Tomatoes are wind pollinated. As long as there is a breeze present, fertilization will happen.

Are these in containers or in the ground? Container grow plants need routine fertilization; inground plants not so much and often not at all if your garden soil has been enriched or if you mulch with something like compost or composted manures.

The idea that plants require unusual amounts of specific nutrients according to life stage is a bit of a fallacy promoted primarily by fertilizer manufacturers. As long as your soil or your fertilizer contains an adequate range of macro and micro nutrients, the plants just draw up what they need as they need it but ALL tend to draw nutrients in a 3:1:2 ratio regardless of what life stage they happen to be in.

Tomatoes have perfect flowers are are self fertile- but they tend to fruit much better and in greater amounts of fruit set with a little wind or a shake of the plant to help improve pollination. If they are outside, the wind usually does the job, but if they are in a greenhouse or polytunnel without much air movement you might want to give the plants a shake to help the pollination more.

If you have bumblebees, carpenter bees, or native bees in your yard outdoors, they are superior pollenators than honey bees- honeybees don't tend to like tomatoes as much as some other flowers.

It's more of a lighting and temp thing for tomatoes rather than a nutrients timing thing so far as bloom and fruiting goes. During the right time of summer when the daylight hours are right, production is good- in off season when the sun isn't right, production declines. If it's too hot or too cold blossoms might drop or fruit might not set- but the right temps and they do great. Make sure the plants are watered evenly- too much wet or dry can stress the plant.

How/when you plants need or should be fed can depend. Are they in containers? If so, what is your container mix? IF in ground, is it good fertile soil, or are you dealing with crappy clay or sand or something not so great for good tomatoes?

If your tomatoes are just starting to flower, you must be in a cooler climate. But if nighttime temps don't get below 70F, you'll get lots of flowers but NO FRUIT. As noted, if your soil is fertile enough for the plants to grow well and flower, it's fertile enough to produce fruit. That's really the case for any food crop. As to lighting, tomatoes are smart enough to flower well when the lighting is sufficient.

Yes the NPK uptake ratio is different during different stages and is not a fallacy, and the NPK ratio of 3-1-2 is way wrong beyond the first 3 or 4 weeks. Note the word uptake and not to be confused with actual mineral content in the soil.

Uptake rate: gr/plant (Source: Huett, 1985)

Here is a more recent study from I think 2005

There is a relationship to plant size to uptake which would be obvious but as vegetative growth slows demand continues to surge to supply the needs of fruit growth, and when looking at the Element composition of a tomato fruit it's easy to see why.

So just using these graphs why would someone dump an all purpose 10-10-10 fertilizer or stick to the same ratio through the entire life of the plant.

Because of a demand for sulfur and calcium along with N and K I will use Ammonium sulfate, calcium nitrate and potassium nitrate when the plants start flowering. Nitrogen should be at least 50% nitrates and 50% ammonium to maintain a proper root zone PH otherwise the ability to uptake other nutrients become a problem.

This short PDF from Cornell University explains it very well. Nitrogen: All Forms Are Not Equal

Ah well, the authority on everything has spoken! I guess we can all go home.🥴

Myth of Bloom Booster fertilizers.

Best NPK ratio for growing plants.

NPK Ratio for Vegetables

The fallacy here is that the uptake ratio has nothing to do with the required nutrient content of the soil. Unless your soil has ZERO nutrients. My soil tests out as excellent in P and K, all by itself, and merely OK in N, which is very hard to measure properly anyway. So I often just add high nitrogen fertilizer to it to bump things up. Why should I add any P and K?

This reminds me of the person that insists on taking ten vitamin pills every day. Why? Because if one makes me healthy, then ten will make me VERY healthy.

Tomato flowers are said to be wind pollinated because their stamens are sealed; so they have to self pollinate. The wind creates a disturbance which causes the pollen to self pollinate the flower. That said there are wild tomatoes with open stamens if you want to produce your own tomato variety. And you can open the stamens; I think, I never considered doing that; so have no experience.

If you supply your soil with long lasting slow release fertilizer you won't have to worry about the timing of fertilization. I improve my soil with horse manure or mushroom compost and that's it for fertilization. If I apply too much the plants get a little over large, but still produce the same amount of fruit.

Robert Pavlis's blog is entertaining but has no more credibility than a stranger on the street, and gardening sites selling products who lure readers in with so sort of wisdom is rarely a source I would bet my reputation on.

"The authority on everything has spoken." I'm not an authority on anything and only pass on what creditable and professional sources have researched through studies built on pass studies to form conclusions offering a high degree of accuracy. A majority come from controlled laboratory and field studies published in major botany and plant science journals, or Universities around the world.

I won't use blogs or garden sites trying to make a buck, and If you visit a dozen garden sites looking for the correct NPK ratio you'll get a dozen different answers and they all recycle their own manure, just like Robert. I hated it, and the reason I started digging so deep for factual information which is true, correct and verified. Please do the same to avoid recycling incorrect information to the next generation GG.

Cherry tomatoes are very easy to grow, I wouldn't worry much. Just water if dry.

If you surface apply potassium or phosphorous without incorporating, it will take a long time to get the nutrients into the root zone. For phosphorous it can take up to 2 years. So 3:1:2 would still be a good amount if you have no idea what is in your soil. Timing for P and K is not as critical as N, since they tend to stay in the soil for a long time.

That's the point. If you don't know what's already in your soil, it's impossible to tweak the nutrient content of the soil to match the uptake ratio. If you think your soil has zero nutrients, you can do it, but that's simply not the case. You just need *enough* NPK. Don't overthink it. If the plants are growing well, you got enough.

Fruit set is dependent on temperature, which you can not control. Keep your plants healthy and let nature take care of pollination.

The best management practices involve applying nutrients at the right rate, time, and place to improve fertilizer use efficiency. A key component in this process is knowing the plants uptake demands which will change through the stages of growth.

One may increase fertilizer efficiency by letting nature take it's course with reduced yields, or one can manage fertilizer applications to maximize yields without excessive waste in a responsible manner, and the right agronomic practices can be applied to an acre of tomatoes or just one plant. I seriously don't pay much attention to NPK ratios because they change over the stages of a tomato plant and I focus on stages, and the total nutrient requirements over the plants life for efficiency and yield.

I broke down to the actual NPK for one tomato plant which would require approximately 0.17 oz. N, 0.10 oz P and 0.27 oz K for the entire season. This ratio would be roughly 2-1-3 and even this would be inadequate during specific stages. This graph shows the approximate percentages of nutrient uptake for the entire season over the stages, and one can clearly see the P uptake is 4 X's N and K. So a 2-1-3 or even a 3-1-2 ratio would be inadequate to supply the demand without overdosing the amounts in the first stage or causing a deficiency in other stages.

For a big expansive root system Phosphate is critical from day one otherwise the plants reach into the soil will will be drastically reduced to reach out for other nutrients causing a reduction in fertilizer efficiency with the results of a low yield and quality. It's not how much you use but how well you use it, and I prefer to use it well.

I will dilute just a little over a gram of Monoammonium phosphate (11-52-0) in 8 oz. of water as a starter, or popup per plant to get them off to a good start. Note the small numbers I used, yes they are correct and in most cases people apply to much fertilizer and because of ratios they cause more problems then they ever imagined.

Every morning when I inspect the garden plants I'll give each blooming tomato plant a good shake/rattle. It doesn't hurt and I get plenty of good sized tomatoes, so many at times that I'll remove a few when a cluster is overloaded. As for fert, a half cup of Gardentone dug into the planting area 2 weeks prior to planting along with some homemade compost is all that's needed here.

If you are growing tomatoes in the ground, it is highly unlikely you will need to add P or K as most soils have those macronutrients available in more than adequate concentrations. And I would hesitate to suggest anyone adding P to their planting beds without a professional soil test showing a deficiency, as phosphate fertilizers tend to be the largest contributor to water pollution and heavy P ferts are even banned or prohibited in a number of states. To add them artificially without a test is just irresponsible.

And if you are growing in a container, routine fertilizations - as is necessary for ANY container grown plant - will address all necessary nutrient requirements without any need to alter due to life stage or rely on waste of time and money "bloom boosters".

As someone who has grown tomatoes in containers annually for more than 25 years, I have never, ever had issues with tomatoes not flowering or setting fruit under a normal 3:1:2 fertilizer ratio. It is just not necessary to get any more precise or complicated that that in a home garden. And anyone who tells you otherwise is just a shill for the fertilizer industry!

With phosphorous, the correct amount can only be know with a soil test, the correct time is 30 days before planting, and the correct place is in the root zone. It is not going anywhere, so applying a little at a time is not useful. Farmers apply all the P needed at the beginning of the year, because it will be there until needed. Again, it can take 2 years to move enough to get into the root zone if surface applied. P is not going anywhere. Not really very complicated. And yes, I am a certified Nutrient Management Specialist in Texas.

Nitrogen is different, it will move and is why it is recommended to split applications. K will move some but unless a large amount is needed it will be applied at the beginning of the season. That is because of a thing called luxury consumption. If the K is in the soil, the plant will take up more than the plant actually needs. With split applications that can prevent this from happening.

But as Dan stated earlier, no one knows the amount of fertilizer needed without a soils test. Most soils in the US do not need additional P. Applying more is a waste of money and can cause problems as well as pollute the environment.

If one keeps confusing "uptake" with nutrient availability, you're making a big mistake. As I said, if you start out with soil that has zero nutrients, absolutely none, you can add exactly the right amounts of NPK to allow proper uptake. But nobody nowhere has soil with zero nutrients. So all you're doing is adding carefully measured NPK to soil that probably already has a lot of NPK. The simple answer is, if you don't have a responsible soil test done, you don't really know what you're doing. In that regard, fertilization is merely insurance. "Uptake" is completely meaningless in that context. If, as you say, you want to apply nutrients at the right rate, time, and place to improve fertilizer use efficiency, you're seriously mistaken if you don't know what's already in your soil. Most soils have plenty of P and even K, so if you add any of that, you're not being very efficient.

The average man needs 56 grams of protein per day. So hey, that average man should take 56 grams of protein powder every day in order to satisfy his uptake requirement, right? Gotta do the fertilization right! Yeah, do it before your cheese lunch or after your steak dinner!

"If one keeps confusing "uptake" with nutrient availability, you're making a big mistake."

There is no confusion and I completely understand the difference well, but thanks for your concern. Say Dan could you take a picture of of your soil report and post it? This year, last year it doesn't matter and post it? I'm curious about your levels including the micro nutrients.

I don't have soil tests done, and believe 99.9% of home gardeners don't either. Kind of do as I say argument falling on deaf ears when addressing the masses. Maybe the other poster screaming the sky is falling could take a pic and post one of hers, after all 25 years of growing there must be a few old ones laying around.

If I lose a few grams in the 10th of an ounce of phosphorous I feed each plant the total wouldn't add up to the bones of a few dead gopher, and not exactly overwhelming.

What I use compared to the 15% phosphorus content of bone meal people pile on their plants like a triple scoop ice cream cone is no risk to anything. So lets see if you practice what you preach and show me.

I don't see any need to post my soil test results. They are basic pH, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Na, tests but don't look at micronutrients. Whyever do you want Fe, Zn, Mg, B, and Cu? What "practice" of mine do you want me to show you? The tests are from Texas A&M Agrilife Extension, and they happen to be free, so I do them repeatedly in slightly different places. If you have a specific question, I'd be happy to answer, though. Want numbers?

Do-as-I-say? Nope. It's do what makes sense. I'm willing to discuss that further. You refer to risks. I don't see any risks with fertilization, except maybe with nitrogen. I'm talking about efficiency and waste.

Serious gardeners, and at least starting gardeners, who don't have a clue about their soil properties, should certainly get one. Definitely worth it. Fertilization without knowing the nutrient status of the soil can be a big waste, wherein you just add loads of stuff you already have in abundance. As I said, that's the "insurance" mode of gardening. If you don't know what you have, just add everything. It works, but you'll pay for it.

I took 2 soil test last year in different areas of my garden. Both showed to be too acidic, 5.2 for one and 5.6 for the other. To my surprise both had high P, but I had fertilized with 13:13:13 the past year without a soil test. I was also very low in K, another mild surprise. So yes, gardeners do get soil test.

The reason for the 3:1:2 ratio recommendation from A&M is because in years past, they said just recommended adding a balanced fertilizer. Then over time, they started getting soil test showing very high levels of P. That excess P will stay in the soil for years if not decades, the reason that nutrient uptake is not really a big deal. Unless you are talking hydroponics. Then it would be important.

Exactly right about nutrient uptake and hydroponics. With hydroponics, you need to add nutrients to match the uptake ratio because what you start out with is water, which has zero nutrients. So what the plant's roots sees is precisely the nutrients that you add. Good point.

"Whyever do you want Fe, Zn, Mg, B, and Cu?" Well I'd say plants need them would be an obvious answer, and are critical including Manganese. Please try and understand these following statements, "There is no fixed recipe for balanced fertilization for a given soil or crop." And "All other factors being optimal, any deficiency of one plant nutrient will severely limit the efficiency of other nutrients" "Imbalanced nutrient supply results in mining of the soil nutrient reserves. It can also lead to losses of the nutrients supplied, such as N, by reducing their rate of utilization. Imbalanced availability of nutrients also encourages luxury consumption of nutrients supplied in excess."

These are from page 142 and 142 from the 366 pages of the Plant nutrition for
food security, A guide for integrated nutrient management from the Food and agriculture Organization of the united nations. (FAO) written by the best in the world.

Golden Gal may want to pay attention this this also. No free soil tests here, and the cost for ALL is $65 here and I have 4 gardens in distinctively different soil types. $270 for soil tests aren't going to happen in my life time.

Why do you find it so necessary to be so deliberately antagonistic and condescending in your remarks? Not to mention outright rude (I'll let that sarcastic "Golden Gal" comment pass)?

No one said anything about free soil tests but they are offered in many places for a very modest and affordable fee. UMass, which has a reputation for excellent soil testing, only charges $20 for a basic nutrient test of soil samples from anywhere in the country! A rather piddling investment, all things considered.

And the quote you referenced, which I would add has absolutely nothing to do with container plantings, demonstrates very clearly the need to know what nutrients are available before adding to them willy-nilly. And how does one know that???.........A soil test!!

What a muppet!!

Iron is an aid in moving oxygen freely and production of chlorophyll, it helps elements run freely through the plants system.

Zinc activates enzymes that are responsible for the synthesis of certain proteins. It is used in the formation of chlorophyll and some carbohydrates, conversion of starches to sugars and its presence in plant tissue helps the plant to withstand cold temperatures. Zinc is essential in the formation of auxins, which help with growth regulation and stem elongation. Oddly enough zinc applied to leaves can also cause damage.

Magnesium is the core of the chlorophyll molecule, and also helps activate some enzyme systems. A shortage results in poor and stunted plant growth.

While B1 isn't necessarily a thing of itself, the active form of thiamine pyrophosphate is a cofactor for enzymes in the synthesis of some amino acids, tricarboxylic acid cycle, penthose phosphate patyway, and has a role in the protection processes against biotic and abiotic stresses.

Copper is required for several enzyme processes, and chlorophyll and seed production. A deficiency can cause poor growth to plant sterility.

Plants need a lot of different micros as well as macros. Sometimes problems or deficiencies happen that can be misdiganosed as a macro or other problem when it's a micro problem. Like a young crop of wheat looks frost damaged, but it is really copper deficient. Sometimes chlorosis is thought to be a watering or nitrogen issue when it's actually a micro issue. Sometimes one micro is confused with another, like iron vs manganese deficiency.

I actually did say that my soil tests are free. I've written about that here before. Nice deal. The city has a grant to map out sites of lead and arsenic pollution. They need soil samples from all over to do it. So (smart move) they invite gardeners to submit soil samples for garden analysis and they ALSO analyze for lead and arsenic. So yes, in addition to all the elements I noted, I also know my lead and arsenic! Neither is a micronutrient for plants but, interestingly enough, there is some evidence that they ARE micronutrients for animals!

As gardengal says, in many places soil tests are very affordable. If your state extension doesn't offer them, you might want to recommend to them that they do so. In Texas, you can pay $20 (not including postage) to have them done by TAMU Agrilife Extension. They'll probably do it for anyone. Now, soil tests CAN be quite expensive, but you're likely then paying for analyses you really don't need that much.

As to gardens with distinctively different soil types, I find that unlikely, if they're in the same location. Geology being what it is, mineral elements are pretty well mixed. For that reason, it's very sensible for a whole neighborhood to get ONE soil test. That'll give you the score pretty well. You might ask around. A neighbor might have done one. Your extension office probably has some good ideas about what your soil composition is.

My question was why YOU wanted my micronutrient levels. Whatever are you going to do with them? My plants need them, but you sure don't. Unless, again, you have some specifc question. Still waiting....

You're flailing a bit here.

Actually the cost for a routine soil test, without micro nutrients, is only $12. It is $19 for routine and micro nutrients. Glad Kevin seems to agree with us, based on his last post, that a soil test is needed. A soil test shows what you need to add, and just as important what not to add. And we are able to save him almost $200 on soil test.

That's correct, Gary. The TAMU lab only charges $12 for a sample to do pH,N, P, K,Ca, Mg, Na, S and conductivity. $19 adds micronutrients Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn. $26 will also get you B for your beets. More for organic matter, texture, and salinity. Might be a little more pricey to get As and Pb! For those prices, it's astonishing that anyone would NOT want to get such an analysis done. You do it ONCE to get baseline. They make no restrictions on the service only being available for Texans.

Have at it. https://soiltesting.tamu.edu/

Thought it was deja vu and in fact it has happened here before. A year ago on a houzz Proper tomato fertilizer ratio but at that time garden gal had 40 years experience growing tomatoes, but today only 25.

You stick to an incorrect fertilizer ratio posting links to Quackery blogs and garden web sites for validation doesn't fly even with proof you're wrong with links to the best and brightest professionals on the planet. It means you have a superiority problem unwilling to conform to science, And all the !!!, an anger problem.

Using "What a muppet!!" and "Ah well, the authority on everything has spoken!" all you need to do is look in a mirror to see an antagonistic, condescending and sarcastic person, plus a few other choice words, but not golden.

Uh, Kevin, science said you had to have a soil test. You stated they were way too high. We pointed out you could a much cheaper soil, saving over $200. But you insist on not following science. And just because you say they are the best and brightest does not mean they are. Look at the CDC and WHO. They were wrong so many times, but are suppose to be the best and brightest. I will take a local authority over a World Authority every time. No one can know everything. Some people never learn, even with talking with licensed professionals.

And yes, I know I live in Texas. If someone lives in the NW, I gladly admit that gardengal probably has better advice than me. But nearly every Nutrient Management specialist anywhere will tell you to get a soil test if you want to put out the correct amount. Anything else is an educated guess, not very scientific but the best you can do when people do not follow the science.

You can spend money on fertilizer, or you can spend money on a soil test that tells you what fertilizers you don't really need. I'm thinking the latter is a lot more economical. I know people around here who insist on using garden lime. Why? Because EVERYONE says it is SO GOOD. Your soil needs calcium!!! Of course, our soil pH is 7.9 so an alkaline mix is basically toxic, and we're sitting on limestone, so our Ca is through the roof. Yep, my soil test tells me that.

As I said, mineral distribution is pretty uniform over at least a neighborhood so talking to neighbors who have dealt with nutrient problems in their soil is not unlike a soil test. A little more social, and a little less descriptive. That's also true that long-term use of compost and manure will mostly fix whatever problems you might face, but in the short term it may not. The caveat is that if the compost is produced locally, micronutrients that aren't in your soil probably won't be in the compost. That's why if you don't want to actively seek out gardening advice from locals, and if you have a new garden, a soil test is a smart move, just to establish a working baseline. A new gardener will be much less scared if they have a real understanding of what's in their soil and what isn't.

I agree that on an area that you have composted and have a good layer of mulch, a soil test is probably not needed. If the garden is doing well and you are not adding additional nutrients, why test. But if you have a garden with over 1000 sq feet (mine is 5000) and not enough to mulch or compost the whole area, a soil test can be beneficial. On my areas that I have raised beds (about 250 sq feet) I do not do a soil test. But I am not really adding much if any fertilizer. The main benefit of a soil test can be telling you what not to add. It is like taking a multivitamin and not knowing if you are deficient in any of them. A blood test would save you a lot of money. But if you are healthy and not taking anything, a blood test could be a waste of money.

I know a gardener in Central Texas that traditionally has a pH of 7.9 adding wood ash. Told her that was not a good idea. However, for me it is a good idea since I traditionally have a low pH. There are areas just south of me that can have a field with alkaline soil of over 7.5 and less than 3 miles away have a pH under 5. I even knew of someone that took a soil test on a knoll with a pH of about 7 and walked 200 feet and took one on the flatland it came by 5.2. Not likely to happen in most areas but can happen where I live.