Working hurricanes

[treeseer]

Dave I agree that callus turns into woundwood as it differentiates and lignifies (sorry but there are no $.49 synonyms), but since this is a gradual transition they are not separate, but blended, entities. I don't follow your veer from pheromones to rams horns--it reads like grasping for theories instead of looking at evidence. If there is useful info from The OSU that would be good to see.

Sorry about the "evapotranspirational dessication"--that was the rum talking. "Drying out" would have been better. I'll avoid that stuff if you stop nitpicking about the usage of "codit".

I'm still waiting for your hard evidence, or a sign that you are gathering data today and not just trying to apply someone else's 20-year old observations to every tree problem. Shigo's Pithy Point #1: "The more you learn about what you are seeking, the better the chances are that you will find it."

Dave, you said you had pics of that bur oak...love to see them!

 

[treevet]

Was just poking a little oke: having a little fun. I know both of you guys (well er,...a Guy and a JPS) are on your game.

I can take it as well as I can dish it out. There is some content in that post as well as the jabs, along with .....having a little fun. No harm meant.

re. JPS quote

 

[treevet]

Dave I agree that callus turns into woundwood as it differentiates and lignifies (sorry but there are no $.49 synonyms), but since this is a gradual transition they are not separate, but blended, entities. I don't follow your veer from pheromones to rams horns--it reads like grasping for theories instead of looking at evidence. If there is useful info from The OSU that would be good to see.

Sorry about the "evapotranspirational dessication"--that was the rum talking. "Drying out" would have been better. I'll avoid that stuff if you stop nitpicking about the usage of "codit".

I'm still waiting for your hard evidence, or a sign that you are gathering data today and not just trying to apply someone else's 20-year old observations to every tree problem. Shigo's Pithy Point #1: "The more you learn about what you are seeking, the better the chances are that you will find it."

Dave, you said you had pics of that bur oak...love to see them!

I will get a pict or two but the tree has regenerated a canopy so well (we found a canopy under the 140 foot one that was a natural one) that it has completely obscured the cut backs at this time of year.

But again, my issue is not the regeneration of canopy (see topping silver maples) but the accumulation of decay and cracks (see silver maples as well).

Sorry, can't stop with the codit. Haven't even got over you turning it into a pet dog lol.

 

[tree MDS]

I didnt realize this turned into a such a good thread, so I'm pretty late getting in on it, but this has been very helpfull. Thanks guys.

Like oldirty, I wasnt exactly clear on the node thing. In the ice storm we had last winter I just tried to prune back to sprouts. This helps clarify the node option. thanks again.

I have a customer that has some red oak trees that someone stubbed back (I assume from an ice storm 5 or 6 years ago), I cant remember for certain but there was only minimal sprouting and most of those limbs had several smaller white shelfs of fungus (basidiocarps??) that carried along the branches and down into the main trunk some. Maybe they didnt cut to nodes? I still dont know if that would have helped with the fungus but that had me wondering having read the tci article (somewhat, obviously not thouroughly enough, lol) on storm damage where this was discussed - I cant find the article now but I think its probably in this thread somewhere, I'll go look.

Anyway, just my two cents and grabbing the popcorn.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I have a customer that has some red oak trees that someone stubbed back (I assume from an ice storm 5 or 6 years ago), I cant remember for certain but there was only minimal sprouting and most of those limbs had several smaller white shelfs of fungus (basidiocarps??) that carried along the branches and down into the main trunk some. Maybe they didnt cut to nodes?

It could be that the tree had low vitality before the storm, or droughts after (you guys have them there, no?), resulting in poor epidermic regeneration. There is also the species propensity for decay resistance, or lack there of in red oak.

Was just poking a little having a little fun.

I'll buy that for a dollar.

 

[treeseer]

some red oak trees that someone stubbed back

yes generally red oaks are not the most damage-tolerant. How big were the cuts? Enough big breaks on major scaffolds and the tree can't recover, but the 50% crown loss guideline some like to repeat is just total nonsense. No science or experience behind it; they just picked a number.

The TCI piece was April 2003 and maybe if you nag the editor/webmaster they will get the archive link working.

It's 4.46 mb, too big to attach here cuz it's chock full of pics. the limit of 1.25 mb is very limiting.

'"my issue is not the regeneration of canopy (see topping silver maples) but the accumulation of decay and cracks"

These issues, like callus and woundwood, are not distinctly separate. Regeneration feeds codit which limits the spread of decay. As for cracks, if cuts have to expose a lot of heartwood, it seems reasonable to experiment with a sealant, to lessen cracking.

Gee that might re-de-rail this thread. Never mind!

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Regeneration feeds codit which limits the spread of decay.

Back to my mention of the Gilman study that showed a correlation between proximity of dynamic mass to the wound and resistance to decay. I think he used young Acer rubrum and an oak.

It feels right to say that that is where I heard/read about the cone shaped discoloration that passed beyond the collar. Cannot say for certain.

 

[treevet]

I'll buy that for a dollar.

What does that mean, I don't get it?

 

[treevet]

Back to my mention of the Gilman study that showed a correlation between proximity of dynamic mass to the wound and resistance to decay. I think he used young Acer rubrum and an oak.

Could you pls. link this research.

 

[treevet]

Dave I agree that callus turns into woundwood as it differentiates and lignifies (sorry but there are no $.49 synonyms), but since this is a gradual transition they are not separate, but blended, entities. I don't follow your veer from pheromones to rams horns--

You have reitterated this point in a later point so I'd like to address it. Callus and woundwood are 2 entirely different entities and not "blended" together.

Callus is undifferented tissue with little or no lignin.
Woundwood is highly ordered wood with lignin.

Since Gilman is your man....Pg. 62....before WOUNDWOOD completely closes over it.

On the same page "If left on trees, decay beginning in stubs can break through the branch protection zone and move into the trunk, causing trunk rot and creating a potentially weak tree. Do not leave stubs, living or dead, on trees." Please direct me to Dr. Gilman's ad vocation of retaining huge stubs and not even monitoring them.

You are back on your crusade for "tree paint" again. Your man Gilman again...."Several products are marketed as wound dressings. In general, their purchase stimulates only the economy. Some may slow the growth of callus over the wound (note...callus can close small wounds). You should never apply an oil based paint. Wound dressings DO NOT PREVENT CRACKS (pls. note Guy....this is your man), mushrooms or wood rot. There is no scientific evidence that they help the tree close over the pruning wound. Some dressings may even stimulate rot by trapping moisture behind them."

As for veering from pheromones to ram's horns, this was just simply 2 points I felt were relevant that you combined to make it appear that I am grasping at straws. The pheromone point I put forth had to do with the compromised large stub in decline desperately issuing sucker growth and just a semblance of what it previously was being a magnet for decay causing orgs. (just as my example of the waning tree being immediately a target for bark beetles as described by my researcher friend). The trunk would not be waning at this point and may have more time to compartmentalize if you make the ntp cut now and let the boundaries be set. This story is all about opportunistic pathogens and failing systems and mobile protection zones. Literally a battle zone.

As for the ram's horns and resultant cracks ....any experienced arb has seen this and the decay I described in hard cut backs, the most obvious example being the Silver maple which is a prolific sprouter when cut back hard.... which the 2 of you have hitched your wagons to as the instigator of strong compartmentalization (more sprouts equals more compartmentalization IYO).

I have read when a branch (stub) is dying, it moves it stores of carbs back into the main stem. This is where compartmentalization comes from and it is leaving.

 

[treevet]

Regeneration feeds codit which limits the spread of decay.

I think regeneration takes away energy, uses energy as opposed to giving it. Photosynthesis gives energy in the form of carbohydrates which are stored and used for compartmentalization.

If a tree has anthracnose, puts out a canopy of foliage, then is defoliated by the disease and has to refoliate.....does it gain energy from this? Nope.....it is drained of some of its energy and susceptible to disease/insects and after a few seasons of this it can become fatal.

 

[treeseer]

Could you pls. link this research.

The ISA arboriculture journal is free to all and very easy to search through. I posted that link once in this thread already--try doing it yourself; not hard!

Sorry no time to follow all the conjecture--how about showing pics of your work to illustrate your points?

 

[treevet]

The ISA arboriculture journal is free to all and very easy to search through. I posted that link once in this thread already--try doing it yourself; not hard!

Sorry no time to follow all the conjecture--how about showing pics of your work to illustrate your points?

Hard to show a picture of nothing. Not going to show a tree with the absence of a 12", by 10 foot long stub that you and Sanborn advocate. I have tried to give my side in not retaining them and more than matched the conjecture you have put forth.

They don't make sense both physiologically and structurally, IMO. But maybe you find them aesthetically appealing. Hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Maybe you 2 like the look of the giant stub in the canopy or maybe even the whole canopy (tree topping advocates too?). To each his own....just stay away from my beautiful natural looking trees.

Let's see a picture of your 12" dia 10 foot long stub in a tree. Maybe I will change my mind........nahhhhht.

Can't play anymore today...we just got hit with huge new discoveries in Cinci. of EAB. Maybe if we just stubbed off all these infested trees, they would make it???

 

[Ekka]

Until foliage is photosynthesizing you have a drain on resources.

Wall 4 commences with callus growth, then the cells which align with the wounded surface differentiate forming a chemical boundary known as wall 4, remaining cells differentiate to their various purposes.

During callus growth, remarkable changes take place in the tissue 3-4 weeks after wounding: the outer cells form suberized walls and phenolic substances are deposited in vacuoles. The subsequent callus tissue on the inside is altered into a tangentially oriented belt of flattened cells: the initiation of a phellogen. After 8 weeks, a fully functional wound periderm has formed, consisting of a complete phellogen forming phellem externally and phelloderm internally. The phellem is clearly suberized and contains phenolic substances in its vacuoles. Brown and Sax (1962) observed a similar reorganization in poplar after 2-3 weeks.

The restructuring of the outer surface callus cells can be compared with the formation of a ligno-suberized layer in the bark formed after wounding (Oven et al., 1999). A necrophylactic periderm develops (Mullick, 1977; Biggs, 1985), which later merges into the original periderm at the rim of the wound. According to Oven et al. (1999), the formation of such a ligno-suberized layer in the bark is a precondition for the growth of a wound periderm. Therefore, restructuring of the outer surface callus as well as the formation of a wound periderm are necessary for continuing surface callus development.

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

Let's see a picture of your 12" dia 10 foot long stub in a tree.

Guy, can you remember the house we did after the ice storm that had been remodeling for two years? the little old lady next door was out of her mind with the constant disturbance, and refused to let us get the hangers that were in her yard. Her son ad to come over to calm her down and let us in the gate.

It was in the medium high end of Raleigh, she on a corner lot with your client to the right. Small lot/house neighborhood with huge old trees.

The willow oak that we worked on had a 10 ft stub fro the previous storm that was healthy looking and a veritable thicket of epicormic branching (as opposed to sprouts, which are are new growth and succulent. I will refer to these as sprout branches when talking to clientele).

For an anecdotal picture this would be great, if the tree is still there 7 years latter.

 

[ddhlakebound]

Great thread, probably the best learning thread so far this year, and I'd like to thank you guys for all the knowledge and contemplation that's being discussed here.

I'm out of my league by a mile, and I know it, but I've gotta ask a few questions to hopefully understand better.

Alot of this discussion has centered around the time it will take for wall 4 to form and prevent further pathogen entry, but isn't how well wall 1 will block decay from entering the main stem a more important factor to the health of the tree as opposed to the health of the limb in question?

And isn't how wall 1 will respond primiarily determined by species?

Once the wind or ice has broken the limb the decay pathogens will begin their work regardless of wether we do nothing, node trim it, or make a larger cut at the stem.

So it seems that what we're risking is the growth that occurs between the node trimming cut and how much more new wood we'd have to wound if the limb was removed at it's origin several years later.

All the wood present at the time of wounding is subject to decay, correct? It's up to the tree to compartmentalize the decay as well as it's able. So if we node trim it, and it resprouts, but then slowly declines and dies, and we must return to make the larger cut at the stem, now we've got all the new growth since the original injury being wounded and subject to a greater amount of potential decay.

But if the tree can successfully compartmentalize the decay and successfully resprout and maintain growth, we may have kept the decay from reaching the main stem at all.

I'm having a difficult time seeing how either option could be correct ALL the time. So isn't it up to us to analyze the variables in each individual situation to allow the tree the best chances to keep the largest percentage of it's mass healthy over the longest term possible?

 

[treeseer]

Dave I already posted 2 pics of healthy growing 10' "stubs" that have minimal decay that is walled off. Now you're asking to see the whole tree so you can assess the aesthetics of it. What next? :rant:

JPS yes i remember the tree; client moved on but I will get a pic thanks for the memory!

I'm out of my league by a mile, and I know it,

O I dunno; you seem to understand a lot of it very well!

isn't how well wall 1 will block decay from entering the main stem a more important factor to the health of the tree as opposed to the health of the limb in question?

Those 2 factors hard to separate in my head; both dependent on same conditions. But yes nothing seems more important than the interior wall

And isn't how wall 1 will respond primiarily determined by species?

Largely yes but primarily how can we know? Previous condition, energy reserves, quality of future care like root invigoration or root abuse are also key. Gene-driven Anatomy by itself rarely makes or breaks the decision imo.

Once the wind or ice has broken the limb the decay pathogens will begin their work regardless of wether we do nothing, node trim it, or make a larger cut at the stem.

Yes but the more tissue, especially heartwood, that is exposed, the more rot will happen. The less "sugar" served, the less dining the fungus can do. The smaller the cut the faster the sealing.

So it seems that what we're risking is the growth that occurs between the node trimming cut and how much more new wood we'd have to wound if the limb was removed at it's origin several years later.

Yes that is a risk, but if the limb has to be shortened later, the damage is less, because the tree will have added tissue where the next cut will be made, so it will close faster.

All the wood present at the time of wounding is subject to decay, correct?

Wherever the bark is intact, the wood is protected, right? Unless you want to consider endophytic fungi that are always present inside the tree. But that is another thread.

It's up to the tree to compartmentalize the decay as well as it's able. So if we node trim it, and it resprouts, but then slowly declines and dies,

This happens rarely, <10%, mainly due to shade, and when it does happen typically collar tissue is visibly added to the base.

and we must return to make the larger cut at the stem, now we've got all the new growth since the original injury being wounded and subject to a greater amount of potential decay.

I don't follow this.

But if the tree can successfully compartmentalize the decay and successfully resprout and maintain growth, we may have kept the decay from reaching the main stem at all.

Yes this is the goal, which happens >90% of the time.

isn't it up to us to analyze the variables in each individual situation to allow the tree the best chances to keep the largest percentage of it's mass healthy over the longest term possible?

:agree2:

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

I'm having a difficult time seeing how either option could be correct ALL the time.

Exactly, we are not trying to say stub it every time, just that collar cuts most of the time is not good tree.

Alot of this discussion has centered around the time it will take for wall 4 to form and prevent further pathogen entry..

Not really, the wall four was a side issue. As Dave keeps pointing out CODIT is a model. It is a four dimensional event taking place in this organic cylinder. That is, the 3 dimensions of space we see and time, so we espouse allowing more time and resources for the tree to recover from this catastrophic event.

Since the chemical reactions that make up walls 1-3 take energy; leaving as much dynamic (photosynthetic) mass near the wound will assist in making these changes. As Dave pointed out, wall four is more then wound closure; it is all the rings, or woody cylinders, that will form later in later years.

The old model assumes that no one will even look at the tree until the next catastrophic event. Our model adopts a philosophy of doing the least harm, and promote tree management over tree cutting. The arborist informs the owner that this is just the first step in a multi-year program; the next step may be in three to five years.

If the tree appears to have been stressed prior to the storm event, then maybe a recommendation for removal is the best route; but might be put off for a few years for the client to recover if insurance does not cover the this.

Another problem that we have not brought up is that when you have multiple wounds in a single column, there is a good change of them coalescing over time. this could be as decay courts, or as perpetual cankers.

 

[treeseer]

Exactly, we are not trying to say stub it every time, just that collar cuts most of the time (on storm-damaged trees) is not good tree (care).

Not really, the wall four was a side issue. As Dave keeps pointing out CODIT is a model. It is a four dimensional event taking place in this organic cylinder. That is, the 3 dimensions of space we see and time, so we espouse allowing more time and resources for the tree to recover from this catastrophic event.

Since the chemical reactions that make up walls 1-3 take energy; leaving as much dynamic (photosynthetic) mass near the wound will assist in making these changes. As Dave pointed out, wall four is more then wound closure; it is all the rings, or woody cylinders, that will form later in later years.

The old model assumes that no one will even look at the tree until the next catastrophic event. Our model adopts a philosophy of doing the least harm, and promote tree management over tree cutting. The arborist informs the owner that this is just the first step in a multi-year program; the next step may be in three to five years.

If the tree appears to have been stressed prior to the storm event, then maybe a recommendation for removal is the best route; but might be put off for a few years for the client to recover if insurance does not cover the this.

Excellent points.

Another problem that we have not brought up is that when you have multiple wounds in a single column, there is a good change of them coalescing over time. this could be as decay courts, or as perpetual cankers.

:agree2:Totally. These cankers occur most often on storm-damaged trees that get sunscald, like beech and other thin-barked species. All the more reason to preserve
as much crown as possible for as long as possible until the tree recovers.

 

[Ekka]

but isn't how well wall 1 will block decay from entering the main stem a more important factor to the health of the tree as opposed to the health of the limb in question?

And isn't how wall 1 will respond primiarily determined by species?

Guys answer,

Gene-driven Anatomy by itself rarely makes or breaks the decision imo.

Some clarification .....

Wall1: Vascular system shut down to prevent vertical infection, weakest wall of them all.

Wall2: Heartwood prevents inward progression of decay.

Wall3: Rays prevent radial progression of decay.

Wall4: Wall 4 is a future boundary in the xylem created by cambium responding to signals of wounding with cells that are significantly more resistant to decay than the earlier xylem (Bob Wulkowicz 28th August 2008). Chemically altered cells which grew over the wound separating tissue present at time of wounding from new tissue. Where there is no cambial growth there is no wall4.

Species and gene driven anatomy makes all the difference! :monkey: