| |
| Web URL(s): | https://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2022am/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/142532
Last checked: 01/30/2023
Requires: JavaScript; HTML5 |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Content Type: | Abstract or Summary only |
|---|
| Author(s): | Barnes, Michael;
Watkins, Eric |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Barnes: Presenting Author and University of Minnesota; Watkins: University of Minnesota-Twin Cities |
|---|
| Title: | "It's hot and rubbery" vs. "soft and plush" comparing perceptions of artificial turf to natural grass |
|---|
| Section: | Turfgrass science oral II
Other records with the "Turfgrass science oral II" Section
C05 turfgrass science
Other records with the "C05 turfgrass science" Section
|
|---|
| Meeting Info.: | Baltimore, Maryland: November 6-9, 2022 |
|---|
| Source: | ASA, CSSA, SSSA International Annual Meeting. 2022, p. 142532. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | [Madison, Wisconsin]: [American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America] |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 1 |
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Lawns make up a significant portion of green spaces in urban areas and afford a variety of ecosystem services that benefit nature and people. Despite such benefits, traditional turfgrass lawns are often critiqued for the amount of inputs required to maintain them such as fertilizer and water. With such input concerns in mind, some cities have found an alternative ground cover in artificial turf. While frequently used in professional sports, the proliferation of artificial turf fields outside of this domain has prompted both environmental and human health concerns. Despite such concerns, research on artificial turf has been minimal compared to the growth of installations, especially related to social aspects of the surface. The current study utilized a nationwide online survey and an in-person experiential survey to assess perceptions of artificial turf and natural grass. Overall, participants preferred natural turfgrass across all use cases except those involving sports where the surfaces were equal, and viewed it as more sustainable than artificial turf. These findings have implications for decision makers as they consider adoption of artificial turf in their communities when other alternatives to obtain sustainability and maintenance savings (e.g, low input turfgrasses, bee lawns) exist." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 0 |
|---|
| Note: | "309-9"
This item is an abstract only! |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Barnes, M., and E. Watkins. 2022. "It's hot and rubbery" vs. "soft and plush" comparing perceptions of artificial turf to natural grass. Agron. Abr. p. 142532. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.lib.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=324985 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 324985. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| Web URL(s):
https://scisoc.confex.com/scisoc/2022am/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/142532
Last checked: 01/30/2023
Requires: JavaScript; HTML5 |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
