can you post some pictures ?

They're doing exactly what they are supposed to do. :) Prune if you need to keep them in bounds, but all those strong side branches will give you lots and lots of tomatoes -- way more than you'd get if you prune it down to the main stem only. You're not "diverting energy from the main stem"; you're letting the tomato plant grow the way nature intended it to. Pruning is for the gardener's convenience, not the plant's.

Good luck!

Kathy

They are all in cages, but do I need to do something else to support them? Even the side branches are all flowering, but should I prune them so that the plant can divert its energy to the main stem (if I gcan find the main stem that is...)?

Sounds like they are doing exactly what they are supposed to so why would you want to prune them now? You'd lose all that fruit if nothing else. Not to mention the stress to the plant.

An indeterminate variety is supposed to have multiple, fruit producing side branches and is quite capable of supporting them all. But if all you have ever seen were heavily pruned plants rather than a normally growing plant before then yes, it can be a surprise.

"Diverting its energy to the main stem" is not a concern and long proven to be just a lack of understanding of how the plants actually grow. Pruning is done for the convenience of the gardener, not for the benefit of the plant. So with proper spacing and proper support, pruning is purely optional. It isn't required for any reason.

Now whether they need more support or not all depends on what you mean by "cages". Real tomato cages, unlike those 3 or 4 ring things that stick in the ground, can easily support a full plant. If you are using the so-called tomato cages with the 3-4 rings then yes the plants will need additional supports - stakes, Florida weave, better cages, etc.

Dave

I'll have to agree with Dave on one point- Why would you want to prune them now? Once you pass a certain point of control the plant becomes an "Unsightly, impenetrable, disease wracked tangle" and at that point it is too late to undo the disaster.

Proper care of the plant in all respects which includes not allowing the plant to develop into the "...Tangle" is to the convenience and benefit of both the plant and also ultimately the gardener. Sure, you'll have a huge number of tomatoes but who wants to eat any that are picked from and covered with a slimey, rotting overgrowth.
No LUCK in this matter. Better CARE next year.

the plant becomes an "Unsightly, impenetrable, disease wracked tangle"

Gee bmoser - never had one of those and don't prune either. Must something in the method of support or the spacing or your environment that causes that to happen.

but who wants to eat any that are picked from and covered with a slimey, rotting overgrowth.

Never had that happen either. Although i have lost lots of fruit to sun scald due to too much pruning. :)

Do over-crowded plants need to be pruned? Yes, or one can just use better spacing when the room is available. Do poorly supported plants need to be pruned? Yes, or just use proper supports. If one is going to prune aggressively does it have to be done from early on rather than as a hatchet job later? Yes. Does pruning benefit the plant or the gardener? The gardener only except under circumstances listed above.

Have no idea where the OP lives as that info wasn't provided for some reason. But you are way north while I'm way south so the very different climates play a role in the pro and cons of pruning too. We each do what time and experience has proven to us works best for our situations.

Dave

I'll have to agree with Dave on one point- Why would you want to prune them now? Once you pass a certain point of control the plant becomes an "Unsightly, impenetrable, disease wracked tangle" and at that point it is too late to undo the disaster.
*************************************

Maybe there IS some luck - bad luck anyway, if this has happened to you bmoser. I've never yet pruned and have not experienced this "...Tangle" of which you speak.

YMMV, I guess?

Let us analyze this:

IF A PLANT WITH SINGLE MAIN CAN SUPPORT MULTIPLE BRANCH OUTS, WHICH FRUITS WILL GROW ON ALL THOSE BRANCHES, THEN why not plant multiple of plants next to each other (in one hill, about 6" apart) and let each have just one main stem. It is logical to believe that say 4 root system(combined) with 4 main stems can deliver more nutrient than a single root system.
There must be a limit(efficient/optimum) as how much a single tomato stem can mediate between its roots and the top (foliage + fruits).
I am thinking !

BTW: I am experimenting few TWO PER HILL this year.

Thanks to this forum, I switched to large cages and no pruning after years of pruning to one main stem and staking about three years ago. I am so happy I changed my method. It's a lot less work and I believe I'm getting better production, although I grow different tomatoes than I did in the past. I use Texas Tomato cages and do have to rein in some of the side branches by either tucking them back in or using twine to support the branches that are sticking out.

By the way, I don't think my plants are any shorter than they were when I pruned the suckers. They are just a whole lot bushier.

I am guessing that the natural limit of how much root mass and how many stems can fit into a single location is roughly equal to how much root mass and how many stems that a tomato plant will naturally produce at the location given a set amount of space, water, sunlight, nutrients, etc.

Planting multiple plants right next to each other and giving them the same amount of resources (space, light, water...) that you give to one plant at a largely identical location will probably end up producing a combined yield similar to what you get from that one plant.

When I planted two Early Girl seedlings in one 18 gal container and then just one in another identical container near it last season, the two containers end up looking about the same. The plant(s) in each container grew roughly the same amount of foliage and fruits. One really couldn't tell which container had two seedlings planted into it and which one had just one.

If this applies more generally, then you are just wasting seedlings by planting several of them together.

This post was edited by DHLCAL on Sun, May 18, 14 at 21:22

IF A PLANT WITH SINGLE MAIN CAN SUPPORT MULTIPLE BRANCH OUTS, WHICH FRUITS WILL GROW ON ALL THOSE BRANCHES, THEN why not plant multiple of plants next to each other (in one hill, about 6" apart) and let each have just one main stem. It is logical to believe that say 4 root system(combined) with 4 main stems can deliver more nutrient than a single root system.

If...then..is the Affirming the Consequent fallacy of logic. This is a horse. IF this horse is brown THEN all horses are brown.

A plant with a single main stem and several secondary stems can support all the fruit that develops on all those stems. That is well proven.

It does not follow however that 4 separate plants planted in the same hole and pruned to a single stem can or will supply more nutrients with their 4 root systems than are supplied by the single plant.

A more likely hypothesis is that they will compete with each other for the available nutrients in the hole.

Dave

It would seem logical in theory to plant 4 plants in close proximity, Seysonn, except for the "Unsightly, impenetrable, disease wracked tangle" which would result. Without air movement and stems and branches laying over eachother the common foliar diseases would spell doom to the overall production soon after plants started producing fruit. A 22-24" in-row spacing appears to me to be as close as one should plant although I've be told by a few extension vegetable specialists that even that is too close.

You can tell I am fascinated with that quoted phrase but I don't want to take credit for it. It was posted on this site quite a few years ago by a respectable member and I just had to write it down. It rings so true that I'll probably repeat it again.

If...then..is the Affirming the Consequent fallacy of logic. This is a horse. IF this horse is brown THEN all horses are brown.

A plant with a single main stem and several secondary stems can support all the fruit that develops on all those stems. That is well proven.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The fallacy lies in your conclusion: that one root system is better than four. And concluding without any back up evidence that ONE root system can provide more nutrients than FOUR. Show mw one university controlled study : Just one.
Even if 4 root system compete, each trying to get more nutrients, 4 of them will grow much bigger root mass combined than one root system. They will expand and grow into much bigger soil volume due competition.

For you to understand, stems are like pipelines. Therefore how much they can deliver and support is limited. For an annual plant like tomatoes is for most of us, it cannot grow a big trunk in one season.(about 5 months)

Seysonn, remember this post you wrote to me earlier in the year? (And in a similar post, telling me I would have to thin my tomato plants?)

Posted by seysonn 7b WA/HZ 1 (My Page) on Mon, Feb 10, 14 at 19:00
Over crowding happens in the nature all the time in the woods, in the prairies. The stronger survives and the weaker dies. But it you want to plant a forest, you would not do it as it happens in the nature, BECAUSE you do it more intelligently for better outcome and productivity. And that is what a gardener doe, GROWING BY DESIGN and order.

@ Lucille,
I don't think it was a case comparison in planting tomatoes.
Give me the address of the post so that I can give you a proper response.

About tomatoes: I have stated before that group planting is possible to some extent. And I have given examples that potatoes(first cousins of tomatoes), cucurbits ... are commonly planted in clumps (up to 3 cucumber per hill, more than 3 tomato stems per hill) we have also seen towering trees growing in clumps. Sure, if there is a sever competition the most fit will survive. That is more likely to happen in early younger stage.

The "4" plant per hill that I mentioned was just to make a point ( if you go back and read my post) that if a single plant can support 4 branches(using one root system), then 4 plants each can support ONE branch in.

FINALLY: I have said this many times: This is a forum. My opinions might sound controversial or uncommon to you. We do not come here to agree with each other all the time on everything. More good comes out of clashing and opposing opinions than concuring. Also, we should not under estimate the intelligences of the readers. They are capable of sifting thru and deciding what to do. BELIEVE IT OR DON'T.

We were indeed speaking of planting tomatoes, in a thread discussing tomato plants growing near each other.

This is a forum, and controversy is a positive quality, readers are able to see many sides of an issue that way.

I'm pointing out that your opinions seem to change depending on the thread you are posting in. Just an observation.

The fallacy lies in your conclusion: that one root system is better than four. And concluding without any back up evidence that ONE root system can provide more nutrients than FOUR. Show mw one university controlled study : Just one.
Even if 4 root system compete, each trying to get more nutrients, 4 of them will grow much bigger root mass combined than one root system. They will expand and grow into much bigger soil volume due competition.

Jeeze, that doesn't even make sense. Are you actually claiming that all these roots from 4 separate plants in the same hole will somehow link up/fuse into one common root ball and so feed all the plants regardless of which plant they originated from? Sorry but plant roots don't work that way any more than the circulatory system of some guy you stand next to is supplying blood to you. The plants aren't siamese twins sharing one system.

Roots from plants can become entangled with each other sure, but they are still only feeding the plant they are attached to.

And I never claimed or concluded "that one root system is better than four. And concluding without any back up evidence that ONE root system can provide more nutrients than FOUR." You're the one who made those wild claims and conclusions, not me.

Each plant has one root system, only one, no matter how close you plant them. Plant 2 or 4 or 27 right next to each other and each plant still only has one root system.

Dave

PS: good points Lucille.

Jeeze, that doesn't even make sense. Are you actually claiming that all these roots from 4 separate plants in the same hole will somehow link up/fuse into one common root ball
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
NO. WHERE DID I SAY THAT ? Go back and read my post again. I did NOT talk about fusing . I said that (at leas in theory) 4 root system combined , (SAY in a soil volume like 3' by 3' by 3' ), can deliver more than a SINGLE root system in the same volume. The reason I brought up this subject b'c you keep saying a single root system can support 4 or unlimited number of fruit bearing branches, So I said in that case 4 plants (each pruned to single stem) should do better even in a confined area(Soil Volume).

And you keep referring MANY studies but have not referenced ONE yet. You keep saying "10000s of tomatoes are grown this way' or that way '!! That is a logical fallacy. Or 'most people do it this way': Another logical fallacy.

The bottom line is that BOTH "not pruning" and "pruning" are optional at best.

@ Lucille
You still have not provided the link to the discussion that on which you made conclusion.

Seysonn,

When I asked you to find a link for some info about tomato roots you had presented, here is a quote of what you told me, in your exact words:

"Growing plants/gardening is not like a pure science like algebra to solve an equation. I don't like to get into lengthy discussion here and be interrogated as if I am in a court of law to submit evidence."

"Bottom line". - So now we're back to pruning huh? Yet another tangent.

reason I brought up this subject b'c you keep saying a single root system can support 4 or unlimited number of fruit bearing branches And you keep referring MANY studies but have not referenced ONE yet. You keep saying "10000s of tomatoes are grown this way' or that way '!!

Don't need a link to any study to prove that. Anyone who has ever grown a tomato plant without pruning it or pruned it to 4 or 5 or 6 branches knows that is true. Any commercial grower knows it is true. Do you really think they prune acres of tomatoes? But just for you the link below - hundreds of pics of of 1000's of acres of fields of unpruned of tomatoes growing. You can click on each photo and go to the page that tells you all about it.

And here are hundreds of pics of home garden unpruned tomato beds. Clicking on these photos takes you all kinds of personal blogs where the growers discuss why they do or don't prune their tomatoes.

So I said in that case 4 plants (each pruned to single stem) should do better even in a confined area(Soil Volume).

And that follows how? The discussion was about pruning not number of plants i a hole. So how is it even relevant to a discussion on pruning?

But you want to argue that 4 plants in a hole of a specific size will do better than 1 plant planted alone in that same hole?

Ignoring the question of why anyone would even plant 4 plants in the same hole in the first place, you claim that overcrowded plants, even pruned to a single stem overcrowded plants, will do better, produce more, than normally spaced plants, pruned or unpruned?

That defies logic and common sense! It totally disregards what is common knowledge about how plants grow, what they need in terms of nutrients, water, air circulation, soil O2, root development, sun exposure, etc. You going to find a way to quadruple all those things in that single whole too?

The only way your claim could make any sense at all is if you thought those 4 root balls were feeding all four plants when you said The fallacy lies in your conclusion: that one root system is better than four. And concluding without any back up evidence that ONE root system can provide more nutrients than FOUR..

Roots in a hole feed the plant they originate from period. Nothing else. The only way 4 rootballs in the same hole - which would be silly to do to begin with - could even come close to matching the performance of a single root ball in that same hole is if you quadruple the available nutrients, water, available room for root development, available soil O2 levels and maximum air circ and sun exposure above ground.

How the Closeness of Plants Affect Growth

The Effect of Growing Tomato Varieties Too Closely Spaced

The minimal spacing for trellised tomatoes is two feet apart in a hedgerow. Research has demonstrated that crowding plants will not increase yields, but will increase disease problems. Colorado State University Extension.

Planting Density in Field Production of Organic Tomatoes

Effects on Plants of Growing in Overcrowded Contitions

Want more - Physical Effects of Overcrowding on Plants

Dave

Here is a link that might be useful: Fields of tomatoes pics

"Ignoring the question of why anyone would even plant 4 plants in the same hole in the first place, you claim that overcrowded plants, even pruned to a single stem overcrowded plants, will do better, produce more, than normally spaced plants, pruned or unpruned?"

I think his theory is not that one would plant 4 plants in the same hole, but that given a bed of a certain fixed size, one would get higher production from 4 highly-pruned single stem tomato plants (say, planted on the four corners of a square bed) than 1 multi-stem tomato left unpruned (say, planted in the center of that same square bed).

I'm not defending the theory, mind, just clarifying that I don't think he meant those 4 plants would be in the same hole.

Fileds of tomato picitures !!!!
haha. What is that supposed to prove ?

Even on commercial planting the recommended spacing in rows is 12 to 18" ( in one of the links you provided ). Not 3 to 4 feet as you have been advocating .

But the subject " UNPRUNED INDETERMINANT TOMATO PLANT ..."

I can also show you threads (hundreds of them about the merits of pruning. Here is one

Pruning tomatoes For Maximum Production

https://www.google.com/#q=pruning+tomatoes+for+maximum+production

http://www.tomatodirt.com/pruning-tomato.html

pruning ti;ds largest tomatoes
http://www.tomatodirt.com/pruning-tomato.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apvT-UwtDts

As far as I know, the larger scale commercial farms mostly grow determinate varieties of compact plant size, not the indeterminate varieties that many home gardners and smaller scale specialized growers grow. This is one factor for the spacing recommendations.

Moreover, even for these compact varieties we are taking about space between rows of 5-6 feet, so we are not taking about planting in a tight grid even for those.

What would you two do without each other?

I can tell you what I could do - same as for the past 10 years here. Go back to having intelligent and at least semi-rational discussions about growing tomatoes. Instead of having to deal with all the silly claims and irresponsible, off-the-wall arguments posted just to create controversy.

It is either deal with them or just let them stand unopposed and risk new and/or inexperienced growers reading them and assuming they are accurate.

Many of us have a sense of responsibility about the quality of the forum and the info it provides to others. But now and then we get someone new like this who get their kicks in other ways.

kathy - it would be nice if you were correct but unfortunately that is exactly what he means. Hard to believe isn't it?

Dave

PS: seysonn - yes, I realize that it is pointless to respond to you but what the pics prove is what you asked for - proof that hundreds of thousands of tomatoes are grown unpruned every year and that pruning is not mandatory to grow tomatoes.

You demanded links - you got links from reputable sources. But I seriously doubt you bothered to read any of them. Hopefully others will take the time to do so.