Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Massaria


Fungus
 Share

Recommended Posts

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Could it be that high and constant particulate attachment is reducing docking availability or success?

 

Dave,

I don't think so, as the spores of the anamorphs of Massaria, that are only a few µm in size, are spread top down through the inner crown by wind, rain and water dripping down on the below branches, which explains, why the lower branches are infected/affected the most.

In Cologne (Germany), researchers counted about 15 million of these spores over 5 metres length on the upper half of a lower branch with a diameter of 10 centimetres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

In Cologne (Germany), researchers counted about 15 million of these spores over 5 metres length on the upper half of a lower branch with a diameter of 10 centimetres.

 

If my math is right (always a question), that's >200 spores/square centimeter.

 

That's a lot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maths is not my strong point but I do remember having been hammered about the SI units at college and I think you'll find that there are 100,000,000 µm2 in 1cm2 which would mean that your estimate of >200 per square cm is really quite conservative and clearly possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If my math is right (always a question), that's >200 spores/square centimeter. That's a lot!

 

It's a lot more than that : 15.000.000 : 7.855 square centimetres (500 cm x 15.71 cm : being half of the circumference of a branch with a diameter of 10 cm and a radius of 5 cm) = 1.910 spores of circa 8 µm pro square centimeter, meaning there still is 0.85 square cm of spore free surface per square centimetre left.

Also see the amount of spores produced by a FB of Polyporus squamosis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave,

I don't think so, as the spores of the anamorphs of Massaria, that are only a few µm in size, are spread top down through the inner crown by wind, rain and water dripping down on the below branches, which explains, why the lower branches are infected/affected the most.

In Cologne (Germany), researchers counted about 15 million of these spores over 5 metres length on the upper half of a lower branch with a diameter of 10 centimetres.

 

Spore counts can be very enlightening. Going by the numbers alone, it seems successful docking would be guaranteed, yet in actuality, only a small percentage of possible sights become occupied. This apears to be true on many levels. In the world of airborne particles, anamorphs of Massaria travel the same paths used by multitudes of others. Hardscape and polutants combined, have been shown to produce many challenges and hurdles for life.

Gerrit, you have a far better grasp of such things than I, and read with great care your well informed posts, so with all else being equal, why would some trees in city areas have a lower infection rate than some trees in a more rural situation? Unless of course, all things are not equal.

 

Dave

 

Module 3: Characteristics of Particles - Particle Size Categories | Basic Concepts in Environmental Sciences | APTI | USEPA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. with all else being equal, why would some trees in city areas have a lower infection rate than some trees in a more rural situation?

2. Unless of course, all things are not equal.

 

Dave,

1. On the basis of what research data do you assume that this actually is the case ?

2. In different situations (city versus rural) all things are not equal, because of the differences in density of trees and the associated infection chance by short or long distance travelling spores from the infected sources, air and water pollution, the lack of or poor association with mycorrhizal fungi by city trees altering the defensive system of the roots and the tree as a whole, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be ironic if the reason that Massaria prefers the top of limbs was because thats where arborists walked...

 

Tony,

... if so, wouldn't this mean, that in future all climbers should be banned from trees and only platforms and high altitude camera's should be allowed :confused1: ??? Don't tell this to David :001_rolleyes: .

Edited by Fungus
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

×
×
  • 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.