Injection systems

[Richard J]

What injection system works the best.There is so much infomation on this Iam lost on this one.I would like to treat trees for insect problems,fert trees,treat trees for BLS.oak wilt,And fungicides ect.
Thank you for your help !!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

What are you injecting, and what for?

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

One of the main concerns is the injury at the injection sites. Micro injections are really hard on living cells. The more dilute the solution, the less phytotoxic reaction you get, and the better coverage up in the tree you get.
Using fungicides were you repeatedly inject, like for DED, you want to use a macro-injection. It takes more equipment and time, but you want the best.
The other consideration is injection site locations. The best place, for several reasons, is in down on the lower root flare. You have to dig with a trowel or air spade to get there.
Tools like the wedgle, that use a small injection hole sound great, you know, small hole, small injury, but the phytotoxic damage turns out to be a large injury, and right on the trunk.

 

[alanarbor]

One of the main concerns is the injury at the injection sites. Micro injections are really hard on living cells. The more dilute the solution, the less phytotoxic reaction you get, and the better coverage up in the tree you get.
Using fungicides were you repeatedly inject, like for DED, you want to use a macro-injection. It takes more equipment and time, but you want the best.
The other consideration is injection site locations. The best place, for several reasons, is in down on the lower root flare. You have to dig with a trowel or air spade to get there.
Tools like the wedgle, that use a small injection hole sound great, you know, small hole, small injury, but the phytotoxic damage turns out to be a large injury, and right on the trunk.

To follow this up, injections often use an solvent carrier that that can cause a phytotoxic reaction. the latest player on the block is Rainbow scientific with their refillable micro infuser, which they have developed water solubles for, which should lessen the toxic reaction.

However, it needs to be said that injections should be used with care in mind. They are a great tool, but should not be the first tool you pull out of your toolbox.

 

[ATH]

I actually talked to a guy from Wedgle today (before reading this post).

He said it does not damage the trees like the other micro injection tools. He did also say if there is any chance of dry soil/drought stress that you should water the tree for several hours a day before treatment.

I'd also be curious to hear real-world experiences from any of the systems.

I am looking at several applications, but mainly imidacloprid treatments ahead of emerald ash borer.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I am looking at several applications, but mainly imidacloprid treatments ahead of emerald ash borer.

Imidichloprid is so effectively taken up by trees with soil injections, and soil injections are so much easier, why would you even think of trunk injecting it?

 

[alanarbor]

I second that motion. Trunk injection might be useful in trees with severely limited soil area (Street trees frex) but it certainly shoulden't be the first method.

The advice given that if you are going to inject a tree and it's been dry to irrigate is a good one, as it will help to limit that phytotoxic reaction, but if you can effectively irrigate, you can apply merit to the soil.

 

[ATH]

So, do you soil inject or soil drench? Soil drench over grass looses a lot to the turf. So I assume if you drench, you do so around a slightly excavated root color?

On the business management side, how do you sell soil drench when the customer can get Bayer Advanced Tree and Shrub Care at Lowes and do the same thing themselves?

 

[Thetreewisemen]

Imidichloprid is so effectively taken up by trees with soil injections, and soil injections are so much easier, why would you even think of trunk injecting it?

I live on Long Island, where the water table is very high. Therefore soil injections can be risky and in some cases illegal, I think. Trunk injections are the way to go around here unless you want the DEC and the EPA breathing down your neck!

 

[tprosser]

Check this out

http://www.************/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=49727&an=0&page=0#49727

Check out the link above and look at the photos on injection injury using the wedgle. It is about 3/4 of the way through the thread.

The wedgle can do severe injury and the volume going in is miniscule.

If you can accomplish your goal without wounding and putting in solvents - the tree will be much happier.

 

[ATH]

Tom, thanks for the link. Wow...wouldn't be happy to do that to a customer's tree without knowing it was coming.

Of course the salesman said it would not damage the cambium, but I did not see how it could not do some damage. That is more than I expected. And looks a lot worse than I expected too.

 

[Urban Forester]

I have used Mauget for nearly 20 yrs. nearly every product in their inventory. I have used wedgle for about 6 or 7 yrs. I have never seen a 'toxic reaction' as a result of of an injection. While the debate on tree wounding is a concern (valid) and how much energy the tree uses to compartmentalize the injection sites is still being evaluated, I believe the benefits FAR out weigh the concerns, especially when dealing with EAB. My personnal experience has been that EAB does FAR more vascual damage than the micro-injection process does. When I've seen trees with larvae in buttress roots I KNOW I'm dealing with a voracious insect. We have seen trees with 100 to 150 larvae in them. What chance does that tree have at that point...none. However with preventive injections PRIOR to that level of infestation, Ashes WILL survive. We have over 300 trees treated w/micro-injection both Mauget and wedgle that are alive AND healthy today because of micro-injection. The one point above that is a concern to me is the collection of imidicloprid at the point of injection, and the resulting bark splitting when using the wedgle. However I stress again that the trees that have been injected w/wedgle ARE alive and we are located in ground zero i.e. the 'dead zone' of metro Detroit. As far as soil injection goes we have found that the levels of imidicloprid do NOT accumulate to desired levels (PPM) in the upper canopy of the tree (independant ELISHA testing). Since this insect attacks from the top-down (in the 3/4 to 1" branches) having as much product as possible in as significant quanities as possible in the upper canopy is very important. We use soil injection in concert w/ either injection or trunk washing with Onyx. Once again RESULTS are the key, micro injection DOES work, both systems, as does macro-infusion, but thats a whole 'nother story.

 

[alanarbor]

I live on Long Island, where the water table is very high. Therefore soil injections can be risky and in some cases illegal, I think. Trunk injections are the way to go around here unless you want the DEC and the EPA breathing down your neck!

Yeah, you're in a special regulation area. In that case I would probably consider the following:

Mauget has the largest product line, though a bit of wounding is going to happen.

The Wedgle might be less wounding, but your products are limited

Rainbow's infuser system might be a good way to go, but there may be some issues with the system being less than completely closed, at least that is what I heard from a RCA out of Conneticut.


I think you have to carefully weigh the benefits against the negatives before you inject.

 

[Thetreewisemen]

I agree, and plus if the client can actually see a marked improvement in their trees health eg. white birches treated for and making a satisfactory recovery from bronze birch borer, then all three parts of the equation are happy......you, the client and last but not least the tree. If it's a toss up between using a little stored energy to compartmentalize a hole the size of a needle, or being eaten inside out by borers........I like to think I would know which one the tree would go for!

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I agree, and plus if the client can actually see a marked improvement in their trees health eg. white birches treated for and making a satisfactory recovery from bronze birch borer, then all three parts of the equation are happy......you, the client and last but not least the tree. If it's a toss up between using a little stored energy to compartmentalize a hole the size of a needle, or being eaten inside out by borers........I like to think I would know which one the tree would go for!

No system uses a hole the size of a needle. Even the wedgle has about an 1/8" hole, into which a rubber gasket is inserted, then the needle is used.
Secondly, it's not the initial hole, it's the size of the wound weeks later, after the chemicals burn the living cells around the tiny hole.
Then you do that every year, and those wound s build into huge areas of decay.
We worked on an old elm that had been treated for years, we warned the tree was unsafe and two weeks later it fell on the homeowner, causing serious injury. You could see the damage years of injecting had done, layers and layers of wounds.

 

[tprosser]

Water based is Better

If you have to inject it is always better to used products that are water based and not solvent based products.

 

[Thetreewisemen]

No system uses a hole the size of a needle. Even the wedgle has about an 1/8" hole, into which a rubber gasket is inserted, then the needle is used.
Secondly, it's not the initial hole, it's the size of the wound weeks later, after the chemicals burn the living cells around the tiny hole.
Then you do that every year, and those wound s build into huge areas of decay.
We worked on an old elm that had been treated for years, we warned the tree was unsafe and two weeks later it fell on the homeowner, causing serious injury. You could see the damage years of injecting had done, layers and layers of wounds.

So, what do you suggest? Inject and initiate decay leading to structural failure? Or, let the borers eat the tree inside out......leading to structural failure? If my client wants to know why her birches are declining, I'll tell her why and treat the problem. However, 'alarm bells' would be ringing in my head if I was injecting a larger more mature tree such as the elm you described, year in year out. We all know what happens with excessive use of any chemical product pertinent to tree care.

 

[Zac]

Soil injections not good for large trees??

As far as soil injection goes we have found that the levels of imidicloprid do NOT accumulate to desired levels (PPM) in the upper canopy of the tree (independant ELISHA testing). .

This is very interesing information. Do you know of a link to a scientific journal that has this?, I would like to discuss this with my boss.

 

[tprosser]

Soil Injection is the best way

I just attended the Ohio ISA show where there were many presentations and conversations regarding Emerald Ash Borer. The consensus is that soil application of Imidicloprid does work extremely well. However, it requires 2 applications at the high rate to build enough residue in the tree. After that - One application per year will maintain those levels. This work was done by David Smitley. The other consensus is that injections should only be used if you need to get the material in the tree fast. The problem with injections today are the solvents used in them. They cause a large amount of injury.

I will attach some photos of injections by equipment that claims not to "wound" the tree. If you inject trees - it is better to use water based materials. If you can soil apply or spray and get results - do not inject.

 

[ATH]

tprosser,
I was only at the Ohio Tree Care Conference for Monday, and only attended one session on EAB. From that, I am not sure I'd feel as comfortable saying:

"The consensus is that soil application of Imidicloprid does work extremely well......The other consensus is that injections should only be used if you need to get the material in the tree fast. "

Being that the presentation was given by a Bayer representative who hardly touched on the alternatives, I did not feel like I learned about ups and downs of alternatives. I wasn't surprised that he thought the Bayer product (soil drench with Merit) worked well. There were a couple of sketchy interprations of the numbers...for example when he was talking about untreated trees if there was around 80-90% dieback in the second year, he counted it as a dead tree (probably a good call). On the treated trees, he counted a couple with just as much dieback as live trees. I would have liked to have a second look at those graphs, but he had a lot to get through so didn't leave them up very long. The research he presented shows soil treatment does work well. It also showed injections worked well.

Of course I didn't have a lot of time to mingle and talk to others about it so maybe that is where you got a more clear consenus from.

In reality, the studies about Emerald Ash Borer are too young to know what the long term results will be. For example, what if we only need to inject every 3rd year instead of soil treat twice per year?