Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We compared the responses of 16 mm tall ‘Tifsport’, ‘Tifway 419’, ‘Tifgreen 328’, and ‘MidIron’ bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. × Cynodon transvaalensis Davy], and ‘SeaSpray’, ‘SeaDwarf’, and ‘Sea Isle 1’ seashore paspalum (Paspalum vaginatum Swartz) to variable rates of irrigation applied using a linear gradient irrigation system in the semiarid Southwest. Target irrigation levels were 100, 80, 60, and 40% (2009) and 100, 80, 70, 60, and 40% (2010) of standardized reference evapotranspiration (ETos). Actual water applied (including rainfall) was 100, 83, 66, and 49% of ETos in 2009 and 100, 83, 75, 66, and 49% in 2010. Canopy temperatures increased as much as 15°C, quality (rated on a scale of 1–9) decreased from values of 6 or greater in turf irrigated with 100% ETos to 1.25 to 4.35 in turf irrigated with 40% ETos in July and August 2010, while dry matter production declined between 1.3 and 15.8 g m−2 d−1. Water application rates required to maximize turfgrass quality ratings across all turfgrasses ranged from 75 to 83% of ETos. Lower application rates were required for acceptable quality turfgrass (with quality ratings ≥6.0) and ranged from 66 to 75% of ETos for bermudagrass, and 75 to 80% of ETos for seashore paspalum. Spring green‐up was delayed by deficit irrigation, approximately 2 wk with 80% ETos, 4 wk with 70% ETos, and 6 wk with 60% ETos. Bermudagrass, particularly MidIron, maintained higher quality ratings than seashore paspalum under accumulated water stress conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bañuelos et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: