treeseer

Along with ID, extent of spread is good to know. Perhaps remove more dead bark, so to find the margins of the infection? The tree's response at the margin, or lack of same, informs management, along with the name of the pathogen. Sounding with a mallet should get you to the margins quickly. Turf culture to trunk seems the causal issue--a shovel might be handy.

Not in the UK; who said that? Why so jumpy today? Chill, mon, chill. Germany I believe. Seen pics of 2 different treees (one showing consecutive years of tomographs), in peer-reviewed presentations by published tree risk managers. Don't shoot me; I was only the piano player--er, audience member. It's like the oak i showed ringed by Big old inonotus conks--target rating very low--only the grass cutting personnel go under it with any regularity, amenity high (sunny side of office bldg) so risk is tolerated. What else?

I can't see that at all. Those ribs of adaptive growth/woundwood could probably hold up the lot of us! That is a small amount of strength loss, even if the branch were hollow. It is on the edge of the crown, so exposure and length of lever arm are risk factors. Both can be quite readily managed, mitigated by reduction, based on the pics. Yes the tree has poor structure--so prune the *(()*())*&^*'n thing! The Arborist formerly known as hama goes on sabbatical, and the place goes to the dogs. Seriously, the best way to assess the risk might be to get a rope up there and pull on it; see how it moves.

Thanks James; no accusations; my issue is with the term, which is so vague I find it useless at best and often misleading. The doc you linked does clarify a little bit, once one gets through the other stuff, to actual information. Right you are, Steven--one can only get edified by ascending with the higher minds over at the consultant's site, away from these scruffy arbo types.

Don't forget the bottom half of the tree--root stress from competition and paving need to be mitigated. Canker can be treated by sanitation.

Perhaps height and location determine frequency, more than anything. How often do Tilia emerge from the canopy? Species susceptibility has been documented in the US, but the data are gained through inventory of old and inadequate samples. The methodology is weak and can mislead imo. The change in mineral composition in and around the tree may be a factor though; no denying that.

It does make trees fall over, but several have been ringed with conks for many years with minimal crown effects, sort of like the case studies I have seen of European beech ringed with Merip that get managed indefinitely.

1. Humble arborists do if they are to assess and manage the stability and the risk of falling of a tree. &Good point--I stand corrected. I should have said "spread to living tissue is a far greater concern than loss of structurally significant but inactive wood. This is especially true since the disease typically moves from the outside in, so destabilization due to Armillaria occurs a long long time after the initial infection." Is that closer to true? 2. Most of the European researchers qualified on the subject of excessive nitrification do not (consider soil works or associated plantings of potential usefulness)and otherwise would have found a "cure" for or a method of mitigating the effects of nitrification. &What is the scientific basis for this opinion? If no experiments have taken place, maybe they should. If this is another case of "believe me/us, based on who we are", then with all due respect there is cause for skepticism. Unless "qualified" means "omniscient". 2. which by the way is not restricted to the soil. & Yes, I'm aware it's in the air, hence the derriere/dairy air reference. (Why don't I hear laughter? ) And you must be aware that associated plants and mulch can capture and hold N that is in the air. 2. And there is no harm in experimenting if it is done by properly trained experts using scientifically valid methods. & There is no harm in experimenting, if the alternative is a removal program--by the way, has this removal program been scientifically verified through experimentation? Or is a best guess, based on the questionable hypothesis that fungus plays the leading part in tsse? 3. If it was that simple, we would not have a massive Armillaria problem. & Maybe the problem seems massive because the range of proposed solutions is mistakenly constrained. If no experiments have taken place, maybe they should.

Rob, yes, very similar, thanks. Your pic shows it spreading callus from a collar, but it often takes off from a point not near an apparent node. Note *past tense*, hama. So you are off the hook. Inosculation has "blend" in its definition so close but no cigar. I prefer "shield"; connotes armoring and protection, and flatness. I. dryadeus looks similar uk or us--one thing we have in common at least!

& 1. No one's guaranteeing forever--a short-term benefit is still a benefit, and may allow other therapies, such as soil work to mitigate acidification and nitrification, take hold. For trunks and buttresses, decay fungi can and should be resisted. 1. Excessive nitrification enhances wood degrading fungi to speed up the decay of dead wood which can not be mitigated by soil work. & 1.a. Who cares about dead wood being decayed? It's the decay of living tree tissue that is of concern, and it can be mitigated by sanitization and exposure. &1.b. Yes excess N can go to the bad guys; no news there. Does anyone doubt that excessive nitrification can be mitigated by soil work, or growing beneficial associated plants that buffer these effects and take up a lot of N? Tautological. Is there any harm in experimenting? &2. Soil type influenced disease development and the proportion of trees infected was higher in an acidic sand soil than in an alkaline clay soil." 2. No wonder, as the hyphae of Armillaria are protected against acids, bacteria and other fungi by the melanin layers shielding them off (plaques) or covering and surrounding them (rhizomorphs). &2.a. That is why Armillaria should be removed from trees of value. This is not a complex concept. &2.b. Nitrification humor--If too much manure is spread, you can smell the derriere, dairy air, hahaha. Other points can be addressed to (or by) the authors of the research. I am not a mycologist or ecologist but a humble arborist, caring for trees the best way I can see. I just posted the research in response to your request. See you on the next thread!

"the use of root invigoration in combination with Trichoderma may provide a useful cultural/bio-control combination for long term A. mellea control." (How, when, where and by whom is this monitored and tested ?) ... & You'll have to ask the authors about that one. We won't argue about how long "long" is. As in other Tree health care typically, it is part of a suite of treatments, not standalone. "Results of our experiments should also be interpreted with some degree of caution when adapting research from grapes and strawberries to large trees with respect to structural aspects." & This is standard cya language; trees are large objects... The amount of soil removed is highly unlikely to destabilize a mature oak--is this a serious question? 2. How can several studies in the forestry, phytopathology and ecology literature demonstrate the effectiveness of these treatments if "the potential of Trichoderma against A. mellea remains unknown" & It's the combination of treatments they were testing, and they were judging by the results. In the references are actual tests and the "results of our experiments should also be interpreted with some degree of caution when adapting research from grapes and strawberries to large trees with respect to structural aspects" ? & Again grasping at the straw of the structural non-issue? Besides, old wine in new bottles considering the extensive research on the effects of Trichoderma (and Phlebiopsis gigantea) on Heterobasidion annosum and the lack of proof for the long term effectiveness of the treatment. & No one's guaranteeing forever--a short-term benefit is still a benefit, and may allow other therapies, such as soil work to mitigate acidification and nitrification, take hold. For trunks and buttresses, decay fungi can and should be resisted. Trees can wall off some wood-destroying fungi, inexorably and indefinitely, indicating immortality. 3. Again jumping to conclusions on an unproven assumption ? & Condemning mature urban oaks based on nearby rhizomorphs sounds more like jumping to conclusions on an unproven assumption! Apart from the above, the following remarks and questions arise : - What about the effects of acidification and nitrification causing the massive outbreak of Armillaria and can these effects be overcome or neutralised by root invigoration and the introduction of Trianum ? & Acidification is global and gradual. Cow crap has been spread on fields since the dawn of civilization. The problems you cite are (somewhat) reversible, at least proven treatable. The authors note at the end that these two therapies are part of a program of care. - What about the effects of tree root invigoration on root protecting and defending mycorrhizae ? & Other studies show improvement in tree health and growth. An inventory over time would be interesting to see, true. The populations might shift, and while this might upset the tssm/tsse applecart in one view, populations of microbes can adjust, influenced by the dominant organism, the tree. - Strawberries and grapes are endomycorrhizal, a lot of the affected tree species are ectomycorrhizal. & True, and the forestry references deal with trees: Redfern notes that "Infection by A. mellea in Britain occurs by means of rhizomorphs; *the transfer of mycelium at root contacts is probably not important as a means of spread. ... Quercus robur and Fagus sylvatica were more resistant* than all the conifers except A. grandis. Soil type influenced disease development and the proportion of trees infected was higher in an acidic sand soil than in an alkaline clay soil." So yes reducing acidification and nitrification should be part of the work--and soil replacement and modificiation does that. & Baumgartner confirms that spread was not significant in that study. If other observations indicate spread between oaks may be faster, is this based on a controlled experiment in which some trees got this proven treatment, and a control group did not? Or was it by passive observation, like the link previously put up about foresters in Arkansas inventorying species of fungi--outside the context of treatment, and this forum's title, "Tree health care". - Why introduce Trianum into the soil food webs of trees if "Trichoderma is a genus of fungi that is present in all soils" and also in trees in combination with plaques of Armillaria ostoyae that does not seem to "suffer" from the presence of Trichoderma at all? & That looks like an issue of timing and quantity. In tree health care, efforts are made to decrease the potential of pathogens. If Armillaria-infected tissue and soil is removed before inoculation, an introduced inoculant can more likely gain the upper hand. The picture shows Armillaria going full force, and a few specks of Trichoderma on top, which is the completely opposite scenario. Earlier, when i described this treatment anecdotally, you did not speak kindly of it, and asked for supporting research. I just ran across it, so there it is. Can you prove it wrong? Talk to the tree health care experts in Reading. All we are saying, is give trees a chance. Before trees of value are condemned, these treatments, in concert with other care such as soil modification, should in all good conscience be considered. It's good chatting with you, as always.

Thanks James for reading between the images; David, you must have mis-scrolled there. That is the UK perspective, as related in the US. That mag has good stuff now and then, aside from my rubbish. The UK lab's research is much more interesting than their US counterpart's; the selection of topics reflects a much higher awareness. Not only more open minds, but more full minds! They do seem to understand how trees work, and seek to put pathogens in their place. Whatever that trident does, I don't want it done to me!

http://www.tcia.org/Digital_Magazine/PDFs/lowres/TCI_Mag_May10LR.pdf Page 22: Trees infected with Armillaria fungus can be treated by exposure and by inoculation with beneficial antagonists to that pathogen. This research, conducted in the United Kingdom and with the lead author from the United Kingdom, proves the effectiveness of exposing the infected area and treating with beneficial microorganisms. In addition, several studies in the forestry, phytopathology and ecology literature demonstrate the effectiveness of these treatments. Therefore, it seems that condemning trees in urban areas based on rhizomorphs without considering these simple therapeutic treatments may be needlessly costing those communities irreplaceable arboreal resources.

Host Q phellos in SE USA is ringed 360 with it; 1 old and new in first pic 2 squirrel on burling stub, showing limb loss; has been dying back for a decade 3 nice rib of adaptive growth 4 a "shield" growth at the top of a sinus. often i see these at stressed points like this, but sometimes unrelated to rot or movement. is there a name for these in Europe, or a thread here about these flat, liquid-looking burls(?)?

Host Q phellos in SE USA is ringed 360 with it; 1 old and new in first pic 2 squirrel on burling stub, showing limb loss; has been dying back for a decade 3 nice rib of adaptive growth 4 a "shield" growth at the top of a sinus. often i see these at stressed points like this, but sometimes unrelated to rot or movement. is there a name for these in Europe, or a thread here about these flat, liquid-looking burls(?)?

"I'd suggest that before an arb can 'look for ways to mitigate/lessen that risk to a tolerable level' they need to first know both what the level of risk is" yes and this includes both the risk of failure, and the risk of damage due to failure. "...obvious defects? Well, I guess what I meant was arboricultural features which would be recognised by many arbs as being a potential indicator that the tree/s in question may have an elevated level of risk of failure... or something along those lines :)" well there in that one sentence you have 3 qualifiers, so your meaning is now even less clear, from here. since tony is enjoying a fag (very different meaning in the US:001_tt2:) i'll suggest that it is this very type of ambiguity that leads to quick and erroneous condemnations, and that was the prompt for this thread. or maybe i too need to lay down in a dark room...no fags thanks

hama will no doubt speak too but generally the owner/manager decides how much "threat" they can handle (risk tolerance), and the arborist looks for ways to mitigate/lessen that risk to a tolerable level. Felling is at the end of the list of options. BTW, what do you mean by "obvious defects"? All trees might pose a threat to people and/or property, and I've seen a lot of trees condemned for no good reason, is why I ask..

page 34, http://www.tcia.org/PDFs/TCI_Mag_Jan_09.pdf DEFENSIVE REPORTING vs. SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT A branch fell from a nearby live oak onto the walkway leading to city hall, so the city paid for a risk assessment from an ISA Certified Arborist on that tree and the Thoburn Oak. In a one-page letter dated July 18, the arborist proposed removing both trees. He said that they posed a danger to the motorists and pedestrians who pass under them each day, but gave few details. Tree risk formulas typically rate the severity of the defect, the size of the defective part, and the “target rating”, or use of the area under the tree. Next, management options to lessen or “abate” the risk are considered, before recommendations are made. "Development of abatement options should be as systematic as development of the ratings...cable/bracing and/or reduction of end weight may be required...", according to A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees. This arborist later said that “Target rating is the most important factor for me. If there’s a lot of use under the tree it’s dangerous, no matter what you do.” The city's Tree Advisory Board rejected this defensive report, and decided to get a second opinion ... The city was satisfied, and decided to go ahead with the cabling of the municipal tree. Given this experience, it is clear that municipalities can and will accept tree cabling. According to Matheny and Clark, “Almost by definition, arborists have a responsibility to care for trees”, and that duty is not breached if we act in a reasonable manner. Offering opinions about trees’ dignity or decrepitude without analyzing the facts is not part of a professional risk assessment. Members of the American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) follow their Standards of Professional Practice, Item 4.2 G. : " Members shall not take advantage of their positions as Experts by assigning or implying greater significance to an interpretation than it warrants. The degree of certainty of an opinion is as important as the opinion itself and Members shall do nothing, actively or passively, to misstate the degree of certainty." Instead of reporting defensively by injecting opinions or exaggerations, we should be systematically assessing standard treatment options to abate risk. If the treatments follow the standards and the ISA BMP’s, there is no reason to fear liability from working on trees that some would dismiss as “decrepit”.

Why? I can see the majority of effort going there, but would not put all the eggs in that or any treatment basket. How will more mycrrhizae affect the decay that is advancing into the stem? Sooner than drying out the infections?

An excellent description--I wish American college students had English that good! I've always found it quite hard to differentiate those black lines; arbogenic or mycogenic?

Heat-treating seems to have merit, to disinfect and preserve. Cauterization. Not to the point of cracking or charring, though. Live oak, q virginiana wood left exposed to the sun gets petrified.

"o.k guy, drying out the wood is going to do what!" Tony, drying out the infection is the treatment, not drying out the wood. Oh yes, a fine line in between, and tricky not to cross. But infections can be dried without introducing dysfunction into wood. Lesions sometimes dry up on their own in nature, too. But sometimes they expand. What other treatment would you recommend for bleeding lesions on beech or oak? Gerrit, sorry, different levels of intervention seem to fit different sites and objectives and perceptions of tree value. not sure where we got off to there.

Gerrit, just consider how often "documented observations" have been proven valid. 2. When and where did I prescribe "cutting and grinding for trees next to farms" ? 2 pages ago: "we have chosen for the proactive strategy of removing an infected lane or roadside tree and both its neighbours to prevent the rhizomorphs from spreading" I assumed root removal meant grinding stump and roots--i stand corrected if these are mechanically extracted. Also, I reread that they are next to roads, and not always next to farms, but near enough to be affected by nitrification (which is not limited to Europe). Again, there's nothing wrong with cutting down trees, if they are not worth the expense of otherwise managing their infections.

Gerrit, the standard I apply to written work anywhere is: reliability, and relevance as a guide to treatment. An inventory of fungi in Arkansas does not readily inform tree care across the country or globe--unless I am missing something, again? As for reliability, documented observations may not be double-blind or controlled, but they do stand for quite a lot! (your cue, hama) 2. "Managing forests as you describe is a different scope" {That depends on how you look at a tree. If you consider it to be an isolated solitary organism not in need of a tree species specific ecosystem and soil food web to survive and thrive in an urban or rural environment, then you're right} Now who would say anything like that? Silly talk. If I consider a tree to be necessarily connected to associated organisms and systems, including those found in the soil food web, and being of high enough value to warrant constructive intervention (arboriculture) instead of the cutting and grinding that you prescribed for trees next to farms (forestry), then it is a very different scope, objectives, and specifications.

How about both? "Could you cite scientific articles on the effectiveness of your methods of drying out and otherwise treating Armillaria infections on white oaks from the US and Canada ?" Several publications describe treatments in both orchards and landscapes. Not MY methods; practiced by many. Are they in journals, no, but they reflect real events in the field, as do the anecdotal observations of arborists of compartmentalization after exposure. "And are you familiar with Kelley, Fierke & Stephen (2009) Identification and distribution of Armillaria species associated with an oak decline events in the Arkansas Ozarks (For. Path. 39, 397-404) and Brazee & Wick (2009) Armillaria species distribution on symptomatic hosts in nortern hardwood and mixed oak forests in western Massachusetts (Forest Ecology and Management 258, 1605-1612) ?" Yes I looked at these and saw no causality, and nothing that directly informs treatment in the landscape. Managing forests as you describe is a different scope, different objectives, so naturally different methods apply.