Stop 10. Spartan Stadium Field Conversion Update: May 2001 Lisa M. Lundberg and Dr. John N. Rogers, III Department of Crop and Soil Sciences

Transcription

1 Stop 10 Spartan Stadium Field Conversion Update: May 2001 Lisa M. Lundberg and Dr. John N. Rogers, III In December 2000, Michigan State University began the process to convert Spartan Stadium Field from artificial turf to natural grass. Considerable energies went toward the decision as to the field system type. A modular (ITM modules, GreenTech, Richmond, VA) system was determined to be the best fit for the situation. This system is similar to the one developed by MSU scientists for the 1994 World Cup matches at the Pontiac Silverdome. The major benefits of a modular field include rapid drainage and air exchange as well as ease of field replacement and environmental control of the root zone. Worn modules can easily be removed, replaced and ready to play on in a matter of hours; and heaters can be implemented to keep the root zone warm enough to provide favorable growing conditions late in the playing season. In addition, the modular system allows for remote planting and maturation. What this means is that the modules do not have to be seeded and grown at the playing field site. This benefit is allowing Spartan Stadium to be seeded in May 2000, mature throughout the next year, and be 16 months old before play begins in September Construction of Spartan Stadium began in March Thirty five people and three University farms helped to fill 6,000 modules with gravel and a 90% sand, 10% silt + clay root zone. Of these 6,000 modules, 4,800 were used for the field and the remaining 1,200 will be used for a replacement nursery. This process took approximately one month. In May 2001, Clark Companies (Delhi, New York) came to MSU to place the modules in the exact configuration of Spartan Stadium, add 4 more inches of root zone, and do a final grade. This took approximately three weeks. On May 25 the starter fertilizer was applied to the surface. On May 26 the field was seeded with Kentucky bluegrass at a rate of 1.3 lbs/1000 ft 2. The seed was sown with a Brillion seeder and a rotary spreader. The nine varieties of Kentucky bluegrass used were: Champagne, Coventry, Limousine, Midnight, Moonlight, North Star, Rugby II, Serene, and Unique. Throughout the rest of the Spring and Summer, the field will be matured as we continue to control weeds, mow, water, topdress, and fertilize on a regular basis. The current plan is to move the field into Spartan Stadium in June 2002 with the first game scheduled for August 31, 2002.

2 Stop 11 Tankmixing Non-Selective Herbicides (and other weedy matters) Aaron Hathaway and Ronald Calhoun Fast car - fuel economy, fried food and a fit figure, we always want the best of both worlds but seldom get it. The same is true for non-selective burndown herbicides. Diquat bromide (Reward) and pelargonic acid (Scythe) are the fastest of the bunch to show symptoms, but perennial vegetation starts to recover in a couple of days. Glyphosate (Roundup Pro) gets to the root of the problem better than some others but can take a week or two to get really brown on top. Tankmixes of Scythe or Reward with Roundup are frequently recommended and used. Do these tankmixes of non-selective herbicides provide fast burndown and complete control? In this study, combinations of non-selective herbicides were applied to plots consisting of annual and perennial vegetation. Scythe, Reward, and Finale were tankmixed with Roundup Pro at a one-to-one rate and at a one-tenth-to-one to examine the effects of these combinations for non-selective burndown on these plots. Separate plots were treated at 56 and 3 days before Field Day. Can you have your cake and eat it too? Treatment Form Rate 1 UNTREATED 2 ROUNDUP PRO 3 ROUNDUP PRO FINALE 5 ROUNDUP PRO 6 FINALE 7 ROUNDUP PRO SCYTHE 9 ROUNDUP PRO SCYTHE 10 ROUNDUP PRO REWARD 11 ROUNDUP PRO REWARD 2 SL 0.4 FL OZ/GAL 2 SL 4 FL OZ/GAL 1 EC 4 FL OZ/GAL 1 EC 0.4 FL OZ/GAL 2 SL 2 FL OZ/GAL 2 SL 0.2 FL OZ/GAL

3 Stop 12 Weed Control Strategies during Kentucky Bluegrass Establishment J.J. Henderson and R. Calhoun The challenge for the sports turf manager is to sustain a dense turf stand throughout the competitive season. However, oftentimes, regardless of proper management practices, areas of the fields or entire fields can be worn very thin or even bare due to their intense use. Consequently, the perennial focus of athletic field management is the establishment of desirable turfgrass species frequently during poor seeding conditions. The most desirable species for athletic fields in a cool climate is Kentucky bluegrass. However, it has a slow germination rate of days and matures slowly. Suboptimal seeding conditions, combined with the slow germination and development of the desired species makes the establishment of a dense, weed free turf very difficult. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of various pre-emergent and post-emergent herbicides applied at different times during the establishment process. Eighteen weed control strategies were investigated. Each of the following products were applied on the day of seeding, 10 days after seeding (DAS), 20 DAS, and 30 DAS: Drive, Dimension, Tupersan, and Gallery. There were two control treatments. One control treatment represented the conventional post-emergent strategy by applying a tank mix of Drive + Buctril 30 DAS. The other control received no herbicide applications.

4 Stop 13 Use of Soybeans as Fertilizer for Turf and Landscape Areas Mike Score and Dr. Kevin W. Frank MSU Extension and Farmers in Washtenaw and Lenawee Counties have used grant funds from Project GREEEN, SARE, and EMPACT to explore the use of ground soybeans for turf and landscape fertility management. In 2000, research plots were set up in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The plot site had no history of soil fertility management. Treatments within the study compared use of soybeans with chemical fertilizers. Summary of first year results showed that ground soybeans performed equal to, or better than chemical fertilizers. Advantages of using soybeans include local production, safety of products for people and pets, reduced phosphorous loading of soil, a single annual application, and no risk of chemical burn from over-application. Disadvantages were related mainly to the quantity of material that had to be handled during fertilizer application, and difficulties of matching variable particle size with suitable fertilizer spreaders. In 2001 we are conducting two new studies. At Willow Golf Course in Wayne County we are looking at how different rates of application affect turf growth. At the MSU Hancock Turfgrass Research Center we are comparing different soybean application rates with urea, and with a slow release chemical fertilizer. The plots at Willow Golf Course suggested that applications resulting in 2 to 4 pounds of N per 1,000 sq. feet of turf developed good to excellent turf ratings. Lower rates led to unsatisfactory responses. Extended hot, dry conditions led to dormancy across the plots. Plot observations will resume this fall when we will evaluate turf recovery from drought where different application rates were used. At the Hancock Turfgrass Research Center early results show that both 2 and 4 pound N rates provide excellent turf quality. We will monitor the plots to measure duration of turf excellence resulting from the different treatments. In a less quantitative study we have begun evaluating use of ground soybeans for fertilizing vegetable gardens and ornamentals. Observations suggest that soybeans perform equal to or better than chemical fertilizers when appropriate rates are used. Ground soybeans have a fertilizer analysis of ( ). In order to apply a standard turf management application of 4 pounds N per 1,000 sq. ft., 70 pounds of soybeans per 1,000 sq. ft. are required. At this rate phosphorous application is limited to.14 pounds per 1,000 sq. ft. This low rate responds well to current interests in fertilizer use that minimizes impacts on surface water quality. For more information on this soybean product development project contact Mike Score, MSU Extension Agent at (734) , ext or scorem@msue.msu.edu

5 Quantification of Cultural Practice Inputs for Athletic Fields Lisa M. Lundberg, Dr. John N. Rogers, III, and Dr. James R. Crum Methods of maintaining high turfgrass density, low surface hardness field were investigated in The variables manipulated in the research included fertilizing, mowing, and cultivation applications. Fertilization rates consisted of low infrequent (4 lb. N applied in 1 lb. increments), low frequent (4 lb. N applied in X A lb. increments) and high (6 lb. N applied in 1 lb. increments) treatment applications. This study was conducted on both a loam textured root zone and a sand peat root zone that met USGA specifications. The effects of the treatments were evaluated based on color, quality, density, percent cover, shear strength, and surface hardness. First year results show that application of the high or low frequent rate of fertility will produce a 16% increase in fall turfgrass cover, a 14% increase in fall turfgrass quality, and a 10% increase in fall turfgrass color, as compared to the low infrequent rate of fertility. Mowing twice per week will yield a 10% increase in fall turfgrass color. The low frequent rate of fertility gives the highest shear strength, and cultivation lowers the surface hardness and decreases shear strength until traffic is applied. Data collected in the second year continues along the same trends and also shows increased interaction of mowing and fertility in regards to turfgrass density.

6 European Chafer Research: Water and Turf Resistance to Grubs Dr. David Smitley and David Cappaert, Department of Entomology Dr. Suleiman Bughrara and David Gilstrap, The European chafer looks like a small June beetle and has the same type of larval stage; a C- shaped white grub that feeds on plant roots. It was discovered in the United States in Newark, New York in It has now spread throughout the states of Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan, where it is a devastating pest of home lawns, municipal turf, and sometimes nursery crops, wheat, alfalfa and pastures. European chafer has rapidly expanded its range across Michigan over the last five years, destroying most of the turf in some subdivisions in the greater Detroit area, Ann Arbor, Jackson, Lansing, and Grand Rapids. However, last year (fall of 2000 and spring of 2001) we saw very little damage to turf from European chafer grubs. Thanks to the Michigan Turfgrass Foundation and Project GREEEN, we now know why European chafer damage to turf is much worse some years than others. Objective 1: Evaluate irrigation as an alternative to Diazinon. Treatments: 1) rain only; 2) daily irrigation, 0.1 inch at 2:00 pm; 3) weekly irrigation, 0.7 inch on Thursday at 6:00 am. Homeowners may be able to minimize grub damage to their lawns with consistent irrigation. In our experiment at the Hancock Turf Research Center, 239 European chafer larvae were introduced in August and September to each of 18 plots maintained under three different irrigation practices. In November plots were sampled to determine grub survival. A mean of 22.1 grubs per ft 2 were found in the non-irrigated plots, 17.0 grubs per ft 2 in the plots irrigated once per week, and 8.2 grubs per ft 2 in the daily irrigated plots. Daily irrigation reduced the survival of European chafer by 63%, a level of control comparable to that obtained by applying Diazinon. Table 1. Survival of European chafer grubs in turf plots that are not irrigated, irrigated once per week, or irrigated daily. Irrigations treatment Grubs/ft 2 Statistics None 22.1 df = 2,15 Weekly 17.0 Daily 8.2 F = 3.7 P = 0.004

7 Objective 2: Develop a method for screening turf for resistance to European chafer and begin testing of turf and ground covers for resistance. New methods were devised for the testing of 18 cultivars of turfgrass in the greenhouse [3 cultivars each of: Kentucky bluegrass, perennial ryegrass, fine fescue, tall fescue, warmseason (Cr4) turfgrasses, and commercially available native grass species]. European chafer consumed between 5 and 95% of the grass roots over an 8-week test period. Six of the nine most susceptible turf cultivars were either Kentucky bluegrass or fine fescue, the type of turf grown in 90% of all Michigan lawns. Tall fescue and perennial ryegrass cultivars were more resistant to European chafer. In the initial run of this experiment in 2000, strong differences were observed among turf types, suggesting that there may be much more benefit from planting resistant turf types than previously believed. In 2001 we are repeating this experiment and initiating a field test to validate the results.

8 Turfgrass Breeding Project: Introgression in Lolium perenne and Festuca Species Dr. Suleiman Bughrara and Jianping Wang Source of Funding: Michigan Turfgrass Foundation Objective: 1. To determine the genetic stability of the Fi hybrids. 2. To evaluate the impact of F. mairei genome on turf quality, drought tolerance, and resistance to grey leaf spot disease in ryegrass. Plant material: Two accessions of F. mairei were collected from Morocco and two accessions of turf type perennial ryegrass were used in the investigations. These were used as male parents in backcross to diploid L. perenne to restore a diploid chromosome number of ryegrass. These BCi and Fi are planted at Hancock Turfgrass Research Center, East Lansing, MI. Interpollinated nursery: Four hundred plants of nine BCi were planted at Hancock Turfgrass Center in August 1999 to permit intermating. The seed was collected in June 2000 for progeny test next growing season. Backcross nursery: Twenty plants from each nine BCi were removed from the field last January and advanced in the greenhouse. Two hundred plants from each BCi were planted Fall 2000 in the nursery to backcross with turf type perennial ryegrass. Screening for drought tolerance and resistance to grey leaf spot disease have taken place in the greenhouse and growth chamber. Evaluations of the genetic stability of the BCi, pollen grain viability, and potential seed yield production will be investigated.

9 Stop 17 Nitrogen Fate in a 10 Year-Old Turf Stand Kevin O'Reilly, Dr. Kevin W. Frank, and Ron N. Calhoun Extensive research has been conducted on nitrate-nitrogen leaching in turfgrass systems and the majority of this research has indicated that nitrogen applications to turfgrass pose minimal risk to the environment with respect to nitrate leaching. However, many of these studies were conducted over short time frames or on newly established turfgrass areas. Initial research from on Kentucky bluegrass at Michigan State University revealed very small amounts of nitratenitrogen leaching through a 1.2 m deep sandy loam soil. Now, after 10 years of continual fertilization and management, research to determine if the amount of nitrate-nitrogen leaching through the profile has changed is underway. Initial results from leachate collected from indicate changes in the amount of nitrate-nitrogen leaching from the soil profile. Leachate will continue to be monitored and nitrogen allocation among turfgrass and soil components will be determined from soil cores harvested through autumn of The results of this research should provide definitive answers on how nitrogen dynamics change over time in turfgrass systems. This research is funded by grants from the USGA and Michigan Turfgrass Foundation.