Full TGIF Record # 7717
Item 1 of 1
Web URL(s):http://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/ressum/1985/15.pdf?_ga=1.120611528.1383136656.1456948762
    Last checked: 01/20/2017
    Requires: PDF Reader
Publication Type:
i
Report
Author(s):Beard, James B.
Author Affiliation:Texas A&M University
Title:Plant stress mechanisms
Source:Annual Turfgrass Research Report [USGA/GCSAA]. 1985, p. 15-17.
Publishing Information:Far Hills, New Jersey: United States Golf Association, Golf House.
# of Pages:3
Full Report URL:http://turf.lib.msu.edu/rprl/122.pdf
    Last checked: 9/2001
    Requires: Adobe Acrobat
    Notes: This is the entire full report!
Keywords:TIC Keywords: Canopy resistance; Cool season turfgrasses; Cultivar variation; Drought resistance; Evapotranspiration rate; Rooting; Shoot density; Stomatal density; Stress factors; Warm season turfgrasses; Water use rate
Abstract/Contents:"From research conducted over the first three years, significant progress has been made. We have the potential to revolutionize our concepts of turfgrass water conservation. Minimal Water Use Rates 1] The major warm and cool season turfgrass species vary substantially in water use rates. Initial data suggest that there may be as much variation among cultivars within a species as there is at the interspecies level. 2] The primary plant parameters affecting the evapotranspiration rate are a high canopy resistance and a low leaf blade area. These parameters are valid in interpreting the differentials in water use rates among eleven major warm season perennial turfgrasses. The morphological parameters can be easily assessed for use in screening thousands of clonal plantings for low water use rates in a breeding program. They are subject to modification by a number of cultural practices; thus, the turf manager can significantly affect the water use rate of a given turfgrass species. 3] Both warm and cool season turfgrass species possess significant differences in stomatal density and vary significantly in stomatal distribution over the leaf. In the case of warm season turfgrasses, there is a distinct relationship between the stomatal arrangement. A significantly higher stomatal density was found on the adaxial side of the leaf in comparison to the density found on the abaxial side, with the exception of Kentucky 31 tall fescue. There was no relationship between an increase in the evapotranspiration rate and a higher stomatal density. 4] It was found that potential evapotranspiration rate assessments across a range of warm season species can be reproduced in a water-heat stress simulation chamber. Growth inhibitors do possess a valid potential for use in reducing evapotranspiration rates of turfgrasses. The evapotranspiration rate increases as the cutting height is raised and as the nitrogen nutritional level is increased. The relative significance of an increased cutting height or nitrogen nutritional level on the evapotranspiration rate varies with the particular turfgrass species. In high nitrogen requiring turfgrasses, the evapotranspiration is most affected by changes in the nitrogen level, whereas, in low nitrogen requiring turfgrasses, evapotranspiration is affected by changes in mowing height. 5] There is genetic diversity within the bermudagrass species that contributes to a variance in potential evapotranspiration. This diversity can be measured and statistically analyzed. Enhanced Rooting/Water Absorption 1] Initial experiments suggest that the root hair dimension of turfgrass root characterization has been overlooked and that over the past three decades, far too much emphasis has been placed on total root mass and depth. The rooting depths and total root weights of the major warm season turfgrasses vary substantially in terms of interspecies rooting potentials. 2] Spring root decine is a separate phenomenon rather than a result of other external stresses. There are two distinctly different dormancy phases for the root and shoot systems of warm season perennial grasses. The spring root decline response has occurred in all ten warm season grasses investigated, which indicates that it is common to most warm season perennial grasses used for turfgrass purposes. 3] Significant differences in rooting depth and root mass were found among the major cool season turfgrass species when grown under near optimum conditions. Certain cool season species, such as crested wheatgrass and the tall fescues, exhibited a stronger capability to sustain root growth under severe heat stress conditions. Improved Drought Resistance The major warm season turfgrass species vary greatly in drought avoidance and in drought resistance with comparative rankings being much different than had been previously assumed. Variations in drought avoidance and recovery is as great within most of the turfgrass species as the variation at the interspecies level. Physiological Basis of Minimal Maintenance Turfgrasses Genetic diversity in terms of minimal maintenance turfgrasses can be statistically evaluated."
Language:English
References:Unknown
See Also:See also related manuscript, Second Year Progress Report Concerning Physiological Investigations in Developing Water Conserving, Minimal Maintenance Turfgrasses and Cultural Systems: Volume II, 1985, R=217425. R=217425
See Also:Other Reports from this USGA research project: 1983-09-009
Note:Entire contents listed in abstract field
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Beard, J. B. 1985. Plant stress mechanisms. Turfgrass Environ Res. Summ. p. 15-17.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.lib.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=7717
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 7717.
Choices for finding the above item:
Web URL(s):
http://turf.lib.msu.edu/rprl/122.pdf
    Last checked: 9/2001
    Requires: Adobe Acrobat
    Notes: This is the entire full report!
Find Item @ MSU
MSU catalog number: SB 433 .A1 A6
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)