How long will a tomato plant produce?
Debie Su Baugher
I started some patio tomatoes last sping and put them into pots for the
summer. When November started to get chilly at night (I live in Atlanta)
I brought my plants in to my kitchen where they keep nice and warm (from
all the cooking and windows). I STILL have blooms and fruit. Would be
interesting to see if anyone can find out if a tomato plant can keep
producing for more than one season if treated with care.
I have several ornamental pepper plants that have produced for a little
over 2 years now with no signs of slowing down.
Debie Su Baugher
Peter Nelson wrote:
> Late last October as we were taking down our garden
> and tossing the summer's tomato plants in the compost
> after the frost had killed them we found one stubborn
> little branch of a tomato plant which had dragged onto
> the ground during the summer and taken root there and
> was still clinging to life.
>
> So we potted that section of branch including a few leaves.
> and put it in our sunroom. This is a room sort of like
> an attached greenhouse on the south side of our house.
> it's all glass on the south wall and ceiling and sticks out from
> out house a bit so it gets some light from east and west as well.
>
> [ On a sunny day when it's in the single-digits outside (we
> live in central Massachusetts) it will reach 80F in the sunroom
> from sunlight alone. If it's 20F out it will be in the 90's in the
> sunroom. We use it to heat the rest of the house on sunny
> winter days. At night if it's below zero outside and windy
> it gets down to about 35F in there. ]
>
> Anyway we coaxed the plant along all winter and it grew to
> 4-feet and flowered and now we have several fruit on it.
>
> 1. How long will one tomato plant bear fruit?
> 2. Is fruiting determined by light, heat or what? That is,
> if we plan it right, so we have a year-round cycle of planting
> so we start seeds in mid summer to produce a mature
> plant in say, November, start some more seeds in the fall to get
> mature plants in the winter, etc, could we have fruit year round?
> Would we need to add some extra hours of light in the short
> months to "fool" it in order to get fruit all year around?
>
> Thanks in advance!!
>
> ---peter
lfo...@pipeline.com
Tomatoes are not sensitive to day length and will set fruit in winter as
well as summer. However, they are sensitive to temperature. Tomatoes
prefer temperatures between 60-95F to set fruit and will be killed by even a
light frost.
Tomatoes are also wind pollinated. When grown indoors they need to be
manually pollinated to set fruit. Lightly tapping the blossom clusters or
shaking the plant will release the pollen but this must be done every 2-3
days while the blossoms are open to insure pollination.
Eventually, the plant will probably lose its vigor and taper off production
requiring more maintenance than it is worth to keep it producing.
-- Larry
Twinsburg, OH
"Peter Nelson" <plne...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:Oveu4.8407$W92.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
Manof...@krypton.com
>
>Tomatoes are also wind pollinated. When grown indoors they need to be
>manually pollinated to set fruit. Lightly tapping the blossom clusters or
>shaking the plant will release the pollen but this must be done every 2-3
>days while the blossoms are open to insure pollination.
>
>Eventually, the plant will probably lose its vigor and taper off production
>requiring more maintenance than it is worth to keep it producing.
>
>-- Larry
Larry,
My understanding is that tomatoes are self pollinating. That being
said, I thought that meant they did not need wind or other agents for
pollination to occur.
Secondly, why will the plants lose vigor? I always wondered if you
could manage to keep disease away from a tomato plant and keep it warm
with good light, it would grow indefinitely (for indeterminate plants)
Greg
FitWell
I learned in grade school about how seeds put in the tombs of the
pharoahs could still germinate after millenia, I'm inclined to try
anything with plants knowing their 110% effort and will for life.
If a plant wants to continue growing all we need to is provide the
needs of life, is this not true?
For those who are farmers or who know chicken farmers, you are aware
of the average natural life span of a chicken (not our stressed ones
nowadays who apparently are lucky to see their 2nd or 3rd year and are
quite diseased often by slaughter time). If I'm not mistaken, and I
know that some kind person will correct me if I'm wrong, but the life
span is around 12 years. (....?). If anyone is truly interested, I
can dig up more details of the actual study done since I kept the
blurb somewhere, but a researcher kept a chicken heart alive for
something life 25 years or so just by keeping the heart de-toxified
(i.e., keeping it clear of accumulated waste and properly 'fed' with
nutrients). So, what we think of as natural lifespans and natural
health have been known to be increased with proper adherence to the
needs of life such as proper air/water/nutrients with proper
elimination of waste. The chicken heart was shut down only because it
seemed like it could go on indefinitely apparently (hmmmm!!).
If your plant has the will to live and you feed it naturally and it
has temperature/air/water it needs, who knows how long it will keep
healthy and vigorous. I am a raw foodist vegetarian (no cooked foods)
and my rabbit has been fed on only raw natural foodstuffs. I overcame
serious illness this way and my rabbit, Bunn-Bunn, who has never recvd
'junk' foods with sugars or processed stuff is an exceptionally
healthy 9 year old with vigour and verve. I was told initially that
rabbits, generally speaking, live around 5 years, other have said a
little more. Thing is, he looks just the same now and is as peppy as
he was 4 or 5 years ago. Providing the optimum needs of life ought to
make any plant live and produce well, no (actually, true of any living
thing...)?
Just my 2¢ worth, for what it's worth...
Cheers all and have a wonderful, wonderful day (it's a bright sunny
morning up here it Ottawa and the forecast sounds good!!!)
***************
Linda McAllister
produced up to the December frosts. They do need heat and light to set fruit,
though: the last 2 years we've had cool summers and didn't get a good crop.
The morning fog didn't burn off until it was time for the afternoon fog to
roll in: great for leaf crops, but the tomatoes hated it!
Linda
Les Ireland
comments. I am a 3rd year genetics student at the U of A and we've talked a
bit (informally) about the life-span of cells (since it is THEY who make up
the cells, of course). Well, it turns out that under natural circumstances,
all cells have a limited life span, although every cell is totally
different. Bacteria, for example, can reproduce at an exceptional rate and
for an exceptional amount of time, but their individual life span is
limited.
Anyway, what I am getting at is the DNA in the cells will eventually
degrade; and not from external influences, but rather from the natural
phenomena within the DNA. I have to appologize ahead about some of the
terms I use, because I am not 100% sure they are correct, and I don't have a
genetics book in front of me right now.
Okay, First piece of info: Each piece of DNA (chromosomes) have 'extra' DNA
at the ends of the strands that are just tandem repeats of useless
information. Every time the cell replicates (to replace damaged or aged
ones, or to grow), a small portion of that DNA is lost. Well, eventually,
there is none of this stuff left (I believe it's called Telomeres), so it
starts hacking pieces of 'coding' (important) DNA. Well, at first, this may
not do anything serious other than slow the cell a bit. Eventually,
however, it may start hacking into protein-synthesis codons or other
important info, at which point the cell will stagnate and die.
I have read a report somewhere about heart cells, apparently they have
targeted the life of a human heart to about 115 years (give or take a few).
I dunno how accurate this is, but there you are. Now, there is research
going into how to 'repair' or 'conserve' telomeric activty which means that
extended life-times are certainly within reach, but not without 'unnatural'
influences.
So where am I going with this? I have reason to believe that this same
effect takes place within plant cells, and indeed all cells. If this is
truly the case, then yes, you can extend your tomato's lifespan, but the
plant itself will eventually die from degraded DNA.
As a side note, telomeric activity is linked with general aging atributes as
well, such as slowed healing. An old man, for example, always heals slower
than a baby heals.
As far as refined foods go (such as sugars) there are studies taking place
about the side-effects of eating pure refined sugar. Apparently it's very
hard on EVERY part of your body, not just teeth ;> ... kinda like trying to
burn straight hexane in your car instead of the mixed gasolines.
So there you are ... hopefully my science is correct (;>) ... it's mostly
food for thought and it's there to pique people's curiosity. Never think of
me as the LAST WORD on this subject!!! <---- that's my disclaimer.
King Pineapple
called "San Francisco Fog". I'm giving them a try here in New
Hampshire this season just for the fun of it. It's 'designed'
for your location.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
FitWell
about right (it is said that under optimum conditions, human beings
can live disease-free and healthy for about 110-140 years). You've
touched on something that is close to me. As a raw foodist
vegetarian, and although we're getting into very controversial ground
for a good portion of the world's population, it has been documented
that people not on cooked diets don't have the
diseases/ailments/problems that the standard diets all over the world
today produce (I can hear the sound of shock of that one
reverberating...). It's interesting that you speak of some actual
scientific terms that I'm sure could describe all of this, but you're
right about refined sugars. The sad thing is that there are many
other harmful things we ingest other than this and that we are told
that they are not only good for us but NECESSARY for us.
But, yes, what I meant about the chicken heart I believe that what
happened there was that optimum conditions produced the longevity and
that it has been long suspected by those following natural practices
that we cannot go beyond what is written in the DNA coding. However,
like you, just musing and sharing some thoughts and I am not an expert
in the field. I only know that tomorrow I turn 38 and, generally
speaking, since I became vegetarian and even more so a raw foodist
vegetarian, that I have had better health now than previously.
Before anyone asks, I don't have at hand any studies except one
involving Pottenger's cats (monitoring several generations of cats in
3 control groups, the effect of their diet) and for the rest, just the
names of studies.
Anyhoo, before I was a black thumb. Then for 2 years I read every
book I found in order to 'get a handle' on the needs of life of
plants. Once I understood them better, my plants have flourished
despite less than optimum conditions (no more risk of being sent to
jail for 'planticide').
Anyhoo, my meanderings for the day. Have a wonderful day all!!
************************
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:14:58 -0700, "Les Ireland" <kal...@sprint.ca>
wrote:
Les Ireland
...
I know a little of what you are talking about from a scientific point of
view (in regards to the cooked food). Cooked food is inherantly
carcinogenic - that is the blackened portions may increase the risk of
cancer. On top of this, many foods undergo chemical changes during the
heating stage (eggs are a simple example - the protein structure totally
changes when it's cooked). This chemical change can produce some nasty
chemicals that are pretty brutal on our health.
However! It wasn't always the case that raw foods were healthier. That is
pretty simple - bacteria and other nasty bugs get in our food (pork and
their nasty worms is a good example), so if we ate it we got sick; the
cooking killed the nasties. BUT! In today's day and age, most of our foods
(vegis AND meats) are fairly safe to eat uncooked (there are exceptions of
course) as long as they are fresh and clean.
I have to say, though, that I could NOT survive without having a big sirloin
steak every so often, slathered in barbecue sauce, seared and well-done with
those tasty little carcinogenic blackened portions .. yummie! *grin*.
On the other hand, we may be able to use genetics to increase human
resistance to these bodily poisons we are always ingesting. I can't imagine
it would be too difficult.
Just my idle musings ... I too have no sources to cite with me!