From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

I've read that many grown from this seed went very heavy according to the OTT est., while some went quite light.
What do you attribute this to? Is it mostly varying genetics, from one seed to the next?
Are those crosses, with 898 as a parent, where it went light, less desireable? I would assume that those that went light would likely pass this trait onto the next generation(of course the other parent will affect this). Is this a valid assumption? Or do you think that weather and growing conditions could cause this much variation?

Douglas

1/3/2005 2:05:46 PM

Pocatello (cliffwarren@yahoo.com)

I believe soil conditions can play a big role. High potassium
and low calcium have caused pumpkins to weigh light, according
to some anecdotal evidence.

What might be interesting to track... is how often does the
same grower/same year experience similar trends in heaviness
to the charts. That is, if you weigh several fruits and they
all go heavy, or they all go light, etc. This would be hard to
track, other than by "anecdotal evidence". But if we had some
data, this might just show a environmental or soil factor in
comparison to the chart...

1/3/2005 6:48:23 PM

Rexburg, Idaho (brianchristensenmd@gmail.com )

I'm inclined to agree with Cliff. I think that environmental conditions play a huge role in "heaviness" of the fruit.
In my patch for my biggest 10 pumpkins the charts overestimate the size of my fruit by an average of 62 pounds. (Range: underestimating by 160 pounds to overestimating by one pound).
All else being equal I'd plant the seed that tends to grow "heavy" pumpkins but I think most of this comes from the patch and not the seed.

1/3/2005 8:43:04 PM

Garden State Pumpkins

Yikes ! Looks like were back to dominant and recessive gene theory here...but I would like to know how many went heavy in Jack Larue's patch and how many went light...we're pretty sure that that patch was well tended with what 16 over 700 lbs...Jack could tell us if it was genetics or patch with that output..

1/3/2005 9:23:22 PM

Mn

I thought i'd give my input. Joe atlis grew a pumpkin on the 898 this year that went light. But he also had a pumpkin off the 960 larue that also went light. The 960 is a 1337 Houghton X 898 Knauss. The 960 ,I belive, also throughs heavy offspring. So if the pumpkin goes light on a plant that ussually throughs heavy offspring, it may have to doe more with the enviroment than genetics.

1/3/2005 10:23:05 PM

Goffstown,nh

Doug,
Excellent question, and funny you mention the 898Knauss.
My 898 in 2003 was 16% heavy (1074). I planted the 898 again in 2004 in the exact same spot as i did in 2003 and it went 6% light (852). All soil conditions, and fertilizing schedules were identical as 2003. Only diffrence was in 2004 we had colder nights, and more rain than ever. I have to believe environmental conditions do play a roll. I will be planting the 898 again this year. I'm not sure if it will be in the same spot, but close. We'll see what happens!
Jim B

1/3/2005 10:29:51 PM

Puyallup, WA

I believe in the "Pyramid Theory" in growing big pumpkins.
One has to have a "good foundation" before your pumpkins will exceed 800 pounds. The second "tier" of 1000 lbs. requires additional skills and genetics. The top "tier" of 1200+ lbs. requires all three plus perfect weather and alot of LUCK!!

1/3/2005 10:45:28 PM

Knopp, Germany

I do not know what the big deal about the 898 Knauss is either, so anyone that isn't going to grow it this year should contact me so that I can make it a good home...;-)

1/4/2005 1:28:57 AM

Appalachian Mtns.

There are several growers that seem to grow many more heavy OTC fruit than others. Jack LaRue and Jean Louis Duchezeua (sp?) in France are 2 that stand out in my mind. Almost everything they grow goes heavy, and then you get the occasional light one...

1/4/2005 6:50:18 AM

Deer Park, WI

I am going to support Jim's contribution with similar evidence. Fruit in my patch have historically weighed heavy to the charts, but last summer was quite cold and wet. All fruit in my patch weighed light last season.

I firmly believe that in ideal weather conditions, the 905 cross will go plenty heavy, but time will tell.

1/4/2005 8:51:07 AM

Cologne / Germany

Maybe we need to look at the OTC statistic about fruit that constantly produce heavy, like the 1260 Weir (24 % heavy for me in 2004 crossed with the 1236 Eaton, the wall thickness was unbelievable, but a pretty cold summer). Many of the reverse crosses (Holland, Goetze, Ailts) did produce pretty good, but not much OTC. My own reverse with the 1260 on the 1236 was the bigger pumpkin from both, but only around 8 % heavy.
In 2003 I had a poor 1260 plant, badly prepared soil, hot and dry weather, unknown male cross partner, bad fruit position but - still 11 % heavy!

1/4/2005 8:57:46 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

No doubt that genetics influences % heavy OTC. But only within the limitations presented by cultural & environmental factors present. Likewise some genetic lines are favored (or not) by different environmental sets.

1/4/2005 10:32:59 AM

Pocatello (cliffwarren@yahoo.com)

Just to be clear, I agree that some genetics are special, such
as the 898. I think there is clear evidence on that. But like
Stan said, the environment and soil have to be there for a
foundation... you said that well, Stan.

Past threads have zero'ed in on Calcium as being a prime
component in heaviness to the charts. I don't have enough
background in this to add to it...

1/4/2005 12:41:54 PM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

Good input so far. Thanks!
Jim-B,
I'm glad you chimed in. It got me thinking, You're 898 went light this year, but this year two of your 1074(898 X 790) went quite heavy(same patch?). This gets me thinking, it could be indiviual seed genetics, that plays a major role in this case. Your 1074 was very heavy last year, and it appears to have passed on the "heavy" trait. Do you have another explanation?
Jim, look for an email from me soon please.
I looked at all pumpkins grown on the 898 Knauss, from Marv Hick's 700 lb. list(2003). I counted 13. Only 3 "went light". They ranged from 32.2 % heavy, to 15.08% light. That's quite a range.

Doug

1/4/2005 8:29:47 PM

Goffstown,nh

Doug,
You brought up an interesting point about my garden. Now that I think about it. My garden is on a 30%incline. The two plants(1074) at the upper end (driest part of the patch) both weighed heavy, 13% and 24%) The two in the middle were almost right on chart. The two lower ones that were in the wettest part of the patch 898 included weighed light. This growing season was by far more wet and had colder nights than the 2003 season. I tend to attribute these conditions as a reasoning for an over or under chart theory. Just my thought!

1/5/2005 8:52:41 AM

Ohio

Jim, I have one patch area on a Incline like yours, that has some flat areas,do you grow your plants going up the hill, down the hill, or do you grow your plants side ways on the hill. Growing a plant downhill seems like it would be better because gravity would pull everything to the pumpkin, do you think gravity would even play a part in how a pumpkin grows when growing on a little Incline?

Brooks

1/5/2005 9:34:03 AM

Utah

Doug-
I think that you are correct -
certain seed lines can tend to go heavy (or light or ave.)
ie- 898 seeds tend to go heavy... and xxx whatever seeds tend to go light.

and also I think that there is enough variation in individual seeds from a given pumpkin - that some of them go heavy or light. (which leads to the silver bullet seed theory. but thats another thread) I think if you planted every seed from a given pumpkin in the same year in the same patch that you would get a bell curve distribution with heavy to light pumpkins.
then if you planted all the seeds from a different pumpkin you would get a different bell curve.
ie- the 898 bell curve would be skewed toward the heavy side and not as spread out.

and also as discussed environmental conditions are a factor.

This year in my patch I had 2 pumpkins that were heavy, one that was close to right on, and one that was really light! So what happened and why? Well it is tough to figure out...

so we look for trends because that is the best that we can do. There are just to many seeds and to many factors to say for certain how any one given seed (or seeds from one given pumpkin) will do.

1/5/2005 11:44:11 AM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

g1t,
You explained what I was getting at, but much better:-). I like the bell curve analogy very much. Maybe what I'm getting at is sort of like the silver bullet seed theory.
Heavy OTT is likely influenced by many factors, I suppose. One we can control is seed selection, when looking at a cross. We can look certain traits of the parents, and maybe know a little about what to expect with the offspring.

Thanks for your sharing your observations Jim.
Did you only plant two of your 1074's?
If you planted more in the wetter spots, and they weighed lighter, you may be onto something, regarding the moisture in the soil and its influence.

I never heard of the 1260.4 Weir going light. Maybe this pumpkin had seeds that were much more uniform, in the "heavy" trait? Any thoughts here?

Doug

1/5/2005 5:19:31 PM

New Hampshire

Last spring, the NH growers had a seminar on genetics. Professor Kopsell from UNH spoke about the bell curve theory. This does not only apply to OTT % but color, vigor, size of leaves ect. Genetics gives us probability but not certainty. As already noted patch variables stirs up the pot.
As to the 898, the family tree of the 898 has a multiple pollinator on one side and an open pollinator on the other side. In my opinion the 898 is a genetic crapshoot. Does this explain the inconsistencies of lot of our genetic questions? To make things worst, how many phony seeds are in our genetic pool we are playing (there is another thread speaking about this issue right now). These people who knowingly pass off bum seeds not only disrespects that individual grower but the whole giant pumpkin world. The nature of genetics keeps us guessing, throw in open pollination and trader abuse we really have muddy waters. This could be another reason why HH grow HH seeds, they believe there is a better chance of a purer cross.

1/5/2005 9:40:48 PM

Utah

great point... there is a variance in all the plant and fruit characteristics not just weight.

1/6/2005 12:54:25 PM

That State Up North

Just an interesting observation that has also been made on % heavy, wall thickness, density or whatever:
"South side of the fruit is thicker"
More sun there? Is this really happening?
Some say yes.
Something to look for and see if you have or can observe this in the future. No time for speculation or detailed comments, just something to look at and ponder.

Nic Welty

1/6/2005 10:10:45 PM

New Hampshire

If that is true why are we shading our fruit?

1/6/2005 10:50:07 PM

Cologne / Germany

My pumpkin this year was really a lot heavier on its left side (facing south), due to the overbalance it almost dropped from the pallet while taking out from the patch. The other one had the stem facing south and was also heavy on its back side. Coincidence?

1/7/2005 5:22:07 AM

FWIW My 853 was bigger and was much thicker on the north side. It was not shaded after early september.

1/7/2005 7:36:00 AM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

Nic,
If that is truly a trend, maybe it would be good to try and plan for the blossom end to face south?

1/7/2005 5:49:26 PM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

We split 2 out of 3 fruit this year. I'd never thought about it before, but both did split on their North ends.

1/7/2005 7:44:56 PM

Cologne / Germany

So we better construct our patches as big turntables to have equal amounts of sun to every part of the plant during the day - which is at least more comfortable than just to rotate the pumpkins all along the day...)

1/7/2005 9:10:43 PM

Deer Park WA

We have grown then stem to blossum at all points of the compass and have never noticed a difference in wall thickness either/anyway, I have found however that the fruit seem to be larger if their butts are facing north? Could be that a small amount of sun radiats on the stem and mother vine from under the shade structure and helps the "juices" flow??

1/7/2005 10:18:41 PM

Commack, NY

My fruit was thicker on the north side this year. and was noticably thinner on the south side.

1/8/2005 8:30:22 AM

Ontario, Canada.

I have never seen any data that relates directly to Nics point. However exposure to light does slow respiration of the fruit. It could be possible that slower respiration in these areas of the fruit is causing increased wall thickness. More research is needed.

1/8/2005 8:44:19 AM

White Bear Lake, Minnesota

rather than use black silt barrier to protect our plants, maybe we should use white or silver to reflect more sunlight onto the plants.

1/26/2005 11:37:11 AM