Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. 3 (2025)

Effect of traffic stress and planting density on biomass and carbon exchange in bermudagrass

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.5247
Submitted
24 September 2024
Published
19-06-2025 — Updated on 01-07-2025
Versions

Abstract

Turfgrass often suffers from traffic stress, which reduces its biomass, including leaf wear and soil compaction. Although plant biomass is related to carbon balance over the canopy, the reduction in biomass due to traffic stress on turfgrass has not been discussed in terms of the carbon balance on turfgrass. Leaf wear can damage the photosynthetic rates of leaves and soil compaction can damage the respiration process of roots. Photosynthesis and respiration are important physiological properties, and the difference between them represents the total carbon gain over the turfgrass. This study conducted four levels of traffic experiments on bermudagrass grown in two levels of planting density, and investigated leaf and root biomass and carbon exchange, including photosynthesis and respiration. A decrease in leaf and root mass was found with the intensity of traffic stress. Photosynthetic rates per leaf mass did not change with the intensity of traffic stress but were 1.7 times higher in high planting density. On the other hand, respiration rates per plant mass decreased with the intensity of traffic stress and were 1.3 times higher in high planting density. When summarizing photosynthesis, respiration, and biomass, the total carbon balance in high-traffic intensity and low-planting density should be small. Therefore, the turfgrass population may degrade under such conditions. It can be concluded that the carbon balance over the turfgrass may serve as an indicator for detecting the effect of traffic stress and suggest management practices that take into account traffic stress and planting density, such as increasing planting density where traffic stress is high.

References

  1. 1. Loch DS, Ebina M, Choi JS, Han L. Ecological implications of Zoysia species, distribution, and adaptation for management and use of Zoysia grasses. Int Turfgrass Soc Res J. 2017;13:11–25. https://doi.org/10.2134/itsrj2016.10.0857
  2. 2. Samaranayake H, Lawson TJ, Murphy JA. Traffic stress affects bent grass putting green and fairway turf. Crop Sci. 2008;48:1193–202. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.09.0613
  3. 3. Braun RC, Bremer DJ, Hoyle JA. Simulated traffic on turfgrasses during drought stress: II. Soil moisture, soil compaction, and rooting. Int Turfgrass Soc Res J. 2021;14:516–27. https://doi.org/10.
  4. 1002/its2.62
  5. 4. Wei H, Yang W, Wang Y, Ding J, Ge L, Richardson M, et al. Correlations among soil, leaf morphology, and physiological factors with wear tolerance of four warm-season turfgrass species. HortScience. 2022;57:571–80. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI16453-21
  6. 5. Han L-B, Song G-L, Zhang X. Preliminary observations on physiological responses of three turfgrass species to traffic stress. HortTechnology. 2008;18:139–43. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.18.1.139
  7. 6. Głąb T, Szewczyk W. The effect of traffic on turfgrass root morphological features. Sci Hortic. 2015;197:542–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.10.014
  8. 7. Dietze MC, Sala A, Carbone MS, Czimczik CI, Mantooth JA, Richardson AD, et al. Nonstructural carbon in woody plants. Ann Rev Plant Biol. 2014;65:6667–87. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-050213-040054
  9. 8. Dhital D, Yashiro Y, Ohtsuka T, Noda H, Shizu Y, Koizumi H. Carbon dynamics and budget in a Zoysia japonica grassland, central Japan. J Plant Res. 2010;123:6519–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-009-0289-6
  10. 9. Liu X, Huang B. Seasonal changes and cultivar differences in turf quality, photosynthesis, and respiration of creeping bent grass. HortScience. 2001;36:1131–35. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.36.6.1131
  11. 10. Laura C, Matteo C, Ilaria P, Marco V, Daniele Z, Alberto M. Estimated Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE) of turfgrass at different management intensities in a golf course in the Province of Verona. J Environ Sci Eng B. 2016;5:601–14. https://doi.org/10.17265/2162-5263/2016.12.004
  12. 11. Pahari R, Leclerc MY, Zhang G, Nahrawi H, Raymer P. Carbon dynamics of a warm-season turfgrass using the eddy-covariance technique. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 2018;251:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.09.015
  13. 12. Fan J, Zhang W, Amombo E, Hu L, Kjorven JO, Chen L. Mechanisms of environmental stress tolerance in turfgrass. Agronomy. 2020;10:522. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10040522
  14. 13. Are KS, Oshunsanya SO, Oluwatosin GA. Changes in soil physical health indicators of eroded land as influenced by the integrated use of narrow grass strips and mulch. Soil Tillage Res. 2018;184:269–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2018.08.009
  15. 14. Dicen GP, Rallos RV, Labides JLR, Navarrete IA. Vulnerability of soil organic matter to microbial decomposition as a consequence of burning. Biogeochemistry. 2020;150:123–37. https://doi.org/
  16. 10.1007/s10533-020-00688-1
  17. 15. Hunt S. Measurements of photosynthesis and respiration in plants. Physiol Plant. 2003;117:314–25. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.2003.00055.x
  18. 16. Lee D, Elrick D, Reynolds W, Clothier B. A comparison of three field methods for measuring saturated hydraulic conductivity. Can J Soil Sci. 1985;65:563–73. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss85-060
  19. 17. Tarawally MA, Medina H, Frómeta ME, Itza CA. Field compaction at different soil-water status: effects on pore size distribution and soil water characteristics of a Rhodic Ferralsol in Western Cuba. Soil Tillage Res. 2004;76:95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2003.09.003
  20. 18. Zhang S, Grip H, Lövdahl L. Effect of soil compaction on hydraulic properties of two loess soils in China. Soil Tillage Res. 2006;90:117–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.08.012
  21. 19. Głąb T, Szewczyk W. Influence of simulated traffic and roots of turfgrass species on soil pore characteristics. Geoderma. 2014;230–231:221–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.04.015
  22. 20. Nosalewicz A, Lipiec J. The effect of compacted soil layers on vertical root distribution and water uptake by wheat. Plant Soil. 2013;375:229–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1961-0
  23. 21. Lipiec J, Hatano R. Quantification of compaction effects on soil physical properties and crop growth. Geoderma. 2003;116:107–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00097-1
  24. 22. Malleshaiah S, Govindaswamy V, Murugaiah J, M G, C SN. Influence of traffic stress on warm season turfgrass species under simulated traffic. Ind J Agric Sci. 2017;87:62–68. https://doi.org/
  25. 10.56093/ijas.v87i1.67024
  26. 23. Choi JE, Song KE, Hong SH, Konvalina P, Chung JI, Kim MC, et al. Changes in growth and leaf hyperspectral reflectance of zoysia grass (Zoysia japonica Steud.) under various soil compaction intensities. Hortic Sci. 2024;51:127–40. https://doi.org/10.17221/173/2022-HORTSCI
  27. 24. Gunton RM, Kunin WE. Density effects at multiple scales in an experimental plant population. J Ecol. 2007;95:435–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01226.x
  28. 25. Ishaq M, Ibrahim M, Hassan A, Saeed M, Lal R. Subsoil compaction effects on crops in Punjab, Pakistan: II. Root growth and nutrient uptake of wheat and sorghum. Soil Tillage Res. 2001;60:153–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(01)00177-5
  29. 26. Chen G, Weil RR. Penetration of cover crop roots through compacted soils. Plant Soil. 2010;331:31–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0223-7
  30. 27. Iijima M, Kato J, Taniguchi A. Combined soil physical stress of soil drying, anaerobiosis and mechanical impedance to seedling root growth of four crop species. Plant Prod Sci. 2015;10:451–59. https://doi.org/10.1626/pps.10.451
  31. 28. Strunk W, Dickson K, Sorochan J, Thoms A. Effects of mowing height and Cynodon spp. cultivar on traffic tolerance. Int Turfgrass Soc Res J. 2021;14:412-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/its2.74
  32. 29. Arrieta C, Busey P, Daroub SH. Goose grass and Bermudagrass competition under compaction. Agron J. 2009;101:11–16. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2007.0282
  33. 30. Brown CA, Devitt DA, Morris RL. Water use and physiological response of tall fescue turf to water deficit irrigation in an arid environment. HortScience. 2004;39:388–93. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.39.2.388
  34. 31. Trenholm LE, Carrow RN, Duncan RR. Mechanisms of wear tolerance in seashore paspalum and bermudagrass. Crop Sci. 2000;40:1350–57. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.4051350x
  35. 32. Lipiec J, Horn R, Pietrusiewicz J, Siczek A. Effects of soil compaction on root elongation and anatomy of different cereal plant species. Soil Tillage Res. 2012;121:74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2012.01.013
  36. 33. Bengough AG, Croser C, Pritchard J. A biophysical analysis of root growth under mechanical stress. Plant Soil. 1997;189:155–64. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004240706284
  37. 34. Grant R. Simulation model of soil compaction and root growth: I. Model structure. Plant Soil. 1993;150:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00779170
  38. 35. Dest WM, Ebdon JS. The effect of wear and soil compaction on Kentucky Bluegrass sod rooting and plant recovery. Int Turfgrass Soc Res J. 2017;13:338–45. https://doi.org/10.2134/itsrj2016.
  39. 05.0366
  40. 36. Luo HH, Zhang YL, Zhang WF. Effects of water stress and rewatering on photosynthesis, root activity, and yield of cotton with drip irrigation under mulch. Photosynthetica. 2016;54:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-015-0165-7
  41. 37. Jiang Y, Carrow RN, Duncan RR. Correlation analysis procedures for canopy spectral reflectance data of seashore Paspalum under traffic stress. J Amer Soc Hort Sci. 2003;128:343–48. https://doi.
  42. org/10.21273/JASHS.128.3.0343
  43. 38. Sancar B, Mutlu SS, Basar EK. Traffic tolerance of bermudagrass (Cynodon spp.) as affected by cultivar and mowing height. Grass Res. 2023;3:15. https://doi.org/10.48130/GR-2023-0015
  44. 39. Aldahir PCF, McElroy JS. A review of sports turf research techniques related to playability and safety standards. Agron J. 2014;106:1297–308. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0489

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.