HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Basye's Purple Rose' Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Foliolosa follies
It follows that if the Rosa foliolosa in commerce since at least 1890 is an imposter, then all hybrids from it would not be true foliolosa either. There are only two I know of, ‘Basye’s Purple’ and ‘Ann Endt’.
Dr. Robert Basye, Professor of Mathematics at Texas A.& M. University also hybridized roses and created ‘Basye's Purple’ in 1968. He reported this hybrid as pollen of Rosa rugosa rubra crossed with seed parent Rosa foliolosa (2n=14). The resulting Rose was full of drama, with pallid foliage, dark brooding canes and flowers having a funeral aspect like their petals were cut from some purple velvet shroud, truly an American Gothic rose!
The rugosa rubra in its parentage was obvious in leaf texture, dark very prickly canes and flower color and size. But where was foliolosa? Nowhere that I could find but there was one clue to the other parent. ‘Basye’s Purple’ has curled, tubular stipules. So Rosa palustris (2n=14 or 28) or some palustris hybrid was the seed parent. Likely, Basye’s seed parent was the foliolosa imposter that’s been around for at least 130 years. Some form of palustris which I’ve named “Hilliers Foliolosa” because that’s where my plant originated via Pat Cole, past Editor of The Rose Letter.
The Canadian hybridizer, Percy Wright reported he received a plant of Rosa foliolosa from “a Texas mathematician” but whether he hybridized with it I don’t know.
The other Rosa rugosa x foliolosa hybrid ‘Ann Endt’ was discovered in New Zealand, given to Nancy Steen author of The Charm of Old Roses as an unknown foliolosa. Nancy already had the true Rosa foliolosa Nuttall ex Torrey & Gray growing in her garden and this was not the same. So she thought it was possibly M. Maurice Vilmorin’s rugosa x foliolosa hybrid illustrated in Les Plus Belles Roses but unfortunately she gave no date or other reference for the publication. Everyone loved the rose and eventually it was given a name in 1978 by Ken Knobbs in honor of their beloved Auckland gardener Ann Endt. In a photo taken by K.K. Ziarnek in the Auckland Botanic Garden stipules of ‘Ann Endt’ are barely visible but they appear to be flat! (Now I discover Patricia Routley posted an excellent photo of the leaf with stipule clearly visible on February 13, 2015.) Nancy likely is correct, this maybe was Vilmorin’s hybrid using the true Rosa foliolosa Nuttall ex Torrey & Gray with rugosa as the seed parent but there is some confusion about the flower color, Nancy only saw a black and white illustration.
Therefore ‘Basye’s Purple’ and ‘Ann Endt’ are not the same cross but worthy roses in their own right as is “Hilliers Foliolosa” with its vivid red flowers and most neglected of all but certainly not least, the lowly White Prairie Rose, Rosa foliolosa Nuttall ex Torrey & Gray, 1840!
|
REPLY
|
|
THANK YOU! Your post answers a question I have long pondered. (See too Paul Barden's seedling of "Purple Folio-Chief" for *another* example of the wine-colors from the presumed "Hillier's Foliolosa" which does *not* include Rugosa in its lineage!)
No one heretofore has been able to tell me what "morph" of the prairie rose contributed to the marvelous coloring on any of these 3 hybrids.
I am not an academician, and have a little difficulty wading through such, but I recall a paper recently on the evolution of polyploid species east of the Rockies -- notably the Carolina complex (Cinnamomaea), that might touch on the origins of these two "Foliolosas"
(HMF won't allow me to post links, apparently.)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 5 posted
9 FEB 22 by
 jedmar
|
Maybe we should add "Hilliers foliolosa" as a separate listing in order to start unravelling this confusion.
|
REPLY
|
|
The nothospecies (if that's the right term) within the Carolina complex, if consistently well-defined across populations, might warrant qualifying Hillier's as a distinct sub-species, to my uneducated mind. I seem to recall reading that the red-flowered morph was found predominantly in Oklahoma whereas the white flowered species is further South and West, which makes sense in view of the distribution of the other species in the Carolina complex. Much of the discussion on DNA markers and such is Greek to me, however.
Any geneticists care to weigh in?
(Sorry I can't link external research links for somebody more fluent in "Greek" to translate! LOL)
I wonder if the the Woodsii group doesn't have at least as much variation.
As an aside, and I have weighed in on this point many times in the past, I really wish the HMF template facilitated a simple presentation of the taxonomy of species. I would *love* to see the pages at the very least modified to reflect the families/subfamilies of species roses in the lineage field (e.g. instead of "If you know the parentage of this rose, or other details, please contact us." It would be helpful, IMHO, to say something like, "Species rose, subg. Rosa (syn. Cinnamomeae), in the Carolina complex, native range Texas to Oklahoma" (or whatever would be more accurate/appropriate).
Thanks.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 5 posted
9 FEB 22 by
jedmar
|
Unfortunately, we are not botanists and are not able to make decisions on classification. Clearly all listings here are Species Rosa, mostly subg. Rosa. We can however add notes to selected items if the information is provided by knowledgable members
|
REPLY
|
|
No need to make decisions -- not to the extent of that which you were just proposing adding. It's easily found online, and would be much more meaningful than "If you know the parentage of this rose, or other details, please contact us" to just permit contributors to add to the species roses e.g.:
-Hulthemia (formerly Simplicifoliae, meaning "with single leaves") containing one or two species from southwest Asia, R. persica and R. berberifolia (syn. R. persica var. berberifolia) which are the only roses without compound leaves or stipules.
-Hesperrhodos (from the Greek for "western rose") has two species, both from southwestern North America. These are R. minutifolia and R. stellata.
-Platyrhodon (from the Greek for "flaky rose", referring to flaky bark) with one species from east Asia, R. roxburghii.
-Rosa (the type subgenus) containing all the other roses. This subgenus is subdivided into 11 sections.
Banksianae – white and yellow roses from China
Bracteatae – three species, two from China and one from India
Caninae – pink and white species from Asia, Europe and North Africa
Carolinae – white, pink, and bright pink species all from North America
Chinensis – white, pink, yellow, red and mixed-color roses from China and Burma
Gallicanae – pink to crimson and striped roses from western Asia and Europe
Gymnocarpae – a small group distinguished by a deciduous receptacle on the hip; one species in western North America (R. gymnocarpa), the others in east Asia
Laevigatae – a single white species from China
Pimpinellifoliae – white, pink, bright yellow, mauve and striped roses from Asia and Europe
Rosa (syn. sect. Cinnamomeae) - white, pink, lilac, mulberry and red roses from everywhere but North Africa
Synstylae – white, pink, and crimson roses from all areas
(Above from Wikipedia entry on Rosa. Wikispecies has more detailed info.)
I would think this type of information *could* be helpful to hybridizers and collectors alike. Much of my research is on species, and the fact that I cannot even search this database on the level of taxonomy puts me on other sites as much as this one.
It would frankly be a lot easier than making the call "Floribunda" vs "Hybrid Tea".
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Du nom de son obtenteur américain Dr Robert E. Basye mort en 2000. Mathématicien
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The Quest for the Rose. Phillips & Rix (1993)
It is tetraploid and fertile, so is able to be crossed with modern garden roses. Basye’s Purple is now in commerce. (Rosa rugosa x Rosa foliolosa)
|
REPLY
|
|
"Able" to be crossed with other roses, but far from willing and extremely willing to pass on awful plant architecture and terminal mildew. Wonderfully seductive plant in its own right, but a truly awful choice for breeding.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 7 posted
30 APR 13 by
CybeRose
|
No doubt. But I'm curious about it being a tetraploid. Do you know who made the determination?
Karl
I don't have the book, so I'm searching through Google Books. It looks like it was 'Basye's Amphidiploid' that was identified as tetraploid, not 'Basye's Purple'.
|
REPLY
|
|
I adore my Ann Endt seedling. It should bloom this year. Its *very* healthy. We still own B's Purple, but I dont use it in breeding, since the plant architecture is ..... atrocious lol. Ann Endt, on the other hand, has a VERY landscape aesthetic plant. The color is just more magenta-purple than beet-purple.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
1 MAR 14 by
CybeRose
|
Basye's Purple is certainly an oddity, with its deep and velvety purple blooms against the chlorotic foliage. It might be useful to backcross BP with another Rugosa, aiming for a deeper, purpler form. Or, to R. foliolosa, if anyone needs a darker colored version of that species.
Karl
|
REPLY
|
|
I'd be curious to see Basye's Purple as the seed parent with Ann Endt as the pollen parent. You could see an interesting variety of different rugosa and foliolosa characteristics in the offspring.
|
REPLY
|
|
I found Basye's Purple quite difficult to use for breeding. In all the years I played with it, its pollen only worked on Yellow Jewel and nothing worked on it. My plant didn't set self hips, either. There were six or so seedlings from its pollen on Yellow Jewel. All had awful, very angular, extremely prickly growth. All were single, white and none repeated. They hung around for several years before I culled them to make badly needed room.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 7 posted
23 MAR 17 by
CybeRose
|
It sometimes (often?) happens that different selections of a species behave somewhat differently. Vilmorin' Rugosa x Foliolosa hybrid (with yellowish-pink flowers) produced seeds.
The Gardeners' Chronicle 40(1023): 95-96 (Aug 4, 1906)
M. Maurice de Vilmorin communicated a note on a new hybrid Rose, a painting of which he passed round for the examination of the Conference, between Rosa rugosa and R. foliolosa, which had the advantage of flowering late in the season.
Mr. Paul congratulated Mr. de Vilmorin on his acquisition.
The Chairman said he should like to ask whether the long flowering was in any way connected with not setting seed?
M. Vilmorin said it was not—it produced good seed.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I love the color and buds of this rose, mine doesnt have typical Rugosa thorns but it did have a few blooms so I know it was labelled correctly. The buds are attractive and take several days to develop, however once the flower is open it only lasts a day on the bush. I haven't seen any disease at all, many of the other liners I planted got some blackspot after a couple of weeks.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
