA
Introduction
Bermudagrass (Cynodon species) is one of the most commonly grown turfgrass genera in the southern United States, providing a quality turf stand for recreational areas and home lawns. Its aggressive nature and excellent drought tolerance provide resistance to weed encroachment and rapid recovery from wear and disease injury during summer stress. These advantageous characteristics can be often overlooked due to its poor shade tolerance. Developing cultivars tolerant to shade would allow bermudagrass to be used in areas where trees dominant the landscape. In addition to cultivar choice, a number of management factors have been shown to affect the performance of turfgrasses under shade stress. Raising the mowing height, reducing nitrogen levels and applying plant growth regulators have all been recommended to provide competitive turf under shaded environments. The continual evaluation of germplasm for shade tolerance is critical in improving overall shade tolerance in bermudagrass; however, each genotype behaves differently when management practices are implemented. The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of varying cultural practices on four commercial cultivars and two germplasm accessions, ‘WIN10F’ and ‘STIL03’, under perpetual shade.
Methods
Treatments were designed to determine the effects of the proposed cultural practices on four cultivars and two South African accessions that were previously reported to show some level of shade tolerance1 (Table 1). The experimental design was a strip-strip-split plot design with three replications and was established from strips of sod under full sunlight in June 2013. Once the plots were completely established, artificial shade fabric was applied over the plots to limit light to 63% in both years of the study.
Table 1. List of treatments and factors for evaluation of cultural practices on bermudagrass when grown under 63% perpetual shade.
† South African accessions
After the first year of data collection, the shade fabric was removed over the winter to mimic normal growth conditions when leaves are not present on surrounding deciduous trees. The shade fabric was replaced in the spring when the plots came out of dormancy. In both years, images were taken weekly for image analysis using a Fiji image processing macro (Fig. 1). Each treatment (mowing height, PGR, and fertility as shown in Table 1) was initiated at the same time the shade cloth was replaced. Plots were mowed once weekly using a rotary mower and a reel mower to achieve the 5.1 cm height and 1.27 cm height, respectively. In order to compare the relative shade tolerance of the South African accessions under each of the management practices relative to the controls, NDVI values along with percent plot cover (decline), percent cup-cutter fill (recovery) and percent divot fill (recovery) were taken beginning on 1 Aug 2014 through 17 Oct in 2014 and from 1 July 2014 through 10 Oct 2015 (Fig. 1). The cup-cutter and divot fill were analyzed by selecting a shape and size and