, I I

TurfgrassMunicipal Integrated Pest Management Lawn Demonstration ProiectFINAL REPORT OF 3-YEAR STUDY SPONSORED BY THE ONTARIO PESTICIDEADVISORY COMMITTEE

Objectives1. To demonstrate the impact of con-

ventionallawn care, IPM, no-pesticide andalternative herbicides on turf quality andpest infestations.

2. To document the results of maintain-ing turf without pesticides for a three yearperiod.

Study DescriptionThis study began in 2003 and contin-

ued on the same plot areas in 2004 and2005. The study was established in threemunicipal settings: Guelph, Brantford andLondon. At Guelph, the plots were locatedat the Guelph Turfgrass Institute (GTI).There were 32 plots, 9x5.5 m each, with atotal demonstration area of 1584 m? (Fig-ure 1). There were four management pro-grams and they include: conventional,IPM, alternatives and no pesticides. Theconventional approach used pesticidesexclusively for pest control (total of 6 ap-plications). IPM plots were monitored forpests and treated with pesticides whenthresholds were exceeded. The alternativemanagement program used organic pesti-cides (corn gluten meal and Nature's Weedand Feed - beet juice extract in year 1 and2 and Juicy Lawn in year 3) for weed con-trol. Lastly, no pesticides were applied un-der the no-pesticide management program.

At Brantford, the plots were located atthe Glenhyrst Art Gallery, near the GrandRiver. There were three management pro-grams and they are as follows: conven-tional, IPM and no-pesticides. There were24 plots, 7x5 m each, with a total demon-stration area of 840 m". In London, theplots were located at Watson Park, nearthe Thames River. There were two man-agement programs, IPM and no-pesti-cides, and the study consisted of 16 plots,10x4.5 m each, with a total demonstra-tion area of 720 m-.

In all three municipal settings, the dem-onstration trials were set up on established,predominantly Kentucky bluegrass turfwith an existing moderate level of weedinfestation. The plots of each demonstra-

Figure 1. Plot plan at the Guelph Turfgrass Institute, Guelph.

Irrigated Irrigated4 em mowing height 8 em mowing height

Fertility No Fertility Fertility No Fertility

Conventional Conventional Conventional Conventional

IPM IPM IPM IPM

Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative

No Pesticides No Pesticides No Pesticides No Pesticides

Non-Irrigated Non-Irrigated4 cm mowing height 8 em mowing height

Fertility No Fertility Fertility No Fertility

Conventional Conventional Conventional Conventional

IPM IPM IPM IPM

Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative

No Pesticides No Pesticides No Pesticides No Pesticides

Figure 2. Influence of lawn care management on turf quality at GTI in 2003/2004 and 2005.

4

3

2

2003 2004 2005Year

tion trial were divided into four lawn caremanagement programs: conventional,IPM, alternative and no-pesticide. Withineach management program, the plots weresubdivided into three superimposed treat-

ments including fertility (2.0 kg/lOO m'of nitrogen annually vs. no fertilizer),mowing height (4 em vs. 8 em) and irri-gation vs. no irrigation. The purpose wasto demonstrate the effect that these treat-

wwwsporlslurfossociolion.com I SPRING 2006 17

Figure 3. Effect of irrigation on turf quality at GTI, 2005.8.2 "'r"""-----"."",..--~~~~~~------.-.~--=---~,..",

8

7.8

.~ 7.6CC'tt2 7.4

7.2

7

6.8irrigated

ments had on turf quality and pest levels.The amount of irrigation was based onrainfall values. If less than 2.5 em of rainfell per week, the plots received irrigationto make up the deficit. However, due tothe large amount of rainfall in 2003 and2004, almost no irrigation was necessaryand we were unable to demonstrate irri-

non-irrigated

gation versus non-irrigation effects. Forthose two years, the irrigation and non-irrigation plot data were combined. In2005, there were several weeks at eachlocation that did not receive 2.5 em of rainand irrigation was necessary. The trialstarted at all three locations at the begin-ning of June and continued until mid-No-

vember in all three years. Visual ratingsand mowing were carried out weeklywhile the application of fertilizers, themonitoring of pests, and the applicationof pest control were carried out accord-ing to each of the four management pro-grams and their superimposed treatments.The schedules of pest monitoring, treat-ments, pest monitoring techniques andamount of time spent monitoring is sum-marized in previous articles in the SportsTurf Manager (Summer 2004, Spring2005 and Winter 2005). Results at all threesites were very similar. Results from GTIare presented here in an effort to savespace. The full report will be available online this spring at www.gti.uoguelph.ca/OPAC. In addition, it must be noted thatthis trial was for demonstration purposesonly and was not set up to be analysedstatistically.

Results - Guelph Turfgrass InstituteTurf Quality

The turf quality was consistently high-est in the conventional plots, followedclosely by the IPM plots, alternative plotsand the lowest quality was consistently inthe no-pesticide plots (Figure 2). Over theduration of this study, the quality of all

~ »)~ANDERSOD CO. LIMITED

* No. 1Kentucky Bluegrass

* Five Varieties of Bentgrass

* Extreme Fescue

Suppliers ofTop Quality Turf Products

G _~el:.ATurf Reinforcement System

(877) 727-2100 (416) 364-5700www.zandersod.com

890 Fairground Rd. R.R. #4 Langton Onto NOE 160Phone (519) 875-4094 Fax (519) 875-4095

Website: mastersturfsupply.comemail: mastersturf@uniserve.com

18 SPRING 2006 I Sports Turf Manager

~I.L.-~~~ EQUIPMENT LTD.

ISO 9002 REGISTERED

Paul TurnerSales Representative

Cellular: (416) 566-0211

1184 PLAINS ROAD EAST, BURLINGTON, ON L7S 1W6Burlington (905) 637-5216 Toronto (905) 338-2404

1-800-883-0761 • Fax: (905) 637-2009· www.gcduke.com

1-877-856-7333. 905-856-7333· www.qualityseeds.ca

QualitySeeds.

District Sales ManagersPeter Coon • Cell: 705-715-3760

John Konecny' Cell: 905-376-7044

Figure 4. Influence of mowing height on broadleaf weed infestation at GTI, 2003,2004 and 200545,.."",..".,..,~

40

35

30

-s 25Cll

~o-e 20

15

10

5

02003 2004 2005

years

management types increased with eachsuccessive year. There was very little ef-fect of mowing height on turf quality over

the three years of the study. The lowermowing height resulted in a slightlydenser turf. There was a slightly larger

effect of fertility on turf quality. The ferti-lizer treatment had an effect on turf den-sity and colour which are two of the threeparameters which are averaged to comeup with turf quality. Uniformity is the thirdparameter that was measured and thesethree are averaged to determine an over-all turf quality rating.

In 2005, we were able to demonstratethe influence of irrigation on turf quality(Figure 3). The overall quality of the irri-gated plots was higher than the non-irri-gated plots. The non-irrigated plots werefully dormant during June and early July.

Broad/eaf WeedsTo determine the influence of mowing

height, fertility and the alternative herbi-cide products on broadleaf weed infesta-tion, only the no-pesticide and alternativeplots were considered because both theconventional and IPM plots receivedbroadleafherbicides to control the weeds.Mowing height had a small effect on thepercent broadleaf weed cover but it hadless of an effect than fertility (Figure 4 and

www.sportsturfassociation.comISPRING 2006 19

721 width • Floating clod breaking pulverizer roller& leveling bar • 6 section packer roller, reduces

skidding during turns & comes with a 5 YEAR WARRANTYAlso features the first in spring loaded wing brushes

OPTIONAL 50 gallon water tank & pumpThe BESTWARRANTY in the industry.

Comes in widths of 4811,7211 & 9611

With the largest seed box capacityThe 7211 will give you over 1700 perforations per

square yd • The base unit comes with front cone spikeor knifing tine roller and a solid rear packer roller

Seed is distributed through our ground drive mechanismOPTIONAL rear cone spike or knifing tine roller

Visit our website www.Reistlndustries.comto preview a video presentation of our equipment.

1-877 -467 -3478

20 SPRING 2006 I Sports Turf Manager

Figure 5. Influence of fertility on broadleaf weed infestationat GTI, 2003, 2004 and 2005.70

2004 20052003

Year

Figure 6. Effectof alternative herbicide treatments vs. fertil-ity alone on broadleaf weed infestation at GTI, 2003, 2004and 2005.40

35

30

25

""tlCll 20~~

15

10

5

0

2003 2004 2005

Year

5). There were slightly more broadleafweeds at the higher mow-ing height in 2003 and slightly fewer broadleaf weeds at thelower mowing height in 2004 and 2005. With the addition of 2.0kg of nitrogen per season in 2004 and 2005, we were able tokeep the broadleaf weed cover below the OMAFRA thresholdof I0-15 %. At this level of weed infestation, spot treatments alonecan be used.

A comparison was made of the alternative plots and the no-pesticide fertilized plots (Figure 6). The purpose of this com-parison was to separate the fertility effect of the alternativeherbicide treatments (corn gluten meal contains 8% nitrogen andthe beet juice extract products, Nature's Weed and Feed and JuicyLawn, contain 7% and 15% nitrogen respectively) from the her-bicidal effects. There was a slight reduction in percent broadleafweed cover consistently each year with the combination of corngluten meal and beet juice extract treatments. Because of thetrial design, we are unable to determine which of these two treat-

ments are responsible for the reduction inbroadleaf weed cover, but we do know thatapplication of both of these products to-gether does result in a reduction of weeds.This could be due to the suppression ofgermination of broadleaf weeds seedsfrom the corn gluten meal or some sup-pression of established broadleaf weedsfrom the beet juice extract or from thenitrogen contained in these products. It isalso suggested from this data that it maytake more than one year of application ofthese products to realize a reduction inbroadleaf weeds. After three years of ap-plication of the combined alternative prod-ucts, the result was an overall broadleafweed cover of less than 10%. It should benoted however, that the addition of ferti- .lizer alone also reduced weed cover to asimilar level.

At the beginning of the study at GTI,there was an average of 15-20% weedcover in all plots. Examining the no pes-ticide/no fertility plots, there was a rapidrise in the weed population to just under60% by November 2003. There was a pla-

teau at this level throughout the 2004 sea-son until September 2004 when weed coverdropped below 50% and rose again in latefall. Over the 2005 season, weed levelsdropped off throughout the season endingoff at 30%. It is possible that the dryweather in the spring and summer of 2005inhibited the germination of new weedseeds or that the drought had an adverseeffect on the perennial broadleaf weeds.

In 2005, the plots at GTI, Brantford andLondon were irrigated. The effect of theirrigation during the season on averageweed cover was the opposite of what wasexpected. The irrigated plots had a higherpercent broadleaf weed cover than thenon-irrigated plots. It is possible that theirrigation provided the necessary moisturefor weed seed germination during adroughty year.

Pesticide ReductionAt the GTI, conventional plots received

a total of six broadcast pesticide applica-tions, while the IPM plots received onlytwo treatments and many of these plots

were spot treatments only. The alternativeplots received a total of five broadcast treat-ments of organic herbicides. At Brantfordthere was an additional post emergencecrabgrass treatment on the IPM plots dueto the presence of crabgrass on some plots.This represents a reduction of 66.6% in thenumber of pesticide applications at GTIfor each year of the study and a reductionof 50% in the number of pesticide appli-cations at Brantford for each year of thestudy.

The total area that was treated with pes-ticides each year on the IPM plots vs. theconventional plots was also calculated forGTI and Brantford in Table 1. By year threeof the study there was a 99.35% reductionin the amount of area treated with pesti-cides for GTI and a 98.33% reduction inthe area treated at Brantford. A part of thisreduction was due to the fact that the con-ventional plots received two insecticidetreatments and a pre-emergence crabgrasstreatment and the IPM plots demonstratedthat those three treatments were not nec-essary. Secondly, by year three there was

TURFRESTORATIONLTD.

Turf Drainage Solutions • Aerification (All Types)Top Dressing • Overseeding • Automated LaserFine Grading of Tee Decks & Sports Fields • GolfCourse Renovations • Sports Field Construction& Reconstruction

~d o/foiClf,t diJ;tut.wto# 01Permallnet • SportGrass™

P.o. Box 240, 2785 County Road 27Bond Head, Ontario LOG 1BO

Tel: 905·778·1222 • Toll Free: 1·800·794·9664Mobile: 416·791·3677· Fax: 905·778·1333Email: gdol@dolturf.com

MEMBER: STA, OGSA & ORFA

The Sports TurfManager isn'tyour only memberresource. Whynot visit

STAOn-line ...at www.sportsturfassociation.comView a listing of all Sports TurfManager articles from 1987 to thepresent. Go to the "newsletter" linkand click on "cumulative index."

Contributions WelcomeContact Lee Huether at the STAoffice if you are interested incontributing to the Sports TurfManager. We appreciate feature-length articles, column ideas andnewsworthy items. Updates oninnovative research or equipmentare also welcomed. This is a greatway to both support your profes-sional association and enhanceyour resume!

www.sportsturfassociation.comISPRING 2006 21

Table 1. Total reduction of pesticide treated area of IPMvs. conventional plotsin Brantford and GTIin all years.

Location Treatment 2003 2004 2005GTI Conventional 2376 2376 2376

GTI IPM 350.955 165.924 15.444

GTI % Reduction (Conventional- 85.23% 93.01% 99.35%

IPM/Conventional x 100)

Brantford Conventional 1680 1680 1680

Brantford IPM 221.2 31.08 28

GTI % Reduction (Conventional- 86.80% 98.15% 98.33%

IPM/Conventional x 100)

only a need to spot treat for broadleafweeds and this also greatly reduced theamount of area treated with pesticide inthe IPM plots.

ConclusionsTurf quality was highest in conven-

tional followed by IPM, alternative andno-pesticide programs in all three years.Despite the 50-66.67% reduction in thenumber of pesticide use or the 98-99%reduction in the area of turf treated withpesticides in the IPM plots compared toconventional plots, the quality of the turfin IPM plots was only reduced slightly. Inaddition, quality of the turf at the two dif-ferent mowing heights was very similar.The 4 em height of cut was slightly denserthan the 8 em height of cut. The applica-tion of fertilizer improved turf colour anddensity resulting in higher quality ratingsand it also reduced broadleaf weed coverin the no-pesticide plots.

Turfgrass insects were not an issue in

all three municipalities in all three years.They were all present in numbers belowthe OMAFRA threshold for each pest.Crabgrass infestation was also not a prob-lem. It was only found at Brantford andLondon in numbers below the IPM thresh-old level (10-15%) with the exception ofone plot in 2003. In subsequent years, itwas below the threshold and only requiredspot treatment in a few plots. Again, thisstudy demonstrated very significant pes-ticide reductions without loss of turf qual-ity by implementing IPM.

As for broadleaf weed cover, a coupleof trends were observed. The no pesticide/no fertilizer plots at GTI had a rapid in-crease in broadleaf weeds in 2003, up to60%. This remained steady through 2004until the late fall. Weed cover rose againin the summer of 2005, but it did not goas high 2003. Finally, at the end of thesummer in 2005, the weed population de-clined to 30%. Both the no pesticide/fer-tilized plots and the alternative plots had

an increase in weeds in the summer of2003. The following seasons there was asteady decline in weeds to a final weedcount of 10% at the end of the study pe-riod. This trend was very similar in the nopesticide plots at Brantford and London.There was a noticeable interaction be-tween the different growing seasons andthe broadleaf weeds, with all weedpopulations decreasing in 2005. This wasconsistent at all three sites and demon-strates the effect of temperature and rain-fall on weed ecology. This trial clearlydemonstrated that broadleaf weed covercan be greatly reduced with regular appli-cations of fertilizer at a rate of 2.0 kg ofnitrogen/l Oom" per season. With this rateof fertilizer application, weeds were be-low the OMAFRA threshold of 10-15%and only spot treatment would be needed,eliminating the need for broadcast appli-cations of broadleaf herbicides. •

- Gema Cheong, Ontario Pesticide Advi-sory Committee (OPAC) Resource Technician(RT); Stacey Fearman, OPAC RT; Erica Gunn,Guelph Turfgrass Institute RT; and PamCharbonneau, OAfAFRA

www.rittenTOP DRESSER• SElF-PROPELLED• 250LB HOPPER CAPACITY• 3' TO 10' SPREAD WIDTH• 34" WIDE, ABLE TO FIT

THROUGH GATES

1-800-461-1041GRANULAR SPREADER• SElF-PROPELLED• JUMP ON AND GO!• 125LB HOPPER CAPACITY• OVER 100,000 SQ. FT. OF

PRODUCTION PER HOUR

22 SPRING 2006 I Sports Turf Manager