From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Connecticut

Fellow pumpkin growers, I know many of you have been watching my diary and I have been getting asked the question what cross do I plan on making. It looks like pollen availability could be a limiting factor, but I am curious what you would like to see (and why) if you had the following three plants…

2009 Wallace ‘12
1725 Harp [2009 Wallace] clone
1789est Wallace [1872 Wallace] clone

Thanks for your input and watch my diary for continued updates.

1/13/2013 7:23:13 PM

Gays Mills, Wisconsin

Self the 1725 clone because it might enhance/purify the resulting fruit's seed with the genetic material of the plant that grew the world record.

1/13/2013 7:55:18 PM

Kevinstinindians@yahoo.com

I would cross the clones all three ways. Three fruit per plant with a self and the other two fruit crossed with each of the remaining two plants. Great crosses on paper don't always work out but with all three crosses being made you would increase the odds of hitting a homerun. I believe enough growers would be interested in each of the crosses that you would see a good sample size of each seed getting planted. The clones don't need to prove what their genetics can do it's already been proven.

The 2009 I would pollinate with the 1725 clone to reinforce the 1725 side of the cross.

1/13/2013 10:48:44 PM

Minnesota

1789 x 1725 would be my favorite. Bring 1725 back as pollinator off plant proven 2k producer on plant proven 1872 producer

1/13/2013 11:10:39 PM

norway , maine

i don't know the first thing about genetics but my gut says self the 1725 clone.

1/14/2013 12:13:54 AM

British Columbia, Canada

2009 X 1789
1789 X 1725
1725 X Self

1/14/2013 1:14:55 AM

Colorado

I like selfing the 1725 harp(2009) plant and crossing the1725 with 1789. The 2009 is the world record and didnt have any dill rings so self it.

1/14/2013 2:16:22 AM

Colorado

I'm taking about selfing the 1725 clone.

1/14/2013 2:19:50 AM

Germany

1725 x self
2009 x 1725
1789 x 1725
(and perhaps 1725 x 2009)
The 1725 should become pollinator in all kinds of crosses.

1/14/2013 6:09:42 AM

Corryton, TN

If I could only choose one it would be the 1725 x self. The 1725 should have 50% homozygous genes. The cross would result in 75%. The next generation may not grow as well as hoped due to depression but the crosses from those seeds could be special. I'd make a spot for that seed this year.

1/14/2013 6:27:53 AM

Central Minnesota

1725 x Self
1789 x Self

1/14/2013 8:49:23 AM

Long Island,New York

Definitely cross everything with a green squash. What? No squash? Shame on you!!

1/14/2013 10:23:13 AM

President - GPC

I agree with the The CoJoe... Also like to see a SIB as well....

1/14/2013 10:48:44 AM

Menomonie, WI (mail@gr8pumpkin.net)

I think what a lot of people are missing here is that the 1725 is a clone from the plant that grew the 2009. So a 2009 x 1725 would be back breeding...I like that cross. No matter what you cross they all look good

1/14/2013 1:19:19 PM

Germany

...for exactly that reason I summarized that it (the 1725, the clone of the one who grew the 2009) should become daddy in all possible crosses. It´s a unique opportunity to get this pollinator into a set of crosses.

1/14/2013 2:05:39 PM

President - GPC

904 SteltZ... Old into new

1381 Checkon, proved to be a good one thiZ year.

1409 Miller

1495 SteltZ

333 Grande (898 Knauss X 901 Hunt that went 27% heavy)

1676 DaletaZ....

Send me a clone..Ill cross them with theZe...and otherZ within the RMGVG...

1/14/2013 3:06:54 PM

South East

I agree with pumpking ;

- the 1725 should become pollinator in all crosses because its track record sofar.
-the 1789 has besides some gigantic fruit also quite a few light ones, so not what you look for in a pollinator. (unless your a gambler) It should be a mother plant
- you know nothing of the 2009 or what its gonna do. Its the biggest fruit ever, but what did the pollinator plant do? It should be a mother plant purely to see what it does, as a pollinator its a gamble untill several have been grown.

so: 2009 x 1725
1789 x 1725
1725 x self

1/14/2013 5:20:36 PM

Willamette Valley, Oregon

Unquestionably - 1725[2009] x self - multiple fruit if possible.

Then 1789[1872] x 1725[2009] - multiple fruit if possible.

Then 2009 x 1725[2009] on one fruit, x 1789[1872] on another.

I'd be happy with one fruit on each, but might as well hope for the best (multiple fruit). You're not growing anything for size in this situation. I'd pollinate whatever you can and make as many seeds as possible to distribute for the 2013 season.

Nice work, Matt. This is exactly the kind of work that will make some major advances in weights in a short time.

1/15/2013 7:06:38 PM

Sourthern Utah

1799.5 daletas into the 1789.. i think this cross will be a good one ,, as it was on pace to the pleasure dome growth if i read the article right ,, but its just my thought ,, maybe,, we will see,, new area,, different climate ,, best to all you good folks ,, also,, i believe the 1677.5 hunt has a good chance to grow big,, with the proper pollinator, imho its as good as the 1622

1/15/2013 7:18:46 PM

Tinykinville

well since having pollen from two amazing plants to use. i know you mentioned having seeds ready by planting time so first thing i would do is use the 1725 clone to pollinate them all including a self. Next i would start a second kin on each and use the 1789 clone as pollinator on all. even if not ready in time for season, so what, will never get another shot with these two beasts, best to make the most of the opportunity and get as many seeds and crosses as possible. thats just my take, best of luck matt.

1/16/2013 8:39:08 AM

Germany

Question to Matt: In addition to the pollinations during the next 2 months, would you consider to clone the clones and to keep some of them going for another season? Availability of some of that 1725 [2009 clone] pollen during 2013 for pollination of various outdoor plants (e.g., a 1770 Lieber, which seems to be refined heavy 1495 Stelts genetics) should be an intriguing thing, in my opinion.

1/16/2013 8:49:59 AM

Hampstead, NC 28443

My suggestion is:
2009 Wallace ‘12 x 1789est Wallace [1872 Wallace] clone
Why: the 2009 and the 1789 have been the best 2 1725 seeds so far to date. Adding the pollinator from each only helps the mix and rounds out the genetics vs. being selfed.

1725 Harp [2009 Wallace] clone x self
Why: could be best way to preserve the power it has demonstrated.

1789est Wallace [1872 Wallace] clone x 2009 Wallace ‘12
Why: same answer as above. I think you should bring in the other genetics.

I too will volunteer to grow a clone or a 1725 x self seed.

1/16/2013 11:18:29 AM

Connecticut

Pumpking-

I do plan on cloning the plant material from all the plant material I have going. Ideally, I would be able to mail out plant material to other growers so the pollen could be shared in many patches over the 2013 growing season. Getting plant material outside the USA looks like it may be a challenge but if there is interest I will at least look into it.

1/16/2013 10:39:25 PM

Pocatello (cliffwarren@yahoo.com)

Exactly as bathabitat said... what you have is not just any 1725, but the 1725 that grew the one-ton pumpkin. So if we subscribe to the theory that all seeds in a fruit are genetically similar but of different potential, then we no longer need to guess, we found it! And thus, creating as many seeds from these genetics as possible is the way to go.

The only thing I can't figure out is why the Wallaces always get the top of the curve seeds? ;-)

1/17/2013 3:45:54 PM

Piqua, Ohio

Partly luck, and lots of hard work I imagine. Matt I'd be interested in a clone of the 1725 for pollen to cross back to the 2009, if you get time shoot me an e-mail giantpumpkin@centurylink.net

1/17/2013 5:06:37 PM

President - GPC

There iZ no luck, there iZ do or do not...

1/17/2013 5:25:46 PM

Piqua, Ohio

Wiz the luck is how they get the top of the curve seeds, luck has nothing to do with growing!

1/17/2013 7:57:56 PM

Lloydminster/AB

I'd bet they don't get the top of the curve seeds it just appears they do because they know what they are doing. The top of the curve seed probably was grown by someone like myself who perhaps had patch problems of some sort that didn't allow the potential to show. Still it's definatly not a mistake to chase the 2009, it's the best proven performer yet.

1/17/2013 10:07:38 PM

Minnesota(dw447@fastmail.fm)

Don Crews,
Good post!!!

1/17/2013 10:57:39 PM

Pocatello (cliffwarren@yahoo.com)

Yes, my comment about top of the curve seeds (in other words, the very best 5% of seeds that were in the original 1725) is alone the very indictment of the theory. I grew a 1725 to about 250 pounds, and Ron grew one to 2009. Am I really that bad, and Ron that good? Yes! Especially, since this is proven year after year... When these seeds came out, nobody was able to hold one up to the light and determine which should be sent to Ron and which to me... it was simply the luck of the draw. But Ron and I have the exact same luck of the draw (over time).

Hard of a pill as that may be to swallow, it's the truth. I think grower skill is at least 90% of the overall equation.

Nevertheless, the clones do have great genetics and I hope the experimentation is fruitful.

1/18/2013 3:27:44 PM