Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Meripilus the pathogen


scotspine1
 Share

Recommended Posts

'Options available' is also perhaps part (individual case dependent) of the management evaluation that is not always expanded on fully toward the latter stages of diagnosis & prescription?

 

 

.

 

Delving into semantics (my chosen specialised subject :001_tongue:), I would say that options available isn't a factor until the diagnosis is complete; to put it another way the diagnosis is independent of all factors - targets, resources, amenity value etc - but the prescription is very much dependent upon them.

 

Apologies if I misunderstood what you were getting at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If we was to take the standard issue advice on most of the principal decay fungi, and actually follow it to a T, we would not make any prognosis without fully evaluating the situation. The reality is that very few individuals responsible for making these decissions are fully aware of mechanics, decay and fungal ecology let alone the full life proscess of a aging/veteran/ancient tree. There are many many more shades of grey more even than fifty between the fell all and the retain all camps.

 

If I was only going on the works that are currently avaliable to me to make my prognosis in the HUNDREDS of cases of principal decays i work I would have had to rely on others work and info and as a consequence a great many trees may well have been needlesly felled.

 

I have gone to great personal lengths to study the ecology and life cycle of trees and their fungi, and I very much take it for granted how easily I make prognosis or choices regarding retention of compromised trees.

 

I guess if there was a golden rule to this kind of evaluation, then it would be to base ones prognosis on the mechanics above all other matters, that applies from root to shoot and then concern regarding the potential invasiveness of the "parasite" the latter matter being a long way from adequately researched.

 

Meripilus is one of those I would not treat with less than the utmost of respects, it is one of the most capable of decay fungi, not only is it very capable of breaking down Pectin in the middle lamella it has both soft rot and white rot capacities.

 

that said, it is in all cases the conditions the trees grow in that is the major contributory factor, and hence we see where man has made the rooting environment difficult we see the most progressive and dangerous cases.

 

One reason for this problem is that beech are naturaly very shallow rooted in old age their heart rooted natures have long ceased, much of the time meripilus simply lives on the old root system that is no longer functional, it is only later and increasingly under stress conditions (compaction) that the fungi must move into living tissues and become the enemy we so far understand it to be.

 

If you study Meripilus youll soon see the direct correlation in these points I raise, of course some wild trees fail but they do not fail nearly as quickly as those in the urban context, because of the conditions.

 

We must ALWAYS remember that ensuring healthy growing conditions, from the Rhizospphere to the growing tips is the key in these situations. A tree growing in optimal conditions will compensate and cope with colonisations even of the most feared of fungi with relative ease, but in stressed conditions, especially drought fungi will win the day everytime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"beech are naturaly very shallow rooted in old age their heart rooted natures have long ceased, much of the time meripilus simply lives on the old root system that is no longer functional, it is only later and increasingly under stress conditions (compaction) that the fungi must move into living tissues and become the enemy we so far understand it to be."

 

Very well put.

 

If the fungi can be compartmentalized or otherwise become latent, or feeding off shed parts, at those times it is not a pathogen. It seems to me that if the arborist is to feel duty-bound to disclose the possibility of pathogenicity, one must also disclose these other stages as well, eh?

 

As for diagnosis being dependent on research, I wonder. There may be more risk of conclusions from research being misapplied, than diagnosis going wanting for the lack of formal studies. The info from the tree in question has to rank highest, if the analysis is reasonable.

 

Lovely pictures, David.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"beech are naturaly very shallow rooted in old age their heart rooted natures have long ceased, much of the time meripilus simply lives on the old root system that is no longer functional, it is only later and increasingly under stress conditions (compaction) that the fungi must move into living tissues and become the enemy we so far understand it to be."

 

Very well put.

 

If the fungi can be compartmentalized or otherwise become latent, or feeding off shed parts, at those times it is not a pathogen. It seems to me that if the arborist is to feel duty-bound to disclose the possibility of pathogenicity, one must also disclose these other stages as well, eh?

 

As for diagnosis being dependent on research, I wonder. There may be more risk of conclusions from research being misapplied, than diagnosis going wanting for the lack of formal studies. The info from the tree in question has to rank highest, if the analysis is reasonable.

 

Lovely pictures, David.

 

I do appreciate what your saying, that I may be at risk because I am working outside the box much of the time. But arboriculture is as much an art as it is a science, the science has a long way to go to catch up with the practitioners long served instincts.

 

And I think I can be pretty confidant in saying that a lot of those who set the current stage would agree on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"beech are naturaly very shallow rooted in old age their heart rooted natures have long ceased, much of the time meripilus simply lives on the old root system that is no longer functional, it is only later and increasingly under stress conditions (compaction) that the fungi must move into living tissues and become the enemy we so far understand it to be."

 

Very well put.

 

...

 

As for diagnosis being dependent on research, I wonder.

 

 

:confused1::confused1::confused1:

 

Every piece of information in the quoted text is the result of research!

 

Without research we would have no information on which to base a diagnosis, so I don't understand your doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we was to take the standard issue advice on most of the principal decay fungi, and actually follow it to a T, we would not make any prognosis without fully evaluating the situation. The reality is that very few individuals responsible for making these decissions are fully aware of mechanics, decay and fungal ecology let alone the full life proscess of a aging/veteran/ancient tree. There are many many more shades of grey more even than fifty between the fell all and the retain all camps.

 

If I was only going on the works that are currently avaliable to me to make my prognosis in the HUNDREDS of cases of principal decays i work I would have had to rely on others work and info and as a consequence a great many trees may well have been needlesly felled.

 

I have gone to great personal lengths to study the ecology and life cycle of trees and their fungi, and I very much take it for granted how easily I make prognosis or choices regarding retention of compromised trees.

 

I guess if there was a golden rule to this kind of evaluation, then it would be to base ones prognosis on the mechanics above all other matters, that applies from root to shoot and then concern regarding the potential invasiveness of the "parasite" the latter matter being a long way from adequately researched.

 

Meripilus is one of those I would not treat with less than the utmost of respects, it is one of the most capable of decay fungi, not only is it very capable of breaking down Pectin in the middle lamella it has both soft rot and white rot capacities.

 

that said, it is in all cases the conditions the trees grow in that is the major contributory factor, and hence we see where man has made the rooting environment difficult we see the most progressive and dangerous cases.

 

One reason for this problem is that beech are naturaly very shallow rooted in old age their heart rooted natures have long ceased, much of the time meripilus simply lives on the old root system that is no longer functional, it is only later and increasingly under stress conditions (compaction) that the fungi must move into living tissues and become the enemy we so far understand it to be.

 

If you study Meripilus youll soon see the direct correlation in these points I raise, of course some wild trees fail but they do not fail nearly as quickly as those in the urban context, because of the conditions.

 

We must ALWAYS remember that ensuring healthy growing conditions, from the Rhizospphere to the growing tips is the key in these situations. A tree growing in optimal conditions will compensate and cope with colonisations even of the most feared of fungi with relative ease, but in stressed conditions, especially drought fungi will win the day everytime.

 

The problem is that these roots may not be "functioning" in the feeding of the tree, but are important for holding the tree upright, which is why a Beech that appears healthy with a full crown will fail in only light wind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that these roots may not be "functioning" in the feeding of the tree, but are important for holding the tree upright, which is why a Beech that appears healthy with a full crown will fail in only light wind.

 

But what about the mechanics Huck, what if that tree could be altered in order to reduce the mechanical loads?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what about the mechanics Huck, what if that tree could be altered in order to reduce the mechanical loads?

 

Very true, but its difficult to know how successful that will be, you are also reducing the trees ability to feed with the reduction, so adding to its problems.

 

I think we have all gone to failed Beech that had been reduced in an effort to save them.

 

As you say its not black and white and the consequences of making the wrong call can be huge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

Articles

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.