treeseer

Pete, you got it. 1. Diagnosed as a pathogen ? It's on the soil surface, so no, not yet. Kd meaning Kretzschmaria deusta ? yes what (other) species at pruning wound pictured. and with what effects on the condition of the tree ? hollow trunk, crown is full and green, but Hollow + Kd + Wound spread + ACTIVE Crack = Remove.

Q phellos strangled itself and was damaged by pavement work. Trunk sounded hollow all around. Pruning wound is spreading. It and a few others had a thin layer of black material on top of the soil outside of sinuses; felt like foam rubber. The fresh crack with the fungal growth at the top = active failure = removal.

I once saw an A rubrum with K.d. 360 fall under the weight of a 190# climber (who recovered), so this can be serious. The circumferential spread seems like the key factor in stability, more than upward spread. It seems worth the time to assess the risk with probing and measurement and looking at tree and targets before advising. If it was A.m., there would be a better chance of codit, yes?

Appears more like soilbone disease like phytpophthora. for starters get the dirt off the stem so you can see the roots originate. an arborist should remove dead tissue, drench and cauterize.

not sayin just askin. 1m every time is very precise--does one take a measuring device aloft?

Always?

"we all love trees, and all want to do the best job we can, we are not magicians though, and need to be realistic and objective." agreed. We especially need to be realistic and objective about our lack of knowledge. "if these trees where humans I am sure no expense would be spared in ensuring thier demise is far slower, more prolonged and very costly:sneaky2:" And with trees, more or less effort might be made, depending on owner objectives. But re costly, again, that is the owner's concern. The arborist just describes the options. "and dont over estimate CODIT, many fungi including Basidiomycetes have a strategy that can get round codit models, Soft rot, with the Barrier zone (wall 4) being the one true barrier to all but the most potent aggressive parasites/pathogens." Walls 1-3 are not false barriers, though yes they can give way. Yes fungi have strategies but so do trees. "codit may be very effective when the tree is in uba health, and has its full compliment of mycorrhizae, but then when a tree is healthy codit isnt usualy needed to the same degree." Right, so typically our job is to describe how health can be restored, diagnosing and prognosing. "Codit isnt so much a barrier as a set of anotomical obstructions" Yes, and physiological obstructions too. "... to which depending on fungi/tree species are in the equation can be rendered as useless as a wet paper bag in a rain storm, like kretz in lime for instance" can be, yes, in time, yes. But we have not seen them all, so our knowledge is not absolute, so our words perhaps should not be so absolute. And buying time, even for a lime with kretz and low probability of codit, may fit the owner's objectives.

1. You refer to images, i.e. microphoto's of inside compartmentalization in (cambium and) sapwood of "infected Prunus standing" ? Wall 4 images only; I'll have to "look into" hahaha this intercellular imaging that you now ask for. The bar for evidence of trees' potential you set mighty high, but the potential of fungi to inevitably and immediately destroy trees seems to be be accepted as a given by you two tag-teamers, regardless. Is this lack of objectivity scientific? 2. Depending on the pathogen, in this case a parasitic Armillaria species, unless scientific valid evidence of the contrary presented, poor compartmentalizers, such as Prunus, are non-compartmentalizers. So "poor" = "non" in the mycophilic view? That's quite a leap! Again, you look for guarantees of the trees' potential, and consider decay as king of the forest. Anyway, these trees are dead, as is this thread.

1. Just images, the same as you can see, of infected Prunus standing. Like Tom noted, this kind of chat goes nowhere without a common referent, in images and details and assessments, all lacking here. Poor compartmentalizers are not non-compartmentalizers. Read the below.

I was talking about an A for the entire course!! And good on you to challenge your professor--keeps em on their toes. Do let us know how that debate turns out. One more aspect of reduction--by removing the tip, growth is activated at other buds, resulting in a more compact form in the long run. The prejudice against reduction is based on tree response to topping/ reduction that is so severe it stimulates a flush of new growth near the cut. Careful reduction avoids this response, so its benefits are sustainable.

"As the initial attacking strategy of parasitic Armillaria species is infiltrating the tree through the roots (hyphae, rhizomorphs) and then rising up the trunk blocking transport and killing the cambium," True, but this rising can be stopped by compartmentalization. - how do you think "drying out" the infected areas of the trunk can help the tree to compensate for the partial loss of its roots and stop further spreading of the infection to other parts of the trunk. Experience, and knowledge and observation of compartmentalization. "how do you invigorate roots, that already are infected or are easily infiltrated by rhizomorphs actively searching for living substrates to colonize in the soil ?" By "fixing" the soil, in hama's word--changing levels of air and moisture and organic matter and nutrients and , to improve root function, including resistance to and potential displacement of pathogens. "But we have to know when were wasting money and time" We do not have to "know", or guarantee, any outcome. But if we are working as arborists, we DO have to know the client invests money in our time because they value the trees. Should our first move be to decide to give up on the trees, without presenting other management options for the CLIENT to decide from? Did the client here assign the arborist to be Chancellor of their Exchequer? We have not seen these trees, so how can we at our computers decide that R&R is the only way to go?

Well my goodness I am not talking about drying out the roots; that would be silly! I meant the infected areas of the trunk, of course. And I did not mention the soil replacement, a la the perlite that has been advocated over there. "Salvage of what" The majority of the tree, and its contributions, and the benefits to all stakeholders in the tree. "with what guarantees" The work could be guaranteed to be up to industry standards. Of course the results could not be guaranteed--when can they? "and at what costs for the client?" The cost/benefit calculation is the client's business, though the arborist can supply needed information. The R&R Removal-and-Replacement approach GUARANTEES the client will lose the value of the tree, and the cost of removal. Would you guarantee that is always the best approach?

If you meant "Once removed..." and the trees are not down yet, consider retaining the trees and attacking the fungus. Even in a weak compartmentalizer, infection should not be a death sentence. By drying out the infected areas, invigorating the roots, and careful pruning, your client may not need to replace them at all.

All good reasons listed above. Today I assessed 38 aging oaks along a street; about half got reductions specced, 10-20%. None overall, just specific portions/quadrants. All with root constrictions/decay, several to correct lean. If you don't get an A out of this thread something's wrong!

If my math is right (always a question), that's >200 spores/square centimeter. That's a lot!

This "inner crown" line is often seen just beyond large forks. Nice looking work! We too often see this here too; well-intentioned arbs following poor guidelines for pruning to "collars" instead of heeding the tree's guidance.

I don't know why they would. tracing followed by torching disinfects the area. I've had good response with callus after hydrogen peroxide and cauterization on oak and beech and maple infections.

Red oak failed; lots of root rot with this subgenus lately.

I agree. It is not any kind of reduction work. It is restoration work--the ice did the reducing. Still, I would be glad to learn from any constructive input you may offer.

The US definition of topping mentions "internodal pruning without regard to plant health or stability" A 15" horizontal wound does not sound good for health or stability. Depends in large part on owner's objectives.

The oak belo was "topped" by ice 6 years previous. The upper rioght branch was tiny then; the other five are adventitious/epicormics. You can see the smaller ones have been removed. Of the 6 remaining, 3 are subordinated. This is the central leader in the 2nd attached.

This seems reasonable, except that more than one or two branches are typically left per end. Gilman's restoration guideline is 1/3 off, 1/3 subordinated, 1/3 retained; a good starting point.

That is the only way to manage drains? Someone is not thinking of alternatives. Branches can be pruned--why not roots?

Good question. No signs of that canvas (?) strap being cut. Low tech tools like hammer, chisel and pliers can also pull semi-swallowed straps out. What is swallowed may not lead to failure. Tissues can graft outside the girdle. Cutting/scraping bark that is "included" can spur grafting. Nothing to lose by trying? Why not install a proper brace for that fork, if that was part of the original purpose, by drilling a 7/16" hole above the union and install a 3/8" cable with end fasteners? Why not install an eyebolt to guy the other tree to?

In 2 Q macrocarpa, maybe 100+ ande 200+ years old, raccoons were creating dens with their waste. Below is the garden that grew in the older tree, with the streaks of decay above and below this toilet. Typically I prefer to let other vegetation in hollows remain, but in this case the forming hollow was spreading rot through the trunk that supports a crown that is over the house. Garden moved, area left exposed to dry. Sometimes tree structure is worth more than biodiversity. Pics 1 and 2 are the younger tree, pic 3 is the forest in the older one.