Tomato’s are a plant that benefit from selective pruning to maximize yields.
You’re arguing against established science regarding plant yields. You can’t just let a tomato plant grow wild and expect the maximum yield or the largest fruits. Yes if I just let these plant run amok, there’s gonna be issues. If that’s all you wanted to point out, it’s noted, and clearly not needed for me eh?
I told you the planter direction, you can’t seem to read my comments, I’ve addressed most of the things you’ve brought up already. You have been wrong about both points you’ve brought up, another user completely agreed with the interplanting.
No, I’m arguing FOR the science of tomato and pepper agriculture.
The same science that says 24" AT A MINIMUM is needed between tomato plants. You’ve halved that here. There is a reason for that, and you seem to want to just argue with everyone explaining why you’ve got a problem here.
Science says 24”…? Please provide this paper, would love to see it and its supporting documents. Determinate and indeterminate have different spaces to begin with, so that’s just obviously bullshit lol.
That’s average “guidelines” anyways, and even some tomato plants say 16, and some say 36”, its each individual cultivar. But it all comes down to root mass to canopy size, a plant only has X energy to give, too many fruiting sites, and you have small shitty fruits. This is basic plant botany even. As I said, it’s far more complicated than you are making it.
And if you have read my comments, it’s quite clear I know I need to address some stuff, which is stuff you need to do ANYWAYS to tomato plants. So yeah…? Of course I do.
Do you want to mention I need to water them once in a while too? Maybe weed them as well?
Than why is the word “prune” so hard for you to comprehend? Your “paper” (not a scientific paper) says pruning changes these numbers. It also goes and says 12” for one of its bullet points. It also says it’s a complex interaction, which I’ve used to rebuke your claims in every comment.
So you either didn’t read your source before posting it, or can’t comprehend the words in it. Nothing you’ve posted actually supports what you’ve claimed. It supports my claims quite well though.
You also showed your inability to read when I told you the planter direction, and than you said you didn’t know the sun path. Fucking yeesh buddy, give it up.
Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.
You’re the epitome of this quote, that’s not an easy feat to accomplish, well done.
You can’t just Google something and paste it without comprehending it, doubly so when it proves the other persons point.
Maybe you could have learned something today, instead you chose ignorance.
Did you miss that part of their source that agrees with me…? Dude couldn’t even read his own sources before pasting them.
It specifies pruning changes those numbers, I’ve mentioned every comment I am pruning. And that same “paper” (not an actually scientific paper)even says 12” is fine for some tomato’s… so yeah, he’s wrong and I’m right going by those specifics.
It also says it’s a complicated interaction and not simple, that’s what I said.
Their sources literally prove their claims wrong, not right. Lol.
I even provided the quoted portion in my comment where the “paper” (not a paper like I asked for) said that.
Tomato’s are a plant that benefit from selective pruning to maximize yields.
You’re arguing against established science regarding plant yields. You can’t just let a tomato plant grow wild and expect the maximum yield or the largest fruits. Yes if I just let these plant run amok, there’s gonna be issues. If that’s all you wanted to point out, it’s noted, and clearly not needed for me eh?
I told you the planter direction, you can’t seem to read my comments, I’ve addressed most of the things you’ve brought up already. You have been wrong about both points you’ve brought up, another user completely agreed with the interplanting.
Just being argumentative?
No, I’m arguing FOR the science of tomato and pepper agriculture.
The same science that says 24" AT A MINIMUM is needed between tomato plants. You’ve halved that here. There is a reason for that, and you seem to want to just argue with everyone explaining why you’ve got a problem here.
Good luck to you.
Science says 24”…? Please provide this paper, would love to see it and its supporting documents. Determinate and indeterminate have different spaces to begin with, so that’s just obviously bullshit lol.
That’s average “guidelines” anyways, and even some tomato plants say 16, and some say 36”, its each individual cultivar. But it all comes down to root mass to canopy size, a plant only has X energy to give, too many fruiting sites, and you have small shitty fruits. This is basic plant botany even. As I said, it’s far more complicated than you are making it.
And if you have read my comments, it’s quite clear I know I need to address some stuff, which is stuff you need to do ANYWAYS to tomato plants. So yeah…? Of course I do.
Do you want to mention I need to water them once in a while too? Maybe weed them as well?
This extension white paper puts a minimum of 18"-24", but also strongly advised that 24" is recommended.
This extension says 24"-36", with a strong emphasis on 36" for best results.
The USDA literally has 24" as a minimum.
Need more?
From your own link, read them instead of just googling some terms and pasting the ai result.
Notice the key word pruning there…?
And the word ideal…? Not an actual minimum…? They do everything to say there isn’t actually a minimum, and there’s too many variables.
lol, lmfao even. I knew the paper would be flawed or point out the issue with what you’ve been saying or comprehending about it.
I read just fine. You seem to be struggling though.
See ya in 2 months when you’re back here wondering what went wrong 🤣
Than why is the word “prune” so hard for you to comprehend? Your “paper” (not a scientific paper) says pruning changes these numbers. It also goes and says 12” for one of its bullet points. It also says it’s a complex interaction, which I’ve used to rebuke your claims in every comment.
So you either didn’t read your source before posting it, or can’t comprehend the words in it. Nothing you’ve posted actually supports what you’ve claimed. It supports my claims quite well though.
You also showed your inability to read when I told you the planter direction, and than you said you didn’t know the sun path. Fucking yeesh buddy, give it up.
See you in 2 months 🫡
You’re the epitome of this quote, that’s not an easy feat to accomplish, well done.
You can’t just Google something and paste it without comprehending it, doubly so when it proves the other persons point.
Maybe you could have learned something today, instead you chose ignorance.
“Give me a source”
“Here’s 3”
“Nah, you’re wrong, I’m still right”
Classic.
Did you miss that part of their source that agrees with me…? Dude couldn’t even read his own sources before pasting them.
It specifies pruning changes those numbers, I’ve mentioned every comment I am pruning. And that same “paper” (not an actually scientific paper)even says 12” is fine for some tomato’s… so yeah, he’s wrong and I’m right going by those specifics.
It also says it’s a complicated interaction and not simple, that’s what I said.
Their sources literally prove their claims wrong, not right. Lol.
I even provided the quoted portion in my comment where the “paper” (not a paper like I asked for) said that.