Crop Res. 55 (5 & 6) : 250-261 (2020) DOI : 10.31830/2454-1761.2020.

035
Printed in India

Effect of weed management and methods of planting on weed

population and establishment of turf grasses

SITHIN MATHEW*, G. K. SEETHARAMU, D. SATISH, M. DILEEPKUMAR AND

S. MUKUND

Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture

University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot-587 104, Karnataka, India
*(e-mail : [email protected])

(Received : July 20, 2020/Accepted : September 29, 2020)

ABSTRACT

The scientific management of weeds and effective establishment of grasses are the
thrust areas of research in turf grass cultivation. Therefore, an investigation was carried
out during 2018-19 at Kittur Rani Channamma College of Horticulture, Arabhavi, University
of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India, to evaluate pre-planting weed
management methods and to identify best establishment method in turf grasses. The
experiment comprised of twelve treatments of which two weed management practices (hand
weeding and soil sterilant application); three planting methods (seed sowing at 10g/m2,
seed sowing at 5g/m2 and stolon dibbling) and two turf grass species (Mexican grass and
Bermuda grass) laid out in factorial Randomised Complete Block Design (RCBD) replicated
thrice. The study has revealed that among the two grasses evaluated Bermuda grass var.
‘Tif dwarf’ showed less number of weeds (4.61/m2), early germination or sprouting (7.28
days), high ground cover per cent score (5.00), higher number of nodes (27.03), number of
leaves per stolon (30.74) and leaf width (2.69 mm) compared to Mexican grass. Seed
sowing method of establishment at 10g/m2 showed a smaller number of weeds per square
meter (9.56/m2) and lowest time taken for germination or sprouting (11.00 days). Stolon
dibbling was found superior with respect to ground cover per cent score (4.85), number of
nodes (27.51) and number of leaves (29.74) while leaf length (23.93 cm), leaf width (2.95
mm) and average leaf area (3.45 cm2) was recorded highest for seed sowing method at 5g/
m2. Among weed management approaches, Dizomet applied plots showed a smaller number
of weeds at 40 days after planting (9.68/m2). Stolon dibbling of Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif
dwarf’ at 160 days after planting recorded highest values for number of nodes (39.61) and
number of leaves (42.78) while seed sowing at 10g/m2 of Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’
recorded lowest number of weeds (2.70/m2), lowest days to germination or sprouting (6.17
days) and maximum ground cover per cent score (5).

Key words : Burmuda grass, ground cover, Mexican grass, seed sowing, stolon dibbling

INTRODUCTION undesirable because they disrupt turf

uniformity and compete with desirable grass
Turf grasses comprise of more than 600 species for moisture, light, and nutrients. A
genera and 7500 species belong to family significant weed infestation can detract from
Poaceae. Lawn is the heart of any landscape turfgrass visual quality, but often poses no
and is an essential feature for any type of functional or environmental problem. Weeds
garden. Lawn grasses reduce noise, control soil are best kept under control through prevention
erosion, and absorb carbon-dioxide and release (Susan et al., 2016). Dizomet (Basamid) is a
oxygen, and the comprehensiveness of these soil fumigant available in the market at 98 pe
environmental benefits improve our quality of cent purity which can kill the weed seeds,
life. Proper establishment and maintenance of rhizomes, stolons and tubers present in the
lawn is essential for any lawn to be healthy soil. According to Bradley and Peter (2002)
and to look at its best (Randhawa and plastic covered Dizomet treatment (388, 340,
Mukhopadhyay, 1986). 291 and 194 kg/ha) provided greater than 98
Weeds in lawn are considered as % reduction in annual blue grass seedling
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 251

compared to control. Bryan et al. (2002) m above mean sea level. The total rainfall in
observed that Dizomet combination treatments experimental area was about 560 mm,
provided control of Coastal Bermuda grass (91 distributed over a period of seven to eight
%). Bruce et al. (2004) also revealed that months (March to October) with peak during
Dizomet rate of 420 or 504 kg/ha yielded lowest June to July. This area receives irrigation water
annual blue grass re-establishment. from Ghataprabha left bank canal (GLBC) from
Establishment of lawn through seeds mid-July to mid-March. The maximum
is the cheapest method of lawn establishment temperature during the period of
for large areas (Janakiram et al., 2015). Easy experimentation was 39.34 ºC and relative
transportation of planting material and easy humidity was 88.59 per cent. The physico-
and fast method of planting makes it less labour chemical analysis of soil in the experimental
intensive. Michael (2012) reported that Dune, plot revealed that the pH of the soil was slightly
La Paloma and Yukon cultivars of Bermuda alkaline (8.2) but electric conductivity and
grass recorded 100 % germination after six days organic matter content was under permissible
of seeding. Turf grass quality, shoot density, limits (0.34 dSm-3 and 0.96, respectively). Soil
fine texture and leaf blade width performed reclamation activities for alkaline soil was
higher levels when vegetative propagated adopted by adding gypsum (10 kg/m2) mixed
(dibbling) compared to seed sowing (Croce and with FYM. Available NPK in the experimental
De, 2011). Hensler and Gotley (2009) evaluated plot was 167.83, 12.07 and 91.09 Kg/ha,
different vegetative propagated turf grasses for respectively.
establishment and persistent capacity and The experiment was laid out in Factorial
found that among Bermuda grasses, cultivars RCBD design with three replications with net
Transcontinental and SWI-1012 performed plot size of 3 x 3 m by leaving a spacing of 0.5
better. Bermuda grass established through m between plots. The experiment consisted 12
stolon dibbling recorded maximum ground treatments, viz., T1 {W1P1T1 : Chemical weeding
cover percentage (96.03 %), whereas Zoysia + Seed sowing at 10g/m2 + Mexican grass}, T2
grass recorded substandard ground coverage {W1P1T2 : Chemical weeding + Seed sowing at
(66.71 %) at 120 days after planting 10g/m2 + Bermuda grass}, T3 {W1P2T1 : Chemical
(Dhanalekshmi et al. 2015). Severmutlu et al. weeding + Seed sowing at 5g/m2 + Mexican
(2011) concluded that Bermuda grass, Bahia grass}, T4 {W1P2T2 : Chemical weeding + Seed
grass and Seashore paspalum established 95 sowing at 5g/m2 + Bermuda grass}, T5 {W1P3T1 :
% or better coverage when vegetative Chemical weeding + Stolon dibbling + Mexican
propagated at 1095 growing degree days [GDD]. grass}, T6 {W1P3T2 : Chemical weeding + Stolon
The information available on the performance dibbling + Bermuda grass}, T7 {W2P1T1: Hand
of different types of turf grass species with weeding + Seed sowing at 10g/m2 + Mexican
regard to early and firm establishment with grass}, T8 {W2P1T2: Hand weeding + Seed sowing
different lawn laying methods is very scanty. at 10g/m2 + Bermuda grass}, T9 {W2P2T1: Hand
Therefore, to generate research evidence on the weeding + Seed sowing at 5g/m2 + Mexican
above aspects, the present investigation was grass}, T 10 {W 2P2T 2: Hand weeding + Seed
performed to evaluate the pre planting weed sowing at 5g/m2 + Bermuda grass}, T11 {W2P3T1:
control methods in different turf grasses and Hand weeding + Stolon dibbling + Mexican
to identify best turf grass species and planting grass} and T12 {W2P3T2: Hand weeding + Stolon
method for early establishment. dibbling + Bermuda grass}.
Digging was done three times before
MATERIALS AND METHODS planting to a depth of about 60 cm followed by
irrigation to encourage the weeds to emerge and
The experiment was carried out during make the plot free from weeds. Double digging
2018-19 at Department of Floriculture and was followed in which trenches of soil with 60
Landscape Architecture, Kittur Rani cm width and 30 cm depth were made and soil
Channamma College of Horticulture, Arabhavi, was made to fine tilth. Well decomposed
University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Farmyard Manure was applied at the rate of 5
Karnataka, India. The experimental site is kg/m2 as a basal dose of fertilizer followed by
geographically located at 16º 15´ North latitude, irrigation and field was left free for one week to
94º 45´ East longitudes with an altitude of 640 encourage the emergence of weeds.
252 Mathew, Seetharamu, Satish, Dileepkumar and Mukund

Chlorpyriphos (2.5 mL/L/m 2) and Phorate Rooted slips of two turf grass species
granules was applied before planting for the viz., Cynodon dactylon and Zoysia japonica
control of termites and ants. planted at an escapement of about 10-15 cm
Hand weeding was done by removing apart on a leveled ground in Zig-Zag rows. Seeds
the weeds using garden khurpi or with hand. of both grasses were uniformly broadcasted on
Pre-emergent herbicide (soil fumigant) Dizomet the field after mixing with sand at 8:1 ratio
98 MZ granules was broadcasted on the field followed by covering soil and cocopeat mixture
at 50 g/m2 rate. Light irrigation was given one up to one-centimeter thickness over the seeds.
day prior to fumigation and it was mixed up to Irrigation was given immediately after seed
15 cm depth followed by mulching with plastic sowing followed by mulching with sugarcane
mulch for 15 days to trap the methyl iso trashes and irrigation was given using rose can
thiocyanate gas released by basamid granules every day.
to kill the weeds and other harmful organisms Data was collected on number of weeds
present in the soil. After 15 days, mulch was per square meter after 40 days of planting of
removed, field was kept two days open for soil grasses by counting the total weeds in one
to get aerated and irrigation was given to square meter area selected randomly from three
remove the excess chemical residues present places in one plot. Number of days taken for
in the soil. The number of different monocot germination of seeds and sprouting of stolons
and dicot weeds identified before planting as were counted and the ground cover percentage
influenced by chemical application is presented was visually assessed based on the extent of
in Table 1. coverage of grasses by using a scale of 1 to 5
Table 1. Number of monocot and dicot weeds (per/m2) (1-less than 25 %, 2 - 25 %, 3 - 50 %, 4 - 75%,
before planting 5 - 100 % green vegetation cover) once in every
40 days during the experimental period,
Treatments Dicot weeds Monocot weeds (Briscoe et al., 2012). The number of nodes per
T1 (W1P1T1) 4.1*,4.7+,1.4×,0.3@ 6.1*,3+,0.9@ stolon, number of leaves per stolon, leaf length,
T2 (W1P1T2) 3.5*,3.9+,2.3×,0.6@ 4*,2.3+,0.3@,1.3× leaf width and average leaf area was counted
T3 (W1P2T1) 2.7*,4.4+,1.6@,1.6° 5.6*,4.6+,2@,1.6× at every 20 days interval up to 160 DAP. The
T4 (W1P2T2) 4.8*,4+,0.3-,1.6@ 5.6*,2.8+,0.3@,0.3° data on various observations were recorded
T5 (W1P3T1) 2.8*,2.1+,0.6@ 4.7*,2.9+,0.6@
T6 (W1P3T2) 4.9*,3.8+,1.4° 7.5*,4.6+,1.15× during the course of investigation were
T7 (W2P1T1) 44.7*,41.3+,9@,1.6× 35.6*,12.9+,3.4× statistically analyzed using randomized block
T8 (W2P1T2) 77.8*,45.2+,19×,3.3@ 33.7*,12.4+,2.6@,5.6× design described by Panse and Sukhatme
T9 (W2P2T1) 37.5*,43.4+,5.9@,1× 22.4*,16.5+,1.6@,1.6× (1985). The appropriate standard error of mean
T10 (W2P2T2) 31.1*,72+,1.6°,14.6@ 20.8*,23.2+,0.3@,0.6@
T11 (W2P3T1) 115.3*,52.3+,1.6°,14@ 33.3*,10.2+,2.1×,2.3@ (SEm±) and the critical difference (CD) were
T12 (W2P3T2) 63.4*,42.9+,10.1@,0.3- 25*,13.3+,3.6@ calculated at 5 per cent level of probability.

Dicot weeds : * Bowheria diffusa, + Parthenium RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

hysterophorus, ? Euphorbia hirta, @ Commelina
benghalensis, 0 Amaranthus viridis, - Abutilon indicum
Monocot weeds : * Digitaria sanguinalis, + Cyprus rotundus, Among two grasses evaluated, plots
@ Eragrostis echinochloidea, ? Axonopus rotundus, 0 planted with Mexican grass recorded
Sorghum halepens. significantly higher number of weeds (17.00/
Residual test was conducted using okra m2) than Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ (4.62/
(Abelmioschus esculentus) seeds, in which 100 m2) planted plots (Table 2) due to less seed
healthy seeds were sown in both chemical count coupled with less germination per cent
applied soil and un-treated soil. Among 100 of Mexican grass seeds and slow growth of
seeds, 99 seeds were germinated in chemical Mexican grass dibbles which increased the
applied soil whereas only 92 seeds shown weed population. These findings were in
germination from un-treated soil due to conformity with findings of Scott and Greg
sterilization effect of Dizomet but germinated (2006) in which Triclopyr herbicide safened the
seeds were found un-healthy in chemical use on Zoysia grass turf without decreasing
applied soil than untreated soil due to the Bermuda grass weed populations. Similar
residual effect of the chemical. Flood irrigation results were also observed by Enzhan (2012).
was given two times to remove the chemical The data presented in Tables 2, 3, 4, 5
residue effect before planting of the turf grasses. and 7 signifies that lower days to germination
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 253

Table 2. Number of weeds and days to germination or Table 3. Ground cover score as influenced by weed
sprouting as influenced by weed management management methods and method of planting
methods and method of planting in turf grass in turf grass species
species
Treatments Ground cover score

Treatments Number of Days to germination Days after planting

weeds/m2 or sprouting
40 80 120 160
Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 17.00 18.28 Grass species
T2–Bermuda grass 4.62 7.28 T1–Mexican grass 2.06 2.30 2.95 3.27
S. Em± 0.45 0.23 T2–Bermuda grass 4.76 5.00 5.00 5.00
C. D. (P=0.05) 1.31 0.66 S. Em± 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.11
Method of planting C. D. (P=0.05) 0.34 0.37 0.28 0.32
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 9.65 11.00 Method of planting
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 11.65 11.17 P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 3.89 3.99 4.03 4.07
P3–Stolon dibbling 11.11 16.17 P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 3.28 3.51 4.03 3.48
S. Em± 0.55 0.28 P3–Stolon dibbling 3.05 3.45 4.03 4.85
C. D. (P=0.05) 1.60 0.81 S. Em± 0.14 0.16 0.12 0.13
Weed management C. D. (P=0.05) 0.41 0.46 0.34 0.39
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 9.68 13.39 Weed management
W2–Hand weeding 11.94 12.17 W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 3.36 3.57 3.92 4.05
S. Em± 0.45 0.23 W2–Hand weeding 3.45 3.73 4.03 4.22
C. D. (P=0.05) 1.31 0.66 S. Em± 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.11
T×P C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS
T1P1 16.61 15.83 T×P
T2P1 2.70 6.17 T1P1 2.83 2.98 3.13 3.14
T1P2 19.77 15.50 T2P1 4.94 5.00 5.00 5.00
T2P2 3.54 6.83 T1P2 1.64 2.02 2.02 1.97
T1P3 14.62 23.50 T2P2 4.92 5.00 5.00 5.00
T2P3 7.61 8.83 T1P3 1.70 1.90 3.72 4.70
S. Em± 0.77 0.39 T2P3 4.40 5.00 5.00 5.00
C. D. (P=0.05) 2.26 1.15 S. Em± 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.19
T×W C. D (P=0.05) 0.58 0.64 0.49 0.56
T1W1 15.60 19.00 T×W
T2W1 3.75 7.78 T1W1 1.97 2.14 2.84 3.09
T1W2 18.39 17.56 T2W1 4.75 5.00 5.00 5.00
T2W2 5.49 6.78 T1W2 2.14 2.46 3.07 3.44
S. Em± 0.63 0.32 T2W2 4.76 5.00 5.00 5.00
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS S. Em± 0.16 0.18 0.14 0.16
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS
P×W
P×W
P1W1 8.46 11.50
P1W1 3.89 3.94 4.09 4.11
P2W1 10.77 11.83
P2W1 3.22 3.40 3.33 3.33
P3W1 9.80 16.83
P3W1 2.98 3.37 4.33 4.70
P1W2 10.85 10.50
P1W2 3.89 4.03 4.03 4.03
P2W2 12.54 10.50
P2W2 3.35 3.62 3.68 3.63
P3W2 12.43 15.50
P3W2 3.13 3.54 4.39 5.00
S. Em± 0.77 0.39
S. Em± 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.19
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W×P×T
W1P1T1 14.59 16.33
W1P1T1 2.77 2.88 3.18 3.22
W1P1T2 2.33 6.67
W1P1T2 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
W1P2T1 18.57 16.33
W1P2T1 1.55 1.80 1.66 1.66
W1P2T2 2.97 7.33
W1P2T2 4.89 5.00 5.00 5.00
W1P3T1 13.65 24.33 W1P3T1 1.59 1.74 3.66 4.39
W1P3T2 5.94 9.33 W1P3T2 4.37 5.00 5.00 5.00
W2P1T1 18.63 15.33 W2P1T1 2.89 3.07 3.07 3.07
W2P1T2 3.06 5.67 W2P1T2 4.88 5.00 4.99 4.99
W2P2T1 20.97 14.67 W2P2T1 1.74 2.23 2.37 2.27
W2P2T2 4.11 6.33 W2P2T2 4.96 5.00 5.00 5.00
W2P3T1 15.58 22.67 W2P3T1 1.81 2.07 3.77 5.00
W2P3T2 9.29 8.33 W2P3T2 4.44 5.00 5.00 5.00
S. Em± 1.09 0.55 S. Em± 0.28 0.31 0.24 0.27
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 17.49 7.51 CV (%) 14.30 14.76 10.25 11.25

NS : Not Significant. NS : Not Significant.

254 Mathew, Seetharamu, Satish, Dileepkumar and Mukund

Table 4. Number of nodes per stolon as influenced by weed management methods and method of planting in turf grass
species

Treatments Number of nodes per stolon

Days after planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 1.56 2.63 4.46 5.92 7.44 8.91 10.15 11.48
T2–Bermuda grass 8.33 11.21 13.83 17.19 20.12 22.59 24.98 27.03
S. Em± 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.27 0.32 0.55 0.66 0.74
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.49 0.43 0.52 0.79 0.94 1.63 1.93 2.19
Method of planting
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 3.43 4.90 6.88 9.20 10.83 12.21 13.37 15.00
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 3.52 5.02 6.89 9.48 11.14 12.44 14.09 15.26
P3–Stolon dibbling 7.89 10.84 13.66 15.99 19.37 22.61 25.24 27.51
S. Em± 0.20 0.18 0.21 0.33 0.39 0.68 0.80 0.91
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.60 0.53 0.64 0.97 1.16 2.00 2.37 2.68
Weed management
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 4.74 6.74 8.86 11.40 13.66 15.55 17.29 19.07
W2–Hand weeding 5.15 7.09 9.42 11.70 13.90 15.95 17.85 19.44
S. Em± 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.27 0.32 0.55 0.66 0.74
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×P
T1P1 1.32 2.35 3.73 4.99 6.37 7.45 8.27 9.48
T2P1 5.53 7.44 10.03 13.41 15.29 16.97 18.48 20.51
T1P2 1.50 2.46 3.74 5.25 6.53 7.67 8.47 9.55
T2P2 5.55 7.58 10.04 13.71 15.75 17.21 19.7 20.97
T1P3 1.86 3.07 5.90 7.53 9.41 11.63 13.72 15.41
T2P3 13.92 18.61 21.43 24.45 29.32 33.59 36.77 39.61
S. Em± 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.47 0.56 0.96 1.14 1.29
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×W
T1W1 1.45 2.58 4.18 5.74 7.35 8.78 10.04 11.41
T2W1 8.03 10.90 13.55 17.06 19.96 22.32 24.53 26.73
T1W2 1.67 2.67 4.73 6.09 7.52 9.04 10.26 11.55
T2W2 8.64 11.52 14.12 17.31 20.28 22.86 25.43 27.33
S. Em± 0.23 0.2 0.25 0.38 0.45 0.78 0.93 1.05
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
P×W
P1W1 3.36 4.81 6.57 9.02 10.72 12.04 13.15 14.75
P2W1 3.43 4.90 6.75 9.29 11.04 12.30 13.81 15.22
P3W1 7.44 10.52 13.27 15.9 19.21 22.31 24.90 27.24
P1W2 3.50 4.99 7.19 9.37 10.94 12.38 13.60 15.24
P2W2 3.62 5.14 7.03 9.67 11.24 12.57 14.36 15.30
P3W2 8.34 11.16 14.06 16.07 19.52 22.91 25.59 27.78
S. Em± 0.29 0.25 0.31 0.47 0.56 0.96 1.14 1.29
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W1P1T1 1.34 2.33 3.45 4.76 6.26 7.30 8.24 9.41
W1P1T2 5.37 7.29 9.69 13.28 15.17 16.77 18.05 20.09
W1P2T1 1.47 2.43 3.61 5.11 6.49 7.50 8.35 9.51
W1P2T2 5.38 7.36 9.89 13.47 15.60 17.11 19.27 20.92
W1P3T1 1.55 2.98 5.46 7.36 9.31 11.55 13.53 15.30
W1P3T2 13.33 18.05 21.07 24.44 29.10 33.07 36.27 39.17
W2P1T1 1.31 2.37 4.00 5.21 6.47 7.59 8.29 9.55
W2P1T2 5.69 7.60 10.37 13.53 15.41 17.16 18.90 20.93
W2P2T1 1.52 2.49 3.87 5.38 6.57 7.83 8.58 9.58
W2P2T2 5.73 7.79 10.19 13.96 15.90 17.31 20.14 21.01
W2P3T1 2.17 3.15 6.33 7.69 9.51 11.71 13.90 15.52
W2P3T2 14.50 19.17 21.78 24.45 29.54 34.10 37.27 40.05
S. Em± 0.41 0.36 0.43 0.66 0.79 1.36 1.61 1.83
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 14.52 9.09 8.31 9.99 9.96 15.01 15.96 16.48

NS : Not Significant.
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 255

Table 5. Number of leaves per stolon as influenced by weed management methods and method of planting in turf grass
species

Treatments Number of leaves per stolon

Days after planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 2.89 4.33 5.38 7.13 8.62 10.22 11.53 12.62
T2–Bermuda grass 10.34 13.5 16.39 18.23 22.76 25.61 28.34 30.74
S. Em± 0.18 0.19 0.22 0.39 0.4 0.51 0.59 0.84
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.54 0.58 0.66 1.16 1.18 1.52 1.73 2.48
Method of planting
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 4.82 6.76 8.39 10.46 12.16 14.07 15.76 17.57
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 4.96 6.89 8.43 10.78 12.23 14.49 15.99 17.73
P3–Stolon dibbling 10.05 13.1 15.83 16.79 22.68 25.2 28.06 29.74
S. Em± 0.22 0.24 0.27 0.48 0.49 0.63 0.72 1.03
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.67 0.71 0.81 1.42 1.44 1.86 2.13 3.04
Weed management
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 6.42 8.74 10.74 12.58 15.64 17.71 19.76 21.35
W2–Hand weeding 6.8 9.09 11.02 12.78 15.74 18.13 20.11 22.01
S. Em± 0.18 0.19 0.22 0.39 0.4 0.51 0.59 0.84
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×P
T1P1 2.37 3.86 4.73 6.31 7.32 8.3 9.29 10.47
T2P1 7.28 9.67 12.05 14.61 17 19.85 22.23 24.66
T1P2 2.36 3.97 4.82 6.63 7.22 8.62 9.35 10.68
T2P2 7.55 9.8 12.05 14.94 17.24 20.35 22.62 24.78
T1P3 3.93 5.16 6.59 8.46 11.32 13.75 15.95 16.7
T2P3 16.18 21.03 25.07 25.13 34.05 36.64 40.18 42.78
S. Em± 0.32 0.34 0.39 0.68 0.69 0.9 1.02 1.46
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×W
T1W1 2.77 4.23 5.33 6.98 8.62 10.13 11.48 12.55
T2W1 10.08 13.25 16.16 18.17 22.66 25.29 28.03 30.14
T1W2 3 4.43 5.43 7.28 8.62 10.32 11.57 12.69
T2W2 10.6 13.75 16.62 18.29 22.87 25.94 28.65 31.34
S. Em± 0.26 0.28 0.32 0.55 0.56 0.73 0.83 1.19
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
P×W
P1W1 4.72 6.61 8.09 10.38 12.1 13.9 15.61 17.25
P2W1 4.91 6.77 8.3 10.73 12.14 14.33 15.74 17.38
P3W1 9.64 12.84 15.84 16.62 22.69 24.9 27.92 29.41
P1W2 4.92 6.92 8.68 10.54 12.21 14.25 15.9 17.89
P2W2 5.01 7 8.57 10.84 12.33 14.65 16.23 18.08
P3W2 10.47 13.36 15.82 16.97 22.68 25.49 28.2 30.07
S. Em± 0.32 0.34 0.39 0.68 0.69 0.9 1.02 1.46
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W1P1T1 2.35 3.74 4.52 6.19 7.23 8.22 9.27 10.43
W1P1T2 7.09 9.47 11.66 14.58 16.98 19.57 21.96 24.07
W1P2T1 2.28 3.88 4.68 6.54 7.24 8.6 9.33 10.64
W1P2T2 7.53 9.66 11.91 14.92 17.03 20.05 22.14 24.12
W1P3T1 3.66 5.06 6.77 8.22 11.4 13.56 15.85 16.58
W1P3T2 15.61 20.61 24.9 25.02 33.97 36.24 39.99 42.23
W2P1T1 2.38 3.98 4.93 6.43 7.41 8.37 9.31 10.52
W2P1T2 7.46 9.86 12.43 14.65 17.01 20.13 22.49 25.25
W2P2T1 2.44 4.05 4.96 6.71 7.2 8.64 9.37 10.72
W2P2T2 7.58 9.94 12.18 14.96 17.45 20.65 23.1 25.43
W2P3T1 4.19 5.27 6.41 8.7 11.24 13.94 16.04 16.82
W2P3T2 16.75 21.45 25.23 25.24 34.13 37.04 40.36 43.32
S. Em± 0.45 0.48 0.55 0.96 0.98 1.27 1.45 2.07
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 12 9.5 8.87 13.24 10.87 12.31 12.62 16.57

NS : Not Significant.
256 Mathew, Seetharamu, Satish, Dileepkumar and Mukund

(7.28 days), high ground cover score (5 at 160 and 160 DAP respectively. Whereas seed sowing
DAP), higher number of nodes per stolon (8.33, method at 5 g/m2 recorded lowest ground cover
11.21, 13.83, 17.19, 20.12, 22.59, 24.98 and score (3.28, 3.51, 4.03 and 3.48) at 40, 80, 120
27.03), higher number of leaves per stolon and 160 DAP, respectively. According to
(10.34, 13.50, 16.39, 18.23, 22.76, 25.61, Thomas et al. (2011) plant counts one year after
28.34 and 30.74) and high leaf width (2.00, seeding were greater in the higher seed rate
2.12, 2.34, 2.44, 2.53, 2.60, 2.67 and 2.69 mm treatment compared to the lower seed rate
at 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140 and 160 DAP, treatments due to better and early germination
respectively) was recorded by Bermuda grass of perennial rye grass. These differences could
var. ‘Tif dwarf’ than Mexican grass due to slow be attributed to the inherent genetic nature like
growing nature of Mexican grass dibbles. Leaf slow growth habit, poor spreading and crown
length (Table 6) was found highest for Bermuda forming nature of seeded Mexican grass.
grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ (5.59, 8.79 and 11.62 cm) Similar trend was also reported by Andrew
up to 60 DAP, there after Mexican grass (2009) in annual rye grass var. ‘Panterra’ and
recorded highest leaf length (13.36, 16.98, Dhanalekshmi (2015) in Bermuda, Mexican,
18.06, 20.10 and 21.99 cm). Average leaf area Centipede and St. Augustine grasses.
was found highest for Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif Stolon dibbling method of establishment
dwarf’ (0.68, 1.20, 1.46, 1.65, 1.81 cm2) up to recorded higher number of nodes per stolon
100 DAP (Table 8) there after Mexican grass (7.89, 10.84, 13.66, 15.99, 19.37, 22.61, 25.24
recorded highest average leaf area (2.12, 2.49 and 27.51) and number of leaves per stolon
and 2.74 cm2 at 120, 140 and 160 DAP). Busey (10.05, 13.10, 15.83, 16.79, 22.68, 25.20,
and Myers (1979) also reported that Bermuda 28.06 and 29.74 at 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120,
grass var. ‘Tif green’ shown fastest ground 140 and 160 DAP, respectively) due to earlier
coverage than that of Japanese grass (Zoysia sprouting of dibbles and better root
japonica Steud.) due to inherent genetic nature establishment in stolon dibbles compared to
of grasses. Similar results were also observed seed sowing. Leaf length, leaf width and average
by Patton et al. (2004) in Bermuda grass and leaf area was recorded highest for
Mexican grass; Leto et al. (2008) in 40 different establishment by seed sowing at 10 g/m2 (5.85,
genotype of Bermuda grass; Severmutlu et al. 10.77, 14.87 cm leaf length, 1.85, 1.99, 2.31
(2011) in Bermuda grass, Centipede grass and mm leaf width and 0.73, 1.31 and 1.78 cm2)
Buffalo grass; Venugopal (2012) in Argentine up to 60 DAP, there after seed sowing method
Bahia grass, perennial rye grass and Zoysia at 5 g/m2 recorded highest leaf length (17.41,
grass; Ubendra (2014) in St. Augustine grass 19.94, 21.02, 23.93 cm), leaf width (2.46, 2.64,
and Zoysia grass; Dhanalekshmi (2015) in 2.84 and 2.95 mm) and average leaf area (2.05,
Bermuda grass, Mexican grass, Centipede grass 2.45, 2.83 and 3.45 cm2) at 80, 100, 120 and
and St. Augustine grass and Roshini (2017) in 160 DAP, respectively. Whereas, turf grass
13 different turf grasses evaluated in southern establishment through seed sowing at 10g/m2
Gujarat. Seed sowing method at 5g/m 2 recorded lowest number of nodes per stolon
recorded significantly higher number of weeds (3.43, 4.90, 6.88, 9.20, 10.83, 12.21, 13.37 and
(11.65/m2) followed by stolon dibbling method 15.00) and lowest number of leaves per stolon
(11.11/m2). Whereas lowest number of weeds (4.82, 6.76, 8.39, 10.46, 12.16, 14.07, 15.76
was recorded in seed sowing method at 10g/ and 17.57) at 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140
m2 (9.65/m2). It could be attributed to less and 160 DAP, respectively. Stolon dibbling
seeds in 5g/m2 seed sowing which led to more method of establishment recorded lowest leaf
vacant spaces between the plants which length, leaf width and average leaf area
triggered more weed population. throughout the study. According to
Early germination was observed in seed Dhanalekshmi (2015) stolon dibbling was found
sowing method at 10g/m2 (11.00 days) whereas superior due to better root penetration and
it was late (16.17 days) in establishment more availability of nutrients which improved
through stolon dibbling method. Seed sowing shoot growth in St. Augustine grass, Bermuda
method at 10 g/m² recorded significantly higher grass, Mexican grass and Centipede grass. The
ground cover score (3.89 and 3.99) at 40, and highest leaf growth parameters in seed sowing
80 DAP, while stolon dibbling recorded highest could be attributed to vigorous growth of
ground cover score of 4.03 and 4.85 at 120 seedlings. These results were in conformity with
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 257

Table 6. Leaf length as influenced by weed management methods and method of planting in turf grass species

Treatments Leaf length (cm)

Days after planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 3.47 7.65 10.49 13.36 16.98 18.06 20.10 21.99
T2–Bermuda grass 5.59 8.79 11.62 12.29 12.36 12.74 12.91 12.91
S. Em± 0.15 0.18 0.21 0.39 0.32 0.40 0.48 0.65
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.44 0.52 0.61 NS 0.96 1.17 1.42 1.93
Method of planting
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 5.85 10.77 14.87 17.15 19.59 20.86 22.56 23.71
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 5.66 10.66 14.79 17.41 19.94 21.02 22.34 23.93
P3–Stolon dibbling 2.08 3.22 3.51 3.92 4.33 4.33 4.62 4.72
S. Em± 0.18 0.22 0.25 0.48 0.4 0.49 0.59 0.80
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.53 0.64 0.74 1.42 1.18 1.44 1.74 2.36
Weed management
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 4.41 8.09 10.95 12.72 14.46 15.20 16.14 17.33
W2–Hand weeding 4.65 8.34 11.16 12.93 14.78 15.61 16.87 17.58
S. Em± 0.15 0.18 0.21 0.39 0.32 0.4 0.48 0.65
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×P
T1P1 4.79 10.83 14.99 18.94 24.18 25.83 28.95 31.46
T2P1 6.91 10.72 14.75 15.37 14.99 15.88 16.17 15.96
T1P2 4.68 10.74 14.90 19.27 24.47 26.09 28.74 31.82
T2P2 6.64 10.58 14.67 15.55 15.41 15.96 15.94 16.04
T1P3 0.96 1.37 1.58 1.88 2.28 2.27 2.62 2.70
T2P3 3.21 5.06 5.43 5.97 6.38 6.39 6.61 6.74
S. Em± 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.68 0.57 0.69 0.84 1.14
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×W
T1W1 3.41 7.39 10.64 13.28 16.77 17.88 19.74 21.83
T2W1 5.42 8.79 11.25 12.17 12.15 12.51 12.54 12.82
T1W2 3.54 7.90 10.34 13.45 17.18 18.24 20.46 22.15
T2W2 5.75 8.79 11.99 12.42 12.37 12.97 13.28 13.00
S. Em± 0.21 0.25 0.29 0.56 0.46 0.56 0.68 0.93
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
P×W
P1W1 5.80 10.67 14.78 17.06 19.40 20.53 22.15 23.53
P2W1 5.59 10.47 14.60 17.27 19.74 20.78 21.83 23.82
P3W1 1.86 3.15 3.46 3.85 4.25 4.28 4.45 4.63
P1W2 5.89 10.88 14.97 17.25 19.77 21.18 22.97 23.89
P2W2 5.74 10.85 14.97 17.55 20.15 21.27 22.85 24.04
P3W2 2.31 3.29 3.56 4.00 4.42 4.38 4.78 4.80
S. Em± 0.26 0.31 0.36 0.68 0.57 0.69 0.84 1.14
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W1P1T1 4.72 10.62 15.26 18.91 23.89 25.58 28.51 31.20
W1P1T2 6.88 10.71 14.30 15.21 14.91 15.48 15.78 15.86
W1P2T1 4.62 10.26 15.13 19.18 24.17 25.85 28.23 31.65
W1P2T2 6.56 10.68 14.07 15.35 15.30 15.70 15.43 15.98
W1P3T1 0.89 1.30 1.54 1.75 2.24 2.21 2.47 2.65
W1P3T2 2.82 4.99 5.37 5.95 6.25 6.34 6.42 6.62
W2P1T1 4.85 11.04 14.73 18.98 24.47 26.08 29.38 31.72
W2P1T2 6.93 10.72 15.2 15.53 15.07 16.28 16.57 16.07
W2P2T1 4.75 11.22 14.67 19.36 24.76 26.32 29.25 31.99
W2P2T2 6.72 10.49 15.27 15.74 15.53 16.21 16.45 16.09
W2P3T1 1.02 1.45 1.62 2.01 2.32 2.32 2.76 2.75
W2P3T2 3.61 5.12 5.49 6.00 6.51 6.43 6.80 6.85
S. Em± 0.36 0.44 0.51 0.97 0.80 0.98 1.18 1.61
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 13.91 9.21 7.95 13.13 9.55 11.07 12.42 16.02

NS : Not Significant.
258 Mathew, Seetharamu, Satish, Dileepkumar and Mukund

Table 7. Leaf width as influenced by weed management methods and method of planting in turf grass species

Treatments Leaf width (mm)

Days after planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 0.94 1.16 1.43 1.61 1.87 2.04 2.11 2.25
T2–Bermuda grass 2 2.12 2.34 2.44 2.53 2.6 2.67 2.69
S. Em± 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.05
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.1 0.13 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.17 0.14 0.15
Method of planting
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 1.85 1.99 2.31 2.38 2.57 2.66 2.82 2.83
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 1.76 1.91 2.27 2.46 2.64 2.84 2.78 2.95
P3–Stolon dibbling 0.8 1.02 1.07 1.24 1.4 1.46 1.58 1.63
S. Em± 0.04 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.06 0.06
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.13 0.17 0.09 0.1 0.1 0.21 0.17 0.19
Weed management
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 1.43 1.62 1.85 1.99 2.19 2.27 2.33 2.43
W2–Hand weeding 1.51 1.66 1.91 2.06 2.21 2.37 2.46 2.51
S. Em± 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.05
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×P
T1P1 1.16 1.35 1.72 1.84 2.13 2.29 2.42 2.54
T2P1 2.54 2.63 2.9 2.91 3 3.04 3.22 3.13
T1P2 1.05 1.33 1.69 1.96 2.25 2.52 2.41 2.68
T2P2 2.47 2.5 2.85 2.96 3.03 3.16 3.14 3.21
T1P3 0.61 0.82 0.87 1.04 1.23 1.32 1.51 1.54
T2P3 0.99 1.22 1.26 1.44 1.57 1.6 1.66 1.72
S. Em± 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.08 0.09
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×W
T1W1 0.89 1.15 1.41 1.59 1.87 2 2.06 2.23
T2W1 1.96 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.52 2.55 2.59 2.64
T1W2 0.99 1.18 1.45 1.64 1.88 2.09 2.16 2.28
T2W2 2.03 2.13 2.37 2.48 2.54 2.64 2.76 2.73
S. Em± 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.07
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
P×W
P1W1 1.83 2.02 2.28 2.35 2.54 2.63 2.75 2.81
P2W1 1.7 1.88 2.24 2.43 2.65 2.75 2.71 2.89
P3W1 0.75 0.97 1.05 1.2 1.39 1.45 1.52 1.6
P1W2 1.87 1.96 2.34 2.4 2.59 2.69 2.89 2.86
P2W2 1.81 1.95 2.3 2.49 2.63 2.93 2.85 3
P3W2 0.84 1.07 1.09 1.28 1.41 1.47 1.65 1.66
S. Em± 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.08 0.09
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W1P1T1 1.14 1.36 1.7 1.83 2.12 2.27 2.37 2.52
W1P1T2 2.52 2.69 2.85 2.88 2.96 2.98 3.12 3.1
W1P2T1 0.96 1.3 1.66 1.95 2.23 2.42 2.39 2.65
W1P2T2 2.45 2.45 2.81 2.91 3.07 3.07 3.02 3.14
W1P3T1 0.57 0.78 0.86 0.99 1.24 1.3 1.42 1.52
W1P3T2 0.92 1.17 1.24 1.4 1.54 1.59 1.62 1.68
W2P1T1 1.18 1.34 1.74 1.86 2.14 2.3 2.46 2.56
W2P1T2 2.56 2.58 2.94 2.94 3.04 3.09 3.32 3.16
W2P2T1 1.14 1.35 1.71 1.96 2.27 2.63 2.44 2.71
W2P2T2 2.49 2.54 2.89 3.02 2.98 3.24 3.26 3.29
W2P3T1 0.64 0.86 0.89 1.09 1.25 1.33 1.59 1.56
W2P3T2 1.05 1.28 1.29 1.48 1.6 1.61 1.7 1.76
S. Em± 0.09 0.11 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.12 0.13
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 10.26 11.88 5.6 5.96 5.4 10.5 8.53 9.05

NS : Not Significant.
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 259

Table 8. Average leaf area as influenced by weed management methods and method of planting in turf grass species

Treatments Average leaf area (cm2)

Days after planting

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Grass species
T1–Mexican grass 0.41 0.74 1.16 1.4 1.76 2.12 2.49 2.74
T2–Bermuda grass 0.68 1.2 1.46 1.65 1.81 2.02 2.12 2.31
S. Em± 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.13 NS NS 0.17 0.16
Method of planting
P1–Seed sowing (10 g/m²) 0.73 1.31 1.78 2.01 2.34 2.79 3.17 3.41
P2–Seed sowing (5 g/m2) 0.71 1.25 1.73 2.05 2.45 2.83 3.13 3.45
P3–Stolon dibbling 0.19 0.35 0.44 0.5 0.56 0.58 0.63 0.71
S. Em± 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.1 0.09 0.07 0.07
C. D. (P=0.05) 0.06 0.09 0.06 0.16 0.28 0.27 0.21 0.2
Weed management
W1–Dizomet 98 MZ 0.53 0.94 1.3 1.5 1.76 2.04 2.28 2.51
W2–Hand weeding 0.56 1 1.32 1.54 1.81 2.09 2.34 2.54
S. Em± 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
T×P
T1P1 0.59 1.07 1.66 1.99 2.45 3.04 3.6 3.9
T2P1 0.87 1.54 1.89 2.04 2.23 2.53 2.73 2.92
T1P2 0.57 1.02 1.63 1.98 2.56 3.04 3.54 3.91
T2P2 0.85 1.48 1.83 2.13 2.34 2.62 2.71 2.99
T1P3 0.07 0.12 0.2 0.22 0.26 0.27 0.34 0.4
T2P3 0.32 0.58 0.67 0.78 0.86 0.9 0.92 1.02
S. Em± 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.14 0.13 0.1 0.09
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS 0.08 0.23 0.4 0.37 0.3 0.28
T×W
T1W1 0.4 0.7 1.16 1.38 1.74 2.1 2.46 2.7
T2W1 0.67 1.18 1.45 1.63 1.78 1.99 2.09 2.31
T1W2 0.42 0.77 1.17 1.41 1.77 2.14 2.53 2.77
T2W2 0.7 1.22 1.47 1.67 1.84 2.04 2.15 2.31
S. Em± 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.11 0.1 0.08 0.08
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
P×W
P1W1 0.72 1.28 1.77 1.99 2.32 2.77 3.15 3.37
P2W1 0.69 1.2 1.73 2.04 2.42 2.8 3.05 3.43
P3W1 0.18 0.33 0.42 0.49 0.55 0.57 0.62 0.74
P1W2 0.75 1.33 1.78 2.03 2.37 2.81 3.18 3.45
P2W2 0.73 1.29 1.73 2.07 2.49 2.86 3.2 3.48
P3W2 0.21 0.37 0.45 0.52 0.57 0.6 0.64 0.69
S. Em± 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.14 0.13 0.1 0.09
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
W×P×T
W1P1T1 0.57 1.03 1.66 1.96 2.43 3.03 3.57 3.83
W1P1T2 0.86 1.53 1.88 2.03 2.2 2.5 2.73 2.9
W1P2T1 0.55 0.95 1.62 1.97 2.53 3 3.47 3.89
W1P2T2 0.83 1.45 1.83 2.1 2.3 2.6 2.63 2.96
W1P3T1 0.07 0.11 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.39
W1P3T2 0.3 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.84 0.88 0.91 1.08
W2P1T1 0.61 1.11 1.66 2.01 2.47 3.05 3.63 3.96
W2P1T2 0.89 1.55 1.91 2.06 2.27 2.57 2.73 2.93
W2P2T1 0.59 1.08 1.64 1.99 2.59 3.07 3.6 3.93
W2P2T2 0.87 1.51 1.82 2.15 2.39 2.64 2.79 3.02
W2P3T1 0.07 0.13 0.2 0.23 0.26 0.29 0.34 0.42
W2P3T2 0.34 0.61 0.7 0.81 0.87 0.91 0.93 0.96
SEm± 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.19 0.18 0.14 0.13
C. D. (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
CV (%) 11.95 11.21 5.4 12.55 18.62 15.15 10.79 9.19

NS : Not Significant.
260 Mathew, Seetharamu, Satish, Dileepkumar and Mukund

Munshaw et al. (2001) in Bermuda grass, various stages of growth. Bermuda grass var.
Venugopal (2012) in Argentine Bahia grass, ‘Tif dwarf’ planted by seed sowing method at
Perennial rye grass and Zoysia grass, Ubendra 10g/m2 took significantly lowest number of
(2014) in St. Augustine grass and Zoysia grass. days for germination (6.17 days). Whereas it
Hand weeding recorded significantly was late in Mexican grass established through
higher number of weeds per square meter of stolon dibbling (23.50 days) followed by
11.94 than the plots applied with Dizomet MZ Mexican grass established through seed sowing
(9.68/m2) due to the herbicidal action of the method at 10 g/m2 (15.83 days).
chemical Methyl Isothiocynate gas released by Among two weed management
the Basamid granules which killed the weed approaches evaluated chemical weeding using
seeds, rhizomes, runners and stolons of weeds Dizomet 98 MZ recorded considerable control
present in the soil. Patrick et al. (2017) also of weeds compared to hand weeding but all
observed that weed cover was reduced to 15, vegetative growth parameters were found to be
53, 81 and 90 per cent of the untreated plots reduced in chemical weeding. Method of
from herbicides applied plots on zero, two, four, establishment through stolon dibbling was
or six weeks before seeding, respectively. found superior over other methods with respect
Similar results were also observed by Bradley to vegetative growth parameters while lowest
et al. (2002) in creeping bent grass, Binghan weed population early germination and better
(2012) in Bermuda grass and Siddappa et al. ground coverage was recorded in seed sowing
(2015) in different warm season grasses. Hand method at 10g/m 2 . Among the turf grass
weeded plots took significantly a smaller species evaluated Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’
number of days for germination of seeds or found superior than Mexican grass.
stolon sprouting (12.17 days) than in Dizomet
applied plots (13.39 days). It is attributed to CONCLUSION
the presence of chemical residues (Methyl
Isothiocynate) which delayed germination. Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ sown at
Aaron et al. (2007) also observed that 10 g/m 2 recorded early germination (or)
Foramsulfuron chemical residue injured sprouting, higher ground cover percentage with
seedling Zoysia grass up to two months after lower weed infestation. Dizomet 98 MZ applied
seed sowing in both the years of testing. Similar plots recorded a considerable reduction in weed
trending was also reported by Bradley et al. population. Stolon dibbling method of plating
(2002) in annual blue grass seedlings when was found superior with respect to ground
treated with Dizomet, Gerald et al. (2012) in cover per cent score.
perennial rye grass in which ground cover was
reduced to 37 to 48 per cent on plots treated REFERENCES
with Indaziflam at 0.75 and 1.0 ai/acre.
Mexican grass established plot through Aaron, J. P., Daniel, V., Weisenberger, G.,
seed sowing at 5 g/m2 recorded significantly Hardebeck, A. and Zachary, J. R. (2007).
highest total weed count of 19.77/m 2 and Safety of herbicides on ‘Zenith’ Zoysia grass
lowest ground cover score (1.64, 2.02, 2.02 and seedlings. Weed Technol. 21 : 145-50.
Andrew, H. H. (2009). Seeding rates of annual
1.97) at 40, 80, 120 and 160 DAP, respectively.
ryegrass that maximize turf cover when
Whereas, lowest total weed count (2.70/m2) and sown during traffic. M. Sc thesis, Iowa State
highest ground cover score was recorded for University, Ames, Iowa.
Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ established Bingham, S. W. (2012). Influence of herbicides on
through seed sowing at 10g/m2 (4.94, 5.00, root development of bermudagrass. Weed
5.00 and 5.00 at 40, 80, 120 and 160 DAP, Sci. 15 : 363-65.
respectively) which was on par with Bermuda Bradley, S. P. and Peter, J. L. (2002). Effect of
grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ established through seed dizomet on annual blue grass emergence
sowing at 5g/m2 (4.92, 5.00, 5.00 and 5.00 at and creeping bent grass establishment in
turf maintained as a golf course fairway.
40, 80, 120 and 160 DAP, respectively). It could
Crop Sci. 43 : 1387-94.
be attributed to better germination and fast- Briscoe, K., Miller, G., Brinton, S., Bowman, D. and
growing nature of Bermuda grass var. ‘Tif dwarf’ Peacock, C. (2012). Evaluation of
which reduced the weed population and ‘Miniverde’ Bermuda grass and ‘Diamond’
difference in growing nature of grasses at Zoysia grass putting green establishment
 Weed management and establishment of turf grasses 261

using granular fertilizer applications. Hort. Panse, V. G. and Sukhatme, P. V. (1985). Statistical
Sci. 47 : 943-47. Methods for Agricultural Workers. ICAR,
Bruce, E. B., Glen, A. H., Joseph, W. M. and New Delhi, India. Pp. 187-202.
Zachary, J. R. (2004). Turf grass renovation Patrick, J. S., Stevan, Z. K., Robert, N. K., Nevin, L.
using dazomet to control the Poa annua L. and Rodrigo, W. (2017). Guide for weed,
soil seed bank. Hort. Sci. 39 : 1763-69. disease, and insect management in
Bryan, J. U., Barry, J. B., John, A. D. and John, S. Nebraska. UNL Extension, Nabraska,
K. (2002). Fumigant alternatives for methyl Lincoln. Pp. 8-21.
bromide prior to turfgrass establishment. Patton, A. J., Hardebeck, G. A., Williams, D. W. and
Weed Technol. 16 : 379-87. Reicher, Z. J. (2004). Establishment of
Busey, P. and Myers, B. J. (1979). Growth rates of Bermuda grass and Zoysia grass by seed.
turf grasses propagated vegetatively. Agron. Crop Sci. 44 : 2160-67.
J. 71 : 817-21. Randhawa, G. S. and Mukhopadhyay, A. (1986).
Croce, P. and De, L. (2011). Turf grass information Floriculture in India. Allied publishers, New
file. USGA 87 : 84. https://www.libraries. Delhi, India. Pp. 560-74.
rutgers.edu/indexes/turfgrass. Roshini, A., Chawla, S. L. and Sudha, P. (2017).
Dhanalekshmi, R., Bhaskar, V. V. and Evaluation of warm season turf grasses for
Subbaramamma, P. (2015). Influence of soil various qualitative and quantitative traits
parameters on the establishment of turf under Gujarat agro-climatic conditions.
grass species under different methods of Indian J. Agric. Sci. 87 : 83-91.
planting. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 7 Scott, J. M. and Greg, K. B. (2006). Triclopyr Safens
: 2607-15. the use of fluazifop and fenoxaprop on
Enzhan, S. (2012). Control of Bermuda grass Zoysia grass while maintaining
(Cynodon dactylon) in Zoysia grass (Zoysia bermudagrass suppression. Applied
japonica) turf by using post-emergence Turfgrass Science, Online. doi:10.1094/
herbicides. M. Sc. Thesis, University of ATS-0502-01-RS.
Missouri, Columbia. Severmutlu, S., Mutlu, N., Shearman, R. C.,
Gerald, M. H., James, T. B., Greg, K. B., Tyler, C. Gurbuz, E., Gulsen, O., Hocagil, M.,
and Leslie, L. (2012). Indaziflam programs Karaguzel, O., Heng-Moss, T., Riordan, T.
for weed control in overseeded Bermuda P. and Gaussoin, R. E. (2011).
grass Turf. Hort Technol. 26 : 774-77. Establishment and turf qualities of warm-
Hensler, K. L. and Gotley, J. M. (2009). Low season turf grasses in the Mediterranean
maintenance turf grass evaluation. In: region. Hort. Technol. 21 : 67-81.
Progress report 2008. Virginia cooperative Siddappa., Jayaprasad, K. V. and Sanjay, M. T.
extension, Virginia, U.S.A. pp.1-30. (2015). Effect of herbicides on management
Janakiram, T., Ritu, J. and Namita (2015). of weeds in lawn. The Bioscan 10 : 285-89.
Introduction to turf grasses. Westville, New Susan, M., Chawla, S. L. and Roshini, A. (2016).
Delhi, India. Pp.12-15. Recent advances in turf management. In:
Leto, C., Sarno, M., Tuttolomondo, T., La, B. S. and Commercial Horticulture. (Patel, N.L.,
Licata, M. (2008). Two years of studies into Chawla, S.L. and Ahlawat, T.R. Eds). NIPA,
native Bermuda grass (Cynodon spp.) New Delhi, India. Pp. 549-61.
Germplasm from Sicily (Italy) for the Thomas, S., Mathew, C. and Jeffrey, F. D. (2011).
Constitution of Turf Cultivars. Acta Hortic. Persistence of over seeded cool-season
1 : 39-48. grasses in Bermuda grass turf. Int. J.
Michael, T. D. (2012). Temperature effects on Agron. 2011 : Article ID 496892. https://
germination characteristics and traffic doi.org/10.1155/ 2011/496892.
tolerance of newly established stands of Ubendra, S. (2014). Evaluation of turf grasses for
nineteen commercially available cultivars tropical conditions. M. Sc. Thesis, Tamil
of seeded Bermuda grass. M. Sc thesis., Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore,
Kentuky University, U.S.A. India.
Munshaw, G. C., Williams, D. W. and Cornelius, P. Venugopal, G. (2012). Studies on the performance
L. (2001). Management strategies during of lawn grasses under different soil and shade
the establishment year enhance production conditions. M.Sc Thesis, Dr. YSR Horticulture
and fitness of seeded Bermuda grass University, Venkataramannagudem,
stolons. Crop Sci. 41 : 1558-64. Andhra Pradesh, India.