1
Research
Leah A. Brilman
Seed Research of Oregon,27630 Llewellyn Rd.,,Corvallis,OR,97333
lbrilman@sroseed.com
Title: Development, Testing, Production and Marketing of Grass Seed
Format: Workshop (2-4 hours)
Description
Development of cultivars is a long term process. Understanding how it is done, influence of seed
production issues and how to evaluate marketing claims and testing to make better choices.
Delivery
Seminar with discussion
Outline
I. Breeding Process
2. Testing of cultivars
3. Seed Production - how it influences what is available
4. Marketing based on testing
Objectives
Understanding of the process helps understand why some cultivars are no longer available.
Choices made based on marketing or just price can both influence availability of seed.
Experience
Parts of it. Broad experience speaking and is seed production. This was a topic requested.
References
Dr. John Sorochan
Dr. Mike Goatley
Andrew Hoiberg
Iowa State University,106 Horticulture Hall,,Ames,IA,50011
android@iastate.edu
Title: Research Update on Seedbanking and Nitrogen Based Establishment
Format: Can fit to conference needs
Description
1
2
Research discussed two years ago at STMA has reached completion and results can be
disseminated to the industry. Seedbanking potential of Kentucky bluegrass and perennial
ryegrass was examined as was increasing nitrogen rate during establishment of the same species
during both spring and fall. Results will be presented to turf managers with recommendations
based on our results. I will address the notion of building a seedbank in athletic field scenarios
and what our results have told us about the possibly of doing so. We will also discuss how
increased nitrogen during establishment has seasonal dependency and how these species
responded to it. The recommendations that come from this talk will help sports field managers
better understand nitrogen needs/use during establishment and will help clarify exactly what
happens to seed as it is applied to heavily trafficked areas.
Delivery
This presentation will be in mostly lecture format with plenty of opportunity for discussion from
the audience.
Outline
I. Introduction: I will discuss why the research was undertaken, how we set up the study, how we
collected data, etc. I have some interesting statistics on youth sports participation that will help
our organization understand the problems that we will face in the future.
II. Experimental design: We will discuss the materials & methods that are applicable to athletic
field managers without being too scientific about it. I will address traffic research vs. reality.
III. Seedbanking potential: I will discuss results from this experiment and what conclusions have
been made based on those results. I will also talk about what the reality is of building a seedbank
and whether it is beneficial for turf managers to attempt. Recommendations will also be made
regarding overseeding rates on heavily trafficked areas and how to best approach your
overseeding program.
IV. Nitrogen based establishment: Again, I will discuss results and conclusions from this
experiment. We will talk about development of site specific nitrogen programs and how N
requirements during seed based establishment truly differs from a the needs of mature turf.
Lastly, I will give the audience information to determine what level of N they want to use when
they are establishing turf from bare ground in heavily trafficked areas.
V. We will discuss where these results will focus research efforts on seed budgeting and what
fate seed has when heavily overseeded into mature stands. I will conclude with a Q&A period for
the audience to get involved and offer input for future research.
Objectives
Attendees will come away with a better understanding of whether a seedbank is actually being
formed under heavy overseeding. They will also have a better understanding of how seasonal
nitrogen use patterns differ with cool season grasses and how nitrogen programs should be
altered for seed based establishment of heavily trafficked areas.
Experience
I spoke at the conference two years ago in Austin and gave a similar talk, but this was
preliminary and only included initial results, which have changed substantially, particularly on
2
3
the nitrogen based establishment. Outside of the conference in Austin, I have spoken numerous
times at both local and regional conferences. I gave two talks at the Ohio Turf conference last
December, spoke at a Colorado STMA event two summers ago, speak yearly at the Iowa Turf
Conference, and was invited to speak at the Rocky Mountain Regional Turfgrass Association
conference this winter.
References
Mike Andresen mandrese@iastate.edu 515-294-2983
Dr. David Minner dminner@iastate.edu 340-244-9377 (until early May) 515-231-1741 (after
early May)
Michael C. Meyers, PhD, FACSM
Montana State University,250 Reid Hall, POB 172940,,Bozeman,MT,59717-2940
meyersgroupinc@gmail.com
Title: Incidence of College Football Injuries on Artificial Versus Natural Grass
Format: Concurrent Session (1-1.25 hours)
Description
BRIEF INTRODUCTION: In the past, serious injuries were attributed to playing on artificial
turf. New generations of artificial turf were developed to duplicate the playing characteristics of
natural grass. Only one study has been reported comparing game-related, college football trauma
between the two surfaces.
PURPOSE OF PRESENTATION: To quantify incidence, mechanisms, and severity of gamerelated collegiate football injuries on artificial turf versus natural grass.
MAIN POINTS OF PRESENTATION: 1. Review of Methodology - A total of 27 universities
were evaluated over five competitive seasons for injury incidence, injury category, time of
injury, injury time loss, player position, injury mechanism, primary type of injury, grade and
anatomical location of injury, type of tissue injured, head, knee and shoulder trauma, and
environmental factors.
Results of Study: A total of 786 college games were evaluated for football injuries sustained
while playing on artificial or natural grass, with 387 (49.2%) games played on artificial versus
399 (50.8%) games played on natural grass. A total of 4,041 injuries were documented, with
1,664 (41.2%) occurring during play on artificial as compared to 2,377 (58.8%) on natural grass.
Statistical analysis per 10 team games indicated significantly lower (p<0.05) total injury
incidence rates of 43.0 on artificial (95% confidence interval, 42.2-43.5) versus 59.6 on natural
grass (95% CI, 58.8-59.7). Significantly lower minor injury incidence rates of 35.0 (95% CI,
34.2-35.5) versus 48.6 (95% CI, 47.8-48.9; p<0.05), significantly lower substantial injury
incidence rates of 5.1 (95% CI, 4.6-5.6) versus 6.7 (95% CI, 6.3-7.2; p<0.05), and significantly
lower severe injury incidence rates of 2.9 (95% CI, 2.5-3.4) versus 4.2 (95% CI, 3.8-4.7; p<0.05)
were documented on artificial versus natural grass, respectively. Findings also indicated
significantly less trauma (p=0.040 to 0.0001) on artificial turf when comparing injury time loss,
3
4
injury category and situation, grade of injury, injuries under various field conditions, and
temperature No significant differences in head, knee or shoulder trauma were observed between
playing surfaces.
Conclusions Derived from Study: Artificial turf is, in many cases, safer than natural grass. The
findings of this study, however, may only be generalizable to this level of competition and this
specific surface.
VALUE TO AUDIENCE: The presentation will enable the sports turf manager to a) achieve a
greater understanding of the incidence, mechanisms, and severity of game-related college
football injuries when playing on either artificial turf versus natural grass, b) understand the
methodology involved in researching injuries on various football surfaces and, c) gain an
appreciation for the importance of properly installed and maintained surfaces to minimize
predisposition to sport injury.
Delivery
Lecture/seminar with ample time for questions and discussion during and after the presentation.
Outline
INCIDENCE OFCOLLEGE FOOTBALL INJURIESON ARTIFICIAL VERSUS NATURAL
GRASS
Michael C. Meyers, PhD, FACSM Montana State University
I. Background
II. Purpose
III. Methods
A. Prospective cohort study
B. Total of NCAA Division-1A universities
C. Total of games
D. Five-year period of competitive seasons and bowl games from 2006-2010
E. Various stadiums utilized - ACC, Big 12, Big East, Conference USA, Mountain West, WAC,
Pac-10
F. Variables studied - Date of injury, Athlete weight, University, Type of playing surface,
Surface quality and age, Temperature/humidity, Year/skill level of athlete, Where injury
occurred, Weather/ field conditions, Injury category, Time period of injury, Injury classification,
Injury time loss, Position played at time of injury, Injury situation, Injury mechanism, Injury site
location, Principle body part, Primary type of injury, Grade of injury, Surgical intervention,
Specific musculoskeletal joint or organ location of injury.
G. Definitions Used
H. Statistical Analyses
IV. Results (Tables on the above variables will be provided comparing artificial turf to natural
grass
V. Comparisons
VI. Conclusion
Objectives
4
5
Understand the incidence, mechanisms, and severity of game-related college football injuries
when playing on either artificial turf versus natural grass.
Understand the methodology involved in researching injuries on various football surfaces.
Gain an appreciation for the importance of properly installed and maintained surfaces to
minimize predisposition to sport injury.
Experience
Michael C. Meyers, PhD, FACSM, is presently Senior Research Scientist in the College of
Education, Health and Human Development at Montana State University. Dr. Meyers is a Fellow
in the American College of Sports Medicine, and Past-President of the Texas Regional Chapter
of the American College of Sports Medicine. Dr. Meyers holds a Ph.D. from Texas A&M
University with an emphasis in exercise physiology as it relates to orthopedic sports medicine.
He is also an Adjunct Associate Professor and Graduate Faculty in the Department of
Psychology at Texas A&M University, working in the area of pain response in athletes following
injury and rehabilitation. He has authored over 75 scientific journal publications, appearing in
such journals as Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Journal of Applied Physiology,
American Journal of Sports Medicine, European Journal of Applied Physiology, Clinical Journal
of Sport Medicine, Journal of Sport Sciences, Physician and Sportsmedicine, Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, and Sports Medicine. Dr. Meyers
has given over 350 regional, national and international presentations, and have been featured in
Energy for Women Magazine, KTRH 740 AM News Radio-Houston, Outside Magazine, Fit
Magazine, Newsweek-on-the-Air Radio Program, Houston Chronicle, Austin American
Statesman, and PBS Scientific American Frontiers Television Series. I have the only published
research addressing injuries on artificial surfaces in football--both published in the American
Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM 2004, 2010). I have been invited to speak extensively on the
topic of playing surface injuries over the past 15 years.
References
Darren Gill, Vice President for Global Marketing, FieldTurf, Inc. (514-340-9311;
DGill@Fieldturf.com)
Jim Knazak (440-221-9620) These references are individuals involved in the sports turf industry
that have actually seen my presentations.
Brad Park
Rutgers University,59 Dudley Rd.,,New Brunswick,NJ,08901
park@aesop.rutgers.edu
Title: Selection of cool-season turfgrasses for sports fields
Format: Can fit to conference needs
Description
Unacceptable sports field performance following initial turfgrass establishment or after
overseeding can often be linked to improper selection of cool-season turfgrass species and
5
6
varieties. Newer Kentucky bluegrass, perennial ryegrass, and tall fescue varieties have been
commercialized with better turfgrass quality, lower disease susceptibility, and greater tolerance
to traffic stresses. Turfgrass field research provides groundwork for germplasm development;
data generated from field trials can serve as the basis for variety selection. This presentation will
elaborate on research results generated by Rutgers University with an emphasis on National
Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) and Cooperative Turfgrass Breeders Test (CTBT) trials at
North Brunswick and Adelphia, NJ. The presenter will also describe case studies using images
taken from sports fields where turfgrass selection (good and bad) enhanced or diminished the
performance of a sports field. Case studies and images are generated by the presenter’s visits to
sports fields as part of his University outreach responsibilities. The presentation of research
results and case studies will be designed to aid the sports turf manager in process of turfgrass
species and variety selection and subsequent turfgrass management.
Delivery
The presenter will describe selection of turfgrass species mixtures and variety blends using a
practical interpretation of research results. The presenter has been afforded the opportunity to
establish, manage, apply traffic treatments, collect and analyze data on field trials. He uses data
generated from field trials to make research-based species and variety recommendations as well
as turfgrass management recommendations for sports field facilities he visits in New Jersey. The
presentation will also describe real-world sports field case studies, largely municipal and
Kindergarten through Grade 12 School settings, where cool-season turfgrass selection was a
significant factor in the performance of the field.
Outline
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
I. OVERVIEW OF COOL-SEASON TURFGRASSES FOR SPORTS FIELDS
1) Kentucky bluegrass
2) Perennial ryegrass
3) Tall fescue
II. CULTIVAR SELECTION USING RESEARCH RESULTS
1) Practical interpretation of results from research performed on the following:
a. 2004 NTEP Perennial Ryegrass Test (Wear stress applied in 2009)
b. 2005 NTEP Kentucky Bluegrass Test (Wear stress applied in 2006-2010)
c. 2006 NTEP Tall Fescue Test (Wear and compaction stress applied in 2007-2011)
d. 2010 CTBT Tall Fescue Trial (Wear stress applied in 2011-2012)
e. Tall fescue and Kentucky bluegrass mixture trial at North Brunswick, NJ
III. CASE STUDIES INTEGRATING TURFGRASS SPECIES AND VARIETY SELECTION
AND MANGEMENT
1) Presentation of Park and Recreation and Kindergarten through Grade 12 School case studies
where cool-season turfgrass selection enhanced or in some instances diminished sports field
performance.
2) Potential overseeding, fertilization, irrigation, and pesticide input strategies for sports fields if
Kentucky bluegrass, tall fescue, perennial ryegrass or mixtures of two or more of these species is
chosen for a sports field.
6
7
Objectives
Objective 1: The attendee will be able to make an informed choice concerning the suitability of
one or more cool-season turfgrass species (Kentucky bluegrass, tall fescue, and/or perennial
ryegrass) for establishment on a sports field.
Objective 2: Field research data will be described to assist the attendee in identifying specific
varieties of Kentucky bluegrass, perennial ryegrass, and tall fescue that have demonstrated
improved turfgrass quality, disease resistance, and traffic stress tolerance.
Objective 3: Case studies will be examined with the goal of enabling the attendee to prioritize
species and variety-dependent turfgrass management strategies, with attention to overseeding,
fertilization, irrigation, and pesticide inputs for sports fields.
Experience
Brad Park, an STMA member and elected member of the Sports Field Mgrs. Assoc. of NJ Board
of Directors since 2003, presented at the STMA Annual Conference in 2007 (San Antonio) and
2012 (Long Beach). He routinely speaks at University- and Industry-sponsored events in both
New Jersey and throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. Brad annually participates as an
Instructor and Faculty Coordinator for multiple sports field classes offered by Rutgers Office of
Continuing Professional Education. Brad has delivered this talk previously in the form of various
extension presentations; however, ongoing research always provides the opportunity for newer,
more current results to be presented.
References
Mr. Matt Olivi President, Sports Field Mgrs. Assoc. of NJ STMA Member Piscataway Twp.
Board of Education Piscataway, NJ 908.421.0933
Mr. Rich Watson Sports Field Mgrs. Assoc. of NJ Board of Directors STMA Member Pine Hill
Public Schools Pine Hill, NJ 856.767.8000
Dan Potter
did not make formal submittal, DuPont offered to cover expenses if he talks about Acelepryn,
offering to do 2 talks (see research for earthworm research), he can be at conference
WEDNESDAY ONLY
Dr. A. J. Powell, Jr.
University of KY Professor Emeritus,3429 Gingertree Circle,,Lexington,KY,40502
turfgrass24@insightbb.com
Title: Agronomic Research Ideas - Volunteered by Professional Managers
Format: Q&A Panel (1-2 hours)
Description
7
8
Every progressive sports turf manager has unanswered turfgrass management questions almost
daily. Some he can research on site but others require private company or university research
involvement. This Q & A Panel will welcome research suggestions from the audience, attempt to
validate the needs, uniqueness and practicality and develop a list of the topics presented. The
accumulated Top 10(or more)suggestions can be summarized and presented in a future STMA
Newsletter or other Publication. Audience participation will be necessary. If successful, this
could be an annual Panel topic.
Delivery
This would best fit a panel of professional educators, especially those that are not heavily
involved with a 'Publish or Perish' livehood. Preferably, university Extension Professors would
be appropriate for this panel. Drs. Powell (retired), Goatley and Zac Reicher or Roch Gaussoin
would be asked to participate.
Outline
I. Each Panel member will give a short introduction concerning sports turf research, to include
present support, increasing activity, etc.
II. Suggestions will be solicited from the audience and then commented upon by the Panel.
III. A brief summary will be given by the Panel Chair and it will be his responsibility to make
this list of suggestions available by various STMA means.
Objectives
1. be assured that his voice is being heard regarding research needs.
2. have some knowledge relative to the research needs as expressed by other professional
managers.
3. possibility determine that some of the stated needs can be demonstrated on-site without
replicated research studies.
Supplies
Individual panel mics and one or more audience mics. It would be helpful to have the entire
session recorded or have a stenographer to capture the audience comments.
Experience
This would be a new and UNIQUE topic and format. All panel members would have 20 years or
more speaking experience
References
1. All panel members have experience speaking at previous STMA conferences and state sports
turf venues.
2. Dr. Mike Goatley, STMA President
3. Dr. Zac Reicher - self Gratification, University of Nebraska
John Royse
8
9
Virginia Tech,109 Northview Dr. ,#4,Blacksburg,VA,24060
jpr195@gmail.com
Title: Trafficked Turf Protection Systems
Format: Concurrent Session (1-1.25 hours)
Description
Sports Turf and Park professionals have a difficult task of hosting concerts, festivals, and rallies
at their facilities. Reestablishing turfgrass can be problematic, either because of the limited time
available to reseed or the difficulty in establishing a healthy and safe surface from new sod.
Therefore, minimizing the damage to the turf before, during, and after public events in the
potential impact areas, such as under stages, tents, temporary roadways, and seating areas, is
important to facility managers and owners. Emphasis will be placed on various types of portable
turf protection panels and their effect on turf quality after removal under various conditions.
Delivery
Seminar will be presented on PowerPoint with questions and answers.
Outline
I will be presenting three main sections. The problems associated with turf protection panels,
research results, and ways that a turf manager can use the data at their facility.
1) Introduction
Problem, I will introduce what happens after an event
Literature Review of scientific papers
Factors that are associated with covering turfgrass
Materials and Methods
2) Results
Soil moisture
Low lighting/stage conditions
Seasonal differences
Predicted amount of days turf can be covered
3) Discussion and Conclusion
Best management practices
Predicted turfgrass efficacy after panel removal
How to host events frequently and efficiently!
Questions
Objectives
After attending this session, attendees will understand:
• Factors that affect turfgrass under panels
• Best management practices associated with these panels
• How to host events frequently and efficiently
Supplies
9
10
I would like to have four turf protection panels that were studied available to pass around during
the presentation.
Experience
Yes, I am graduate student graduating from Virginia Tech this May with my Master’s degree and
have spoke about this topic in front of scientists, grad students and turf managers. I have also
provided tours at a VSTMA conference in Washington, DC when I was groundskeeper for the
Washington Nationals in 2008.
References
Dr. Mike Goatley Professor of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences 424 Smyth Hall Virginia
Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 (540) 863-1368
Dr. Erik Ervin Professor of Turfgrass Culture and Physiology, Crop and Soil Environmental
Sciences 424 Smyth Hall Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 (540) 231-5208
Pamela Sherratt
The Ohio State University,Dept. Hort & Crop Science,202 Kottman Hall,Columbus,OH,43210
sherratt.1@osu.edu
Title: Athletic Field Traction & Hardness
Format: Can fit to conference needs
Description:
This session will describe athlete:playing surface interaction and look at how that has typically
been measured. There will be a brief review of the new technology and research looking at how
synthetic and natural grass surface conditions affect foot traction and surface hardness.
Delivery: PowerPoint
Outline:
An introduction to playing quality criteria. A review of how traction & hardness have been
quantified and related to the athlete. A look at technology and research looking at how synthetic
and natural grass surface playing conditions affect traction & hardness.
Objectives
Articulate the relationship between playing surface conditions and athlete performance.
Identify surface management techniques that can influence hardness and traction.
Experience
I have talked about this subject at OSU's research field day.
References
Dr. John Street, OSU: street.1@osu.edu
10
11
Brian Gimbel, OSU Varsity Athletics: GimbelB@buckeyes.ath.ohio-state.edu
11