RELATIVE WATER REQUIREMENTS OF SIX GROUND-COVER SPECIES.

in HortScience
Authors:
D.R. PittengerBotany and Plant Sciences. University of California. Riverside. CA 92521.

Search for other papers by D.R. Pittenger in
ASHS
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Donald R. HodelBotany and Plant Sciences. University of California. Riverside. CA 92521.

Search for other papers by Donald R. Hodel in
ASHS
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
David A. ShawBotany and Plant Sciences. University of California. Riverside. CA 92521.

Search for other papers by David A. Shaw in
ASHS
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close

Non-turf ground-covers occupy a significant portion of the landscape, and understanding their water requirements is important when water conservationism being practiced. Six groundcover species (Baccharis pilularis `Twin Peaks', Drosanthemum hispidum, Vinca major Gazania hybrid, Potentilla tabernaemontani and Hedera helix `Needlepoint') representing a range of observed water needs were evaluated under different levels of irrigation based on percentages of real-time reference evapotranspiration.

Treatments of 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% of ETO were applied during 1989 while treatments of 50%, 40%, 30% and 20% of ETO were applied during 1990. Plant performance ratings in the first year indicated that 50% of ETO was the minimum treatment which resulted in acceptable plan aesthetics for all species except for Drosanthemum which performed equally well at each treatment. Significant differences in performance did occur among and within species at the different treatments. Results from 1990 will reveal which species might maintain aesthetic appearance at irrigation levels between 50% and 20% of ETO. These results will be presented and discussed in terms of their significance to species selection and total landscape irrigation management.

  • Collapse
  • Expand

 

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 5 5 0
PDF Downloads 26 26 2