Fungus

As an illustration of the possible limitations of tomographs: a couple of months ago, we organised a tomograph workshop, felling the tree afterwards. The tomograph picked up a large crack and overrated the decay by Ganoderma (Gerrit, since I've been talking to you, I don't dare to say if it's applanatum or australe) in this Quercus rubra.

Tom,

Great documentation of the problems in diagnosing the white rot with selective delignification of Ganoderma cf. australe in Q. rubra (and Tilia, Populus, Salix) with tomography as I pointed out before.

And were any FB's present, what did they look like, just big perennial brackets or (also) panic fruiting ? In/on Q. rubra, IME it's close to 100 % G. australe.

1. I thought these were Ganoderma australe brackets, realising G. australe is a biotrophic parasite, this has to be G. applanatum (beech has been felled 1,5 years ago). untill now I always thought this kind of lumpy brackets with a thick white growth margin were australe ... I'll have to reconsider

2. Pholliota aurivella bottom left

Tom,

1. No galls of Agathomyia wankowiczi present ? Were the recently formed brackets attached to older brackets and positioned at a 90 degree turned level (geoptropism) ? And don't reconsider as long as you don't have microscopical (spores) evidence of this species not being G. australe .

2. .

1. A very superficial outside in saprotrophic pioneer white rotter such as a Stereum species (© G.J. Keizer ?) indicating ... the spread of decay and the spreading towards a similar "hot spot" node on a branch ... destabilizing branches of a tree ?

 

the suspected stereum would indicate that decay is spreading yes.

 

"And how did you assess a recent pruining wound being "attacked" by the same fungus if you didn't identify any of the fungi in the first place ?"

 

It looks the same. Precision is nice, but general accuracy often works.

 

What Polyporus species is parasitic and grows in/on Quercus phellos and with what effects ?

 

I don't know that, but I do know that all those fb's are not good for stability.

Precision is nice, but 1-7 met the assignment. In total, they point to interior decay and poor condition, beyond any mitigation. Removal should be strongly considered.

 

2. IME, a valid and reliable tomograph reading can be done by someone who has personally (visually and by sounding) assessed the tree before tomographing it. It is desirable but not necessary--or always possible!-- to identify the wood degrading macrofungi and the type(s) of woodrot correctly,or to have experience with the tree species specific interaction of the fungi with the tree species, or to have often seen the damage done to the tree after it had been felled.

Periodic readings indicate decay progression, and contribute to competent assessments. Some decay fungi cannot be identified, some folks don't get a chance to do a lot of autopsies, so how can all that be *necessary* ?? Arboriculture works better with mycology, but it is not always impossible without mycological precision.

1. It's not evidence of the spreading of the decay, it's the spreading of the killing of cambium and shedding of bark by an unidentified parasite/pathogen followed by a superficial wood decayer that is assessed.

Assumptions, speculations, jumping to conclusions without assessment of the types of wood rot and identification of the fungi ("It looks the same ... I don't know that, but I do know that all those fb's are not good for stability"), not much to base a valid diagnosis on.

2. See my post.

1. IME, a valid and reliable tomograph reading can be done by someone who has personally (visually and by sounding) assessed the tree before tomographing it.

2. It is desirable but not necessary--or always possible!-- to identify the wood degrading macrofungi and the type(s) of woodrot correctly, or to have experience with the tree species specific interaction of the fungi with the tree species, or to have often seen the damage done to the tree after it had been felled. Periodic readings indicate decay progression, and contribute to competent assessments. Some decay fungi cannot be identified, some folks don't often get a chance to do autopsies, so how can all that be *necessary* ??

3. Arboriculture works better with mycology, but it is not always impossible without mycological precision.

Guy,

1. IME ? How much (supervised) training and experience in using a tomograph as a diagnostic instrument and reading the data do you personally have then ?

2. So anyone renting or buying a tomograph and reading the manual is qualified to do the job ? Wouldn't it be better to leave this type of assessment to the experienced professionals, who also can integrate mycological expertise into their diagnosis ?

3. What aspects of arboriculture work better with mycology, but are not impossible without mycological precision ?

As Marco already said : "the piece of equipment is only as good as the Guy operating the equipment."

1. (Again) poorly documented and without valid assessment of the effects on the condition and stability of the trees, the type of woodrot and the body language of both the trees and the fungi.

 

Inadequate so far, yes, that is why advanced assessment is specified.

 

2. And apart from the tree species specific Phellinus robustus and Daedalea quercina, one could add several other co-existing wood decaying parasitic and/or saprotrophic species to the list of macrofungi on older oaks.

 

Well i'll look for all that, but strength loss is what matters, so advanced assessment is specified.

If you really want to contribute to a better understanding of tree-fungus interactions and fungal invading and decaying strategies in trees, you will have to document your diagnosis and interpretation of "research" data at a much higher level of "advanced" assessment and can't confine to stating, that only "strength loss is what matters" without properly assessing what caused the strength loss in the first place.

By the look of the flesh it could be a Bolete sp.

, possibly Boletus (= Xerocomus) badius, an ectomycorrhizal fungus associated with old deciduous and coniferous trees, that have (partially) lost their tree species specific symbionts.

Phytophthora ... it isnt actually a fungi, but a water mould (oomycete) and is a bacterial infection.

Rob,

Oomycetes resemble fungi in mycelial growth and mode of nutrition, but differ from fungi, because they lack chitin in their cell walls. They are not related to bacteria, but are, together with diatoms and brown and golden algae, part of the Kingdom Stramenopila.

smooth black area underneath the uppermost sign, unlike P. So is this the melanine plaque indicative of Armillaria? How to examine further to get a better idea?

Without the presence of rhizomorphs, for the procedure to follow, see my earlier reply after 1.

This fb almost rotted/eaten away. Grifola?

Identification of this material is impossible, unless you use a microscope. And it could just as well be Meripilus giganteus.

Found these Ganoderm brackets on a Yew in my parents Churchyard in Norfolk yesterday. My 'gut' feeling is that these are possibly G. resinaceum or G. lucidum as opposed to G. carnosum.

David,

According to Ryvarden & Gilbertson, G. resinaceum has not been documented from coniferous trees (yet).

1. ... the piece of equipment is as only as good as the guy operating the equipment ... decay in (monitored) trees.

2. I must point out that the PICUS will not pick up early decay from Ustilina deusta- be aware ...

Marco,

1. True, especially the intensive training and experience one needs and the (close) monitoring of the body language of the affected tree species.

2. ... and of white rot with selective delignification caused by Ganoderma australe in trees such as Aesculus, Populus and Salix.

Quote : "How do you assess the effects of an unidentified fungus" : with a rubber mallet

Quote : "Tomography without properly identifying the macrofungi first ?" : Yes, the name of the fungus does not matter ... not all mycological aspects are relevant.

See reliability of reading tomography.

Anyone used one? Experience in reading the pictures...? Have you compared the pictures to reality after felling a tree that has been inspected with a Tomograph? Reliability?

Tobias,

IME, a valid and reliable reading can only be done by :

- someone who has personally (visually) assessed and monitored the tree before tomographing it,

- has identified the wood degrading macrofungi and the type(s) of woodrot correctly, which in this case is ,

- who has lots of experience with the tree species specific interaction of the fungi with the tree species

- and has often seen the damage done to the tree after it had been felled.

would it be edible and where do they grow i found it in grass at the side of a path and didnt seem to be attached

Ray,

Yes, it is, provided it is identified correctly and as long as it is completely white in- and outside. A warning though, the FB's can accumulate heavy metals to a toxic level.

And it grows on rich soil in (manured) pastures, in orchards, road sides, parks, broad-leaved woods and shrubberies, often on recently disturbed soil or dried mud and in greenhouses, after the soil has been steamed.

could you identify this for me

Ray,

A not that giant Giant Puffball (Langermannia gigantea).

Myxomycetes on this Piptoporus?

David,

No, anamorphs of the ascomycete Hypocrea pulvinata.

1. a black growth resembling a fungal fruiting body

2. We also noted fungal infections adjacent to pruning wounds in the canopy, which also indicates the spread of decay ... Apparent saprophytic fungus (which grows on tissue that is already dead), perhaps Stereum sp., is spreading towards a similar “hot spot” node on a branch facing west ... Recent pruning wound being attacked by this fungus

3. Apparent parasitic fungus (which grows in living wood), resembling Polyporus

 

We can clarify any portions of it upon request.

Kind request to (outside the personal realm) clarify the following questions :

1. Resembling a fruitbody meaning it still might not be a black foamy rubber fungus at all ?

2. A very superficial outside in saprotrophic pioneer white rotter such as a Stereum species (© G.J. Keizer ?) indicating ... the spread of decay and the spreading towards a similar "hot spot" node on a branch ... destabilizing branches of a tree ? And how did you assess a recent pruining wound being "attacked" by the same fungus if you didn't identify any of the fungi in the first place ?

3. What Polyporus species is parasitic and grows in/on Quercus phellos and with what effects ?

1+2+3+4 was on Red Oak

Although I can't see the tube layer (maze ?), because of the woodpecker's whole and the tree being Q. rubra, I think it's Daedalea quercina, a brown rotter of oaks, that is a fast and invasive decomposer of cellulose in Q. rubra.

I would mind putting a substantial bet on the last two being fistulina cankers.

So would I, but only if the tree species is Quercus robur, Q. petrea or Castanea sativa.

As for 12 and colour of spores - white.

Marco,

Still a number of bracket fungi possible. Annual or perennial and on what tree species ?

1. Quote : "Any documentation on the assessment of the (tree species specific) effects on the condition and stability of each of these Quercus species ? Attacking strategies, softrot and/or white rot ? Body language of the trees, bark and cambium necrosis ?" : butt rot

2. Quote : "Co-existence with Fistulina hepatica and/or Laetiporus sulphureus ?" : seldom other fb's or other signs/symptoms visible. one rotter is enough!

1. (Again) poorly documented and without valid assessment of the effects on the condition and stability of the trees, the type of woodrot and the body language of both the trees and the fungi.

2. And apart from the tree species specific Phellinus robustus and Daedalea quercina, one could add several other co-existing wood decaying parasitic and/or saprotrophic species to the list of macrofungi on older oaks.

Pics 5,6 - Unknown fungi growing on dead Cornus alba

Matt,

Hard to say from a photo alone, probably a Trametes/Antrodiella species.

Some Gano i found growing on a Sallow Willow. I'm thinking G.australe. It is panic fruiting and the tree is starting to show signs of die-back.

Matt,

Salix + panic fruiting + signs of die-back = with over 90 % certainty the biotrophic parasitic G. australe.

The tree was 173 years old before it had to be taken down. Honey fungus is rife now but I do not know what made the tree unsafe. It was a cedar as is the next few pictures.

Marco,

1/2 + 6/7 : could be Phellinus pini.

3 : Armillaria mellea.

8 : Trametes gibbosa.

9/10/11 : Aleuria aurantia.

12 : colour of spores ?

13/14 : Grifola frondosa.

15/16 : barkcanker.

Pics 7,8,9,10,11 - Found growing at the base of a recovering/subsiding beech.

Could be one of the saprotrophic look-a-likes of K. deusta, such as Eutypa scabrosa, Anthotosma decipiens or Glyphium elatum : microscope.