Yamadori. Does size have anything to do with survival in a pot?

Mike Corazzi

Masterpiece
Messages
2,771
Reaction score
3,442
Location
Lincoln, CA
USDA Zone
9b
Just curious. Have only collected twice. Both times small in parking lots.

Does the size of a collected specimen have anything to do with how long it survives after collection.

I'd guess species would be a factor, too.

Anyone want to chime in with data?
 
I collected the vast majority of my trees - lots of different species and sizes. In my experience, survival has more to do with season than size but size does matter, A seedling collected in early spring is almost indestructible where as a large oak collected in the heat of summer is almost surely doomed.
 
Your title says "size".
Not "age", I suppose.
If collected at the right time, small plants (young or older) will survive as much as big plants, being of the same species.
The trick is the size of the rootball, what to cut and what to take.
 
Last edited:
Size is not as big a factor as the health and growing conditions of the tree, plus immediate after-care (I don't have any data for you, just 30 years of experience and observation). Unfortunately, we don't often know the health of a tree we're collecting, or its growing conditions. After care is easier to manage. To be sure, you can look at a tree and sometimes gauge its health just by appearance, but you can just as easily be fooled. Another factor is the timeframe in which you collect. There are better and worse times, and they vary according to the species. So the bottom line is, if your tree is in good health and the conditions have been favorable during the current growing season and the most recent few, and you're collecting at the ideal time for the species, then size does not matter as far as I have been able to tell.
 
Generally speaking in plant terms, the taller the trunk the more pressure water needs to be drawn from the roots to the foliage. If everything stays intact, that's not an issue. If you make cuts on both ends, parts of the tree will act as a drinking straw and it's hard to fight gravity; roots can push water up only so far up, and foliage can only draw water from so far down. Again, if all stays intact, so will the equilibrium between foliage and roots.
I can imagine taller trees would need a bit more healing before they recover.
But when it comes to stored resources, sometimes a little bigger is better.
 
Generally speaking in plant terms, the taller the trunk the more pressure water needs to be drawn from the roots to the foliage. If everything stays intact, that's not an issue. If you make cuts on both ends, parts of the tree will act as a drinking straw and it's hard to fight gravity; roots can push water up only so far up, and foliage can only draw water from so far down. Again, if all stays intact, so will the equilibrium between foliage and roots.
I can imagine taller trees would need a bit more healing before they recover.
But when it comes to stored resources, sometimes a little bigger is better.
I've often wondered this about trunk chopping at collection time. One the one hand, chopping for bonsai is typically to a short trunk...probably short enough for roots to pump water...BUT...there is the open ended straw issue. Much water is pulled up into trees by transpiration in the leaves creating a partial vacuum that pulls up moisture to replace what is lost.

Breaking this closed system is a death knell for some foliage. Some plants develop embolisms in their vascular system when too dry and cannot easily restart the transpiration pump when provided more water at the roots. They wilt...but cannot recover. Other plants don't develop the same sorts of embolism and/or can clear them. These tend to recover more easily from wilting.

I've also wondered why, especially for more difficult to collect species, more care isn't taken to preserve existing buds. 1) it keeps the closed system intact 2) the tree has already "primed" those buds so it should be able to push new leaf with less energy expenditure.

I'm mostly talking deciduous trees here. Maybe keeping buds is standard practice for many, but a lot of the advise I see says it is ok to chop at collection time when I would think preserving buds while balancing root and foliage would be more ideal??
 
I've often wondered this about trunk chopping at collection time...I would think preserving buds while balancing root and foliage would be more ideal??

On broadleaf trees, mostly tropicals here, preserving the fine roots is more important than the leaves. Most tropicals can be defoliated twice in a season and they sprout back happily. Even if cut back to a stump.
I guess @leatherback has a nice tale of a jaboticaba stump he is growing in the Netherlands.
 
It is advisable to trunk chop deciduous trees and drastically prune the major roots at collection time. The trunk chop and all large cuts over 1/8" should be sealed to prevent moisture loss. It is not necessary (and usually not possible) to collect a lot of fibrous roots at collection time; the tree will grow new feeders as part of the natural recovery process, and the feeders will harden off as they branch off and in time you have a new fibrous root system (this is the same process that causes the tree to push new above ground shoots). Drastically trunk-chopping and root-pruning at collection time maintains the balance of the tree. More root won't hurt, but you'll regret having too much large radial root length when it comes time to go to a bonsai pot; why chop those roots twice? Too much top and not enough root hinders the balance, making for a more difficult recovery and usually dieback above ground since there's not enough root to support it all.
 
I've often wondered this about trunk chopping at collection time. One the one hand, chopping for bonsai is typically to a short trunk...probably short enough for roots to pump water...BUT...there is the open ended straw issue. Much water is pulled up into trees by transpiration in the leaves creating a partial vacuum that pulls up moisture to replace what is lost.

Breaking this closed system is a death knell for some foliage. Some plants develop embolisms in their vascular system when too dry and cannot easily restart the transpiration pump when provided more water at the roots. They wilt...but cannot recover. Other plants don't develop the same sorts of embolism and/or can clear them. These tend to recover more easily from wilting.

I've also wondered why, especially for more difficult to collect species, more care isn't taken to preserve existing buds. 1) it keeps the closed system intact 2) the tree has already "primed" those buds so it should be able to push new leaf with less energy expenditure.

I'm mostly talking deciduous trees here. Maybe keeping buds is standard practice for many, but a lot of the advise I see says it is ok to chop at collection time when I would think preserving buds while balancing root and foliage would be more ideal??
We have to take compartmentalization into consideration here too. Some trees have sponge-like nodes that can close off, some even have some type of valves or membranes (if memory serves me right, bamboo has membranes to serve this purpose, but my microscopy days are far in the past).
If you'd asked me this 10 years ago, I could have told you all about the internal structures of a plants vascular system, but since I have focused on plant tissue culture (mainly hormonal effects) and molecular genetics for the past couple of years, I don't think I'm the right person to lecture on this. I'd have to google it for that knowledge to resurface.

I think @rollwithak and @BonsaiNaga13 should be able to tell us more, if they've done their homework ;-)

I think the difficulty in collection also has to do with hormonal response and longevity of the cells; and older tree, and some trees of certain species, and ALL GOSH DARN erythroxylum coca var. coca stop responding to, or never have responded to certain auxins and cytokinins. Their cells age to such an extent that they can't rejuvenate and they can't switch their programming from 'being a cell in some tissue' to 'becoming a new root' or 'becoming a scab to close a wound'. Juniperus communis for instance is a terrible rooter, if you cut too much of the roots or change their environment too quickly, they will never recover. People repot older trees way more careful, not just because they are more valuable, but also because they have more trouble with restoration of damaged tissue. This can be epigenetic; if you don't use a function long enough, it'll stop working. But it can also happen because of ageing (telomere shortening, folds in the DNA that block functions, can be chemical, can be environmental).
But I'm drifting off into more common grounds for me. Let's stick with the size issue!
 
From what I see so far, the lower the plant, the better.
Whether low from being an old juniper or low from a chop, the lower the plant is, the easier time it will have getting what it needs.
In native site or pot/box.
So, height more critical than bulk or age.

??
 
I LOVE wild collection.. and appear “pirate-esque” in my endeavors.. but DO get all the proper permission/permits (if necessary), it’s just REAL easy to do here...

I have been (I say this not as advice, as I am fairly new to this, just chiming in) collecting “smaller” (post-work) specimens in spring... and putting them “to bed on a full stomach” in Autumn...

In a few years.... We’ll see if this was a good idea.

🤣
 
Size isnt everything! be selective in what you collect -Does it really have bonsai potential? Survival of a transplanted tree is far more to do with timing, collecting technique and aftercare. A tree could probably outlive you if it was collected then cared for properly!
You could successfully dig a 6inch sapling with a trowel or collect a 30 foot high semi mature specimen using a JCB excavator or a tree spade but its pointless unless you protect the roots from drying out during transport and establishment then provide the optimal aftercare regime until the tree recovers in its new environment.
 
Just curious. Have only collected twice. Both times small in parking lots.

Does the size of a collected specimen have anything to do with how long it survives after collection.

I'd guess species would be a factor, too.

Anyone want to chime in with data?
Mostly NO as long as has proper after care and properly collected. Do you know that technique and after care? Best "data" is record of survival of trees collected by Randy Knight. This can be found in interview on Mirai website. Also record of other collectors by contacting them. Pretty simple really. Gary Wood could give good info on this. Too often collection should have been left to professionals as over enthusiastic amateurs kill many many trees as a group.
 
Last edited:
BUT...there is the open ended straw issue. Much water is pulled up into trees by transpiration in the leaves creating a partial vacuum that pulls up moisture to replace what is lost.
I think the view of straws is too simple when it comes to the vascular system. It does not help to chop off the top of a tree. But it does not mean there is nothing left. Also, these are so thin they will act as capillaries, and as such, water will still rise in them.

I do however try and keep a few visible buds. So I often will collect long, rather than stumps. Just because I think it will give the tree an easier start. But it is not needed for most species. THere are loads of latent buds in the bark that can be activated when needed for most species.
 
Isn't it illegal to spit in Germany? Better make it over that border!

I think size has more to do with how long it seems to have survived over how long it actually survived.

Sorce
 
I don't collect any deciduous trees, only conifers. Size does make a difference there because the bigger the tree the bigger the root system is and the size of some of these roots. Most conifers don't like their roots wacked on very much so one has to be careful when collecting. Sometimes I collect ones that have a root system way to big with heavier roots and put it in a larger container hoping that it will develop a lot of feeder roots so I can trim the root ball down. Lots of rocky ground around here so larger, adventurous roots are common. Have to see how that works. I will repot some I've had 2-3 years this spring and see what they look like. Cutting off big roots on conifers at collection time does not work well for me here.
 
I think @rollwithak and @BonsaiNaga13 should be able to tell us more, if they've done their homework ;-)
I believe you have me mistaken with someone else! I’m far too green, pun intended, to have this conversation and eat at the grown-up table, so to speak..... but thanks for the bode in confidence @Wires_Guy_wires
 
I don't collect any deciduous trees, only conifers. Size does make a difference there because the bigger the tree the bigger the root system is and the size of some of these roots. Most conifers don't like their roots wacked on very much so one has to be careful when collecting. Sometimes I collect ones that have a root system way to big with heavier roots and put it in a larger container hoping that it will develop a lot of feeder roots so I can trim the root ball down. Lots of rocky ground around here so larger, adventurous roots are common. Have to see how that works. I will repot some I've had 2-3 years this spring and see what they look like. Cutting off big roots on conifers at collection time does not work well for me here.
Big difference in location for sure, sandy areas like mine make it harder to get feeder roots for conifers, but doesn't make a huge diff for deciduous trees. Low spring flood area gets very good roots and easy to get out of the ground. Last year I trenched half the rootball on pines, bagged it, backfilled the hole and let it go until this year. We will see if that helps with feeder roots closer to the tree, and survival.
 
Back
Top Bottom