Bundle 2

Yes, I agree that Plippy has a good point here....The principle of maintaining standing deadwood over high target locations must not be dismissed without due consideration... I however would like to pursue your poiint further CTS as there are alot of situations that are not on your list that it would be quite feasible to maintain and manage with a more `"holistic" or longterm view. There is so much pressure on the greenspace of this country that it is simply not gonna work if the countryside is not allowed to exist within an urban setting. I am sure you are a sensible and smart human being and I tend to think that the extent of understanding is in the posts and no more. This is clearly not true but I do think that there is a habit on the forum for Arborists to over egg their whole perspective of the safety of the trees they manage and it frankly has to do with justifying the living they make from treework coupled with the "fever" of our risk averse society...What? Did you think because you are a tree surgeon, you were somehow above all this "Safety/schmafety" routine. I ve had my say....I just wish the industry got to have more say in the way our treestock is managed....rant over!

You seem to be missing the point cts and also, you seem to be dismissing the argument that has been outlined in this discussion so far. The dangers relating to the retention of a mono can ( & should) be minimised. This is right and proper. That you have mono's throughout your local park is testament to this fact. You are providing your own argument or tact within this discussion with which we are both iun agreement. It needs be retained. Contact with the natural environment improves our awareness of a real world perspective, and by so doing, goes some way to giving the "much needed education" to Jo Public. Its a win win situation. The crux of the scenario is in "persuading" the authorities and tree managers, those with their mawks on the purse strings, that it is actually, very worthwhile doing. That to fail to recognise this fact of life is to ignore to some large degree their remit. By answering their queries before they ask the questions, you may find the task meets with less resistance than you imagine. As I said - Do what you can-No-one can ask more!

".... basing a decision on personall prefrence..." This is not a case of personal preference though is it. In case we are failing to make our point clearly or forcefully enough for you....we simply cannot afford to miss these opportunities to retain and maintain our ecology. The habitat is fast dwindling and the brief window offered up to us to "manage" in a positive way should be grasped with both hands. Where better than the parks where , once again, people and nature can rub along together. It is IMO because of the "alienation' from our natural world (ie..Not coming into contact with it ) that we fail to see how "risk averse " we have become. Its a disease that needs nipping in the bud.... Get real. Do what you can (No-one can ask more ) but above all, DO THE RIGHT THING! -

Er...What; like it was "clearly" monitored before the failure! IMO, if a mono is left at a sensible height it will be substantially less of a hazard than a growing tree....just my opinion mind. But we need as an industry, to be "selling" this to the authorities and tree managers alike>

This is such a narrow view and has no basis in fact. As has been posted above, the part that deadwood plays in the ecology of our natural world is not to be underestimated. The ONLY basis on which your comment may have some pertinence lies in the need to protect the remaining three trees from the disease. This should be done by removing the affected trees and burning the arisings. And this needs doing sooner rather than later in the case of Ophiostoma novo-ulmi (DED) Get with the program Plippy, please....!

:confused1:I'd have to agree. Looks like a bit of a wasted opportunity!

With wood/tree decay fungi, it has been postulated that the `FB's form when the hyphae are close enough to the exterior of the trees core....It could be said that the wood is knackered and thats why we see the fungi's FB. It may also be that the tree (host) is past it's best and the fungi is simply trying to procreate before it dies from lack of food...Seriously though, there as many times if not more when these "half truths" lacck any real scientific substance.

Its a little underexposed but looks like one of the Coprinus spp..

". Electronmicroscopical analyses of spore wall structures have been disappointing because similar structures appear in very different taxa. Biochemical and genetical approaches offer more promise to unravel the causes of differentiation and controlled morphogenetic expression of the genome." So it seems, finding out aint so simple!...It goes on to say..." Blah blah..it would be good to know blah blah"- Im paraphrasing... ScienceDirect - Mycological Research : Differentiation in agaric basidiomata and phylogenetic problems*

Sure...morphing...we are talking about "haptomorphosis" but that is quite different from the generative process of cell division. If cells are differentiated etc..callus and woundwood being the obvious example. When I find the info I'll post it up. Theres no way mycologists haven't dissected these FB's to establish whats going on at a cellular level....I'm just ignorant of the science atm....!

Cool...but in most cases ( exceptions prove the rule ) they prefer a specific and it should be said, uniform orientation.... What of the cell differentiation Tony. If merisrematic tissue is homologous, then the fungus ,if for some reason cannot fulfil its development, would present with distorted tube layer maybe. Look at the white FB in D's post. You can just see a tube layer (twice imo) that has "ingrown" if you will. Cant explain it!

Bummer. Thats a bit tough to lose half the canopy given its woodland situation.It may explain the onset of merip though eh!

Fairly clearly the Oak mazegill from that angle David - good. So then I am tending to concur with the Daedalea consensus atm! And the idea that it is not too concerned about it's pore layer.... Andy Summerley made a comment I remembered for some reason about pore layers and their orientation. ( Basically cos I didnt agree with him - lol ) He seemed to suggest that protection from water ingress was the only "valid" reason they should be so often (in most cases infact ) on the underside of the FB. opps.. actually, andy contends that gravity is the only reason for their orientation. The ingree of h20 was why I disagreed. Dont want to go misquoting the ,amn now do we...!

Whats the history of that Oak with respect the Gano and Merip David? Its putting up a bit of resistance isnt it!

Mmm.Interesting markings on the outer surface of the last (white) FB ? And it is dissected top to bottom right? ( Im on about the post b4 last..) Its almost as if the fungus lost interest whilst forming. And the same thing again ( if you accept that the fb shows two annual seasons..) Resulting in the pattern distributed as it is... I am wondering what cell differentiation there is within the FB itself? Sorry...yeah, color looks pretty consistent.

If its in use..( and it rather looks as though it is from the shiny metal in the pics ) it should ought to be on the LOLER sheet ? Name and number I would think.

MesterH- That is Amanita rubescens- The Blusher..Not much like those posted by Rob. The Blusher - Amanita rubescens - fungi found in swansea Wildlife Photography @ http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/gallery Im not surprised to see the Solitary in a group myself. They do appear to have slight coloration tho Rob...( I put that down to the detritus that sits on the caps...) Dunno!

Yes..I see you posted "aborted archetype"...my bad! Some kind of parasitism of the fruit body causing this maybe...another fungus perhaps even. Keep us posted.

So perhaps we are looking at some form of "disruption" in the formation of this specimen, or maybe species/host dynamic we are not use to associating together...? Mmmm...Has the removal of a sample had any adverse effects out of interest`? Always with the questions huh!

I take it you know that prunus is no willow...! Looks like Amanita echinocephala...Common name "Solitary Amanita" but dont let that put you off!

"There isn't much in the way of external decay evident on the exposed heartwood." Certainly fits with the alacrity with which it forms! At the same time though, you are saying that you expect the decay to be concealed within the heartwood and not using sapwood? oh- and Edit- Blimey, you took a big ol' chunk out of 'er eh! Edit 2- Sorry mate...but which face/plane is the mazed surface?

Located where it is...( & not so much the height of it actually, although it is of some significance quite possibly (? )- ) Do you think it is acting saprobically or is it perhaps more pathogenic ?

Rainforests....less than 7% of the land mass of the planet- estimated to have 40-75% of the worlds species indigineous to them. Will we see 48 million year fungi extinct as a result of palm oil obsession....? Groovy post Geoff- Rainforest Facts :: Environmental Facts :: Young People's Trust for the Environment

Epicorm is good...it will go on to provide the framework for the starch factory, forming an integral part of the management process if you're lucky. It is not necessarily a symptom of stress but more likely that the dormant buds within the bark are initiated by exposure to light ( + heat)- Typical oak!

Its a documented relationship , that between oak and the dryadeus. Take the view that the pathogen takes a while to get established and a lifetime to have the tree away. Handsome looking bracket !