CODIT: D=Dysfunction not Decay

[David Humphries]

Although a wee bit mischevious, I'd be interested in hearing what our fine American cousins think about our (European) knocking of their great Seer

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Although a wee bit mischevious, I'd be interested in hearing what our fine American cousins think about our (European) knocking of their great Seer

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

naughty! giggles, come on they base their whole working life around it!

 

bit hard to let go when its THAT ingrained:sheep:

[sean freeman]

It seems inevitable that many discussions/arguements will go around and around for a long time, I remember reading about this necessary change in emphasis some years ago and honestly assumed most of us that deal with these issues in our daily work would have adopted dysfunction rather than decay.

 

On the late Dr Shigo I have (it seems) often had the same discussion/arguement with numerous American Arbs...Alex Shigo clearly stated on many occaisions (including during his lecture tour of Oz in the early 1990's) that others should never stop the process of learning and development of ideas, that his ideas (specifically CODIT) were models for a dynamic ever changing (never balanced - unless dead) set of relationships. That people shold not simply believe his interpretations parrot like; but rather take his ideas and further develop them.

 

I like to remember a man who lived to help others develop their understanding of the natural world around them, who would be saddened (and probably angered) by being placed on any kind of pedestal m- since that would work against challenging thought being applied.

 

Francis Schwarze often makes the point that had Alex Shigo had access to the kinds of microscopy and successional microtomes which underpin Francis's analysis of fungi-host relations Alex might well have developed slightly different ideas about the interactions between specific decay fungi and specific tree hosts.

[RobArb]

naughty! giggles, come on they base their whole working life around it!

 

bit hard to let go when its THAT ingrained:sheep:

 

Haha, now who's being naughty!

 

And I wasn't knocking shigo, think the word I used was revolutionary (at the time). But alas, yes, things move on and at the moment are moving fast IMO.

 

Each bit of progress is the next rung on the ladder:thumbup: and old hats like shigo, were an important part of the footings!

 

(cliched or what!)

 

Sent from Rob's GalaxySII

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

It seems inevitable that many discussions/arguements will go around and around for a long time, I remember reading about this necessary change in emphasis some years ago and honestly assumed most of us that deal with these issues in our daily work would have adopted dysfunction rather than decay.

 

On the late Dr Shigo I have (it seems) often had the same discussion/arguement with numerous American Arbs...Alex Shigo clearly stated on many occaisions (including during his lecture tour of Oz in the early 1990's) that others should never stop the process of learning and development of ideas, that his ideas (specifically CODIT) were models for a dynamic ever changing (never balanced - unless dead) set of relationships. That people shold not simply believe his interpretations parrot like; but rather take his ideas and further develop them.

 

I like to remember a man who lived to help others develop their understanding of the natural world around them, who would be saddened (and probably angered) by being placed on any kind of pedestal m- since that would work against challenging thought being applied.

 

Francis Schwarze often makes the point that had Alex Shigo had access to the kinds of microscopy and successional microtomes which underpin Francis's analysis of fungi-host relations Alex might well have developed slightly different ideas about the interactions between specific decay fungi and specific tree hosts.

 

Thats a very good post:thumbup1:

[ADB328]

Apologies for dragging up an old thread but does anyone have an online version of this article as everywhere i have found it want to charge me money for the privilege of reading it.

 

Thanks

 

Yes

 

 

AA Journal 2010 Vol. 33 pp. 95-105

 

Towards a new model of branch attachment

 

D. Slater & C. Harbinson

 

 

 

.

[detritus21]

Apologies for dragging up an old thread but does anyone have an online version of this article as everywhere i have found it want to charge me money for the privilege of reading it.

 

Thanks

PM me you e-mail and I'll send you a copy accross

[ADB328]

PM me you e-mail and I'll send you a copy accross

 

PM sent

[daltontrees]

I am seeing this thread for the first time. Have there been any advances on the revised model, to anyone's knowledge?

 

And digging up old ground, I am inclined to disagree with RobArb's original suggestion that D should be renamed Dysfunction. It seems to me that Damage would be more appropriate since the compartmentalisation of Wall 4 will take place regardless of decay or dysfunction, and regardless of whether Walls 1, 2 and 3 developing. I would also suggest that the formation of all 4 walls in the CODIT model are examples of function, not dysfunction. It is trees' ability to compartmentalise damage that has given the evolutionary advantage to outcompete plants of lesser stature. This seems to me a function. One could go on to argue that all the mechanisms or physical barriers of walls 1, 2 and 3 will happen or are already present regardless of pathogens.

 

Sorry, Rob, but I can't see why Dysfunction is an appropriate term. Decay doesn't seem that apt now either.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

After reading a few articles on the CODIT model and the actual process of compartmentalisation, and reading a few opinions of other authors, should we be re-naming the acronym to Compartmentalisation of Dysfunction in Trees as this more precisely describes and illustrates the role of this process...

 

Thoughts and opinions?

 

this was proposed by Rayner and boddy many moons ago, the industry is slow to learn!

 

good post though robarb, it does need constant re iterating sadly:thumbup: