Evaluation of turf grasses for quality traits in different phases (season) under Hisar climatic conditions Evaluation of turf grasses in different season

Introduction

Grasses are monocotyledonous plants belonging to the family Graminae. Turf grasses are the low growing monocot plants that form a sort of contiguous ground cover maintained at a particular height by regular mowing (Turgeon, 1980) [1] . Turfgrasses consist of a remarkably diverse group of species which are selectively used on the basis of applications and/or climatic conditions (Janakiram et al., 2014) [2] . Turfgrass provides at least three major benefits to human activities: functional, recreational and ornamental (Beard 1973, Christians 2004, Wiecko 2006, Turgeon 2008, Bell 2011, Jankairam et al. 2015) [3] . Since, wide variability occurs among commercial turfgrasses, the choice of species and/or variety should be taken in high consideration in accordance with the intended use as low maintenance turf, high maintenance sports turf, home lawn or public places, etc. Despite, cultural practices are very critical for turf performance, varietal selection adaptable to the particular area plays an important role. Cynodon dactylon species are one of the most widely used warm season turfgrasses on lawns, roadsides, parks, school grounds, athletic fields, golf courses where dense turf is desired while Paspalum notatum grass is useful for lawns as well as roadsides and for slope stabilization as a low maintenance grass (Christians, 2004) [4] . Cynodon dactylon grass adapted to tropical and warm climate and has good density, texture and wears tolerance making it suitable for high quality turf (Romani 2004, Rodriguez-Fuentes, 2009) [5] . Cynodon dactylon grass also shows drought and heat tolerance and has the capacity to provide high quality turf with minimal cost and low water inputs (Macolino, 2012) [6] . Acceptable turf quality is defined as meeting the appearance expectations for a particular area and includes traits such as green colour, fine leaf texture, high tiller density, and overall aesthetic appeal (Hanks, 2005) [7] . For initiating a sound turf research and development program will begin with the identification of genetic resources in turf grasses and cultivars/varieties should be given prime importance. A strong research pro gramme focusing on evaluation of important turf grasses would be a significant start on meeting this national need. Lack of new germplasm availability and insufficient evaluation and characterization of existing collections are the serious constraints in solving the problems further associated with pests, extreme temperatures, water requirement and other plant stresses that limit the performance and persistence of turf grasses. For the development of lawn/turf in Indian conditions, the choice of grasses that are available is limited and therefore very often Bermuda grass and Zyosia grass were evaluated for various quality, functional and physiological traits with the aim of selecting promising varieties under Hisar conditions.

Materials and methods

The study was carried out at Experimental Orchard area, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar during the year 2021-2022. Geographically, Hisar is situated at an elevation of 215.2 meters above mean sea level with latitude of 29° 10' in the North and longitude of 75° 46' in the East in sub-tropical zone (Agro-Meteorological Observatory of CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar). The area is semi-arid with continental climate characterized by hot summers and cold winters. During summer, the mean maximum temperature is as high as 48 °C and minimum temperature can reach near 0 °C accompanied by frost in peak winter months of December and January is common feature of the climate of this region. There were eight varieties in this experiment (V 1: Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1, V 2: Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419, V 3: Cynodon dactylon var. Panam, V 4: Cynodon dactylon var. Palma, V 5: Cynodon dactylon var. Panama, V 6: Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto, V 7: Korean grass (Zoysia japonica) and V 8: Manila grass (Zoysia matrella) and four phases (P 1: December-January, P 2: February -March, P 3: April -May and P 4: June -July). The experiment was laid out in randomized block design, with three replications. These varieties and species were collected from Division of Floriculture and Landscaping, Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi. Grass stolons were dibbled on raised beds of 3 × 3 m 2 beds during the month of December, 2021. The dibbling method of planting was followed. Data were recorded at the end of each phase for various quality traits. The quality traits included turf quality Clipping yield (g), Thatch dry weight (g), Thatch accumulation (cm), Root dry weight (g), Root depth (cm), Total chlorophyll content (mg/g) The clippings yield (g) from two randomly collected spots from each plot were harvested from an area of 100 cm 2 just before mowing. The dry and dead biomass that remains between the soil and the green portion of the grass is called as thatch. The height of such dead portion was measured and expressed in centimetres and also the dead biomass was collected from 100 cm 2 area from each plot and ex-pressed in grams after drying in hot air oven. The root length was measured by taking out soil core samples up to a depth of 20 cm depth and kept in tray with water for overnight and roots were extracted by washing the soil and dried at 75 °C and the dry weight was recorded and expressed in grams. Total chlorophyll content (mg/g) in leaves was determined by DMSO (Dimethyl sulphoxide) method (Wellburn, 1994) [8] at the end of four different phases. The data recorded on various quality, functional and physiological traits were analysed using OPSTAT software.

Results and discussion

It is revealed from the data presented in Table 1 that the clipping yield of different turf grasses influenced significantly by varieties and phases. Varieties had significant effect on clipping yield and observed that the maximum clipping yield (323.46 g/m 2 ) in Cynodon dactylon var. Panama and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (235.62 g/m 2 ), Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (235.62 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Panam (209.02 g/m 2 ), while minimum clipping yield (27.67 g/m 2 ) was observed in Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) which was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (31.84 g/m 2

) and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (69.33 g/m 2

). These findings are supported by Wiecko (2006) [9] and Jankairam et al. (2015) [10] , who reported that warm-season turf grass biomass peaks rapidly when heat and humidity are non-limiting. Phases also had significant effect on clipping yield. Maximum clipping yield (240.36 g/m 2 ) was observed in phase June -July and it was followed by phase April -May (138.52 g/m 2

), whereas, minimum clipping yield (78.93 g/m 2 ) in phase Dec -Jan and it was followed by phase Feb -March (93.75 g/m 2

). The drastic surge in clipping yield during the monsoon/summer season (June-July) aligns with Turgeon (2008) [11] , who noted that elevated temperatures accelerate cell division and vertical shoot expansion. Interaction effect of varieties and phases was found significant in influencing the clipping yield of different turf grasses. Cynodon dactylon var. Panama observed the maximum clipping yield (560.10 g/m 2 ) in phase June -July and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Palma and Cynodon dactylon var. Panam in the same phase (400.63 g/m 2 , 382.45 g/m 2 ) respectively, whereas, Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) observed the minimum clipping yield (14.63 g/m 2 ) in phase Dec -Jan, which was on par with Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 in same phase (15.50 g/m 2 ), Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) in phase Feb -March (18.43 g/m 2 ), Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 in phase Feb -March (21.34 g/m 2 ) and Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) in phase April -May (23.09 g/m 2 ). Rest of interactions were significant to each other.

The data presented in table 2 revealed that thatch accumulation of different turf grasses varied significantly with varieties. The minimum thatch accumulation (0.338 cm) recorded in Cynodon dactylon var. Palma and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (0.377 cm) and Cynodon dactylon var. Panam (0.436 cm), whereas, maximum thatch accumulation (0.570 cm) recorded in Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (0.538 cm) and Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) (0.498 cm). These findings are supported by Turgeon (1980) [1] and Christians (2004) [4] , who noted that dense, vigorously growing warm-season turfgrasses under high-input regimes are inherently prone to thatch accumulation, requiring mechanical management such as verticutting or core aerification. Phases also had significant effect on thatch accumulation. The minimum thatch accumulation (0.426 cm) recorded after the second phase, while the maximum thatch accumulation (0.493 cm) recorded after the fourth phase. Aligning with observations by Bell (2011) [12] and Jankairam et al. (2015) [10] on organic layer dynamics in mature turf stands. Interaction between varieties and phases was found significant in influencing thatch accumulation. Cynodon dactylon var. Palma recorded the minimum thatch accumulation (0.307 cm) after second phase and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto after second phase (0.353 cm) and Cynodon dactylon var. Palma after fourth phase (0.370 cm), whereas, Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 recorded the maximum thatch accumulation (0.627 cm) after fourth phase and it was followed 43 by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (0.590 cm) and Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) (0.527 cm) in the same phase. Remaining interactions were significant to each other.

The data presented in table 3 showed that thatch dry weight of different turf grasses is significantly influenced by varieties and phases. The minimum thatch dry weight (0.418 g/m 2 ) was recorded in Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (0.522 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (0.675 g/m 2 ), whereas, the maximum thatch dry weight (1.602 g/m 2 ) was recorded in Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (1.117 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Panam (0.840 g/m 2

). These findings align with Turgeon (1980) [1] and Christians (2004) [4] , who noted that dense, high-yielding warm-season cultivars under active growth accumulate substantially higher thatch biomass compared to slow-growing species like Z. japonica. Among the phases, the minimum thatch dry weight (0.552 g/m 2 ) was recorded after second phase, whereas, the maximum thatch dry weight (1.102 g/m 2 ) was recorded after fourth phase. Consistent with observations by Bell (2011) [12] and Jankairam et al. (2015) [10] on organic layer dynamics in mature turf stands. Significant interaction effect was observed between varieties and phases. Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) recorded minimum thatch dry weight (0.277 g/m 2 ) after second phase and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Palma and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (0.350 g/m 2 , 0.450 g/m 2 ) respectively, in the same phase, while Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 recorded maximum thatch dry weight (2.143 g/m 2

) after fourth phase and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 and Cynodon dactylon var. Panam (1.450 g/m 2 , 1.140 g/m 2 ) respectively, in the same phase and rest of interactions were significant to each other.

The data presented in table 4 regarding root length had shown significant differences for different varieties and phases. The maximum root length (14.58 cm) was recorded in Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (14.22 cm), Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (13.77 cm) and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (13.52 cm), whereas, minimum root length (9.27 cm) was recorded in Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) followed by Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) (9.55 cm). These findings align with Rodriguez-Fuentes (2009) [13] and Macolino (2012) [6] , who noted that hybrid Bermuda grasses allocate substantial assimilate fractions to belowground organs to optimize moisture extraction from deeper soil profiles. Among the different phases, the maximum root length (16.20 cm) was recorded in phase April -May and it was followed by phase June -July (12.41 cm), whereas, the minimum root length (10.95 cm) was recorded in phase Dec -Jan and followed by phase Feb -March (11.16 cm). Consistent with observations by Hanks (2005) [7] and Taher et al. (2023) [14] regarding temperature-dependent root dynamics in warm-season turf grasses. Interaction between varieties and phases was observed significant in influencing root length of different turf grasses. However, Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 recorded the maximum root length (18.45 cm) in phase April -May and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (18.29 cm) in phase April -May, Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (18.12 cm) in same phase and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (17.57 cm) in the same phase, whereas, Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) recorded the minimum root length (8.18 cm) in phase Dec -Jan and it was followed by Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) in the phase Feb -March (8.27 cm) and Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) in the phase Dec -Jan (8.34 cm).

The perusal of data presented in table 5 regarding effects of varieties and phases on root dry weight of turf grasses was influenced significantly by both the factors. The maximum root dry weight (0.266g/m 2 ) was recorded in Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 and it was followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 (0.220 g/m 2 ), Cynodon dactylon var. Panam (0.184 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Bargusto (0.176 g/m 2 ), whereas, minimum root dry weight (0.122 g/m 2 ) was recorded in Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) followed by Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) (0.136 g/m 2 ), Cynodon dactylon var. Panama (0.151 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (0.151 g/m 2

). These findings are supported by Rodriguez-Fuentes (2009) [13] and Macolino (2012) [6] , who reported that hybrid bermudagrasses allocate substantial photoassimilates to root production during peak active growth stages. Among the phases, maximum root dry weight (0.227 g/m 2 ) was recorded in phase June -July and it was followed by phase April -May (0.200 g/m 2 ), whereas, minimum root dry weight (0.134 g/m 2 ) was recorded in phase Dec -Jan and it was followed by in phase Feb -March (0.148 g/m 2 ), consistent with observations by Hanks (2005) [7] and Taher et al. (2023) [14] . Interaction between varieties and phases was observed significant in affecting root dry weight of turf grasses. However, Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 recorded the maximum root dry weight (0.346 g/m 2 ) in phase June -July followed by Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 in phase April -May (0.314 g/m 2 ) and Cynodon dactylon var. Selection 1 in phase June -July (0.295 g/m 2

), whereas, Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) recorded the minimum root dry weight (0.080 g/m 2 ) in phase Dec -Jan followed by Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) in phase Feb -March (0.099 g/m 2

) and Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) in phase Dec -Jan (0.103 g/m 2

). [8] and Uddin et al. (2012) [15] , who noted that pigment retention during active growth phases supports higher photoassimilate production and leaf greenness. Among the different phases, maximum total chlorophyll content (3.49 mg/g) was observed in phase April -May and it is followed by phase June -July (3.14 mg/g), whereas, minimum total chlorophyll content (2.40 mg/g) was observed in phase Dec -Jan and it was closely followed by phase Feb -March (2.65 mg/g). This thermal sensitivity aligns with findings by Taher et al. (2023) [14] , who documented significant chlorophyll degradation in warm-season turf grasses subjected to winter cold stress. Interaction between varieties and phases was found significant in influencing total chlorophyll content of turf grasses. This thermal sensitivity aligns with findings by Taher et al. (2023) [14] , who documented significant chlorophyll degradation and semi-dormancy in warm-season turfgrasses subjected to winter cold stress. Among interaction of varieties and phases, Cynodon dactylon var. Tif 419 observed maximum total chlorophyll content (3.96 mg/g) in the phase April -May, which is statistically at par with Cynodon dactylon var. Palma (3.92 mg/g) in the same phase and Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) observed the minimum total chlorophyll content (2.03 mg/g) in phase Dec -Jan and it was followed by Korean grass (Zoysia matrella) (2.15 mg/g) in Feb -March phase and Manila grass (Zoysia japonica) (2.20 mg/g) in phase Dec -Jan. However, there were significant differences between rest of interactions between varieties and phases.

References

1. Turgeon AJ. Turfgrass Management. Reston, Virginia: Reston Publishing Company, Inc.; 1980.
2. Janakiram T, Namita. Evaluation and characterization of warmseason turfgrass species for urban landscaping. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2014;84(9):1085-1091.
3. Beard JB. Turfgrass: Science and Culture. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1973.
4. Christians NE. Fundamentals of Turfgrass Management (2nd ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2004.
5. Romani M. Adaptation and quality parameters of warm-season turfgrass species in Mediterranean environments. European Journal of Agronomy. 2004;21(4):441-450.
6. Macolino S. Growth, quality, and cold-tolerance responses of warm-season turfgrass cultivars under warm-temperate climatic conditions. Agronomy Journal. 2012;104(3):712-719.
7. Hanks DW. Physiological and morphological responses of warmseason turfgrasses under seasonal temperature fluctuations and cold stress regimes. HortScience. 2005;40(5):1432-1438.
8. Wellburn AR. The spectral determination of chlorophylls a and b, as well as total carotenoids, using various solvents with spectrophotometers of different resolution. Journal of Plant Physiology. 1994;144(3):307-313.
9. Wiecko G. Turf Management in the Tropics. Enfield, New Hampshire: Science Publishers; 2006.
10. Jankairam T, Namita, Singh KP. Turfgrass Management for Sports and Landscaping. New Delhi, India: Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI); 2015.
11. Turgeon AJ. Turfgrass Management (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2008.
12. Bell GE. Turfgrass Maintenance Reduction Handbook: Sports, Lawns, and Golf. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2011. 13. Rodriguez-Fuentes H. Morphological characterization and root dynamics of warm-season turfgrasses. International Turfgrass Society Research Journal. 2009;11(2):823-831.
13. Taher M, Ahmed S, Rahman M. Chlorophyll degradation, root death, and cold-stress physiological responses of warm-season turfgrasses during winter dormancy. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2023;205:105120.
14. Uddin MK, Juraimi AS, Ismail MR, Othman R, Rahim AA. Physiological and biochemical responses of warm-season turfgrasses under environmental stress conditions. Australian Journal of Crop Science. 2012;6(3):420-429.
15. How to cite this article: Savita, Beniwal B, Sheoran S, Kumar D. Evaluation of turf grasses for quality traits in different phases (season) under Hisar climatic conditions Evaluation of turf grasses in different season. International Journal of Horticulture and Food Science. 2026;8(10):09-14. doi: https://www.doi.org/1
16. 33545/26631067.2026.v8.i10a.868 International Journal of Horticulture and Food Science https://www.hortijournal.com 26631075, 2026, 8(10), Downloaded from https://www.doi.org/10.33545/26631067.2026.v8.i10a.868 by International Journal of Horticulture and Food Science on [02/10/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://www.hortijournal.com) for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License