Comparative Performance of Three Tropical Turfgrasses Digitaria longiflora, Axonopus compressus and St. Augustinegrass under Simulated Shade Conditions

  • Chin, Siew-Wai (Centre for Urban Greenery & Ecology, National Parks Board, Singapore Botanic Gardens)
  • Received : 2016.10.04
  • Accepted : 2017.02.27
  • Published : 2017.04.03


Shade affects turf quality by reducing light for photosynthesis. The shade tolerance of the tropical grasses, Digitaria longiflora and Axonopus compressus were evaluated against Stenotaphrum secundatum (St. Augustinegrass). The grasses were established under shade structures that provide 0%, 50%, 75% or 90% shade level for 30 days. A suite of leaf traits, recorded from similar leaf developmental stage, displayed distinct responses to shade conditions. Leaf length, relative to control, increased in all three species as shade level increased. The mean leaf extension rate was lowest in St. Augustinegrass (80.42%) followed by A. compressus (84.62%) and D. longiflora (90.78%). The higher leaf extension rate in D. longiflora implied its poor shade tolerance. Specific leaf area (SLA) increased in all species with highest mean SLA increase in D. longiflora ($348.55cm^2mg^{-1}$)followed by A. compressus ($286.88cm^2mg^{-1}$) and St. Augustinegrass ($276.28cm^2mg^{-1}$). The highest SLA increase in D. longiflora suggested its lowest performance under shade. The percent green cover, as estimated by digital image analysis, was lowest in D. longiflora (53%) under 90% shade level compared to both species. The relative shade tolerance of the three turfgrasses could be ranked as St. Augustinegrass > A. compressus > D. longiflora.


Supported by : Singapore National Parks Board


  1. Baij, M.J., Anand, A., Mandal, P.K. and Bhatt, R.K. 2005. Irradiance influences contents of photosynthetic pigments and proteins in tropical grasses and legumes. Photosynthetica 43:47-53.
  2. Beard, J.B. 1973. Turfgrass: Science and culture. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. USA.
  3. Brouwer, B., Ziolkowska, A., Bagard, M., Keech, O. and Gardestrom, P. 2012. The impact of light intensity. on shade-induced leaf senescence. Plant Cell Environ. 35:1084-1098.
  4. Chin, S.W. 2015. Turf characteristics of native grasses Digitaria longiflora & Ischaemum ciliare. RTN02-2015. Centre for Urban Greenery & Ecology, National Parks Board (Accessed Nov. 14.2016).
  5. Jiang, Y.W., Duncan, R.R. and Carrow, R.N. 2004. Assessment of low light tolerance of seashore. paspalum and bermudagrass. Crop Sci. 44:587-594.
  6. Karcher, D.E. and Richardson, M.D. 2003. Quantifying turfgrass color using digital image analysis. Crop Sci. 43:943-951.
  7. Kim, T.J., Neal, J.C., Ditomaso, J.M. and Rossi, F.S. 2002. A survey of weed scientists perceptions on the significance of crabgrasses (Digitaria spp.) in the United States. Weed Technol. 16:239-242.[0239:ASOWSP]2.0.CO;2
  8. Modrzynski, J., Chmura, D.J. and Tjoelker, M.G. 2015. Seedling growth and biomass allocation in relation to leaf habit and shade tolerance among 10 temperate tree species. Tree Physiol. 00:1-15.
  9. Peterson, K.W., Fry, J.D. and Bremer, D.J. 2014. Growth responses of Zoysia spp. under tree shade in the Midwestern United States. HortScience 49:1444-1448.
  10. Qian, Y.L., Engelke, M.C., Foster, M.J.V. and Reynolds, S. 1998. Trinexapac-ethyl restricts shoot growth and improves quality of 'Diamond' zoysiagrass under shade. HortScience 33:1019-1022.
  11. Qian, Y.L. and Engelke, M.C. 1999. Infuence of trinexapac-ethyl on Diamond zoysiagrass in a shaded environment. Crop Sci. 39:202-208.
  12. Reich, P.B., Ellsworth, D.S. and Walters, M.B. 1998a. Leaf structure (specific leaf area) modulates photosynthesis-nitrogen relations: evidence from within and across species and functional groups. Funct. Ecol. 12:948-958.
  13. Reich, P.B., Tjoelker, M.G., Walters, M.B., Vanderklein, D.W. and Buschena, C. 1998b. Close association of RGR, leaf and root morphology, seed mass and shade tolerance in seedlings of nine boreal tree species grown in high and low light. Funct. Ecol. 12:327-338.
  14. Sladek, B.S., Henry, G.M. and Auld, D.L. 2009. Evaluation of Zoysiagrass genotypes for shade tolerance. HortScience 44:1447-1451.
  15. Smith, H. and Whitelam, G.C. 1997. The shade avoidance syndrome: multiple responses mediated by multiple phytochromes. Plant Cell Environ. 20:840-844.
  16. Tegg, R.S. and Lane, P.A. 2004. A comparison of the performance and growth of a range of turfgrass species under shade. Aust. J. Exp. Agr. 44:353-358.
  17. Trenholm, L.E. and Nagata, R.T. 2005. Shade tolerance of St Augustinegrass cultivars. HortTechnology 15:267-272.
  18. Veierskov, B. 1987. Irradiance-dependent senescence of isolated leaves. Physiol. Plantarum 71:316-320.
  19. Wherley, B.G., Gardner D.S. and Metzger, J.D. 2005. Tall fescue photomorphogenesis as influenced by changes in the spectral composition and light intensity. Crop Sci. 45:562-568.
  20. Wherley, B., Chandra, A., Genovesi, A., Kearns, M., Pepper, T., et al. 2013. Developmental response of St Augustinegrass cultivars and experimental lines in moderate and heavy shade. Hort-Science 48:1047-1051.
  21. Wong, C.C. 1990. Shade tolerance of tropical forages: A Review. In: Shelton, HM and Stür, WW (Eds.) Forages for Plantation Crops. Proceedings of workshop, Bali, Indonesia. ACIAR Proceedings 32:64-69.
  22. Wu, L., Huff, D.R. and Davis, W.B. 1985. Tall fescue turf performance under a tree shade. HortScience 20:281-282.