Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleResearch Note

Preventing Sapsucker Damage on Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)

E. Thomas Smiley, Donald C. Booth and Liza W. Wilkinson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) September 2007, 33 (5) 367-370; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2007.042
E. Thomas Smiley
E. Thomas Smiley, PhD (corresponding author), Arboricultural Researcher, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories
Adjunct Professor, Clemson University, 13768 Hamilton Rd., Charlotte, NC 28278, U.S.,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Donald C. Booth
Donald C. Booth, PhD, Entomologist, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, 13768 Hamilton Rd., Charlotte, NC 28278, U.S.,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
Liza W. Wilkinson
Liza W. Wilkinson, Research Technician, Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, 13768 Hamilton Rd., Charlotte, NC 28278, U.S.,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

The yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) is the primary cause of sapsucker damage on trees in the eastern United States (Ostry and Nicholls 1976). This migratory bird winters in the south and summers in northern states. In the Carolinas, U.S., the birds cause damage from November through March. Insects are a major part of this species diet; however, it is best known for making small wounds in stems and large branches and feeding on either phloem or xylem sap that oozes from the wounds. Phloem sap is the main source during the summer breeding season (Tate 1973; Eberhardt 2000), whereas xylem sap is more readily available from deciduous trees after leafdrop in the winter. Sapsuckers will test many trees and select only those that have the highest quality sap to feed on repeatedly. Sugar and amino acid levels are often highest on trees that have injuries that restrict sap movement (Kilham 1964; White 1984). Similarly, sapsuckers are thought to choose trees in poor health (Eberhardt 2000).

Symptoms of repeated feeding are horizontal rows of 1 cm (0.04 in) diameter holes in the bark. These wounds ooze sap that the bird feeds on. Excess sap may run down the surface of the bark and promote the growth of dark-colored fungi, a condition called “Black bark” (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1999). Insects and animals, including squirrels, porcupines, hummingbirds, ants, hornets, and wasps, are also attracted to this sap food source (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1997). Some of these may cause more damage to the tree.

Although most trees do not exhibit severe decline from sapsucker attack, some studies have found a loss of growth and crown dieback associated with severe girdling (Erdmann and Oberg 1974; Eberhardt, 2000). Sapsuckers have also been found to cause damage, which results in ring shake and the entrance of wood decay (Shigo 1963).

Wrapping trunks and branches with burlap is the traditional method to deter sapsucker wounds (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1999). However, no published studies could be found that quantify the effectiveness of this treatment. This study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of two different trunk wrap materials, burlap and polypropylene tree wrap, for preventing sapsucker feeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Listen

Fifteen sugar maples (Acer saccharum) with evidence of active sapsucker damage were selected at the Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories in Charlotte, NC, U.S. Mean trunk diameter measured at 1.4 m (4.6 ft) was 23.7 cm (9.5 in) with a standard deviation of 13.1 (5.1). Black electrical tape was used to divide affected tree trunks into three 60 cm (24 in) sections.

One of three treatments was randomly applied to each section on each tree on 9 February 2006. The treatments were:

  1. Nontreated control;

  2. Natural burlap fabric; and

  3. Polypropylene tree trunk wrap 76 mm (3 in) wide (DeWitt, Sikeston, MO).

Burlap was cut into the largest piece that would cover an area of the trunk and stapled into place with T-32, 7.8 mm (0.31 in) staples (Arrow Fastener Co., Saddle Brook, NJ). Edges of the burlap were overlapped approximately 2 cm (0.8 in) when multiple sections were used. The trunk wrap was spiraled around the trunk with approximately 25% overlap and stapled at both ends. Additional wrapping and stapling was used as needed to keep wraps close to the trunk and to reduce gaps around branches.

On each stem section, the numbers of “active” and “bleeding” wounds were counted on a weekly basis. Active wounds had exposed live phloem with no evidence of callus growth. Bleeding wounds had the characteristics of active wounds plus they had sap flowing from them (Figure 1). Trees were evaluated before treatment on 9 February 2006 after treatments were applied on 16 and 24 February and 3 and 10 March 2006 by counting the active and bleeding wounds on each treated and untreated section of stem. After treatments were removed on 11 March 2006, all previously covered areas were inspected for the presence of previously undetected sapsucker damage.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

A bleeding wound in the bark of sugar maple (Acer saccharum) created by sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius).

Data were analyzed using an analysis of variance with separation of means using the Student Newman-Keuls procedures (SPSS, Chicago, IL; P = 0.05).

RESULTS

Listen

Burlap was much faster to install and easier to work with than the tree trunk wrap. This was because of the larger pieces of burlap that could be used as well as the pliability of the burlap. With the tree wrap, there were many large gaps between the bark and the trunk that need to double-wrapped or fastened down with additional staples to reduce the gaps.

There were highly significant differences in the number of active and bleeding wounds between treatments and the controls. Both the tree wrap and burlap treatments completely prevented feeding by sapsuckers in the protected areas of the trees (Figures 2, 3, and 4). There were no significant differences in the number of bleeding wounds before treatment or at the 10 March count. No wounds were found under the burlap or trunk wrap after it was removed at the end of the trial.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

The number of active wounds created by Sphyrapicus varius before and after trunk wrapping treatments on 60 cm (24 in) sections of Acer saccharum stems. The mean number of wounds was significantly different after 16 February 2006.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

The number of bleeding wounds created by Sphyrapicus varius before and after trunk wrapping treatments on 60 cm (24 in) sections of Acer saccharum stems.

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius) feeding on control treatment between tree wrap (top) and burlap (bottom) of Acer saccharum stem.

DISCUSSION

Listen

The traditional trunk wrapping treatment for sapsuckers works extremely well to both stop ongoing attacks and prevent new damage. Increasing attacks on the control areas may indicate that the bird has changed its feeding habits, going from the treated area to the control area. This may have implications for susceptible trees near treated trees.

There are anecdotal reports that sapsuckers in the western United States are not deterred from damaging trees wrapped with burlap. A study of western sapsuckers is required to clarify the effectiveness of wrap treatments in that area.

It was thought that using a trunk wrap instead of burlap might speed the installation process and be more effective than burlap, but that did not turn out to be the case. Burlap was easier to install and remove, and both products were equally effective at preventing sapsucker damage.

Although trunk wrapping did protect treated trees, it is a very time-consuming operation and the treatment could be considered unsightly by many consumers. Further study is needed to find effective treatments that can be applied more rapidly.

Acknowledgments.

Listen

We express our appreciation to Robert A. Bartlett Jr. and the Bartlett Tree Expert Co. for their support of this research and to Bruce R. Fraedrich, Director of the Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories.

  • © 2007, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.

LITERATURE CITED

Listen
  1. ↵
    1. Eberhardt, L.S.
    2000. Use and selection of sap trees by yellow-bellied sapsuckers. The Auk 117: 41–51.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    1. Erdmann, G.G., and
    2. R.R. Oberg
    . 1974. Sapsucker feeding damages crown-released yellow birch trees. Journal of Forestry 72: 760–764.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Kilham, L.
    1964. The relations of breeding yellow-bellied sapsuckers to wounded birches and other trees. The Auk 81: 520–527.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
    . 1997. Animal Damage—Sapsucker Damage. Yellow-bellied Sapsucker. Forest Insect and Disease Newsletter. June 1997. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources web site (online). www.dnr.state.mn.us/fid/june97/06209714.html (accessed 10/26/2006).
  5. ↵
    1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
    . 1999. Yellow-bellied Sapsucker. Forest Insect and Disease Newsletter June 1999. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources web site (online). www.dnr.state.mn.us/fid/june99/06019906.html (accessed 10/26/2006).
  6. ↵
    1. Ostry, M.E., and
    2. T.H. Nicholls
    . 1976. How to Identify and Control Sapsucker Injury on Trees. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station.
  7. ↵
    1. Shigo, A.L.
    1963. Ring Shake Associated with Sapsucker Injury. U.S. Forest Service Research Paper NE-8.
  8. ↵
    1. Tate, J.
    1973. Methods and annual sequence of foraging by the sapsucker. The Auk 90: 840–856.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. White, T.C.
    1984. The abundance of invertebrate herbivores in relation to the availability of nitrogen in stressed food plants. Oecologia 63: 90–105.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF): 33 (5)
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 33, Issue 5
September 2007
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Preventing Sapsucker Damage on Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
Preventing Sapsucker Damage on Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)
E. Thomas Smiley, Donald C. Booth, Liza W. Wilkinson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 2007, 33 (5) 367-370; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2007.042

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Preventing Sapsucker Damage on Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum)
E. Thomas Smiley, Donald C. Booth, Liza W. Wilkinson
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 2007, 33 (5) 367-370; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.2007.042
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments.
    • LITERATURE CITED
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Sixth- and Tenth-Year Growth Measurements for Three Tree Species in a Load-Bearing Stone–Soil Blend Under Pavement and a Tree Lawn in Brooklyn, New York, U.S.
  • Growth of Balled-and-Burlapped versus Bare-Root Trees in Oklahoma, U.S.
  • New Diagrams and Applications for the Wire Zone–Border Zone Approach to Vegetation Management on Electric Transmission Line Rights-of-Way
Show more Research Note

Similar Articles

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire