Fungi identification and its impact on this tree.

[daltontrees]

More specifically, COCIT up!

[treeseer]

no Guy, dysfunction is the right term, trees dont limit fungi, hydration does.

If that is so, then dessication (the lack of hydration) could also be the right term!

 

not sure it matters though.

 

"rapid colonisation and fruiting when tissues become aerated via failures."

 

and made less rapid or even stopped again, according to tree resource levels etc. etc. And Schwarze agrees.

 

I haven't had a knockdown dragout fung v. tree spat for years now--time to harvest the archives if this goes any further!

[daltontrees]

 

I haven't had a knockdown dragout fung v. tree spat for years now--time to harvest the archives if this goes any further!

 

Oh, please let's not! The correct term is Decay, because that's what Sgigo said it is. WHta is now being debated is whether Shigo was right or chose the right word, that's a different matter. Fortunately, those that have read his works or learnt of CODIT second-hand get the important point that trees deal with wounding damage by hampering the spread of resultant decay/dessication/drying/wetting/dysfunction (walls 1 to 3) until they can effect a permanent repair by occluding the wound (wall 4).

 

Hopefully that's the way this Beech will go, but the race is on. What I have always been a little unclear on , despite woute a few Shigoesque dissections I have made across partial occlusions of infected wounds is the extent to which the action of a fungus like P. squamosus will interfere with the occlusion. That is to say, in a straight race the occlusion should be complete before the fungus has done critical biomechanical damage, but if the fungus is also letting the tree's tyres down to get a head-start, it must become a different race.

[treeseer]

"Oh, please let's not!

 

Agreed; that battle need not be repeated, as it was clearly resolved.

 

"The correct term is Decay, because that's what Sgigo said it is. WHta is now being debated is whether Shigo was right or chose the right word, that's a different matter. Fortunately, those that have read his works or learnt of CODIT second-hand get the important point that trees deal with wounding damage by hampering the spread of resultant decay/dessication/drying/wetting/dysfunction (walls 1 to 3) until they can effect a permanent repair by occluding the wound (wall 4).

 

Which D to use is a tangential and semantic battle, though I agree with Tony the distinction is important, on another level. Is every Shigovian version correct in 2013...Alex would be disappointed if they all were so considered.

 

"Hopefully that's the way this Beech will go, but the race is on. What I have always been a little unclear on , despite woute a few Shigoesque dissections I have made across partial occlusions of infected wounds is the extent to which the action of a fungus like P. squamosus will interfere with the occlusion. That is to say, in a straight race the occlusion should be complete before the fungus has done critical biomechanical damage, but if the fungus is also letting the tree's tyres down to get a head-start, it must become a different race.

 

Perhaps, but one must also consider walls 1-3 letting air out of the fungus' sails, to introduce another torturous metaphor. Strategies are simultaneous; fascinating stuff, but he potential in both sides must be accounted for, to be close to accurate. We guess more than we know.

Edited July 7, 2013 by treeseer