Getting rid of ivy!!

[Mick Dempsey]

Amongst all the caps lock, multiple usage of punctuation marks and general nonsense, there’s always a particularly outrageous statement and the above is the one I picked.

 

Here he is creating an apocalyptic certainty based on zero evidence and little to no knowledge.

Preceded by a “now let’s get serious”

 

Good idea! 

 

[Stere]

Quote

But in warmer climes broadleaved trees grow in forests and cultivated in isolation and are deciduous in the main. They have evolved with shallower root systems compatible with luxurious plant growth soils and increasing rainfall and ultimately rainforest conditions. So when the wind blows their shallower root structures are less able to cope. Some are able to evolve genetically and phenotypically to protect others at the borders of a forest in windy areas (like Dartmoor for example). Just look at the isolated copses there. Always shaped with low growth on windwards edge and rising away to leeward. Same for individual trees there. Clever little souls. Much to be learned from trees. 

 

Broadfleaf trees more shallow rooted? 😏

 

Any reference for that?

 

 

Trees  evolved genetically to protect others?🤨  (apart from the fungi network being used to exchange nutrients) aren't they they are just being "wind pruned"? Could at at stretch say its epigenetic...

 

This paper might interest you:

 

A New Architectural Perspective on Wind Damage in a Natural Forest

 

Frontiers | A New Architectural Perspective on Wind Damage in a Natural Forest | Forests and Global Change

WWW.FRONTIERSIN.ORG

---

Wind damage is a significant driver of forest structure, ecology and carbon cycling in both temperate and tropical regions...

 

Quote

Seasonality

The interaction between wind damage risk and the presence or absence of leaves is complex, since leaves alter the wind regime as well as the trees response to wind forcing (Roodbaraky et al., 1994; Finnigan, 2000). Our field data predicted lower CWS in summer than in winter, meaning that trees were at a higher risk from the same wind speed in summer. This is not a measure of absolute risk, and Figure 6 clearly shows that wind speeds are generally much lower in summer, but it does emphasize the importance of transition periods when trees are either growing or losing their leaves. In these transition periods, early or late winter storms can bring strong winds and, if a tree still has increased sail area due to leaves, it may be at a higher risk of damage. To add to this effect, if the surrounding trees have lost their leaves, wind will more easily penetrate into the canopy and the total drag force will be higher (Dolman, 1986).

The three species in our plot display distinct leaf phenology, particularly in autumn (Woodland Trust, 2014). The timing with which they drop their leaves reflects their predicted critical wind speeds, with the ash trees being the most at risk and dropping their leaves first, while the oaks keep their leaves the longest. As would be expected, this order does not hold in spring when other factors (e.g., avoidance of frost risk) determine leaf out timing (Vitasse et al., 2009a,b). As we have only studied three species our conclusion is highly tentative, but our findings provide a novel strand of evidence that the timing of leaf drop in autumn may be a trade-off between decreasing marginal returns on photosynthesis and increasing risk of wind damage from winter storms. These findings need to be further explored with other tree species and in other forests. This hypothesis could be tested at scale by analyzing remotely sensed leaf phenology in combination with wind field data.

 

Edited February 19, 2022 by Stere

[CambridgeJC]

1 hour ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Amongst all the caps lock, multiple usage of punctuation marks and general nonsense, there’s always a particularly outrageous statement and the above is the one I picked.

 

Here he is creating an apocalyptic certainty based on zero evidence and little to no knowledge.

Preceded by a “now let’s get serious”

 

Good idea! 

 

Hello Mick. So now you suggest that I am creating an apocalyptic certainty!!!

You credit me with rather exaggerated powers…and with no evidence. Wow!!!
You are do determined to discredit me and pick little holes in my contributions that you fail completely to understand my motives. Simply to encourage you guys to make mature and informed comments based on actual experience which I fully admit I do not possess. 
I seem to have rubbed you up the wrong way for which I cannot apologise as it has prompted a display of the confrontational approach adopted by a very few arborists. Most have been very measured in their response and it seems many arborists confirm the extent of ivy penetration into our environment. Possibly even a mature concern. So let’s just stick to facts and observations rather than focusing on confrontation. Please. 
Have I offended you with my punctuation?

[CambridgeJC]

1 hour ago, Stubby said:

Love to have seen before the edit 😄

Its all a bit earlier in this page 

[gary112]

12 minutes ago, CambridgeJC said:

Hello Mick. So now you suggest that I am creating an apocalyptic certainty!!!

You credit me with rather exaggerated powers…and with no evidence. Wow!!!
You are do determined to discredit me and pick little holes in my contributions that you fail completely to understand my motives. Simply to encourage you guys to make mature and informed comments based on actual experience which I fully admit I do not possess. 
I seem to have rubbed you up the wrong way for which I cannot apologise as it has prompted a display of the confrontational approach adopted by a very few arborists. Most have been very measured in their response and it seems many arborists confirm the extent of ivy penetration into our environment. Possibly even a mature concern. So let’s just stick to facts and observations rather than focusing on confrontation. Please. 
Have I offended you with my punctuation?

If you are sticking to facts and observations,ivy is no worse now than it was probably 20 yrs ago and it doesn,t kill trees!There you go simples.

[Sutton]

Here's a very feeble christmas cracker joke:

 

Why won't retired academic@CambridgeJC get the data he needs, because he's not an ivy leaguer!

[Doug Tait]

32 minutes ago, gary112 said:

If you are sticking to facts and observations,ivy is no worse now than it was probably 20 yrs ago and it doesn,t kill trees!There you go simples.

Can you be a bit clearer on this Gary. Are you talking about the Ivy that grows up trees and causes no sail effect, or the Ivy that grows up trees and causes sail effect with detrimental consequences for the environment? 

[CambridgeJC]

13 minutes ago, Sutton said:

Here's a very feeble christmas cracker joke:

 

Why won't retired academic@CambridgeJC get the data he needs, because he's not an ivy leaguer!

Absolutely right Sutton…feeble 🤣🤣🤣

[CambridgeJC]

45 minutes ago, gary112 said:

If you are sticking to facts and observations,ivy is no worse now than it was probably 20 yrs ago and it doesn,t kill trees!There you go simples.

…probably…or maybe not…

[CambridgeJC]

If you are up to it, read this…

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4829722/

 

It almost certainly applies to ivy and explains the diversity of local ivy cultures in our environment. And the mechanisms involved.