Search

Tree pruning is carried out to reduce conflict with infrastructure, buildings, and any other human activity. However, heavy pruning may result in a diminished tree crown capacity for sugar production and exposure to fungal infection. This risk leads to a decrease in tree stability or vigour. In this work, we analysed the effect of heavy pruning of roadside trees on the photosynthetic performance process compared to neighbouring unpruned trees. Four years of tree crown growth was studied by terrestrial imaging. Tree vitality (Roloff's classification) and risk (Visual Tree Assessment) were evaluated. Over-pruned trees showed intensified photosynthetic efficiency during the growing season following pruning. Particularly ET0/TR0 and PIABS tended to increase in pruned trees while higher Fv/Fm was noted only in late October, suggesting delayed leaf senescence. After four years, pruned trees rebuilt their crowns, however not in their entirety. Results obtained from biometric, vitality, and risk assessment showed high differentiation in pruned tree crown recovery. Our results revealed that despite the intensified efforts of trees to recover from wounding effects, severe pruning evokes dieback occurrence and a higher risk of failure in mature trees.

Parents’ attitudes to trees and nature are reflected not only in their children’s outdoor activity, but also in the way they perceive, learn and value the environment. One hundred and eleven respondents, divided into two groups by place of residence, assessed statements in a survey questionnaire. Two groups of questions aimed at evaluating tree benefits and disservices as perceived by urban and rural parents, and identifying their preferences concerning outdoor activity of their children. Tree benefits and disadvantages were grouped into five categories (social, economic, environmental, health and aesthetic). Both urban and rural parents presented similar attitudes to trees as well as to their children’s play environments. Among 37 statements concerning tree benefits, only five revealed statistically significant differences. The most important difference appeared in the way urban and rural parents perceived the aspects of danger. Trees were not perceived as posing any risk on playgrounds for city residents, who—unlike villagers—opposed to the removal of trees from playgrounds.