Observation of External Wounding on Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall) Trees Associated with Tree Injection Systems

Field observations of external wounds associated with two common tree injection methods compared open (plug-less) and sealed (plug) systems in green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall) trees. A wound from any cause within 1.37 m above the ground was common with 28.8% of all trees. The open system had statistically fewer (p < 0.001) trees with at least one wound (11.6% of trees) than the sealed system (47.4% of trees). The open system had fewer (p < 0.001) wounds (0.17, 0.04 SE) per tree and a smaller (p < 0.001) total wound area (25.5 cm2, 8.7 SE) per tree, compared to the sealed system wounds (1.14, 0.13 SE) per tree and the total wound area (99.7 cm2, 16.2 SE) per tree. The incidence of a tree with a wound(s) within 1.37 m above the ground was 7.2 times more likely with trees treated though the sealed system. Wounds in the sealed system were observed to appear to have a high rate of improper application of plugs, which was associated in 77% of the cases to explain the wounds. Implications of study results are further provided to best protect ash trees, while at the same time reducing the incidence external wounding on ash trees.

[1]  D. Sivyer,et al.  Planning for active management of future invasive pests affecting urban forests: the ecological and economic effects of varying Dutch elm disease management practices for street trees in Milwaukee, WI USA , 2020, Urban Ecosystems.

[2]  R. Marra,et al.  Incidence of Internal Decay in American Elms (Ulmus americana) Under Regular Fungicide Injection to Manage Dutch Elm Disease , 2020, Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

[3]  S. Jansen,et al.  Using the CODIT model to explain secondary metabolites of the xylem in defence systems of temperate trees to decay fungi. , 2019, Annals of botany.

[4]  A. Berg,et al.  Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution , 2018, Scientific Data.

[5]  T. Poland,et al.  Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) Densities Over a 6-yr Period on Untreated Trees and Trees Treated With Systemic Insecticides at 1-, 2-, and 3-yr Intervals in a Central Michigan Forest , 2018, Journal of Economic Entomology.

[6]  Nora Forbes,et al.  Seven-Year Evaluation of Insecticide Tools for Emerald Ash Borer in Fraxinus pennsylvanica (Lamiales: Oleaceae) Trees. , 2018, Journal of economic entomology.

[7]  D. McCullough,et al.  Evaluation of Xylem discoloration in ash trees associated with macroinjections of a systemic insecticide , 2016 .

[8]  S. Aćimović,et al.  Comparison of drill- and needle-based tree injection technologies in healing of trunk injection ports on apple trees , 2016 .

[9]  A. Munson,et al.  Evaluations of emamectin benzoate and propiconazole for protecting individual Pinus contorta from mortality attributed to colonization by Dendroctonus ponderosae and associated fungi. , 2014, Pest management science.

[10]  D. Herms,et al.  Emerald ash borer invasion of North America: history, biology, ecology, impacts, and management. , 2014, Annual review of entomology.

[11]  L. Montecchio.  A Venturi effect can help cure our trees. , 2013, Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE.

[12]  P. Wild,et al.  Tree Wound Responses Following Systemic Insecticide Trunk Injection Treatments in Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marsh.) as Determined by Destructive Autopsy , 2011, Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

[13]  A. Munson,et al.  Effectiveness of two systemic insecticides for protecting western conifers from mortality due to bark beetle attack. , 2010 .

[14]  D. L. Cox,et al.  Multiple-year Protection of Ash Trees from Emerald Ash Borer with a Single Trunk Injection of Emamectin Benzoate, and Single-year Protection with an Imidacloprid Basal Drench , 2010, Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

[15]  Robert G. Haight,et al.  Cost of potential emerald ash borer damage in U.S , 2010 .

[16]  E. Rebek,et al.  Progression of Ash Canopy Thinning and Dieback Outward from the Initial Infestation of Emerald Ash Borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) in Southeastern Michigan , 2008, Journal of economic entomology.

[17]  Therese M. Poland,et al.  Emerald ash borer in North America: a research and regulatory challenge , 2005 .

[18]  R. Jay Stipes,et al.  Exploring Alternatives to Tree Injection , 1991, Arboriculture &amp; Urban Forestry.

[19]  G. Mayhead.  OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF A HIGH PRESSURE TREE INJECTION SYSTEM , 1991 .

[20]  KevinM. Smith.  Wounding, Compartmentalization, and Treatment Tradeoffs , 1988, Arboriculture &amp; Urban Forestry.

[21]  Alex L. Shigo,et al.  Compartmentalization of decay in trees , 1985 .

[22]  A. Shigo,et al.  Some Internal Effects of Mauget Tree Injections , 1977, Arboriculture &amp; Urban Forestry.

[23]  Lara A. Roman,et al.  How should we measure the DBH of multi-stemmed urban trees? , 2020 .

[24]  Andrew K. Koeser,et al.  Long-term effects and development of a tree preservation program on tree condition, survival, and growth , 2020 .

[25]  R. Hauer,et al.  Effects of emerald ash borer on municipal forestry budgets , 2017 .

[26]  Clifford S. Sadof.  Tools for staging and managing the emerald ash borer in an urban forest , 2016, 2016 International Congress of Entomology.

[27]  M. Gonzalez-Meler,et al.  To treat or not to treat: Diminishing effectiveness of emamectin benzoate tree injections in ash trees heavily infested by emerald ash borer , 2015 .

[28]  Kevin T. Smith,et al.  Potential concerns for tree response from stem injection , 2005 .

[29]  Alex L. Shigo,et al.  Compartmentalization: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding How Trees Grow and Defend Themselves , 1984 .

[30]  W. A. Roach.  Plant Injection as a Physiological Method , 1939 .