Municipal water supply systems are increasingly burdened by population growth, and public utilities often implement water use restrictions during periods of severe drought to ensure an adequate supply of potable water for the population. These water restrictions commonly target discretionary uses such as lawn and landscape irrigation. When considering water restrictions and other water conservation methods, replacing traditional turfgrasses with native or indigenous species is often a favored approach despite the apparent ability of warm-season turfgrasses to withstand and recover from prolonged periods of drought. To enable regulators to make informed decisions, additional information is needed documenting both the maximum duration without added water that allows for turf survival and post-water stress characteristics as affected by water stress duration and genotype.
Although a group of different turfgrasses may experience the same climatic conditions, they may not all experience exactly the same degree of water stress as a result of various modes of drought avoidance. Such mechanisms include deep rooting (Huang et al., 1997a, 1997b; Marcum et al., 1995; Sheffer et al., 1987), rapid water uptake from deeper soil layers (Huang et al., 1997b), root branching at lower depths (Marcum et al., 1995), and preconditioning to water stress (Qian and Fry, 1996, 1997). More recent breeding efforts to develop dwarf-type grasses with lower mowing heights and greater plant densities have tended to result in shorter root systems and increased susceptibility to water stress (Qian et al., 1997; White et al., 1993).
The onset of limited soil moisture triggers a host of physiological actions within turfgrass plants. Increased levels of abscisic acid and reduced levels of cytokinin have been correlated with drought conditions and reduced levels of growth and transpiration (Assmann and Shimazaki, 1999; DaCosta and Huang, 2007). During the initial stages of drought, an increased amount of carbon is partitioned to the root system to increase root growth and exploration of the soil for water followed by increased carbon storage as carbohydrates in the leaves and stems for future use during drought recovery (DaCosta and Huang, 2006). Under severe drought conditions, many root and stem cells suffer damage to cell membranes causing leakage of solutes and electrolytes, which result in increased resistance to water transport and ultimately leads to plant death (Boyer, 1971; Huang et al., 1997b). Field evidence collected by Griffin and Hoffmann (2012) showed that mortality of two alpine grass species (P. hothamensis and P. hiemata) in Australia was directly related to the amount of plant-available water in the upper 6 cm of soil. Thus, drought of sufficient magnitude and duration may result in the death of the entire plant.
Recovery of turf from drought stress has only been studied to a limited extent and largely with cool-season grasses such as tall fescue (Huang et al., 1998), kentucky bluegrass (Wang and Huang, 2004), and bentgrass (DaCosta and Huang, 2007). Heckathorn et al. (1997) found that nitrogen levels in C4 prairie grasses were reduced during drought periods resulting in lower enzyme levels, which lowered photosynthetic activity for at least 14 d after the end of the drought period. Cathey et al. (2011) studied turf response to increasing water stress as measured by reduced transpiration rates in a greenhouse experiment and found that zoysiagrass reflected less stress in the plants as compared with bahiagrass and st. augustinegrass. The lower stress in zoysiagrass was attributed to a combination of this grass having a longer time of acclimation as a result of lower transpiration rates and greater osmotic regulation resulting in higher turgor pressures.
The present study was conducted to evaluate the recuperative potential of transplanted plugs of 24 commonly grown cultivars of three species of warm-season turfgrasses subjected to varying amounts of water stress caused by prolonged withholding of water to plants grown in restricted (10 cm) and unrestricted root zones.
BeardJ.1973Turfgrass: Science and culture. Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs NJ
CatheyS.E.KruseJ.K.SinclairT.R.DukesM.D.2011Tolerance of three warm-season turfgrasses to increasing and prolonged soil water deficitHortScience4615501555
ChalmersD.R.SteinkeK.WhiteR.H.ThomasJ.C.FippsG.2008Evaluation of sixty-day drought survival in San Antonio of established turfgrass species and cultivars. Final Report to the San Antonio Water System and the Turfgrass Producers of Texas
DaCostaM.HuangB.2006Changes in carbon partitioning and accumulation patterns during drought and recovery for colonial bentgrass, creeping bentgrass, and velvet bentgrassJ. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.131484490
DaCostaM.HuangB.2007Drought survival and recuperative ability of bentgrass species associated with changes in abscisic acid and cytokinin productionJ. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci.1326066
GriffinP.C.HoffmannA.A.2012Mortality of Austalian alpine grasses (Poa spp.) after drought: Species differences and ecological patternsJ. Plant Ecol.5121133
HeckathornS.A.DeLuciaE.H.ZielinskiR.E.1997The contribution of drought-related decreases in foliar nitrogen concentration to decreases in photosynthetic capacity during and after drought in prairie grassesPhysiol. Plant.101173182
HuangB.DuncanR.R.CarrowR.N.1997aDrought-resistance mechanisms of seven warm-season turfgrasses under surface soil drying: I. Shoot responseCrop Sci.3718581863
HuangB.DuncanR.R.CarrowR.N.1997bDrought-resistance mechanisms of seven warm-season turfgrasses under surface soil drying: II. Root aspectsCrop Sci.3718631869
HuangB.FryJ.WangB.1998Water relations and canopy characteristics of tall fescue cultivars during and after drought stressHortScience33837840
MarcumK.B.EngelkeM.C.MortonS.J.WhiteR.H.1995Rooting characteristics and associated drought resistance of zoysiagrassesAgron. J.87534538
NeumannR.B.CardonZ.G.2012The magnitude of hydraulic redistribution by plant roots: A review and synthesis of empirical and modeling studiesNew Phytol.194337352
Soil Conservation Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Texas Agricultural Experiment Station1976Soil survey laboratory data and descriptions for some soils of Texas. Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 30. U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 178–179
SteinkeK.ChalmersD.ThomasJ.WhiteR.2011Bermudagrass and buffalograss drought response and recovery at two soil depthsCrop Sci.5112151223
SteinkeK.ChalmersD.ThomasJ.WhiteR.FippsG.2010Drought response and recovery characteristics of st. augustinegrass cultivarsCrop Sci.5020762083
TrappeJ.PattonA.KarcherD.RichardsonM.2010Divot recovery among bermudagrass and zoysiagrass cultivars—Year 2. Arkansas Turfgrass Report 2009Ark. Ag. Exp. Stn. Res. Ser.579119122