| | |||||||
| Register | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Botany Forum Botany Forum |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
| I am questioning an assumption. I assume that all shoots emanating from a grafted tree of its original rootstock is to be pruned off and suppressed so that the graft becomes the sole plant above ground. Is that assumption in error? Or can a tree be allowed to express itself without the graft being exclusive expression above ground? I wonder if there is an advantage to not cutting off all rootstock shoots. |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Archimedes Plutonium <[Only registered users see links. ]> schreef + + + Yes. That is pretty much the point of the graft + + + without the graft being exclusive expression above ground? + + + As a rule the rootstock will overgrow the graft, as the rootstock will be of tougher stock than the graft, that being the reason for using it in the first place. + + + + + + Depends on what you want and how much time you are willing to spend. PvR |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| You never stop and think things through, which leads to your asking silly questions. Get a book out of the library on grafting & you will soon find out. Iris, Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40 "If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming train." Robert Lowell (1917-1977) |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| Archimedes Plutonium <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered users see links. ]>... The problem with leaving the shoots from the rootstock (called suckers or watersprouts) in place is that the plant will devote some of its available energy to these rather than to the valuable top growth. The rootstock in grafted plants is chosen to resist disease and to support the top growth (also, particularly in the case of dwarfing rootstock, to regulate it), not because it has any other value. Plants on which suckers or watersprouts are allowed to persist will produce less vegetative growth, flowers, or fruit on the top growth; if persistently neglected, the top growth may languish, die back, or even be lost to disease. This is particularly so with the dwarfing rootstocks commonly used for fruit trees. -- Chris Green |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| 11 Jun 2004 17:14:16 -0700 Christopher Green wrote: I wonder if anyone has quantified the success at which a grafted tree lives versus the success of a cutting. In a cutting you have no root system. In a graft you have a root system yet a top removed and replaced by a new top. For example with Sunburst Honeylocust cuttings, few if any will live but with grafts almost 100% will live. Grafts versus cuttings should be quantifiable and linked to stem cell quantity. Yew trees are easy via cuttings but honeylocust are difficult so is there a large difference in numbers of stem cells in yew versus honeylocust? |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| You need to go to the library, find a book about grafts and cuttings, and read it. That is, if you are really interested. Chuck "Archimedes Plutonium" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:[Only registered users see links. ]... news:<[Only registered users see links. ]>... from lives versus the success root system yet a top with grafts almost quantity. a large difference in |
|
#7
| |||
| |||
| On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 03:37:14 -0500, Archimedes Plutonium <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote: The answer is a merely practical one: grafting is done when either: * This is a good means of propagating a desirable plant; for example, if the plant does not tend to root from cuttings or layerings. * The rootstock has desirable qualities that the plant, rooted on its own, would not have. These may include resistance to disease or pests (as in grapes) or growth regulation (as in dwarf fruit trees). -- Chris Green |
|
#8
| |||
| |||
| Sat, 12 Jun 2004 18:16:29 GMT Christopher Green wrote: I do not know what layering is. I know cuttings. Can you describe layering.. Off topic. I now like my bush cherries prunus tomentosa. But for the past 2 years have been unable to get a single seedling. I wonder if they require going through the gut of a bird? I wonder why any plant would evolve to the point where they depended on the gut of a bird rather than viability without the gut. This gut dependency strikes me as a flaw in the theory of Darwin Evolution. A plant seed has the greatest survivability if it had no bird gut dependency so that if the bird ate the seed or did not eat the seed would be viable in either case. |
|
#9
| |||
| |||
| In article <[Only registered users see links. ]>, NOiwEMAIL wrote: Cut a narrow ring around the branch (like ring-barking) bend it down to the ground and "plant" it so the cut is under ground. Wait until roots form from the portion above the cut then chop it off below the cut and plant the top section normally. Some plants won't grow under the parent, so it's advantageous for them to move away. Also, if you want to take over the world you'll find it hard to do if you just stay in one place. :-) But I take your point, and I suspect the answer is that most seeds *can* be made to grow without passing through the gut of an animal. However, if the plant needs to be dispersed to avoid the consequences of allelopathy, then, if it is too heavy to just blow around on the wind, it needs something to carry it. If that something is an animal that eats the fruit, then the seed needs to be able to survive passage though the gut. And if it is to do that successfully, it probably needs to be fairly resistant to "normal" processes conducive to germination for the time being. Passing through the gut may well neutralise this "dormancy" factor, thus enabling the seed to germinate successfully before it dies. (Plants in moist environments, such as the tropical rainforests, often seem to have recalcitrant seeds which both die quickly in nature and are difficult to store even with the best of technology.) Cheers, Phred. -- [Only registered users see links. ]LID |
|
#10
| |||
| |||
| Archimedes Plutonium <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<[Only registered users see links. ]>... Get a book on plant propagation. It will be well described there. Layering is an alternative to making cuttings that preserves some of the connection to the parent plant; the layered tip is less stressed than a cutting would be. Many plants that are difficult from cuttings are easier from layerings. No, it may have a much greater viability with a "bird gut dependency". Seeds that require a pass through a digestive tract, or a fire, or a freeze and thaw are generally also well protected and will survive harsh conditions in dormancy. They will receive better dispersal or germinate under better conditions, and so will end up with a greater yield. -- Chris Green |
| Tags |
| grafted , rootstock |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| whether grafted RockElm or rootstock SiberianElm and what roles theyplay | Archimedes Plutonium | Botany Forum | 2 | 07-17-2009 08:27 PM |