Status assessment of water use research in turf growth and maintenance.

The strategic objectives of Turf Australia (formerly the Turf Producers Association (TPA)) relating to water use in turf are to: • Source and collate information to support the case for adequate access to water for the Turf production and maintenance sectors and • Compile information generated into a convincing communication package that can be readily used by the industry in its advocacy programs (to government, regulators, media etc) More specifically, the turfgrass industry needs unbiased scientific evidence of the value of healthy grass in our environment. It needs to promote the use of adequate water even during drought periods to maintain quality turfgrass, which provides many benefits to the broader community including cooling the environment, saving energy and encouraging healthy lifestyles. The many environmental, social and health benefits of living turfgrass have been the subject of numerous investigations beyond the scope of this review. However further research is needed to fully understand the economic returns achievable by the judicious use of water for the maintenance of healthy turfgrass. Consumer education, backed by scientific evidence will highlight the “false economy” in allowing turfgrass to wither and die during conditions which require high level water restrictions. This report presents a review of the literature pertaining to research in the field of turf water use. The purpose of the review was to better understand the scope and nature of existing research results on turf water relations so that knowledge gaps could be identified in achieving the above strategic objectives of the TPA. Research to date has been found to be insufficient to compile a convincing communication package as described. However, identified knowledge gaps can now be addressed through targeted research. Information derived from targeted research will provide valuable material for education of the end user of turfgrass. Recommendations have been developed, based on the results of this desktop review. It was determined that future research in the field of turf irrigation needs to focus on a number of key factors which directly or indirectly affect the relationship between turfgrass and water use. These factors are: • Climate • Cultivar • Quality • Site use requirements • Establishment and management The overarching recommendation is to develop a strategic plan for turfgrass water relations research based around the five determinants of turf water use listed above. This plan should ensure research under these five categories is integrated into a holistic approach by which the consumer can be guided in species and/or cultivar choices as well as best management practices with respect to turfgrass water relations. Worsening drought cycles and limited supply of water for irrigation were the key factors driving every research project reviewed in this report. Subsidence of the most recent (or current) drought conditions in Australia should not be viewed by the turf industry as a reason to withdraw support or funding for research in this area. Drought conditions, limited domestic water availability and urban water restrictions will return in Australia albeit in 5, 10 or 20 years time and the turf industry has an opportunity to prepare for that time.

Managing glyphosate resistance in Australian cotton farming: modelling shows how to delay evolution and maintain long-term population control

Glyphosate resistance is a rapidly developing threat to profitability in Australian cotton farming. Resistance causes an immediate reduction in the effectiveness of in-crop weed control in glyphosate-resistant transgenic cotton and summer fallows. Although strategies for delaying glyphosate resistance and those for managing resistant populations are qualitatively similar, the longer resistance can be delayed, the longer cotton growers will have choice over which tactics to apply and when to apply them. Effective strategies to avoid, delay, and manage resistance are thus of substantial value. We used a model of glyphosate resistance dynamics to perform simulations of resistance evolution in Sonchus oleraceus (common sowthistle) and Echinochloa colona (awnless barnyard grass) under a range of resistance prevention, delaying, and management strategies. From these simulations, we identified several elements that could contribute to effective glyphosate resistance prevention and management strategies. (i) Controlling glyphosate survivors is the most robust approach to delaying or preventing resistance. High-efficacy, high-frequency survivor control almost doubled the useful lifespan of glyphosate from 13 to 25 years even with glyphosate alone used in summer fallows. (ii) Two non-glyphosate tactics in-crop plus two in-summer fallows is the minimum intervention required for long-term delays in resistance evolution. (iii) Pre-emergence herbicides are important, but should be backed up with non-glyphosate knockdowns and strategic tillage; replacing a late-season, pre-emergence herbicide with inter-row tillage was predicted to delay glyphosate resistance by 4 years in awnless barnyard grass. (iv) Weed species' ecological characteristics, particularly seed bank dynamics, have an impact on the effectiveness of resistance strategies; S. oleraceus, because of its propensity to emerge year-round, was less exposed to selection with glyphosate than E. colona, resulting in an extra 5 years of glyphosate usefulness (18 v. 13 years) even in the most rapid cases of resistance evolution. Delaying tactics are thus available that can provide some or many years of continued glyphosate efficacy. If glyphosate-resistant cotton cropping is to remain profitable in Australian farming systems in the long-term, however, growers must adapt to the probability that they will have to deal with summer weeds that are no longer susceptible to glyphosate. Robust resistance management systems will need to include a diversity of weed control options, used appropriately.