I'm a relative newcomer (obviously) to the world of tomato growing. I first heard/read of Big Zac in a 2009 R.H. Shumway's Illustrated Garden Guide (pg. 54). The description reads, in part, "An excellent tomato in every respect; meaty and delicious". I grew it that year and was hooked.
In 2010 I became involved in growing tomatoes for size through Perry's Greenhouse (
http://www.perrysgreenhouse.com/vbforum/). That endeavor was instrumental in opening my eyes to an entire world of tomatoes (etc.) outside the big seed company catalogs (Burpee, Gurney's, Jung, Park, etc.).
Anyhow, apparantly giant tomato growers are taking their cue from the world of giant pumpkin growers. See
http://www.pumpkinlink.com/ and
http://www.aggc.org/aggc_main.asp if you're not familiar with how they trace lineages in that world. Briefly, each registered pumpkin is designated first by an official weight, second by the grower's last name, and third by the year grown. The current world's record is 1818.5 Bryson 2011. More than 12,000 pumpkins are listed!
Of course the world of giant tomato growing is very different. We're dealing with multiple varieties instead of just one. However, most of the really huge ones (5 lbs. plus) have Delicious or Big Zac ancestry (though Marv Meisner grew some monsters from Brutus Magnum and MegaMarv this year as well).
As far as I can tell, there is not a standardized convention for naming noteworthy giant tomatoes. I have suggested following the lead of giant pumpkin growers but adding the variety name. For example, I would suggest listing the largest tomato grown (and officially weighed and registered) in 2011 as:
Delicious (6.51 Meisner 2011)
(See
http://www.bigpumpkins.com/WeighoffR...spx?c=T&y=2011 for the full list).
Over the years, I'm guessing that many hybrids have been de-hybridized by tomato growers, yet the OP strain (is there a better term?) still retains the same variety name as the original. Carmello is one that comes to mind.
In the world of Big Zac tomatoes, growers have been selecting for big tomatoes for several years. This means, of course, doing what we're told never to do: save seeds from a hybrid.
Documentation of lineages for giant tomatoes is nothing like it is for giant pumpkins. However, the most promising lineage (is this a more acceptable term than "strain"?) I have is:
Big Zac (2.660 Thurber 2011) ← (came from) 2.762 Thurber 2010 ← 4.83 Perry 2009 ← 5.58 Timm 2008 ← 3.9 Catapano 2007 ← 4.29 Lyons 2006 ← Big Zac (assume commercial F1).
So that brings us to F7, at least. When do we quit counting F's and just call it OP? I, for one, am not inclined to call something a new variety just because someone grew a remarkable specimen or because it's been de-hybridized. By the way, the 5.58 Timm seed produced a 7.18 Harp 2009!
So, NewWestGardener, I've listed one of the better lineages I raised this year. The tomatoes are very tasty and productive, as mentioned. On October 16th I finally got around to thinning off the smaller tomatoes on one of the plants, leaving just two big ones. The thinned tomatoes came to 24 lbs. (see pic).
Just as with giant pumpkins, those who are serious about growing giant tomatoes don't bother with the unproven genetics in seed catalogs. They obtain seeds through auctions, raffles, club membership, seed swaps, or contacting the grower directly. I don't think you'll see tomato seeds going for $350 a pop anytime soon, however! (Perhaps if you manage to grow a 10 pounder...)
Lineage, cultivar, strain, variety, open pollinated descendent of a hybrid variety - have you posted somewhere, Carolyn, what the proper definitions are for these terms? I agree that word choice is important so that confusion and miscommunication are minimized.
I hope I haven't hi-jacked this thread too terribly or bored anyone with too many details!
