Debating to just let it be, or cut it out. Autumn Blaze Maple Z5 Chicago Suburbs.

I'm usually good about this stuff but life got in the way and I never noticed this one until now

Bill, here's what I think is known about these things; So, that is indeed a girdling root, in that its position is such that as it grows, and as the root underneath it grows, they will exert pressure on each other. So far so good....er bad. A study in the Journal of Arboriculture-but this was years ago-compared maple types for outcomes of such root morphologies. At that time-according to that peer-reviewed study-all maple species could develop girdling roots but that it is only in Norway maples where they actually go on to cause problems.

Other studies from way back also showed a strong tendency for new roots to form where old, girdling ones had been removed. So there's that. On the other hand, it is nice and accessible and small now. A couple cuts with the loppers...I might even do that, even knowing what I just wrote. It kind of sticks out like that, asking for removal!

Yeah, I think I'll cut it out, it's just slightly bigger then I'd like, and not really circling back so that's why I considered maybe just let it do it's thing. Trunk on all other sides looks good.

"...it is only in Norway maples where they actually go on to cause problems."

And did they recommend removal of the tree? ;)

I'd cut it out. Maples supposedly fuse roots but this one is so obvious and so easy to get. If you can't get a pruners on it, a hammer and chisel works well. The tree should be fine.

Root needs to be removed.

My only concern is that it could serve as an entry point for decay. How big is it? Kinda hard to tell from the photo.

Since it's exposed & easy to get to, I'd cut it.

Again, like beng, I'd cut it, but only because A) it's so easy to get at, and only with the understanding that it is likely to not be a problem if I leave it, and B), it will likely grow back anyway.

Maack, I was referencing a study of multiple cohorts, not an investigation of a single tree. So, in this case, across hundreds of replications, it was only in Norway maples that these researchers could get girdling roots to cause a problem for the tree. They seemed to form in other maple types, but there would be no corresponding flattening of that side of the trunk, with attendant loss of vascular connection. That seems to point to the likelihood that maples other than platanoides are able to fuse roots and maintain this vascular connection, even as roots impinge on each other.

If this tree is important to the landscape for shade/appearance then my vote is "No". All maples are very susceptible to Vertillium wilt (a slow killer of maples) which usually enters the vascular system through cut roots both above and below ground. Bill, do a search for V. wilt and maples before making a decision.

It was meant as a joke and I was playing off Norway Maple's less than stellar reputation: "Oh look, there's a girdling root at the surface. I guess we'll have to remove that Norway Maple."

get rid of that root, use a pruning saw.

I'm a little perplexed by Tom's report above. It's fairly well know that some types of maples typically do a pretty good job of dealing with potentially girdling roots. They may do this by fusing vascular tissue and, in some cases, self-pruning the roots by expanding until the girdling roots break. BUT, that's not how I read Tom's report. If I am understanding what he wrote, it appears he is saying that the study found all maples, other than Acer platanoides, are immune to problems caused by girdling roots. Well, that's not even close to being reality. So, I'm not sure if I misunderstand what Tom is saying or the conclusions he reports are just bogus. Many types of maples are frequently good at overcoming girdling root problems, but I also see many maples (of various species) with issues (some serious enough to result in tree failure) caused by girdling roots. My parents, for example, have a sugar maple in their yard that is very flattened on one side and appears to be starting to lean. It's obviously the result of a girdling root.

- - - - - - -

With that said, I agree with most other contributors to this thread regarding this case. The root may not need to be removed, but I would definitely remove it if it were my tree.

I went........and was going to cut it out. Then I chickened out. Sorry. It's probably a good 2 to 3 inch root and I don't want to mess with that. It's the only one and rest of tree, and trunk flare looks good. I'm going going with "when in doubt, just leave it alone" Thanks for input/good thread.

Brandon, it's possible that info is out of date. Study was from late 80s. IIRC, immunity would be too strong a word for the conclusions reached, but not by so much; They said that only Norways were found to frequently have problems caused by girdling roots, whereas the presence of roots that look like they might cause problems was common across the genus.

Here in this city, following the demise of thousands of Am. elms (And in numerous new subdivisions with their increasingly stripped soils), numerous streets were planted with both Norway and sugar maples. Both have since developed problems, but not the same set of problems. In Norways, it's very evident that girdling roots are shortening their lifespans whereas with sugars, it's "maple decline", that murky set of issues-road salt, poor soils (in new subdivisions), compaction, planted too deep (in the way-back days), and all the rest.....

Silvers, reds........nothing of the sort ever happens. Are you telling me that you see those species too suffering from girdling roots? I sure don't nor sugars for that matter. But Norways........you can go right down the block and check them off. Huge difference.

Bill, I understand your reluctance (first, do no harm), but that root is small enough that it's almost insignificant & you won't hurt the tree by cutting it.

Where do I cut it off? Close to trunk of the tree?

Bill - yes, close to trunk, and then I generally make a second cut to remove as much as I can without disturbing the rest of the roots in any way.

Regarding Acer and fusing roots - my arborist has told me, in the context of A. palmatum, that their roots can fuse. Just fyi, and she keeps up on research.

Tom, girdling problems are definitely the minority. I've frequently noticed how thoroughly maples fuse their roots together. I've also seen numerous examples of where maples self-pruned roots by expanding and breaking girdling roots (obviously, these weren't being fused or fused fast enough). It just seemed to me that you were reporting that the researchers found no girdling problems, and that has not been my experience.

I just remembered a situation I ran into a few years back that might relate to this case. I saw a root not too different from the one in the picture, except on a much larger silver maple. It wasn't causing a problem but, like in this case, just looked like it was begging to be removed. I made the cut at the tree, assuming I could pull the remaining root back to cut it off at ground level. With a quick visual inspection, I had thought that the root was unattached to the roots below it. Boy was I wrong. Once I started tugging on the thing, I found it was completely fused with roots below. My evaluation had been way to hasty, and I kind of had a mess on my hands. I ended up with what I thought was kind of a mess, but I didn't have any wood glue with me to make amends.

p.s. Yes, I am kidding about the wood glue.