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

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
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
AbstractAbstracts

Abstracts

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) September 1982, 8 (9) 249; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/joa.1982.8.9.249
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Dirr, Michael A. 1982. The great elm debate — Siberian vs. Chinese. Am. Nurseryman 155(4): 75-79.

Siberian and Chinese elms represent the greatest case of misidentification since “The Prince and the Pauper.” No two trees have been more confused by the American nursery trade than these. The Chinese elm offered by most nurserymen is, in fact, Siberian elm (Ulmus pumila), a woefully inferior tree. True Chinese elm (U. parvifolia) is infinitely superior as a landscape specimen, but it is not widely available. E.H. Wilson noted this problem in “Aristocrats of the Trees” in 1930. “I fear many years will lapse before the confusion existing between them is straightened out,” he said. The American gardening public has been the loser in the great elm debate. Ulmus pumila was introduced into North America in the early 1900’s. It found wide acceptance among nurserymen who raved about its rapid growth and tolerance of almost any soil. Ulmus parvifolia was introduced into cultivattion in the late 1700’s, but it has never become a popular landscape tree. Its great beauty resides in its oval to rounded crown of gracefully spreading branches. Its mature height and spread are approximately 40 to 50 feet.

Haller, John M. 1982. Common tree ailments and what to do about them. Am. Forests 88(2): 27-30.

What do you do with a sick tree? Sometimes, unfortunately, the answer is “nothing.” In many cases, however, the owner can take measures to prevent disease from getting started, or can assist a diseased tree toward recovery. We can call such measures protection, eradication, and immunization. Protection means prevent. Certain practices will prevent the onset of disease. Prominent among these is anticipatory spraying, which prevents many diseases from taking hold. Trees growing in good soil and receiving abundant water are more resistant to disease than trees growing in less favorable situations. Hence the best step in protecting a tree is to improve the soil and to stabilize the water supply. Eradication means the elimination of diseased parts. Eradication also involves cavity repair, treatment of cankers, and other surgical measures. Another form of eradication involves the elimination of an alternate host that is necessary in the life cycle to the pathogen. Immunization means two things: 1) the development of disease-resistant strains that may be planted in infected areas with impunity; and 2) the use of chemical compounds that act inside the plant to increase its resistance to disease.

  • © 1982, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 8, Issue 9
September 1982
  • Table of Contents
  • 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.
Abstracts
(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
Abstracts
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1982, 8 (9) 249; DOI: 10.48044/joa.1982.8.9.249

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Abstracts
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Sep 1982, 8 (9) 249; DOI: 10.48044/joa.1982.8.9.249
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • 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

  • Abstracts
  • Abstracts
  • Abstracts
Show more Abstracts

Similar Articles

© 2023 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire