Meripilus the pathogen

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

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.

 

True about consequences, never seen a reduced one fail though myself.

 

its not easy wouldnt say it was, but there are ways and means of ensuring ones confidance or lack of is backed up, airspading compaction tests ect

[treeseer]

"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."

...

As for diagnosis being dependent on research, I wonder.

...

['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.]

 

We better call in that semantics expert then--does your definition of research include only formal controlled studies, or does it include less formal but quite valid types of science? Research is only one aspect of science. “Science” includes observation, description, analysis, study, review and identification; functions that all human minds employ every day to gain knowledge.

 

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'll respectfully suggest that {Loss of leaves = Loss of ability to photosynthesize and feed the tree system} obvious though it may seem, is an oversimplification. It's been repeated far more often than its scientific basis can support.

Keep in mind that a reduction pruning will greatly reduce the energy needed to feed the system, by shortening distances and lessening ramifications (forks) for the energy to flow through. So how can we know that pruning is always reducing the trees ability to feed with the reduction, so adding to its problems??

 

Photosynthesis is not working full tilt all the time, and formerly sheltered leaves will photosynthesize more with the suppressing foliage gone, and turgor pressure increased after the less productive outer portions. Common sense, explained well by Shigo et al. The assumption that {Loss of leaves = Loss of ability to photosynthesize and feed the tree system} is not supported by formal research that I am aware of. Frankly, it's sounding like a myth that can feed paranoia. Many informal observations and analyses over time support Tony's point that reduction can rejuvenate a tree, while reducing lever arms and load and risk.

 

If you want to hear that from a researcher at Harvard U, "Rejuvenation of a tree’s physiology slows down its aging clock. This is best seen in trees that grow on stressful environments, like mountaintops. Among trees, adversity promotes longevity. Pruning does it by inducing the growth of younger meristems, shortening the internal transport path, and balancing shoot load and activity with limited root activity and support. In trees, physiological and developmental aging operate independently. They can be simultaneously embryonic and senile, resulting in a form of ecological immortality. It is this potential for immortality that makes trees so fascinating to work with."

...

 

"...the consequences of making the wrong call can be huge."

 

And the consequences of making the right call are huge as well. Liability is something we have to deal with, preferably in a proactive and constructive fashion based on experience rather than a reactive and destructive fashion based on questionable hypotheses like {Loss of leaves = Loss of ability to photosynthesize and feed the tree system}.

 

it's a challenge to find a tree management path between rosy-colored overoptimism and paranoia. I've been guilty of both. We can only find a balanced view with balanced inputs.

Science and Research Kane discussion.doc

Edited August 26, 2012 by treeseer

[HCR]

"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."

...

As for diagnosis being dependent on research, I wonder.

...

['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.]

 

We better call in that semantics expert then--does your definition of research include only formal controlled studies, or does it include less formal but quite valid types of science? Research is only one aspect of science. “Science” includes observation, description, analysis, study, review and identification; functions that all human minds employ every day to gain knowledge.

 

I'm happy enough to go with a dictionary definition of research - the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions

 

Or to put it another way; finding stuff out with some sort of objective. Formal or informal, it's all the same.

[treeseer]

I'm happy enough to go with a dictionary definition of research - the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions

 

Or to put it another way; finding stuff out with some sort of objective. Formal or informal, it's all the same.

 

I'm totally in agreement. So we need to systematically assess both formal research and other experience, recognizing the limitations of both.

[skyhuck]

 

I'll respectfully suggest that {Loss of leaves = Loss of ability to photosynthesize and feed the tree system} obvious though it may seem, is an oversimplification. It's been repeated far more often than its scientific basis can support.

Keep in mind that a reduction pruning will greatly reduce the energy needed to feed the system, by shortening distances and lessening ramifications (forks) for the energy to flow through. So how can we know that pruning is always reducing the trees ability to feed with the reduction, so adding to its problems??

.

 

Fair does

 

Thats obviously why all those trees I have topped have done so well

 

There was me feeling bad about it, when in reality I was doing the tree a favour

[omahaalex]

Cheers for an interesting read guys

[David Humphries]

Here's a beech with a Meripilus association that goes back to 1999 and probably beyond.

 

It's an unreduced tree in woodland (though close to the edge) surrounded by lapsed hornbeam coppice and similar sized maiden oaks.

 

The first shots of the fruiting bodies were taken in 1999 and also 2004 by a colleague. The last two shots were from the autumn period of 2008.

 

It was subjected to an air spade investigation a few years ago, which at the time showed no significant white rot on the major lateral roots.

 

Since the airspading the fruiting bodies have been conspicuous by their absence up until the autumn last.

 

.

[David Humphries]

Here's a beech with a Meripilus association that goes back to 1999 and probably beyond.

 

In full leaf it survived the strong gusts of the St Judes storm in October (whilst this woodland lost a substantial number of sizeable trees) but it was toppled in the high winds and rain of last week.

 

 

.

[David Humphries]

on closer inspection of the failed roots, it was interesting to note that only some of the major laterals were heavily decayed by white rot.

 

The roots on the left hand side of the root plate were largely un-decayed and fractured due to the force loaded on to them via the tree going over, where as the roots on the right hand side of the root plate had evidence of almost total lignin decay.

 

 

.

[sloth]

Great documentation as always

What are your thoughts on the theory of there being two sub-types of M giganteus?