I wonder if....

[hamster]

Based on a totally unscientific study of my kitchen windowsill, I've noticed that the seeds where you have to choose between eating the fruit and saving the seeds (tomatoes, peas) have all germinated and sprouted seedlings very quickly and prolifically, while the seeds where you can eat the fruit and save the seeds (peppers, squash) haven't done a thing and are being much slower. Is this just coincidence, or could there be some evolutionary reason why? Maybe if you didn't get to eat them and then you didn't get many replacement plants too, they'd die out, or societies/nature favoured the more prolific ones to maximise yields. Whereas if you could eat the fruit and plant the seeds, it didn't matter so much if the seeds weren't so productive.

If that makes any sense to anyone else...... I do think some odd things at times....

[Annpan]

Not sure... but it kind of makes sense... also think of the amount of seeds in a pepper, maybe only the strongest of 100 should survive???

OTOH - things that you could est the seed... I guess that is because they would be eaten, carried a few miles in the stomach of whatever ate them... then pooped out in their very own mound of manure....




I have another theory... and I have a cross-stich that reads this

The seeds I sew somehow don't grow,
I'm sorely disenchanted,
But oh what luck I have with stuff,
I never even planted.


Sums it all up fo me - or at least thats how I feel sometimes

[mrsflibble]

that poem is cool.

[ina]

It could simply be that peppers and squash need it a lot warmer than tomatoes and peas...

[eccentric_emma]

my peas have gone mad with growing as well. not much else though.