Trees "calculate" which branches to drop based on data they gather as they grow. A competent and experienced arborist knows how to read the tree and simply safely cut off the branches that the tree was already intending to drop so that it doesn't fall on your house or whatever. Inexperienced arborists often ignore this key dendrology fact and may totally butcher your tree. In the process they can create an even larger risk of a tree falling over onto your house during a storm
Coppicing or pollarding are both well-historied techniques that can be used to keep trees growing short. They differ significantly from topping and require a lot of expertise. They also have to be started when the tree is young
This is often not useful advice, as it is common to acquire responsibility for a tree than has been badly managed. The GP's link actually gives a solution for this case: pruning more accurately over a slightly longer period.
More generally, I've found as the maintainer of a building that while mainstream practices (of property generally, not specifically trees) often undershoot good practice, heritage techniques are often impractically expensive, and function more as a status signalling mechanism than really as a way of doing better. Even more generally, economy-wide; there is a tendency to criticise the mainstream but then promote expensive, semi-artisanal products and services, which while better, simply offer an escape valve to pressure for reform. Better techniques can only benefit the populace as a whole if they are cost reduced under the discipline of serving the mass market, not just offered as a premium version for the well-to-do.
I'd like to grow bonzai. I have zero prior knowledge. I suppose what you mention applies. Would you happen to have any good resource that applies to bonzai science please?
Imo the title here buries the lede: we've known that trees form tension wood in response to external stress. This study claims to find that trees will form it in response only to their own curvature, independent of external factors even including gravity. They compare it to proprioception. That's neat!
Yes, the science has moved to "drink when you're thirsty" a long time ago and it's annoying how many people believe drinking 3 liters of water per day is a key tenant of human health.
(most of) Our bodies are quite good at telling us when we should drink more water. You should never be forcing yourself to drink
All that being said, I'm not sure GP was necessarily endorsing the idea that you should drink a certain amount of water a day. I read it as a suggestion to pull away from the screen and listen to your body
But why? unless it’s a copious amount of water like a gallon or more in an hour or two or something insane like that what is the problem with drinking water? I would assume it would just have positive effects.
> "You can become dehydrated if you take in too little. And you can actually cause problems, such as exercise-induced low sodium or hyponatremia, if you take in too much," says Dr. Sara Filmalter, a Mayo Clinic family physician. "So the general rule of thumb at this point among physicians is to drink to thirst."
I've often read (sorry, no citations handy) that by the time you notice / feel thirst, you've already been dehydrated for some time. And chronic (mild) dehydration is much more common than hyponatremia. I'll always err on the side of drinking water whenever it occurs to me (and deliberately starting my morning with 16-20oz on waking) instead of waiting to feel thirsty.
It's called cladoptosis (basically self-pruning) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cladoptosis
EDIT: since I'm on the topic of bad tree trimming, NEVER TOP YOUR TREES https://www.arborday.org/tree-resources/dont-top-trees
they do it where I live because the branches bang against apartments' windows when it's windy. I don't think there's another low-maintenance solution.
More generally, I've found as the maintainer of a building that while mainstream practices (of property generally, not specifically trees) often undershoot good practice, heritage techniques are often impractically expensive, and function more as a status signalling mechanism than really as a way of doing better. Even more generally, economy-wide; there is a tendency to criticise the mainstream but then promote expensive, semi-artisanal products and services, which while better, simply offer an escape valve to pressure for reform. Better techniques can only benefit the populace as a whole if they are cost reduced under the discipline of serving the mass market, not just offered as a premium version for the well-to-do.
Kind of annoying when all the fruit is several meters out of reach
(most of) Our bodies are quite good at telling us when we should drink more water. You should never be forcing yourself to drink
https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/mayo-clinic-mi...
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/313389
All that being said, I'm not sure GP was necessarily endorsing the idea that you should drink a certain amount of water a day. I read it as a suggestion to pull away from the screen and listen to your body