Skip to content Skip to footer

Provisioning

Provisioning

Construction of greenscape (landscaping)

The landscape construction sector lies at the hub of the $3.49 billion (2007-08) lifestyle horticulture industry in Queensland. The landscape industry consumes green life products produced by plant nurseries and turf farms, as well as irrigation and arboricultural services.

The living landscape and irrigation component of this service industry is worth $1.132 gross (2007-08) to the Queensland economy. The sector is largely made up of thousands of small businesses specialising in residential landscaping, commercial landscaping or a combination of both. Soft landscaping with plants accounts for around 43.4% of total turnover according to the peak body, Landscape Queensland.

Continue reading

Provisioning

Adaptation of warm-season turf grasses for tropical environments

Summary

Trials will determine how suitable different warm-season turf grass cultivars are for different tropical environments, along with their specific maintenance requirements.

This information is valuable for both turf producers and end users. Turf producers will gain confidence that well-adapted cultivars will produce good results for their customers in the chosen environment. Additionally, end users will be provided with a shortlist of the best adapted cultivars from which final choices can be made, based on their particular requirements.

Details

Full titleAdaptation of warm-season turf grasses for tropical environments
IDTU09001
StatusCurrent
DatesStart date: June 2010
End date: May 2013
Project leaderMatt Roche, +61 7 3824 9502
matt.roche@daff.qld.gov.au
Aims
  • To gain a comprehensive understanding of the demands and tolerances of turf grass cultivars grown in the tropics
  • To outline the most appropriate selections for turf grass sod production in these climates
  • The development of practices for the optimal cultivation of quality turf grass in these regions
  • To broaden the range of cultivars that are commercially available for end users
Benefits
  • Increased choice of turf grass at all levels of the tropical turf industry (producers, turf grass managers, landscapers, home owners etc.)
  • The potential for sod producers to develop new premium lines for their climatic area, leading to increased profitability
  • Improved efficiency in the growth and maintenance of turf grass, by the development of management practices which yield quality turf through cost-effective applications of irrigation, fertiliser etc.
Project staff
  • Matt Roche, Acting Senior Research Scientist
  • Jon Penberthy, Experimentalist
  • Lin O’Brien, Scientific Assistant
Funding
  • Horticulture Australia Limited
  • Darwin City Council
  • Mackay Regional Council

 

Collaborating agencies
  • Darwin City Council
  • Mackay Regional Council

 

Research locations
  • Mackay
  • Darwin

 

Contact detailsMatt Roche
Phone: +61 7 3824 9502
Email: matt.roche@daff.qld.gov.au

Continue reading

Provisioning

Indian bluegrass

Scientific nameBothriochloa pertusa
CharacteristicsIndian bluegrass or Indian couch grass grows best in a warm climate and has become naturalised in central and drier areas of northern Queensland. It is a very drought hardy plant growing within an annual rainfall range of 500-900 mm. It is suited to well-drained loam and clay soils, but will also grow better than most other grasses on difficult to manage, forest soils.

Continue reading

Provisioning

Commercial turf production – capital items

The following equipment is likely to be required for small- to medium-scale production of warm-season turf grasses. The capital items required will vary with the systems and extent of operations adopted by individual enterprises.

General

  • Tractor
  • Chemical store
  • Irrigation system, e.g. centre-pivot or travelling irrigator
  • Irrigation infrastructure (supply lines, pumps and fittings)
  • Machinery shed
  • Fencing
  • Office with a telephone, facsimile, computer and/or printer
  • Staff toilets and lunch room

Specialised machinery

  • Mowing equipment
  • Turf cutter
  • Heavy goods vehicle and forklift for bulk delivery and unloading at the customer’s site
  • Compost spreader
  • Spray equipment (separate tanks for herbicide)
  • Fertiliser spreader
  • Cultivation equipment for land preparation and levelling
  • Roller
  • Pallet system

References

These are only a small selection of the publications available.

Aldous, DE, Haydu, JJ and Satterthwaite, LN 2007, ‘Economic analysis of the Australian turfgrass industry’, Project TU06004, Horticulture Australia Limited.

Department of Employment, Economic Developmment and Innovation 2009, Prospects for Queensland’s Primary Industries 2009-2010, Queensland Government, Brisbane.

Beard, JB 1973, ‘Turfgrass: Science and culture’, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Handreck, KA and Black, ND 2002, ‘Growing media for ornamental plants and turf’, University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.

Spencer, J 2002, ‘The definitive guide to Australian turfgrass pesticide management’, Glenvale Publications, Melbourne.

Turgeon, AJ 2008, ‘Turfgrass management’, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Other organisations

 

Continue reading

Provisioning

Commercial turf production – variable expenses

Consult an accountant or another professional who can assist you in developing a strong financial model for your business before commencing production.

The following lists show some of the variable expenses involved in producing warm-season turf grass for sale as sod. Factors such as the species/cultivar choice and time of planting will influence production practices and therefore the costs involved.

The lists exclude marketing costs, which are normally undertaken by individual enterprises. Add-on services can include turf installation and maintenance.

Land preparation

  • herbicide pre-treatments (multiple)
  • fumigation
  • rotary hoeing – fuel/oil
  • disc harrowing – fuel/oil
  • levelling
  • fertilisers
  • labour

Planting

  • foundation sod
  • equipment – fuel/oil
  • labour

Fertilising

  • fertilisers
  • organic amendment, e.g. poultry litter, vermicastings
  • labour

Weed control

  • herbicides
  • mowing – fuel/oil
  • mower blades
  • labour

Pest and disease control

  • insecticides
  • fungicides
  • miticides
  • labour – spraying and monitoring

Irrigation

  • water charges
  • electricity – pumping
  • irrigation and pump repairs and maintenance
  • labour

Rolling (optional)

  • equipment – fuel/oil
  • labour

Harvesting

  • turf cutter – fuel/oil
  • turf cutter blades
  • labour – cutting and stacking
  • transport – fuel, oil, labour
  • pallet collection – labour

Other

  • royalty payments per metre cut (licensed cultivars)
  • industry levy (per metre cut)

References

These are only a small selection of the publications available.

Aldous, DE, Haydu, JJ and Satterthwaite, LN 2007, ‘Economic analysis of the Australian turfgrass industry’, Project TU06004, Horticulture Australia Limited.

Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation 2009, Prospects for Queensland’s Primary Industries 2009-2010, Queensland Government, Brisbane.

Beard, JB 1973, ‘Turfgrass: Science and culture’, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Handreck, KA and Black, ND 2002, ‘Growing media for ornamental plants and turf’, University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.

Spencer, J 2002, ‘The definitive guide to Australian turfgrass pesticide management’, Glenvale Publications, Melbourne.

Turgeon, AJ 2008, ‘Turfgrass management’, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Other organisations

Continue reading

Provisioning

Turf contract research

The department conducts contract turf grass research. We have successfully partnered with a range of stakeholders to deliver fee-for-service outcomes in accordance with its program objectives. Projects are able to be negotiated if they align with government priorities and are in the areas of:

  • genetic improvement
  • efficient production systems
  • market access
  • pest and disease management
  • technology transfer
  • knowledge export.

Project partners have included Aquatrols, Turfgrass Producers International and Huidon Green Pty Ltd. A diverse range of projects have been undertaken from product assessments through to the development of management protocols. The project results are the property of the project partner. These may be publicly released at the request of the partner.

Continue reading

Provisioning

Gardening with greywater – water quality

Gardening with greywater – water quality

Greywater is domestic wastewater from baths, showers, basins, laundries and kitchens. It does not include water from toilets.

It is important to be aware of the substances going into your greywater, as these may affect plants in your garden.

Note: Greywater generated from kitchens, swimming pools and spa pools should not be reused for irrigation.

On this page:

  • Using greywater in the garden
  • Storing and distributing greywater
  • Detergents and other substances in greywater
  • How greywater affects plants
  • Greywater dos and don´ts

Using greywater in the garden

Greywater is an excellent additional water supply for your garden. For example, you can collect water from the shower in buckets and then use it to irrigate your lawn and plants.

A typical Australian house generates an average of 100 litres per person per day of greywater, which is enough to supply 1 mm of irrigation over 100 m2 of lawn.

Reusing greywater can reduce your household´s total water usage, which is particularly important in times of drought and water restrictions.

Storing and distributing greywater

You can control where your greywater comes from and where it goes. You also control what goes into it and how and when it is used for irrigation.

In Queensland, you may collect greywater and apply it to the garden using:

  • buckets
  • a flexible hose connected to a washing machine outlet
  • a council-approved greywater diversion device or treatment plant installed by a licensed plumber.

Greywater cannot be stored on-site for more than 24 hours unless it has undergone treatment in an approved system. Always check with your local council before purchasing and installing diversion devices or treatment plants to make sure that your area is zoned as suitable and that you have the correct permits in place.

Detergents and other substances in greywater

Detergents

Greywater from laundries can contain very high levels of salts, particularly in the wash water as distinct from the rinse water. Applying greywater without dilution may cause damage to some plants and to the soil itself (particularly clay soil).

Not all detergents are suitable for greywater systems. You can obtain information about the chemical composition of a detergent from either the product label or the Lanfax Laboratories website (see ‘Further information’ below).

Substances to avoid

These substances should not be allowed to enter your greywater system:

  • bleach and caustic cleaners
  • detergents that advertise whitening, softening or enzymatic powers
  • detergents that contain borax, chlorine, bleach or petroleum-based products
  • garden chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides
  • automotive products such as oils, greases and brake fluid
  • paints and thinners
  • kitchen products such as oils and food particles
  • faecal matter, such as from nappies.

For health reasons, greywater is not recommended where there is a risk that its microbial components may be ingested. Do not allow greywater to contact the edible portion of plants (e.g. fruits and vegetables).

How greywater affects plants

Nutrients

Some of the components found in greywater (water, salts and nutrients) have no adverse effects on plants, and in many cases they can be beneficial to plant growth. Nitrogen is a key nutrient for plant growth that is commonly found in greywater.

In some cases, however, greywater contains chemicals in high enough concentrations to be damaging to plants. Certain plants, such as South African proteas and some Australian native species, are sensitive to even low levels of phosphorus. For these plants, choose detergents with either no or low levels of phosphorus.

Consult your local nursery to determine which plants may be damaged by nutrients and salts found in greywater.

Plant stress

Look out for signs of plant stress such as wilting, leaf rolling and leaf death. Plants under stress are susceptible to greater damage from other stresses such as high or low temperatures and wear. If you observe any of these stress symptoms, use only the highest quality greywater.

Note: Greywater may not always be the cause of plant stress. Sometimes the same symptoms are caused by other factors (e.g. root rot). Even the best quality greywater or rainwater will not stop the symptoms from progressing if this is the case.

Reducing the risk of damage

You can reduce the risk of salt damage to plants by:

  • not applying greywater directly to the leaves
  • choosing low-salt detergents
  • using the correct amount of detergent for the task
  • discarding greywater from the wash cycle of the washing machine and using only the rinse cycle water
  • mixing laundry greywater with bathroom greywater, if possible
  • regularly changing the location where the greywater is applied.

Excessive salts are difficult to remove from soils high in clay and can cause permanent damage to soil structure, causing water to pool on the soil surface. Do not apply greywater if this appears to be occurring. If salts accumulate they can sometimes be flushed from the soil with rainwater. Gypsum can help to remove sodium from soils that have had salty greywater applied.

Greywater do and don’ts

Do:

 

  • check with your local council before purchasing and installing diversion devices or treatment systems to check zones and permits
  • have a licensed plumber install your greywater diversion device or treatment system
  • use laundry liquids rather than powders to reduce the salt content of laundry greywater
  • use laundry detergents with little or no phosphorus or boron
  • use only as much detergent or cleaner as is required for the task
  • combine laundry and bathroom greywater

Don’t:

  • use wastewater generated from the kitchen, swimming pool or spa pool for irrigation
  • apply greywater to any food crops or edible portions of plants (e.g. fruits and vegetables)
  • use greywater generated by the wash cycle of the washing machine, unless it is diluted with other greywater
  • use detergents that advertise whitening, softening and enzymatic powers and those that contain borax, chlorine, bleach and petroleum-based products
  • apply undiluted greywater to clay soils
  • apply greywater to oversaturated soils

Further information

Continue reading

Provisioning

Safe and sustainable AFL playing surfaces

Summary

In the project (trademarked Sureplay®), the Department and AFL Queensland staff worked together to improve community sports fields-fields played on by junior footballers and used for League fixtures.

The project was successful in improving AFL playing surfaces, particularly through the recognition of the importance of ground hardness on surface quality. Surface condition can be improved with judicious irrigation design, maintenance and management, aeration and soil amendments. The project provided critical support for continued sports field irrigation during tight water restrictions.

The work was made available through an extensive program of industry events and publications.

Details

Full titleBest management practices for sustainable and safe playing surface of Australian Football League sports fields
IDTU02007
DatesStart date: July 2003
End date: June 2007
Project leaderCraig Henderson, 07 5466 2222
Aims
  • Demonstrate potential best management practices for AFL sportsfields in subtropical Queensland
  • Review current world practice and performance benchmarks relevant to community standard fields
  • Develop methodologies for surface benchmarking and define relevant performance standards
  • Improve player safety on community-based AFL sports fields by addressing issues of surface hardness and playability, focusing on low cost methods for improving surface quality-soil profile and irrigation management
  • Evaluate soil profile amendments in the laboratory and the field
  • Deliver workshops, seminars, training events, field days and publications to ground curators to improve their ability to self-manage their playing surfaces and ensure the sustainability of project outcomes
Benefits
  • Established scientifically based sports field management protocols and benchmarks
  • Increased the technical and professional proficiency of paid and voluntary sports field curators
  • Improved water use efficiency and environmental stewardship
  • Increased facility access and sports participation, with reduced injury levels
  • Provided community sportsfields with cost-effective strategies for managing their fields with limited resources
MethodologyDepartment of Primary industries and Fisheries (DPI&F) Project Component:
A comprehensive literature review of best practice benchmarking, renovation and maintenance, covering elite and non-elite sports fields was conducted.

Eleven non-elite fields and one elite field (for comparison) were selected for benchmarking. Surface characteristics were measured on nine occasions through the life of the project including: hardness, torsional resistance, shear resistance, turf height, surface soil strength, turf coverage and composition, and surface soil moisture. Six test positions (including the goal mouths) were selected on each field.

Irrigation audits were conducted in general accordance with Irrigation Association of Australia certification requirements. Audits were conducted after 9:00 pm at night and three sprinklers were audited per field. 12 x 13 catch can grids at 3 m spacings were used around each sprinkler. Static and operating mainline pressure, the static and operating flow rate at the mainline meter, operating pressure and condition of all sprinklers and the precipitation in catch cans were measured. From this data, distribution uniformity (DU) was calculated, head to head sprinkler coverage was assessed and a precipitation map constructed. Operating sprinkler pressures were used to calculate estimated variation in pressures due to system design versus maintenance issues. Field water usage was calculated from precipitation rates and likely irrigation regimes.

Findings regarding the project were widely distributed to industry via workshops, field days, seminars, training events and publications throughout the process.

AchievementsThrough regular scientific assessment of project fields, the Sureplay® team identified ground hardness as the No. 1 problem. Applying project results, AFLQ now regularly audits affiliated fields several times per year, using a specific instrument. AFLQ closes grounds that are not of standard.

Throughout the project, the Sureplay® team concentrated on regular ground aeration, and effective irrigation practices. Eventually, playing conditions on many AFLQ grounds approached those of elite national fields.

Benchmarking measurements suggested that hardness, penetrability and inconsistent traction become problems in goal squares, centre squares and training flanks when they begin to dry out. Surface water content appears to be the major management factor for the manipulation of playing surface conditions and safety on many grounds. Interestingly, turf height and condition had little impact on measured hardness, although hard, compacted areas such as goal squares also had less desirable turf cover.

The Sureplay® team audited irrigation across project grounds. Poor system maintenance was a problem, with less than 65% of sprinklers operating properly. Re-adjusting sprinklers, and fitting more appropriate nozzles, significantly improved irrigation evenness. The team investigated weekly watering, and waiting longer after rain before re-starting automatic systems. These strategies reduced irrigation requirement by more than 30%, compared to non-project fields. This was a critical finding during a time of drought. It helped convince authorities to still allow sports field irrigation, despite harsher water restrictions.

The presence of tufted weed species (Eleusine indica and Eragrostis spp.) has been identified as a major cause of uneven playing surfaces. These weeds are particularly present in the compacted and worn areas in centre corridors and training shed flank.

Sureplay® investigated subsurface incorporation of organic materials (e.g. composts), before laying turf in high wear areas (e.g. goal mouths). The results – softer playing surfaces in dry soils. In a regular football season, top-dressing turf with crumb rubber helped grass persist into early winter. However, neither process could stop loss of turf following consistent heavy wear. Research into managing high-wear sections of community sports fields is a priority.

Apart from enabling research and ground improvements, project funding helped publish more than 80 articles, and hold 100+ industry events, with several thousand participants. A structured curator training program, with accompanying resources, may be commercialised.

Project staffCraig Henderson, Larry Cooper, Kaylene Bransgrove and Greg Finlay (all DPI&F); Nick Jeffrey and Craig Moffatt (AFL Queensland), Neil Power (Irrigation Turfgrass Consultancy Group), Steve Raine and Jochen Eberhard (University of Southern Queensland).
FundingHorticulture Australia Limited (HAL), AFL Queensland, Brisbane Lions Football Club, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Irrigation Turfgrass Consultancy Group, McCracken´s Water Services, St Margaret´s Anglican Girls School, Hortech Services Pty. Ltd., Black Kubota.
Collaborating agenciesAFL Queensland, Brisbane Lions Football Club, Irrigation Turfgrass Consultancy Group, Hortech Services Pty. Ltd., University of Southern Queensland, St Margaret´s Anglican Girls School, National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture.
Research locationsBrisbane Cricket Ground/”The Gabba”; Morningside AFL Club: Mt Gravatt AFL Club: Brisbane Lions AFL Club, Coorparoo; Zillmere Road Football Ground; Everton Football Park; Sherwood Football Ground; Redlands Football Ground; St Margaret´s Anglican Girls School sports field; Broadbreach AFL Club; Labrador AFL Club and Southport AFL Club.

Continue reading

Provisioning

How does a newly developed turfgrass obtain PBR?

On this page:

  • Benefits of PBR
  • DUS trials
  • Centralised testing centres
  • Benefits of CTCs
  • Redlands Research Station CTC
  • Redlands turfgrass living library
  • Obtaining turfgrass descriptors
  • DNA testing
  • Access to Redlands CTC

Benefits of PBR

The growth of Australia´s $450 million p.a. turf production industry can primarily be attributed to the breeding, development and rollout of new turfgrass cultivars. The development cost for new cultivars is high, but this can be offset after release by royalty streams available to breeders of Plant Breeder’s Rights (PBR) protected cultivars. This does not imply that non-PBR or older varieties are not useful or do not have a place within today´s turf industry. However, it is imperative for turf researchers and breeders to continue to further develop and enhance key turfgrass traits to meet Australia´s harsh environmental conditions-developing varieties that more closely match client needs, which, in turn, will sustain a viable Australian turfgrass industry into the future.

Cultivars are protected for 20 years following the granting of PBR. If a turfgrass cultivar is sold or marketed illegally during this time, the title holder may initiate legal action. The PBR title holder is entitled to seek damages or an account of profits, which can range from $55,000 for individuals to $275,000 for companies.

DUS trials

An application for PBR on a new variety in Australia is based on a ´breeder testing´ system. The applicant, in conjunction with a nominated Qualified Person, establishes, conducts and reports on a comparative growing trial to demonstrate that the new (candidate) variety is Distinct, Uniform and Stable, hence the term “DUS trial”.

DUS trials generate comparative data on different varieties. This is also useful in developing a better understanding of the plants´ growth habits and required management practices. For example, a researcher may observe that a particular cultivar spreads faster laterally and produces more branches along its stolons in a spaced plant trial. These data are useful to turf managers wanting to know the likely timeframe that a turf divot may take to repair, or to turf farmers trying to predict the maximum number of harvests per year for the new cultivar on a commercial sod farm.

Centralised testing centres (CTCs)

Under PBR Regulations introduced in 1996, establishments designated as Centralised Test Centres (CTCs) may be officially authorised by IP Australia to conduct comparative growing trials on behalf of a wider group of breeders. There are currently two turfgrass CTCs in operation in Australia assessing a wide array of turfgrass species. One CTC is located in Victoria, focussing on cool-season grasses, while the other, a predominantly warm-season testing facility, is located in Queensland.

Benefits of CTCs

A major benefit of a CTC is that it enables a larger number of candidate varieties to be tested in a single comprehensive DUS trial with a larger number of comparators or varieties of common knowledge. Field trials enable the Qualified Person to observe and record morphological and developmental characteristics of the candidate variety against (generally) multiple comparator varieties grown as spaced plants and as swards.

A CTC can also provide accurate measuring instrumentation and greater scientific rigour. Independent field or glasshouse tests are conducted, if necessary, with the benefit of specialised facilities and equipment.

Redlands Research Station CTC

The Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries (QPIF) runs a CTC at Redlands Research Station, Brisbane (27º31´S, 153º14´E, approximately 25 metres above sea level). PBR assessments commenced there in 2000. Under the CTC model, this service has significantly increased the efficiency of the PBR process for turfgrass breeders within Australia. To date, QPIF have processed 25 turfgrass cultivars under the CTC model-80% of all turfgrass registrations in Australia from 2000 to 2008 (Table 1).

Table 1. Cumulative numbers of published PBR descriptions of turfgrass cultivars in Australia (to June 2008).

Genus/groupPBR Registrations

(pre-2000)

Total PBR Registrations

(2000-08)

Descriptions from DPI&F Redlands

(2000-08)

Axonopus011
Bothriochloa100
Buchloe100
Cynodon51212
Digitaria010
Panicum100
Paspalum205
Pennisetum010
Poa hybrid011
Stenotaphrum272
Zoysia074
Total123125

Redlands turfgrass living library

Redlands Research Station boasts a ´living library´ of turfgrasses-an in-ground collection of 138 warm-season turfgrasses grown in unreplicated observational plots measuring 3 x 2.5 metres. This provides ready access to a large number of comparators for PBR testing.

When new cultivars are released within Australia, or overseas cultivars have been imported through the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service (AQIS), these new cultivars need to be incorporated into the ´living library´ to keep it up to date. In such cases, older or less favoured turfgrass varieties may be removed from the field plots to make room, but are then planted in backup 40L tubs for future access. Currently, over 100 genotypes are kept in the backup collection and, together with the unreplicated field plots, provide a valuable source of material for use in PBR and/or other funded trials undertaken by the QPIF turf team.

Obtaining turfgrass descriptors

Most of the descriptive data required for PBR registration are generated through spaced plant trials, which allow inherent plant traits to be more fully expressed than in a sward trial. In these trials, 30 plants (for vegetative turfgrasses) or 60 plants (for cross-breeding seeded varieties) are grown in a minimum of three replicates for later statistical analysis of the data. For spaced plants, the minimum set of descriptors that should be measured is usually 10. These descriptors include assessing the plant´s development (lateral spread, growth habit, days to flower), internode lengths and diameters on stolons and flowering tillers, leaf length, width and sheath characteristics on stolons and tillers, and inflorescence (seed head) characteristics. For sward experiments, the minimum set of descriptors may also include measurements of the unmown plant height and inflorescence density, as well as inflorescence, stem and leaf measurements.

A replicated field trial enables a Qualified Person to establish the individuality of the new (candidate) cultivar and to generate the documentation needed for a grant of PBR. The field trial provides an opportunity for QPIF researchers to measure and record up to 27 turfgrass characteristics (refer to turfgrass characteristics below) for each variety being tested. These descriptors, along with ground and air temperatures and differences in the incidence of pests and disease, contribute to developing a better understanding of the cultivar and how best to manage it. The extensive list of descriptors measured provides comprehensive DUS data, which also strengthens the legal right of the plant breeder should a future dispute arise.

Turfgrass characteristics

Turfgrass descriptors (characteristics) recorded in spaced plant trials at Redlands Research Station.

Whole plant measurements

  • diameter of spread (4 measurements per plant)
  • growth habit
  • days to first flower

Stolon measurements

  • number of branches at nodes 2,3,4,5 & 6
  • fourth internode length, diameter, colour
  • fourth internode leaf length (L), width (W), L:W ratio
  • fourth internode sheath length

Flowering tiller measurements

  • flag leaf length, width, L:W ratio
  • flag leaf sheath length
  • fourth leaf length, width, L:W ratio, colour

Inflorescence measurements

  • peduncle length, diameter
  • spike length(s)
  • number of spikes present
  • inflorescence density

Morphological characteristics, especially those least affected by environmental factors are preferred. Performance attributes can also be included as distinguishing characteristics, provided they are clear and consistent. Clear repeatable varietal differences must be demonstrated.

DNA testing

While comparative DNA testing can be an important and useful adjunct to those primary tests, such information is only accepted by IP Australia and the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) as secondary (or supporting) data for the purposes of PBR.

DNA testing of plant material is relatively costly. However, QPIF and University of Queensland scientists have been collaborating to develop standard extraction and testing protocols and a reference library of varietal DNA fingerprints to make this technology more affordable and convenient for breeders in the future.

Access to Redlands CTC

PBR testing is offered by QPIF on a fee-for-service basis to assess new turfgrasses developed in Australia or overseas. PBR conducted through QPIF´s CTC results in substantial cost savings through economies of scale. Potentially, each breeder/applicant can also save up to 40% of the normal IP Australia examination fee when five or more candidate varieties of the same genus are tested and examined simultaneously.

Further information

For further information on PBR or DNA testing through the QPIF’s research group, or Testing Centre for Plant Breeder’s Rights Registration, contact Matt Roche (PBR Qualified Person) on (07) 3286 1488.

Continue reading

Provisioning

Wear testing for community sports fields

This project examines the wear tolerance of warm-season turf grass cultivars suited for use on community sports fields. The four-year trial is being undertaken at fields played on by the Redlands Touch Association, the University of Queensland and at DEEDI’s Redlands Research Station. The results from monitored touch football and multi-use sports fields will be compared against the simulated wear site at Redlands Research Station. Management factors, including field usage (wear tolerance and recovery) and the frequency of decompaction, will be monitored with a view to providing information on cost-effective maintenance programs and cultivar choices for user-friendly community sports fields. The results will be augmented by conducting mowing cost-benefit analysis studies with the use of the growth regulator trinexapac-ethyl.

Details

Full titleTraffic tolerance of warm-season turf grasses under community sports field conditions
IDTU08018
StatusCurrent
DatesStart date: October 2008
End date: May 2012
Project leaderMatt Roche, 07 3286 1488
matt.roche@deedi.qld.gov.au
AimsTo document and assess the wear of different turf grass cultivars as they are used on community sports fields and in simulated testing.

To look at the impact of decompaction frequency on reducing ground hardness, improving safety and field usage on natural grass sports fields.

To investigate the morphology and agronomy of Cynodon spp. (green couch hybrids), Pennisetum clandestinum (kikuyu) and Digitaria didactyla (blue couch) turf grasses, including mowing requirement and the effect of trinexapac-ethyl (a growth regulator) application.

In a separate trial (greens quality grasses), to investigate the effect of trinexapac-ethyl (a growth regulator) application on Cynodon sp. (green couch hybrids) and Paspalum vaginatum (seashore paspalum).

To use aggregated data to develop best management practices and to highlight the financial implications of selecting one turf grass over another.

BenefitsThe project will improve decision-making on the choice of cultivars, decompaction, mowing and other management regimes for community sports fields. High wearing, lower input turf grass can save community sports clubs considerable money. This will produce more cost-effective, wear-tolerant, uniform and safe turfed playing surfaces.

Through the correct choice of wear-tolerant cultivars gains of 20% to 40% may be attained for on-field use and play. More frequent decompaction regimes have the potential to increase the availability of sports fields for play even further.

As an added benefit, the study will allow researchers to compare the damage incurred by a wear traffic simulator with that of damage from actual playing fields where the hours of wear are being formally recorded. This will benefit future wear-testing studies.

MethodologyA total of 10 warm-season turf grass cultivars are being trialled, including 7 Cynodon spp. (green couch/hybrids), 2 Digitaria didactyla (blue couch) and 1 Pennisetum clandestinum (kikuyu).

A total of three decompaction levels are to be adopted: no decompaction, once per year in line with many council operations and work being undertaken at six-week intervals. This work will be conducted at the two touch sites and at the simulated wear trial site.

A range of scientific testing including assessing turf grass density, hardness, automated traction, soil moisture and water infiltration started in May 2009. Wear was applied on two sites in May 2009 and on the third site in March 2010. All sites will be tested for a full two years.

Morphological and agronomic data and ash and lignin fibre tests will be correlated against the relative wear tolerance of the turf grasses being trialled.

In a separate study, a comprehensive range of best management practices in relation to the choice of turf grass, mowing, growth regulator use and frequency of decompaction, including financial considerations will be developed. These tests will be undertaken with 19 warm-season turf grass cultivars, including 14 Cynodon spp. (green couch/hybrids), 4 Digitaria didactyla (blue couch) and 1 Pennisetum clandestinum (kikuyu).

In a separate test, the quality of Cynodon hybrid and Paspalum vaginatum greens grasses will be evaluated after trinexapac-ethyl is applied at four different levels.

AchievementsFigures to date from the current trial (TU08018) indicate that there are considerable wear tolerance (e.g. 87%) and wear recovery differences between Cynodon, Kikuyu and Digitaria species and cultivars. As these cultivars are commonly used for sports and recreational purposes, this means that if a less suitable cultivar is chosen, a sports field could be closed up to 85% more often than is necessary, as it is unfit for play.
Project staff
Collaborating agencies
  • Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation
  • Horticulture Australia Limited
  • Redland City Council
  • Redlands Touch Association
  • Oz Tuff Turf
  • Twin View Turf
  • Australian Lawn Concepts
  • University of Queensland
  • Golf Course Superintendents Association of Queensland
  • Australian Golf Course Superintendents Association
  • Sports Turf Institute
  • Golf Queensland Pty. Ltd.
  • Sports Turf Association (Queensland)
  • Sports Turf Association (NSW)
  • Syngenta
  • Turf Grass Association of Australia (Victoria)
  • Q Turf Machinery
  • Turf Force
  • Turf Solutions
  • Turf World
  • Caboolture Turf
  • Jimboomba Turf
Research locationsRedlands Showgrounds, The University of Queensland and DEEDI’s Redlands Research Station.
Contact detailsDEEDI Customer Service Centre

Continue reading