North Star and P-105 KBG

[Green]

Does anyone here know if North Star and P-105 are still grown/sold? I have not heard much about them recently on here. Anyone here used or seen seed from them in the pst year or two? Also, are these considered "aggressive" cultivars?

[andy10917]

Call ProSeeds about P-105 (actually called "Princeton-105"), and ask if anyone is growing it. Call Pure Seed about "North Star".

The "Aggressive Family" group designation was ended around 2010 - but the grass doesn't change because somebody naming it.

While "North Star" is aggressive, it also has a track record of being pretty sensitive to herbicides. My "Emblem" lawn is a descendant of "North Star", and is quite aggressive.

[Green]

While "North Star" is aggressive, it also has a track record of being pretty sensitive to herbicides.

I heard.

I did not know about the dropping of the recent dropping of "aggressive" from turf classification vocabulary.

I've been calling companies this week, so what's a few more on the list to call? Thanks for the tips regarding which go with who. This is a good time to call these companies.

[Green]

Was Certainty contraindicated for Emblem back when it was advertised/labeled for use on KBG (or do you think it should have been contraindicated based on your results?).

I remember back when I was selecting my varieties, I was considering P-105. Being a newbie, I did not fully understand what aggressive meant. I didn't quite believe it. It's probably a good thing I didn't go with something aggressive in the mix, after reading about how your Emblem ate up everything in its path over a period of years. Probably would have tried to overtake my TTTF, too. The TTTF has enough trouble competing with standard KBG types.

I've also had to back off my PR percentages when mixing that with TTTF...to below 10%. Otherwise, the TTTF doesn't stand a chance.

Any idea why they dropped "aggressive"? Was it a push to get the correct classifications (e.g. compact America, etc.) for those varieties used? How do you know anymore which are the aggressive ones? Just the marketing material?

[Green]

Ok, it appears P-105 is now classified as a "P-105 type".

[andy10917]

Was Certainty contraindicated for Emblem back when it was advertised/labeled for use on KBG (or do you think it should have been contraindicated based on your results?).

I don't remember the official guidance - it's been 9 years. I remember testing a patch, and the damage was tolerable.

after reading about how your Emblem ate up everything in its path over a period of years

I have tried to introduce "Moonlight" and "Bewitched" into it over the years. It wasn't happening. The "Emblem" completely crushed it.

I've also had to back off my PR percentages when mixing that with TTTF...to below 10%. Otherwise, the TTTF doesn't stand a chance.

At 10%, the seed count is the same per lb.

Any idea why they dropped "aggressive"? Was it a push to get the correct classifications (e.g. compact America, etc.) for those varieties used? How do you know anymore which are the aggressive ones? Just the marketing material?

If I remember right, they reorganized them after genetic testing.

[Green]

I've also had to back off my PR percentages when mixing that with TTTF...to below 10%. Otherwise, the TTTF doesn't stand a chance.

At 10%, the seed count is the same per lb.

For KBG and TTTF, sure. But I'm talking TTTF and PR now. The PR is only a little bit smaller...I think the averages are like 250,000 seeds/lb for TTPR vs. 230,000 for TTTF. I've never done a TTPR/TTTF mix, but I have KBG/TTTF/TTPR (with a little FF in some areas) in the front. Between the PR and the KBG, the TTTF has the toughest time...it's the weakest competitor in the mix after the 2-3 tiller stage, imho. I saw some studies illustrating similar results. That's why I use primarily TTTF when overseeding that mix, and generally zero PR.

I can't imagine what an Emblem or even P-105 would have done to the TTTF. I have America, Rugby II, and Bewitched (and PR, too, in the front) with my TTTF, and they compete more than enough with it.