From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Clinton, Iowa

Ok fire away all thoughts. We generally agree ( I think) that most feed comes from the plant that sets between the fruit and the stump. We'll call that "before the fruit" WHat if any does the fruit get from plant PAST the fruit. What do you think....ANd on the same train of thought...Has anyone done any research on whether fruits set farther out tend to weigh "heavier to the chart" verses fruits set closer to the stump? Now we would have to compare from same fruits from same plants. that way they would atleast have the same genetics . Granted there are other factors from soil to climate to grower tech. BUT I was just wondering if anyne had done any research. Our 1016.5 went a little light and it was only about 9 feet out. ALl others were basically on or slightly over the chart. all were over 15 feet out. THANKS
DAN

11/10/2004 11:41:43 PM

Port Alberni, BC, Canada

Dan, I had two fruits on the same plant. The first was on a secondary vine 8 ft. from the stump. It was 958 lbs and 3.84% heavy to chart. The second was 20 ft. from the stump on the main vine. It was 1142 lbs. and 2.67% heavy to chart. There wasn't much "before the fruit" for the 958.
BTW, genetics are the same for both. 1066 Vezzolo X 1367.5 Rose.

11/11/2004 3:18:27 AM

Ohio

WOW!dutchman!!

Dan, I always wondered about this also, There was a few Wentzell Pumpkins grown over a 1000 pounds only 6 feet out from the stump on the main, One was the 1081 Wentzell Im almost sure(correct me if Im wrong someone), and a couple others under 10 feet that went in the 900 range.

I dont know if this was a fluke this year but My 572 pumpkin was 13 feet out on the main and stopped growing for 2 days so I cut everything past the pumpkin and it definatly started growing again,But stopped a couple days later. I have heard of people doing this and they did get extra growth but yet others havn't. Ill do it again in 2005 when mine stops growing again just to see if it was just a fluke,you really have nothing to lose trying it.
Brooks

11/11/2004 4:41:38 AM

Cologne / Germany

If have to second that Brooks - 2100 lbs. of fruit on 1 plant, truely amazing: WOW dutchman!
Concerning before / after this sounds interesting:
http://www.bigpumpkins.com/MsgBoard/ViewThread.asp?b=3&p=83800

11/11/2004 4:59:20 AM

Deer Park, WI

Way to get me all fired up Carlson. This issue is a hot one for me, mostly because growers throw logic out the window when it comes to this. There are a couple of well respected growers out there who swear up and down that foliage after the fruit plays little-no part in fruit growth, and becuase of their reputation, the masses follow their ideals like gospel.

We've hashed this topic time and time again, and its good cause people need hear it time and time again before it sinks in. If you've followed my posts in the past, you know that I truly believe foliage beyond the fruit plays a huge role.

I wish i didnt have to toot my horn to get some respect on this matter, but im afraid that's the way the world turns. With that said, I've got 2-1000lb fruit, 1-900, and a couple of 700's under my belt in 4 years of growing. Because I live in the great cold North, my frost date comes up a little quicker than most. This forces me to set fruit EARLY on the main vine, in the 7-10ft range. And that's exactly what i do. My 3 largest fruit have been set at 8, 8, and 10 feet. I grow my mains to 20', so a little math shows that 50% of my foliage is comes from in front of the fruit, and another 50% behind it. continued....

11/11/2004 8:51:27 AM

Deer Park, WI

"is comes"...wow thats great english. sorry, i need to proof before posting...

Anywho, the one point i need to drive home loud and flippin clear is that PHOTOSYTHATE TRANSPORT IS NOT UNI-DIRECTIONAL! Here's the quick version- Roots suck up water, water is shuttled to leaves via xylem. Leaves mix water with sugar and ship it back out to ROOTS, GROWING TIPS, and PUMPKINS via phloem. This is the same process in front and behind the fruit.

Here's a bit a controversy for you. What if i said the plant before the fruit supplies LESS to the pumpkin that the plant after the fruit??? ***GASP*** Keep in mind that photosynthate gravitates towards the closest sink. What if its the first few secondaries that are supplying all the juice to the root system below the crown, and the plant material after the fruit is pumping up the fruit. HUH? I think i hear crickets......

I'll hang up the science hat and donn the practical experience hat for a moment. In 2003 i was blessed with a personal best fruit. I was also cursed with a major case of Powdery mildew in August and September. Come early September, I had lost roughly 50% of my leaves to PM, all in front of the fruit. Foliage after the fruit was fairly new, and had not succumbed to the plague. THE FRUIT CONTINUED TO GROW, PACKING ON 200LBS IN SEPTEMBER, minus the foliage in the front.

Have I made my point folks??? Please someone tell me i have made a difference here. Im not telling you that you have to have foliage after the fruit to grow big, what im saying is FOLIAGE AFTER THE FRUIT PLAYS A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN FRUIT PRODUCTION.

Im beggin any of you to shoot this down. Convince me to change my mind and my seed collection is yours.

11/11/2004 9:06:55 AM

Indiana

I say results are inconclusive...LOL

Tom

11/11/2004 9:07:02 AM

Www.extremepumpkinstore.com

Very intersting Joze!

11/11/2004 9:18:42 AM

That State Up North

Joe speaks truth. It is all source-sink relation, and definitly not directionaly dependent. The plant after the pumpkin does play a tremendous roll, the choice is yours to ignore it, or use it.
Now some thoughts on the matter:
It is distance dependent, so this causes me to think of "radius of influence" as a means of analyzng your plant structure and its importance to the fruit.
Also, must consider the developmental impact. When the fruit is pollinated, the vast majority is behind the fruit. And depending on how your plant grows, this is most likely true for at least 30 days, and probably up to 50 days or more depending on how you are managing the plant. Also, compound this with the fact that all the vine tips are being terminated behind the fruit. Each one of these tips is also a sink. The pumpkin is a sink, well our favorite and most important sink. So, where is the focus of all phloem movement in the plant that is behind the fruit? That is at least until much later in fruit developement, there is less growth past the fruit, and that groth past the fruit has vine tips growing much later each representing a sink that is distracting from the fruit. For this reason, the "befor" section of the plant is contributing a major amount of the fruit mass up to 50 days old. So, check your 50 day est, and see what % of your final weight that was. Now, as the

11/11/2004 9:40:07 AM

That State Up North

season hits the 50+ day fruit age mark, you may be finishing up, terminating an equal surface area past the fruit (all dependent on how you managed the plant, but you could be terminating much earlier with reduced "after" surface area, or later). When all the shoots are terminated after the fruit, we reach a point, given equal surface area where before and after should be playing an equal role in contributing to fruit growth. The kicker then is that you must consider the plant health at 60, 70, 80, 90 days old for your fruit. Those leaves "before" the fruit are begining to be less healthy, and contribute less and less, so now the "after" plant is more important.
Well, think this one over, and Joe, look at the surface area distribution, and age, and compare to fruit weights, and I think you will see that "before" in most cases is supplying a majority of your fruit weight, so go ahead and send me your seeds since I have no-where to plant them.

Nic Welty

11/11/2004 9:40:14 AM

That State Up North

for % heavy vs distance out, well there are lots of numbers out there, and we can do some crunching and make some eyeball guesses, back when I used to have two fruit per plant in '98 I had a 595 Stellpflug, 809 and 739 on that plant, the 809 was closer to the stump, on the main vine, and it was higher % heavy thatn the 739 which was farther out on the second main. Also of note is that the stump rotted off on the 595 plant, so the fruit grew without the mid-secton of the the plant. Another tidbit, the 809 was grown with the vine terminated at the fruit, and the 739 was grown more traditional with plant before and after. Also in '98 had an 833.5 Mombert plant (ended up 5000 sq ft and had over 5000 pounds of fruit on that one, ah those were the days) that plant had a 728 lb fruit on a second-main close to the base, and a 538 lb fruit very far out on the main vine. The 538 was the winner in terms of relative % heavy and wall thickness.
These comparisons however lack enough information to make any conclusions from them, way to many other factors influencing what actualy happend there. Time of year (different environments), success of pollination (seed counts), disease impacts, altered pruning methods of other form, situational conditions of soil between each fruit, ect ect
so lets make some speculation

Nic Welty

11/11/2004 9:51:00 AM

Cologne / Germany

As far as I know pap made it to 900+ with a plant that was mostly behind the fruit (the link I posted). Pap and other growers suggested not to cut anything from the plant after the fruit in case you wouldn´t be forced to do so (space, disease, stem stress) - apart from regular pruning.

IMHO we should accept the plant as a "closed circuit". As long as anything is in good condition, the plant is operating at full capacity in all directions. If a part of it gets lost (eg. due to disease), the rest will still work. Maybe it´s even strong enough to resume the former capacity.
Might not sound scientific but somehow logical though :)

11/11/2004 10:01:28 AM

Applegate, Oregon

Interesting conversation, this very thing came up at the PGVG patch tour this year, with no definative conclusion. My 1028 this year was set at 7 ft, with no secondaries on the fruit side of the main before the fruit.

11/11/2004 10:22:41 AM

Brush Prairie, Wa

hmmm, maybe this explains why my 620 this year never really took off around day 30. There was no plant behind the fruit because the fruit was at the very edge of my patch already. I do know that I've seen pumpkins cut off the vine and when the vine after the pumpkin is cut I've seen that weep as much as the vine before the pumpkin.

11/11/2004 10:59:15 AM

Choctaw, OK

OK, so, Conclusion...Keep your plants healthy as growth comes from EVERY direction. Sounds good to me.
case

11/11/2004 1:11:36 PM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

These type of cultural discussions are among my favorites on this forum. You can learn alot from them, or at least they get you thinking.
If the whole plant contributes to fruit growth(which I have no reason to doubt), wouldn't the largest plant possible, give the best results? But it seems the recent trend is toward smaller plant sizes. Why is this?
Also, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the best time terminate secondary vines. Do you try to start the termination process right around fruit set time, or do you do it when the vines get to a certain length? I think I saw it mentioned here, that after a certain length, longer secondaries, aren't helpful. I don't know why though.
I've got other questions, but I'll stop here for now.

Doug

11/11/2004 1:38:57 PM

Western Pa.

This year I grew 8 plants, all flag style. One day I got so wrapped up in pruning, that when I looked back at what I had done, it appeared that I had overdone it. My 898 Knauss plant (when I had finished "attacking" it), had less than 75 sq. feet of plant. After almost giving up all hope, I grew another 100' of plant after the fruit. This growth appeared new to the end, while the first 80' was just about done for. The results, a new PB of 809.5#!

just my 2,

kilr

11/11/2004 1:46:18 PM

Www.extremepumpkinstore.com

I am really interested in Doug14 question, very interesting.

11/11/2004 1:57:39 PM

Garden State Pumpkins

This is really good when it comes to pruning questions and early pollenation. I have often thought that trimming off early secondaries and getting the main to run faster for an earlier main vine pollenation would be good...There has to be a balance on the sink....if early secondaries were trimmed and the main got out to 12 feet by first week of july with a pollenation this would be a good thing??? I don't know how else to get this 12 feet length on the main since my secondaries grow just as fast early on in early spring...I hot house em(grow light and heat lamp under plastic) ...but they grow as wide as they grow long...So I guess my question is does anybody trim early secondaries, provided of course, that the main is lookin healthy and solid to promote main vine growth? Or is this too big of risk knowing that more then a few have snapped tips in the wind and a secondary has to be trained in it's place.

11/11/2004 3:13:03 PM

Cologne / Germany

Doug and others, just 3 theories I read here on BP.com:

- Secondaries longer than 17 ft don´t contribute to the plant any more, they only feed themselves
- It´s typical to terminate the first secondary by the time you pollinate your first female on the main
- Concentrate your keeper in the middle of the plant. So terminate your main about the same length after the fruit than what you have before.

Is this the Holy Grail of AG growing? :)

11/11/2004 3:21:36 PM

I'm with Gordon... GO UTES!

Here is something that I've been wondering about, sorta
along these lines, but a different approach...

Usually when females start opening I get a wave of them
all in the same week. This very first week, usually these
are always four-lobe females. Then after a week or 10 days,
I start seeing 5 lobe females in the patch. And, these are
usually further out on the vines, perhaps the second or
third to open on a vine... Finally, later in the season
I usually see a switch back to 4 lobe females.

Now, if you assume that a 5 lobe is "better" than a 4 lobe,
(which isn't necessarily so) and you assume that all of
this is genetically programmed in the plant, it would seem
that females toward the middle of the pollination season
have a genetic predisposition to become larger ... ?

Just thinking...

11/11/2004 3:23:08 PM

Clinton, Iowa

WOO HOO!! I really did it hear didn't I.....Heck Joze COULD lose his seed collection over this one!!LOL!!
I loved the part about the creditials!!LMAO!! WOw and no comments about the weight of your wife (LOL! inside joke wink wink)
ANyways....WHat joze says really makes sense...as does Nic Welty's thinking...Very insightful thinking and they even have some honest to goodness KNOWLEDGE!!!
ANyways...our 1432 was out there near 20 feet maybe a bit more but we'll call it 20....maybe 10 feet of main tops past it and NO sides past it either....basically aLL 550 TO 600 SQUARE FEET behind the fruit...and I have never had growth like I had this year. 3.. 50 pound plus days in a row. Scarey...others in the patch did heavy growth also....40ish range I would think with out looking it up..Most of these fruits were also set a ways out...with little plant after the fruit...BUT with what Joze is telling me I am thinking it probably pays to keep that plant on after the fruit....Makes sense..I do know that the portion of th eplant is th eonly part that looks for crap at around labor day . so I would assume any growth coming in Sept would be from that area of th eplant. Hey it makes sense..THANSK for th ethoughts and all your answers
DAN

11/11/2004 3:36:54 PM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

Thanks floh. How did the 17 foot number come about? Was there a study to determine this?

Alexsdad,
I was thinking along your lines a few months ago, when I asked a question about if a snake vine pumpkin would result in a faster growing mainvine(as opposed to letting the secondaries grow). I think the few resposes I got, was that it would not. But maybe others will chime in.
For those of you that prune every other secondary off, do you find the mainvine to be more vigorous(faster growing), compared to leaving all secondaries on?

Doug

11/11/2004 3:38:20 PM

Clinton, Iowa

As far as pruning and when to do it..Our plants have assigned areas...when they reach that "line in the dirt" they get cut. Sorry it's a dog eat dog world!! If you happened to read about Steve D record breaker in 2003 he mentioned something about how the early warm spring enabled him to set his fruit out further on the main then normal. as in close to 18 feet (from memory here) out the main maybe even 20.. I know it was mentiioned by him it was "farther out then normal" I believe this further out played a direct result in getting the weekly weight gains we recieved on alot of our fruits..We (marc and I) will be shooting for 16 feet minimum in 2005 and 20 would be better in my book. BUT weather in the spring plays a role...on just how big your plant will be come the golden time to pollinate. Basically you take what you get here in Iowa. Thanks again for all the thoughts
DANNY

11/11/2004 3:44:33 PM

Clinton, Iowa

Our 1432 was a 4 lober?? what does that mean//Who knows just throwing it out there

11/11/2004 3:46:19 PM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

Danny
I appreciate your insights, and willingness to share. With the success you and Marc had this year, it carries a lot of weight(forgive the pun). I'd like to learn as much as I can here, to set myself up for a successful 2005 growing season.
With all the collective experience of the members here, we should have a lot to go by. It should be an interesting winter.

Doug

11/11/2004 5:44:36 PM

Choctaw, OK

Other factors like weather, soil, and genetics play a role in how fast the fruit will grow as well. If dan set a fruit at 10 feet on his 1097, would it have done differently? Absolutely. I have grown 800+ at 8-10 feet and 800+ at 17-20 feet. The 17 foot set had NO plant beyond the fruit, due to some critter muching on the main vine (that fruit was easy to take care of the stem stress, vine positioning, etc). All of my big fruit have come from plants that have somewhat puttered out after the fruit, around day 30 of fruit growth. You get an extra 300 sq feet at the most and the plant just dosent want to grow anymore. This could be due to pruning, because you are thwarting all stuff to the fruit by terminating side vines before the fruit. It could signal the plant to do that with the plant beyond the fruit automatically? Who knows....something to ponder i guess. Lobes dont mean much to me, that just basically determines the amount of seeds in a fruit, i dont know if it really affects fruit shape, etc. I havent bought into that one.

case

11/11/2004 6:01:55 PM

Choctaw, OK

Another possible thing to ponder....(a little off the subject, but...)

Later sets seem to grow faster, from experience and hearing from others. Those later sets are typically farther down the main vine, unless you grow in WI and the weather only lets you set by july 15th at 8 feet out. LOL. Joe can validate that fact.

Earlier sets grow slower, which means more consistantly, probably anyways, and that could in turn reduce splits? Just throwing that one out there.

My earliest set grew my biggest fruit this year and also grew the longest(most days with growth) out of all the fruit, even the late sets, which technically should grow longer since they were pollinated later. I guess that all depends on where you grow. September weather is better in Ohio than it is in, say, MN or WI.

11/11/2004 6:09:08 PM

Ohio

Dan, How many seeds did your 4 lobe pumpkin have in it?

11/11/2004 6:36:36 PM

Brillion Wisconsin

This is always a great subject and I really enjoy reading others perspectives on this and other subjects like this.

I was a firm believer in farther out fruit sets, say 12 ft+. Get as much plant behind the pumpkin as possible to really provide maximum nutrition.

After a disappointing 2004 season, I'm likely to take the advice and adopt some of the techniques of those who done well in 2004. It may not really matter which philosophy you agree with, just which technique you feel confident with and works for you.

This year I tried to grow the side vines closest to the pumpkin the longest, both before and after the pumpkin. I remember reading somewhere that the side vines closest to the fruit set supposely contribute the most to the pumpkin.
The theory had to do with proximity side vine roots. I hacked off the side vines that were creating stem stress and stress on the main(4 feet in either direction)and grew the nearest remaining side vines out to 25+ feet. Although things did'nt turn out the way I wanted them to I can't blame my pruning techniques. I think I just had a DUD seed. Listen to Joze and Casey they consistantly grow big.

I'm working on a new strategy for 2005 and plan on bringing that Weidman Trophy home with me next year. Dean o

11/11/2004 7:13:14 PM

Saegertown Pa.

At the Niagara seminar this year, I brought up the subject about a few good growers suggesting that you get little, or no, growth beyond the pumpkin and that it would be a good idea to try cutting off the vine right past the pumpkin. A face-to-face discussion at that time would have been beneficial due to the fact that the purpose of the seminar is for growers to get together, compare ideas, and throw out theories for discussion. This is my opinion and observation based on what I have grown. It would be silly to make the statement that you get no growth after the pumpkin. Of course you get some growth from the plant after the pumpkin. A prime example is the 898 Knauss that I grew this year. When the pumpkin was 200 lbs., I lost the stump and the first two side vines off from both sides of the main. Half of the leaves from that point up to the pumpkin were very, very diseased. I decided to let the main run and I did not terminate it. I let the side vines grow 12' and then terminated them. The pumpkin ended up 998 lbs. When comparing this pumpkins potential growth rate with my pumpkins from this year and last year, this should have ended up being a 1,200+ lb. pumpkin. Along the lines with the source-sink relation, which I agree on, once everything is terminated from stump to pumpkin, all, or most, of that energy is going to the fruit. Everything after the fruit, is being divided between the pumpkin and the new growth. I believe that you should terminate enough beyond the pumpkin so most of the energy is going to the pumpkin, not to the new growth. How much to terminate is anyones guess. I believe that letting 50% of the plant grow beyond the pumpkin will drastically take away from the potential total weight of that pumpkin.

11/11/2004 7:46:50 PM

Saegertown Pa.

One of the keys is to have healthy leaves from stump to pumpkin at the end of the growing season. That can be accomplished with a disease-free plant, but is another suject for another time. I disagree with the opinion that the masses follow the idea that you get no growth after the pumpkin. Successful growers from many states and different regions of the country,that I have talked to about this subject, believe in some growth after the pumpkin. Most of them believe in more after-pumpkin growth than I do. This is a good subject for discussion, but we need to remember that there is more than one way to skin a cat and very large pumpkins have been grown using a variety of different methods that sometime contradict each other. We need to be open to new ideas and at least consider that we don't know everything and if we did, we would all be growing world-record pumpkins every year. Insanity is doing things the way you've always done them and wondering why you always get the same results. What does this all mean? This is just my opinion. It doesn't make me right, or wrong. For you, Joze, I'm sure I didn't change your mind, but just in case I did; I know of a good organization you can send your seeds to :)

11/11/2004 7:47:15 PM

Ontario, Canada.

Well this has certainly been an interesting topic. Please allow me to wade into the fray. Here is my belief based on the research I have done these past two years and based on a number of articles I have read.

You are all right for many reasons. Before is good for the fruit just as after is good too. It is all about nutrient uptake and which parts of the plants are actively growing with the fruit and the plants young unsuberized roots. The nutrient uptake I refer to is calcium, nitrate nitrogen and ammonium nitrogen.

Nitrate nitrogen tends encourage soft succulent vegetative terminal growth at the expense of reproductive growth. This is noticed with fresh applications of manure in plants that produce excessive green growth but yeild little fruits or ones that split.

Ammonium Nitrogen uptake alters the plants sugar metabolism. This encourages not only more sugar production but a greater rate of export out of the leaves to the roots and on the way to the roots, the fruits (sinks) and storage organs can grab the sugars and enhance growth, yield and over the chart high quality fruit.

11/11/2004 8:36:35 PM

Ontario, Canada.

As the plant continues its growth cycle nitrate nitrogen can tend to accumulate in the leaves and increase organic acid production, which increases the demand for Calcium to neutralize the acidity, if this calcium is in short supply calcium may be mobilized from the roots. This movement of calcium from roots is the demise of the root integrity and can lead to leaky roots and ethylene production thus signaling the plant(pumpkin) to shut down or shortly before hand causing the pumpkin to split from the redirected calcium supply to the leaves.

The key is only young roots can readily absorb enough calcium fast enough to stave off this depletion in the roots. This maybe the answer as to why some growers report good gains in September when young far out vines and leaves are not affected by PM and thier roots are helping to support the older sections of the plant. These roots are relitively young an can still supply enough nutrients to the rest of the plant. Swing the balance to far and the aging gas ethylene is produced halting your growth permanently.

Therefore no matter 8' out or 20' out young roots are the main contributor to the sink. So it is my belief that were ever the fruit is really matters not what is more important is the quality and age percentage of your young roots and vines.

11/11/2004 8:36:47 PM

I'm with Gordon... GO UTES!

> Nitrate nitrogen tends encourage soft succulent
> vegetative terminal growth at the expense of
> reproductive growth.

This is the first time I'd heard that different types of
nitrogens had different effects. But I must say, your
description sounds exactly like what I saw in my patch
last year. I got some manure in March. Now I know why that
is bad... well, it was fresher than I thought it would
be. Anyway, my plants grew like crazy. But I had very little
fruit growth and way too many aborts.

This is a great discussion...

11/12/2004 12:08:20 AM

Eddyz@efirehose.net

Joze, I agree with you totally on the need for plant beyond the fruit. But how important is the plant beyond the fruit in the traditional way of planting, ie: pit or mound. From what I understand most of the growers used to pit or mound all the time. And of late the growers have more of a tendancy to build up their patches, Jerry Rose for instance.

Now in the pit or mound the main area of nutrients is located at the stump, and the balance of the patch was more for leaf area and not so much for nutrients. So in a case like this would the plant beyond the fruit be that important. And in the case of Jerry Rose's patch(being built up) the whole patch is like the pit and nuitrients are picked up all over, then the plant beyond the fruit would be more important. So what I'm trying to say is, the level of importance of the plant beyond the fruit would be determined by the method of Soil prep.
my 2 cents
Eddy

11/12/2004 12:40:18 AM

nanaimo,B.C,Canada

I think that one of the reason's the weights have gone up so much is because of smaller pruned plants,thus we are not wasting the plants energy on leaf growth. There has been a dramatic increase in weight gains over the past few years and the one common denominater with most big pumpkins is plants under 600 square feet. Just my 2 cents worth.

Dave

dave

11/12/2004 1:21:54 AM

Colorado Hail, CO. Elev. 5,900 FT

This is quite the informative thread, I was wondering when one might come up... it is November...LOL! Those are all excellent observations and all good things to point out.

The different changes in the soil environment probably have the most effects on fruit growth and overall growth, but pruning techniques and the sink/ sources are equally important. Also, temperatures and moisture contents affect the microbes and soil pathogens. Temperature and moisture also play a role in the availability of certain key nutrients the plant can or cannot take in. Both factors cause changes in the early season soils PH {warmer soils are able to build up amino and other soil acids}.This early season soil usually will be more acidic, which allows the plant to take in the micro nutrients iron, manganese,and zinc. As the plant absorbs the essential early season nutrients like phosphates and nitrates,they release hydroxyl groups and bicarbonates {OH- and HCO3- , to be politically correct..chemically}, which is what makes soils alkaline. As plants absorb mineral nutrients, also called ions, they will replace those ions with other different ions. Plants absorb minerals which fall in either the "anion " and "cation" categories. Depending on what the plant needs or if the soil nutrients are out of balance, the plant will absorb and release hydrogen {H+} or hydroxyl {OH-} ions.....

11/12/2004 2:34:07 AM

Colorado Hail, CO. Elev. 5,900 FT

Nitrogen is one of the most influencing factors during all of the season, but it is changing from one state to another and is used up by the soil microbe population as well as the plant. It also leaches out of the upper soil zone with excessive applications of water, or is lost to the atmosphere in the form of ammonia , especially during hot conditions. Getting the nitro just right is probably one of the most important things a grower needs to grow a P.B. weight. Too much will induce vigorous vegetative growth to the detriment of root and/ or fruit growth.. Another factor in root/ plant growth are the oxygen/ carbon dioxide levels in the root areas. It also is constantly changing as the plant grows. The roots {and beneficial microbes} need to "breath" oxygen, they replace it with carbon dioxide gas { the gas which the leaves need to "breath"}. As the season goes by, the initial growth area of the plant may have an excess/ lack of "this or that", which affects the growth rate of fruit/ vegetation/ or roots. The plant growing in soil past the fruit {newly rooted areas} may have what the plant needs in those locations. I don't mean to get too detailed on the soil chemistry stuff {I'm still trying to understand how it all works myself}, but I needed to include that info to make a point.... the availability of nutrients in the soil medium affects fruit size just as much as plant size or growing techniques do. They all play important roles in growing fruits to their maximum potentials.

11/12/2004 2:34:43 AM

Colorado Hail, CO. Elev. 5,900 FT

OK.. what the hell does all this mumbo jumbo have to do with this thread? How the hell does a grower know when to prune... or where? What do we need to add, or not add, to keep the soil and plant in the best possible condition?On top of those questions, how do genetics factor in with all this? The answer my friend...is blowing in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind...
{that brings up another undiscussed factor... wind}
LMAOLOL!!!!!!

11/12/2004 2:35:16 AM

Colorado Hail, CO. Elev. 5,900 FT

Well, it isn't right for me to jump in and not give some input which might be beneficial or helpful. I better at least suggest some kind of method to keep the plant and fruit in the best health possible. Ok.. here are some possibilities...

Apply organic fertilizers in fall and spring, along with high organic materials in fall. Test PH in fall, directly before pulling out the plants leaf canopy. Adjust soil accordingly {it should be on the high end of things} and till in everything. In spring, test PH again and submit soil samples to determine what specific nutrients should be added. Hope for nice warm sunny spring conditions and construct whatever ingenious cold frame you can to optimize early season growth rates. Get the plant growing to the largest possible size right before fruit set, then allow an equal amount of growth after the fruit {less depending on plant health}, then stand back and wait for weigh offs. Sounds all so easy, huh? I wish it was....

I hope my 2.3 cents helps someone out down the road... I'm sure this thread will! Everyone has shared some great information, I've got a lot out of it... thanks everyone for taking the time out to post! B.T.W...I'd love to continue on and discuss the things I've observed & learned while growing the clones, and touch on the subject of sucker vines and what harm or good they are. I don't have the credentials maybe some of you guys do weight wise, but I have you all topped when it comes to growing in the worst possible place to grow! Just ask Pete Glazier...LOL! I'm sure he won't be EVER moving back to this state again anytime soon...Does one need credentials to post in here Joe? LOL!!!!!

11/12/2004 2:36:15 AM

Cornwall UK.(50N 5W)300ft.

My best fruit in 2003 and again this year (791 & 430) were 20 ft out on main vines and both terminated at the fruit not really my plan but no worries about growing that way for me.For me growth after the fruit is about growth anywhere on the plant after pollination whether in front or behind the fruit.

11/12/2004 3:30:53 AM

Caceres, mid west of Spain

The explanation of Nic Welty is one of the clearest I've ever read. My thoughts go on the same way.
What I will do next season is to allow the secondaries behind the fruit to grow as far as they can until the first pollination will be done. Then I will prune the tips in order to send the phloem from the first part of the plant to the fruit, while the main vine and the secondaries after the fruit continue growing. The secondaries after the fruit will be pruned sequentially, looking for a balance between enough foliar area after the fruit for the late season and not many sinks that make competency with the fruits.
That will make the shape of the plant close to a typical Christmas tree, rather than the traditional rectangle I used. So I will have to prepare a wider area for the back side of the plant.

Carlos

11/12/2004 4:27:29 AM

Ljubljana, Slovenia

My plant behaved exactly the way Nick described and it was my biggest success. Jernej

11/12/2004 4:47:47 AM

Clinton, Iowa

brooks....400 roughly...(seeds) our 1016.5 had 900...that is the most I have ever goten from a fruit
Quinn....wonderful writing..and guess what...My partner Marc has an arrow in a big 10 point tonight...!!! WOO HOOO!!!
we will look this morning,Hence the early am posting here..Can't sleep!!LOL!!
I took him to a stand tonight...gota shot at a wonderrful animal that should score in the 140's maybe more....He is sooo excited..What are partners for!!LOL!! Bleeding real good but has already went some 400 yards...heading across an open picked corn field...crossed infront of our parked jeep aboout 40 yards away....WHAT A NIGHT!! wish us luck
and I am just over whelmed at all th einfo from this posting..MAN I am glad I asked such a question..I am sure others are also!
DANNY

11/12/2004 5:12:10 AM

Garden State Pumpkins

Hey Danny hope you find em early today...A quick question. For this thread...distance from the stump? Did you terminate all females prior to the twenty feet out or was that your first viable pumpkin pollenation. Getting a mai out twenty feet by the first week in July seems like quite a feat...heat cables? any tips on haow to get a main ot that long...I try to plant first week of May...but even six week later I'm lucky to have 12 foot mains..and also just starting to trim the first secondaries...I do note that as these secondaries get trimmed that the main starts to really move...maybe I'll go with ten foot secondaries..LOL

11/12/2004 7:33:56 AM

Deer Park, WI

Wooza- 45 replies and not one handful of mud has been thrown (except for that comment about my wife, that will be handled later). It brings a tear to my eye.... Nice work Carlson, on finding a topic where we can all get along. You get a gold star for today.

Lots of great ideas and suggestions in this post. Quinn I like your answer, your points are well taken. As a final comment, I'd like to restate that Im not against sets with little plant material after the fruit. My argument was that this plant material does indeed play a big role in fruit development, which you seemed to agree with.

Welty- IM gonna hafta check my numbers on the development of the fruit relative to the plant area and get back to you. It will make for another interesting midwinter discussion.

11/12/2004 9:13:32 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Joe,

You were going to attempt a vascular system dye trace this year. Did you ever find time to do it?

For the sake of this discusion, when radio-isotopes were injected into Cucurbita pepo, the vascular movement consistantly moved toward any & all sinks regardless of direction. The tests were kind of flawed for the purpose of our discussion because it confirmed rate of travel & not distance. But bi-directionalism is proven in Cucurbita.

The timing element is interesting & almost certainly valid.

11/12/2004 9:56:22 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

One thing that was discussed at Topsfield this year that I don't see mentioned here:

I've heard that the first prime fruit should be pollinated at the expense of every other possible fruit as early in the season as possible & that no cullable set should remain longer than absolutely necesary. The argument goes that the plant must never be allowed to "think" it has more sinks. Theory being that once the vascular tubes are routed, they won't "redirect" with the same ferocity elsewhere.

11/12/2004 9:56:35 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Now I have to get back to the task at hand.

Don't forget to donate seeds to the CT Giant Squash & Pumpkin Growers Assoc first ever seed auction. We need the list finished by this evening.

Dan, Joe, Tom, & Marc = Thanks for all the support so far!!!

11/12/2004 9:58:50 AM

Deer Park, WI

Steve- i didnt get around to the vasular dye trace and im kicking my self for it. Plus it was so damn cold in may june july august that the dye wouldnt have moved anyways...lol. its on this years agenda.

11/12/2004 10:55:41 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Dye + soluble Nitrogen = moving dye.

11/12/2004 10:59:38 AM

Ontario, Canada.

Steve, are you referring to the first flower on the main as the prime?

11/12/2004 11:10:10 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Remove females until the prime (10-18') location. Set one of several prime remaining choices. Cull to one before grapefruit size. Then immediately remove all others all year. It takes guts & maybe lots of plants. But I hear there are some very mysterious gaps found in the patches of certain hitters every summer.

11/12/2004 11:15:07 AM

Colorado Hail, CO. Elev. 5,900 FT

I have one good question to add... what would be better to have, less plant tips {sinks} before the fruit sets, or as many as is possible? If more is the case, would it be better to allow the back mains to grow out additional sides for additional foliage/ roots/ and sinks? This would get the plant much larger early on. Wayne Kennedy would have good input on the subject perhaps. I can say that my largest fruits were grown on plants that had more foliage than other years except the 666 {grown off sides and teriaries on a hail damaged plant}. Does the plant respond differently when it is injured or pruned extremly hard?

I have noticed if you allow the sides to grow out and bury the vine, allowing it to root, then dead head at the last buried point instead of the tip, nothing noticable happens. If you bury the vine but prune off just the vine tip, the plant will grow out the largest leaves on the plant. When the vine is buried then, the roots usually never even develop at all below those big leaves. So, what method is better to use... dead head to the last rooted leaf, or cut the tip the vine and let it grow out? How does this affect the plants behavior?

11/12/2004 12:03:31 PM

Cornwall UK.(50N 5W)300ft.

Chuck,
my plants were about 90 days from sowing to female open at that distance (21st April to 21st July)both had pumpkins set at 10-12ft(late June set)that were culled because of slow growth.

11/12/2004 12:54:51 PM

Clinton, Iowa

Ok here goes...NO mud slinging!!
Bummer on Petey's deer...We looked for 6 or 7 hours...he never bedded....We are both just sick...I asked him WHAT"S up...first i take off and leave him our biggest pumpkin and he splits it!! LMAO!! and now I give him my best stand and he miss fires!!LOL!! Yea he is just sick over it BUT we will survive!!
Now on to the pumpkin thing. THAT 1097 beachy plant was an ANIMAL as far as growth goes Plant wise. it had a main out there to 20 feet and beyond by earl;y july. WEATHER I will stress that...THE WEATHER WAS PERFECT those early months....it was started may 1st...it was up in 4 days out side on the 5th. ALso...it was the third one out on the main that we let go..we had 2 other pollinated but they were early..from memory here....june 20th....june 25th....we kept the june 30 set fruit....culled the earlier 2...maybe let them get to slightly bigger then grapefruit size....BUT we were terminating side vines before that final set main vine fruit..the side were out there 15 feet by that time...I telll you and marc will agree..the plant was extremely aggressive.... ALso when we decided to cull out all the side vine fruits and such..Marc did al those on that particular plant..I think he did cull out atleast 15 to 20 fruit total....because this thing set fruit EVERYWHERE....that culling left us with one main vine fruit and 2 on opposising side vines rougly 8 or so secondary out from the stump...ALso I do believe we had 12 side vines on each side going back to the stump from the fruit to the stump....
All my plants went and grew abnormally fast for my area or compared to other years. WEATHER and the fact my soil was the best I had ever seeen it even after 14 years none stop in the same patch we got this kind of growth and fruit developement...Ok anything else?? i think I answered those question directed to me...
Good luck..Love this thread.. I am learning a ton!!!

11/12/2004 2:16:17 PM

Clinton, Iowa

for what it is worth...I have had trouble blowing up some main vines when I over prune th esecondaries...is it plant genetics or what I don;t know BUT I think I caused it to happen by limiting the secondary growth and when ther roots get developed under those secodaries and start helping out. the massive amount of energy they push out to the growing tips is to much and I have seen mains just splitter and blow completely out...Hence one of the reasons I have never taken out every other secondary . It just worries me to much....that I''ll blow out the mains because I won't have enough "sinks" ( how's that Joze I am even using the new LINGO I have learned!!!) to take the all that energy. so all my plants to date have been total plants with out any removal of the secodaries..Marc and i are stillpondering doing somethign there BUT I am hedging against it as of right now....with last years results...how can you argue changing some thing..BUT liek Quinn mentioned....You have to try other things...You are always learnign new things all the time...Like just look at the "Handy tilts" and the "Stelts 90's" Scotty A and I have employed over the past couple years..Do they help ?? I have no idea BUT I am doing them anyways??

11/12/2004 2:24:20 PM

ontario

very interesting thread...my thoughts.......if you set a pumpkin before 10 ft one should try to grow more plant at the back by allowing the tertiaries to grow off the first two secondaries...if you set passed 10 ft you would not need that extra back growth.....I think the plant will decide for you after fruit set how much growth you can get passed a fruit...I believe if the pumpkin is under 30 days you could possibly allow abit more growth passed it, but after that age you had better terminate all vines and get that weight into the fruit....you need healthy leaves and if yours are poor in the later stages of growth you better have some beyond the fruit to keep her going.....as for % over regarding length out I don't believe its the determining factor...nutrients and genetics are..... if your ready for a rolle-coaster ride.....then go with 90% growth behind fruit, but be ready for splits( really)....if you like it slow and safe grow more past the fruit and terminate later.....both these methods work,but are we going to set Personal bests or Records playing it safe .....healthy roots are a must and a balanced soil...Nic ...Dan and Quinn have all made very valid points......each year we try new things, some work some don't...never hurts to experiment....prune out every other vine is good, but not pruning out works as well....every other helps in maintaining your plant because of easier access.....one thing I learned this year.....you have known better LOL.....pollinate every bud 3 ft to 20 ft if need be, at least till you have a fruit select to go with......I cut-off buds that were to close to the stump, stupid me, put me way behind with late sets.....they grew like monsters but I ran out of season and out of good weather......do what seems to work for your patch and experiment each year......another thing I learnt this year......fast growing Squash don't like cool spells at all......so I'll be building a insulated inclosure for mine once they are going.......

11/13/2004 11:49:37 AM

Ontario, Canada.

I'm gonna print this thread and refer to it often. There is a ton of good stuff in here to read.

11/13/2004 12:05:05 PM

ENGLAND

Russ
Exactly what i was thinking, going out to buy another pack of paper tomorrow. The other thread on Vine Pruning is also a must print.

11/13/2004 5:44:28 PM

New York

Does anyone do what I do and replace old leaves behind the pumpkin with new growth? I got tired of seeing old beat up leaves in September, and since I usually have very little in front of the fruit, I felt like keeping the early stuff "fresh". All the main vine leaves behind the pumpkin along with many secondaries are cut off and replaced with a few well placed growing vines to fill the void. The area is filled in very quickly, buried, and pruned well before the pumpkin hits day 40...more like 30 days. The result is a very healthy 500'-600' of plant right up to harvest behind the fruit....with the middle actually being the healthiest at seasons end. It's takes a lot of time and patience as to not disturb the soil with pre set walking boards, but the end result looks good. Perhaps this is a kind of loop around approach as the vines are grown AFTER fruit set, but techniquely appear to have been grown before. It's good to see talk like this come up.

11/14/2004 3:11:04 AM

Oz

The SVBs got my root stumps this year.
The fruit that did stay on the vine grew their last without much,if any,stump root.

11/14/2004 7:41:28 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

The Powdery Mildew was bad here this summer. It started earlier than any year since I've grown. Thus we did "regrow" spent leaves by leaving some teriary vines. I took 2 (one off each off the first secondaies) & trained them foward parallel the main for 3 nodes to replace the oldest lost leaves. I can't say that I buried them well since they were crossing secondaries that were already buried. They never produced the agressive ariel roots either.

At the least, the fresh green leaves shaded the main vine area which lessened the impact of late encroaching weeds. Its not worth disturbing roots weeding late if they're very small. Plus I felt better about seeing verdant leaves & not the ethylene producing PM spore factories they replaced.

I started to think about doing this after talking about it with you Alan. In hindsight, I should have started "back training" earlier.

Of course had I started my fungicide sprays earlier I wouldn't have needed to.

11/14/2004 9:41:47 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Perhaps the "sink" doesn't care at all where the "source" is. Maybe a healthy young set of "source" leaves anywhere at all will still find the "sink" whether in front or behind.

Too young isn't good since young leaves are sinks themselves. Hmmmm......

11/14/2004 9:45:24 AM

Garden State Pumpkins

I tried to wrap a main back over secondaries that were trimmed of all leaves and buried about 8 inches in a very tight patch. The results were inconclusive. By the time I went and redug the area to see if the buried secondary roots were still viable the plant had already had a heavy frost so I couldn't tell if the original secondaries had stayed viable or succumbed to the extra soil depth deposited on them but in any case they looked as beat up as the overgrowing root system that covered them.

11/14/2004 10:02:00 AM