| |
| Web URL(s): | https://stri.lib.msu.edu/vol61-1985/pdf/sptri85061148.pdf#page=2
Last checked: 08/30/2006
Requires: PDF Reader
Notes: Available to TGIF and STRI users |
|---|
| Access Restriction: | Certain MSU-hosted archive URLs may be restricted to legacy database members. |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Report |
|---|
| Content Type: | Q & A |
|---|
| Corporate Author(s): | Sports Turf Research Institute |
|---|
| Title: | Privet hedge |
|---|
| Section: | Enquiries and replies
Other records with the "Enquiries and replies" Section
|
|---|
| Source: | Journal of the Sports Turf Research Institute. Vol. 61, 1985, p. 149-150. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | Bingley, West Yorkshire, UK: The Sports Turf Research Institute |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 2 |
|---|
| Question: | "One side of our green is bordered by a privet hedge separated from the green by a concrete path. The edge of the green adjacent of this hedge has always been weak and we were wondering if the hedge is responsible for poor grass growth and whether we should remove it." |
|---|
| Answer/Response: | "It is certainly possible that your hedge may be responsible for the weakness of the green. Roots tend to penetrate quite some distance and if they are growing under the sward will tend to remove water and nutrients at the expense of the sward. From this point of view the hedge is undesirable and it seems likely that the green would improve as a result unless of course there are other reasons why grass growth is poor over that particular section. However, from the players point of view such hedges may be an advantage in sheltering them, from cold winds, increasing privacy etc. One further disadvantage of such hedges may be the shading effect which besides limiting growth to some extent may also encourage Fusarium patch disease as shaded swards are likely to be wetter and more prone to fungal attack. Rather than removing the hedge entirely, a compromise solution might be appropriate. Halving its height could be useful or alternatively it could be possible to sever roots to prevent them growing beneath the playing surface. The ditch adjacent to the hedge could be excavated and any roots found could then be severed. At the same time it could be useful to see if roots are blocking underlying ditch drainpipes and clear these at the same time. This often is a solution which clubs feel preferable to removing hedges altogether." |
|---|
| Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Bowling greens; Competition; Hedgerows; Recommendations; Shade stress; Turfgrass quality
|
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 0 |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Sports Turf Research Institute. 1985. Privet hedge. J. Turfgrass Sports Surf. Sci. 61:p. 149-150. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=114455 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 114455. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| Web URL(s):
https://stri.lib.msu.edu/vol61-1985/pdf/sptri85061148.pdf#page=2
Last checked: 08/30/2006
Requires: PDF Reader
Notes: Available to TGIF and STRI users |
| 
MSU catalog number: SB 433 .A1 S63 |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
