22 Tomato and 11 pepper plants, spacings a little tighter than it should be on some of the tomatoes, but it should be okay.
this post was submitted on 25 May 2026
92 points (97.9% liked)
Gardening
6513 readers
103 users here now
Your Ultimate Gardening Guide.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's less about maximizing in volume in the way you seem to be thinking.
20 tomato plants planted too close together are going to produce X tomatoes of shit quality.
10 tomato plants planted too close together will produce X tomatoes of a slightly better quality.
6 tomato plants at this grouping would produce potentially normal quality fruits.
I'm almost positive those pepper plants won't produce anything.
That’s just entirely not true. It’s far more complicated than that.
20 plants can produce just as much and as high quality fruit as 6, is it as easy? No. Those 20 plants would be pruned a down to 4 vines say, whereas 4 plants could have 20 or more. That doesn’t mean it makes larger fruits. It could make them smaller.
In fact, having one plant or even four with a canopy this large. Would make for many tiny shitty fruits instead of large ones, the inverse happens if the plant grows TOO large. Since there is now too many fruiting sites for the root mass.
Well, feel free to show us the results in 2 months and see if I'm right. I can't even tell the directions of sun traversal from this pic, and I'm 100% sure about my assertion here.
Tomato’s are a plant that benefit from selective pruning to maximize yields.
You’re arguing against established science regarding plant yields. You can’t just let a tomato plant grow wild and expect the maximum yield or the largest fruits. Yes if I just let these plant run amok, there’s gonna be issues. If that’s all you wanted to point out, it’s noted, and clearly not needed for me eh?
I told you the planter direction, you can’t seem to read my comments, I’ve addressed most of the things you’ve brought up already. You have been wrong about both points you’ve brought up, another user completely agreed with the interplanting.
Just being argumentative?
No, I'm arguing FOR the science of tomato and pepper agriculture.
The same science that says 24" AT A MINIMUM is needed between tomato plants. You've halved that here. There is a reason for that, and you seem to want to just argue with everyone explaining why you've got a problem here.
Good luck to you.
Science says 24”…? Please provide this paper, would love to see it and its supporting documents. Determinate and indeterminate have different spaces to begin with, so that’s just obviously bullshit lol.
That’s average “guidelines” anyways, and even some tomato plants say 16, and some say 36”, its each individual cultivar. But it all comes down to root mass to canopy size, a plant only has X energy to give, too many fruiting sites, and you have small shitty fruits. This is basic plant botany even. As I said, it’s far more complicated than you are making it.
And if you have read my comments, it’s quite clear I know I need to address some stuff, which is stuff you need to do ANYWAYS to tomato plants. So yeah…? Of course I do.
Do you want to mention I need to water them once in a while too? Maybe weed them as well?
This extension white paper puts a minimum of 18"-24", but also strongly advised that 24" is recommended.
This extension says 24"-36", with a strong emphasis on 36" for best results.
The USDA literally has 24" as a minimum.
Need more?
From your own link, read them instead of just googling some terms and pasting the ai result.
Notice the key word pruning there…?
And the word ideal…? Not an actual minimum…? They do everything to say there isn’t actually a minimum, and there’s too many variables.
lol, lmfao even. I knew the paper would be flawed or point out the issue with what you’ve been saying or comprehending about it.
I read just fine. You seem to be struggling though.
See ya in 2 months when you're back here wondering what went wrong 🤣
Than why is the word “prune” so hard for you to comprehend? Your “paper” (not a scientific paper) says pruning changes these numbers. It also goes and says 12” for one of its bullet points. It also says it’s a complex interaction, which I’ve used to rebuke your claims in every comment.
So you either didn’t read your source before posting it, or can’t comprehend the words in it. Nothing you’ve posted actually supports what you’ve claimed. It supports my claims quite well though.
See you in 2 months 🫡
You’re the epitome of this quote, that’s not an easy feat to accomplish, well done.
You can’t just Google something and paste it without comprehending it, doubly so when it proves the other persons point.
You have no self awareness. They tried to help and give advice. They weren't the only one to give that advice, but you got really defensive and convinced you were right. So rather than appreciating the effort, you just started arguing and focusing on how right you were.
It was clear you didn't want advice, just praise and validation. Eventually you just wanted to win an online argument you created. They opted out and you're still going.
I probably wouldn't respond to one of your posts in future, it's probably not worth it.
Anyway, I learned from what they were saying. It was interesting. Whether it was right, time will tell, but it was good food for thought.
How is providing completely false information and arguing when responded to is helping? And then when asked for the source, it doesn’t even say the same thing.
Is it being defensive to call someone’s bullshit out?
Did you notice the other user finally understood the method I was going for? They noticed their advice wasn’t needed after a little back and forth discussion, THIS user on the other hand…. As the other user said “general convention” I’m not going for general, and pruning changes things, like the persons “sources” state unequivocally. And yet you seem to miss this detail somehow too.
I’m not looking for advice (did you see me asking for any), and I’m not looking for praise and admiration (did you see me ask for any), I am sharing my method and process of growing, which is established on proven science, not some basic guidelines with no supporting research. And some user started spouting bullshit, so yes, I’m going to say something to prevent others from thinking it’s right.
What…? They’re the ones arguing and I didn’t create it.
They are the ones continuing to respond, even after pointing out their source agrees that pruning changes the “guideline”, not minimum numbers.
If you’re not just an alt of this user, you should really try reading the thread fully. And I’m sorry that you’re taking their comment to heart, instead of reading the sources that disagree with their comments.
Tomatoes aren’t like carrots, where there is actually direct consequences that you can’t address by planting too close together, the persons knowledge is pretty darn basic, and they’re burying their head in the sand to anything more complex than what’s on the back of the seed packages.
American?
"Give me a source"
"Here's 3"
"Nah, you're wrong, I'm still right"
Classic.
Did you miss that part of their source that agrees with me…? Dude couldn’t even read his own sources before pasting them.
It specifies pruning changes those numbers, I’ve mentioned every comment I am pruning. And that same “paper” (not an actually scientific paper)even says 12” is fine for some tomato’s… so yeah, he’s wrong and I’m right going by those specifics.
It also says it’s a complicated interaction and not simple, that’s what I said.
Their sources literally prove their claims wrong, not right. Lol.
I even provided the quoted portion in my comment where the “paper” (not a paper like I asked for) said that.