|
|
Daniel Alm 
-
-
|
Why has the listed parentage of this rose been modified from the original? It is an important stud rose BECAUSE "Joanna Hill" was one of its parents. Modern Roses 10 does not give Joanna Hill as a parent to Daisy Hill, but several other sources do; MR10 is not the final authority on all parentage information, there are plenty of inaccuracies in the tome. ~Benaminh
|
REPLY
|
|
If 'Daisy Hill' was bred circa 1900 then it would have been an impossibility to have 'Joanna Hill' as parent as it was bred in 1928. Nice thought though, I would have been interested in that hybrid!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Lineage:
"Origin and Breeding Controlled pollination. Seed parent ‘New Dawn’ x pollen parent ((‘Chaucer’ x ‘Aloha’) x (‘Iceberg’ x “unnamed seedling”))"
Ref: http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/pbr_db/docs/2001265.doc
|
REPLY
|
|
I suspect but can't confirm the 'Iceberg' shown in this lineage is incorrect and should be the more common floridunda version 1958.
|
REPLY
|
|
What was it before? I assumed the 'Iceberg' in the lineage I posted would automatically be entered as the common Kordes, 1958, version.
|
REPLY
|
|
It was entered as Kordes 2002 florists version, which is highly unlikely since this rose was introduced in 1991.
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.36436
|
REPLY
|
|
Its essentially just New Dawn x Graham Thomas. The way the parentage is listed is really odd. Its hard to fathom the breeder followed the same pathway as Austin did, lol. But yeah. Definitely the well-known Iceberg.
|
REPLY
|
|
The notes in the description of this rose should be updated to say that the pollen parent was most likely Graham Thomas. The parentage is "New Dawn X Graham Thomas," as proposed by Michael Garhart. ~Benaminh
|
REPLY
|
|
By the same breeder, Sonia Rykel follows the same pattern. Yet, two other roses by the same breeder simply say 'Graham Thomas'.
|
REPLY
|
|
I request that the HMF admins just add a note at the bottom of the description tab stating that Graham Thomas is the likely pollen parent versus changing the official parentage hot link. Saves us time having to look at all the progeny of Charles Austin (Chaucer X Aloha) and Iceberg to reach the same conclusion. ~B.
|
REPLY
|
|
Done. I know you will also be using the PARENTAGE TREE in LINEAGE
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#11 of 12 posted
21 DEC 21 by
jedmar
|
The Breeder confirmed in a personal message that 'Graham Thomas' is the pollen parent of 'Martine Guillot and 'Sonia Rykiel'
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#16 of 12 posted
23 DEC 21 by
Duchesse
|
Pleased to hear this. Martine and Sonia are doing great in my garden.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Available from - Roses Unlimited
https://rosesunlimitedsc.com
I received the paper catalog from Roses Unlimited, and they list both this 'Bolero' and the 2004 'Bolero'.
:-)
~Christopher
|
REPLY
|
|
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).
~Benaminh
|
REPLY
|
|
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)
|
REPLY
|
|
We did release a BOLERO® Meicauley in 1997 (Europe Only) different from BOLERO® Meidelweis in 2004 (US/Japan Only) ;)
Matthias
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
3 MAY 21 by
jedmar
|
As all photos of this listing are from USA, itwould mean they belong to the 2004 Bolero
|
REPLY
|
|
Jedmar,
I fully agree. Meicauley was an HT type Florist rose. Not a "Modern Heritage" (Romantica for us, English for Austin...etc)
cheers
Matthias
|
REPLY
|
|
I’ll move all photos from Dianne's Southwest Idaho Rose Garden, Suebelle, Sbaham, Matthew W. Gerber and Johnnfon out of Bolero MEIcauley 1997 and into Bolero MEIdelweis 2004.
|
REPLY
|
|
thank you Patricia ;)
Matthias
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Anyone have this rose think Boulie's Dream better than Folklore? For me they are very looks a like and class is the one different.
|
REPLY
|
|
