Review of cool‐season turfgrass water use and requirements: II. Responses to drought stress

Abstract

AbstractKnowledge of drought resistance of cool‐season turfgrasses is important because drought stress can occur wherever they are grown even in humid regions with wet climates. This review is Part II of two companion papers that review water use and requirements in cool‐season turfgrasses. Part I presented the history of early water conservation and quantification methods in turfgrass and then summarized research results since 1980 on cool‐season turfgrass evapotranspiration and deficit irrigation. Part II presents a brief history of drought research and then summarizes studies completed since 1980 on cool‐season turfgrass drought resistance including interspecies and intraspecies differences. This overview of research regarding drought resistance covers >30 field experiments that evaluated drought response to irrigation amounts, length of dry down, and the influence of environmental and management factors. More cool‐season turf research has focused on intraspecies variation in drought resistance of Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) or tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) than any other cool‐season turf species; therefore, more research is needed on other cool‐season turfgrass species, such as perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), bentgrasses (Agrostis L. ssp.), and fine fescues (Festuca L. spp.). Further study is warranted to investigate differences in drought resistance strategies among plants and management practices, shoot and root responses, subsequent recovery, and inter‐ and intraspecies variation in cool‐season turfgrasses especially in northern climatic regions where cool‐season turf species are adapted. Improvement of drought resistance in cool‐season turfgrasses will require focused breeding efforts with acute drought screening protocols.