Browsing by Author "Watkins, Eric"

Now showing 1 - 20 of 39
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2007 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2008) Watkins, Eric; Hollman, Andrew
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides, along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2008 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2009) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2009 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2010) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2010 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2011) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2011 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2012) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2012 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2013) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2013 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2014) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2014 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2015) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2015 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2016) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2016 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2017) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    2017 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results
    (2018) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric
    Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Alteration in spectral quality of natural sunlight by various photoselective gels during summer 2020 in St. Paul MN
    (2021-03-12) Petrella, Dominic; Watkins, Eric; dpetrell@umn.edu; Petrella, Dominic; University of Minnesota Turfgrass Science
    Data included here show how various color correction, color conversion, or color effect photoselective gels alter the spectral quality of natural sunlight. Data were collected from three brands 1)LEE filters, 2)Rosco Cinegel, 3) Rosco e-color+, and 4) Rosco CalColor and from 45 photoselective gel models. Photoselective gels are primarily used to alter lighting quality for film and stage production, but photoselective gels can also be used to alter the spectral quality of sunlight in order for plant science researchers to simulate the spectral quality underneath foliage. These data will help plant scientists choose photoselective gels to match the spectral quality of shaded areas, and will help improve the research of the impact of shade on plant growth and development.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Association between Inflorescence Morphology and Seed Shattering in Perennial Ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.)
    (2020) Barreto Ortiz, Joan; Watkins, Eric; Ehlke, Nancy
    The objective of this preliminary study was to develop and implement an imaging system to explore the association between seed shattering and spike architecture. We found a significant association between spike morphology and seed shattering.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Best Management Practices for Establishment of Salt-Tolerant Grasses on Roadsides
    (Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2017-07) Watkins, Eric; Trappe, Jon
    Roadsides are a unique growing environment for turfgrasses and can be a challenge to establish and maintain. The University of Minnesota turfgrass research program has been investigating low-input turfgrasses that are better adapted for roadsides and our previous research project identified a new mixture for use on Minnesota roadsides that was able to perform adequately under pressure form road salt (MNST-12). As this new mixture was used, it became apparent that more research was needed to better understand how to improve establishment and performance by adjusting typical roadside maintenance practices. In this project, we developed a series of experiments addressing three areas: (1) preestablishment soil amendments; (2) planting date; and (3) watering during establishment. We found that soil amendments had little effect on roadside turf performance. We found that seeding of low-input roadside mixtures such as MNST-12 should be performed in late summer, while sodding can be done throughout the growing season, assuming that soil moisture is properly maintained. Finally, based on our findings, we recommend that current MnDOT specifications for watering of new roadside turf installations should be changed, especially for mixtures with high proportions of fine fescue.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Can Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Inoculum Improve Conditions of Various Golf Greens?
    (2020) Sessoms, Florence; Schwab, Ryan; Watkins, Eric
    Objective: Determine if repeated inoculations of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi would result in improved turfgrass quality, NDVI, and soil moisture of four different types of golf greens. Conclusion: Additional research is needed on the use of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi inoculations for established golf greens in northern climates.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Determining optimal nitrogen fertility rates for reduced-input fine fescue putting greens
    (2018-11) Petrella, Dominic; Bauer, Sam; Horgan, Brian; Watkins, Eric
    The use of nitrogen fertilizers on golf courses is scrutinized worldwide. Identifying alternatives to creeping bentgrass Agrostis stolonifera L for putting greens may help decrease nitrogen use while maintaining turfgrass quality. Fine fescue turfgrasses are known for lower nitrogen requirements and reduced input management. Fine fescues are used for putting greens in northern Europe, Ireland, the UK, and other European countries, but have received limited attention in the U.S. Our objective was to determine the optimum annual nitrogen fertilizer rate for maintaining a reduced input fine fescue putting green in Minnesota.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Developing Online Education and Training for Installation and Management of Roadside Turfgrasses
    (2019-11) Moncada, Kristine; Trappe, Jon; Bauer, Sam; Watkins, Eric
    Roadside turfgrass establishments often fail due to poor establishment, leading to losses of money and time for departments of transportation in the northern U.S. One of the reasons for this failure is a lack of training given to installers. To address some of the concerns turf installers have regarding roadside turfgrass establishment, we worked with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to create an online training course for contractors and other stakeholders called Installation and Management of Roadside Turfgrasses. The goal of this course is to teach students the importance of species selection for roadsides, what the proper establishment procedures are for seed and sod, and how to implement fundamental cultural practices for maintaining turfgrasses on roadsides in the northern U.S.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Developing Salt-Tolerant Sod Mixtures for Use as Roadside Turf in Minnesota
    (Center for Transportation Studies University of Minnesota, 2014-12) Friell, Joshua; Watkins, Eric; Horgan, Brian
    Failure of roadside grass installations due to high levels of road salt is a common occurrence in Minnesota. Several species that are not currently included in the MnDOT recommendations for these sites have performed well in low-input turfgrass evaluations in Minnesota and warranted evaluation for salt tolerance and suitability for roadside environments. The goal of this project was to develop a recommended mixture or a set of mixtures that provide salt-tolerant sod for roadsides. In the first part of this research, cultivars of cool-season turfgrass were assessed for their ability to establish and survive on roadsides in Minnesota. Concurrently, these grasses were evaluated in a hydroponic system in the greenhouse for salinity tolerance. Together, these studies identified several species and cultivars that were promising for use on Minnesota roadsides. These top-performing grasses were then evaluated in a series of mixtures in three research trials: (1) a roadside evaluation at two locations in Minnesota; (2) a sod strength trial planted at two locations in Minnesota; and (3) an acute drought evaluation utilizing an automated rainout shelter. From these results, we identified species that should be components of a salt-tolerant turfgrass mixture for use on roadsides in Minnesota. Mixtures that included high proportions of fine fescues, especially hard fescue and slender creeping red fescue, performed the best in our trials indicating that these species should be utilized in MnDOT recommendations for turf grown on roadsides.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The effect of fine fescue species and seeding rate in no-mow areas
    (2018-11) Hollman, Andrew; Watkins, Eric; Heineck, Garett
    In northern states, fine fescues species are often used for low-input areas and are recommended for “No-Mow” situations. The correct seeding rate and species to use could vary depending on the users desired aesthetics, maintenance requirements, and site use. The objectives of this study were to evaluate five commonly-used fine fescue species for their suitability to be maintained with minimal mowing and to determine a seeding rate based on Pure Live Seeds (PLS) for a given area to maintain adequate quality without excessive biomass.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item