609 Buffalograss

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Buffalograss, Buchloe dactyloides (Nutt) Engelm., is a perennial, low growing, drought tolerant species native to the Central and Southern Great Plains that spreads by profusely branching stolons and thrives under semi-arid conditions with heavy to moderate grazing.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
609 Buffalograss is distinguished from other commercially available cultivars in being a vegetatively propagated female plant with a darker green color than `Prairie` Buffalograss. 609 Buffalograss has better overall quality, appearance, density and uniformity than seeded varieties. It has a vigorous, low growing growth habit and is more competitive than all commercially available Buffalograsses, other than Prairie. 609 Buffalograss provides an attractive, wear tolerant turf which requires less water, fertilizer and mowing than other turfgrass species. These characteristics, along with on-site testing, having shown that 609 Buffalograss is well adapted to golf course roughs, home lawns, and institutional areas requiring a reduced management level.
A single plant of the genotype 609 Buffalograss was selected from a nursery of plants. The nursery of plants from which the selection was made was grown from a single female plant designated TAES 1321.1. This nursery was not maintained after 1984, in Texas and the germ plasm was transferred to Nebraska. The single female plant TAES 1321.1 had been selected from a field grown from seed. The seed was from an open pollinated hybridization nursery of: (1) a plant found in a native stand in 1980 in Austin, Tex. designated TAES 1321; and, (2) 149 other native ascessions.
This female genotype was found in a plot labeled 1321.1 which was originally collected in Austin, Tex. This selection was identified as NE 84-609 and evaluated at the John Seaton Anderson Turfgrass Research Facility near Mead, Nebraska. The female genotype was propagated vegetatively by stolons and pre-rooted plugs to provide planting stock for studying performance and making comparisons to "Texoka", a commercial standard; "Prairie", a new release from Texas A&M.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS
FIG. 1 is a photograph showing a field of NE 84-609 on the right and a field of Prairie Buffalograss on the left.
FIG. 2 is a photograph showing a field of NE 84-609 Buffalograss sod below and Prairie at the top.
FIG. 3 is a photograph showing a NE 84-609 breeder's field.
FIG. 4 is a photograph of NE 84-609 in Arizona.
FIG. 5 is a photograph of PCR DNA Fingerprint for Buffalograsses: NE 84-609--No. 5; Prairie--No. 7; and NE 84-378--No. 6, University of California--Davis, Dr. Lin Wu.
FIG. 6 is a photograph of a NE 84-609 plant.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANT
The excellent overall turfgrass quality, rate of establishment, good cold tolerance, high density and drought tolerance of Buffalograss along with other information allow this genotype to be distinguished from other Buffalograsses. Vegetative propagation of 609 Buffalograss from plugs or sod pieces permits maintenance of cultivar with no genetic variation.
Gentotype Buffalograss is a female plant from a dioecious species which has a yellow anther color. The growth characteristics of buffalograss can be used to distinguish one cultivar from others. 609 Buffalograss, Prairie, Texoka and the Nebraska experimentals are all female clones, but eventually male clones will be developed.
The internodes of 609 Buffalograss are similar to "Texoka" in width, but longer in length (Table 1). The length of internode one of 609 Buffalograss is longer than NE 84-315 and NE 84-378, but internode widths are all the same. The tiller leaf blade width is similar to "Texoka" and other experimentals, but the tiller leaf blade length is much smaller for all tillers measured (Tables 2 and 3). Measurements of the spikelet and length indicate that Buffalograss has a shorter spikelet than the standard "Texoka" (Table 4). At the UNL research facility, 609 Buffalograss produced more, lower growing inflorescences than Texoka or NE 84-315. 609 Buffalograss had inflorescences comparable to NE 85-378; however, its canopy is medium and NE 85-378 is open (Table 5).
609 Buffalograss has been evaluated at several locations throughout the United States. In most tests 609 Buffalograss was compared to "Texoka" a commercial standard; "Prairie" a new release from Texas A&M; and other experimentals which are being considered for release.
609 Buffalograss had an excellent rate of establishment (Tables 6 and 7). The Texas A&M-Dallas trial shows that 609 Buffalograss and "Prairie", both well adapted to the deep South, had better establishment than "Texoka" or other Nebraska selections. The Southern Illinois study indicated that 609 Buffalograss showed slower establishment than the better adapted northern selections, and was more sensitive to over applications of Princip.RTM. (Table 8). Stolen production and stolon length at Texas A&M-Dallas showed that 609 Buffalograss produced more stolons and larger stolons than "Texoka" or other Nebraska selections (Table 9). At Nebraska, 609 Buffalograss exhibited excellent establishment in all plantings, including increases of material for plant breeders' nurseries and experimental plot area. David Doguet, of Crenshaw & Doguet Turfgrass, Inc., reported that 609 Buffalograss showed slightly faster establishment than "Prairie" buffalograss under sod farm conditions.
The most definitive way to differentiate 609 from "Prairie" is a DNA fingerprint. Work conducted at the University of California-Davis has distinguished 609 Buffalograss from "Prairie" with at least two primers. Primer AO-1 provides a very clear separation of these two cultivars (FIG. 1).
Buffalograss is a warm season species and will green up later and go dormant earlier than cool season species such as Kentucky bluegrass. Although this characteristic may be a negative in the northern part of the United States, buffalograss may have a longer growing season than other warm season turfgrasses in the South. Spring green-up has been evaluated at both the University of Nebraska and at Texas A&M-Dallas. 609 Buffalograss had a spring green-up rate similar to Texoka in Nebraska and similar to Prairie in Texas (Tables 10 and 11). Although an earlier spring green-up and a later dormancy in the North would be advantageous, it is possible that cold hardiness would be lost. 609 Buffalograss may have slightly less cold hardiness than Texoka when grown in the North.
Turfgrass color is an important component of turfgrass quality. At Texas A&M-Dallas, 609 Buffalograss had color ratings superior to the commercial standards Texoka and Prairie. (Tables 12 and 13).
Turfgrass quality is a rating used to indicate the aesthetic value of a turf cultivar. This characteristic is very important in buffalograss because its turf characteristics have been overlooked in the past. 609 Buffalograss had outstanding turfgrass quality at each location in the South (Tables 14, 15, 16, and 17). In each location, 609 Buffalograss had quality comparable or superior to Prairie, Texoka and Nebraska experimentals. At the University of Nebraska, 609 Buffalograss had turfgrass quality ratings comparable to Texoka in the spring and higher ratings during the summer (Table 18). At the Crenshaw & Douget sod farm, Bastrop, Tex., 609 Buffalograss had an excellent, high quality sod.
Reduced water use and drought stress avoidance are important characteristics of drought resistance in buffalograss, contributing to its lower maintenance cost. 609 Buffalograss has been shown to have drought stress tolerance at University of Arizona (Table 19) and at the University of Nebraska (Table 22). Water use rates of 609 Buffalograss have been comparable to Texoka and Prairie in Nebraska (Table 23). The water use rates of all three cultivars are less than those of other turf species.
Density is an important component of turfgrass quality. In studies at the University of Arizona and at the University of Nebraska, 609 Buffalograss had turfgrass density ratings equal to or better than Texoka (Table 24). This density has permitted 609 Buffalograss sod to be harvested three months after planting at the Crenshaw & Douget sod farm.
The Variety
Origin: Cultivar of a single superior female plant selected from the progeny of a plant collected in Austin, Tex., and open-pollinated by a collection of native accessions from the Great Plains.
Classification:
Botanic.--Buchloe dactyloids (Nutt.) Engelm.
Chromosome number.--2n chromosomes=40.
Form: Monocot gramineae.
Growth habit: A perennial female plant, with a stoloniferous growth habit, which allows it to be vegetatively propagated. It is able to spread rapidly under non-competitive conditions when conditions are favorable for stolon production. It has a very fibrous root system which can have a depth of 100 to 150 cm. It will produce a dense, fine textured turf with excellent color throughout most of the growing season.
Establishment rate:
Plugs.--8 to 10 weeks with irrigation.
Sod.--1 to 2 weeks.
Sprigs.--Not recommended.
Adaptation: North/South from the Nebraska-South Dakota border to Central Mexico and East/West from Georgia to California.
Blade:
Shape.--Long, slender.
Length (mature).--Approximately 10-12 cm.
Width.--Approximately 1.0-1.1 mm.
Pubescence.--Minimal compared to other buffalograsses.
Mature plant height: 10 to 12 cm.
Above canopy stolon production: minimal compared to Prairie.
Internode length: 4-10 cm (internode 1).
Internode width: 0.9 mm.
Node pigmentation: green.
Stolon color.sup.1 :
Midsummer.--Typically green (143B).
Late fall.--Purple (65D) or green (142B).
Winter.--Brown (164C).
Leaf Color:
Midsummer.--Bluegreen (141C) to dark green (141A).
Winter.--Brown (164C).
Soil adaptation:
Heavy soils.--Silty clay loam preferred, slightly acid to alkaline pH.
Female inflorescence: Present, but not readily apparent.
Male inflorescence: Absent.
.sup.1 RHA Colour Chart Designations
COMPARATIVE DATA
The following tables provide data comparisons of selected characteristics between 609 Buffalograss, Prairie, Texoka and Nebraska experimentals.
TABLE 1______________________________________Internode Length and Width:University of Nebraska GreenhouseWinter 1988 Internode Length Internode Width (cm).sup.1 (mm).sup.1 Inter- Inter- Inter- Inter- node 1 node 2 node 1 node 2______________________________________609 Buffalograss 7.2 .+-. 3.0 2.0 .+-. 2.5 0.9 .+-. 0.1 0.9 .+-. 0.2Texoka 6.6 .+-. 1.7 6.2 .+-. 0.4 0.8 .+-. 0.1 0.9 .+-. 0.1NE 84-315 4.2 .+-. 0.7 4.3 .+-. 0.9 0.8 .+-. 0.1 0.8 .+-. 0.1NE 85-378 4.7 .+-. 0.9 4.4 .+-. 0.4 0.8 .+-. 0.1 0.8 .+-. 0.1______________________________________ .sup.1 Average of 10 measurements
TABLE 2______________________________________Leaf Tiller Length Characteristics:University of Nebraska GreenhouseWinter 1988 Leaf Tiller Length.sup.1 Right Tiller Left Tiller Tiller 1 Tiller 2 Tiller 1 Tiller 2______________________________________609 Buffalograss 3.5 .+-. 1.0 1.9 .+-. 0.9 2.8 .+-. 1.0 1.8 .+-. 0.5Texoka 4.8 .+-. 1.8 3.9 .+-. 1.5 5.6 .+-. 2.3 4.5 .+-. 1.6NE 84-315 4.0 .+-. 1.2 3.1 .+-. 1.2 3.7 .+-. 1.6 2.9 .+-. 1.2NE 85-378 5.1 .+-. 1.8 2.9 .+-. 1.3 4.5 .+-. 1.1 3.2 .+-. 1.7______________________________________ .sup.1 Average of 10 measurements
TABLE 3______________________________________Leaf Tiller Width Characteristics:University of Nebraska GreenhouseWinter 1988 Leaf Tiller Width (mm).sup.1 Right Tiller Left Tiller Tiller 1 Tiller 2 Tiller 1 Tiller 2______________________________________609 Buffalograss 1.2 .+-. 0.1 1.1 .+-. 0.5 -- --Texoka 1.2 .+-. 0.2 1.3 .+-. 0.4 1.2 .+-. 0.2 1.3 .+-. 0.4NE 84-315 1.2 .+-. 0.2 1.3 .+-. 0.3 1.2 .+-. 0.2 1.2 .+-. 0.3NE 85-378 1.2 .+-. 0.2 1.4 .+-. 0.1 1.1 .+-. 0.2 1.3 .+-. 0.1______________________________________ .sup.1 Average of 10 measurements
TABLE 4______________________________________Spikelet Length Characteristics:University of Nebraska John Seaton AndersonTurfgrass Research FacilitySummer 1991Spikelet Length (cm).sup.1______________________________________609 Buffalograss 3.5 .+-. 0.7Texoka 10.8 .+-. 2.0NE 84-315 3.9 .+-. 1.0NE 85-378 4.2 .+-. 1.1______________________________________ .sup.1 Average of 20 measurements
TABLE 5______________________________________Canopy Density and Inflorescence Characteristics:JSA Buffalograss Trial, 7/4/89(Established June 1987) Canopy InflorescenseExperimental Density.sup.1 Inflorescense Height (cm)______________________________________609 Buffalograss 2.2 a* 21.2 abc 2.8 cTexoka 2.2 a 10.5 b c 8.9 bNE 84-315 1.2 b 7.0 c 13.4 aNE 84-378 1.2 b 17.8 abc 2.4 c______________________________________ .sup.1 Canopy Density is rated 1 = open, 2 = average, 3 = closed *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100)
TABLE 6______________________________________Establishment Vigor:1990 Colorado State Buffalograss TrialFort Collins, Colorado.sup.1 (Est. 9/89)Establishment Vigor.sup.2 % 6/13 SpringExperimental May July Survival______________________________________609 Buffalograss .sup. 2.7.sup.1 3.3 92Prairie 1.7 1.7 33Texoka 3.0 3.7 100NE 84-315 2.3 3.0 100NE 85-378 3.0 4.0 100LSD (.05) 0.9 -- --______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. R. Cuany .sup.2 1 to 4 scale with 4 best establishment vigor LSD (.05)
TABLE 7______________________________________Percent Cover:Buffalograss Regional Trial, Dallas TX.sup.1(Est. 5/17/88)Experimental 6/23/88 7/26/88 3/25/89 4/8/89______________________________________609 Buffalograss 19.3 ab* 41.3 ab 87.7 a 88.3 aPrairie 21.0 a 56.7 a 96.7 a 100.0 aTexoka 12.3 bc 21.0 c 78.3 ab 85.0 abNE 84-315 7.3 c 18.0 c 60.0 b 70.0 bNE 85-378 7.3 c 19.3 c 80.0 a 86.7 ab______________________________________ *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100) .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. B. Ruemmele
TABLE 8______________________________________Establishment Percent Cover 1990:Southern Illinois Buffalograss TrialCarbondale, Illinois.sup.1 (Est. 5/34/90) Establishment Percent CoverExperimental 6/12 7/17 8/15.sup.2 9/17 10/18______________________________________609 Buffalograss 25.0 a* 53.3 d 5.0 b 33.3 b 55.0 bTexoka 20.7 a 83.3 abc 63.3 a 86.7 a 91.7 aNE 84-315 25.0 a 98.3 a 83.3 a 98.7 a 99.7 aNE 85-378 17.3 a 90.0 ab 78.3 a 96.0 a 96.7 a______________________________________ *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100) .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. K. Diesburg .sup.2 Herbicide Damage Occurred LSD (.05)
TABLE 9______________________________________Stolon Production and Length 1988:Buffalograss Regional Trial, Dallas, TX.sup.1(Est. 5/17/88) # Stolons Stolon Length cm.Experimental 49 days 49 days 57 days 70 days______________________________________609 Buffalograss 10.7 ab* 6.1 a 8.0 a 10.6 aPrairie 17.1 a 5.4 ab 7.5 ab 9.5 abTexoka 4.1 b 2.5 c 4.9 cde 6.5 dNE 84-315 8.1 b 2.6 c 3.5 e 5.1 dNE 84-378 4.0 b 2.2 c 4.4 de 6.1 d______________________________________ *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100) .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. B. Ruemmele
TABLE 10______________________________________Spring Greenup:JSA Buffalograss Trial, Mead, Nebraska 1989(Est. June 1987) Spring GreenupExperimental 4/25 5/4 5/11______________________________________609 Buffalograss 3.5 a* 6.6 a 7.0 aTexoka 3.5 a 7.0 a 7.6 aNE 84-315 1.8 b 4.8 b 5.5 bNE 85-378 1.8 b 4.4 b 5.5 b______________________________________ Spring greenup is rated 1-9, with 9 = most green *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100)
TABLE 11______________________________________Percent Spring Greenup:Buffalograss Regional Trial, Dallas, Texas.sup.1(Est. 5/17/88)Experi- Percent Spring Greenupmental 3/15/89 3/22/89 3/29/89 4/5/89 4/15/89______________________________________609 20.0 c* 40.0 a 83.3 b 96.3 ab 99.0BuffalograssPrairie 40.0 b 40.0 b 73.3 b 93.3 b 99.0Texoka 20.0 c 50.0 ab 95.0 a 97.7 a 99.0NE 84-315 8.0 c 43.3 b 98.3 a 99.0 a 99.0NE 85-378 18.0 c 50.0 ab 91.7 a 97.7 a 99.0______________________________________ *Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100) .sup.1 Data taken by B. Ruemmele
TABLE 12______________________________________Turfgrass Color 1989-90Buffalograss Regional TrialDallas, Texas (Est. 5/17/88) Turfgrass Color.sup.2 1989 1990 20 10 13 21 31 23 04 24Entry Jun Aug Sep Sep Oct Nov Jan Jan______________________________________609 6.7 7.0 7.0 7.3 7.3 7.0 2.3 1.0BuffalograssPrairie 5.0 3.7 4.3 3.3 4.3 5.0 2.3 1.0Texoka 6.7 4.3 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.7 1.0NE 84-315 7.3 8.7 1.7 2.7 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.0NE 85-378 6/7 7/7 1.3 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0C.V. 21.5 16.0 25.9 31.7 24.8 30.2 22.3 0.0______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. B. Ruemmele .sup.2 Turfgrass color is rated 1-9, with 1 = brown, 5 = med green, and 9 = dark green
TABLE 13______________________________________Turfgrass Color:1990 Season Buffalograss Clonal EvaluationJohn Seaton Anderson FacilityMead, Nebraska (Est. 1986) Turfgrass Color.sup.1Experimental 6/8 6/15 7/30 8/10 9/13 AVG______________________________________609 6.0 5.8 7.3 6.8 7.3 6.6BuffalograssTexoka 5.5 5.8 6.8 6.3 7.0 6.3NE 84-315 8.0 7.3 6.8 6.3 7.3 7.1NE 85-378 7.8 7.0 5.3 7.3 7.1 6.9MEANS 6.8 6.5 6.6 6.7 7.2 6.7LSD (0.05) 1.2 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.1 --______________________________________ .sup.1 Turfgrass color is rated 1-9, with 1 = brown, 5 = med green, and 9 = dark green.
TABLE 14______________________________________Turfgrass Quality:1990 University of Arizona Buffalograss Trial.sup.1(Est. 9/4/88)______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sup.2Experimental 5/9 5/29 6/13 6/24 7/29______________________________________609 5.3 a* 6.9 a 8.3 a 8.0 a 7.0 aBuffalograssPrairie 3.7 ab 6.8 a 8.0 a 8.0 a 7.0 aTexoka 5.0 a 4.3 b 5.3 b 5.3 b 3.7 bcNE 84-315 5.3 a 6.8 a 7.3 a 7.3 a 3.3 cNE 85-378 5.0 a 6.6 a 8.0 a 8.0 a 4.3 b______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sup.2Experimental 9.6 10/31 11/15 11/25 12/20______________________________________609 5.7 a 5.3 a 5.7 a 4.7 a 4.7 aBuffalograssPrairie 4.0 abc 4.0 b 5.3 a 4.3 a 3.0 bcTexoka 3.7 bcd 1.7 c 2.3 b 2.0 b 2.0 cdNE 84-315 2.0 d 2.0 c 1.7 bc 2.0 b 2.0 cdNE 85-378 2.7 cd 2.0 c 2.3 b 2.0 b 2.0 cd______________________________________ .sup.1 Turfgrass color is rated 1-9, with 1 = brown, 5 = med green, and 9 = dark green
TABLE 15______________________________________Turfgrass Quality:Buffalograss Regional Trial, Dallas Texas.sup.1(Est. 5/17/88)______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sub.2 08 06 27 20 10 13 21Entry Apr May May Jun Aug Sep Sep______________________________________609 6.3.sup.2 7.3 8.0 7.3 9.0 7.7 8.7BuffalograssPrairie 6.0 7.3 7.0 8.0 7.7 7.3 7.7Texoka 4.7 6.0 6.3 6.0 6.3 4.0 4.7NE 84-315 6.0 7.3 6.0 5.7 6.3 3.3 3.7NE 84-378 5.3 7.7 7.3 7.0 7.0 4.0 4.7MSD.sup.3 2.4 n.s..sup.4 1.6 1.5 1.8 0.9 1.0______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sub.2 12 31 23 04 24 25 DateEntry Oct Nov Jan Jan Feb Avg______________________________________609 9.0 8.7 7.0 6.0 5.7 7.6BuffalograssPrairie 8.3 8.3 7.0 6.0 5.7 7.2Texoka 4.0 4.7 4.3 4.0 3.7 4.9NE 84-315 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 4.5NE 84-378 5.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.3 5.4MSD.sup.3 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. B. Ruemmele .sup.2 Turf quality is rated 1-9, 9 = best .sup.3 MSD = Minimum significant Difference to separate classes within each column using the Waller Duncan K ratio T Test (K ratio = 100) .sup.4 n.s. indicates dates where no significant differences were determined among the means
TABLE 16______________________________________Turfgrass Quality Buffalograss Regional Trial.sup.1, 1990, Dallas, Texas(Est. 5/17/88)______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sup.2 May 9 May 29 June 24 July 29 Sep 24______________________________________609 5.3 a.sup.3 8.3 a 8.0 a 7.0 a 5.7 aBuffalograssPrairie 3.7 ab 8.0 a 8.0 a 7.0 a 4.0 abcTexoka 5.0 a 5.3 b 5.0 b 3.7 bc 3.7 bcdNE 84-315 5.3 a 7.3 a 5.7 b 3.3 c 2.0 dNE 85-378 5.0 a 8.0 a 5.3 b 4.3 b 2.7 cd______________________________________ Turfgrass Quality.sup.2 Oct 31 Nov 15 Nov 25 Dec 20 Dec 20______________________________________609 5.3 a 5.7 a 4.7 a 4.7 a 5.7 aBuffalograssPrairie 4.0 b 5.3 a 4.3 a 3.0 bc 5.0 abTexoka 1.7 c 2.3 b 2.0 b 2.0 cd 3.3 cNE 84-315 2.0 c 1.7 bc 2.0 b 2.0 cd 3.0 cNE 85-378 2.0 c 2.3 b 2.0 b 2.0 cd 3.0 c______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. B. Ruemmele .sup.2 Turfgrass quality is sum of color and density. For Dec 20 dates, first quality includes density for green tissue and second quality includes density of all tissue (ground coverage). Density 1-9, 9 = denses for green tissue only except second Dec 20 date which is density of all tissue regardless of color. .sup.3 Means within a column followed by the small letter are not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100)
TABLE 17______________________________________Turfgrass Quality 1990:University of Georgia, Tipton, GA.sup.1 Turfgrass Quality.sup.2Experimental 6/14 7/7 9/15 10/24______________________________________609 Buffalograss -- 2.0 6.0 6.0Prairie 3.0 2.0 6.5 6.5Texoka 2.0 4.5 5.5 4.5NE 84-315 -- 3.5 6.5 7.0NE 85-378 -- 3.5 6.5 6.0LSD (.05) .8 1.1 1.8 1.5______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. W. Hanna .sup.2 Turfgrass Quality: 1-9, 9 = best
TABLE 18______________________________________Turfgrass Quality:1990 Season Buffalograss Clonal EvaluationJohn Seaton Anderson Facility,Mead, Nebraska (Est. 1986) Turfgrass Quality.sup.1Experimental 6/8 6/15 7/30 8/10 9/13 AVG______________________________________609 Buffalograss 3.3 3.0 5.0 6.5 7.0 5.0Texoka 3.8 3.8 4.3 5.3 5.0 4.4NE 84-315 6.3 6.5 5.3 4.8 5.5 5.7NE 85-378 7.3 5.8 5.8 5.5 4.8 5.8LSD (0.05) 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.4 2.4 --______________________________________ .sup.1 Turfgrass Quality is rated 1-9, 9 = best
TABLE 19______________________________________Summer Stress:1990 University of Arizona Buffalograss Trial.sup.1(Est. 9/4/89) Summer Stress.sup.2 June 24-July 29, 1990Experimental Stress 1 Stress 2 Stress 3 Stress 4______________________________________609 Buffalograss 8.0 a.sup.3 8.0 a 7.0 a 6.7 aPrairie 8.0 a 8.0 a 7.3 a 6.3 aTexoka 6.3 b 6.7 b 5.3 b 5.0 bNE 84-315 6.3 b 5.7 c 4.0 c 3.0 cNE 85-378 6.3 b 4.7 d 3.7 c 2.3 c______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. C. Mancino .sup.2 Summer Stress is rated 9 to 1 with 9 = no stress and 1 dormant .sup.3 Means within a column followed by the small letter and not significantly different using the WallerDuncan multiple comparison procedures (K = 100)
TABLE 20______________________________________Comparative Dehydration Avoidance, as Accessedby Percent Fixing, of Buffalograss Observed During48 Days of Drought Stress During the Summer of 1989College Station, Texas.sup.1Dehydration Avoidance Dehydration AvoidanceExperimental Rating.sup.2______________________________________609 Buffalograss Very HighPrairie LowNE 84-315 Very HighNE 85-378 Very High______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. J. Beard .sup.2 Dehydration Avoidance Rating: Very High, High, Medium, Low
TABLE 21______________________________________Comparative Drought Resistanceevaluated as shoot recovery of buffalograssobserved 30 days following rewetting, after 48 daysof drought stress in 1989, College Station, Texas.sup.1Comparative Drought Resistance ComparativeExperimental Drought Resistance.sup.2______________________________________609 Buffalograss High.sup.2Prairie LowNE 84-315 HighNE 85-378 High______________________________________ .sup.1 Data taken by Dr. J. Beard .sup.2 Comparative Drought Resistance: High, Medium, Low
TABLE 22______________________________________Turfgrass Stress and Dormancy:1990 Late Season Buffalograss Clonal EvaluationJohn Seaton Anderson, Mead, Nebraska(Established 1986) Stress Stress Dormancy rating.sup.1 rating rating.sup.2Experimental 9/13 10/2 10/2______________________________________609 Buffalograss 2.5 3.8 2.7Texoka 3.5 5.5 3.8NE 84-315 4.8 8.3 7.8NE 85-378 6.0 8.0 7.5Means 4.2 6.4 5.5LSD (0.05) 1.7 1.3 2.0______________________________________ .sup.1 Stress is rated 1 to 9, 9 = plot desiccation, 5 = partial plot desiccation, 1 = no plot desiccation (desiccation rated as amount of leaf firing and palegreen to brown spots forming on turf canopy). .sup.2 Dormancy is rated 1 to 9, 9 = completely dormant turfgrass with no green color or signs of plant growth, 5 = partially dormant turfgrass, 1 nondormant turfgrass.
TABLE 23______________________________________Water Use Rates 1990John Seaton Anderson Buffalograss Research Trial Water Use Rates.sup.1Experimental 7/3-5 7/16-18 8/7-9 8/28-30______________________________________609 Buffalograss 401.6 342.4 265.6 330.2Prairie 454.5 359.1 269.0 323.8Texoka 434.2 375.3 281.3 337.5LSD (0.05) 56.1 43.1 17.3 92.8______________________________________ .sup.1 Water use rate is a three day total water use measured by grams water lost through evapotranspiration.
TABLE 24______________________________________Turfgrass Density:1990 Season Buffalograss Clonal EvaluationJohn Seaton Anderson, Mead, Nebraska(Established 1986) Turfgrass Density.sup.1Experimental 6/8 6/15 7/30 8/10 9/13 AVG______________________________________609 Buffalograss 2.5 3.8 4.3 6.3 6.8 4.7Texoka 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.8 4.8 3.884-315 5.8 7.3 5.8 5.3 4.8 5.885-378 6.8 6.0 5.8 6.5 6.0 6.2MEANS 6.8 6.5 6.6 6.7 7.2 6.7LSD (0.05) 1.3 1.9 1.2 1.2 1.7 --______________________________________ .sup.1 Turfgrass Density is rated 1-9, 9 = most dense

609 Buffalograss

Information

Patent Number

Date Filed

Date Issued

Inventors

Original Assignees

Examiners

Agents

US Classifications

Field of Search

US

International Classifications

Abstract

Description

Claims

US Referenced Citations (1)