Veterans- The ultimate survivors

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

  RobArb said:

Should of sniffed it too, for the beeswax:biggrin:

it isnt a typical colouration and certain it is this that is leading to students being taken into epping and being told that certain trees are hosting G australe or applanatums rather than the true identity! its multi bracketed nature is also a clue, but partly due to the origional sporocarp being taken and regeneration.

 

the classic give away is the amorphous black clumps which are atypical of seasoned pfieferis.

 

australe would not be confined to the dysfunction, though pfiefferi will cause sinks in living cambium though rare and on very weak trees.

[EddieJ]

This one at Seven Sisters always makes me think.

 

I imagine that it's far older than it's size would have you believe.

 

Edited January 16, 2012 by EddieJ

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

  EddieJ said:

This one at Seven Sisters always makes me think.

 

I imagine that it's far older than it's size would have you believe.

 

 

oh im going to play with that later and overlay the tensile triangle!

 

wonderful example:thumbup1:

[David Humphries]

  EddieJ said:

This one at Seven Sisters always makes me think.

 

I imagine that it's far older than it's size would have you believe.

 

 

 

Doesn't look anything like the trees at the Seven Sisters that I know

 

 

.

[EddieJ]

  David Humphries said:

Doesn't look anything like the trees at the Severn Sisters that I know

 

 

.

 

Bloody photoshop gets better and better!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

these two are for david! I even got to let Tom our young gun do the first one of the day, and a blooming fine job he did to:thumbup1:

 

beaconsfield golf course today, fractures a natural and retained by the way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[David Humphries]

Nature copying man copying nature

 

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

  David Humphries said:

Nature copying man copying nature

 

 

 

.

 

That stub with the best tear was last years, the newer one is not obvious in shot.

 

which leads me to ponder and ask you in particular...

 

this spur has not produced shoots, I suspect due to a lack of light, do you find similar failure to regenerate in shady stubs?

[David Humphries]

  hamadryad said:

this spur has not produced shoots, I suspect due to a lack of light, do you find similar failure to regenerate in shady stubs?

 

If I get your train of thought, then I generally expect failure on a retained beech stubs in shade. particularly if they are bare stick.

 

 

Always a better scenario to fracture back a branch with existing photosynthetic capacity, preferably already in light.

 

 

 

 

Shots show at point of work & then another one a year on.

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

  David Humphries said:

If I get your train of thought, then I generally expect failure on a retained beech stubs in shade. particularly if they are bare stick.

 

 

Always a better scenario to fracture back a branch with existing photosynthetic capacity, preferably already in light.

 

 

 

 

Shots show at point of work & then another one a year on.

 

 

.

 

I think a lot of work needs doing on light, we need to know more about the response of cambium to certain levels of it and other stimuli.