Pumpkins have become a major crop throughout the Northeast,
yet little research based information has been available for pumpkins.
Since 1995, we conducted trials to determine ways growers can
maximize yield through various cultural inputs and methods. This
presentation will focus on the questions we tried to answer in
Trials conducted at two locations in 1995 demonstrated that
there was little difference in the yield of two pumpkin varieties
(Howden and Wizard) as nitrogen rates were increased from 60 to
140 lbs/A. There was a trend towards slightly larger fruit size
with higher rates of N but this was not consistent. These tests
were conducted on silt loam soils with relatively good nutrient
holding capacity; however, greater amounts of nitrogen may be
useful on sandy or gravelly soils. Higher amounts may lead to
more foliage which could lessen fruit set. Based on these tests,
60 to 100 pounds N/A seems to be adequate.
One reason for a lack of effect due to nitrogen may be due to the timing of application. Typically, pumpkins are sidedressed just as they begin to run; this is the same time when female flowers are forming. We need to investigate whether additional nitrogen at that time interferes with the number of female flowers produced or with fruit sizing. With pumpkins, it is difficult to sidedress later in the season since equipment would run over vines and fruit. One alternative is to use trickle irrigation and fertigate later in the season after fruit set. (Preliminary results from a 1999 trial show no effect on fruit size from fertigation.)
Growers have two options when increasing plant populations: either within-row spacings or between row spacings can be decreased. Grower practices vary in terms of spacing to optimize pumpkin yields. With cucumbers and watermelons, closer spacing increases fruit per acre and decreases fruit size. The effect on tons/A varies, from no effect to a significant increase. This trial was conducted to determine the effect of in-row spacing on two pumpkin varieties, Howden, a large vining type, and Wizard, a semi-bush type.
Pumpkins were planted on 6 foot centers with in-row spacings of 1, 2, and 4 feet. Plants were thinned to a single plant per hill. At both locations, closer in-row spacings significantly increased the number of pumpkins/A while decreasing the average weight per fruit. At one location, despite the smaller fruit, the increase in fruit numbers resulted in a significant increase in tons/A while in the second location, the tons/A was not increased. Why the difference? The location in which we saw increased tons/A was irrigated while the other location was not. Apparently, to take maximum advantage of increased plant populations, growers need to ensure that water is not limiting.
From our previous trial, we know that changing in-row spacing
significantly affects yield. For pumpkin growers, a wider between-row
spacing may be better, allowing for easier access to fields for
the purpose of cultivation, pesticide, or fertilizer applications.
A trial was conducted comparing the same plant populations on
6 and 12 foot centers. For 6 foot centers, in-row spacings of
2, 4 and 6 feet were used. For 12 foot centers, in-row spacings
of 1, 2, and 3 feet were used.
For both the 6 and 12 foot centers, we saw an increase in yield as within-row spacing decreased and population increased. Row width had little effect on any aspect of yield with the exception of the number of fruit /A. Six foot centers resulted in a significant increase in fruit numbers at both locations. The greater number of fruit did not result in increased tons/A as the average fruit size declined slightly with the narrow spacing.
The data indicate that row width may become more important at higher plant populations. The highest plant population resulted in greater fruit number and tons/A. The effect is significant, however, only when spacing between rows is narrow. The narrow row width provides each plant a more square area of land than did wider spacings at the same population. Plants are spread out more eveniy in the field and may be less likely to compete in this arrangement. The effect was seen for both a large vining variety (Howden) as well as a semi-bush type (Wizard). This effect may be more pronounced when yields are maximized with optimum inputs of fertilizer, irrigation, and pesticides.
Some growers have traditionally kept two or three plants per
hill in the belief that this increases yield. It is also good
insurance in case a plant is lost to insect or disease. Based
on previous studies, it would seem that two or more plants per
hill would not increase yield. In 1997, a trial was conducted
in which pumpkins were grown on six foot centers with 2,4, or
6 foot in-row spacings. Each hill contained either one or two
plants. As in the other studies, Howden and Wizard were the varieties
Doubling the number of plants per hill had very little effect on yield. At one location, there was an increase in fruit number/A and a decrease in average fruit size with two plants. Most of the significant increase in yield was due to the closer in-row spacings which resulted in more fruit/A and more tons/A, with a typical decrease in fruit size.
Although there was no advantage to having more than one plant per hill, there was also no yield penalty. Growers may want to consider using 2 plants per hill to ensure that at least one healthy plant is available for yield.
From earlier trials, it appeared that irrigation may be extremely important in determining the final size of a pumpkin. In 1995, two variety trials were conducted, similar in all ways except one was irrigated (overhead irrigation) and the other was not. The results indicate that irrigation increased fruit size from 50-100%.
In 1998, a trial was conducted in which three levels of trickle irrigation were maintained on pumpkin plots. There was no yield difference between the high and low irrigation treatments but when irrigation is compared to no irrigation, there was a significant increase in fruit number per acre and tons per acre.
In addition to maximizing spacing and fertilizer use, growers need to use varieties that are adapted to a particular region. In 1999, I evaluated twenty varieties of pumpkins at Stone Wall Hill Farm in Stephentown, NY. Varieties were from Abbott and Cobb, Peto, Asgrow, Harris-Moran, Harris, Johnnys, and from Bruce Howden. The most promising varieties in this trial were experimental lines from Asgrow - SVR 6234-2, EXT 1229-7, and SVT 2083-7; and Magic Lantern and HMX 6689 from Harris-Moran (samples will be shown at the conference). However, almost all the varieties in the trial had strong points to them, and there were really no bad varieties. Many years of conducting variety trials has demonstrated to me that different varieties perform better on specific soil types and under specific environmental conditions.
The overall effects seem to be true for both large vining varieties like Howden as well as semi-bush types like Wizard. Competition for light, nutrients, and water would be increased in high density plantings. Close spacings could increase leaf wetness causing greater disease pressure. Growers who choose higher populations need to ensure that all inputs are optimized to reduce potential plant to plant competition.
To maximize yields growers must constantly evaluate new varieties for their specific situation and determine which cultural practices maximize the potential of that variety.
We wish to thank the Pennsylvania Vegetable Marketing and Research Program for their support of this study in 1995 and the NYS Vegetable Crops Statewide Program Committee for support in 1996 and 97. Also, thanks to cooperating growers, Saulpaugh and Sons, Richard Ball, and Burton Mattice.
Stephen Reiners, Assistant Professor, Department of Horticultural Sciences, NYS Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY 14456
Dale I.M. Riggs*, D. Riggs Consulting, Stone Wall Hill Farm, LLC, 15370 NY Rt. 22, Stephentown, NY 12168
Originally published: Proceedings. 1999. New England Vegetable & Berry Growers Conference and Trade Show. Sturbridge, MA. p. 31-34.
Information on our site was developed for conditions in the Northeast. Use in other geographical areas may be inappropriate.
The information in this material is for educational purposes. The recommendations contained are based on the best available knowledge at the time of printing. Any reference to commercial products, trade or brand names is for information only, and no endorsement or approval is intended. The Cooperative Extension system does not guarantee or warrant the standard of any product referenced or imply approval of the product to the exclusion of others which also may be available.All agrochemicals/pesticides listed are registered for suggested uses in accordance with federal and Connecticut state laws and regulations as of the date of printing. If the information does not agree with current labeling, follow the label instructions. The label is the law.Warning! Agrochemicals/pesticides are dangerous. Read and follow all instructions and safety precautions on labels. Carefully handle and store agrochemicals/pesticides in originally labeled containers immediately in a safe manner and place. Contact the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection for current regulations.The user of this information assumes all risks for personal injury or property damage.Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Kirklyn M. Kerr, Director, Cooperative Extension System, The University of Connecticut, Storrs. The Connecticut Cooperative Extension System offers its programs to persons regardless of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability and is an equal opportunity employer.