Reducing Codominant Pine

[JeffE]

Thanks for the good discussion; i'm fine with the "specious" claims, not as bad as what some Floridians are throwing out these days. :Monkey:

LOL, no offense intended, just a fancy way of saying, "I ain't buyin' it."

One more little zinger in reference to this:

other Phytophthora infections (and signs of these are often seen on margins of bacterial infections)

My guess is that there you're talking about the "black zone lines" that are listed as Phytophthora symptoms? Those are actually found with a wide variety of different pathogens, including Armillaria. The pathologist who heads the Forest Health section complains about that, because we're always getting <i>P. ramorum</i> false alarms. He says it's just a common indicator of a pathogen attacking the tree. If it interests you, you can get culture plates that are treated to only allow <i>Phytophthora</i> spp. to grow - you don't even need to use sterile protocols.

 

[Ekka]

From what I know phosphite was used to treat soil borne fungi Phytophthora in Western Australia. I think they even did aerial spraying and they noted a substancial decline in the problem where it had been sprayed. Also they injected some trees with it etc.

But please realise .... I'm in Brisbane and we don't have the problem here. Brisbane to Perth is a 6 hour flight. What I do know of it is only hear say from third parties and some stuff on the web. So I don't get to vocal about any of this stuff as I'm simply not experienced or qualified enough to discuss it. Just like beetles.

When our tutors talk about excavating they refer to it as the practice of clearing away/removing frass, debri, dust, bark etc down to clear wood. This may involve the removal of effected wood in the reactive zone, which is now understood to be alterred wood that has phenolic antimocrobial substances to slow down decay. So the risk of removing this zone is not worth it ... however, if one argues that removing down to clean heartwood and dosing with phosphite will be better than leaving it alone and can back it up with proof I'll be interested ... otherwise I'll leave things be.

So, I'm open on this but I'm not going to go to our next prac day with with a scraper and a bag full of phosphite to demonstrate excavation and treatment of decaying wood without my facts ... enlighten me if you can.

 

[treeseer]

When our tutors talk about excavating they refer to it as the practice of clearing away/removing frass, debri, dust, bark etc down to clear wood.

That's what I'm talking about, but instead of "clear" I would say "solid".

This may involve the removal of effected wood in the reactive zone, which is now understood to be alterred wood that has phenolic antimocrobial substances to slow down decay. So the risk of removing this zone is not worth it

I totally agree! as previously stated, I do NOT cut into wood that is still lending any physical or chemical function or support. your tutors, like US pathologists, are frowning upon the process of excavation based on the fear that the excavator is going to break boundaries and invade useful tissue. This fear assumes that the person with the tool in his/her hand doesn't know the difference, or will get carried away. A legitimate concern that can be dealt with by demonstration and practice and instruction, not by prohibition.

I'm not going to go to our next prac day with with a scraper and a bag full of phosphite to demonstrate excavation and treatment of decaying wood

1. The scraper should be a blunt instrument that willl not even nick the tissue that you want to keep. Air excavation is very useful. 2. Phosphite as I understand it is applied to living tissue so it can be taken up. Its function is to "jump-start" defensive responses in the tree. 3. Excavation is just clearing away decayed and damaged tissue so you can gauge the extent and aggressiveness of decay.

The first step in risk assessment is to see how strong the stem is. physically measuring cavities is more relable than resistographs or other instruments. Excavating is the only way to clear the way for measurement.

Jeff re bleeding lesions and diagnoses, I'm cautious enough to say "Phytophthora-like" signs, though I've inspected trees with some excellent pathologists, like Dan Marion who will be back at ISA this year, and Bartlett's VP of research, who say that some types of bleeding are characteristic of P. Armillaria and other infections look different, but i agree that a test is the only way to go. If you know of a kit that can ID this stuff I'd love to get it; last time I sent samples to 3 labs and none could give a difinitive ID.

 

[JeffE]

From what I know phosphite was used to treat soil borne fungi Phytophthora in Western Australia. I think they even did aerial spraying and they noted a substancial decline in the problem where it had been sprayed. Also they injected some trees with it etc.

That situation in W. Australia is pretty interesting... widespread mortality of natives due to <i>Phytophthora cinnamomi</i>, which is the same pathogen that causes littleleaf disease on southern pines (mainly shortleaf) in the southeast US. A native disease here, thought to be exotic there.

 

[NickfromWI]

Guy and everyone else, can we play a quick game for my own personal betterment as a tree-fixer...

Guy, if you were called to look at that tree say 30 years ago, but with the knowledge you have today, you might see the codominant stems, but not much of the cracking/splitting that we see now. The stems would obviously be much shorter.

My question- would this now be the time to subordinate (reduce, shorten, cut, etc) one of the stem in the hopes that the one left unadulterated would BECOME dominant and thus prevent the future splitting that may have happened, or at least greatly reduce the severity of the codominantness?

I see it a lot. The tree usually "looks" bad (to the lay-person) immediately after, as it is no longer symetrical. But the payoff should be worth it, right?

love
nick

 

[texasnative]

Treeseer, Jeff has made some excellent points to consider. In my opinion, identification of the tree's pest and a close inspection of the pitch tubes are critical before any further steps are taken. Are there any exit holes coming out of the pitch tubes, or are they sealed up completely? The male beetle bores into the tree to make galleries for the female to lay her eggs. While the male is bores the galleries, the pine tree makes an attempt to seal the hole with pitch. The male finishes his gallery and tries to make his way back out the same hole he originally made to enter the tree, and often gets trapped in the pitch. If he bores his hole back through the pitch and gets out, he starts releasing pheromones to attract a female to mate with. If there are no exit holes in the pitch tubes, your tree will likely recover, as the males never made it out of the tree to mate with a female. If there are exit holes in the pitch tubes, saving this tree may present a challenge. But I know your up for that. And I'm sure you are going to keep an eye on the top for that tell tale sign that vascular damage has been done.

 

[JeffE]

Treeseer, Jeff has made some excellent points to consider. In my opinion, identification of the tree's pest and a close inspection of the pitch tubes are critical before any further steps are taken. Are there any exit holes coming out of the pitch tubes, or are they sealed up completely? The male beetle bores into the tree to make galleries for the female to lay her eggs. While the male is bores the galleries, the pine tree makes an attempt to seal the hole with pitch. The male finishes his gallery and tries to make his way back out the same hole he originally made to enter the tree, and often gets trapped in the pitch. If he bores his hole back through the pitch and gets out, he starts releasing pheromones to attract a female to mate with. If there are no exit holes in the pitch tubes, your tree will likely recover, as the males never made it out of the tree to mate with a female. If there are exit holes in the pitch tubes, saving this tree may present a challenge. But I know your up for that. And I'm sure you are going to keep an eye on the top for that tell tale sign that vascular damage has been done.

I definitely agree that identification of the pest is important before making managment decisions. Not to be a pain in the arse, but I have some corrections. Hey, this is my job (though I'm working off the clock right now).

Whether it's the female or male that does the initial attack and pheremone release depends on the species. For SPB and black turpentine beetle, it's the female that does this, and with <i>Ips</i> engravers it's the male. In all cases, the beetle doesn't leave the inner bark to release the pheremones; in fact, in some cases they need to be actively feeding on phloem and encountering pitch to release the strongest aggregation pheremones (the signal that the tree is vulnerable to attack, but still has active defenses). The tree's chance to pitch the beetle out occurs when the beetle is first making its entrance hole and galleries, and it's the entrance holes that have the pitch tubes. Similarly, the next generation doesn't need that entrance hole to leave; they bore new exit holes after they feed and pupate. The parent beetles can also re-emerge through the bark to attack another tree and mate again.

I've seen a couple of people here say that if the pitch tube isn't open, then it's not a successful attack. I've never heard of this as a reliable indicator, although it may be a clue to the success of the tree's pitch response when there are only a few pitch tubes. But the beetles don't need that hole to breathe, or to exit.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

Jeff, I may have missed it, but what is your vote in the poll?

 

[JeffE]

Mike, I voted cut 'er down, it's a low-value hazard tree.

 

[treeseer]

Mike, I voted cut 'er down, it's a low-value hazard tree.

Remember what I said about arboriculture and forestry involving way different recommendations? Your assessment of value is a case in point. The owner is the one who determines that; she thinks highly of the tree. As far as "hazard' goes, I would eliminate the word "hazard" from the process. I call it Risk Management or in the case of inspections "Risk Assessment". All trees entail risk; risk is a continuum not a branding term.

"Hazard" is so negative, and it causes people to call for the saw before thinking about mitigation. Kind of like catching a teenager with a joint in his pocket and branding him a "delinquent" and locking him up. That's why I like the THE form in the ISA evaluation book; it lists possible steps to take, onlythe last of which is removal.

With all due respect, putting someone with forestry training in a yard to advise the owner on individual tree management is like putting an arborist in the woods and asking him how many board feet can be harvested. I know you may have had training in both, so this isn't necessarily personal.

 

[JeffE]

Remember what I said about arboriculture and forestry involving way different recommendations? Your assessment of value is a case in point. The owner is the one who determines that; she thinks highly of the tree. As far as "hazard' goes, I would eliminate the word "hazard" from the process. I call it Risk Management or in the case of inspections "Risk Assessment". All trees entail risk; risk is a continuum not a branding term.

"Hazard" is so negative, and it causes people to call for the saw before thinking about mitigation. Kind of like catching a teenager with a joint in his pocket and branding him a "delinquent" and locking him up. That's why I like the THE form in the ISA evaluation book; it lists possible steps to take, onlythe last of which is removal.

With all due respect, putting someone with forestry training in a yard to advise the owner on individual tree management is like putting an arborist in the woods and asking him how many board feet can be harvested. I know you may have had training in both, so this isn't necessarily personal.

I'm not the only one who voted for removal. The only place we disagree is in the degree of hazard and the effectiveness (edit: and cost/benefit) of mitigation in this particular instance. Codoms like that are extremely weak on loblolly pines, and it's only going to get weaker with time. I see power lines and structures in the fall path. I see a poorly-formed, poorly-sited tree, and a species that reaches that size by the time it's a teenager in many cases. How much for a cabling job, plus revisits & reinstalls for the life of the tree? How much is their insurance deductible?

Really getting tired of "forester this, arborist that..." It all has to do with the individual's experience and training. Next you'll be telling me that my job is all about fire control. I've actually never even been a member of SAF, but my ISA membership has recently come up for renewal.