<p>  </p> <p>Kentucky bluegrass is the most common cool-season turfgrass grown in the northern US. <br> The fact that Kentucky bluegrass requires s high quantity of fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation to produce high quality turf has led to environmental concerns among policymakers, researchers, and consumers. To address this concern, turfgrass breeders have developed improved cultivars of low-input turfgrass species that aim to improve the sustainability of US lawns (Ghimire et al., 2019). For instance, tall fescue [(<em>Festuca arundinacea </em>Schreb.; syn. <em>Schedonorus arundinaceus</em> (Schreb.) Dumort., nom. cons.] and fine fescues (<em>Festuca </em>spp.) may represent viable options for residential and commercial buildings due to their outstanding performance under lower amounts of inputs such as irrigation, pesticides, and fertilizers (Watkins et al., 2011). Thus, adopting improved cultivars of low-input species may be a step towards reducing the use of inputs in landscapes (Simmons et al., 2011; Pooya et al., 2013). Yet, the production of low-input turfgrasses in the northern US is slow and limited, which leads to marketing and education obstacles that support their adoption. Thus, understanding factors that influence sod buyers to purchase low-input turfgrasses is imperative to increase the market share and the adoption of these turfgrasses. </p> <p>This study investigated the factors influencing sod buyers to purchase low-input turfgrass in the northern US, using tall fescue and fine fescue as low-input sod species. Using a logistic regression model, we assessed the determinants of low-input turfgrass purchase among sod buyers (i.e., athletic facilities, landscape contractors, garden centers, general contractors, lawn care, golf courses, and municipal parks). The logit model assumed the adoption decision to be driven by the buyers’ perception of the utility of buying low-input turfgrass species. Thus, the dependent binary variable Y equals 1 if the firm purchased tall or fine fescue in 2020, and 0 otherwise. The adoption is then expressed as a function of determinants, including the firm’s characteristics, supplier characteristics, sod attributes, and buyer’s perceptions. </p> <p>Data for this study came from a 2021 web-based survey of sod buyers located in 19 states of the Northern US. A total of 200 buyers completed the survey, including landscape contractors, golf courses, general contractors, lawn care services, and landscape maintenance firms who have purchased sod in 2020. The significant mean comparisons between adopters and non-adopters showed that adopters of low-input turfgrasses purchased most of their sod through contract agreements. The main suppliers of adopters were located at a closer distance to on-site delivery than the non-adopters. The logit regression results showed that low-input turfgrass adoption was positively influenced by the number of sod suppliers and managerial experience of the sod buyer. Landscapers were more likely to purchase tall fescue and fine fescue compared to golf courses and municipal parks. We found that distance from sod supplier to on-site delivery negatively impacted the purchase of low-input turfgrasses. Similarly, Kentucky bluegrass buyers were less likely to purchase low-input turfgrass species.</p>

Buffalograss [Buchloe dactyloides (Nutt.) Engelm.] is a warm season, perennial grass native to the Great Plains from southern Canada to Mexico (Beetle, 1950). This newly developed, low input, turf-type grass is recommended for use on low maintenance sites (Falkenberg-Borland and Butler, 1982; Pozarnsky, 1983; Wu and Harivandi, 1989; Shearman et al., 2005). Recently, the use of buffalograss as a turfgrass has increased due to its drought tolerance, low nutrient requirements, and low growing height (Harivandi and Wu, 1995; Frank et al., 2004). It is an excellent choice in California where water use is limited. Unsightly winter dormancy of buffalograss can be overcome by growing mixtures of buffalograss and fine fescue (Festuca spp.). Overtime species composition can be overtaken by the fine fescue, unintentionally converting the mixed turfgrass stand to a fine fescue monostand (Severmutlu, et al., 2005). Research on buffalograss establishment in fine leaved fescues from seed or by vegetative methods was completed from 2007 to 2009 at the California Polytechnic State University Horticulture Unit in San Luis Obispo, California. Comparisons were made between mixtures of eight cultivars of buffalograss (Prairie, Prestige, UC Verde, 609, Bowie, Cody, Texoka, and Bison) and three fine leaved fescue species [hard fescue (Festuca trachyphylla Thuill.), sheep fescue (Festuca ovina L), and red fescue (Festuca rubra L.)] to determine which combination and establishment strategy provides the highest quality turf for the California central coast region. Evaluations made on buffalograss establishment and competitive ability when grown in pre-existing fine fescue turfgrasses showed seeded cultivars (Bowie, Cody, Texoka, and Bison) were unsuccessfully established (zero percent coverage in two growing seasons), and vegetative cultivar (Prairie, Prestige, 609 and UC Verde) establishment was greatly dependent on the type of cultivar planted. After two growing seasons, buffalograss cultivar UC Verde had the highest establishment rate (38.6 percent living ground cover) and Prestige had the lowest (11.4 percent living ground cover). Results from this study do not recommend establishing seeded buffalograss cultivars into pre-existing fine leaved fescue turfgrass stands. Vegetative buffalograss cultivars can be established into pre-existing fine leaved fescue turfgrass stands; however, this process is too slow for most turfgrass practitioners and is quite unsightly in winter dormancy during the establishment process.