daltontrees

OK the makeshift microtome is made, but first I am going to put up some pictures of a real microtome. The one I have is about as basic as they come, real lab ones can cost £thousands. This one can be clamped onto a table edge. It is basically a block of metal with a smooth top surfaces and a piston up the middle thaty can be advanced by means of the gnarled screw at the bottom. One twist on the screw produces a click and advances the piston a tiny amount, 10 microns. A micron is 1/1000 of a millimetre. A typical biological sample will be thin-sectioned after about 5 clicks, i.e. 50 microns which is about 0.05mm. The sample is put in the top and the space around it is filled slowly with molten parrafin wax. The pictures show the start of the process for a piece of Poinsetta leaf. I am warming the wax part of a tealight candle on a spoon over the gas cooker.

Unbelievably lucky! They should be buying lottery tickets...

That's the way I've always done it, but tip of bar on a 2 -3 " branch so you can really push down on the gullets. Keeps the chain out of the dirt too.

Nice illustration! In practice using standard heras panels means the minimum polygon side is 3.5m but they can be overlapped to give straight sections of anything from 3.8m upwards. Standard clips can't be used, but standard tying wire can. I have found guys on site less inclined to remove panels if it nmeans cutting tying wire or having to move a couple of panels.

I'd go along with this, an a little further. There are people who come on to Arbtalk and ask for advice or tree idents or clarifications of regulations etc. then get lots of useful responses and don't even bother to acknowledge the help they have received. If they even took the trouble to ask nicely one would feel more inclined to pitch in. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but it doesn't feel that old-fashioned when I am trying to explain to my 4 year old daughter that being polite makes people like you better and gets you things too and is just plain nice. I have got to the point on Arbtalk where (and I didn't realise it until this thread was started) I make a mental note of those who don't acknowledge assistance or comments or don't ask 'nicely', and I just don't pitch in on their threads any more. So how about a 'thank' function for those who haven't got 10 seconds to acknowledge the help they have received? This 'like' culture that seems to be obligatory in every aspect of social media seems lazy and meaningless by comparison, and I would hate to see a point where no-one wants to contradict a poster's opinion because everyone already likes it. If you like it, it's not hard to say so, and why. The threads that do this are the more enjoyable threads. Do we want to see rapport reduced to counting the number of 'likes'?

I agree with the point made about volume versus surface area. But I think it is probably a bit of both. But sdince we aren't party to the basis on which the RPA formula was arrived at by BS, we don't know what emphasis has been put on which aspect of root function. For structural roots, the RPA is likely to be more than adequate, and both depth ansd spread are significant factors, depending on species. For water gathering, surface area seems the obvious important factor unless soil depth, texture and structure and topography allow for collection in a dip. For nutrient gathering volume is important but simce many trees are reabsorbing nutrients every year from decayed leaf litter very close to the surface, surface area is also important. For gas exchange, surface area must be by far the most important factor. And as for competition from other trees, shrubs and herbaceous plants? Deviation from a circle and from the 12 x DBH rule should probably be the norm. Someone I work with often expresses RPAs as polygonal CEZs on the basis that things like heras fencing comes in straight lines. My rule is, there is no rule.

Different sort of ash from volcanoes, it is fine rock mineral particles with a very high surface area to volume ration that give out useful elements like soduim, potassium, magnesium, iron etc. readily. Wood ash is fairly caustic, the elements usually being in a form that is ready to react with just about anything. They can be toxic to bacteria, worms, insects and can create pH levels that are phytotoxic (i.e. kill plants). Use sparingly. I empty my stove into a bucket and every now and then sieve it and chuck out the lumps. The fine powder can be dusted on the soil surface just before rain is expected. I probably use about 1 kg per m2 a year.

Defo F.v, just saw a load today running rampant up the stem of a Lime.

I'm not being argumentative, but why are you sure there are negative effects and how do you know trees by design require a rest in winter?

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=onzonium&client=firefox-a&hs=dtZ&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=VcPmUs-AC8mt7QamhIDICw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAg&biw=1366&bih=640#facrc=_&imgrc=KPaxEt0krZPoUM%253A%3BI0YSXH7byAmGyM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.wildaboutbritain.co.uk%252Fpictures%252Fdata%252F8%252Fmedium%252FOzonium_-_Coprinus_sp.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.wildaboutbritain.co.uk%252Fpictures%252Fshowphoto.php%252Fphoto%252F106328%3B880%3B710

It's a new one on me, thanks for explaining.

The what?

Beal will stitch ropes for you but I would imagine it's not cheap. BEAL PRO - ROPES FOR PROFESSIONAL - SECURITY ROPES and click on the 'sewn terminations' link. You'll see they use a nylon thimble, but witha karabiner not a snaphook. And I was talking about using a throwbag in the tree too, not from the ground. It only works from the ground with low branches or with a throwline which is only a few mm diameter.

I though you said 'tuned up'! Now that would be bad...

When CAMP sell this snaphook as a work positioning connector, they pre-attach it ti a thimbled spliced-end lanyard. Use it any other way at your own risk. Personally I wouldn't. For throw weight I have a throw bag on my harness with a snapgate krab, I can stick that on to my normal climbing rope eye in about 5 seconds. If you tie your snaphook onto your rope end with a fishermans, you will have to untie it evry time you feed rope through a cambuim saver or redirect, then re-tie it in the tree. If it has got wet and has trhen been loaded by body weight, won't it be very hard to untie with cold wet fingers then re-tie like your life depends on it?

I just had a wee thought there, would it create a problem for getting your kit LOLERed if it's non-standard? The steel clip is EN rated but the whole set-up might not be.

Hello, I think you are right to worry about the reduced rope radius on this thing. I have tsame type of fixing on my swedish strop nad it has a metal thimble. Sloth's suggestion of a thimble is a decent idea, but the nylon ones won't last too long. Be careful if you are using one of those lumps of metal as a throw weight. One of them swinging back towards you after going over a branch will be pretty scary, teeth-breaking potential very high. I know because I regularly get a bash off the swedish throwing it round the back of a stem. Perhaps you could consider a maillon to join rope spliced eye to the device? Remember to inspect regularly to make sure the nut on the maillon is tight, possibly even glue it shut with epoxy resin glu or spot-weld it shut.

New Songdo City South Korea (Seoul)

Seoul?

I have had the same discussion with developer clients. I have to caution them that the fines are in theory unlimited and can be linked to the value the tree removal adds to the value of the property. See for example Poole v Dorset, or is it Dorset v Poole? Somewhere down that direction anyway. And they have to replant if so directed. So the loss of public amenity is temporary and deferred.

Well, we live in an age where morality and business are mutually exclusive. The developer hasn't broken any laws though, has he? It is for the LA to foresee tree loss, assesswhether the trees contribute to the amenity of the area and if so consider TPOing them if it's expedient. All very well in theory and in law but if they go around TPOing trees where there is no threat of loss they are criticised. Personally I'd like to see the 'expedient' test given its widest possible interpretation so that LAs can literally go round their area and spot all the trees that are important for amenity and TPO them regardless of any real or perceived threats to the trees. The question of whether the trees should be preserved for the amenity of the development is much more difficult because the people to whom the amenity will be provided don't yet live in the houses that haven't yet been built. Or, often, designed. 5837 says the survey should disregard development anyway. Were the removed trees on this site visible to the public?

I knew I'd seen it somewhere! Conversion of Phenylalanine to Benzaldehyde Initiated by an Aminotransferase in Lactobacillus plantarum Concentration of benzaldehyde in the fungus seems to me more likely than production of it by the fungus.

There may be a point. The situation is a bit more complicated with Council-owned land. Councils are encouraged not to TPO their own land, but legally they can. But in cash-strapped times it is not unheard of for Councils to compromise their own planning policies by allowing development on land they are selling that otherwise they would resist or control tightly. In the end less conditions means more capital receipt. I am maybe being too cynical, Councils can sell land with conditions attached that are more enforceable than planning conditions. They can also sell land subject to a development brief that can specify from the outset that a formal Planning Agreement will be put in place. This is like very firm planning conditions but in a deed that is recorded and runs with the land and which is more enforcable than planning conditions. Maybe that's what is proposed. Maybe the right thing to ask the Council is what measures have been put in place, and are proposed, to make sure that no trees are lost prior to planning applications, to make sure that trees are properly taken into account as part of the site design process and to protect trees during and after construction. And copy it to your local councillor(s) and MP.

Or there's this... [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXElBhPX05k]coconut tree climbing - YouTube[/ame]

BS3998 cautions against the misuse of spikes for avoiding danage from tree work operations. If your client' consent makes reference to BS3998 being followed, you shouldn't use spikes. In my personal view you shouldn't anyway, but that's a matter of personal standards and reputation. If I saw someone spiking up a lime to do pruning, I'd make a mental note never to use him on any of my jobs. And if I was rth Tree Officer reinspecting afterth job is done and I saw the stems riddled with gouges I'd be on my guard every time the contractor's name was raised in connection with an application for consent. There's always another way to get up there. It might take longer, it might cost more, it might involve slightly higher risk (but still tolerable), but there's always another way.