HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Patricia Routley 
-
-
|
Would someone who grows "Kombacy Marianne" please comment on whether they have ever seen hips on it.
I note that Mme De Watteville has three descendants, as seed parent.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 11 posted
3 DEC 21 by
HubertG
|
I've only had my cutting-grown plant for a short time and it's still in a pot but I was very curious to know whether it would set hips and so have looked carefully for stigma and stamen etc in most of its flowers. Generally they weren't formed but in one flower there were several normal-looking stigma and I pollinated them using pollen at hand. It seemed to take and swell quite quickly as if a normal hip would develop, but unfortunately recent wet weather caused it to start browning and it rotted off. In my limited experience, my speculation is that hips won't set naturally very often but it's quite possible that careful artificial fertilisation might produce some hips. I'd be curious to know others' experience too.
|
REPLY
|
|
I don’t think I have ever seen a hip, but can’t guarantee that. I like to deadhead this plant and will tie a bit of ribbon to it to alert me to watch for anything.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you.
Mme de Watteville also has a descendant listed, as pollen parent.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 11 posted
5 AUG by
HubertG
|
I noticed that my winter flowers this year had relatively normal looking stigma and there seems to be a hip developing on one at the moment, I'd say about two months old and it's rather oval-shaped.
|
REPLY
|
|
For the next edition of the Mystery Roses booklet (which will only be on-line), I'm asking those who grow any of them to let me know if they're seed-fertile. I don't know whether a hip set in winter will ever ripen. Anyway, if the hip looks like it will persist, I'd love a photo of it, please.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 11 posted
8 AUG by
HubertG
|
Margaret, here's the hip on my plant. It isn't large; just 13mm across and about 20mm long. I suspect that there is a seed or two in there otherwise it would not have remained on the plant, which is still a young cutting-grown plant in a pot. If it ripens or falls off I'll let you know what it contains. Please feel free to use the photo, Margaret, if you think it's worthwhile.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you! I'll be interested to see if anything comes of it.
|
REPLY
|
|
You are a hip-whisperer HubertG! I have checked thousands of spent blooms on our plant over the years and have yet to find anything that didn't dry up and drop off. Yours look promising.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 11 posted
12 AUG by
jedmar
|
Reassigned your two hip photos to "Kombacy Marianne"
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#10 of 11 posted
12 AUG by
HubertG
|
Thank you billy teabag and jedmar. Nothing may come of the hip but the fact that it has stayed on for this long is encouraging. I noticed yesterday on my plant five new shoots growing from the abscission layer from where an old flower stem fell off. I did think it was interesting enough to post a photo of it, so I'll try to do that tomorrow.
|
REPLY
|
|
Did you get any seeds from the hip?
Margaret
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
At ‘Fortune’s Double Yellow’ Paul Barden commented “FDY is largely infertile as a female parent…” so when we discovered a ripe hip on a FDY bush we seized it and passed it on to Kim Rupert who successfully sprouted the seed. The result was a pink, single-petalled climber with droopy foliage, unlike the glossy leaved double yellow blend of its parent, ‘Fortune’s Double Yellow’. We’ve given it the name “Kim’s Fortunate Surprise”.
|
REPLY
|
|
Rather than add a synonym of ‘Kim’s Fortunate Surprise’ to ‘FDY Seedling’, I think it may be better to just alter the name to ‘Kim’s Fortunate Surprise’.
I am also inclined to drop the pollen parent listed leaving just Seedling of Fortune’s Double Yellow. Please advise.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 4 posted
3 days ago by
Rosewild
|
Great! Kim deserves the credit. And I also agree, the pollen parent should be dropped.
Don
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you Don. Done.
|
REPLY
|
|
Rosewild sent me three seeds from the FDY hip. Peter Harris in West Virginia excised the embryos from the seeds and raised the three seedlings, which he sent me. I raised them to large plants. One was semi double and bright pink. Its flowers were rather misshapen A second was single and pink like this one, but with smaller flowers. This is the third. I discarded the first two due to room and this being the more desirable seedling. It continued growing and getting rather large. It only made sense to pass it back to Rosewild who has the room to allow it to mature and live its best life!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I picked up a Marc Chagall at Home Depot. Own root. The tag is says: "Marc Chagall (TM), Floribunda Rose, my painter's palette - Inspired by the Great French Impressionists" The back of the tag it has the "PEPINIERES ET ROSERAIES GEORGES DELBARD" logo, the inside has the 'CERTIFIED' logo. What I find interesting is that the TAG shows the patent name to be (DELstricol). The Delbard website, and most of the USA websites selling the rose list it as DELstrirojacre.
|
REPLY
|
|
Odd! Perhaps you might like to add photos of the tag. We have:
1996. Camille Pissaro DELstricol. yellow, striped with red.
2013 Marc Chagall. DELstrirojacre. Pink, striped with cream.
|
REPLY
|
|
Looks like the tag is printed with incorrect info - easy enough to do, and most people won't care. As you have commented: DELstricol is actually the rose Camille Pissarro, a "yellow, red striped" rose. Marc Chagall is listed as a "pink, yellow stripes, cream stripes, yellow undertones" rose. I'm not sure that the pictures on the tag match which plant, or another. The bush I have is young, but it is growing similar to a floribunda. Beautiful rose so far.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I have had a private query on the parentage of ‘J. Otto Thilow’. In the hope that more information may come to light, I am replying publicly:
The rule is the seed parent always comes first.
From 1930 Modern Roses 1, page 1:
"Where two parents are shown, the first is usually the seed-bearer".
I have a funny feeling that there was one small country who earlier listed the pollen parent first, but without spending time researching this, I cannot remember which country. Could it have been Holland in the early days? If so, it could explain why Hazlewood in 1928 listed (Souvenir de H. A. Verschuren x Hadley). He explains in his 1928 reference that the main description came from the breeder, and until he knew the rose better, he was adding his own brief comments in italics. I have added a Note to this reference.
A question remains for me - did he get his budwood from each breeder? (There were so many); or did he get his budwood from an agent, or big nursery? Someone told him the parentage he listed.
Most later references show J. Otto Thilow's parentage as (Hadley x Souvenir de H. A. Verschuren) and HMF initially showed this parentage as listed in Modern Roses 1. When I later started adding references the reversed parentage in Hazlewood's catalogues came to light. We have added a Note that there is a discrepancy.
Frank Reader’s parentage suggests that the breeder was popping the pollen of Souvenir de H. A. Verschuren on to more than just J. Otto Thilow.
1927. J. Otto Thilow (Hadley x Souvenir de H. A. Verschuren)
1927 Frank Reader (Golden Ophelia x Souvenir de H. A. Verschuren)
|
REPLY
|
|
|
