Evaluation of Sedges and Nimblewill as Low-input, Shaded Lawns in Oklahoma, USA

IF 1 4区 农林科学 Q3 HORTICULTURE
Godwin Shokoya, C. Fontanier, D. Martin, B. Dunn
{"title":"Evaluation of Sedges and Nimblewill as Low-input, Shaded Lawns in Oklahoma, USA","authors":"Godwin Shokoya, C. Fontanier, D. Martin, B. Dunn","doi":"10.21273/horttech05107-22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Consumers desire low-input turfgrasses that have tolerance to both shade and drought stresses. Several sedges (Carex sp.) and nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi) are native plants prevalent in dry woodland ecosystems in Oklahoma, USA, and may have potential as alternatives to conventional species in dry shaded turfgrass systems. To evaluate selected species for this purpose, a multilocation field trial was conducted in Stillwater and Perkins, OK. Four sedges [gray sedge (Carex amphibola), Leavenworth’s sedge (Carex leavenworthii), ‘Little Midge’ palm sedge (Carex muskingumensis), and Texas sedge (Carex texensis)] and nimblewill were evaluated as alternative turfs for the study. Alternative turfs were compared against two conventional turfgrasses [‘El Toro’ Japanese lawngrass (Zoysia japonica) and ‘Riley’s Super Sport’ bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon)]. The conventional turfgrasses outperformed each sedge and nimblewill in coverage and turf quality. Leavenworth’s sedge, gray sedge, and Texas sedge persisted well but did not spread quickly enough to achieve a dense canopy by the end of the 2-year trial. In contrast, nimblewill established quickly but declined in coverage over time. This study demonstrated some sedges and nimblewill can be established and maintained as a low-input turf in dry shade, but development of unique management practices is still required for acceptable performance.","PeriodicalId":13144,"journal":{"name":"Horttechnology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Horttechnology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21273/horttech05107-22","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HORTICULTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Consumers desire low-input turfgrasses that have tolerance to both shade and drought stresses. Several sedges (Carex sp.) and nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi) are native plants prevalent in dry woodland ecosystems in Oklahoma, USA, and may have potential as alternatives to conventional species in dry shaded turfgrass systems. To evaluate selected species for this purpose, a multilocation field trial was conducted in Stillwater and Perkins, OK. Four sedges [gray sedge (Carex amphibola), Leavenworth’s sedge (Carex leavenworthii), ‘Little Midge’ palm sedge (Carex muskingumensis), and Texas sedge (Carex texensis)] and nimblewill were evaluated as alternative turfs for the study. Alternative turfs were compared against two conventional turfgrasses [‘El Toro’ Japanese lawngrass (Zoysia japonica) and ‘Riley’s Super Sport’ bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon)]. The conventional turfgrasses outperformed each sedge and nimblewill in coverage and turf quality. Leavenworth’s sedge, gray sedge, and Texas sedge persisted well but did not spread quickly enough to achieve a dense canopy by the end of the 2-year trial. In contrast, nimblewill established quickly but declined in coverage over time. This study demonstrated some sedges and nimblewill can be established and maintained as a low-input turf in dry shade, but development of unique management practices is still required for acceptable performance.
美国俄克拉何马州莎草和柔韧性草作为低投入、遮荫草坪的评价
消费者希望低投入的草坪草能同时承受遮荫和干旱的压力。几种莎草(Carex sp.)和水草(Muhlenbergia schreberi)是美国俄克拉何马州干旱林地生态系统中普遍存在的本土植物,可能有潜力在干燥遮荫的草坪草系统中作为传统物种的替代品。为了评估为此目的选择的物种,在Stillwater和Perkins进行了一项多地点实地试验。四种莎草[灰色莎草(角苔草)、莱文沃斯莎草(曲纹莎草)、“小Midge”棕榈莎草(麝香莎草)和得克萨斯莎草(德克萨斯莎草)]和灵草被评估为研究的替代草皮。将替代草皮与两种传统草坪草[“El Toro”日本草坪草(结缕草)和“Riley’s Super Sport”狗牙根(犬齿龙)]进行了比较。传统的草坪草在覆盖率和草坪质量方面都优于每种莎草和灵活草。Leavenworth的莎草、灰色莎草和得克萨斯莎草保持得很好,但在2年的试验结束时,它们的传播速度不够快,无法达到浓密的树冠。相比之下,nimblewill建立得很快,但覆盖率随着时间的推移而下降。这项研究表明,一些莎草和灵草可以在干燥的阴凉处作为低投入的草坪来建立和维护,但仍需要制定独特的管理实践来获得可接受的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Horttechnology
Horttechnology 农林科学-园艺
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: HortTechnology serves as the primary outreach publication of the American Society for Horticultural Science. Its mission is to provide science-based information to professional horticulturists, practitioners, and educators; promote and encourage an interchange of ideas among scientists, educators, and professionals working in horticulture; and provide an opportunity for peer review of practical horticultural information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信