From

Location

Message

Date Posted

Spearfish Sd,USA

Hello,

Wondering what are the big differences (if any) of a cross compared to its reverse cross (A x B vs B x A). Is there some method to the madness whether one should make a cross of A x B or B x A. Like for example the 1953 Daletas vs the 2174 Daletas. As of right now the 1953 is on fire while the 2174 hasn't produced anything super huge. Is there a strategy out there to determine whether A x B or B x A would produce better seeds. Like which genetic would be best served as the mother and which genetic would best be served as the pollinator or is it just luck?

2/23/2022 4:08:30 PM

Lodi, California

Well neither were grown very much 2 1953s were weighed,and 4 2174s were weighed. The 2174 produced a 1300 pounder and an 1800 pounder, which is pretty good for a sample size of 4, but statistically the 1953 did better, producing a 1900lb and 2200lb offspring. However, the sample size is too small to make any meaningful conclusions from this data, other than that the 1953 is capable of producing very big pumpkins. We don't have enough information about how well yhe grower grew the seeds, which at this point is most of the battle in my opinion.

I don't think anyone can definitely tell you whether a cross is as good as its reverse. However, this is my opinion based on fact:
Every grain of pollen is genetically different, and every ovum that becomes a seed is genetically different, and when they combine, the process of combining the dna from the two is to an extent random, creating even more genetic diversity of seeds from the same fruit.

However, when a seed produces a large offspring, the seeds are similar enough than the likelihood of another seed from the same fruit producing a large offspring is high. Or it could be a dud. I personally think reverse crosses are similar. They have similar potential, but they can also be a dud.

Tl dr: It could be just as good, it could be better, or it could be a dud. You'll never know until you grow it. That's just how randomly mixing the same/similar genes works.

2/23/2022 4:59:31 PM

Norwich, NY

Luck of the draw basically. Maybe you get a seed from the kin that has perfect genetics. Maybe you don’t. Maybe your weather or climate limits the outcome. I guess my point is I agree with pg3, everything is different. The only way to find out is to grow the seed to the best of your ability.

2/23/2022 7:50:07 PM

Cincinnati,OH

Look up 1016 Daletas and 1230 Daletas. Same cross.

2/23/2022 7:57:34 PM

Colorado

One seed will seem to be/do better than the reverse cross.Predicting which will be better-well good luck with that.If one is better than the other it will be epigenetic not genetic.

2/23/2022 10:55:28 PM

Western NY

Herd mentality too - once you're two years out to know that one seed is hot, how many would gamble on it's reverse cross.

A few did with the 800 McMullen, but it didn't get a fraction of the wide planting that the 2145 did.

As for the 2174 - I broke the main vine on mine, I have a feeling it would have put up a much better number otherwise.

2/24/2022 8:04:43 AM

Kutztown, PA

I cut and pasted the following analogy, which is an excerpt from an article I wrote about a seed selection scoring system.

Consider this: A breeding of a pair of great hunting dogs produced eight pups. Of the eight pups, four feared water so would not enter it to retrieve game. Three were extremely timid and developed a fear of loud noises, i.e., gun fire. Only one of the eight pups produced had the right mental capacity for hunting. Having this progeny data would a smart hunter be comfortable reserving a puppy (seed) from a future breeding of the same pair?
Clearly, I could go on here ad nauseum, but it suffices to say that the available progeny data is interesting, but of little use for rating seeds. In the end I did not include progeny data in the scoring system for the reasons I stated.

2/24/2022 10:46:10 AM

Kutztown, PA

pg3 and Andy are right. We (me too) tend to follow the herd, but the herd relies on very little real progeny data.

Big x Big is the best you can do with the data we do have.

2/24/2022 10:49:24 AM

Syracuse, NY

All I know is that when I go on Pumpkinfanatic.com and research a seed and see what it has produced for any other growers, my beliefs instantly turn further toward that if it grew that for THEM, there is a good chance that it'll grow something SIMILAR for ME, although I'll take the bad with the good (properly worded, there) and also realize that the end result can be an ugly or lightweight or misshapen fruit as well - But, the track record is better than any musings of what looks good on paper - They ALL do! I do not think that anywhere near every fruit gets listed nor displayed, as, why would it be if it were not an exemplary specimen? Well, I do hope that MOST of them are shown and listed as such, regardless of any demeaning details, because some of the BEST crosses ever have probably come from not-so-great pumpkins. 'THAT came from THAT???' Yeah, the reverse of the 2145 (AND others' copies of the 2145's cross) I cannot research at the moment, but deserves to be planted more, with its initial splash rippling still as I recall lol---eg

2/25/2022 3:08:58 AM

Eugene,OR

Ashton, did Steve teach you this genetic knowledge on your phone call with him when you did your PGVG consultation? It sounds like you have a masters degree in genealogy. That is a good deal for $100!

2/25/2022 11:41:19 AM

Lodi, California

Lol I haven't talked much to Steve yet unfortunately. He said I can just call him during the growing season to discuss any problems or questions I have so we'll probably just do that. He definitely knows what he's doing

2/25/2022 2:41:22 PM

Eugene,OR

I think Steve just gets lucky

2/25/2022 4:15:40 PM

Bethlehem CT

Years ago growers usually preffered the pollinator be from the bigger pumpkin. For example the 1385 Jutras 07. (pollinator grew the 1687 Jutras world record.). 1161 Rodonis 07 (pollinator grew the 1566 Rodonis)

2/25/2022 6:13:46 PM