|
| the question is..
is there any documentation to back up this theory.. or did i just dream this up .. to make a point ... i cant even think of a way to google it ... ken ps: i try not to make things up.. but sometimes it gets so ingrained.. you start to wonder if there is any truth in it ... like a story from grandpa.. lol .. |
Follow-Up Postings:
|
| To be strictly accurate, there will be variation from species to species. However, I believe the figure that is most often accepted is 3X below ground as above. I do not have a citation handy for this however. Arktrees |
|
- Posted by ilovemytrees 5b Western NY (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 15:35
| I've seen pictures of tree downed by tornadoes, and some of the biggest trees had the puniest root systems. |
|
| Ken, do you mean in the volume of space the roots or crown takes up in the ground or above ground? Or the distance the roots travel from the trunk? (Like the roots extend twice as far as the canopy edge.) OR, in surface area? In the attached link from UFL, Ed Gilman (a much respected scientist) indicates that roots of healthy trees can be expected to grow up to 3 times the diameter of the canopy. He is speaking in terms of lateral measurement, which what most of us are concerned about. If you were to think of surface area of a root system compared to a crown of a healthy tree....gosh, I couldn't even hazard a guess! The roots would be about umteen million times greater, lol! You know, a lot of people go to their graves thinking that trees form a mirror image of themselves at the soil level, with the size and dimension of the roots being just like that of the crown. It takes some educating to convince them otherwise. You are way ahead of the game thinking in terms of 'twice as big'. This link will take you to another good article, but it's the diagram I'd like you to look at. |
Here is a link that might be useful: Tree roots
|
- Posted by toronado3800 Z6 St. Louis (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 16:11
| Good link and interesting question. When I dug up the crap myrtle the other week the tree was larger above ground than what I removed from below by about 2 to 1. I did not remove roots six feet below the ground. Now I severed many roots. The question is how far did they go? And who would know. What is the largest tree ever bare rooted? Anyone do horticultural science like this? |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 16:11
| so.. safe to say.. i didnt dream it.. lol and safe to say.. i am not exaggerating when i say it ... yeah rhiz.. i know the drawing you are talking about.. probably some old hippy drawing from way back.. the mirror image .... green man.. druids.. etc ... whatever.. glad i am not having auditory or dreamal hallucinations.. to take is a step further ... i am thinking about instant gratification or tree planting .. and the argument that the smaller the transplant .. tree .. the faster it gets established.. and can probably outgrow a large transplant.. say the instant gratification 2 inch caliper type ... in a given 5 year span .. and i am figuring that it all has something to do with the ratio of root loss to the plant itself ... [i havent read the link above yet] ken |
Here is a link that might be useful: a cursory review seems to indicate that not a single one is close to reality .. of which i reject yours.. and substitute my own ...
|
| Actually, ken, the drawing in that link is an accurate depiction of a tree's root system, lol. |
|
- Posted by toronado3800 Z6 St. Louis (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 17:08
 This is what I picture. Perhaps a could extra large structural roots but pretty much the one on the right. |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 17:24
| what are you talking about rhiz???? .. there are 3.3 million pix at my link .. which did you choose to comment on??? or am i missing something?? try this link ken |
Here is a link that might be useful: can i put a driveway here ...
|
| lolol...we are BOTH missing something. I meant the picture in MY post, from UMN. THAT'S the one that is accurate. Tornado's picture is a good one. |
|
- Posted by ken_adrian z5 (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 19:12
| this is really weird.. when i hit the rhiz link above here in GW.. i get all words ..... but when i hit the link in the reply to my email.. i get a different link ... here is what i get here: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/wo017 oohh crude.. you have two links there.. only one hotlinked.. what a dullard .. lol ... never mind.. as whats here name used to say ... ken
|
Here is a link that might be useful: check this one rhiz
|
- Posted by wisconsitom 4/5 WI (My Page) on Sun, Mar 25, 12 at 21:58
| Keep in mind, whoever said that they see the largest trees have the smallest root systems (When blown over), that the majority of the root system did not end up in that tipped-up root plate. Most were torn asunder in the event. Or did I just want to say 'torn asunder'? +oM |
|
| From personal observations, the roots of blown over Willow Oaks in swampy areas in Lousisana are not as substantial as those of excavated Live Oaks in hot dry central Texas. Neither one looked like it would be 2 time the size of what is above ground. The hill-country live oak roots gave the impression that they were about the same size as the above-ground parts of the tree. Have read that Bur Oak can have as much volume below ground as above ground but have not seen any proof of it. Perhaps Bald Cypress would be apt to have more volume in roots than in top. These trees along with Live Oaks are highly rated for resistance to hurricanes along the coast.
|
|
| Keep in mind, too, that tree in urban and suburban locations often have SEVERELY compromised root systems. Simple compaction, excavation, construction, and a host of activities damage and diminish the health of a natural root system. |
|
| Although it varies by species, site, and individual tree, in most instances the root system makes up less than half of the total biomass of a tree - often a lot less than half (see link below). But I would agree that the roots often spread out much farther than the distance of the canopy. |
Here is a link that might be useful: Biomass and utilization of trees
Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum. If you are a member, please log in. If you aren't yet a member, join now!
Return to the Trees Forum
Instructions
- You must be a registered member and logged in to post messages on our forums.
- Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review the contents and make changes.
- After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
- It is illegal to post copyrighted material without the owner's consent.
- HTML codes are allowed in the message field only.
- No advertising is allowed in any of the forums.
- If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
- If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.