2012 Turfgrass Pathology Field Research

Transcription

1 2012 Turfgrass Pathology Field Research Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology Texas A&M University October 9, Turfgrass Pathology Report 1

2 I am very excited about sharing the results of the Turfgrass Pathology Field Research performed in Texas over the past year with you. The field tests for 2012 included six field plot sites established at three golf courses in The Woodlands and Bryan, and Texas A&M University research farms located in College Station. More than 3,000 miles were driven during the past year to set up plots, apply treatments and evaluate diseases. Many County Extension Agents, Golf Course Superintendents, Landscape Mangers and Sod Farmers have been collaborated with our research efforts and provided invaluable supports to complete productive field study for the past year. I believe this report provides research-based and locally-tested information to Texas turfgrass industry. I am sincerely grateful for the tremendous industry support shown for the Texas A&M Turfgrass Pathology Program by BASF Corporation, Bayer Environmental Science, Cleary Chemical Corporation, Dow AgroSciences, Dupont Crop Protection, Quali-Pro, and Syngenta Professional Products. This field study is also sponsored by Turfgrass Producers of Texas (TPT) and Texas Turfgrass Research, Extension, and Education Endowment (TREEE). I also would like to acknowledge and give special thanks to the golf course superintendents, golf club owners, and sod producers for participating in our research projects and providing us field research sites. Your volunteer effort made this research possible. Some of the great people that provided tremendous help include Eric Bauer, Tim Huber and Kevin Bednarik of the Club at Carlton Woods; George Manuel of Royal Oaks Country Club; George Cincotta of Riverbend Country Club; Nick Johnson of the Woodlands Country Club, Palmer Course; Jesse Shulse and Zack Elies of Traditions Club. Without the support of turf industry members like you, the Turfgrass Pathology Research and Extension Program would not be a success. I look forward to your continued support and collaborative relationship. Sincerely, Young-Ki Jo Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology 120 Peterson Building, 2132 TAMU College Station, TX 778 Phone: ; ykjo@tamu.edu 2012 Turfgrass Pathology Report 2

3 Table of Contents # Title Page 1 Efficacy of nematicides for control of root knot nematode on bermudagrass in College Station in Efficacy of spring fungicide application for control of fairy ring on bermudagrass in the Woodlands in Efficacy of spring fungicide application for control of black spot on zoysiagrass in the Woodlands, TX in Efficacy of summer fungicide application for the Champion bermudagrass putting green in Bryan, TX in Evaluation of fungicide programs for control of root-associated diseases on ultra-dwarf bermudagrass during a growing season in College Station in 2012 Experiment 1 6 Evaluation of fungicide programs for control of root-associated diseases on ultra-dwarf bermudagrass during a growing season in College Station in 2012 Experiment Disclaimer The research results in this document are not intended to be management recommendations. Products, application procedures and other research methods used in this study may not be registered, legal for public use or beneficial for use in some situations. No endorsement of products is implied or intended. This publication was prepared and distributed by the Turfgrass Pathology Laboratory, Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology, Texas A&M University as a service to the turfgrass industry and management professionals in Texas Turfgrass Pathology Report 3

4 1. Efficacy of nematicides for control of root knot nematode on bermudagrass in College Station in 2012 Young-Ki Jo, J.L Starr, William Cromwell and Joopil Yang, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Charles Fontanier and Richard White, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate nematicides for management of nematode problems on the bermudagrass putting green. Materials and Methods Field efficacy was evaluated on bermudagrass cultivar TifEagle for control of nematode disease in The field trial was conducted on the putting green (5-inch capping sand) located at Texas A&M Turf Research Field, College Station, TX. This putting green had been determined to be highly infested with root knot nematodes before the field experiment began. Individual plots measured 4 4 feet and were arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The application of treatments began in mid-april and will continue until November. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 psi using a CO2-pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two TeeJet 8002 nozzles. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied at the equivalent of 2 gal dilute fungicide spray per 1000 ft2. The granular product (MCW-2) was applied with hands and brush in. After treatment, addition water (~1 inch) was sprayed until the turf was saturated. Composite soil and root samples will be collected monthly from each test plot using a standard 2.5 cm diameter soil probe. Ten individual cores will be collected from each plot and mixed to form a composite sample. Nematodes will be extracted from the samples using a modified Baermann funnel system, identified to genus, and counted using an inverted compound microscope. All data obtained were subjected to analysis of variance and means comparisons were performed using Fisher s Protected LSD (alpha = 0.05). Results and Discussion Turf quality of the untreated control was acceptable level (> 6) until July and then became below acceptable levels because of biotic and abiotic stresses during the summer season. No significant improvement on turf quality, nematode population, root growth among treatments was observed compared with the untreated control, although there was different turfgrass quality between treatments between April and June Turfgrass Pathology Report 4

5 Table 1. Efficacy of nematicide treatments on turf quality (1-9 scale; 6 = acceptable and 9 = best) of the bermudagrass putting green in College Station Tmt# Treatment name App rate App interval* 26-Apr 24-May 22-Jun 6- Jul 19- Jul 2- Aug 17- Aug 3- Sep 18- Sep 1 Nortica WP5 70 lbs/a Monthly 6.0 ab 6.5 ab 7.3 a Nano Ag Biweekly 6.5 a 6.8 a 7.3 a % surfactant (Duplex) 3 non-treated 6.3 ab 6.5 ab 6.3 abc control 4 Eximo 2 qts/a A 6.5 a 6.3 abc 6.8 ab Eximo 2 qts/a A 6.0 ab 5.5 bc 6.5 abc MCW lbs/a 6 MCW A 5.8 abc 5.3 c 6.3 abc lbs/a 7 MCW AB 5.0 c 5.3 c 5.5 c lbs/a 8 MCW AC 5.5 bc 5.5 bc 6.0 bc lbs/a 9 MCW lbs/a AD 5.5 bc 5.3 c 6.0 bc P-value NS NS NS NS NS NS Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = Not significant. *Application interval: A = Apply following aerification on April 25; B = Second application at 2 months after A; C = Second application at 4 months after A; and D = Second application at 6 months after A Turfgrass Pathology Report 5

6 Table 2. Efficacy of nematicide treatments on nematode population and root growth of the bermudagrass putting green in College Station App No. root-knot nematode (per 100 cc soil) No. galls (per 5 roots) Tmt# Treatment name App rate interval* 14-Jun 10-Jul 8-Aug 9-Sep 20-Aug 1 Nortica WP5 70 lbs/a Monthly Nano Ag Biweekly % surfactant (Duplex) 3 non-treated control Eximo 2 qts/a A Eximo 2 qts/a A MCW lbs/a 6 MCW lbs/a A MCW lbs/a AB MCW lbs/a AC MCW lbs/a AD P-value NS NS NS NS NS *Application interval: A = Apply following aerification on April 25; B = Second application at 2 months after A; C = Second application at 4 months after A; and D = Second application at 6 months after A. NS = Not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 6

7 2. Efficacy of spring fungicide application for control of fairy ring on bermudagrass in the Woodlands in 2012 Young-Ki Jo and William Cromwell, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate fungicides for management of fairy ring problems on the bermudagrass putting green. Materials and Methods The field trials were conducted at the Woodlands County Club, Palmer Course, Spring, TX. Field plots were established on the bermudagrass green of a driving range. Individual plots measured 4 by 5 feet. The field plots were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. In past year, this green was heavily infested with fairy ring. The green still showed residual symptoms although there was significant recovered from the previous year. A total of 4 different fungicide treatments along with a non-treated control were applied on April 9 and May 1. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 p.s.i using a CO 2 pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two Teejet 8002 VS nozzles. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied in the equivalent of 2 gallons of dilute fungicide spray per 1,000 ft 2. Turfgrass quality (1-9 scale: 6 = acceptable and 9 = best) of each plot were recorded during the field evaluation. Data obtained were subjected to an analysis of variance to determine significant differences between treatments using the SAS software program. The mean turf quality for each treatment is presented in the tables below. Results and Discussion No fungicide treatments showed significant reduction of disease severity or improvement of turfgrass quality compared with the untreated control. Improvement of turf quality and fairy ring symptom on Torque-treated plots was not different from that on untreated control in which turf quality and symptom were naturally improved as temperature increased and bermudagrass grew actively Turfgrass Pathology Report 7

8 Table 3. Efficacy of fungicide treatments tested on the bermudagrass green in the Woodlands. Treatment Name Rate (fl oz or oz/m) Turf quality Initial (9- April) 22- May % improve % disease Initial (9- April) 22- May % improv e Torque Torque ProStar WP Heritage TL Control P-value NS NS NS NS NS NS NS = Not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 8

9 3. Efficacy of spring fungicide application for control of black spot on zoysiagrass in the Woodlands, TX in 2012 Young-Ki Jo, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate fungicides for management of black spot disease caused by Cochliobolus species on zoysiagrass. Materials and Methods The field trials were conducted at the Club of Carlton Woods, Tom Fazio Championship Course, The Woodlands, TX. Field plots were established on zoysiagrass (cultivar Zeon) fairway (a chipping practice hole), maintained at 1/4-inch mowing height. Individual plots measured 3 by 6 feet. The field plots were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. A total of 17 treatments including 10 different fungicide treatments, 4 fertilizer treatments and 2 plant growth regulators along with an untreated controls were applied. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 p.s.i using a CO 2 pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two Teejet 8002 VS nozzles. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied in the equivalent of 2 gallons of dilute fungicide spray per 1,000 ft 2. Fungicide applications were performed on May 29. Percent diseased area and turfgrass quality of each plot were recorded weekly during the field evaluation. Turf quality (1-9 scale: 6 = acceptable and 9 = best) and number of black spot (2-inch diameter) were measured. Data obtained were subjected to an analysis of variance to determine significant differences between treatments using the SAS software program. The mean percent disease for each treatment is presented in the tables below. Results and Discussion Symptoms of black spot disease included distinctive black round spot on zoysiagrass fairways. As the disease progressed, individual spots were merged to bigger and irregular patches. Most fungicide treatments except Daconil and 3336 showed reduced disease severity and turfgrass quality improvement within 2 weeks after application. The disease pressure reduced and turf quality improved naturally in July. A single application of one of effective fungicides in May could hold down the disease throughout the summer. Fertilizers (except TurfRx penecal) were not effective on the disease and the plant growth regulator treatments even promoted the disease severity Turfgrass Pathology Report 9

10 Table 4. Black spot severity on the zoysiagrass fairway Rate Unit 19-Jun 3-Jul Tmt# Treatment name (fl oz or oz/m) # spot Quality # spot Quality 1 Ammonium sulfate cd 6 a 2 bc 6.75 abc 2 Ammonium sulfate bcd 5.75 ab 4 bc 5.75 c-f 3 Primo Maxx bcd 5.5 abc 3.25 bc 6 b-f 4 Primo Maxx a 4.75 c a 5.25 f TurfRx fairway bcd 5.5 abc 2.75 bc 6.25 a-e 5 (PKBCuFeMnZn) TurfRx penecal d 6 a 1.5 c 6.5 a-d 6 (surfactant Ca) 7 Armada WDG d 6.25 a 0 c 6.25 a-e 8 Disarm 480 SC d 6 a 1 c 6.5 a-d 9 Heritage TL d 6 a 0 c 6.75 abc 10 Eagle 20 EW d 6.25 a 0.5 c 7.25 a QP Enclave cd 6 a 2 bc 6.5 a-d 11 + Foursome 0.40 QP Enclave cd 5.75 ab 2 bc 6.5 a-d 12 + Foursome 0.40 QP Tebuconazole d 6 a 0 c 7 ab + QP IPRO 2 SE Foursome Daconil ULTREX bcd 5.5 abc 12 a 5 f 15 Iprodione PRO 2SE cd 6 a 1.25 c 5.75 c-f plus ab 5 bc 7.25 ab 5.5 def 17 Non-treated control bc 5.5 abc 2.5 bc 6 b-f Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = Not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 10

11 4. Efficacy of summer fungicide application for the Champion bermudagrass putting green in Bryan, TX in 2012 Young-Ki Jo, William Cromwell and Joopil Yang Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate fungicides for managing the bermudagrass putting green during the summer. Materials and Methods The field trial was conducted at Traditions Club, Bryan, TX. Field plots were established on the bermudagrass cultivar Champion putting green, maintained at inch mowing height. Individual plots measured 4 by 4 feet. The field plots were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. A total of 11 different fungicide treatments along with a non-treated control were applied. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 p.s.i using a CO 2 pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two Teejet 8002 VS nozzles on June 18. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied in the equivalent of 2 gallons of dilute fungicide spray per 1,000 ft 2. Turfgrass quality (1-9 scale: 6 = acceptable and 9 = best), percentage of phytotoxicity, turf color (1-9 scale) and turf density (1-9 scale) of each plot were recorded during the field evaluation. Data obtained were subjected to an analysis of variance to determine significant differences between treatments using the SAS software program. Results and Discussion No fungicide treatments showed significant improvement of turfgrass conditions compared with the non-treated control. The application of treatment 10 (Briskway + Primo Maxx + Appear) caused slight phytotoxicity on turf and reduced turf quality at three weeks after the treatments Turfgrass Pathology Report 11

12 Table 5. Turfgrass conditions of the bermudagrass putting green on July 7, 2012 Tmt# Treatment name Rate (fl oz or oz/m) Turf quality Phytotoxicity (%) Turf color Turf density 1 Control 8.25 ab 0 b Briskway a 0 b Briskway ab 1.25 b Banner Maxx ME 8.25 ab 0 b Briskway ab 0 b Primo Maxx 120 ME Briskway Primo Maxx 120 ME b 2.75 b Appear 4.1 SL Fisher's Protected LSD (P = 0.05) NS NS Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = Not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 12

13 5. Evaluation of fungicide programs for control of root-associated diseases on ultra-dwarf bermudagrass during a growing season in College Station in 2012 Experiment 1 Young-Ki Jo, William Cromwell, and Joopil Yang, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Charles Fontanier and Richard White, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate fungicide programs for turf quality and control of root-associated diseases on the ultra-dwarf bermudagrass putting green in a growing season. Materials and Methods The field trial was conducted at Turf Research Farm at Texas A&M University in College Station. Plots were established on ultradwarf TifEagle bermudagrass putting green, maintained at 1/8-inch mowing height. Individual plots measured 4 by 4 feet, and were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Nine different fungicide programs along with 2 non-treated controls were performed. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 p.s.i using a CO 2 pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two Teejet 8002 VS nozzles. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied in the equivalent of 2 gallons of dilute fungicide spray per 1,000 ft 2. The first application of the treatments was begun on April 10 and continued until the end of September. All treatments were applied repeatedly at a 14-day interval and total four times were applied. Turfgrass quality and density (1-9 scale: 6 = acceptable and 9 = best), and phytotoxicity (%) of each plot was recorded biweekly throughout experiment. Data obtained was subjected to an analysis of variance to determine significant differences between treatments using the SAS software program Turfgrass Pathology Report 13

14 Results and Discussion Turf quality naturally improved until July and decreased from August to early September when turfgrass was stressed from continued heat and drought during the summer. Turf quality and density decreased by phytotoxicity caused by DMI fungicides within 2 weeks after treatment. The treatments 2, 4, and 5 which did not contain DMI did not cause any adverse effect. The treatment 5 slightly improved the turf quality. However, DMI fungicides applied in the spring and early summer provided better turf quality and density in the fall after the summer passed. This effect is speculated that DMI fungicides might inhibit the plant growth and cause the positive effect on stress tolerance during hot and dry weather conditions; and these fungicides might effectively reduce the take-all root rot fungus (Gaeumannomyces spp.) which is widely distributed in this field area Turfgrass Pathology Report 14

15 Tmt# Treatment name Rate (fl oz or oz/m) 26- Apr Table 6. Turf quality the bermudagrass putting green after treatments 24-May 5-Jun 22-Jun 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17- Aug 3- Sep 18-Sep 1 Control ab 5.50 bc 6.50 b 7.50 ab 7.00 a 7.00 a d 2 Heritage 50WG b 5.25 bc 6.00 bc 6.00 bc 6.25 abc 6.25 ab d 3 Headway ab 5.25 bc 5.50 cd 4.75 cd 5.00 cd 4.75 cd ab 4 Briskway ab 5.75 bc 5.75 bcd 6.00 bc 5.75 a-d 6.25 ab cd 5 Heritage a 7.00 a 7.50 a 8.50 a 6.75 ab 7.00 a d 50WG Daconil Action Heritage a 5.75 bc 6.00 bc 5.50 c 5.25 cd 6.25 ab cd 50WG Secure Banner MAXX b 5.00 c 5.00 d 5.25 c 5.25 cd 5.25 bcd a 8 Bayleton b 5.25 bc 5.50 cd 6.00 bc 5.50 bcd 5.50 bc bc 9 Eagle ab 6.00 b 5.75 bcd 6.00 bc 6.25 abc 6.00 abc ab 10 Torque b 5.75 bc 5.00 d 3.50 d 3.50 d 4.00 d ab P-value NS < NS NS Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = not significant 2012 Turfgrass Pathology Report 15

16 Table 7. Phytotoxicity (% damage) of the bermudagrass putting green Tmt# Treatment name Rate (fl oz or oz/m) 22-Jun 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 1 Control 1.00 b 0.00 d 0.00 b 0.00 d Heritage 50WG b cd 1.25 b 6.25 cd Briskway ab ab a ab Quadris Top b cd 2.50 b 8.75 cd Heritage 50WG b 0.00 d 1.25 b 0.00 d Daconil Action Heritage 50WG b abc ab 5.00 cd Secure Banner MAXX a bc 7.50 b bcd Bayleton b bcd ab abc Eagle b cd 2.50 b 6.25 cd Torque a a a a P-value NS NS Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = not significant 2012 Turfgrass Pathology Report 16

17 Table 8. Turf density of the bermudagrass putting green Tmt# Treatment name Rate (fl oz or oz/m) 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 18-Sep 1 Control 9.00 a 9.00 a 7.75 ab de 2 Heritage 50WG ab 8.88 a 6.00 cd cde 3 Briskway b 8.38 a 4.50 de abc 4 Quadris Top ab 8.75 a 6.00 cd de Heritage 50WG a 9.00 a 8.50 a e 5 Daconil Action Heritage 50WG ab 8.63 a 6.75 bc de Secure Banner MAXX ab 8.50 a 5.75 cd a 8 Bayleton ab 8.63 a 5.75 cd bcd 9 Eagle ab 9.00 a 6.25 bc de 10 Torque c 7.38 b 3.50 e ab P-value NS NS < Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 17

18 6. Evaluation of fungicide programs for control of root-associated diseases on ultra-dwarf bermudagrass during a growing season in College Station in 2012 Experiment 2 Young-Ki Jo, William Cromwell, and Joopil Yang, Department of Plant Pathology & Microbiology, Texas A&M University Charles Fontanier and Richard White, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University Objective To evaluate fungicide programs for turf quality and control of root-associated diseases on the ultra-dwarf bermudagrass putting green in a growing season. Materials and Methods The field trial was conducted at Turf Research Farm at Texas A&M University in College Station. Plots were established on ultradwarf Champion bermudagrass putting green, maintained at 1/8-inch mowing height. Individual plots measured 4 by 4 feet, and were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Thirteen different fungicide programs along with 2 non-treated controls were performed. Individual treatments were applied at a pressure of 40 p.s.i using a CO 2 pressurized boom sprayer equipped with two Teejet 8002 VS nozzles. All fungicides were agitated by hand and applied in the equivalent of 2 gallons of dilute fungicide spray per 1,000 ft 2. The first application of the treatments was begun on May 11 and continued until the end of September. All treatments except treatment 13 were applied repeatedly at a 14-day interval and total six times were applied. The treatment 13 was applied at a 21-day interval and total four times were applied. Turfgrass quality, color and density (1-9 scale: 6 = acceptable and 9 = best), and phytotoxicity (%) of each plot was recorded biweekly throughout experiment. Data obtained was subjected to an analysis of variance to determine significant differences between treatments using the SAS software program Turfgrass Pathology Report 18

19 Results and Discussion Turf quality naturally improved until July and decreased from August to early September when turfgrass was stressed from heat and drought during the summer. Turf quality, color and density decreased by phytotoxicity caused by DMI fungicides within 2 weeks after treatment. The treatments 7 and 9 which did not contain DMI did not cause any adverse effect, and slightly improved turf quality, color and density. However, DMI fungicides applied in the spring and early summer provided better turf quality, color and density in the fall after the summer passed. This effect is speculated that DMI fungicides might inhibit the plant growth and cause the positive effect on stress tolerance during hot and dry weather conditions; and these fungicides might effectively reduce the take-all root rot fungus (Gaeumannomyces spp.) which is widely distributed in this field area Turfgrass Pathology Report 19

20 Table 9. Turf quality the bermudagrass putting green after treatments Rate (fl Tmt # Tmt Name oz or oz/m) 24- May 5- Jun 22-Jun 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 18-Sep 1 Control abc 7.00 ab 7.00 a 6.00 ab 6.50 a 6.50 a 6.75 a Briskway 2.71 SC bc 4.50 d 4.25 cd 3.75 efg 4.75 cd 5.75 ab 6.25 ab QP Enclave c 4.50 d 4.00 d 3.25 g 3.00 e 4.00 d 5.00 c 12 Foursome QP Enclave bc 5.25 cd 5.00 bcd 3.50 fg 4.00 de 4.50 cd 5.50 bc 13 Foursome QP Tebuconazole d 2.00 e 2.00 e 1.00 h 1.00 f 1.00 e 2.25 d QP IPRO 2 SE Foursome P-value NS NS < < < < < < < Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 20

21 Table 10. Phytotoxicity (% damage) of the bermudagrass putting green Tmt# Tmt Name Rate (fl oz or z/m) 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 18-Sep 1 Control 0.00 e 0.00 d 2.50 ef 1.25 d 1.25 c 0.00 d Briskway 2.71 SC b b cd 8.75 c 2.50 cd QP Enclave bc b b bc b bc 12 Foursome QP Enclave bcd bc bcd bc bc 7.50 bc 13 Foursome QP Tebuconazole a a a a a a QP IPRO 2 SE Foursome P-value < < < < < < Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference. NS = not significant Turfgrass Pathology Report 21

22 Table 11. Turf color of the bermudagrass putting green after treatments Rate (fl oz Tmt # Tmt Name or oz/m) 24- May 5- Jun 22-Jun 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 18-Sep 1 Control ab 7.50 a 8.50 a 5.75 abc 6.25 ab 7.00 ab 7.00 a Briskway 2.71 SC bcd 4.50 e 5.00 de 3.00 f 4.75 bc 6.00 a-e 6.50 ab QP Enclave d 4.50 e 3.75 e 3.75 ef 2.50 de 4.00 f 5.00 bc 12 Foursome QP Enclave cd 4.75 de 4.75 de 4.00 def 3.75 cd 5.25 def 6.00 abc 13 Foursome QP Tebuconazole e 2.00 f 1.00 f 1.50 g 1.00 e 1.25 g 2.50 d QP IPRO 2 SE Foursome P-value NS NS < < < < < < Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Turfgrass Pathology Report 22

23 Table 12. Turf density of the bermudagrass putting green after treatments Rate (fl oz or Tmt# Tmt Name oz/m) 22-Jun 6-Jul 19-Jul 2-Aug 17-Aug 3-Sep 18-Sep 1 Control 8.75 ab 8.75 a 8.75 a 7.00 a 8.50 a 7.50 a 7.00 a Briskway 2.71 SC bc 7.00 c 6.13 c-f 4.00 def 6.00 bc 5.75 a-d 6.50 a QP Enclave bc 7.38 bc 4.50 f 3.50 f 3.25 ef 3.50 de 4.25 c 12 Foursome QP Enclave c 7.50 bc 5.50 ef 3.75 ef 3.50 def 4.00 dc 5.50 abc 13 Foursome QP Tebuconazole d 2.00 d 1.00 g 1.75 g 1.50 f 1.25 e 1.50 d QP IPRO 2 SE Foursome P-value < < < < < < < Fisher's protected LSD (α = 0.05) Different letters within the same column indicate significant difference Turfgrass Pathology Report 23