Increment borers, who uses them

[10 Bears]

10 Bears, was your study in conjunction with any format of sterilisation? The same could be said for all kinds of invasive techniques, not just increment borers, could it not?

 

Yes perhaps it could be said of all other similar techniques, but my intuition is that as the increment borer goes significantly deeper into the area of decay then say a simple nail through the bark as used with a Picus, then the increment borer is actually an appreciably more detrimental weapon.

 

Our experiment was intended to show what effect going through an infected compartmental wall would have on subsequent trees. We did not apply the correct field sterilisation technique intentionally (roughly requiring boiling or direct flame heat for 15 minutes at over 100deg between each use - not absolutely certain of the exact figures right now without checking), in order to find out how far we could carry the contamination.

 

After an ingestion period over various trees in our sample - we detected on average 8 trees were secondarily infected, and a DNA sample confirmed this was from the original fungal source.

 

So, ultimately, for the increment borer it appears it can be said to be problematic for cross-contamination issues and on that basis alone I would not recommend its use (unless it was single use only and then sterilised). I cannot comment on other less invasive methods as I have not tested them.

[Jake Andrews]

With that in mind we should really be sterilising our chainsaws and handsaws between each tree

 

This is what I was taught and practised in Australia. We had a tub of bleach and a paintbrush on site for dipping our secateurs and handsaws. The brush was for the saws.

[Jake Andrews]

Yes perhaps it could be said of all other similar techniques, but my intuition is that as the increment borer goes significantly deeper into the area of decay then say a simple nail through the bark as used with a Picus, then the increment borer is actually an appreciably more detrimental weapon.

 

Our experiment was intended to show what effect going through an infected compartmental wall would have on subsequent trees. We did not apply the correct field sterilisation technique intentionally (roughly requiring boiling or direct flame heat for 15 minutes at over 100deg between each use - not absolutely certain of the exact figures right now without checking), in order to find out how far we could carry the contamination.

 

After an ingestion period over various trees in our sample - we detected on average 8 trees were secondarily infected, and a DNA sample confirmed this was from the original fungal source.

 

So, ultimately, for the increment borer it appears it can be said to be problematic for cross-contamination issues and on that basis alone I would not recommend its use (unless it was single use only and then sterilised). I cannot comment on other less invasive methods as I have not tested them.

 

That's a pretty cool and interesting study with shocking results. 8 affected trees is incredible from 1 borer. What was the invading fungi?

I wonder if different fungi would spread at different rates.

[10 Bears]

With that in mind we should really be sterilising our chainsaws and handsaws between each tree

 

Well, really yes you should if you are using the same saw on an infected/decayed tree that you are just intending to fell, and then going to the next job where you are lightly pruning a tree that you are intending to keep.

 

A simple observation is that between each job there would have to be a notable passage of time for the fungal inoculation to occur, and simply, it could just be put down to the natural onset of nature rather than the result of cross contamination from a tree surgeon.

 

What I didn't study in the original investigation was the period of activity potential between each phase eg if I left it a day between using the same saw/borer, then what is the effect then? or if I left it 2 days then... etc.

 

Perhaps this is another area for investigation... but I am on with other investigations at the moment (and at least for another year!). so perhaps this thread could form the basis of a study for an interested undergrad or masters student should they happen to stumble across it...

[10 Bears]

What was the invading fungi?

I wonder if different fungi would spread at different rates.

 

Yes, it was quite interesting - especially after such a short inoculation time! We used Chicken of the Woods (Laetiporus sulphureus) in the study, and found results after only/less than 3 months.

 

I thought the same - the potential for other fungi colonisation cross-contaminating at different rates, but we didn't have the time/funds to look into it further.