| |
| DOI: | 10.21273/HORTSCI.19.2.309 |
|---|
| Web URL(s): | https://journals.ashs.org/horttech/view/journals/horttech/19/2/article-p309.xml?rskey=9BlgIQ
Last checked: 11/21/2019
Requires: PDF Reader |
|---|
| Publication Type:
| Refereed |
|---|
| Author(s): | Bell, Gregory E.;
Martin, Dennis L.;
Koh, Kyungjoon;
Han, Holly R. |
|---|
| Author Affiliation: | Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma |
|---|
| Title: | Comparison of turfgrass visual quality ratings with ratings determined using a handheld optical sensor |
|---|
| Section: | Research reports
Other records with the "Research reports" Section
|
|---|
| Source: | HortTechnology. Vol. 19, No. 2, April-June 2009, p. 309-316. |
|---|
| Publishing Information: | Alexandria, VA: American Society for Horticultural Science |
|---|
| # of Pages: | 8 |
|---|
| Keywords: | TIC Keywords: Comparisons; Visual evaluation; Quality evaluation; Optical analysis; Hand tools; Bouteloua dactyloides; Zoysia; Cynodon
|
|---|
| Abstract/Contents: | "Turfgrass performance can be assessed in terms of visual quality, but evaluators require training and may be distracted by many factors that affect accuracy and consistency. The objectives of this study were to assess a handheld optical sensor (GreenSeeker) for evaluating overall turfgrass quality in three turf species over two growing seasons, and to compare the combined time required for visual evaluation and data entry with the time required for the same functions using the handheld optical sensor. Visual quality ratings and sensor ratings were collected on schedules prescribed by the National Turfgrass Evaluation Program for the 2002 bermudagrass (Cynodon spp.), 2002 buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides), and 2002 zoysiagrass (Zoysia spp.) studies in 2003 and 2004. Use of the sensor reduced the time required to complete data collection and data entry by 58% compared with human visual evaluation. Of the three species tested, the bermudagrass evaluation had the strongest correlation between ratings collected by the human evaluator and the sensor [r = 0.79 in 2003 (n = 343), r = 0.85 in 2004 (n = 343)]. The handheld optical sensor provided a consistent, objective evaluation of overall turfgrass quality and required less time than visual evaluation. The handheld optical sensor provides advantages for assessing turfgrass quality that cannot be realized by human evaluation, but the sensor alone is not sufficient for specific evaluations such as color, texture, or density that are routinely characterized by human evaluation." |
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| References: | 16 |
|---|
| Note: | Tables
Brief summary appears in Plant Management Network, 09/23/2009, p. [1-2] |
|---|
| ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Bell, G. E., D. L. Martin, K. Koh, and H. R. Han. 2009. Comparison of turfgrass visual quality ratings with ratings determined using a handheld optical sensor. HortTechnology. 19(2):p. 309-316. |
| Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=148483 |
| If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 148483. |
| Choices for finding the above item: |
|---|
| DOI: 10.21273/HORTSCI.19.2.309 |
| Web URL(s):
https://journals.ashs.org/horttech/view/journals/horttech/19/2/article-p309.xml?rskey=9BlgIQ
Last checked: 11/21/2019
Requires: PDF Reader |
| 
MSU catalog number: b2917674a |
| Find from within TIC:
Digitally in TIC by record number. |
| Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record) |
