Effects of Different Amounts of Codominant Stem Subordination on the Growth and Aesthetics of Acer rubrum ‘October Glory’

Literature Cited

1. ↵
   American National Standards Institute. 2017. ANSI A300 (Part 1)—2017 Pruning: Revision of ANSI A300 (Part 1)—2008 (R2014). Londonderry (NH, USA): Tree Care Industry Association, Inc. 36 p. https://treecareindustryassociation.org/business-support/ansi-a300-standards
2. ↵
   1. Desrochers A,
   2. Maurin V,
   3. Tarroux E.

   2015. Production and role of epicormic shoots in pruned hybrid poplar: Effects of clone, pruning season and intensity. Annals of Forest Science. 72:425–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13595-014-0443-8

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Downer AJ,
   2. Shaw M,
   3. Pittenser D.

   1994. 815 PB 228 The effect of pruning on branch growth in two oak species. HortScience. 29(5):550b. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.29.5.550b

   OpenUrl
4. ↵
   1. Eisner NJ,
   2. Gilman EF,
   3. Grabosky JC.

   2002. Branch morphology impacts compartmentalization of pruning wounds. Journal of Arboriculture. 28(2):99–105. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2002.013

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Gilman EF.

   2003. Branch-to-stem diameter ratio affects strength of attachment. Journal of Arboriculture. 29(5):291–294. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2003.033

   OpenUrl
6. ↵
   1. Gilman EF.

   2015. Pruning severity and crown position influence aspect ratio change. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 41(2):69–74. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2015.008

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Gilman EF,
   2. Grabosky JC.

   2006. Branch union morphology affects decay following pruning. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 32(2):74–79. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2006.010

   OpenUrl
8. ↵
   1. Gilman EF,
   2. Grabosky J.

   2009. Growth partitioning three years following structural pruning of Quercus virginiana. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 35(6):281–286. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2009.042

   OpenUrl
9. ↵
   1. Grabosky J,
   2. Gilman E,
   3. Harchick C.

   2007. Use of branch cross-sectional area for predicting pruning dose in young field-grown Quercus virginiana ‘Cathedral’ in Florida, US. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 6(3):159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2007.06.002

   OpenUrl
10. ↵
    1. Kane B,
    2. Farrell R,
    3. Zedaker SM,
    4. Loferski JR,
    5. Smith DW.

    2008. Failure mode and prediction of the strength of branch attachments. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 34(5):308–316. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2008.042

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Lilly SJ,
    2. Gilman EF,
    3. Smiley ET.

    2019. Best management practices: Pruning. 3rd Ed. Atlanta (GA, USA): International Society of Arboriculture. 63 p. https://wwv.isa-arbor.com/store/product/58
12. ↵
    1. Shigo AL.

    1990. Tree branch attachment to trunks and branch pruning. HortScience. 25(1):54–59. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.25.1.54

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
13. ↵
    1. Shigo AL,
    2. Hillis WE.

    1973. Heartwood, discolored wood, and microorganisms in living trees. Annual Review of Phytopathology . 11:197–222. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.py.11.090173.001213

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
14. ↵
    1. Smiley ET.

    2003. Does included bark reduce the strength of codominat stems? Journal of Arboriculture. 29(2):104–106. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2003.013

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Ferrini F,
    2. Konijnendijk van den Bosch CC,
    3. Fini A

    1. Smiley ET,
    2. Matheny NP,
    3. Lilly SJ.

    2017. Tree risk assessment. In: Ferrini F, Konijnendijk van den Bosch CC, Fini A, editors. Routledge handbook of urban forestry. 1st Ed. London (United Kingdom): Routledge. P. 478–488. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315627106-31/tree-risk-assessment-thomas-smiley-nelda-matheny-sharon-lilly
16. ↵
    Soil Survey Staff. 2019. Web Soil Survey. Washington, DC (USA): Natural Resources Conservation Service (United States Department of Agriculture). [Accessed 2024 January 15]. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app
17. ↵
    1. Zhang QQ,
    2. Zhou ZZ,
    3. Huang GH,
    4. Zhao WW,
    5. Liu GF,
    6. Wang XB.

    2022. Effects of pruning intensity and season on wound occlusion and stem form of teak (Tectonia grandis) in China. Journal of Tropical Forest Science. 34(4):439–449. https://wwwjstor.org/stable/48694006

    OpenUrl