Tree bark peeling from wind damage

Page 2 of 2  


Please define "dead wood".
--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

symplastless
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don Thank you for taking the time to define your terms. See that's the problem (not the fact that you defined your terms - that's great). People speak of material or a mass of material such as a piece of wood and its contents as being dead, non-ecologically functioning, waste, no value, etc. When in reality it is symplastless and house a great deal of living organisms and organs such as mycorrhizae. I understand that a plane is dead yet often there are many people inside the plane. To call a plane flying over above as dead is at least a half truth. Same as referring to a chunk of wood in a forest as dead. A symplastless piece of wood often specifically recognized as "dead wood" can be made up of at least 35% fungi cells alone. You stated that when you say dead wood you mean symplastless. That's fine, at least I know now what you mean. However too often the term dead wood is used and misunderstood. I do respect the fact that you defined your terms. Please understand when I say symplastless wood I do not mean dead wood, non-ecologically functioning, waste, no value, etc.
In contrast, a symplastless tree or log includes a considerable number of living cells, as much 35% of the biomass may be live fungal cells (Franklin, Shugart and Harmon, 1987, pg 551).
We document that a large symplastless tree is not a wasted resource; indeed, it continues to function as an important part of a terrestrial or water system, either while remaining on the site at which it once grew, or by becoming a structural part of an aquatic or marine habitat. We aim to help anyone interested in perpetual forest productivity to understand the importance of large, symplastless woody debris. The book develops certain principles and ideas in sequence from the forest to the sea (Maser, Tarrant, Trappe and Franklin, 1988, pg 1par5).
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:34:12 -0400, "symplastless"

Huh? You asked for donuts on tree cuts outside the branch collar, not dissections. OOp, I'm talking about trees and I never dissected one. Conversation over.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I will explain again. First you are right. That was a huge wound and by all means if you hit the target you should get great credit. Due to my ignorance I was not sure that was really the way it was, thus I asked if it was possible to get a dissection. Instead of arguing I went and did a dissection on my pruning jobs. To really understand you must dissect trees. I did it here: http://www.treedictionary.com/DICT2003/tree_pruning/peach/index.html
Come on, give me something to work with. Just remember the target of a dissection in a longitudinal plane is to try to get the pith. By all means it is dangerous work. If you cannot do it fine. Send me a sample and I will dissect it. Will you never forgive for my ignorance?
--
Sincerely,
John A. Keslick, Jr.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Ignorance can be correct, stupidity cannot, in that you are a lost cause.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Didn't anyone tell you not to mess with a tar baby? The more you mess with it, the worse it gets.
--

Billy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KVTfcAyYGg&ref=patrick.net

  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.