2012 Annual Report

Purdue University Turfgrass Science Program

Department of Agronomy
915 W State St
Purdue University
West Lafayette IN 47907-2054


In this report, you may see pesticide use in research reports that do not conform to the pesticide label. These uses are not provided as recommendations. By law, it is the responsibility of the pesticide applicator, to follow current label directions for the specific pesticide being used. No endorsement is intended for products mentioned, nor criticism of products not mentioned. The authors, Purdue University, and the Midwest Regional Turf Foundation assume no liability from misuse of pesticide applications detailed in this report. The Agricultural Experiment Station of Purdue University is an equal action/equal opportunity institution.

Understanding the Data

Most of the data presented in this report was subjected to statistical analysis. Statistical procedures are a combination of logic and arithmetic that allow us to interpret information gathered from experiments. We most frequently use a Least Significant Difference Test to explain our test data.

Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) Test is a statistical procedure that determines if the difference found between two treatments is due to the treatment or if the difference is simply due to random chance. For each set of data, a value termed the LSD is calculated at a chosen level of significance. If the difference between two treatment means is greater than this calculated value then it is said to be a ‘significant difference’ or a difference not due to random chance. The level of significance that we use most often is 0.05 (LSD0.05). In other words, this difference will occur 95% of the time these treatments are compared. If ‘NS’ is reported at the bottom of a column of means, then no significant difference was found among the means in this group of data at a probability = 0.05.


Table of Contents:

2012 Turf Research Report - Full Report
Introduction to the 2011 Turf Research Summary PDF

Turf Management

Association of Candidate Genes with Drought Tolerance Traits in Diverse Perennial Ryegrass Accessions PDF
Growth and Physiological Responses of Diverse Perennial Ryegrass Accessions to Increasing Salinity PDF

Weed Management

Efficacy of Methiozolin for Controlling Annual Bluegrass in a Creeping Bentgrass Golf Course Putting Green PDF
Dandelion Control and Flower Suppression with Defendor Herbicide PDF
Herbicide Selection and Timing Influences Ground Ivy Control – 2012 Results PDF
Selecting Turfgrasses and Mowing Strategies to Reduce Mowing Requirements PDF
Controlling Poa annua on putting green height turf in Indiana, Michigan, and Nebraska: 2012 Research Update PDF
Postemergence Broadleaf Herbicide Safety on Creeping Bentgrass Putting Greens – 2012 Update PDF
Evaluation of Crabgrass Control with Various Preemergence Herbicides - 2012 PDF
Herbicide Efficacy on Wild Violet – Greenhouse Experiments PDF

Insect Management

Influence of Application Rate on the Efficacy of Acelepryn Against Bluegrass Billbug in Kentucky Bluegrass Turf 2012 PDF
Residual Activity of Meridian 25WG and Two Rates of Acelepryn 1.67SC Against Second and Third Instar Black Cutworm Larvae on Creeping Bentgrass Turf PDF
Influence of Application Timing on the Efficacy of Acelepryn and Merit Against Japanese Beetle Larvae in Kentucky bluegrass turf PDF
Efficacy of Single vs. Split-Application of QualiPro Imidacloprid, Aloft and Allectus Against Japanese Beetle Larvae in Kentucky Bluegrass Turf 2012 PDF

Disease Management

Integrating fungicide and genetic host resistance for control of dollar spot on creeping bentgrass PDF
Evaluation of Velista (penthiopyrad) for Control of Brown Patch and Dollar Spot on Creeping Bentgrass, 2012 PDF


Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, 625 Agriculture Mall Drive,
West Lafayette, IN 47907-2010 USA, (765) 494-8039
© 2010 Purdue University. An equal access, equal opportunity university.
If you have trouble accessing this page because of a disability, please contact the Webmaster at