Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:53:22.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Response of ‘TifEagle’ Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon × C. transvaalensis) to Fenarimol and Trinexapac-Ethyl

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Patrick E. McCullough
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, D-136 Poole Ag. Center, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0375
Lambert B. McCarty*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, D-136 Poole Ag. Center, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0375
Haibo Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, D-136 Poole Ag. Center, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0375
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Fall applications of fenarimol on hybrid Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon × C. transvaalensis) provide effective preemergence Poa annua (L.) control and suppress Ophiosphaerella spp. pathogens; however, concerns exist for turf injury and root growth restrictions. Two 60-d greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate the effects of fenarimol at 0, 1.6, and 3.2 kg ai/ha per 30 d with and without trinexapac-ethyl (TE) at 0.017 kg ai ha/15 d on ‘TifEagle’ Bermudagrass. Turf color was enhanced by TE 14 d after initial treatment (DAIT) and was continually superior throughout the experiment. Fenarimol at 3.2 kg/ha per 30 d decreased turf color 14 DAIT, but was similar to nontreated turf on all other observation dates. Increased fenarimol rates applied twice caused approximately 10% injury at 42, 49, and 56 d after treatment; however, injury was acceptable after initial and repeat applications. TE reduced clipping yield an average 39% from six sampling dates. Initial fenarimol applications (without TE) reduced clippings by 37% 20 DAIT and repeated applications reduced clippings 40, 50, and 60 DAIT. Increased fenarimol rate linearly decreased root mass for turf treated with and without TE; however, Bermudagrass receiving TE averaged 23% enhanced root mass 60 DAIT over all fenarimol rates. Bermudagrass receiving fenarimol at 0, 1.6, and 3.2 kg/ ha per 30 d with TE averaged 27, 24, and 16% higher root mass, respectively, compared to turf receiving fenarimol without TE. Treatments had no influence on root length. Results indicate that two consecutive fenarimol applications at 1.6 and 3.2 kg/ha per 30 d may cause minor injury to TifEagle Bermudagrass and restrict root growth. Repeated TE applications, however, could decrease injury from fenarimol and enhance rooting relative to fenarimol applied exclusively.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Beard, J. B. 2002. Turf Management for Golf Courses. 2nd ed. Chelsea, MI: Ann Arbor Press. Pp. 138139.Google Scholar
Bunnell, B. T. 2003. Physiological response of hybrid bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. × C. transvaalensis Burtt-Davy) to reduced light environments. Ph.D. dissertation. Clemson University, Clemson, SC. Pp. 3357.Google Scholar
Coats, G. E. 1986. Turfgrass weed control. Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station. Bulletin 95. Mississippi State. 25 p.Google Scholar
Elliot, M. L. 1999. Effect of demethylation inhibiting fungicides on ‘Tifgreen’ bermudagrass quality. Hort. Technol. 9:195197.Google Scholar
Engel, R. E. and Ilnicki, R. D. 1969. Turf weeds and their control. in Hanson, A. A. and Juska, F. V., eds. Agronomy Monograph No. 14. Turfgrass. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy. Pp. 240282.Google Scholar
Fagerness, M. J. and Yelverton, F. H. 2000. Tissue production and quality of Tifway bermudagrass as affected by seasonal application patterns of trinexapac-ethyl. Crop Sci. 40:493497.Google Scholar
Gent, M. P. and McAvoy, R. J. 2000. Plant growth retardants in ornamental horticulture: A critical appraisal. in Basra, A. S., ed. Mechanism of Plant Growth and Improved Productivity: Modern Approaches. New York: Marcel Dekker. Pp. 89145.Google Scholar
McCarty, L. B. and Miller, G. L. 2002. Managing Bermudagrass Turf: Selection, Construction, Cultural Practices and Pest Management Strategies. Chelsea, MI: Sleeping Bear Press. Pp. 39, 135, 207–208.Google Scholar
McCarty, L. B. and Murphy, T. 1994. Control of turfgrass weeds. in Turgeon, A. J., ed. Turf Weeds and Their Control. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy. Pp. 209248.Google Scholar
McCullough, P. E., Liu, H., and McCarty, L. B. 2004. Response of ‘TifEagle’ bermudagrass to seven plant growth regulators. Hort. Sci. In press.Google Scholar
McCullough, P. E., Whitwell, T., McCarty, L. B., and Liu, H. 2005. Physiological response of ‘TifEagle’ bermudagrass to fenarimol and gibberellic acid. Intl. Turf. Sci. J. In press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. D. 2002. Turf quality and freezing tolerance of Tifway bermudagrass as affected by late-season nitrogen and trinexapac-ethyl. Crop Sci. 42:162166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Statistical Analysis Systems. 1999. SAS User's Guide. Release 8.00. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. Pp. 20832226.Google Scholar
Smiley, R. W., Dernoeden, P. H., and Clarke, B. B. 2000. Compendium of Turfgrass Diseases. 2nd ed. St. Paul, MN: The American Phytophathological Society. Pp. 5556.Google Scholar
Waltz, F. C. Jr. 1996. The effect of trinexapac-ethyl on total carbohydrates in field grown hybrid bermudagrass. M.S. thesis. Clemson University, Clemson, SC. 84 p.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Bednarz, C. W., and Hanna, W. W. 2003. Sensitivity of triploid hybrid bermudagrass cultivars and common bermudagrass to postemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 17:509515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Younger, V. B. 1969. Growth and development. in Hanson, A. A. and Juska, F. V., eds. Turfgrass. Agronomy Monograph No. 14. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy. Pp. 187216.Google Scholar