cambistat

Morice

Member
[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate positive feedback.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Tom,
It was great speaking with you in Baltimore @ the TCIA. I just wanted to say that I 've seen great results using Cambistat and will continue to use it.
 

easyphloem

Well-Known Member
Use Holly-Tone!


Seriously, Cambistat would not be my choice for a transplanted tree or shrub. After it is established, it wouldn't be a bad idea, but for the first year or two, I would load it up with high phosphorus fertilizer. But that's just me. I'm sure MoRice will have a different opinion.
 

TProsser

New Member
Unlike most tools used in arboriculture, Cambistat needs to be dosed exactly. Small trees and sensitive trees can have too much material applied very easily. If the rate chart is followed exactly - you won't have trees that look like broccoli. Unfortunately small trees that are more sensitive have small margins of error and should only be treated by those who use a high degree of accuracy. If I was beginning the use of this product - I would avoid small trees in the A-C range until one feels comfortable measuring in milliliters.

EasyPhloem - We have an antidote for your Maple. Email me and I will send it to you at no charge.

Holly trees are less sensitive and it probably would be OK to use and would help the roots establish faster. Be careful to accurately dose the tree.
 

easyphloem

Well-Known Member
Thanks Tom.

The Japanese maples that turned into Broccoli was a desired effect. It actually looks good. It is in a courtyard of a condo where the HOA wants to top them to keep them below a certain height, and this is the solution we came up with. We used something like 22ml of cambistat per maple, and they looked great (to me). I know some little old lady gardeners who would have a fit if it was theirs.



I know what you mean about the sensitive species and smaller dosages though. Gotta be careful!
 

MATT_MAYO

New Member
We have a 20" Linden that was in decline three years ago. We treated with at the specified rate for lindens. The tree continued to decline and look worse. The homeowners want to blame the treatment for the decline of the tree. Has anyone had experiance with lindens and has the rate changed in the past three years? We have had wonderful results in every other situation.
 

TProsser

New Member
Sometimes the effects of the Cambistat will not help a tree in decline depending on the cause. Cambistat changes the tree in very specific ways. If the cause is herbicides, girdling roots, poisoning, or other trauma - it won't help.

Also as reminder to people, there is not only a new rate chart every 6 months with new trees and updates, but last year we rewrote the application guide and have new recommendations - one of which is to automatically reduce 25% for a declining tree. This is because declining trees usually have lost crown and seem slightly more sensitive to the treatment.
Get the new rate chart at www.cambistat.com
 

TProsser

New Member
Sorry - I have not looked at this for a while.

The answer is that we have tested on trees all over the US. Minnesota is our home - but we understand this is a material that is used everywhere. The east coast, Texas, Illinois, Colorado and Georgia have all had extensive use testing and analysis.

Regarding the large chestnut. The biggest immediate threat to that tree is dehydration. Water is the number 1 thing it needs. Second would be soil compaction - the tree may have the stored energy to regrow those roots over time if it doesn't dry up and the soil is healthy for regrowth.

If the soil is compacted, there are a couple of soil replacement techniques that are very effective at creating a healthy soil environment.

Where Cambistat comes in is two fold. #1. It reduces water loss out of the tree by about 50% according to studies. (That is not enough for a injured tree in a high drought situation)

#2. It stimulates the tree to direct energy to the growth of fibrous roots. Thus less energy is used to grow crown and more is used to grow fibrous roots.

I hope that answers your question.
 

Mangoes

Well-Known Member
What do you have to register as? Pesticide?

Mucho denero!

In 2001 I got intorduced to the Arborjet team to see if they would register products in Canada. I did a bit of research on their behalf and it is VERY expensive to register a pesticide in CAN.
 

TProsser

New Member
Its not cheap. But not super expensive. It takes a long time though. We hope to have it by 2009.
It is considered a pesticide, but since it is so low tox - it makes it easier.
 

TreeDr

Active Member
In declining or construction damaged trees, keep in mind guys, if the trees vascular system is so far damaged, it will not take up the material. That is exactly what I tell my customers as a soft sell.
 

mdvaden

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
We estimate now that over 300,000 trees have been treated with Cambistat since it came out in 2002. This has given us a large number of trees to analyze and refine the process.

I want to respond to Roxy and his comment to go light. We have updated the rate chart 7 times now and beleive that you should follow the rate chart EXACTLY. Reduce dosage as instructed in the application guide. The rates have been refined very thoroughly. The goal has been to create an application guide and system that has minimal chance of too much growth reduction.

I believe the 4 best uses for this material are:
1. Managing the growth on large trees growing on smaller sites (To keep from outgrowing the soil volume available to support it)

2. To increase the fibrous root systems of yard trees that are stressed from drought or other situations.

3. To increase the trees ability to manage its water better in situations where it is prone to drought.

4. To increase tolerance to leaf fungus diseases.

Companies such as Bartlett, Davey and The Care of Trees have made it a staple in their tree health programs, which bodes well for its future. Please continue to call us with feedback.
Thanks
Tom Prosser
Rainbow Treecare Scientific

[/ QUOTE ]

From reading your post, I'd conclude that each point you listed appears to be a reasonable potential benefit as long as history does not take a sharp turn.

The one thing you wrote that really caught my attention, and seems to merit the least amount of optimism, was the concluding summary where you mentioned Davey and Bartlett as good for the "bodes" of Cambistat's future.

Why I say that, is that the facts and time are what "bodes" well for the future. The big names in our industry are not icon companies, but icon names like "oak", like "maple", like "hemlock".

Let us not put our past too far behind us, when icons of arboriculture seemed to "bode" well for the future of tree wound dressing, for virtually all trees. Then like out of nowhere, big-name-use as a credit for the wound paint, was neutralized by the real relevant laboratories - that within each tree, but within each micro-environment as well.

All it takes sometimes is like 7 more days, and someone can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a product causes cancer, then SWOOSH !!, off the shelf it goes.

And that kind of reality demonstrates all the more, that its very important not to become so dependent on one product, that we don't put equal emphasis on alternatives.

Personally, I prefer for products to survive. It's one more screwdriver in the toolbox so to speak.
 
Top