Billy wrote:
>> Billy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok - I had my first, maybe not quite ripe, cherry tomato - a
>>>> Rosalita (pink), a bit tart, but just a few more days and I'll
>>>> have ripe ones for sure. The rest of the cherry tomatoes are few
>>>> weeks away I think.
>>>
>>> Speaking of tomatoes, my understanding was that determinant tomatoes
>>> all ripped at the same time, but I have a Glacier with ripe tomatoes
>>> and just set, green fruit!? Is this another urban legend biting the
>>> dust, or is this just something odd about Glacier?
>>>
>>
>> It doesn't sound right to me. The genetic determination limits the
>> number of nodes but they still have to develop in sequence so the
>> fruit must be of different ages and maturity. It sounds to me like
>> this is an unwarranted extrapolation that gets passed around as a
>> fact.
>>
>> David
> Well, I've eaten the first 2 facts, and the rest are waiting in the
> wings at different stages of development. The Glacier was only
> supposed to be 30" (0.762M) tall, and it is 5' (1.5M) easy. So as you
> were sayin' . . . ?
No, I am agreeing. Your legend is my extrapolation. I am saying I doubt
that determinancy implies synchronised ripening.
David
> Billy wrote:
> >
> >> Billy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Ok - I had my first, maybe not quite ripe, cherry tomato - a
> >>>> Rosalita (pink), a bit tart, but just a few more days and I'll
> >>>> have ripe ones for sure. The rest of the cherry tomatoes are few
> >>>> weeks away I think.
> >>>
> >>> Speaking of tomatoes, my understanding was that determinant tomatoes
> >>> all ripped at the same time, but I have a Glacier with ripe tomatoes
> >>> and just set, green fruit!? Is this another urban legend biting the
> >>> dust, or is this just something odd about Glacier?
> >>>
> >>
> >> It doesn't sound right to me. The genetic determination limits the
> >> number of nodes but they still have to develop in sequence so the
> >> fruit must be of different ages and maturity. It sounds to me like
> >> this is an unwarranted extrapolation that gets passed around as a
> >> fact.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> > Well, I've eaten the first 2 facts, and the rest are waiting in the
> > wings at different stages of development. The Glacier was only
> > supposed to be 30" (0.762M) tall, and it is 5' (1.5M) easy. So as you
> > were sayin' . . . ?
>
> No, I am agreeing. Your legend is my extrapolation. I am saying I doubt
> that determinancy implies synchronised ripening.
>
> David
<http://gardening.about.com/od/vegetablepatch/g/Determinate.htm>
probably doesn't rank high as an authority, and they don't have a hard
and fast description of determinate tomatoes, buuuuut, generally
speaking, they are supposed to ripen at about the same time, so that
gives some wiggle room for the early ripeners, and the small green
stragglers.
Whereas my description of them is 30" (0.762M) container plants, my
feral ones are about 2M tall (and growing). Because of their early
production, I think they will be back next year.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/28/naomi_klein_the_real_crime_scene
XML site map
>>>
>>>> Ok - I had my first, maybe not quite ripe, cherry tomato - a
>>>> Rosalita (pink), a bit tart, but just a few more days and I'll
>>>> have ripe ones for sure. The rest of the cherry tomatoes are few
>>>> weeks away I think.
>>>
>>> Speaking of tomatoes, my understanding was that determinant tomatoes
>>> all ripped at the same time, but I have a Glacier with ripe tomatoes
>>> and just set, green fruit!? Is this another urban legend biting the
>>> dust, or is this just something odd about Glacier?
>>>
>>
>> It doesn't sound right to me. The genetic determination limits the
>> number of nodes but they still have to develop in sequence so the
>> fruit must be of different ages and maturity. It sounds to me like
>> this is an unwarranted extrapolation that gets passed around as a
>> fact.
>>
>> David
> Well, I've eaten the first 2 facts, and the rest are waiting in the
> wings at different stages of development. The Glacier was only
> supposed to be 30" (0.762M) tall, and it is 5' (1.5M) easy. So as you
> were sayin' . . . ?