Technical
“Any turf-limiting soil conditions should be noted during the site assessment. It may be necessary to implement a robust aeration programme to alleviate these problems”
and extremes in pH, can weaken the turf and result in increased disease injury or weed encroachment. A soil test should be taken on a quarterly basis so that fertility levels and pH can be determined on a regular basis and adjusted if necessary. Any turf-limiting soil conditions, such as compaction or poor drainage, should be noted during the site assessment. It may be necessary to implement a robust aeration programme to alleviate these problems.
The cultural programme should be designed to favour the most desirable turf species. Factors such as mowing practices, fertility management, irrigation practices, thatch management and aeration should all be considered. Using disease resistant species from the outset will make life a lot easier. If traffic across your surface is not managed properly, significant damage can occur and additional pesticide applications may be necessary. On any sportsturf facility, the intensity of use can be so great that the turf suffers from excessive wear and soil compaction. The result is a reduction in grass cover and an increase in weed invasion. This situation can be corrected by distributing traffic to other locations, and by limiting play when the turf is under heat and drought stress, or if the site is excessively
A robust aeration programme will reap dividends wet.
Carrying out a pest survey is an important part of formulating an IPM and involves determining the identity, location and populations of weeds, insects and diseases. It also involves identifying the environmental conditions and times of the year that certain pests are likely to occur or cause damage. The survey should be carried out over a period of several months or years, since certain pests occur only at specific times of the year, whilst others may only occur once every two or three years. Assessing pest populations can be difficult and time-consuming. It is, however, a very valuable information and can be used as a comparison to monitor success or otherwise.
One way to keep track of weed and disease populations is to record a rough estimate of the infested area. Although this is not a very accurate method, it can provide an indication of the pest population and may be useful in evaluating the effectiveness of control procedures.
The next step is to determine the pest response threshold level. Once the site and pest assessments have been completed, the pest response threshold levels should be established for each pest. This is really a decision to be taken
locally in your situation, and with your end users in mind, as what is acceptable in one situation may be different to another. Determining a threshold level involves discussion and agreement between the turf manager and the end user.
Factors to consider in attempting to establish threshold levels are the use of the site, the aesthetic value of the turf, and the potential of a pest to cause serious turf damage. As use will vary for each site, pest response thresholds will differ accordingly. For example, a limited amount of grub damage may be tolerated by some sportsturf managers as the damaged area can be repaired at a later date. However, where serious injury on a sports pitch is a possibility, then the threshold is different.
An important consideration in establishing a pest response threshold level is the potential of the pest in question to cause serious turfgrass damage. Fusarium or Anthracnose, for example, are capable of causing extensive turf damage in a very short time.
The monitoring techniques used in an IPM programme vary depending on the type of pest and the resources available. Frequent visual inspection of the site is the most common means of monitoring.
134 PC APRIL/MAY 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156