Tennessee Turfgrass - August / September 2016

August/September 2016

The Official Publication of the Tennessee Turfgrass Association, the Tennessee Valley Sports Turf Managers Association and the Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

Interesting Details about Tennessee’s Turfgrass Industry from the 2015 Survey Report What Grows There?

Identifying Nuisance Fungi on Bark Mulches

Seed: What’s in the Numbers?

The Official Publication of the Tennessee Turfgrass Association, Tennessee Valley Sports Turf Managers Association and the Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

TABLE OF CONTENTS

16

August/September 2016

FEATURED ARTICLES

16 24 28

Cover Story — Interesting Details about Tennessee’s Turfgrass Industry from the 2015 Survey Report Landscape Tips — What Grows There?

Identifying Nuisance Fungi that Commonly Occur on Bark Mulches Turf Basics — Seed: What’s in the Numbers?

24

DEPARTMENTS

4

From the TTA President, Theo Lankford

6

From the TVSTMA President, Thomas Trotter

8

From the MTGCSA President, Matthew Powell

10

News from TTA (Call for Awards Applications)

13

University of Tennessee Turf Team

32

Calendar of Events

34

Index of Advertisers

34

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016

28

From the TTA President

Wow!

Theo Lankford

So Much Is Happening!

W

hat a summer! Depending on your geographical location within the state, you either had a really wet or a really dry summer. But one thing is for sure — it was HOT for everyone.

So much went on this summer, it’s hard to wrap my head around what to write. I’ll start with our executive director’s position.

As most of you likely know, Shelia Finney has taken the position of Senior Director of Member Programs for GCSAA. She is still helping out here in Tennessee until a replacement can be found. We already miss her ability to get things done. Thank you, Shelia, for all your hard work!

While I’m on the topic of the executive director, we are hard on the hunt for a well-qualified, experienced individual to fill such big shoes. By the time this letter makes it to your eyes, we will have already had our deadline for resumes, and we will

io The miss

have narrowed candidates down to a select few. We may have even had an interview or two. We plan to have a new director named by the first of December.

The UT Field Day was recently held in Franklin, at the Golf House this year.

A sports turf session was held nearby at Battle Ground Academy. There was a great turnout, with lots of information and networking available. TTA held our annual raffle that raised $1,200 that went directly to UT turfgrass research. A big thanks to all who purchased tickets and also a big thank you to all the vendors that donated gifts to be raffled off.

It’s that time again to start thinking about the Conference and Tradeshow. If you missed last years event, I know you’re in deep regret and don’t want to miss the next one, scheduled for January 9–11, 2017. Even though last year was our 50th

Anniversary Celebration and we went big, don’t think that this year’s will be a boring, sleep-walking festival. Our Education Committee has been working hard to make sure we don’t disappoint after such a successful conference early this year.

The tradeshow is sure to impress; we have already completely sold out of booths and are looking for other places to put vendors and their displays.

Be on the lookout (in this issue of Tennessee Turfgrass) for nomination applications for awards and scholarships.

It makes it very difficult to give awards away if we don’t have folks nominated to give them to.

I hope to see you in January.

Doers DO!

Theo Lankford

2016–2017 TTA President

n of the Te nn essee Tur fg ra ss A s s o c i at i o

To promote the turfgrass industry through education, scholarship and research.

6

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

n

The Official Publication of the Tennessee Turfgrass Association, the Tennessee Valley Sports Turf Managers Association and the Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

Tennessee Turfgrass is the official publication of The Tennessee Turfgrass Association 400 Franklin Road Franklin, Tennessee 37069 (615) 465-6339 tnturfgrassassn@aol.com www.ttaonline.org Published by Leading Edge Communications, LLC 206 Bridge Street Franklin, Tennessee 37064 (615) 790-3718 Fax (615) 794-4524 Email: info@leadingedge communications.com Editor Dr. James Brosnan TTA OFFICERS President Theo Lankford Kormac, LLC (615) 519-2701 Vice President Jason Pooler Tri-Turf Sod Farms, Inc. (731) 642-3092 Secretary/Treasurer Doug Ward Belle Meade C.C. (615) 292-6752 Past President Paul Carter, CGCS Bear Trace at Harrison Bay (423) 344-6374 Executive Director Shelia Finney Tennessee Turfgrass Assn.

(615) 465-6339 TTA 2016 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Ryan Blair, CGCS Kurt Dryden Doug Estes Cal Hill Joe Hill Timothy Long Mickey Lovett Bill Marbet Mitch Parker Richard Pavlasek, CGCS Jason Sanderson Chris Sykes TTA ADVISORY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD Bill Blackburn Dr. Jim Brosnan Dr. Brandon Horvath Lynn Ray Jeff Rumph, CGCS Dr. Tom Samples Dr. John Sorochan Dr. Wes Totten

TTA • TVSTMA • TGCSA

7

From the TVST M A President

Thomas Trotter

The Year’s Events Aren’t Over Yet! We

have a lot of great events coming up, now that summer has finally wound down.

The UT Field Day was a great way to kick off the end of this summer. I hope everyone enjoyed it, as I know there was a lot of hard work and planning involved.

Another event worth putting on your calendar is the GIE + EXPO in Louisville, KY. The event takes place at the Kentucky Expo Center on October 20–21. It is one of the largest green-industry events in the country and definitely worth the effort to attend.

We also have a TVSTMA event coming up on November 2 at Bellevue Baptist Church in Cordova, TN. Be on the lookout for a finalized list of speakers soon.

We are also looking for other event locations in the near future, so please let us know if you have an interest in a particular venue.

Thomas Trotter

2016 TVSTMA President

8

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

9

From the M TGCSA President

Where

Matthew Powell

We Started W

here did you start? I think back to my early teenage years, working after school, weekends and holidays at my local golf club. How many of your stories are the same? Now think about whom you worked for and what kind of values and ethics they demanded of you. Did it make you the person you are today? How much gratitude do you owe to those individuals who took the time to teach and invest in you? I can safely say that they certainly shaped who I am today.

In the society we live in currently, the values and ethics that we were shaped by are rarely the values and ethics we see portrayed. The success we have achieved did not come to any of us by happenstance. Everyone’s degree of success has been accomplished with hard work, discipline and dedication. These values and ethics are the cornerstone of a successful life. So, the next time you have a young person come in looking for a job, remember that you once knew nothing about

anything and that those individuals who influenced you were a blessing to your success in life and in the golf industry.

Technology is rapidly changing; we see new equipment and products coming to market that claim to make our jobs easier or even more efficient. And they do, by most accounts, but the fact remains that the work still must get done by people. I do not see that changing anytime soon. People will always be the driving force behind the golf courses we represent. As I write this, fall is quickly approaching and soon will be in full force.

Think about you staffing needs for the next several months, taking into account that our courses are a great training ground for this generation. I believe, we have a great responsibility to see the generations after us succeed, just as we have.

In addition, 2016 has turned out to be a great year for Tennessee in regards to research and your willingness to support Rounds 4 Research. In 2016, TGCSA raised $15,000 in rounds donations.

That is five times more donations than in 2015. That’s huge! The total amount raised nationally (reported by EIFG) was $164,000. It seems that golf in TN is in great hands, thanks to all of the professionals, like you, that make up our Tennessee GCSAA. I thank you all for the opportunity to serve this great association. I hope everyone has a great rest of the year!

Matthew Powell

2016 MTGCSA President 2016 TGCSA President

10

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

New s from TTA

Who Would You Select As

TTA Professional of the Year?

?

TTA Professional of the Year • Nomination Form Person Being Nominated:________________________ Person Making the Nomination:___________________

Do

you know an outstanding turfgrass professional in Tennessee who deserves the recognition of his or her peers? If so, now’s the time to let the TTA know who you believe should receive one of the association’s highest honors — the TTA Professional of the Year Award — at the TTA Annual Conference and Tradeshow this coming January.

Please take a moment to mail in the nomination form on the right.

Nominees will be reviewed by the TTA Awards & Scholarship Committee, which will make a recommendation for approval by the TTA board of directors. Nominations must be postmarked no later than November 15, 2016.

Please send entries to: TTA Awards Program • Cal Hill, Winfield Solutions 7594 Raptors Roost Lane • Signal Mountain, TN 37377 (901) 412-0121 • cchill@landolakes.com

Reason for Nomination:_________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________

2017 TTA Environmental Stewardship Award

The

Tennessee Turfgrass Association (TTA) would like to recognize outstanding contributions by individuals, organizations, businesses, educational institutions and agencies for successful projects or activities designed to improve the environment through wildlife-habitat preservation, water and resource conservation and reduction, and educational outreach. Through our Environmental Stewardship Award, we can create greater knowledge and awareness of environmental and conservation practices and projects by members of TTA who have demonstrated outstanding contributions to environmental protection and improvement.

All entry materials must be submitted according to the procedures outlined below. The TTA Awards Committee, consisting of highly regarded TTA professionals, will independently judge the entries.

The winner will be notified in November, and the Environmental Stewardship Award will be presented at the TTA Awards Ceremony at the 2017 TTA Annual Conference.

Criteria for Consideration The following criteria must be met to

submit for the TTA Environmental Stewardship Award: • Property must be fully managed by an active and in-good-standing member of TTA. • Property must have been in use for at least two years.

• All materials must be submitted in one application packet.

How to Apply In order to be considered for the TTA Environmental Stewardship Award, the following materials must be submitted to the TTA Awards Committee no later than November 15, 2016: 1. A type-written essay, no longer than one page in length, that includes the following information: • Name and location of the property • Name and contact information of the person in charge of the property • A detailed account of how the property has improved, protected and/or promoted environmental protection and conservation. The Awards Committee is looking for unique and innovative ways in which individuals have changed practices or programs on the property to either reduce the use

of (and conserve) natural resources, improved or created natural habitats, or encouraged environmental awareness through outreach and education.

2. A minimum of two original photographs of the property, with captions.

The committee encourages creative photos that show how actions and activities on the property have improved or benefitted the environment. Documentation of environmental certifications from Audubon International, The Groundwater Foundation or the Environmental Institute for Golf is encouraged. Materials prepared for education and outreach, as well as any published articles or case studies promoting environmental stewardship, are also encouraged. Photos of wildlife, unless unique in nature, should not be submitted. T All entries must be postmarked no later than November 15, 2016.

Please send entries to: TTA Awards Program Cal Hill, Winfield Solutions 7594 Raptors Roost Lane Signal Mountain, TN 37377 (901) 412-0121 • cchill@landolakes.com

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

13

NE W S FR OM TTA 2017 TTA Golf Course of the Year Award

The

Tennessee Turfgrass Association (TTA) recognizes that golf course superintendents make personal and professional contributions to our industry and to the organizations/golfers that they serve.

Therefore, the TTA would like to distinguish golf courses across the state with the Golf Course of the Year Program. Through this program, we are able to greatly further one main element of our mission: to gain acknowledgement for the professionalism of our members.

This year, based on the results of the judging, the following awards may be presented at the TTA Awards Ceremony at the TTA Annual Conference in January 2017: • TTA Private Golf Course of the Year • TTA Public Golf Course of the Year All entry materials must be submitted

according to the procedures outlined below. The TTA Awards Committee, consisting of highly regarded TTA professionals, will independently judge the entries.

Winners will be notified in November.

Criteria for Consideration The following criteria must be met to submit for the TTA Golf Course of the Year Awards Program: • The golf course must have had two full seasons of play.

• All materials must be submitted in one application packet.

How to Apply In order to be considered for the TTA Golf Course of the Year Awards Program, the following materials must be submitted to the TTA Awards Committee no later than November 15, 2016:

1. A type-written essay, no longer than one page in length, that includes the following information: • Name and location of the golf course • Level of play (i.e., private, public) • Name and contact information of the golf course superintendent • An explanation any special challenges faced by you and/or your team. These challenges may include funding, lack of labor, weather, drought, event preparations/conversions or anything else that you feel the Awards Committee should know about why this golf course should be recognized as Golf Course of the Year. Include anything unusual or new that you have done to overcome these challenges. The Awards Committee is looking for innovative solutions to turfgrassmanagement problems.

2. A minimum of two original photographs of the golf course, with captions.

The committee encourages creative photos — photos that show the versatility of the course, display unique characteristics of the course and show the crew’s unique talents. Focus on issues specific to your golf course that tell the story (issues such as drainage, environmental stewardship, weather, etc.). Do not simply provide “beauty shots” of the course, as they do not reflect the true struggles and triumphs of you and your crew. T All entries must be postmarked no later than November 15, 2016.

Please send entries to: TTA Awards Program Cal Hill, Winfield Solutions 7594 Raptors Roost Lane Signal Mountain, TN 37377 (901) 412-0121 • cchill@landolakes.com

14

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

2017 TTA Sports Field of the Year Award

The

Tennessee Turfgrass Association (TTA) recognizes that sports field managers make personal and professional contributions to our industry and to the organizations/athletes that they serve. Therefore, the TTA would like to distinguish athletic fields across the state with the Sports Field of the Year Program. Through this program, we are able to greatly further one main element of our mission: To gain acknowledgement for the professionalism of our members. This year, based on the results of the judging, the following awards may be presented at the TTA Awards Ceremony at the TTA Annual Conference in January 2017: • TTA Professional Sports Field of the Year • TTA Collegiate Sports Field of the Year • TTA High School Sports Field of the Year • TTA Municipal Sports Field of the Year All entry materials must be submitted according to the procedures outlined below. The TTA Awards Committee, consisting of highly regarded TTA professionals, will independently judge the entries.

Winners will be notified in November.

• Level of play (i.e., professional, collegiate, high school – public, high school – private, municipal) • Name and contact information of the head turf manager • An explanation any special challenges faced by you and/or your team. These challenges may include funding, lack of labor, weather, drought, event preparations/conversions or anything else that you feel the Awards Committee should know about why this sports field should be recognized as Field of the Year. Include anything unusual or new that you have done to overcome these challenges. The Awards Committee is looking for innovative solutions to playing-surface problems.

2. A minimum of two original photographs of the field, with captions.

The committee encourages creative photos — photos that show the versatility of the field, display unique characteristics of the field and show the unique talents of the crew. Focus on issues specific to your field that tell the story (issues such as drainage, environmental stewardship, weather, etc.). Do not simply provide “beauty shots” of your field, as they do not reflect the true struggles and triumphs of you and your crew. T All entries must be postmarked no later than November 15, 2016.

Please send entries to: TTA Awards Program Cal Hill, Winfield Solutions 7594 Raptors Roost Lane Signal Mountain, TN 37377 (901) 412-0121 • cchill@landolakes.com

Criteria for Consideration The following criteria must be met to submit for the TTA Sports Field of the Year Awards Program: • For the purposes of this program, a “field” constitutes ONE natural grass playing surface.

• A field must have had two full seasons of play (may be concurrent — i.e., football and soccer on the same field in the fall, etc.).

• All materials must be submitted in one application packet.

How to Apply In order to be considered for the TTA Sports Field of the Year Awards Program, the following materials must be submitted to the TTA Awards Committee no later than November 15, 2016: 1. A type-written essay, no longer than one page in length, that includes the following information: • Name and location of the field TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

15

Cover St ory

Interesting Details about

T ennessee ’s T urfgrass In d

ustry

from the 2015 Survey Report

16

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

By Burton C. English, Ph.D., Professor; Jamey Menard, Research Leader; Kim Jensen, Ph.D., Professor; and Chris Boyer, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics; with Jim Brosnan, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Turfgrass Weed Science

T

urfgrass requires human action.

These actions result in expenditures by turfgrass producers, manufacturing and services, and users for goods and services, land, labor, capital equipment and other materials. These expenditures enhance the local economy and the local tax base.

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the magnitude of the economic contributions of Tennessee’s turfgrass industry to the state’s economy. To obtain this information, an online survey of Tennessee’s turfgrass industry was conducted from September 15, 2014, to January 31, 2015.

Surveys were designed to obtain information from sod producers, turfgrass manufacturing and service sectors (lawn/ turfgrass and irrigation equipment manufacturers; turfgrass fertilizer and chemical manufacturers; nursery, garden center and farm supply stores; and landscape, lawn and sports turf services), and turfgrass users (airports, apartments/condominiums, residential builders/developers, cemeteries, churches, colleges/universities, elementary/secondary schools, parks, gardens, museums, state highway roadsides, hotels/motels, golf, homeowners and other non-profit/profit entities).

The survey report included information in three sections — Economic Contributions of the Turfgrass Industry, Anticipated Growth and Future Concerns, and Additional Responses from the Turfgrass Survey. Below are interesting details from the third section of the survey. Future issues

of Tennessee Turfgrass will cover other sections of the survey, including total economic contributions and a compiled report for sod production.

Golf Responses for golf totaled 138. For golf courses, an average of 3.3 acres were in greens, 4.2 acres in tees, 34.2 acres in fairways, 68.4 acres in roughs and 22.4 acres in the category “other,” which was primarily natural or native areas (N=130). In a separate question, golf respondents were asked the total acres of turfgrass associated with their golf facilities. The average response was 151.0 acres (N=112).

Approximately 81% of the respondents had 18-hole golf facilities, and 84% of all respondents had a driving range (N=128).

Only 9% had both a driving range and a par-three course, while 7% had neither.

On average, 78% of the golf played was

18-hole rounds (N=108), and 22% was 9-hole rounds (N=99).

Most of the golfers were in-state but less than 50 miles from the golf facility (66% average) (N=125). In-state golfers more than 50 miles from the golf facility averaged 16% (N=124), with tourists or out-of-state residents averaging 10% (N=125). Most of the golfers fell in the 50 to 59 age group (22% average) (N =117), followed by the 60 to 69 age group (20% average), 40 to 49 age group (18% average), 30 to 39 age group (13% average), less than 30 age group (9% average), and at least 70 years of age (8% average).

For 2013, the majority of the golf respondents (89%) did not add any acreage or square yards to their golf facility (N=112). For the golf respondents who indicated they produced turfgrass for their golf facility, the average amount produced for those responding in square yards was 595.0 (0.1 acre) (N=12) and 1.6 for those responding in acres (N=20). For those indicating they purchased turfgrass, the average amount for those responding in square yards was 4,439.2 square yards (0.9 acre) (N=30), and 17.3 acres for those responding in acres (N=37).

Golf respondents were asked about their total revenues. For those responding (N=57), approximately 28% indicated $2 to $4.9 million; 28% indicated $500 to $999 thousand; 18% indicated $1 to $1.9 million; 11% indicated $5 to $9.9 million; 9% indicated $250 to $499 thousand; and 7% indicated less than $250 thousand.

In decreasing order, golf revenues were

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

17

Cover St ory generated primarily from rounds of golf (50% average) (N=66), followed by food and beverage services (10% average) (N=68), other (4% average) (N=68), retail sales (4% average) (N=68), other recreation (2% average) (N=67) and lodging (1% average) (N=68). For the category “Other,” golf dues, driving range, marina and golf lessons were listed.

Revenues for the golf maintenance budget primarily came from memberships (57%), public play (41%) and other (PGA tour) (2%) (N=61). For those indicating membership (N=35), 40% indicated that golf maintenance revenues have increased in the last three years; 26% indicated a decrease; and 31% indicated no change. For those indicating public play (N=25), 56% indicated a decrease; 32% indicated no change; and 8% indicated an increase.

The average number of individuals on the golf course maintenance team was 13.2 (N=53), and an average of 9% of these individuals had degrees in turfgrass management. Approximately 69% of the respondents indicated no change in the expectation of future maintenance team members with turfgrass management degrees, followed by 26% indicating an increase, and 6% indicating a decrease (N=51).

Sod producers A total of 19 sod producers responded to the survey. The average acres of land

18

owned and rented for sod producers were 407.8 (N=19) and 231.1 (N=9) acres, respectively. For those producers responding in acres (N=14), an average of 170.0 acres of sod was harvested; for those responding in square yards (N=5), the average was 412,524.8 (85.2 acres). An average of 43.3 acres of new sod was established by producers (N=17), and 20.7% of sod sales were installed by their farm operation (N=19).

Sod producers were asked about their total revenues. For those responding (N=18), approximately 28% indicated $2 to $4.9 million; 22% indicated $500 to $999 thousand; 22% indicated less than $250 thousand; 17% indicated $250 to $499 thousand; and 11% indicated $1 to $1.9 million. An average of 75% of total revenues was from sod sales (N=19).

Sod producers were asked what percent of their sod sales were to various turfgrass users (Table 36). The majority of their sod sales went to landscape service providers at 36%, followed by single family homes (25%), commercial businesses (14%), other (11%), golf courses (3%), apartments and condominiums (3%) and non-profit or government institutions (3%). For the category “Other,” wholesale to other farms, cemeteries and sports fields were listed.

Approximately 66% of the sod sold was at wholesale (N=13).

Approximately 56% of the sod producers (N=10) indicated an increase in sod sales over the past three years, which averaged a 17% increase. For sod producers indicating a decrease in sod sales (28%) (N=5), the average decrease was 26%.

Only three sod producers (17%) indicated no change in sold sales for this timeframe.

Tall fescue, hybrid bermudagrass and bermudagrass were the predominant sod types grown. These three turfgrasses comprised 94% of the sod produced. Approximately 72% of the sod produced was irrigated (N=13), and 30% of the sod producers had converted established sod to an annual crop in the last five years (N=10).

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

Sports turf services Thirty-seven responses for sports turf services were received. The average total sports turf serviced by respondents was 80.9 acres, with 100.0 acres receiving the most responses (N=36).

The average total area of sod installed for those responding in square yards (N= 10) was 17,282.0 (3.6 acres), and 5.5 for those responding in acres (N=14). An average of 23% of the sod installed was purchased from vendors outside of Tennessee (N=24). For total area seeded, the average for those respondents reporting in acres (N=14) was 26.8, and 5,428.3 (1.1 acres) for those responding in square yards (N=6).

Average percentage total sales for sports turf was the largest for mowing (10%), followed by fertilization (7%), other (don’t sell, infield mix-mount clays, equipment maintenance) (5%), over-seeding or establishment with seed (4%), weed control (4%), irrigation (3%), sod installation (3%) and aerification (2%). The smallest was for tree trimming/removal, clipping/ leaf removal, disease/insect control, ornamental plant/tree installation, liming and landscape design (all less than 1%).

Sports turf respondents were asked about their total revenues. Approximately 64% indicated less than $250 thousand; 4% indicated $250 to $499 thousand; 7% indicated $500 to $999 thousand; 7% indicated $1 to $1.9 million; 4% indicated $2

Cover St ory to $4.9 million; 7% indicated $5 to $9.9 million; 4% indicated $10 to $14.9 million; and 4% indicated $25 million or greater (N=29).

sod installation (2%), liming (1%) and tree trimming/removal (1%).

Lawn service respondents were asked about their total revenues. Approximately 45% indicated less than $250 thousand; 27% indicated $250 to $499 thousand; 13% indicated $500 to $999 thousand; 9% indicated $1 to $1.9 million; 4% indicated $2 to $4.9 million; and 2% indicated $25 million or greater (N=55).

Lawn services A total of 68 responses for lawn services were received in the survey. The average total lawn/turf serviced was 667.7 acres, with 100 acres receiving the most responses (N=65).

The average total area of sod installed for those responding in square yards (N= 19) was 81,237.5 (16.8 acres), and 7.5 for those responding in acres (N=20). An average of 14% of the sod installed was purchased from vendors outside of Tennessee (N=39). For total area seeded, the average for those respondents reporting in acres was 79.9 (N=31), and 2,531.3 (0.5 acre) for those responding in square yards (N=4).

The respondents indicated that the majority of their total sales went to singlefamily homes (averaged 64%), followed by commercial businesses (averaged 22%), apartments or condominiums (averaged 7%), non-profit or government institutions (averaged 6%) and other (averaged 1%) (N=61). The largest average percentage of total sales for lawn services was for mowing (38%), followed by fertilization (13%), weed control (11%), ornamental plant/tree installation (6%) and clipping/leaf removal (6 percent) (N=57). The smallest was for

20

associations, industrial) (averaged 1%) (N=29).

Average percentage total sales for landscaping services were the largest for ornamental plant/tree installation (24%), followed by mowing (19%), other (primarily hardscapes, mulching, and pruning) (8%), irrigation (7%), sod installation (7%) and landscape design (7 percent) (N=28). The smallest was for disease/ insect control, aerification and liming (all less than 1%).

Landscape respondents were asked about their total revenues. Approximately 32% indicated $250 to $499 thousand; 32% indicated less than $250 thousand; 18% indicated $500 to $999 thousand; 14% indicated $2 to $4.9 million; and 4% indicated $1 to $1.9 million (N=28).

Landscape services A total of 32 responses for landscape was received in the survey. The average total lawn/turf serviced by respondents was 234.4 acres, with 10 to 20 acres receiving the most responses (N=30).

The average total area of sod installed for those responding in square yards was 3,359.2 (0.7 acre), and 21.0 for those responding in acres (N=31). An average of 20% of the sod installed was purchased from vendors outside of Tennessee (N=26).

For total area seeded, the average for those respondents reporting in acres (N=24) was 30.7, and 85,033.3 (17.6 acres) for those responding in square yards (N=3).

Respondents indicated that the majority of their total sales went to singlefamily homes (averaged 61%), followed by commercial businesses (averaged 23%), non-profit or government institutions (averaged 8%), apartments/condominiums (averaged 4%) and other (homeowners’

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

Homeowners A total of 134 homeowners responded to the survey. The majority of the respondents had homes located in suburban areas (60%), followed by rural (25%) and urban (15%). For total lawn/turf maintained at the respondents’ homes, the average was 1.6 acres (median was 0.5 acre) (N=132).

For those responding in square feet (N= 32) and in length x width measurement (N=15), the averages were 35,290.8 and, 98.3 feet x 104.7 feet, respectively.

The majority of the respondents did not irrigate their lawn/turf (56%) (N=133).

However, for homeowners that irrigated

Cover St ory (N=58), the average percent of the lawn irrigated was 30%, with 100% the most frequent response. The majority of the respondents used an underground irrigation system (N=43), followed by a garden hose sprinkler system (N=23).

Approximately 71% of the respondents do not use a landscape service company to maintain their lawn/turf (N=133). For those respondents that did use a landscape service company to maintain their lawn (N=38), the average annual expense for their lawn maintenance was $7,996 (median $1,480), with estimates ranging from $200 to $105,000.

Mowing, fertilization and weed control were the primary practices performed by both landscape service companies and homeowners. For the category “Other,” the majority of the lawn care practices indicated were aeration and over-seeding.

use a landscape service company and had no plans to use one in the future (N=18).

Only one respondent that currently does not use a landscape service company is planning to do so in the next few years.

The average total expenditures for lawn/turf services were $46,723 (median $5,000), with values ranging from $15 to $415,000. The most frequent responses were $5,000 and less. The average per acre cost for landscape services was $1,617; the median per acre cost was $1,046.

Equipment

Non-Profit

For-profit companies For-profit responses totaled 44. The average acres of lawn/turf associated with their for-profit organization were 679.1; the median was 9.5 acres (N=42). The most frequent response was 1 acre, with values ranging from 1 to 3,000 acres.

Approximately 55% of the respondents indicated that they currently use a landscape service company to take care of their facilities lawn/turf (N=23). The remaining respondents, 43%, indicated they do not

$1.8 million. The most frequent response was $2,000 (N=38). The average per acre cost for landscape services was $2,023; the median per acre cost was $900.

Non-profit responses totaled 143. The average acres of lawn/turf associated with their non-profit organization were 436.8, and the median was 7.5 acres (N=140). The most frequent response was one acre with values ranging from zero to 50,000 acres.

Approximately 63% of the respondents indicated that currently no landscape service company takes care of their facilities lawn/turf and had no plans to use one in the future (N=142). Although 4% of the non-profit respondents indicated they currently don’t use a landscape service company to take care of their lawn/turf but have plans to do so in the future, 33% of the non-profit respondents use a landscape service company.

The average total expenditures for lawn/turf services were $100,378 (median $4,000), with values ranging from $300 to

Eight responses were received for the equipment survey. Five indicated affiliations with turfgrass equipment, and three indicated lawn equipment. The various markets segments that the equipment companies sold to, in descending order, were golf turf equipment, sports fields and grounds, private individuals, landscaping products, equipment dealers and non-profit or government institutions. Total sales in descending order of equipment/products were residential mowers, commercial mowers, specialty equipment (debris, bunker rakes, compact utility loaders, greens rollers, etc.) and application equipment (sprayers, top-dressers, etc.).

Equipment respondents were asked about their total revenues. Approximately 43% indicated $5 to $9.9 million; 43% indicated $15 to $19.9 million; and 14% indicated $2 to $4.9 million (N=7).

Approximately 63% of the equipment respondents indicated no change in their turf/lawn equipment sales over the past three years (N=8). For those who indicated an increase in sales for this timeframe, the average percentage increase was 25% (N=2). One respondent indicated a 30% decrease in sales. T

Funding for this study was provided by the Tennessee Turfgrass Association, Midsouth Turfgrass Council, Middle Tennessee Nursery Association, The Tennessee Nursery & Landscape Association, Inc., and Tennessee Chapter Golf Course Superintendents Association of America.

22

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

Landscape Tips

— What —

G rows Th e r e ?

A Handy Guide for Identifying Nuisance Fungi that Commonly Occur on Bark Mulches

By John Olive, Auburn University Ornamental Horticulture Research Center, Mobile, AL, and Alan Windham, Ph.D., University of Tennessee Extension Soil, Plant Pest Center, Nashville. All photos by Alan Windham.

W

ood, bark and other forest byproducts are used extensively as mulches in landscapes and as potting media for commercial nurseries.

Unfortunately, these organic substrates provide the perfect growing media for several common nuisance fungi. Although these fungi are not harmful to the plants growing in the media, they are often unsightly and aesthetically unappealing, or they are malodorous and can be disagreeable to the final consumer. These fungi can also speed decomposition of bark substrates and mulches.

Identifying these nuisance fungi can help ease homeowners’ fears and prevent unnecessary chemical applications. Many fungi are considered a nuisance in landscape mulches, potting media and greenhouses. Let’s take a look at some of the most common nuisance fungi.

size depending on the species but is usually in the range of 5 to 12 mm (1/5 to 1/2 inches) across. The “eggs” are a group of spore sacs called peridioles. Dispersal of the spores occurs when a drop of water hits the cup and the eggs are splashed out as far as seven feet.

A number of genera and species make up this group of fungi, with the most common being Cyathus and Crucibulum spp.

These fungi can cover house siding with black specks that are difficult to wash off. On plants, the peridioles can look like insect frass and be so numerous on foliage that they cause the grower to believe it’s an insect infestation.

Peridioles of this group are easily recognized, as they often have a length of white hyphae attached called a funicular cord.

They do not cause damage to the plants, and there is no need to control them.

Bird’s nest fungi

Artillery fungi

These are aptly named for their vaseshaped resemblance to a tiny bird’s nest complete with a cache of eggs (see Photos 1 and 2). The fruiting structure varies in

In the genus Sphaerobolus, artillery fungi are much smaller (0.04 to 0.1 inches or 1 to 3 mm) than the bird’s nest fungi and therefore are often not as visible and

24

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

are difficult to detect (Photo 3). These “cannons” can send the single spore sac (shot from the tiny fruiting body) as far as 17 feet.

Like the bird’s nest fungi, they do no damage to plants, but the tiny projectiles can cover plant leaves and structure siding and are unsightly and often difficult to remove.

Artillery fungus is commonly found on hardwood mulch. Choosing an alternative mulch or mixing mushroom compost with mulch can reduce the incidence of artillery fungus.

Yellow houseplant mushroom, yellow parasol or flower pot parasol Leucocoprinus birnbaumii is commonly found growing in containers in greenhouses and houseplants (Photo 4). As the common name indicates, it is easily identified as a yellow mushroom 1 to 4 inches tall. The cap usually has a nipple in the center and is 1 to 3 inches across.

There are reports of this mushroom causing gastrointestinal discomfort in some people, so it is not advisable to eat this mushroom, but it is not damaging to the plant, and there is no control recommended. They can be enjoyed as an unusual color surprise in houseplants. Containers infested with Leucocoprinus may have an extensive network of mycelium throughout the bark substrate, which may affect water retention.

Stinkhorn Stinkhorn is the common name given to a number of fungi that are common in landscape wood mulches, three of which are discussed here. Stinkhorns are often first noticed as a slimy, gelatinous, white egg-shaped mass buried in mulch. The stinkhorns emerge from this structure and are identified by their shape.

The Elegant Stinkhorn (Photo 5), Mutinus elegans, forms a single pink to red narrow column that’s 4 to 7 inches tall.

Sometimes the top portion will be covered with a brown slime. The Starfish Stinkhorn (Photo 6), Aseroe rubra emerges from

Photo 1

Bird’s nest fungus close-up.

Photo 3

Artillery fungi.

Photo 5

Elegant stinkhorn, Mutinus elegans.

Photo 2

Bird’s nest fungus colony on hardwood mulch.

Photo 4

Yellow houseplant mushrooom, Leucocoprinus birnbaumii.

Photo 6

Aseroe rubra, starfish stinkhorn fungus.

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

25

Landscape Tips the egg as a hollow white stalk topped with a crown of deeply divided arms radiating from the center like a flower.

The Columnar Stinkhorn (Photo 7), Linderia columnata erupts from the egg as 5 to 7 spongy red to orange columns that are joined at the top and that can grow 6 inches tall.

As indicated by the name, all are identifiable by the putrid smell they produce at maturity. When conditions are ideal, they can emerge in large numbers and be very malodorous. They are often detected by their odor long before they are observed.

Flies and other insects are attracted to stinkhorns and disperse spores. They are

Photo 7

Columnar stinkhorn fungus, Linderia columnata.

Photo 9

False morel mushroom in mulch, Gyromitra sp.

26

Photo 8

usually short lived and do not last long, but they can be removed by hand if needed (rubber gloves are recommended).

Dog vomit slime mold This mold is not a fungus but is included in this discussion because it looks like a

Dog vomit slime mold, Fuligo septica.

Photo 10

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

Puffball, Calvatia cyathiformis.

fungus and is a nuisance in bark mulches (Photo 8). It is in the Kingdom Protista like the amoeba. This organism, Fuligo septica appears in early evening as a whiteto-yellow gelatinous mass that slowly moves across mulch. In pre-dawn hours, this slime mold contracts to form soft crusty growth, which is sometimes mistaken for something a dog threw up.

It can appear in mulch, lawns or even bare ground. It is extremely common on hardwood mulch. As with the other fungi, this growth is not harmful, does not last long, and control is not required.

Other common fungi Other common fungi found in mulch include Coprinoid mushrooms (ink caps), Leucoagaricus americanus, Gyromitra esculenta (false morels, Photo 9) and puffballs (Photo 10) such as Geastrum, Lycoperdon and Scleroderma.

None of these fungi are harmful to the plants they grow adjacent to, but they are often the subject of frantic calls or emails to plant diagnostic labs and university horticulture departments. Being able to identify these nuisance fungi is useful in educating consumers as well as possibly preventing unnecessary chemical applications. T

Other Resources Arora, David. 1979. Mushrooms Demystified. Ten Speed Press. 959pp.

Davis, DD., L.J. Kuhns and T. L. Harpster. 2005. Use of mushroom compost to suppress artillery fungi.

Journal of Environmental Horticulture 24: 212-214.

Volk, Tom. 2006. Tom Volk’s Fungi: Fungus of the Month. http://TomVolk Fungi.net Weber, Nancy Smith and Alexander H. Smith. 1985. A Field Guide to Southern Mushrooms. The University of Michigan Press. 280 pp.

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

27

Turf Basics

Seed: Numbers?

What’s in the

By David R. Huff, Ph.D., Professor of Turfgrass Breeding and Genetics, Pennsylvania State University

S

eed serves as a remarkable means of plant propagation, particularly in terms of commercial application of plant material. It ships well, it stores well, and large-scale establishment can be achieved relatively quickly at low cost. In the turfgrass industry, it is most typical that cool-season species are propagated by seed, whereas warmseason turfgrass species are propagated vegetatively through either sprigs or sod.

While there are exceptions to this general tendency (i.e., vegetatively propagated cool-season species and seeded warmseason species), for the most part, our industry utilizes seed to establish coolseason turfgrass species like bentgrass, perennial ryegrass, tall fescue, Kentucky bluegrass and fine fescues, while vegetative propagation is commonly utilized for warm-season species like bermudagrass, St. Augustinegrass, zoysiagrass and seashore paspalum.

Much has been written about using seed as a means of turfgrass propagation, including the basic importance of various aspects like purchasing, applying and establishing seed; for example, being able to properly understand and utilize the important information contained on a seed label like the calculation of the percent Pure Live Seed (PLS) for comparing the true costs of different seed products (example, see http://plantscience.psu. edu/research/centers/turf/extension/ factsheets/seed).

However, in this article, I would like to present some of the different, though no less important, aspects of using seed

28

to establish areas of turf. For example, over the years, I have found that most turf managers view their seed as an individual cultivar or variety, in that all the seed in a bag, of say ‘Penncross’ creeping bentgrass, is genetically all the same. The truth is that each individual seed gives rise to a genetically unique individual plant. By genetically unique, I mean that some plants will be big and others small, some will be dark green and others light green, some will tiller more while other stay less dense, etc.

This is because each seed in the bag of seed was the result of a fusion between a sperm from the pollen-donator parent plant and an egg from the seed-bearing parent plant. And just as in animals, insects and human beings, each individual is genetically unique and different from all others because each was derived from a unique combination of sperm and egg that gives rise to their genetic uniqueness.

A numbers game I often like to tell my students that there are more stars in the universe than all the grains of sand on all the beaches of planet Earth and that there are more genetically different individuals of ‘Penncross’ creeping bentgrass than there are stars in the universe; but that statement seems to lose its impact unless you do the math, so let’s do the math (see Figure 1).

There are approximately 700 trillion cubic meters of beaches on planet Earth, and using an average medium sand particle size that is equivalent to 8,000 sand grains per cubic centimeter, that equals 5 quintillion (5 x 1018 ; in this decimal

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

notation, 1018 is a 1 followed by 18 zeros) grains of sand on all the beaches of planet Earth. Now, there are approximately 250 billion stars in our Milky Way galaxy, and there are approximately 200 billion galaxies in the known universe. That equals 50 sextillion (50 x 1021) stars in the universe (give or take).

These are very large numbers of things, too large really to even comprehend; however, they pale in comparison with the number of genetically unique individuals of sexually reproducing species, like creeping bentgrass. To estimate the number of genetically unique individuals of creeping bentgrass, we’ll apply a standard genetics formula that uses the number of different combinations of different forms of any given gene to the power of the total number of genes that an organism possesses. On average, this number is 1 x 1030,000, or 10 different combinations per gene to the power of 30,000 genes per organism. I don’t even know that there is a name for this number, but I do know that it is a very large number.

Finally, of the total amount of all this genetic variation within the creeping bentgrass species, approximately 2/3 of the genetic variation have been found to reside within cultivars, while 1/3 has been found to reside between cultivars. And thus, if we assume that there are roughly 200 cultivars of creeping bentgrass in today’s market (there really aren’t that many, but it helps to make the numbers work better), then the total number of genetically unique individuals that might exit within the ‘Penncross’ cultivar would roughly be on

Photo 1: Different turfgrass species have different seed size.

Figure 1: A numbers game.

Photo 2: Segregating bentgrass green cropped via S. McDonald.

Grains of sand on beaches: 5 x 1018 700 trillion m3 of beach on Earth 8,000 grains = cm3 (1cm3 = 0.06 in3) Stars in the Universe: 5 x 1022 250 billion stars in the Milky Way x 200 billion galaxies Genotypes of bentgrass: 1 x 1030,000 (Number of allelic combinations)# of genes Genotypes in Penncross: 1 x 10100 More than 2/3 of all creeping bentgrass genetic variation resides within cultivars divided by approximately 200 cultivars.

the order of 1 googol (or 1 x 10100; that is a 1 followed by 100 zeros). Thus, there is way more number of genetically unique individuals of Penncross creeping bentgrass, or any cultivar of creeping bentgrass for that matter, than there are stars in the universe.

The point of this exercise is to illustrate the importance of management of your young seedling plants during establishment. If, for example, you plant creeping bentgrass, which possesses 6 million seeds

per pound, at a recommended rate of say 1 lb. per 1,000 ft2 on an average sized golf course putting green of 5,000 ft2, then your initial establishment will give you 30 million genetically unique seedlings.

Over time, it is unrealistic to believe that all 30 million seedlings will survive. Some seedlings will succumb to disease, other will die from heat or cold, and many will simply be outcompeted by their neighboring brothers and sisters. There is immense competition for the limited

resources of light, nutrients, water and simply space to grow on a golf course putting green. Therefore, over time, those 30 million seedlings will be reduced to some lower number, maybe thousands or maybe hundreds. In addition, the surviving plants will very often tend to look very different from one another due to their genetic uniqueness. This is one explanation of how and why putting greens tend to segregate over time into a network of patches (Photo 2).

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

29

Turf Basics The maintenance factor However, the most important force for determining the level of competition and subsequent survival among these bentgrass seedlings is most likely the type and level of maintenance given by the turfgrass manager. Are these greens initially mowed at 1/8 inch or at 1/10 of an inch?

Are these greens regularly cultivated, fertilized and irrigated, or are they kept lean and hard? These different management parameters have an extremely important impact on the final composition of the resulting bentgrass population because the genetically unique individuals will have different abilities to respond to different levels of management. For example, some individuals will tolerate lower mowing heights better than others, some will respond more to increased levels of nitrogen fertilizer than others, some will tolerate traffic more than others, etc. And thus, the original seedling population, which initially started at 30 million plants, will be steadily winnowed down to a much reduced number of plants depending on the level and type of management received.

Additionally, once a particular genotype has been eliminated from the population, it cannot be resurrected because turfgrasses like creeping bentgrass do not typically flower and set seed underneath our mowing heights. Thus, if management practices are abruptly changed, after say

10 years, to a different level of intensity, then the genotypes best adapted to the new management practices might have already been eliminated from the existing population. And once these individuals are gone, they are gone, never to come back again.

It is at this point when my students typically ask, “But what about overseeding?”

Well, in some cases overseeding can add or replace lost genetic variation, but in the case of creeping bentgrass, it is surprising to me how little genetic variation can actually be added through overseeding (see: Sweeney, P. and K. Danneberger.

1998. Introducing A New Creeping Bentgrass Cultivar Through Interseeding: Does It Work? It sounds like a good idea, but there are drawbacks. USGA Greens Section Record Sept-Oct 1998. Pp. 19–20.). Thus, the point of all this is for superintendents to know and value their seedling population and to appreciate the fact that their management techniques will greatly influence the resulting plant population for a long, long time to come.

This same principle described above also holds true for home lawns and landscape turf. However, for lawn and landscape turf, the seed numbers game is initially more important during the act of initial establishment. This is because most lawn and landscape turfs are established as a mixture of different species. The

important point here is that these three species have very different sizes of seed and that the available information on the seed label provides only the percentage of each type of seed by weight. Thus, when calculating out the final composition of species in the final product (the lawn itself), the Pure Seed component that is listed on the seed label as percent by weight of each species, in combination with PLS, must be converted to percent by number. This is because each pure live seed, regardless of its weight, gives rise to an individual seedling plant, and thus, the numbers are often very, very different.

As can be seen in Table 1, the number of Pure Live Seed per pound of each species is very different than the amount of Pure Seed that is listed on the seed label as a percent by weight. For example, as a percent by weight, Kentucky bluegrass only registers 10% of the above bag of seed. Moreover, when the percent germination is included into the calculation in order to determine PLS, Kentucky bluegrass is only 7.5% of the seed mix. However, when we take into account that Kentucky bluegrass has 2.2 million seeds per pound, then the final species composition of the resulting lawn is a whopping 43.1% Kentucky bluegrass. This example demonstrates the importance of knowing about the effect that seed numbers have on establishing various turfgrass species. T

Table 1: The percent by weight compared to the percent by number of a typical Northeast lawn seed mix containing Kentucky bluegrass, perennial ryegrass and fine fescue.

Typical Northeast Lawn Mixture: LOT NO. PSU-1-100

30

Seed Variety

Pure Seed % by wt

Germination

Pure Live Seed and % of mix

Number of seeds per pound

Percent of each species by number of pure live seed

Perennial Ryegrass

60%

90%

54% (54/87) = .621

.621 x 237,000 = 147,177

147,177/438,927 = 0.335 Or 33.5%

Fine Fescue

30%

85 %

25.5% (25.5/87) = .293

.293 x 350,000 = 102,550

102,550/438,927 = 0.234 Or 23.4%

Kentucky Bluegrass

10%

75%

7.5% (7.5/87) = .086

.086 x 2,200,000 = 189,200

189,200/438,927 = 0.431 Or 43.1%

Total

—

—

87

438,927

100%

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

The Turfgrass Team at the Univers ity of Tennessee Scott Boyle Communications Coordinator The University of Tennessee 2431 Center Drive 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-6730 sboyle1@utk.edu

Frank Hale, Ph.D. Professor, Entomology and Plant Pathology The University of Tennessee 5201 Marchant Drive Nashville, TN 37211-5201 (615) 832-6802 fahale@utk.edu

Tom Samples, Ph.D. Professor, Turfgrass Extension The University of Tennessee 2431 Joe Johnson Drive 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-2595 tsamples@utk.edu

Greg Breeden Extension Specialist The University of Tennessee 2431 Center Drive 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-7208 gbreeden@utk.edu

Brandon Horvath, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Turfgrass Science The University of Tennessee 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

2431 Joe Johnson Drive Knoxville, TN 37996 (865) 974-2975 bhorvath@utk.edu

John Sorochan, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Turfgrass Science The University of Tennessee 2431 Joe Johnson Drive 363 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-7324 sorochan@utk.edu

Johnny Parham Research Technician The University of Tennessee 2431 Joe Johnson Drive 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996 (865) 974-7324 jparham2@utk.edu

John Stier, Ph.D., M.S. Assistant Dean The University of Tennessee 2621 Morgan Circle 126 Morgan Hall Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-7493 jstier1@utk.edu

James Brosnan, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Turfgrass Weed Science The University of Tennessee 2431 Joe Johnson Drive 252 Ellington Plant Sci. Bldg.

Knoxville, TN 37996-4561 (865) 974-8603 jbrosnan@utk.edu

32

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com

Adam Thoms Senior Research Leader The University of Tennessee 605 Airways Blvd.

Jackson, TN 38301 (731) 425-4705 Wes Totten, Ph.D. Associate Professor, Turf and Landscape Management The University of Tennessee at Martin 256 Brehm Hall Martin, TN 38238 (731) 881-7936 wtotten@utm.edu Alan Windham, Ph.D. Professor, Entomology and Plant Pathology The University of Tennessee 5201 Marchant Drive Nashville, TN 37211-5201 (615) 832-6802 awindham@utk.edu T

Digital Marketplace Scan the QR code: Download your favorite QR reader to your phone and scan the code to learn more about these companies.

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS ASSOCIATION • TENNESSEE VALLEY SPORTS TURF MANAGERS ASSOCIATION • Tennessee Golf Course Superintendents Association

33

Calend ar of Events November 8

MTGCSA Meeting Bluegrass Yacht & C.C. Hendersonville, TN

January 9–11, 2017

51th Annual TTA Conference & Tradeshow Embassy Suites Hotel Murfreesboro, TN

January 16–20

Green & Growin’ Show (NC Nursery & Landscape Assn.)

Sheraton Four Seasons Hotel

and Greensboro Coliseum Greensboro, NC

January 24–27, 2017 STMA Conference and Exhibition Orlando, FL

February 4–9, 2017

Golf Industry Show Orange Co. Convention Ctr. Orlando, FL

February 20–23

TPI International Education Conference & Field Day (Turfgrass Producers Intl.)

Saddlebrook Resort Tampa, Florida

In de x o f Advertisers Bayer....................................................................... 3 www.bayerprocentral.com

McCurdy Sod Farms.............................................. 33 www.mccurdysodfarms.com

Southern Athletic Fields....................................... 33 www.safdirt.com

Brouwer Kesmac................................................... 11 www.kesmac.com

Mid Tenn Turf, Inc.......................................... 10, 33 www.midtennturf.com

Southern State Turf.............................................. 33 www.ssturf.net

Buy Sod........................................ Inside Back Cover www.buysod.com

Mid-Atlantic STIHL, Inc......................................... 19 www.stihldealers.com

Sur-Line Turf, Inc..................................................... 7 www.surlineturf.com

BWI Companies...................................................... 9 www.bwicompanies.com

Modern Turf, Inc..................................................... 8 www.modernturf.com

The Turfgrass Group......................................... 5, 21 www.theturfgrassgroup.com

Carolina Green Corp.............................................. 33 www.cgcfields.com

RD Murphy, LLC.................................................... 27 www.rdmurphy.com

Tri-Turf Sod Farms................................................ 33 www.triturfsod.com

Champion Turf Farms............................................ 14 www.championturffarms.com

Regal Chemical..................................................... 31 www.regalchem.com

Turf Mountain Sod.................................................. 7 www.turfmountain.com

Coosa Valley Turf Farms....................................... 33 coosavalleyturffarms.com

Riverside Turf........................................................ 23 www.riversideturf.com

Turface Athletics................................................... 32 www.profileproducts.com

Covermaster, Inc..................................................... 9 www.covermaster.com

SiteOne Landscape Supply................................... 15 www.siteone.com

Turfgrass of Tennessee........................................ 27

Greenville Turf & Tractor, Inc............................... 12 www.greenvilleturf.com

Smith Seed Services............................................. 33 www.smithseed.com

Lebanon Turf........................................... Back Cover www.lebturf.com

Southeast Turf Maintenance................................ 27 southeastturf.com

Winstead Turf Farms...................Inside Front Cover www.winsteadturffarms.com

The Tennessee Turfgrass Association serves its members in the industry through education, promotion and representation. The statements and opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the association, its staff, or its board of directors, Tennessee Turfgrass Magazine, or its editors. Likewise, the appearance of advertisers, or Turfgrass Association members, does not constitute an endorsement of the products or services featured in this, past or subsequent issues of this quarterly publication. Copyright ©2016 by the Tennessee Turfgrass Association. Tennessee Turfgrass is published bi-monthly.

Subscriptions are complimentary to members of the Tennessee Turfgrass Association. Third-class postage is paid at Nashville, TN. Printed in the U.S.A. Reprints and Submissions: Tennessee Turfgrass allows reprinting of material. Permission requests should be directed to the Tennessee Turfgrass Association. We are not responsible for unsolicited freelance manuscripts and photographs. Contact the managing editor for contribution information. Advertising: For display and classified advertising rates and insertions, please contact Leading Edge Communications, LLC, 206 Bridge Street, Franklin, TN 37064, (615) 790-3718, Fax (615) 794-4524.

34

TENNESSEE TURFGRASS August/September 2016 Email TTA at: tnturfgrassassn@aol.com