"Super Duper" Tomato Fertilizers?

[Greatgardens]

Is anyone aware of unbiased studies of the results of various tomato fertilizers? By unbiased, I would mean university studies, etc., scientifically controlled, and there is no conflict of interest in determining the results.

From what I have personally seen over the years is that there is little if any discernable difference in actual results. Except, there is a dramatic difference between fast-acting and slow-release fertilizers. Organic ferts would generally be in the slow-release category. Extended release chemical products can supposedly last up to 6 months, while organic products seem to be listed at 4 to 8 weeks. I tend to use the least expensive organic fertilizer that I can find (usually that is Burpee's at Menards) and some Osmocote. Most of this goes into my EarthBoxes and hanging baskets. And of course occasionally Miracle-Gro for some quick results.

It seems to me that making organic fertilizers is essentially a "boutique industry" and the main differences are the marketing and the prices of the products. Of course, that's just an opinion.

And that said, maybe there actually is some super duper product out there that I'm not familiar with. (?)

GG

[simmran1]

For slow release I like (and use) Tomato-Tone and Garden-Tone because the ingredients and the ratios make sense. I've seen fellow gardeners using products with too much N and achieving an over abundance of foliage in contrast to yield so I think it best to purchase rather than guess with manures and such.

This year I’m trying Flora Nova Grow 7-4-10. The results seem good so far, though I would prefer a pour spout on the bottle, is my only negative opinion. I have not done a control vs product used test, just used it as recommended on everything.

[mobiledynamics]

I don't think the test would matter in the real world, as take the top winning super duper fertz. Apply it Soil A and Soil B. The ability to uptake fertz in soil B may be completely different than soil A. Lotsa of uncontrolled variables once it's in the real world.

IMO, osmocote would fall into the most $$ of fertz. I use it , mainly as a CRF for my Indoor Potted Stuff but I do also put a handful every year in my outdoor containers - both flowering (pink) and the tom. (green oscmo).

[brownrexx]

I agree that different soil conditions affect how plants can absorb nutrients from fertilizers but I don't see how the soil conditions would affect different brands differently.

For example a high pH will prevent nutrients from being available and I don't think that a different brand will matter.

[Worth1]

I have never ever had a problem using a cheap well balanced fertilizer.
Even too much.
Problems for me start when I start using for tomatoes and so on type fertilizers.

I really do think that some people dont realize that Nitrogen Phosphorus and Potassium are elements on the periodic table.

How that element is presented to you matters not the price

[MadCow333]

Last year, I ended up using 10-10-10 on my container tomatoes. I actually think it worked far better than the Tomato Tone and other expensive stuff. I put little effort into my tomato's last year due to demands of my work schedule. But still got LOADS of tomatoes of all varieties.

[Worth1]

Originally Posted by MadCow333

Last year, I ended up using 10-10-10 on my container tomatoes. I actually think it worked far better than the Tomato Tone and other expensive stuff. I put little effort into my tomato's last year due to demands of my work schedule. But still got LOADS of tomatoes of all varieties.

Last year I had ghost peppers doing nothing with all of the organic stuff Plant tone in the soil Fish emulsion and even MG liquid plant food no matter how much I used.
As soon as I hit them with 13-13-13 the things exploded.
At this time I am fertilizing about once a week with it with good results.
Biggest bell peppers ever so far.
Worth

[mobiledynamics]

it's always been my understanding that the tone's need the micro's, etc in real dirt to work effectively, whereas in containers, it does not work as well

[Worth1]

Originally Posted by mobiledynamics

it's always been my understanding that the tone's need the micro's, etc in real dirt to work effectively, whereas in containers, it does not work as well

Depends on what you put in the containers.
The results I have had were in all types of soils including my raised beds.
The raised beds did okay but it played out too soon and I had to start adding 13-13-13.
This is with me mixing in the Plant Tone with the soil before I ever planted a seed.

This year I haven't planted anything in the raised beds, but I have wild sweet potatoes growing in one of them.
I'm giving them a rest for this fall.

Worth

[fonseca]

I grow 100% organically in containers. In general, you are feeding microorganisms in the soilless mix, not the plants themselves. I also start preparing my mix at least a month before the growing season starts. And I go through a lot of compost each season. Compost is the best fertilizer, and also the cheapest if you DIY. Raise red wriggles and make vermicompost. The N-P-K numbers are next to meaningless when growing organically.

I also add 1-2 cups fertilizer meals per cubic foot soilless mix annually. Alfalfa, kelp, neem, crab/shrimp/lobster shell, fish bone meal, etc. Buy them in 40-50lb bags from a co-op or feed store and they are very economical. I get through the whole season without adding additional fertilizer, and only rarely show any nutrient deficiency.

Ensure the health of the microbiome, and you won't have to worry about the plants. I inoculate all seedlings, and use compost tea several times throughout the season.

[Koala Doug]

I ran a small test last year between Miracle-Gro's specific tomato product (the 'red stuff', not their popular 'blue stuff'), Texas Tomato Food, and a trio of Roots Organics liquid fertilizers. It took about three weeks to dial the proper feeding and dosing schedule for each product. And I had to add calcium separately for the Miracle-Gro and the Roots Organics (the TTF already has calcium in the mix).

The Miracle-Gro was the worst performer by far... and the Texas Tomato Food was clearly the best. The Roots Organics products were notably better than the Miracle-Gro, but not as good as the Texas Tomato Food.

I'd also be keen to try the Chem-Gro line of products (from Hydro-Gardens) and pit it against the Texas Tomato Food. But that's more of an aspiration future event.


I should also point out that my 'n' value is way too small to be statistically significant. But in saying that, I should note that I am only using Texas Tomato Food this year.

[AKmark]

Originally Posted by Greatgardens

Is anyone aware of unbiased studies of the results of various tomato fertilizers? By unbiased, I would mean university studies, etc., scientifically controlled, and there is no conflict of interest in determining the results.

From what I have personally seen over the years is that there is little if any discernable difference in actual results. Except, there is a dramatic difference between fast-acting and slow-release fertilizers. Organic ferts would generally be in the slow-release category. Extended release chemical products can supposedly last up to 6 months, while organic products seem to be listed at 4 to 8 weeks. I tend to use the least expensive organic fertilizer that I can find (usually that is Burpee's at Menards) and some Osmocote. Most of this goes into my EarthBoxes and hanging baskets. And of course occasionally Miracle-Gro for some quick results.

It seems to me that making organic fertilizers is essentially a "boutique industry" and the main differences are the marketing and the prices of the products. Of course, that's just an opinion.

And that said, maybe there actually is some super duper product out there that I'm not familiar with. (?)

GG

The only thing that counts is when leaf samples are sent to a lab for analysis. They tell us exactly where we stand. With that said, I use fertilizers that give me good scores on the bar charts. Everyone has an angle, many have their perfect blends they sell, but how do those products stand when the guys in the white coats get involved?

I use 4-18-38 in containers, Haifa has a great blends, Jacks has a good blend, there are a few others. I want to find the genetic potential of a variety, if my fertilizer is not close to perfect, or my management, I will never find it.

[fonseca]

Originally Posted by AKmark

The only thing that counts is when leaf samples are sent to a lab for analysis. They tell us exactly where we stand.

I believe a refractometer will provide a good basis for comparison if you want to DIY.

[Greatgardens]

When I first started with EarthBoxes, I used Tomato Tone, but was not happy with the results. I went with 10-10-10 in a fertilizer "strip" as recommended by EB. Did much better than Tom. Tone. But I didn't like the nasty-looking remains at the end of the season. So I went back to organics that contained bacterial "enhancers." I ended up with Jobes and Burpee. Both have good results with Burpee being slightly cheaper. Yes, Osmocote is usually expensive, but a few years ago, I got a real deal on end-of-season close out. I use it sparingly to give a bit longer feeding.

[Worth1]

Originally Posted by fonseca

I believe a refractometer will provide a good basis for comparison if you want to DIY.

Interested as to how you would use a refractometer to analyze the content of a leaf for elements such as NPK and other things.

Just asking, all I have ever used one for is the percentage of foam in fire protection water.