HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ellram, A. Articles by Hulke, B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Ellram, A. Articles by Hulke, B. Agricola Articles by Ellram, A. Articles by Hulke, B. Related Collections Turfgrass Management Pest Management Systems Plant Disease

Mowing Strategies and Dew Removal to Minimize Dollar Spot on Creeping Bentgrass

^a College of Agriculture and Technology, Dep. of Plant Science, State Univ. of New York, Cobleskill, NY 12043
^b Dep. of Horticultural Science, Room 305 Alderman Hall, Univ. of Minnesota, 1970 Folwell Ave., St. Paul, MN 55108
^c Dep. of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, Room 411 Borlaug Hall, Univ. of Minnesota, 1991 Upper Buford Circle, St. Paul, MN 55108

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Actual mean percent diseased area for combined effect of mowing time x mowing frequency for all disease assessment dates. Each mean is averaged across all dew removal methods. Means with different letters are significantly different (LSD 0.05) after means were log transformed to stabilize variance.

View larger version (6K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Actual mean percent diseased area by mowing time for all disease assessment dates. Each mean is averaged across all dew removal methods. Means with different letters are significantly different (LSD 0.05) after means were log transformed to stabilize variance.

View larger version (10K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Actual mean percent diseased area by treatment combination for all data collection dates. Each mean is averaged across all dew removal times and dew removal methods. Means with different letters are significantly different (LSD 0.05) after means were log transformed to stabilize variance.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Mean dollar spot lesion diameter by leaf wetness duration (LWD; number of hours of leaf wetness daily) in a controlled environment (mist chamber). All means with dissimilar LWD times were significantly different (LSD 0.05).