Search Results
You are looking at 11 - 20 of 40 items for
- Author or Editor: Mary Hockenberry Meyer* x
Miscanthus sinensis was investigated where it has naturalized and invaded native plant communities in southeastern Pennsylvania, the Washington, D.C. area, western North Carolina, and Iowa. Plants were identified; inflorescences were collected; seed was cleaned and tested for viability; and soil was collected for seed bank analysis. Many individuals were interviewed at each location. Locations were mapped to show miscanthus. The species or “wild type” Miscanthus sinensis that has naturalized at the above locations is rarely sold in the nursery trade. The numerous, popular, ornamental cultivars derived from this species are vegetatively propagated clones that are common in the nursery trade. Miscanthus is self-incompatible and sets seed only when two or more genotypes are grown together. Individual isolated plants set little seed. Plants of the wild type which have naturalized each represent a unique individual or genotype and thus set heavy seed, quite different from ornamental cultivars. Further complicating this is the high variability of seed set due to environmental conditions. Management guidelines were developed along with recommendations which include: Do not plant the species Miscanthus sinensis. Cultivars of the species, especially when two are more are grown together, represent a high risk for self-seeding in the Mid Atlantic states. Cultivars should only be planted in areas where they can be watched and managed for self-seeding. No miscanthus should be planted where it can seed into native areas, such as highways, fields, meadows, or wooded areas. A comprehensive website with identification, pictures, management guidelines, and recommendations was developed: http://horticulture.coafes.umn.edu/miscanthus.
Homeowner surveys conducted in Edina, Minn., showed varying levels of horticultural knowledge on lawn care. A majority of consumers, 75%, knew the value of lawn clippings was equivalent to one fertilization treatment, but 72% did not know the amount of fertilizer needed for a medium maintenance lawn. A total of 77% indicated spring as the single best time to control broadleaf weeds, and 39% thought spring was the best time to fertilize, whereas 48% indicating fall as the best time to fertilize. Current practices included the following: leaving clippings on the lawn, 75%; bagged and removed clippings,16%; 83% apply fertilize in the spring; 67% fertilize in the fall; 61% apply herbicides; 74% mow weekly; 51% mow at 2–3″, but 27% mow at 1–2″. Environmental attitudes were rated on a scale of 1 to 4, with 1 being strongly agree and 4 being strongly disagree. Consumers strongly agreed that pesticide (1.5) and fertilizer (1.7) applications should be posted in public areas. The statement “A well kept lawn increases property values” also found strong agreement, (1.6). Consumers disagreed that pesticides are not harmful to the environment (3.3) and public health (3.3); while fertilizers were only slightly less harmful to the environment (3.0) and public health (2.9). A 10% weed population was acceptable (2.2) but 25% was not (3.3). Areas for consumer education exist in the time and amount of fertilizer, timing of weed control, and mowing height. Because of negative attitudes toward pesticides and fertilizers, recommendations for medium to low input grasses should be well received.
Many different vegetatively propagated cultivars of Miscanthus sinensis Anderss. are popular ornamental grasses sold at garden centers and nurseries. Large stands of the “wild type” or species (not ornamental cultivars) of this grass have self-seeded near Asheville, N.C.; Valley Forge, Pa.; and Washington, D.C. In order to document the competitive ability of this self-seeded naturalized species, a greenhouse competition study was conducted with Panicum virgatum L. `Forestburg' (P), switchgrass, and several non-native, naturalized biotypes of Miscanthus sinensis (M) grown from seed collected from the above locations. Seedlings were transplanted into #1 (2.88 L) containers in nine different planting arrangements: 2M; 4M; 8M; 2M2P; 4M4P; 8M8P; 2P; 4P; 8P, and grown for 15 weeks. Growth measurements were taken during the 15 weeks. At harvest, shoot and root dry weights were calculated. Panicum had significantly larger root (0.50 g vs. 6.00 g) and shoot (6.96 g vs. 2.3 g) biomass, respectively, than Miscanthus. Intraspecific competition in monocultures was significantly higher for Panicum than Miscanthus. Panicum showed higher competitive ability than all Miscanthus biotypes, with one exception: root dry weights of one Pennsylvania biotype. Panicum increased in dry weight at the expense of Miscanthus. Panicum dominated Miscanthus during the 15 weeks and, in this study, proved to be a better competitor than Miscanthus. Miscanthus and Panicum did not fully share the common limiting resources and they showed partial resource complementarity. Miscanthus biotype variation was evident; the highest dry weights were from a Pennsylvania biotype and the smallest weights were from a Washington, D.C., biotype.
Fifty-five online survey responses, 15 phone interviews, and 9 site visits were conducted to collect information on academic (for credit) classes, internships, and Cooperative Extension programs at botanic gardens and arboreta in the United States. Academic programs investigated were primarily instructional credit classes. Thirty-five (64%) of the respondents indicated their garden offers an entire or partial academic class on-site. The most limiting factor in offering more academic classes was faculty time or staff limitations, as indicated by 21 participants (38%). Thirty-one (56%) gardens offer some type of internship, although only 16 (30%) were offering an academic (for credit) internship. Respondents indicated extension involvement as follows: Extension Specialists/Extension Master Gardeners (EMG) teach classes on-site, 23 (42%); EMG training was held on-site, 17 (31%); EMG answered questions on-site, 16 (29%); and 26 (47%) indicated “other” extension collaboration. Sixty-six percent reported their working relationship with extension as minimal or fair as opposed to 33% who described their extension relationship as good to excellent. Examples of successful programs in these three areas are presented, which offer models for collaborative work between botanic gardens, academia, and extension.
A survey of e-mail discussion list participants found 84% rated the program as a valuable or very valuable educational tool. Most participants, 82%, thought it was equal to or more valuable than printed materials such as fact sheets or bulletins. Participants cite advantages as rapid response, unique, specific information not found in other sources, and a sense of connectedness to the Master Gardener program. Disadvantages include too much e-mail, frustration with participants who do not look up easy traditional questions, chitchat, and nonhorticultural postings. A summary of messages by subject shows tree and shrub questions are asked most often.
This paper presents a decision case concerning the application of herbicides to turfgrass at a public university housing project. Some residents opposed pesticide use, even though the grounds were infested with weeds. The chair of the grounds committee had to decide whether or not to use herbicides given the resulting social implications. The case was written for use in turfgrass management or introductory horticulture classes and possibly for turf and landscape personnel taught through extension education. Students assume the role of a decisionmaker in the complicated issue of pesticide use.