Beech ground layering?

[Aeast]

I guess I could have but that would have been extremely difficult, that root is probably 12" in diameter. Then if it would have rooted, how would you get the part I girdled to eventually root?

I'm not sure how I will attempt it next time.

 

[HoneyHornet]

GADDAMNIT!!!!!
You're right!
Ever freaking last one of us missed it!
Turn the picture 90 degrees so it looks like a branch. Would that girdle EVER work on a branch? Of course not. it's kill it.

I feel a bit dumb now.

Yea that was suppose to say under not Uber lol and for a second I thought you were being sarcastic but I’m feeling like genius now

 

[HoneyHornet]

I guess I could have but that would have been extremely difficult, that root is probably 12" in diameter. Then if it would have rooted, how would you get the part I girdled to eventually root?

I'm not sure how I will attempt it next time.

Would have to undermine both sides and have a nice clearing all around it, would be doing a little blind shaving on bottom but I have faith it could of been set up, and then eventually go back and undermine the site again on both sides of girdle and sawzall that mamma jamma free

in theory of course, I understand it would be difficult

 

[leatherback]

GADDAMNIT!!!!!
You're right!
Ever freaking last one of us missed it!
Turn the picture 90 degrees so it looks like a branch. Would that girdle EVER work on a branch? Of course not. it's kill it.

I feel a bit dumb now.

I must be stupid, because I do not understand what is being suggested, or I do, and I have no idea why one would.
Naturally, one could have chopped the root between the tree and the sprout and dug up the whole root it is attached to too. But that defeats the idea.

My guess is it failed because of a lack of growth on the sucker, and the tree just abandoning it, as it was never an important part of the tree.

 

[ShadyStump]

I must be stupid, because I do not understand what is being suggested, or I do, and I have no idea why one would.
Naturally, one could have chopped the root between the tree and the sprout and dug up the whole root it is attached to too. But that defeats the idea.

My guess is it failed because of a lack of growth on the sucker, and the tree just abandoning it, as it was never an important part of the tree.

Maybe. I'm no expert.
My thinking is this:
Go back to the picture showing the sucker right after it was girdled. Rotate it 90 degrees, and imagine you're looking at a branch starting from a trunk in stead. The girdle would be just a ring of bark cut in the trunk around where the branch starts, not actually around the branch itself.
Now, if it were an actual branch on an actual trunk, we'd all say it's theoretically possible for it to succeed, but no one would be surprised it didn't. It's just in a sketchy spot, essentially cutting bark right on the node.

Assuming roots work essentially the same way as branches, just their extremities geared toward absorbing nutrient solutions versus transporting carbohydrates from the foliage, we'd never expect carving a ring over top a node to be successful. I'm not certain of the exact details of why it works how it does in that exact spot, but we'd all have our doubts about its efficacy.

That situation never occurred to me until @HoneyHornet asked his question. We'd never suggest girdling a branch in that way in that position, so why would we think it would work on a root?

 

[ShadyStump]

Sorry, my excitement here comes from the feeling that I may have had a bit of a eureka moment as far as tree biomechanics are concerned.

 

[leatherback]

Maybe. I'm no expert.
My thinking is this:
Go back to the picture showing the sucker right after it was girdled. Rotate it 90 degrees, and imagine you're looking at a branch starting from a trunk in stead. The girdle would be just a ring of bark cut in the trunk around where the branch starts, not actually around the branch itself.
Now, if it were an actual branch on an actual trunk, we'd all say it's theoretically possible for it to succeed, but no one would be surprised it didn't. It's just in a sketchy spot, essentially cutting bark right on the node.

Assuming roots work essentially the same way as branches, just their extremities geared toward absorbing nutrient solutions versus transporting carbohydrates from the foliage, we'd never expect carving a ring over top a node to be successful. I'm not certain of the exact details of why it works how it does in that exact spot, but we'd all have our doubts about its efficacy.

That situation never occurred to me until @HoneyHornet asked his question. We'd never suggest girdling a branch in that way in that position, so why would we think it would work on a root?

Not how I see it. To me what you have done is no different from layering at the base of a branch. Layering works because you interrupt the flow from the foliage to the roots, so that auxins accumulate at the cut area, triggering the cambium to produce rootcells instead of wood. This is what was done. To get sufficient auxins to accumulate and trigger the cambium to change the cells it produces, you need decent top-growth. If your suker did not grow much, it did not push roots, just like any layer. And, as with any layer, if the roots have not been pushing strongly to a layered section, the roots do not have the reserves to support the top part once sapflow (And carbohydrates) stops fro the leaves to the roots, and the top section dies off.

 

[HoneyHornet]

It was fun while it lasted lol

 

[ShadyStump]

Not how I see it. To me what you have done is no different from layering at the base of a branch. Layering works because you interrupt the flow from the foliage to the roots, so that auxins accumulate at the cut area, triggering the cambium to produce rootcells instead of wood. This is what was done. To get sufficient auxins to accumulate and trigger the cambium to change the cells it produces, you need decent top-growth. If your suker did not grow much, it did not push roots, just like any layer. And, as with any layer, if the roots have not been pushing strongly to a layered section, the roots do not have the reserves to support the top part once sapflow (And carbohydrates) stops fro the leaves to the roots, and the top section dies off.

Of course.
It just seems to me we're not looking at an air layer even at the base of a branch, but a ring cut in the trunk bark AROUND the base of the branch.

This was essentially an attempt to air layer a burl. Most of the nutrients flowing through the sap wood in the cut site aren't even getting directed to the branch, but further up and down the trunk. We aren't even certain where the actual branch begins and ends here, so even if any rooting at all had begun, it would have been only one tiny spot capable of even doing so, and then not likely because the cut couldn't get all the way around the actual branch section within the burl.

So I was wrong in it being the placement of the girdle. I now think we never should've expected layering a burl to work.

And even if I'm still wrong about that, I appreciate you humoring me in the rather odd way my mind pieces together and then disassembles information attempting to fully understand things. It's an arduous but entertaining learning style.