How tree branches are attached to trunks

[Gary Prentice]

Could you have a look, to see if you 've access to the article in my opening post. I'm still trying to follow up this branch attachment proposal of Duncan's because of David Dowsons comments at treelife. Thanks

[RobRainford]

Unable to access sorry. System seems to have changed since I was last on so my details won't be there anymore.

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

[Gary Prentice]

OK Rob, thanks for trying. I'll see if treelife have it when I'm back there at the end of the month.

[woodyguy]

Only six universities in Britain buy this journal. So sorry Athens won't let me download it.

[daltontrees]

Sorry, I can't help you. Attached is aletter you might already have seen defending Shigo's principles and I think identifying some of the origins of conflict between Shigo's and Slater's approaches.

 

I have no problem with people knocking Shigo's work but it's a pity the detractors can't come up with a better explanation. It could scarcely be clearer to anyone that has had a branch snap underfoot up a tree that the connection on top of the branch to the stem is purely mechanical, with minimal if any vascular connection.

[daltontrees]

Sorry, here's the attachment.

KTSmithletter7Feb11.pdf

[Gary Prentice]

Only six universities in Britain buy this journal. So sorry Athens won't let me download it.

 

Okay, thanks for looking. I've one more lead, which if that fails will just mean putting my hand in my pocket:lol:

[Gary Prentice]

Sorry, I can't help you. Attached is aletter you might already have seen defending Shigo's principles and I think identifying some of the origins of conflict between Shigo's and Slater's approaches.

 

I have no problem with people knocking Shigo's work but it's a pity the detractors can't come up with a better explanation. It could scarcely be clearer to anyone that has had a branch snap underfoot up a tree that the connection on top of the branch to the stem is purely mechanical, with minimal if any vascular connection.

 

Thanks Jules, I've read that now and D.S's reply. I've still got to read Ed Gilman's article (BRANCH-TO-STEM DIAMETER RATIO AFFECTS

STRENGTH OF ATTACHMENT) and some other references. It's a little like opening Pandora's box, one article leading to many many more.

[daltontrees]

Thanks Jules, I've read that now and D.S's reply. I've still got to read Ed Gilman's article (BRANCH-TO-STEM DIAMETER RATIO AFFECTS

STRENGTH OF ATTACHMENT) and some other references. It's a little like opening Pandora's box, one article leading to many many more.

 

My cynical view is that we should be surprised not by what is in Pandora's Box but by how much truth is wilfully concealed by those who stand to gain advantage by the concealment.

[Gary Prentice]

My cynical view is that we should be surprised not by what is in Pandora's Box but by how much truth is wilfully concealed by those who stand to gain advantage by the concealment.

 

I'm trying to keep up, but now I am utterly and totally lost and confused. Are we still talking about branch attachment:confused1: