Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

Visual Tree Assessment (VTA), mechanistic models, wind load predictions and pulling tests or Tree-Statics, have been so far the dominant methods for assessing the risk of uprooting and breaking of trees, both in commercial arboriculture and forestry. Regarding the VTA of Mattheck, its main foundations such as the axiom of uniform stress, compression forks and supposed compression-failure-induced wrinkles on the bark, are suggestive of pseudoscience. It is also shown that the published “Generalised Tipping Curve” (GTC) of Wessolly, which allegedly predicts the uprooting of trees combined with commercial wind load analysis software, pulling tests, inclinometers, strain gauges, accelerometers and motion sensors, is suggestive of either misinformation or being erroneous. Also two other uprooting curves will be presented, based on real pulling tests, although then all three curves seem to invalidate each other. And comparison with a simple “beam fixed on a half sphere” model also raises doubts regarding the real source and validity of the GTC, suggesting data manipulation or fabrication. Also a surprising finding regarding highly-cited and influential claims on dynamics is shared. All the findings were condensed into one simple mechanistic model that faithfully reproduces the results of commercial pulling tests and related software, on a simple spreadsheet. A model such as this, license-free and at no cost, would be very attractive, and especially in low-income countries. This paper also analyses influential proclamations that may have sprouted from flawed research practices. A wide range of papers, published by predatory journals, were found that perpetuated dubious, false or misleading claims. Unconscious bias or negligent research practices can give birth to potentially harmful products and practices, which in turn can lead to loss of life and limbs or legal and societal consequences. Trees and palms that have been assessed over the last three decades as “safe” could thus be dangerous, and vice versa. Therefore this study is deemed to be a crucial contribution, while it has far-reaching consequences and concerns a wide public.