From

Location

Message

Date Posted

New Hampshire

My attention lately has been studying pummkins that go heavy. I have been observing that there is alot of heavies that throw light and vise versa. Many of the great parents and grandparent went light. In some cases their seems to be no rhyme or reason. I know growing conditions play a huge part.

Here is one case in point. The 746 Larue produced both of his 1014 03(+13%) and his 910 02(-16%). I am sure his practices did't change that much. Was it the year? This year he had fruit that were 25,21,19,15,13% Heavy. Again, is it genetics, soil, or growing condtions.

What are your thoughts on the 746 discripency?

12/27/2003 3:42:24 PM

Stouffville

I seem to think it's mainly genetics especially seeing a case like the 746 Larue. But the actual shape of the fruit also plays a role which can vary from pumpkin to pumpkin on the same plant in fact. My 832 had a very thin concave bottom that was only 2 inches thick, yet the other fruit on this exact same plant had a flat bottom that was 6-7 inches thick.

Have people been able to link heavy fruit to growing conditions? I can't since I've seen both heavy and light fruit come out of the same or similar conditions. Perhaps under dry conditions pumpkin flesh will be less dense, i don't know, but I can't see how growing conditions affect flesh thickness. The benefit of thick walls is that you receive a nice surprise on weighoff day and your fruit is structurally stronger.

12/27/2003 4:38:51 PM

Appalachian Mtns.

I believe "heavy OTC" is a genetic trait and this can be continued down the line by breeding heavy to heavy, regardless of the pumpkins weights.
Each seed from a pumpkin is different from the others. Therefore you can have siblings that grow different shapes, sizes, colors, and logically, different variance percentages.
But does calcium help? Can calcium actually thicken cell walls or is it's use just assisting skin elasticity that might allow for more growth and wall density?
Either way, I'll still use it and I'll be crossing heavy OTC pumpkins with each other in 2004. That's the way to head if 1500 is to be reached within the next 5 years....my thoughts.

12/27/2003 4:50:42 PM

Key West, FL

That 746 is an interesting seed. I think the 910 was one of those ugly ducklings in the flock. I think it had more 616 genes in it than 846. The other 746 plants grown this year had nice orange pumpkins that I think were heavy. The 746 is a good seed, if I had more room I would plant it. Jack had a fruit that was ripping on his 910 this year I think, it split though. Jack did have a lot of fruit go heavy this year, I think it's a combination of the seeds he grew, his growing practices, and his soil.

12/27/2003 5:04:00 PM

Caceres, mid west of Spain

In 2002 Pam Vanderschoot grew two pumpkins in her 846 Calai plant in Napa, California. They were pollinated in 07-13 and in 07-12, only one day difference.
One fruit weighed 759 and was 4% under, the other one was 645 and 29% heavy; shape and colour not much different.
What does it mean to me? That there is a lot of unknown things in this subject that we do not control, and surprises are always possible in every climate, with any seed and with any growing practice.
Carlos

12/28/2003 2:01:20 AM

Deer Park WA

Carlos, you are correct that planting times, and seasonal temperatures, along with pollination times, temperatures, and moisture levels greatly effect the outcome of weight V.S Size. This should be a new thread in itself!

12/28/2003 2:22:54 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Carlos,
Were they grown on the same plant? If so, this might speak to the sink/source relationship. Knowing where on the plant they were would help.
I think we're driving blind until someone gets the AG genotyped in a lab.
Steve

12/28/2003 8:03:15 AM

ontario

I think in any pumpkin out of 500 seeds you might get 10% with the potentional to throw a monster..the others might throw big but not monsters..I believe some seeds will carry genes that throw heavy and some that throw light...we just hope that more heavy genes are in each seed...like a racehorse......breed a mare to the same stud twice....end up with two mares.....one becomes a champion racehorse the other a so so....but the so so becomes a top broodmare and the champion can't throw a runner at all.....go figure ???

12/28/2003 9:18:04 AM

ontario

I have 842 Eaton and 898 Knauss to grow.......and no they are not for trade :0)..if all goes well and I do my job right I am sure they will get me a decent fruit 800 lbs or more.....but now which one has the extra little bit to give me that monster 1200 lbs or more....thats why we all grow 5-6 or more top seeds....a numbers game...and if we knew for sure, wouldn't that take the fun out of it...

12/28/2003 9:27:05 AM

Caceres, mid west of Spain

Steve,
they were grown on the same plant, the biggest and lightest was on the main vine 20 feet apart from the stump, and the smallest and heaviest was on a secondary 12 feet apart. That is the info, but I don't know if the secondary began 12 feet apart from the base or the adition of the main part and the secondary part until the fruit was in total 12 feet.
Both of them came from 5 lobes flowers and were shaded.

Carlos

12/28/2003 1:13:42 PM

New Hampshire

Steve,
I think we should propose to the goverment to put a couple million into some AG research project. It would be more beneficial than some other stuff they allot money to.

12/28/2003 5:18:53 PM

Morris, Connecticut

I've heard that Organic matter content may play a role. Some think that OM levels that are too high (above 20%) may lead to big fruit with thin walls...

No doubt that Calcium plays a major role wall development. I also think that growth rate plays a role. Fruit that grow very fast (30-40lbs a day) tend to weigh lighter than those that chug along at 20 for an extended amount of time.

12/28/2003 5:53:22 PM

Stouffville

what environmental factors have been connected to thickness? and state the anecdote leading to the conjecture

12/28/2003 5:59:16 PM

Bristol, ME (stunner906@roadrunner.com)

I think Adam has a good thought that any one of us could get some data on with a few emails. However, weight is tissue, whether it is 20 lbs a day for 3 weeks or spiking to 35 a day then leveling out at 20 something. It could be that large gains are gains obtained by the fruit physically expanding in size and not really increasing wall thickness. Unfortuately, just like the genetics of AG's, it is another variable that we cannot knowingly effect one way or the other directly.....yet. It is, however an interesting hypothesis and may be further explored by gathering gains on some of the heavier fruit as compared to some others of equal weight that had big, short lived spikes in their gains. I suppose the only way to really prove anything on this theory is to be able to measure on a scale a pool of fruit daily so you could see gains without significant physical increase in size....i.e...wall thickness increase.

12/28/2003 6:38:29 PM

South Hill, Virginia

Don't forget that the chart weights based on a few measurements are only an approximation. If a pumpkin is an unusual shape for its size then the chart may not do a very good job of approximating its weight. The chart is not written in stone either...it is updated yearly so what was light one year could be heavy the next year.

12/28/2003 8:46:38 PM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Sorry Bears, Us fiscal conservatives would get all up in arms if the money wasn't being used for the nations security. That was the sole objective behind setting up the federal government in the first place. LOL. We'll have to rely on private & commercial resources.

I suspect the rapidly expanding (yet thin walled) fruit will only appear to be making large weight gains to the tape measure charts. Perhaps it is the thin walls that allow for the rapid expansion.

Likewise maybe the fruit that appears to be gaining slowly is gradually filling it's cavity with weighty flesh. So perhaps it is gaining weight in pounds even faster than it's thin walled colleague but we don't know because it isn't growing on a scale.

Now that would be an experiment. Grow some fruit directly on a scale. That or devise a nondestructive method capable of accurately determining the real mass of the pumpkin while it's sitting in the patch. Such devices exist that can detect the presence & approximate size of voids within trees. The "Shigometer" is in common use but requires drilling holes in the subject. No good for us.

Maybe an ultasound device should be tried on some developing pumpkins in conjunction with the tape & the collected data compared to the certified scales.

Do any of us have friends or relatives in the field of pre-natal medicine?

Steve

12/28/2003 10:11:52 PM

Syracuse, NY

STEVE---once again i am in awe---excellent...a great deal
of stuff for us all to chew on over the next couple of years, especially the comparison of
tortoise/hare--thick/thin!

12/30/2003 5:31:22 PM

Ontario, Canada.

I know a guy who does Non Destructive Testing. He has a few ultrasonic probes for measuring wall thickness. I could have him do a few tests next summer. i hope they work on pumpkin walls they maybe too porous.

12/30/2003 6:39:55 PM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Russ,

I would be very interested to hear this persons thoughts. There is no reason to wait for summer. Squash can be found on the supermarket shelves all year. I also worked in a non-destructive industrial test lab years ago. That's what got me thinking about this again. We used X-Rays. Those machines were very flexible with respect to the medium being tested. We tested everything from pieces of the Alaskan natural gas pipeline for Dupont to stuffed Chinese Teddy Bears for Macy's. But the machine was far from portable.

Maybe electrical conductivity tests would be useful for determining wall thickness. Some variation would be expected based on moisture content, but a quick evaluation of soil moisture & salinity should narrow the range a bit. The problem of getting good conduction without making holes might require the use of a fruit-safe conductive gel on the skin. Hmmmmmm......sounds like the same stuff used on a pregnant womans belly for a sonogram again.

We need a prenatal specialist.

Steve

12/30/2003 7:24:40 PM

Ontario, Canada.

Done. Come Monday morning I will take with me to work a squash to test. We spend a great deal of time testing axles, wheels and other metal components. I hope to have the results as soon as he is able to make time. Should be by mid next week. The probe sensitivity can be adjusted as far as I am aware. Ckeck out Sweden-Gustavsson - 2003 Growers Diary for details on growing pumpkins on scales. I believe he at one point set up a dial indicator on his fruit to measure growth in .001". Geez, you gotta luv this sport.....LOL.......hobby.

12/30/2003 7:57:06 PM

Roselle, IL GJGEM@sbcglobal.net

I used to do NDT . I actually tried ultrasonics to check thickness and failed. The problem is you need a special made transducer. Super low MHz and at least 1"Dia transducer. This set up would costly. We didn't have one and the company I worked for was not about to buy one for this application. You would also have to have a Calibration standard. A cut up pumpkin of various thickness. If I had the right set up, I could probably pull it off

12/30/2003 9:02:49 PM

Brillion Wisconsin

I can see a device like this for all of us in the future. It would be hand held and about the size of a flashlight. Using sound waves we could accurately determind density of all fruit on the vine. Determinding which ones to cull, with repect to pollination dates, would take a giant step foward. Great post

12/30/2003 9:34:56 PM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

George,

How many MHz? Fishfinder sonar?

12/30/2003 11:15:50 PM

Ontario, Canada.

Has anyone ever tried to weigh a one inch cube of fruit. If a standard weight could be found then it may be possible to use a formula to calculate the pumpkins weight. Are the
densities of the flesh different of heavy fruit or is it just increased wall thickness?

12/30/2003 11:23:50 PM

Greencastle, PA

I've heard that late-season fruit growth is mainly focused on wall thickness and density, don't know if it's true or not, but could be something to look at.
tom

12/31/2003 12:29:53 AM

Indiana

It must be winter!
Steve

12/31/2003 7:03:27 AM

Long Island,New York

Pumpkin flesh density changes throughout the crossection of the fruit. There cannot be a standard among pumpkins or within a pumpkin. This would limit your calibration considerably. Many of todays sonar-type micrometer's will send the signal out, hit the inside surface of what your testing,return, and based upon your calibration indicate the thickness of the test subject. You'd probably have to scrape the skin into the flesh to avoid getting a skin only thickness...not what Id call non-destructive. Perhaps the more medically tuned measurement options would be more appropriate than a T-mike or other non-destructive testing apparatus.....G

12/31/2003 9:03:12 AM

Roselle, IL GJGEM@sbcglobal.net

You would first need a Oscilloscope. They start at around $5000. The tranducer of choice would be around .5MHz. Would need a couple transducers to play around with. These would run about $500. A thick couplant material-vaseline, would have to be rubbed on the pumpkin. I played around with this around 10 years ago. It's funny to see a post on this now. I still have contacts in the NDT field and access to a scope. Maybe I will play around with it this summer. A fish/stud finder would never work. I also have X-rayed a bunch off seeds. Now that was INTERESTING.

12/31/2003 9:09:42 AM

Roselle, IL GJGEM@sbcglobal.net

The skin would not pose a problem. We would test material with a couple mils of paint or rust all the time. You would just have to adjust your Db. Unless you have done a lot of ultrasonics, it's not worth discussing the whole nuts and bolts of it.

12/31/2003 9:28:03 AM

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

Used O'Scopes can be had on eBay for a couple hundred. There are even 2 Dr's office x-ray machines on there.

12/31/2003 10:07:23 AM

Utah

I think you could set up a ultrasonic system fairly easily... but like George said the cost would be the big hit. In my building at work a lot of ultrasonic and x-ray testing is done. i wonder what they'd think if i showed up with some pumpkin samples ?

12/31/2003 11:38:35 AM

Ontario, Canada.

Sorry for the delay in responding. basically I have come up with a dead end. As George previously stated the low Mhz probe or transducer is generally not required for someone testing metal components which require higher Mhz. It can be done however at great expense with the right equipment as George has established above. Once the transducer is decided upon and callibrated it may be very easy to test wall thickness. My guy does not have the ability to do this at present without a low Mhz probe.

1/8/2004 1:36:22 PM

Roselle, IL GJGEM@sbcglobal.net

I will be working with an associate of mine this summer to see if we can pull this off ultrasonically. We are fairly certain we can. I will write a procedure on how to it do it, equipment needed, etc. I can send a copy of this procedure to all that is interested.

1/10/2004 5:21:00 PM

Ontario, Canada.

Thanks George, send it too me please when you have it. Good growing.
Russ L.

1/10/2004 6:21:08 PM