Agronomy Journal Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 1 November 1982
Published in Agron J 74:933-936 (1982)
© 1982 American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by O'Neil, K. J.
Right arrow Articles by Carrow, R. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by O'Neil, K. J.
Right arrow Articles by Carrow, R. N.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by O'Neil, K. J.
Right arrow Articles by Carrow, R. N.

Kentucky Bluegrass Growth and Water Use Under Different Soil Compaction and Irrigation Regimes1

K. J. O'Neil and R. N. Carrow2

Soil compaction and efficient use of irrigation water are important concerns of turfgrass managers. This field study examined effects of soil compaction on growth and water utilization of a cool-season turfgrass species under different irrigation programs.

A 2-year-old stand of Poa pratensis L., ‘Baron,‘ on a fine, montmorillonitic mesic Aquic Arguidoll soil, was subjected to four treatments resulting from a factorial design with two levels of compaction (none and 30 passes per week with roller) and two levels of irrigation (set schedule of 3.8 cm water per week plus rainfall and 3.8 cm when tensiometer at 10 cm depth read –0.70 bar).

Soil compaction had no effect on root weight or distribution. Visual quality, shoot density, verdure, and percent total cover were reduced by compaction while total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC) were unaffected. In the surface 3 cm of soil, compaction increased bulk density and moisture retention but reduced aeration porosity at –0.1 bar from 18.1 to 12.5%. Irrigation treatment had no effect on any of the soil physical properties.

Without affecting turf quality, water use with tensiometer was reduced by 28 and 48% on noncompacted and compacted areas, respectively, compared to set-schedule irrigated plots. Water use over a 9-day period in August indicated that the turf grown under the tensiometer scheduled regime was physiologically or anatomically adapted to use less water even when it was available. This adaptation was not due to differences in vegetative or root growth in this study.

Compaction reduced water use by 20% over the 4 month study. During a 9-day period in August, compaction reduced water use by 3.5 to 11% for the tensiometer and set-scheduled treatments, respectively. This response appeared to be due primarily to altered moisture retention properties and reduced shoot growth. Thus, compacted and noncompacted sites should be irrigated on separate schedules.

Key Words: Turfgrass • Poa pratensis L. • Root growth • Tensiometer


1 Kansas Agric. Exp. Stn. Journal Article No. 82-82-5. Research supported by the Central Plains Turfgrass Foundation.

2 Graduate research assistant and associate professor, Horticulture Dep., Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506.

Received for publication September 14, 1981.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1982 by the American Society of Agronomy.