Developing Sustainable Turfgrass Mixtures for …...Road Salt Use in MN • Saline soil • Soil...

Developing Sustainable Turfgrass Mixtures for Roadsides in Minnesota

Eric Watkins

Professor

Horticultural Science

Minnesota Roadsides

What is the problem?

Photo Credit: Dwayne Stenlund, MnDOT

Extreme Stresses

Extreme

Temperature

Drought

& Compaction Photo Courtesy Andrew Hollman

Disease

Road Salt Use in MN

• Saline soil

• Soil degradation

• Tissue desiccation

• Ion toxicity

(Biesboer & Jacobsen, 1994; Kronzucker et al. 2013, Munns & Tester 2008)

(Biesboer & Jacobsen, 1994)

Grass Type Acceptable

Varieties

Minimum

Percent

by Mass

Maximum

Percent by

Mass

Alkaligrass Fults, Salty 15 20

Red fescue Dawson,Cindy

15 20

Park Kentucky bluegrass

Park 10 15

Improved Kentucky bluegrass

(Baron, Odyssey, Rugby2, Shamrock,

Limousine, Chateau)

20 30

Low maintenanceKentucky bluegrass

(America, Aquila, Caliber, Certified Park, Challenger, Impact, Kenblue, Nassau, Newport, Ram 1, Nugget)

20 30

2010 MnDOT Specification

Grass Type Acceptable

Varieties

Minimum

Percent

by Mass

Maximum

Percent by

Mass

Alkaligrass Fults, Salty 15 20

Red fescue Dawson,Cindy

15 20

Park Kentucky bluegrass

Park 10 15

Improved Kentucky bluegrass

(Baron, Odyssey, Rugby2, Shamrock,

Limousine, Chateau)

20 30

Low maintenanceKentucky bluegrass

(America, Aquila, Caliber, Certified Park, Challenger, Impact, Kenblue, Nassau, Newport, Ram 1, Nugget)

20 30

2010 MnDOT Specification

• Minnesota Crop Improvement, MnDOT, Minnesota Turf Association

• Quality assurance program (records, inspections, etc.)

• Economic benefit for rural Minnesota

• Must be based on unbiased data in order to succeed

• Started BEFORE research was funded

STS Certification Program

Project 1: Determine Best Species and Cultivars for Roadsides

Roadside Cultivar Evaluation

• 2 Locations

– I-94, Albertville, MN

– Larpenteur Ave, Roseville, MN

• Randomized complete block

• 3 Replications

• 75 Cultivars in 14 Species

Species EntriesSeeding Rate (lb-1000 ft-2)

fine fescue (Festuca spp.) (HD,SLCR,STCR,SH,CH) 23 5

tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) 14 7

Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) 13 1.5

perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) 16 8

tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) P. Beauv.) 2 2

prairie junegrass (Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schult.) 2 3

creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) 2 1

alkalaigrass (Puccinellia spp.) 4 4

Idaho bentgrass (Agrostis idahoensis Nash) 1 3

Friell, J.*, E. Watkins, and B. Horgan. 2012. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Soil & Plant Science 62:44-52.

ROSELAWN BLVD SURVIVAL

APRIL 27, 2011a

ab

ab

ab

c

ab

cd

ab

cd

ab

cd

ab

cd

e

ab

cd

e

ab

cd

ef

ab

cd

efg

ab

cd

efg

ab

cd

efg

ab

cd

efg

ab

cd

efg

h

ab

cd

efg

hi

ab

cd

efg

hi

ab

cd

efg

hi

bcd

efg

hij

bcd

efg

hij

bcd

efg

hijk

bcd

efg

hijk

cd

efg

hijkl

defg

hijkl

defg

hijkl

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Cultivar

Me

an R

atin

g

- perennial ryegrass

- tall fescue

- fine fescue

- alkaligrass

- creeping bentgrass

- tufted hairgrass

MNROAD SURVIVAL

MAY 15, 2011a

a

a

a

b

bc

bcd

bcd

bcd

e

bcd

e

bcd

ef

bcd

efg

cd

efg

h

cd

efg

h

cd

efg

h

cd

efg

h

defg

hi

defg

hi

defg

hi

defg

hi

defg

hij

defg

hij

defg

hij

defg

hij

defg

hij

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Cultivar

Me

an R

atin

g

- perennial ryegrass

- tall fescue

- fine fescue

- alkaligrass

- creeping bentgrass

- tufted hairgrass

Salt Tolerance Screening

KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS

Friell, J*, E. Watkins, and B. Horgan. 2013.

Crop Science 53:1743-1749.

Fine Fescues

Species Common Name

Festuca rubra ssp. rubra strong creeping red fescue

Festuca rubra ssp. litoralis slender creeping red fescue

Festuca rubra ssp. commutata Chewings fescue

Festuca trachyphylla hard fescue

Festuca ovina sheep fescue

Identifying Best Mixtures

Friell, J., E. Watkins, and B.P. Horgan. 2015.. Ecological Engineering 84:579-587.

Sod Strength Testing

Sod Strength Testing

Friell, J., E. Watkins, B. Horgan, M. Cavanaugh. 2016. Agronomy Journal doi:10.2134/agronj2016.05.0295.

Impact

• Identified new turfgrass mixtures for roadsides in Minnesota

• Results were used to amend species proportions in MnDOT mixture specifications

Grass Type Acceptable

Varieties

Minimum

Percent

by Mass

Maximum

Percent by

Mass

Alkaligrass Fults, Salty 15 20

Red fescue Dawson,Cindy

15 20

Park Kentucky bluegrass

Park 10 15

Improved Kentucky bluegrass

(Baron, Odyssey, Rugby2, Shamrock,

Limousine, Chateau)

20 30

Low maintenanceKentucky bluegrass

(America, Aquila, Caliber, Certified Park, Challenger, Impact, Kenblue, Nassau, Newport, Ram 1, Nugget)

20 30

2010 MnDOT Specification

Common Name Approve Varieties %

Creeping red fescue (slender)

Seabreeze GT, Shorline, Sealink 20

Creeping red fescue (strong)

Cardinal, Celestial, Epic, McAlpin, Navigator

20

Kentucky bluegrass Bedazzled, Diva, Moonlight SLT, Shiraz 20

Hard, Sheep and/or Chewings fescue (minimum of two species, each making up at least 10% of the total mix)

Hard fescue: Beacon, Bighorn GT, Little BighornSheep fescue: Marco PoloChewings fescue: Radar, SR5130

40

2012 MnDOT Specification (MNST-12)

Reality…• Designing a good mixture is not enough

• Success of sod or seed installation depends on a number of factors

– Time of year

– Water

– Soil preparation

– Temperature

– Sod harvest depth

Photo Credit: Dwayne Stenlund, MnDOT

JULY

AUGUST

Photo Credit: Dwayne Stenlund, MnDOT

Photo Credit: Dwayne Stenlund, MnDOT

Photo Credit: Dwayne Stenlund, MnDOT

Project 2: Best Management Practices

Seeding and Sodding Date

May 1

August 1

October 1

b

a

b

a

b

a

b

ab

b

a

b

a

b

a

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

May - Seed May - Sod June - Seed June - Sod July - Seed July - Sod August -Seed

August -Sod

September- Seed

September- Sod

October -Seed

October -Sod

November- Seed

November- Sod

Turf

qu

alit

y (1

-9)

Planting month (2015) and type

Blaine, MN

Turf Quality (May 2016)

Water Requirements

Soil Amendments

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Control 22-5-10 8-2-4 5-8-0 Grade 1 Compost Grade 2 Compost Verdyol Black

Turf

qu

alit

y (1

-9)

Amendment type

Turf Quality - St. PaulJune 2016

b

a

aa

b

b

b

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Control 22-5-10 8-2-4 5-8-0 Grade 1 Compost Grade 2 Compost Verdyol Black

Clip

pin

g yi

eld

(g)

Amendment type

Clipping Yield - St. Paul14 days after planting in 2015

Impact and Next Steps

• Work with MnDOT to change specifications for managing new installations (ongoing)

• Contractors are familiar with Kentucky bluegrass sod, need to be educated about differences

• Watering is critical, no good options exist

Project 3: New Irrigation Options and Educational Resources

Watering Methods

Education: Installers

• Education and training to address:

– Basic turfgrass management

– Salt tolerant turfgrasses

– Roadside specific issues

• Free and “voluntary” for contractors

• Website developed for training program, factsheets and videos

Education: Homeowners

• Designed for use by homeowners that receive salt tolerant turfgrass installation

• Content will detail how to properly manage salt tolerant grasses:– Watering

– Fertilizing

– Mowing

– etc…

• Videos, information sheets, brochures

It Works!

Next Steps….

• Better understanding of stress tolerances necessary for roadside turfgrass success– More than just salt

– Inform makeup of recommended mixtures

– New cultivars have been developed

– Test additional species

• Knowledge about the importance of region-specific mixture recommendations

• Continue to improve MnDOT specifications for roadside turfgrass installations

Project 4: Stress Tolerance Screening

Trial 1: Ice encasement

Trial 2: Salt tolerance

Trial 3: Heat stress tolerance

Project 5: Regional Roadside Testing

• Multiple state DOTs contribute to a single project (pooledfund.org)

• Researchers within each state establish and evaluate two roadside cultivar trials

• UMN coordinates, analyzes data, reports, etc.

• Reduces issues related to non-stressful conditions at any given site

• Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, Wisconsin

Benefits for MnDOT

• Fewer failed turf installations

• Reduced erosion and improved infiltration

• Development of more effective seed mixture specifications

• Knowledge about the need/lack of need for region-specific recommendations

• Builds off of previous research

• Informs educational efforts

• Continues MnDOT leadership in this area

Acknowledgements

• Local Road Research Board / MnDOT

• Dwayne Stenlund(MnDOT)

• Ben Lang (MCIA)

• Sam Bauer

• Brian Horgan

• Josh Friell

• Matthew Cavanaugh

• Maggie Reiter

• Andrew Hollman

• Craig Krueger

• Mario Gagliardi

• Jonah Reyes

• Jon Trappe

Questions?