"Brace Grafting" information?

mmatch

I am hoping someone can help us find information on what I will call "Brace Grafting".
By this I mean a way to bypass stress on weak crotched leaders/branches by grafting upper, secondary young branches to span above the weak crotch in question (at least when this graft union has fused strong enough over time).

Thus the load of heavy wet branches, fruits, storm winds, etc. will be primarily borne by the grafted "brace" branch.
The problem of included bark can be obviated, etc. without resorting to more complicated metal braces, cables, etc. (which become bigger problems over time versus growing stronger over time).

I especially wonder what might be the:

1. best angle?
2. best cutting methods?
3. best cutting tools (e.g. rasps)?
4. amount of initial slack in brace branch?
5. "temporary" bracing (until substantial tissue fusion is complete)
6. et cetera ...


Rather than re-inventing this wheel, I feel there must be some info already out there.
I did a variety of online searching (EDIS, Google, etc.) but without any results.
(Maybe if we were simply told what is the the proper terminology ...)

Beyond our local interest, this might be a good time worldwide to re-publish this more "additive" approach (versus the more commonly recommended
subtractive, "pruning only" treatments.)
At least, it seems people are responding well to recently renewed reports on many long-overlooked issues AND ALTERNATIVES for
tree problems due to below-ground causes (roots, pruning, planting depth, etc.)

Thank you in advance,

RR, Horticulture consultant
Dania Beach, FL

Eric Frei

Interesting concept

Has it been done before on trees as structural support?

__________________

osb_mail

Have you checked out the grafter hand book old book but a good one I has som e info on this I think.

mmatch

Not that much, but I have heard of it for years. It still seems better than braces and cables, esp on younger trees - and better than chop and start over.

I might have to go to old books, but was hoping that more current reviews and updated techniques were available.

Bob

treeseer

Lots of new things in old books, long forgotten and waiting for discovery and use.

The concept sounds a little sketchy. It could cause a whole new set of problems. Subordination solves codominance simply in most cases, but is not well understood by many in the industry.

mmatch

Hmmmm... what do you mean "Subordination solves codominance"?

In any case, the problem of a weak, acute crotch would remain after subordination and would need to be corrected ... before wind or weight stress finally causes separation, etc.

In other words, it might still be worth the tradeoff for whatever "new set of problems" arise.

In spite of sketchy outline, it has been done a great many times. This is not a new, hypothetical proposal.

I am simply looking for organized investigation/information to more systematically advance the practice.

Bob

TreeSpecialist

While looking for a "less complicated" way than "mechanical braces or cables," you are in fact getting into a much more complicated method of bracing a weak fork.

Cables and/or through rods correctly placed are quick, efficient, and not very expensive.

What you are proposing with brace grafting should only be done by someone skilled in the trade.

#1) It won't be easy or inexpensive.
#2) It may not work the first time tried.
#3) It starts a variety of problems with potential decay (you didn't mention the species - is a good compartmentalizer?)
#4) The longevity of the species being grafted should be taken into account.

I have seen many natural "brace grafts" where one limb rubs another and then eventually grafts to it. It can take years - even decades - to for a graft to occur and it's questionable how strong it ultimately might be.

Small limbs crossing one another can be bolted together with some luck but you would be better off pruning the tree in the long run.

Subordination of codominant stems can add tissue to the base of the stem to the point of creating a branch collar where none existed.

Making a tree more compact rather than skinning out the interior also makes it stronger and better able to withstand wind loading.

__________________

treeseer

Once a stem has been subordinated, it is a side branch with little strain on the defect. This was published 10 years ago and is on this site : Species - Landscape plants - Edward F. Gilman - UF/IFASBob, this is not clear. If it has been done many times (can you cite one please?), the information should be readily available.

"Subordination of codominant stems can add tissue to the base of the stem to the point of creating a branch collar where none existed.

Making a tree more compact rather than skinning out the interior also makes it stronger and better able to withstand wind loading."

TrevMcRev

If the branch or stem union that is identified as weak and needs bracing now to prevent failure, the grafting process would likely take too long to form any real strength.

Pruning as treeseer said would be the answer and if needed, look into cobra cable bracing as a tree-friendlier alternative to steel.

If it is a weak union but identified early on, then bracing now at the ideal point of leverage for the future support would be imposible as the branch or stem would not be long enough.

The correct position today, would lose effectiveness in years to come.

A Cobra cable could be installed now, and moved up/out the branch/stem in the future to maintain the ideal point of support.

Points for the interesting idea though!

Eric Frei

Great thread.

Without going out there for days to find an example I can only hypothesize what I feel is likely to happen.

The brace or bridge graft between the two stems if too horizontal will not grow much unless if has it's own foliage.

From my observations trees are adventitious and lazy.

See, why take the long way around when there's a short cut. The flow of the tree would likely be up and down the stems rather than taking some 90 degree turn across a suspension bridge spanning a valley to get to the same place.

In nature I observe that upon the connection being made that the horizontal graft stays small and doesn't grow as much as the larger stems it's attached too.

However, if that suspension bridge had foliage it would then call for resources and return manufactured goods without the govt's tax (lol), If the bridge could photosynthesize it would grow better.

__________________

mmatch

Well, this is probably a BAD example, but at least its a graphic sketch from a conventional publication:

docs\lectsupl\Propaga\propaga


Also, I guess I needed to have been clearer:
my idea is to merely bend over an exiting, well positioned subordinate branch/twig to serve as the actual bracing member (not a disconnected cutting as shown in this sketch).

I also expect we should leave a few degrees of slack so that it can still flex enough (undisturbed) in strong breezes (during the months/years of fusion and growth that will render it rigid).

I imagine it better to leave the end of the branch/foliage intact, and merely do a veneer graft where it contacts the larger branch in question. Then the "scion" wont dry out before fusion and only one (distal) end needs to grow a connection (not both).

Yes, any species that is hard to graft in general might be poorer candidates for this alternative. For instance, plants of the Myrtaceae family (due to their "double" cambium?) However, crepe myrtle stems self-graft by friction all the time, so ... (photos by request).

In any case, the vast majority of dicot trees should still graft well - especially to their own tissue/DNA, etc.

Finally, I also am intending this for younger trees and branches (less than 6" diameter). Trees with weak branching structure that may predict likely future problems ... but only after many years of added branch length and height.
Another way of looking at it would be to compare the years needed for a 6" crotch cut to heal might be equivalent or greater ... compared to the fusion/healing time needed for sufficient brace graft.

Venerable, girthy branches/trees might well do better with cables and braces.
Ultimately, this should be a simpler alternative since it involves much lower technology, infrastructure, etc. (esp. for remote locations, 3rd world growers, etc.)

Now, I am still stuck on best means of to secure the two in place while the grafting fusion grows. I think I'd prefer a means that will need minimal human removal after fusion (so, not metal nails, etc.).

Any other thoughts or insights?

BR

Eric Frei

Man, great link.

I have been off doing some tests. LOL

__________________

mmatch

So, keep me posted on what kind of testing you might be up to ...?

I have thought it over a bit more and think that some type of rubber might be a good self-removing, binding means (to keep the two tissues together until fusion is sufficient). [Nails would be easy but might cause splitting, etc.]

Then the rubber tie (band, cut from an old inner tube?) will bio-degrade slowly under UV sunlight, etc. slowly but surely enough to not need human removal ... e.g within a year or less (depending on thickness).

Nothing hugely new in this ... self-removing, latex grafting ties (essentially rubber bands) have been available from grafting/nursery suppliers for many years. So, this would be an extension of that concept. The initial binding pressure they provide enables steady, maximum surface area contact between the open, living tissues ... yet not so much to stop the flow of fluids within the thin, outer cambium cells the rubber must press against.

Ultimately, their grip will fade as they break down in the open air conditions (quicker in warm climate areas). Then the cambium and newly fused tissues are free of further pressure that might otherwise retard more complete "knitting" of the callus/cells.

I also imagine a few easy ways to remove just enough bark/cambium from each side while making a perfect fit. In both techniques, be sure to have gone BEYOND the green/yellow cambium layer and into a bit of the WHITE XYLEM LAYER. If not, then they could each callus and heal over, without fusing much to each other, this is the same critical step as in any other plant grafting.

Note that a perfect fit is neither possible nor necessary. As an early grafting instructor told our class: "If you got a 100% perfect fit, you did something wrong." His point was to not be intimidated but to try and try again. Each ring of healing callus tissue will creep and find each other, just like the way any graft unites. (This is also like how healing tissues converge and fuse from opposing sides after sealing over a bark/branch injury.)


1) Using a sharp vegetable peeler to remove just of a veneer from each side. Such "peeler" blades are designed to remove a consistent thickness (versus any normal/grafting knife, etc.), not to mention the obvious safety benefits versus sharp steel knives. (I would leave all foliage in place on both branches.)

2) An alternate way would be to slip some very coarse sandpaper/emery cloth between the contact "points" of both branches to be grafted. Then, while lightly pressing them together, pull the emery cloth through. Repeat enough times until you are deep as needed (see above).

Flip the emery cloth over, and repeat this scraping process to the other side. The beauty of this method is that the convex shape of each opposing branch will form fit perfectly its own receiving "face", dictated by its own exact dimensions (not to mention the safely of not needing any knife work).

3) A little wood rasp to remove the right amount of bark might work just fine and would be the simplest way yet.

After both sides are cut and ready, wrap/lash the rubber banding somehow to hold the two branches firmly together (leaving minimal spaces for air to dry out the open wounds/tissues. One might even try to LIGHTLY seal the edges (beeswax, grafter's wax, liquid latex, etc.?) But this would not likely be critical (unless the contact point/groove is a bad fit.)

Results will be evident within a month or less (depending on species, size, local season, etc.), not unlike the time needed for conventional grafting.

Again, if possible, try to include a bit of slack (to allow for some branch movement in the wind, until the fusion is really strong (the first year or more?). Alternately, some "loosely rigid" bracing means could be arranged to limit any such movement, for the first year or more.

That's it for now. Any other suggestions?

mmatch

Actually, you might be able to bend the bracing branch over to fuse it to the opposite side of the other branchc. This would provide natural spring tension to press the two graft cuts together (to help or eliminate any such rubber or other binding). The graft point would still need some way to assure that it will not slide or flex (e.g. by wind movements). If not, the newly fused graft would tear apart before its strength to resist is more substantial.

Of course, the pre-selection of a brace branch would have favored one with the best (widest) angle of attachment at its origin, etc.

Bob

vitex42

Maybe I'm being facetious (in fact I'm certain of it) but we could try bolting the 'grafted' limb in place to guarantee certainty of grafting?

This is wonderful to watch. A bunch of really skilled arborists are swarming all over this idea and throwing ideas like sparks from a grinder.

I have to ask about Occam's Razor though - the simplest way of doing it is probably best (i.e. prune the tree, brace it, or cut it down).

However, it is fantastic to have the technology available for the day when we absolutely have to bridge-graft a tree (for example when we want to restore a tree that's been vandalized by ring-barking).....

treeseer

I've done that on 2 multistemmed magnolia trees, and on an oak too. Simple enough for Occam, very effective and very low maintenance. Grafting would be desirable but really moot since the steel will hold.

mmatch

Very interesting.
Any photos of said examples you could share?

I will attach here a couple photos of natural grafts, if interested.
One is crepe myrtle (Lagestromia indica and Black Olive (Bucida bursera).
Although they are not attractive or even that strong looking,
they might serve a purpose to see and be shown. So, if these branches can fuse well enough on their own, by accident, think how much better
they might work with a little encouragement, cleaner attachment, more horizontal/bracing orientation, etc.

Thanks,
Bob
Mmatch@hotmail.com

Attached Thumbnails

   

TrevMcRev

What a co-incidence! Yesterday i inspected an Oak with a natural brace graft!
And it needed it too! A co-dominant stem was seriously weakened by some imbedded corrugated iron around 2/3rds its diameter. I thought whoa thats bad, then looked up and saw a sizeable branch had found its way across from the other good stem and fused onto the bad stem at a pretty ideal point of leverage to give some good support.

Dont have time to put up the pics at the minute, will do tonight or tomorrow.

mmatch

That is interesting timing, indeed. Yes, please post any clear photos of that.

Another point to consider in all this is twofold:

1) the force needed to fracture a weak crotch is really not very much.
I was just remembering how there is virtually NO connecting tissue due to included bark. In fact, the continual growth of new cambium layers beneath is actually pushing its own the two branches apart, right? So it will not take all that much more force (wind, wet leaves, fruit, ice, etc). to cause the fracture to completely open up.

2) the TENSILE strength provided by a near linear connection would be quite substantial, even from a much smaller branch, especially the higher up it is connected. (Try PULLING a 1/4 inch wooden dowel in two.) As such, a little reinforcement would go a long way - even via a much younger/thinner brace branch.

BR

wulkowicz

Here's a picture of a tree that looks like it came out of an engineer's workbook.



Bob Wolfowitz

Attached Thumbnails

 

mmatch

Thanks. Any 5-W info on that "woven trunk" tree?
What? Where? When? Who? How? Why?, etc.

(Species, location, who grew/grafted it, etc.)
BR

Sean Freeman

Arborsmith Studios - Axel Erlandson Tree Circus

wulkowicz

I bumped into Richard Reames, originator of the Arborsculpture site about 15 years ago when we were both learning about the art and ardour of having people listen to us.

I thought he had the advantage in that he created remarkable and beautiful examples of his craft along with sharing his excitement about new directions. The only problem he really had, it seemed to me, was the creatures would take so long to grow and be understood. A multi-curved sapling is cute and interesting; a big sculptured tree is intimidating and brooks no disagreement.

I later discovered that presenting things in words and diagrams, and challenging dogma and embedded mythology, would take just as long and I didn't have gardens full of intriguing and beautiful structures as a side benefit.

Richard is a pioneer in his presentations of remarkable creatures. He simultaneously touches our souls and challenges our minds-- no easy task--and has us step away with both a smile and a furrowed brow.

Mmatch is now breathing the same air and properly pursuing things in the shadows. I've included two photos from Richard's site that are fascinating by themselves, but also expand the question about having square trees. (?)

http://www.arborsmith.com/images/fiduc_house2.jpg

http://www.arborsmith.com/images/ficus-house.jpg

Will the cylinders of the latticed faces expand in later years to form a flat plane, suggesting one side of a hollow square tree? Or will the cellular instructions in the cambium, the gossamer engine, follow the Law of 6.28? And then what would it all end up looking like?


Bob Wulkowicz

(An acknowledgment here to Ekka whose cynicism about a Theory of 6 prompted my being positive about a provable bio-mathematical law in my presentations. I know he didn't quite mean it to be a validation, but I do thank him anyway.)

Attached Thumbnails

   

Eric Frei

LOL, I still aint sold! On the cell thing that is.

__________________

wulkowicz

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but trees don't care what we think. And they don't do what we want.

And if left alone, they would outlive us, as well evolved organisms with excellent solutions to most of the adversities in their world. We show up as tardy adolescents, tell them we know better and saw away at them; most every solution born of a saw.

I'm not against someone making a profit and I respect arborists for their hard work in chosen careers. But I do believe we have a responsibility to know what we're actually talking about when we talk about trees. In my time as an arborist, there has been a remarkable shift in the areas and quality of knowledge about trees. There is nothing wrong in learning and expanding one's skills and understandings.

There is nothing wrong in admitting we're still learning or acknowledging that we may not think the same way in the future. That's all.

I welcome your criticism as a tool for correcting errors or sometimes keeping me humble. There is a reciprocal. I can be a tool for correcting your errors or for keeping you humble--where necessary.

In any case I don't want to clutter this very important thread with a Dagwood and the mailman wrestling match on the back porch. The Law of 6.28 is correct, and it is the proper explanation for why trees defy Errera's Law.



Bob (me go to sleep now) Wulkowicz

mmatch

" Will the cylinders of the latticed faces expand in later years to form a flat plane, ...?

Yes, I believe they will form a flat plane (with rounded corners).

Maybe in 20+ years the braided walls of this Ficus hut will thicken to a more rounded shape. Of course, if totally untended, they will send out adventitious, aerial roots that get into the ground and thus add thicker, more rounded, multiple stemmed trunks.

In this way they would loose their original flat plane, while the living house would eventually loose its open, room/space within. Not unlike how stone buildings are reclaimed by the jungle after untended for ages.

Note: this might not happen to such a "living house" constructed in arid zones, where no aerial/adventitious roots will form without humid air (e.g. California).

In our south Florida neighborhood, we kids would unwittingly practice braiding on the hair-like masses of hanging Ficus roots like it were human hair, our way to fabricate Tarzan rope-vines.
But after +/- 5 years, and the lowest root ends rooted into the soil below, these rope-braids swelled and fused together like strands of dough into fancy loaves of bread. But then after another 5 years, their braided shapes grew out and were replaced by more amorphous pillars.

(Such "flying buttress" construction would seem to be the secret to survival against tropical storms by these shallow rooted giants. The ones that have these "overly-exotic" pillars pruned away seem the first to blow over in heavy winds.)

So, I expect the same for those Ficus woven walls ... if left unattended. But if the height/foliage is maintained (monthly maintenance?) then maybe the open weave and flat plane might be retained indefinitely.

TrevMcRev

Here is the oak with a natural brace graft (top left cnr) i found:






Whats strangely amazing about this is that the supported stem actually needed it! It has embedded corrugated iron near where it joins that has created a significant defect.
How did the tree know to sens across a branch from the good stem and fuse it onto the bad one at a pretty ideal point of leverage to give support.....
[insert twilight zone/x-files music here]

Attached Thumbnails

   

newguy18

X Files audio music tracks on Project Playlist | Music Playlist || Facebook, Tagworld, Stickam, Hi5, Friendster, Infieldparking.com, Xanga, Myspace Music Playlists

__________________
Have your say join us today.


old schooler

newguy18

Twilight Zone audio music tracks on Project Playlist | Music Playlist || Facebook, Tagworld, Stickam, Hi5, Friendster, Infieldparking.com, Xanga, Myspace Music Playlists

__________________
Have your say join us today.


old schooler

Eric Frei

I think you'd like to see this, very unusual.

And it defies my theory as I would expect it to "die" due to the fact that it has no foliage and the trunk would be the shortest route.

It's on a Eucalyptus torelliana, Cadagi.

Attached Thumbnails

     

__________________