what are the benefits of a tree reduction?

[David Humphries]

David,

Here's an example of activating dormant buds on the sunny side of the trunk by an oak. The tree also has a bark canker to the left.

---

 

Gerrit,

would you say that the canker & bud eruption (although close) are totaly unconected ?

[armybloke]

I looked into this a while back, it is something to do with the growth being imature and being less able to form the absiccion, sorry to pee on the bonfire!

 

Thanks, you've not put it out forever as my brain continually ticks! Thanks for the insight anyway - I like quirky facts and Beech has more than many others

[armybloke]

Marco,

 

Your hypothesis is contradictory to beeches having very superficial root systems, that mainly stretch out to the dripping zones just outside the crown projection, where the finer, with ectomycorrhizal pioneers associated roots uptake water and nutrients, i.e. the products of decomposition of litter "shared" with neighbouring beeches by saprotrophic soil mycoflora and fauna.

Besides, beech leaves are shaped in such a way, that they can hold small volumes of water, that is drop after drop dripping from the sharp point at the tip of the leave (see photo) on to other leaves and in that way is transported in the direction of the dripping zone.

And that's why you can find shelter from a mild rain shower without getting wet under a beech and not under an oak .

---

 

Thank you Gerrit, always nice to hear interesting facts and also despite my theory being 'contadictory to the species' I thought it could have fit the case - heyho, I keep learning...

[Fungus]

would you say that the canker & bud eruption (although close) are totaly unconnected ?

 

David,

Hard to say, I would have to cut the tree at that level to be sure, but I think they are not connected because they are over 40 centimetres apart.

[treeseer]

David,

Hard to say, I would have to cut the tree at that level to be sure, but I think they are not connected because they are over 40 centimetres apart.

 

True, plus the view of the "canker" from here does not show definite signs of being dead tissue. That growth might be called a burl.

 

I agree with hama about juvenility being a common factor in holding onto dead foliage.

 

And thanks to GK for the gorgeous images of trees adapting. as they do so well..

[Fungus]

the view of the "canker" from here does not show definite signs of being dead tissue. That growth might be called a burl.

 

You may call it what you like, but I've seen all of it, i.e. not just from the side and it definitely is a necrotic bark and cambium canker.

[treeseer]

A climber assessing it can indeed see it from all angles, and probe to ascertain living or dead tissues, thereby confirming necrosis, or not. When I see a structure like that next time, I'll look into it--thanks!--so I can *know* what it is.

 

[Fungus]

A climber assessing it can indeed see it from all angles, and probe to ascertain living or dead tissues, thereby confirming necrosis, or not.

 

A climber ? It's at 2 metres above ground level !!!

[treeseer]

A climber ? It's at 2 metres above ground level !!!

 

Then all the easier to see it from all angles, and probe to ascertain living or dead tissues, thereby confirming necrosis, or not. Physical facts, microscopically derived or otherwise, are useful to scientifically confirm opinion based on external sight.

 

[Fungus]

... see it from all angles, and probe to ascertain living or dead tissues, thereby confirming necrosis, or not. Physical facts, microscopically derived or otherwise, are useful to scientifically confirm opinion based on external sight.

 

Thanks for the compliment, and this is your standard practice too ?