University of California

Strength characteristics of fruit tree bark


R. B. Fridley
G. K. Brown
P. A. Adrian

Authors Affiliations

R. B. Fridley was Professor of Agricultural Engineering and Agricultural Engineer in the Experiment Station, Davis; G. K. Brown was Agricultural Engineer in the Agricultural Engineering Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Riverside; P. A. Adrian was Agricultural Engineer in the Agricultural Engineering Research Division, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Salinas.

Publication Information

Hilgardia 40(8):205-223. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v40n08p205. August 1970.

PDF of full article, Cite this article


Mechanical harvesting of fruit trees by shaking their primary limbs or trunks has sometimes been responsible for injury to the trees at the point where shaking equipment is attached. Such injuries often result in infection by the fungus Ceratocystis fimbriata. In the present study, research was conducted to determine the strength of tree bark so as to evaluate its ability to resist injury caused by forces applied radially, tangentially, or longitudinally to the limb. The maximum radial stress which could be exerted on the bark of trees tested without damage which can lead to Ceratocystis canker was found to be in the range of 500 to 1000 psi, whereas the maximum tangential and longitudinal stresses were only about one-third or one-fourth as strong. Low strengths were generally associated with high moisture conditions, young tree age, and growing cambium.

Literature Cited

Adrian P. A., Fridley R. B. Shaker-clamp design as related to allowable stresses of tree bark. Transactions of the ASAE. 1964. 7(3):232-37. DOI: 10.13031/2013.40744 [CrossRef]

DeVay J. E., English H., Lukezic F. L., O’Reilly H. J. Mallet wound canker of almond trees. California Agriculture. 1960. 14(8):8-9.

DeVay J. E., Lukezic F. L., English H., Uriu K., Hansen C. J. Ceratocystis canker on prunes and apricots. California Agriculture. 1962. 16(1):2-3.

DeVay J. E., Lukezic F. L., English W. H., Moller W. J., Parkinson B. W. Controlling Ceratocystis canker of stone fruit trees. California Agriculture. 1965. 19(10):2-4.

Esau Katherine. Phloem structure in the grapevine, and its seasonal changes. Hilgardia, University of California. 1948. 18(5):217-96. DOI: 10.3733/hilg.v18n05p217 [CrossRef]

Evert Ray Franklin. Phloem structure in Pyrus communis L., and its seasonal changes 1958. Ph.D. Thesis (Botany), University of California, Davis.

Priestley J. H. Studies in the physiology of cambial activity III. The seasonal activity of the cambium. New Phytologist. 1930. 29:316-54. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1930.tb07398.x [CrossRef]

Schneider Henry. The phloem of the sweet orange tree trunk and the seasonal production of xylem and phloem. Hilgardia, University of California. 1952. 21(12):331-66. DOI: 10.3733/hilg.v21n12p331 [CrossRef]

Fridley R, Brown G, Adrian P. 1970. Strength characteristics of fruit tree bark. Hilgardia 40(8):205-223. DOI:10.3733/hilg.v40n08p205
Webmaster Email: sjosterman@ucanr.edu