Conservation & Ecology
requires a “plant passport” to permit its transport between countries. Even within countries, plants are required to leave production nurseries in a healthy condition to prevent the spread of pests and diseases. More stringent checks are applied to plants originating from outside the EU but, despite this, outbreaks of new diseases continue to appear and spread in Europe every year. This highlights the difficulty in maintaining good plant health in a world with increasing levels of trade and tourism.
Countries such as the USA, Australia and New Zealand regard protection of their environment and agriculture as the highest priority, thus they have identified tourists as a potential source of new plant health problems. In particular, Australian quarantine authorities impose very strict checks on visiting golfers, requiring sports equipment such as golf shoes and golf clubs to be “free of sand, soil and grass residues” before permitting entry into the country. This recognition of sand, soil and grass as potential sources of plant disease raises questions for the turf industry in Europe, where biosecurity on existing facilities and new constructions is rarely a major consideration. So, is there any evidence that we should be concerned about the accidental introduction of new pests and diseases into golf greens or sports fields? All quarantine authorities recognise plant material as the most likely source of unwanted pests and diseases, hence turf sod or sprigs would be regarded as high risk.
A classic example of accidental spread within the turf industry concerns the sting nematode, one of the most devastating turfgrass pests. This nematode is native to the warm sandy soils of southeastern and midwestern United States but, in 1992, it was discovered on several golf courses in California having, it is believed, been transported across the USA on infested plant material. Such is the threat to agricultural crops and other sports turf in California that stringent rules are now in place to prevent its further spread within the state. Producers of high grade turf sod will use a range of cultural practices and chemicals to ensure their product is of the highest possible health quality, but examples from the USA have shown that fungal pathogens can sometimes be present in a latent state within turf, eventually leading to disease problems many weeks after establishment. There have also been cases of turfgrass
in European sports fields and golf courses succumbing to severe lesion, cyst or root
“It is the responsibility of the whole industry to increase the awareness of
biosecurity issues and to help minimise the impact of new plant health problems as they appear”
knot nematode damage months after turf- laying. In these cases, analysis of existing and the recently re-turfed areas suggest that the new turf sod was indeed the source of the nematode outbreaks. Most recently, during 2013, samples of turf from Europe have been analysed and found to contain significant levels of plant parasitic nematodes. Rootzone and topdressing materials have also been shown to contain plant parasitic nematodes, albeit at much lower levels than those usually found in turf sod. The role of construction materials in the development of plant disease problems in new sand-based golf greens and sports fields has been an area of particular discussion within the industry. Studies at a number of sites across Europe have shown that immediately after seeding a creeping bentgrass turf, plant parasitic nematodes are rarely detected. However, within 8-16 months, intensive soil sampling often reveals that localised areas of the turf contain expanding populations of root knot nematodes, eventually leading to the typical shallow-rooted yellow patches, that are characteristic of this endoparasite. This pattern of infection suggests that very low numbers of nematodes (undetectable using normal sampling methods) were present in the construction rootzone. Significantly, observations on greens constructed using rootzone that had been stored for an extended period before use (allowing the already low nematode levels to drop to almost zero) usually show considerably reduced infection levels.
This observation provides one simple management approach to the reduction of nematodes in construction and maintenance materials. Other solutions being tested and considered include heat sterilisation and pre-treatment with biological extracts capable of suppressing pests and pathogens.
It is accepted that certain fungal diseases, such as dollar spot, can be spread on mowers and other turf maintenance
units, hence the importance of regular cleaning of machinery during routine operations.
The value of effective biosecurity has also been demonstrated by the recent appearance of an alien pest, the Pacific shoot gall nematode, Anguina pacificae. This nematode is native to a narrow coastal strip of Northern California where it causes severe damage to Poa annua golf greens, including those on elite courses in the Pebble Beach area. It came, therefore, as a surprise to find A. pacificae was causing turf decline in Poa annua greens on a golf course in Europe. The nematode has a number of unique characteristics, including its pathology in causing onion- like stem galls at the base of Poa annua plants. More significantly, A. pacificae can survive many months in a dessicated state inside dried plant material, which may be the key to its movement from a Pacific location, across the continental USA and Atlantic Ocean and into Europe. The use of “soft-spikes” on golf shoes has been encouraged as a means of minimising “wear and tear” on putting surfaces. However, this design tends to gather greater amounts of plant material than traditional metal spikes, and it is possible that Anguina-infected plant material could have been transferred accidently from the USA to Europe by golfers on the soles of their shoes. Significantly, perhaps, the European Anguina outbreak was initially detected on a turf nursery, which does not usually come into contact with golfers. However the infected turf nursery had been used as a demonstration and testing location for maintenance equipment, and
contaminated machinery originally used in the USA may be a more likely source of the A. pacificae.
Clearly then, the turf industry is not immune from the effects of new pests and diseases. Evidence from recent construction projects and the case of A. pacificae, demonstrates some of the vulnerabilities of the industry, with the movement of materials, the trade in used equipment and increasing numbers of golfers travelling overseas to play golf, all opening potential routes of entry for new pathogens. It is the responsibility of the whole industry to increase the awareness of biosecurity issues and to help minimise the impact of new plant health problems as they appear.
Article written and provided by Dr Colin Fleming (Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast), Dr Kate Entwistle (The Turf Disease Centre, Waverley Cottage, Sherfield Road, Bramley, Hampshire) and Thomas Fleming (School of Biological Sciences, Queen’s University Belfast)
Yellow patch symptoms caused by Meloidogyne minor in a creeping bentgrass green
Damage to a Poa annua golf green caused by Anguina pacificae
Swollen Anguina pacificae shoot galls in Poa annua
FEBRUARY/MARCH 2014 PC 89
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