Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - [NAFEX] Cleft graft vs bark.

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jwlehman@aol.com
  • To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [NAFEX] Cleft graft vs bark.
  • Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:57:09 EST

> Does anyone still make cleft grafting tools?
> If not what do most people use now?

The cleft graft is another old method that does work, but bark grafting is better and easier. Although I've not made a study of it, my guess would be twice the success rate of bark grafting over cleft. I've visited many University test plots and see very very few cleft grafts. Bark is the preferred method. One of the problems with the cleft graft is normally only two can be placed on the understock that has been cut off, one on each side. Last summer at the annual NNGA meeting in Michigan we saw chestnuts top worked on trees with 5 and 6 inch diameter trees. They recommended to help heal over the wounded area faster that one scion be placed for every inch of diameter. So a 6 inch understock would have 6 scions evenly placed around it.  This promotes healing over the exposed area faster while a cleft graft would only have 2 grafts and would take much longer to completely heal.  Then after healing over is completed, one by one the grafts are cut off.

Most bark grafting I do is on persimmon two and three inches across. Two scions placed across from each other is much better than one. It normally completely heals across in the second year. Then in the third year I cut off the poorer of the two grafts, leaving one. If anyone wants pictures I can take and e/m on the net. One other thing that reduces the success rate in cleft grafting is the extremely small area of cambium to cambium contact.   Jerry Lehman




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page