From

Location

Message

Date Posted

[email protected]

I've recently taken to retraining a couple of strategically located tertiary vines to replace the oldest least productive leathery excuses of old worn out leaves around the crown. I know I'm not the only grower doing this. But I've seen nothing here or elsewhere to suggest this is good or bad. It does stand up to reason.

If nothing else, the new leaves in their youthful exuberance do a better job of shading out those now hard to get at weeds that try to pop up around the main.

It also helps ease the strain on a growers pysche to see young green healthy leave around the crown. For whatever that's worth.

Do we think these young studs have much to contribute or does the act of growing them just set us back?

8/2/2004 9:04:41 PM

Hudsonville, Michigan ([email protected])

Steve:
Jack LaRue recommended that technique to me last year to replace hail-tattered foliage. He calls it "backvining." It didn't work for me because my plant was just too far gone, but I would think that when your plant is on the decline, you need some fresh foliage to keep the photosynthesis factory rolling...
I have no scientific data to back that up, but I second your notion that it even if it doesn't help the plant, it helps the grower's psyche to see green around the crown late in the season... :)
Frank

8/2/2004 9:27:33 PM

northern indiana

I have been warned that these new young studs dont produce as well due to the fact that they dont have as good a root system supporting them. If you do this I would make sure to bury the vines to promote rooting. It is one thing for them to look tired, it is another to be punched full of holes. I have one plant with far more of these replacements that grew in after I removed a number of PM infected leaves. That plant is producing but not as well as it should. The other plant didn't loose as many to the pruning but overall seems to be producing just as well. It would be interesting to find out how this practice coupled with burying to promote rooting works out.
Eric

8/2/2004 9:39:26 PM

South Hill, Virginia

Actually sounds pretty smart to me Steve. On my plants the older leaves seem to be more susceptible to powdery mildew and I would happily replace them with new leaves had I thought of it.

While I'm on the subject of powdery mildew does it spread by contact? Is it best to remove leaves that are covered with it?

8/2/2004 10:39:26 PM

[email protected]

It doesn't hurt to get them out of the patch if they no longer produce. Yes the gray stuff is the causal pathogen. Removing them can do more to spread it. Catch 22. So spray them with soap, oil or a darn good surfactant & remove them wet.

8/2/2004 11:12:10 PM

Brillion Wisconsin

I remember reading something about this a while back. I think it was in a transcript from chat with a heavy hitter.

It went something like this-Its better to have a leaf growing in a bare spot, than just have a open void in the plant.

I try to follow this practice of training a select few tertiary vines/leaves to help fill in the voids.

8/3/2004 9:01:34 AM

Indiana

I do the same thing Tremor, it seems to make since to me! Anything to keep the food factory going.
Steve

8/3/2004 9:27:01 AM

Chesterfield, MO

Yep...I do the same.

8/3/2004 12:10:31 PM

Joliet, IL

i have done the same this year by accident at first,
and then after watching some areas fill in with newer
leaves, i have let the pop up tertiaries retain about 3 or
4 leaves and snip the end. i have added many newer leaves
this way, especially around the stump. it does fill the voids. until they grew in for shade protection of the stump,
make a mini shade cover for the stump area to keep it dry
and from direct sunlight hitting it. at first when i saw
a pop tertiary i went in and removed it, doing more damage
to the existing leaves in the removal process. then i
decided just to snip the ends. after i saw all the new
leaves fill in the gaps, i thought this might be a way
for me to extend my season by having younger leaves that
will last longer than the older ones. i never saw any posts
on this either tremor. there has to be a line where the
new growth takes away fruit growth in the short term,
but in the longer run it may put on 200 more pounds
after day 60 with leaves that still produce the sugars.
definately a question for debate.

8/3/2004 1:57:12 PM

Ontario

Bryan Dueck grew new growth last year to replace old growth. Don't know if it helped but it didn't hurt

drew

P.s Bryan and I are out of the hunt this year but there is one grower in St Catharines that has a 450 pound pumpkin off the 734 cheam and a 400 pound squash off the 675 hester both pollinated July 4th. Will keep you updated.

8/3/2004 2:34:29 PM

Ohio

Maybe this is a reason why some people never terminate the main vine at a certain lenght after the pumpkin. Might be a idea for me next year to keep my main vine growing till it dead ends it self.People probably do this all ready, but After i have my pumpkin set, let all secondaries grow out of the main for about 10 feet, after that let the main keep growing and terminate every secondary. Make sense? More leaves, More energy, and u would be replacing the ones that die. But all the leaves would be after the pumpkin, do you think that would matter?
Brooks

8/3/2004 9:26:49 PM

[email protected]

Thanks for the info. I guess the effort cuase little or no harm & could help if the "backvines" are terminated promptly after reaching goal.

Drew, I'm sorry to hear you guys are out. Disease?

Brook, This debate has raged for a lot longer than I've been growing AGs. Personally I believe the plant past the fruit does send photosynthate back toward the fruit. For how far I can only guess. Eight - twelve feet maybe???

Some other cucrbita crops have had sap tracings done with the use of radio-isotopes. Back feeding is a confirmed fact in these cases. AG's shouldn't be any different.

We had some very productive conversations about this over the past winter. Try searching for the word "sink" & read all the sink-source theory post by Joze. It's good stuff.

8/3/2004 10:51:39 PM

Joliet, IL

the sink source info is definately a must read.
to sum it all up the best i can with an example is
a strawberry plant. it will send out shoots that take
root and eventually become their own plant eventhough still connected. i believe this is a self cloning trait
similar to vining plants like squash. once the tap roots
become mature enough, that portion of the plant can live on
its own incase of damage in between the 2. with the
pumpkins, sooner or later as the plant keeps spreading
out, the plant no longer sends its energy to the main
area sink and the plant starts to act like multiple
plants with multiple sinks and sources, thus dividing its
energy into multiple areas instead of concentrating it
on the main area where your pumpkin is sitting. learning
from the reduction in size patch by most N.H. growers
and the successes they repeatedly have, i would tend to
believe that although some photosynthate comes back to the
pumpkin, at some point, it takes more energy away from
the main sink the further the plants grow from this sink
as the plant tries to continue to clone itself for
better chances of reproduction. this is the way i have
come to understand it, but maybe i am all wrong in my
thinking. so then with the pop up tertiaries, it they are
with in your main sink area and even if they do not have
a solid root system, they should still be adding
photosynthate to your pumpkins because they are being
fed the water from already established roots throuout
the entire system. i wouldn't think just because a leaf
above a tap root dies off that the tap root under neath it
also stops taking in water for the entire plant.
i am not sure if any of this makes sense. lol.

8/4/2004 3:14:49 PM