HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Daniel Alm
most recent 11 days ago SHOW ALL
Initial post 27 JAN by AquaEyes
Available from - Roses Unlimited

I received the paper catalog from Roses Unlimited, and they list both this 'Bolero' and the 2004 'Bolero'.


Reply #1 of 2 posted 11 days ago by Daniel Alm
I seriously doubt the existence of this variety MEIcauley. If it was ever in commerce as a separate variety, it’s probably extinct due to lack of vigor. I vaguely remember the introduction of BOLERO in the late nineties when it was panned for being a rose that refused to grow. It was then immediately & unceremoniously yanked from the shelves until reappearing years later. Is it the same rose or a doppelgänger? Another possible explanation to my mind is that Meilland used two different codes MEIcauley & MEIdelweis for the same rose variety. Is there a US PP for MEIcauley? Does anyone have access to Meilland’s records for confirmation?

In my humble opinion, the only two pictures of MEIcauley on this HMF profile are actually of the other BOLERO (2004).

Reply #2 of 2 posted 11 days ago by Patricia Routley
I'll check my computer later in the day, (have some urgent watering to do) but doubt if I have anything helpful.

You are probably right about the photos. I'll mark them as being possibly incorrect with an explanation, as the photographer hasn't logged in for a long time.

Michael Garhart - can you help with any patent for
Bolero MEIcauley 1997

(Daniel - i really love the word: doppelgänger)
most recent 11 days ago HIDE POSTS
Initial post 11 days ago by Daniel Alm
Moderators, please check the height stated in the HMF profile. The reference tab states 70cm, which is roughly 2.5 feet, not 5’10 to 7’ tall! What is the given height in the patent?

Reply #1 of 1 posted 11 days ago by Patricia Routley
Obviously wrong and we've corrected it to the patent's measurements of 90cm x 50cm. Many thanks Daniel.
most recent 3 JAN HIDE POSTS
Initial post 3 JAN by Daniel Alm
Moderators, I can’t find any reference to the stated nine to twelve foot height for this rose on its HMF description? I did find the following references that vary from two feet up to six feet in height (~Benaminh):
Reply #1 of 2 posted 3 JAN by HMF Admin
The odd height would indicate the source was a non-US metric designation. That will have to be our starting point to research its origin.

Thank you so very much for taking the time to report this issue. We very much rely on the HMF community to help us continually improve the depth, accuracy, and overall usefulness of our website.
Reply #2 of 2 posted 3 JAN by Patricia Routley
I've changed the mysterious height to that quoted by the Patent.
most recent 19 DEC SHOW ALL
Initial post 16 DEC by Daniel Alm
Admins, there's something wrong with the lineage database for BRITE EYES. After the 6th generation of descendants, it repeats again from the 1st to 6th generation again ad infinitum. The descendants listed in the 21st generation are the exact duplicate of the 6th generation. Either Radler inbred or back crossed everything multiple times or there's a system error. Is there a fix for that? ~Benaminh
Reply #1 of 7 posted 16 DEC by HMF Admin
We'll take a look - thanks so much for taking the time to alert us to this problem.
Reply #4 of 7 posted 17 DEC by jedmar
The problem is not in the software, but in the declared parentages:
'Morning Magic' <-- RADspot <-- RADbrite <-- RADtee <-- RAD95.1016.17 <-- 'Morning Magic'

then the caroussel starts all over again! Perhaps Bill Radler can correct the error in this loop.
Reply #5 of 7 posted 17 DEC by jedmar
Parentage of RADbrite is corrected, so that there is no loop any more. The only issue is that the declared parentage in PP 17'391 seems incorrect.
Reply #6 of 7 posted 18 DEC by HMF Admin
Thank you jedmar.

Yes, that's true but the issue is the software allowing this error. Recording and presenting information is only half the battle on a website like HelpMeFind. Ensuring the integrity of the data requires a very significant, if not majority, of the available resources.

We will be addressing this software oversight as well as writing software to root out other instances of this type of error in our database.
Reply #7 of 7 posted 19 DEC by Jay-Jay
It was in the offspring of a rose (Descendants per Generation), that I experienced the same repeating over and over until the 21rst generation.
Reply #2 of 7 posted 16 DEC by Jay-Jay
I experienced the same at another look-up. It started all over at the beginning.
Can't recall the search.
Reply #3 of 7 posted 17 DEC by HMF Admin
Okay, thanks Jay-Jay.
© 2018