There is a tremendous amount of data demonstrating that Tree Wound Dressings are effective at controlling the spread of plant pathogens, especially Oak Wilt Disease. Probably the best known on Oak Wilt is:
"Studies on Pruning Cuts and Wound Dressings for Oak Wilt Control" written by Kim Camill, David Appel, and Todd Watson, published in Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, 2007,33(2): 132-139
The USDA Forest Service publication "How To Identify, Prevent and Control Oak Wilt" NA-FR-01-11
"How to Prune Trees" USDA forest service publication:
HOW to Prune Trees
These are just a few, I would be glad to direct you to several other studies with the same recomendations. Additionally, nearly all extension services in areas prone to Oak Wilt highly recomend the application of Tree Wound Dressings at certain times of the year, some areas even amke it mandatory.
Tree Wound dressings have also been shown to be effective at controlling the spread of other pathogens that cause tree diseases such as Dutch Elm, Silver Leaf, several "stone fruit" diseases and diseases of apple trees, as well as pitch canker in cherry trees.
Our own test is available on our web site: waltereclark.com, which demonstrates the reduction in dieback.
I would also suggest to those who base their conclusions on Shigo's well known studies (Wound dressings on red maple and American elm:effectiveness after five years and wound dressings:results of studies over 13 years, both published in the Journal of Arboriculture) why he did not report on all of the subject trees? In one study, they wounded 375 trees, but only studied 275 or 74%, in the other, they wounded 110 but only studied 75 or 60%.
If we had picked which trees to study in our test, we could have made the results look dramatically different!
Kind of makes me wonder if they were looking to prove an preconceived notion.