The Scientific World Journal

The Scientific World Journal / 2013 / Article

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2013 |Article ID 409413 |

Md. Kamal Uddin, Abdul Shukor Juraimi, "Salinity Tolerance Turfgrass: History and Prospects", The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2013, Article ID 409413, 6 pages, 2013.

Salinity Tolerance Turfgrass: History and Prospects

Academic Editor: G. E. Brust
Received20 Jun 2013
Accepted25 Aug 2013
Published03 Oct 2013


Land and water resources are becoming scarce and are insufficient to sustain the burgeoning population. Salinity is one of the most important abiotic stresses affecting agricultural productions across the world. Cultivation of salt-tolerant turfgrass species may be promising option under such conditions where poor quality water can also be used for these crops. Coastal lands in developing countries can be used to grow such crops, and seawater can be used for irrigation of purposes. These plants can be grown using land and water unsuitable for conventional crops and can provide food, fuel, fodder, fibber, resin, essential oils, and pharmaceutical products and can be used for landscape reintegration. There are a number of potential turfgrass species that may be appropriate at various salinity levels of seawater. The goal of this review is to create greater awareness of salt-tolerant turfgrasses, their current and potential uses, and their potential use in developing countries. The future for irrigating turf may rely on the use of moderate- to high-salinity water and, in order to ensure that the turf system is sustainable, will rely on the use of salt-tolerant grasses and an improved knowledge of the effects of salinity on turfgrasses.

1. Introduction

Turfgrasses are among the most important industries in many countries including Malaysia because of the development in landscaping and recreation amenity [1]. Turf grass, as an important element to the landscape, serves the functions as beautification and its attractiveness are suitable for mental health, more specifically, the aesthetic effect of parks, gardens, and lawns. Turfgrass is also used to cover sports fields, such as golf, soccer and serve in the stabilization of slopes, among other purposes [2]. Turfgrasses, especially sport turf, play an important role by providing cushioning effect that could help reduce injuries to participants and improve playability.

Turfgrasses are monocot plants under the family Poaceae that act as vegetative ground cover. With its above-ground network of leaves, shoots, and stems and an extensive fibrous root system, turf grasses reduce soil erosion, remove dust and dirt from the air, release oxygen that provides a cooling effect, filter water by trapping potential groundwater pollutants, and produce safe playing surfaces for children and adults [3].

Salinity causes a major environmental problem limiting plant growth and productivity of both irrigated and nonirrigated lands in many areas of the world and include imposition of ion toxicities (e.g., Na and Cl), ionic imbalances, osmotic stress, and soil permeability problems [4]. In general, salt tolerance in plants is associated with low uptake and accumulation of Na, which is mediated through the control of influx and/or by active efflux from the cytoplasm to the vacuoles and also back to the growth medium [5].

Owing to added anthropogenic contributions to global warming, the rate of sea level rise is expected to increase and will have dramatic effect on crop production. In fact, global warming is one of the greatest threats now facing the planet. The oceans, which cover 71% of the Earth’s surface, are currently rising at a rate of about 0.25 cm per year due to global warming [6]. However, projections for the year 2100 show great uncertainty, ranging from several centimetres to nearly a meter. The impacts of rising sea level will include increased vulnerability to storm surges and flooding of once cropped lands with salty water among many other impacts which are predicted to alter many facets of life on earth [7].

There are a number of potential turfgrass species that may be appropriate at various salinity levels of seawater. The demand for salinity-tolerant turfgrasses is increasing due to augmented use of effluent or low-quality water (sea water) for turf irrigation. This need has been exacerbated by rapid urbanisation (and associated turfgrass acreage increase) in arid/semiarid regions having intense competition for limited potable water resources [8] and in coastal areas where salt water intrusion into fresh water irrigation wells is common [9]. A new generation of turf varieties allows landscape development in saline environments [10, 11]. Such type of several grasses has now been developed and selected to produce plant varieties that can be utilized as turf. These turfs are ideal in environments in which salinity is a problem or where limited or no fresh water is available for irrigation.

2. Natural and Taxonomic Distribution of Turfgrasses

The turfgrass species are in the family Poaceae which was formerly known as Gramineae under the class Monocotyledoneae. More than 800 genera comprising over ten thousand species belong to the Poaceae [12]. Each species may contain a number of cultivars or varieties. Most cultivars are produced by hybridization followed by natural selection and also artificial selection. In consideration of life cycle, annual and perennial turfgrasses are available throughout the ecosystems [13].

Differences in ecological adaptation of turf determine their obvious geographical distribution over the climatic regions of the world. Bermudagrass, Cowgrass, Serangoongrass, Zoysiagrass St. Augustinegrass, Bahiagrass, Seashore Papalum, and Centipedegrass are highly appreciated as tropical warm season turfgrasses. On the other hand, Kentucky bluegrass, Rough Bluegrass, Canada Bluegrass, Annual Bluegrass, and Annual Ryegrass have established their position in the list of cool season turfs [14].

3. Morphology of Turfgrass Species

Most grasses are established by seeding, but, in some cases, they can also be established vegetatively using sod, sprigs, stolons, or plugs. Turfgrasses have an extensive fibrous root system. It is common for grasses to have several tons of roots per acre. The bulk of the root system is in the top 10 to 15 cm of soil. They may have some roots that grow down several feet into the soil. The three major types of stems associated with turfgrass are the crown, the flowering culm, and lateral or creeping stems. The crown, the principal meristematic region, is an unelongated stem. At reproductive stage, it produces an elongated stem, which is called the flowering culm. Some turfgrass species have lateral or creeping stems called stolons and rhizomes. These stems elongate horizontally from the crown of the parent plant. Stolons grow along the surface of the ground, while rhizomes grow beneath the surface. Shoots and roots form at nodes on the horizontal stems [14].

A leaf of turfgrass is divided into two major parts: the sheath and the blade. The blade is the upper, relatively flat part of the leaf. The sheath is the cylindrical portion of the leaf that surrounds the culm or young leaves. The sheath margin (the area where the two edges come together around the culm) can be used for identification. These two edges or margins can be open (not touching), closed (seamless), or overlapping. The sheaths are rolled around each other and support the leaf blades, holding them above the ground so that they can intercept sun light. A collar is the growing area or band that divides the sheath and leaf blade. Auricles are outgrowths that arise on each side of the collar. They can be short and blunt, long and clasping, or absent. Another feature, the ligule, is an outgrowth that arises at the inside junction of the sheath and leaf blade. The inflorescence, produced at the top of the culm, is the flowering part of a grass plant and is where seeds are formed [15].

4. General Aspects of Salinity Problems in Plants

Salinity causes major environmental factors limiting plant growth and productivity in many areas of the world. Salinity is one of the most important abiotic stresses widely distributed in both irrigated and nonirrigated areas of the world. Plants that grow on saline soils are confronted with soil solutions exhibiting a wide range of concentrations of dissolved salts. Concentrations fluctuate because of changes in water source, drainage, evapotranspiration, solute availability, and hydrostatic pressures. The leaves of glycophytic plants cannot retain high levels of salt without injury. In addition to the osmotic effect of concentrated solutes, there are ionic effects that arise from the specific composition of the solute flowing through plant tissues. Internal excesses of particular ions may cause membrane damage, which interferes with solute balances or causes shifts in nutrient concentrations. Some specific symptoms of plant damage which may be recognized especially in the leaves are colour change, tip-burn, marginal necrosis, and succulence [16, 17].

5. Salinity in Water and Soil

The technical term for saltiness in a solution is salinity. Different types of units have been used for salinity level expression. These are molarity (M), milli molarity (mM) (based on molecular weight of the salt), micro Siemen (μS cm−1), milli Siemen (mS m−1), deci Siemen (dS m−1) (based on electrical conductivity), and % salt (based on percent concentration of the salt). Among these, mM, dS m−1, and % salt concentrations are most generally used. Approximately 58.45 mg NaCl per litre is 1 mM solution of NaCl, and 640 mg NaCl per litre is equivalent to the EC value of 1 mmhos cm−1 or 1 dS m−1 [18]. Therefore, 1 dS m−1 salinity is equivalent to 11 mM salt solution. When salinity is expressed in terms of % concentration of salt solution it is estimated that 1% concentration is equivalent to 16 dS m−1 [19].

The salinity of a solution is measured using an electrical conductivity meter (EC meter), whereas in situ mud and soil salinity are measured using a conductivity probe [18]. Electrical conductivity of a solution (EC), expressed in dS m−1 at 25°C, is recommended as a salinity index by US Salinity Laboratory [20]. According to the description of the US Salinity Laboratory (1954) the saturation extract of a saline soil has an electrical conductivity (EC) greater than 4 dS m−1 and an exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) < 15. Although the pH of saline soils can vary over a wide range, it is usually around neutrality, with a tendency toward slight alkalinity (less than 8.5). Saline soils with an ESP of greater than 15 are termed saline-alkaline soils (or saline-sodic soils), have high pH values, and tend to become rather impermeable to water and air when the soluble salts are removed by leaching [21]. Although NaCl is predominant [22, 23], ionic constituents include varying proportions of chlorides, sulphates, bicarbonates, carbonates, and occasionally nitrates and borates of Na, K, Ca, and Mg [16]. Seawater contains generally Na, Mg, SO4, Ca, and HCO3 at 77.4, 17.6, 9.2, 3.4, and 0.4 meq L−1, respectively [24].

6. Tuning Mechanisms in Plants under Saline Environment

Regulation of ion transport is one of the most important factors responsible for salt tolerance of plants. Membrane proteins play an important role in selective distribution of ions within the plant or cell [25]. The membrane proteins are involved in cation selectivity and redistribution of Na+ and K+ [26]. These proteins are: (a) primary H+-ATPases which generate the H+ electrochemical gradient that drives ion transport, (b) Na+/H+ antiports in the plasma membrane for pumping excess Na+ out of the cell, (c) Na+/H+ antiports in the tonoplast for extruding Na+ into the vacuole, and (d) cation channels with high selectivity for K+ over Na+. It is well established that Na+ moves passively through a general cation channel from the saline growth medium into the cytoplasm of plant cells [21, 27], and the active transport of Na+ through Na+/H+ antiports in plant cell is also evident [28]. Energy-dependent transport of Na+ and Cl into the apoplast and vacuole can occur along with H+ electrochemical potential gradients generated across the plasma membrane and tonoplast [29]. The tonolast H+ pumps (H+-ATPase and H+-pyrophophatase) also play a vital role in the transport of H+ into the vacuole and generation of proton (H+) which operates the Na+/H+ antiporters [27, 30].

Within the general hypothesis of a NaCl-induced disturbed nutrition, the dominant specific hypothesis has clearly been that of “ion excess,” that is, the idea that Na+ and/or Cl rise to toxic levels in the shoot, eventually to high levels in the cytoplasm leading directly to metabolic inhibition [31]. There are three major constraints for plant growth on saline substrates.

Water deficit (drought stress) arising from the low (more negative) water potential of the rooting media;(i)Ion toxicity associated with the excessive uptake mainly of Na+ and Cl.(ii)Nutrient imbalance by depression of mineral nutrient uptake, Ca2+ in particular.(iii)The effects of salinity and possible mechanisms of adaptation by plants are summarized in Figure 1.

7. Salt-Tolerant Turfgrass Species

Relative salinity tolerance among turfgrass species and cultivars has been associated with restriction of saline ion accumulation in shoots [32]. Many different criteria have been used to measure salinity tolerance of turfgrass, such as shoot and root weight, shoot weight reduction relative to a nonsaline control, visual scores of salinity injures such as leaf firing, plant survival, and seed germination [33]. Also the EC at 25 or 50% shoot and root growth reduction has been used for relative tolerance rankings [34].

Paspalum vaginatum is one of the most salt-tolerant turfgrasses where sea water or any type of reclaimed/recycled water can be used for irrigation [35]. An estimated relative salinity tolerance of Paspalum vaginatum for 50% decrease in growth is 25 dS m−1 [36]. Most Paspalum vaginatum exhibited halophytic responses to salinity and some could tolerate sea water salinity [37, 38]. Paspalum vaginatum has the potential to be one of the most environmentally compatible turfgrasses in the near future [39, 40]. Bermudagrass also exhibits good tolerance to salty water [41]. Fifty percent shoot growth reduction for Bermudagrass cultivars and accessions has been reported at salinity levels of 24 and 33 dS m−1 [42]. Zoysiagrass having good salinity tolerance has recently been developed. Zoysiagrass has long been considered a salinity tolerant turfgrass and has been reported as equivalent in salinity tolerance to a highly salt-tolerant seashore paspalum [43, 44].

8. Effect of Salinity on Turfgrass Morphology

Osmotic adjustment under increased salinity occurred in Seashore paspalum, St. Augustine grass, Bermuda grass, Manila grasses and Japanese lawn grass concurrent with increased shoot Na+ and Cl concentrations, decreased shoot K+ concentration, and decreased shoot succulence [4548]. Osmotic adjustment and maintenance of positive turgor under salt stress occurred in Seashore paspalum Turfgrasses may exclude saline ions in several ways: via compatible solute accumulation in association with ion compartmentalization, and excretion [33]. In Bermudagrass and other turfgrass species it was found that proline and glycine betaine levels increased as salinity increased [4951]. Most of the salt-tolerant plants can still function by maximizing water uptake and turgor pressure meaning that water relations are important for negating salinity stress. Salt-tolerant turfgrasses have the ability to minimize the detrimental effects by producing a series of anatomical, morphological, and physiological adaptations. However, salinity causes lower osmotic potential, loss of turgor potential, ion toxicity, and nutritional disturbances [52]. Relative salinity tolerance is generally quantified as the salt level resulting in a 50% shoot growth reduction [34].

Zoysiagrass cultivars having good salinity tolerance have recently been developed; these have a high degree of salt gland activity [43]. The two-phase growth response curve has three essential parameters used for classifying plant salinity tolerance [5355]: (i) threshold , the maximum soil salinity that does not decrease yield below that obtained under nonsaline conditions; (ii) the slope of the section where increasing salinity reduces growth, which is represented as the yield decline per unit increase in salinity beyond the threshold ; and (iii) the related to 50% growth reduction.

9. Effect of Salinity on Physiological Process of Turfgrass

Plants osmotic adjustment subjected to salt stress can occur by the accumulation of high concentration of either inorganic ions or low molecular weight organic solutes. Although both of these play a crucial role in higher plants grown under saline conditions, their relative contribution varies among species, among cultivars, and even between different compartments within the same plant [56]. The detrimental salinity effects on plants include growth suppression, lower osmotic potential, loss of turgor potential, ion toxicity, and nutritional disturbances [52].

References [45, 46] also demonstrated that, as salinity increased, plant K levels decrease and to a lesser degree there is a decrease in Ca, Mg, and P.

Some selections of Seashore paspalum can tolerate undiluted seawater under the correct management regimes. Seawater has an EC of 54 dS m−1 (34 560 mg/L), and these new salt-tolerant varieties provide an opportunity to use very brackish sources of water though a high level of management is required [35].

Salinity effects on turfgrass growth have been summarised by [8] asreduced water uptake due to osmotic stress;reduced nutrient uptake, for example, K may be depressed by absorption of Na;root biomass may increase to improve water-absorbing ability; andNa and Cl reduce growth by interfering with photosynthesis.

Some cool and warm season turfgrasses were classified in Table 1 on the basis of salt tolerant level.

Cool season turfgrassRatingWarm season turfgrassRating

Puccinellia spp. (Alkaligrass)TPaspalum notatum Flugge (Bahiagrass)MS
Poa annua L. (Blue grass)SCynodon dactylon (Bermuda “Tifdwarf”)MS
Lolium multiflorum (Annual ryegrass)MSCynodon dactylon (Bermuda “Satiri”)MT
Festuca rubra L. spp. (Chewing fescue)MSBouteloua gracilis (H.B.K) (Blue Grama)MT
Agrostis tenuis (Colonial bent grass)SBouteloua dactyloides Nutt. (Buffalo grass)MT
Agrostis palustris (Creeping bent grass)MSEremochloa ophiuroides (Centipedegrass) MunroS
Festuca rubra L. spp. rubra (Creeping red fescue)MTPaspalum vaginatum (Seashore paspalum)T
Agropyron cristatum (Fairway wheat grass)MSStenotaphrum secundatum (St. Augustine)T
Festuca longifolia Thuill. (Hard fescue)MTZoysia japonica (Japanese lawn grass)T
Poa pratensis L. Kentucy (Blue grass)MSZoysia matrella (Manila grass)MT
Lloium perenne L. (Perennial rye grass)SZoysia tenuifolia (Korean grass)MS
Festuca arndinacea Schreb. (Tall fescue)MTDigitaria didactyla Wild (Serangoongrass)MT

The rating is based on soil salt test levels, sensitive <3 dS m−1, moderate sensitive 3–6 dS m−1, moderate tolerant 6–10 dS m−1, and tolerant >10 dS m−1.

10. Conclusion

The development of turfgrass industry in the coastal areas is challenging due to scarcity of fresh water for irrigation. The relative salinity tolerance of turfgrass root growth, shoot growth, and leaf firing was closely associated with salinity tolerance of the grasses. The different species of grasses were grouped for salinity tolerance on the basis of 50% shoot and root growth of reduction, leaf firing, and turf quality with increasing salinity. The use of halophytes for rehabilitation and reclamation of salt-affected lands has proven to be feasible if certain precautions are taken. Plantations of halophyte species are justified when they can make areas productive. The soil/water management practices to provide adequate rainage and other soil-related aspects are critical factors in using saline water for irrigating halophytes. There is a need for developing the proper agromanagement and conditions to maximize the productivity of these known economical halophytic species.


  1. A. S. Juraimi, “Turfgrass: types, uses and maintenance,” Garden Asia, vol. 8, pp. 40–43, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
  2. P. H. Raven, R. F. Evert, and S. E. Eichhoron, Plant Biology, Translation by A. Salatino, Guanabara Koogan, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 6th edition, 2001.
  3. R. D. Emmons, Turfgrass Science and Management, Delmar Thompson Learning, New York, NY, USA, 4th edition, 2008.
  4. M. Ashraf, H. R. Athar, P. J. C. Harris, and T. R. Kwon, “Kwon, some prospective strategies for improving crop salt tolerance,” Advances in Agronomy, vol. 97, pp. 45–110, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. B. Jacoby, “Mechanism involved in salt tolerance of plants,” in Handbook of Plant and Crop Stress, M. Pessarakli, Ed., pp. 97–124, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 1999. View at: Google Scholar
  6. BAAC, Assesment of Climate Change for the Baltic Sea Basin, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2008.
  7. L. D. D. Harvey, “Characterizing the annual-mean climatic effect of anthropogenic CO2 and aerosol emissions in eight coupled atmosphere-ocean GCMs,” Climate Dynamics, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 569–599, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. A. Harivandi, J. D. Bulter, and L. Wu, “Salinity and turfgrass culture,” in Turfgrass Agronomy Monograph, D. V. Waddington, Ed., pp. 208–230, ASA. CSSA and SSSA, Madison, Wis, USA, 1992. View at: Google Scholar
  9. C. L. Murdoch, “Water the limiting factor for golf course development in Hawaii,” USGA Green Section Record, vol. 25, pp. 11–13, 1987. View at: Google Scholar
  10. M. W. Hester, I. A. Mendelssohn, and K. L. McKee, “Species and population variation to salinity stress in Panicum hemitomon, Spartina patens, and Spartina alterniflora: morphological and physiological constraints,” Environmental and Experimental Botany, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 277–297, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. S. Gulzar, M. A. Khan, and I. A. Ungar, “Salt tolerance of a coastal salt marsh grass,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 34, no. 17-18, pp. 2595–2605, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. D. R. Piperno and H.-D. Sues, “Dinosaurs dined on grass,” Science, vol. 310, no. 5751, pp. 1126–1128, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. V. Prasad, C. A. E. Strömberg, H. Alimohammadian, and A. Sahni, “Paleontology: dinosaur coprolites and the early evolution of grasses and grazers,” Science, vol. 310, no. 5751, pp. 1177–1180, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. G. P. Chapman and W. E. Peat, An Introduction to the Grasses, CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 1992.
  15. Turgeoan, Turfgrass Management, Pretice Hall, USA, NJ, USA, 7th edition.
  16. K. M. Volkmar, Y. Hu, and H. Steppuhn, “Physiological responses of plants to salinity: a review,” Canadian Journal of Plant Science, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 19–27, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  17. T. Colmer, “Salt tolerance in plants. Australian Turfgrass Management 2.5 (October/November),” in Plant Ecology, M. J. Crawley, Ed., Balckwell Scientific Publishers, Oxford, UK, 2000. View at: Google Scholar
  18. M. C. Shannon, J. D. Rhoades, J. H. Draper, S. C. Scardaci, and M. D. Spyres, “Assessment of salt tolerance in rice cultivars in response to salinity problems in California,” Crop Science, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 394–398, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
  19. M. I. Jackson, Soil Chemical Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1958.
  20. M. Pessarakli, Handbook of Plant and Crop Stress, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 1994.
  21. H. Marschner, “Adaptation of plants to adverse chemical soil conditions,” in Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants, pp. 596–680, Academic Press, London, UK, 2nd edition, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
  22. S. Yoshida, “Salinity,” in Fundamentals of Rice Production, pp. 175–176, IRRI, Philippines, 1981. View at: Google Scholar
  23. J. Jungklang, K. Usui, and H. Matsumoto, “Differences in physiological responses to NaCl between salt-tolerant Sesbania rostrata Brem. & Oberm. and non-tolerant Phaseolus vulgaris L,” Weed Biology and Management, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 21–27, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. H. J. Walker, “Coastal morphology,” Soil Science, vol. 119, pp. 3–19, 1975. View at: Google Scholar
  25. M. Ashraf and P. J. C. Harris, “Potential biochemical indicators of salinity tolerance in plants,” Plant Science, vol. 166, no. 1, pp. 3–16, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. F. M. Du-Pont, “Salt induced changes in ion transport: regulation of primary pumps and secondary transporters,” in Transport and Receptor Proteins of Plant Membranes, Molecular Structure and Function, D. T. Cooke and D. T. Clarkson, Eds., pp. 91–100, Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA, 1992. View at: Google Scholar
  27. M. M. F. Mansour, K. H. A. Salama, and M. M. Al-Mutawa, “Transport proteins and salt tolerance in plants,” Plant Science, vol. 164, no. 6, pp. 891–900, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. H. Shi, B.-H. Lee, S.-J. Wu, and J.-K. Zhu, “Overexpression of a plasma membrane Na+/H+ antiporter gene improves salt tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana,” Nature Biotechnology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 81–85, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. P. M. Hasegawa, R. A. Bressan, J.-K. Zhu, and H. J. Bohnert, “Plant cellular and molecular responses to high salinity,” Annual Review of Plant Biology, vol. 51, pp. 463–499, 2000. View at: Google Scholar
  30. E. Blumwald, “Sodium transport and salt tolerance in plants,” Current Opinion in Cell Biology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 431–434, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. D. B. Lazof and N. Bernstein, “The NaCl induced inhibition of shoot growth: the case for disturbed nutrition with special consideration of calcium,” Advances in Botanical Research, vol. 29, pp. 113–189, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. L. Wu and H. Lin, “Salt tolerance and salt uptake in diploid and polyploid buffalograsses (Buchloe dactyloides),” Journal of Plant Nutrition, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1905–1928, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  33. K. B. Marcum, “Salinity tolerance mechanisms of grasses in the subfamily Chloridoideae,” Crop Science, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 1153–1160, 1999. View at: Google Scholar
  34. R. N. Carrow and R. R. Duncan, Salt-Affected Turfgrass Sites: Assessment and Management, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1998.
  35. R. R. Duncan and R. N. Carrow, “Soon on golf courses: new seashore paspalum,” Golf Course Manager, vol. 68, pp. 65–67, 2000. View at: Google Scholar
  36. K. B. Marcum, M. Pessarakli, and D. M. Kopec, “Relative salinity tolerance of 21 turf-type desert saltgrasses compared to bermudagrass,” HortScience, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 827–829, 2005. View at: Google Scholar
  37. G. Lee, R. R. Duncan, and R. N. Carrow, “Salinity tolerance of seashore paspalum ecotypes: shoot growth responses and criteria,” HortScience, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 1138–1142, 2004. View at: Google Scholar
  38. G. Lee, R. N. Carrow, and R. R. Duncan, “Salinity tolerance of selected seashore paspalums and bermudagrasses: root and verdure responses and criteria,” HortScience, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 1143–1147, 2004. View at: Google Scholar
  39. R. R. Duncan, “The environmentally sound turfgrass of the future,” USGA Green Section Record, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 9–11, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  40. R. R. Duncan, “Seashore paspalum: the next generation turf for golf courses,” Golf Course Manager, vol. 65, pp. 49–51, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  41. K. B. Marcum and C. L. Murdoch, “Salinity tolerance mechanisms of six C4 turfgrasses,” Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, vol. 119, no. 4, pp. 779–784, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  42. A. E. Dudeck and C. H. Peacock, “Salinity effects on growth and nutrient uptake of selected warm-season turfgrasses,” International Turfgrass Soceity Research Journal, vol. 7, pp. 680–686, 1993. View at: Google Scholar
  43. M. C. Engelke, J. A. Reinert, and P. F. Colbaugh, “Registration of “Cavalier” Zoysiagrass,” Crop Science, vol. 42, pp. 302–303, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  44. M. C. Engelke, J. A. Reinert, P. F. Colbaugh et al., “Registration of “Diamond” Zoysiagrass,” Crop Science, vol. 42, pp. 304–305, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  45. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, M. A. Hossain, R. Othman, and A. A. Rahim, “Effects of salinity stress on growth and ion accumulation of turfgrass species,” Plant Omics Journal, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 244–252, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  46. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, M. A. Hossain, and M. A. Alam, “Effect of salt stress of Portulaca oleracea on antioxidant properties and mineral compositions,” Australian Journal of Crop Science, vol. 6, pp. 1732–1736, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  47. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, M. A. Hossain, R. Othman, and A. A. Rahim, “Effect of salinity stress on nutrient uptake and chlorophyll content of tropical turfgrass species,” Australian Journal of Crop Science, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 620–629, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  48. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, U. A. Naher, R. Othman, and A. A. Rahim, “Application of saline water and herbicides as a method for weed control in the tropical turfgrass: its impact on nutrient uptake and soil microbial community,” African Journal of Microbiology Research, vol. 5, no. 29, pp. 5155–5164, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  49. W. G. Munshaw, E. Ervin, and X. Zhang, “Pass the salt,” Golf Course Management, pp. 81–92, 2004. View at: Google Scholar
  50. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, M. A. Hossain, O. Radziah, and A. A. Rahim, “Physiological and growth response of tropical turfgrass to salinity stress,” The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2012, Article ID 905468, 10 pages, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. M. K. Uddin and A. S. Juraimi, Using Sea Water for Weed Mangement in Turfgrass, LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, German, 2012.
  52. S. F. Alshammary, Y. L. Qian, and S. J. Wallner, “Growth response of four turfgrass species to salinity,” Agricultural Water Management, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 97–111, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. M. C. Shannon, C. M. Grieve, and L. E. Francois, “Whole-plant response to salinity,” in Plant-Environment Interactions, R. E. Wilkinson, Ed., pp. 199–244, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  54. K. B. Marcum, “Growth and physiological adaptations of grasses to salinity stress,” in Handbook of Plant and Crop Physiology, M. Pessaraki, Ed., pp. 623–636, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
  55. M. Ashraf, “Breeding for salinity tolerance in plants,” Critical Review Plant Science, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 17–42, 1994. View at: Google Scholar
  56. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, R. Othman, and A. Abdul Rahim, “Growth response of eight tropical turfgrass species to salinity,” African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 8, no. 21, pp. 5799–5806, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  57. M. K. Uddin, A. S. Juraimi, M. R. Ismail, R. Othman, and A. A. Rahim, “Relative salinity tolerance of warm season turfgrass species,” Journal of Environmental Biology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 309–312, 2011. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright © 2013 Md. Kamal Uddin and Abdul Shukor Juraimi. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.