HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
-
-
|
Egad, this rose is so beautiful. IMO many of the modern hybrid teas need to 'de-evolute' and become more natural looking, and this one is an example of what can be achieved. Wish it was here in the States. Nate
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
8 days ago by
HubertG
|
I agree, it's very beautiful.
What should one call a Tea crossed with a Hybrid Tea? Should it still be just a Hybrid Tea?
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes, a Tea and HT cross would still be an HT. Teas crossed with types other than Hybrid Perpetuals or Hybrid Teas are "Tea Hybrids", and also whatever else they are crossed with. For example, if you crossed a Tea with a Hugonis, it could be a Tea Hybrid or a Hybrid Hugonis.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 4 posted
8 days ago by
HubertG
|
Technically that's true, but I was wondering if a rose like this took after the Tea parent more and flowered through winter in a mild climate, retained its foliage etc, would it be a sort of subclass of HT? And what if you backcrossed this rose to another Tea? Still a Hybrid Tea even if it was more Tea-like?
Lol, just thinking out loud here.
|
REPLY
|
|
Traditionally, a Tea X HP cross would be an HT. Any other Tea cross would be a "Tea hybrid" or hybrid of whatever else the other parent contained. Of course, it's up to the breeder and introducer to classify it as whatever they feel it would sell best as. So, yes, "technically" and traditionally, any HT blood contained in the product makes it a Hybrid Tea, no matter how much Tea it contained. And, "if it quacks like a duck"..as far as marketing is concerned.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Many thanks for this photo Moray. The reduced petalage certainly reflects the hot Perth summers. The next time you are at Araluen, would you mind photographing any hips on ‘Mrs. Fred Danks’. I am seeking a good side-on photograph of an average hip shape. Many thanks.
(HubertG - if you are watching, mine are all round so far)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 5 posted
13 days ago by
HubertG
|
Patricia, I'm watching, ;-)
I did have another fresh look at the photos of your "presumed Mrs. Fred Danks" and I do feel it isn't 'Mrs. Fred Danks'. There are too many differences in my opinion, including the long flower stems.
|
REPLY
|
|
Wonderful. I knew you would be.
I would like to wait until we get more side-on hip photos from people before splitting the file. It would seem from the 2005 reference that there are two similar roses around. One more pink and the other more lilac. However these descriptions are not enough to really distinguish them at this stage. We need something more tangible like the hip shape. It would be really good to get hip photos from the Alister Clark garden at Bulla.
In case my rose does prove to be different, I took the precaution of striking it last January and have a spare plant that I could post in winter if you would like.
And if it is different, I will be equally as pleased because I know it was an old rose and there is the thrill of the identifying chase once more.
|
REPLY
|
|
OK. I am not going to wait for hip photos. I ventured out at midday to water the pots to get them through this very hot day and the potted plants of “Ruth Spencer’s Chowerup Pink HT” had white filaments. (Years ago I had also noted white filaments). I’ll make a separate file for my foundling. Thank you very much for your input on my foundling HubertG. It has proved to be most helpful.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 5 posted
12 days ago by
HubertG
|
Thanks Patricia, you're welcome, glad I could be of some help. I feel that the original 1951 reference, though succinct, sums up 'Mrs. Fred Danks' perfectly:
"A rose which can be grown either as a dwarf or a pillar. It is of good foliage with blooms of pink shaded slightly with lilac. The blooms, which are borne on rather short stems, have only 15 petals, but are very highly perfumed."
Your foundling looks like a great rose to grow - a real survivor - I'd love to grow it! Many thanks.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks, Patricia. I'd be very happy to do so the next time I'm at Araluen.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I realise that in the Australian book on tea roses the fragrance is described as moderate -- and no doubt that's how it comes across in those climatic conditions. In Europe, however (or at least Britain) Lady Hillingdon's scent is dependably strong (I have grown it for almost a decade). Indeed, it may well be the most strongly scented tea. See David Austin, Peter Beales and Trevor White websites, all describing the scent as 'strong' or the rose as 'very fragrant'. From memory Graham Stuart Thomas also praised the scent. So the description should probably be 'moderate to strong, opinions vary fragrance'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
13 days ago by
HubertG
|
I find that the fragrance is stronger here in Sydney in the cooler months of the year. It probably dissipates too quickly when it's hot. It has a lovely scent.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 4 posted
13 days ago by
Hamanasu
|
Yes, that's my guess too -- that the heat plays a major role in the intensity of scent. Heat can have the reverse effect, too -- I understand that Marie Lambert (aka Ducher) is strongly scented in Oz, but the scent is only light (at best moderate) over here.
|
REPLY
|
|
I'd call Marie Lambert "moderate" for scent. It's very pleasant, but not strong.
|
REPLY
|
|
The references mention “strong” and “rich” which certainly aligns with your nose Hamanasu. I have not bothered with “opinions vary” but just changed the fragrance to “Strong”. Many thanks for your insight.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Found an unidentified rose yesterday. The only extra information about the bush is that it grows near where the woman who runs the cafe lives. I forgot to ask about growth habit (yes, will ask).
However, I think it is likely to be a sizeable bush. Her comment makes me think it's protruding past the property boundary and she just nicked some, or it possibly has gone feral in a paddock.
So probably a fairly decent size, and durable on its own in the subtropics.
There is a distinct and very pleasant rose scent, with sugary/sweet notes but not at all sickly. Not a "pong out the whole room" scent, but very noticeable once you get close.
Blooms in clusters. Blooms are approximately 45 mm in diameter. Petals have a bit of a white centre once you open a bloom up. Stamens are very short and a nondescript brown.
Prickles are small (around 6mm) and hooked, at least on the cut arrangement I saw yesterday. Forgot to ask about the base of the canes. Quite sparse.
Any suggestions for what to start searching?
|
REPLY
|
|
My kneejerk reaction was Paul's Scarlet, which does repeat a bit, and is a survivor. Not known for scent, but worth looking at. Marie Nabonnand has much better scent but is mostly thornless, and hasn't been around in Aus as long. Its buds may help distinguish it.
|
REPLY
|
|
Paul's Scarlet definitely looks similar.
The buds on this mystery rose are almost spherical. Well at least, the one bud I happen to have at the moment is. That one's quite green though, so I should go see the bush itself.
|
REPLY
|
|
I don't recognise it but noticed the fairly coarse leaf serrations and that round little bud.
Will be interesting to get your impressions of the bush.
|
REPLY
|
|
I went and checked out the actual bushes. Turns out there's a dozen or two of them, and they aren't hanging over any fences. That'll teach me to make assumptions.*
Anyway, they turn out to be quite small bushes, around 70 cm (28") high. Spreading form, more or less. I saw them as they currently are, but was told they throw out quite long canes at times (which most roses will do when the mood takes them).
I was also told it seems to be repeat-flowering, for most of the year (sub-tropical climate) as far as she can recall. Pedicels are slightly bristly, but do not bite.
I don't know how long they have been there, but looking at the retaining wall blocks I'm guessing somewhere around the 20 year mark. So, this mystery beastie is probably a floribunda that was reasonably popular in the 1990's.
I'm going to contact the local garden club, as they may know which variety it is (it's planted in the cemetery grounds at Bangalow).
Photos of various bits and pieces are attached.
*Actually it probably won't, but you never know.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 15 posted
30 JAN by
HubertG
|
I don't know what it is, but that looks like mosaic virus affecting some of the leaves in the second photo. You might want to be careful what you bring back to your own garden.
|
REPLY
|
|
Whoops, I'll back off re Paul's Scarlet; unlikely to have been planted in a row. Next wild guess: Orange Triumph (Orange in the name is for Holland, not for colour).
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes I spotted that. Definitely something to be wary of.
|
REPLY
|
|
I feel that the rose is not the more rounded leafed 'Orange Triumph', but instead may be a member of the more elliptical leafed 'Orleans' tribe. Look closely at the stipule of your foundling.
|
REPLY
|
|
Here are some pics of 'Orange Triumph' budded from the hedge in Ethel Street, Guildford (Perth).
Two plants from the same budstick and on this day, one was producing flowers that were less full than the other. It was just a curiosity of the day and not a consistent character of those plants.
|
REPLY
|
|
The leaves on the Bangalow rose are definitely not as round as the ones shown in Billy's photos. Much more elongated.
*goes to look for "Orleans" tribe"*
ETA: Similarities there, but it's not 'Orléans Rose', or Koster's sport or 'Maréchal Foch', as all of those have wrinkly leaves (rugose, for the posh types) and this critter has smooth ones.
'New Orleans' doesn't match for scent (not enough shots available to tell much else).
I'm just digging though everything tagged as "polyantha". The Bangalow beastie could pass for 'Eutin' if you squint at it sideways. Colour of 'Eutin' is more towards red while "BB" more towards carmine-pink, but otherwise seems to be a close match. 'Eutin' is still in commerce in Australia.
|
REPLY
|
|
Ok, have been through all 63 pages of small thorny things tagged as polyantha, and have looked at anything that the thumbnail indicated might be in the right colour range. Can't find an exact match that jumps out at me, which probably means I'm missing something.
It's unlikely that "BB" is not listed, but quite a lot of them are missing photos, and frankly some of the photos of "the same rose" show so much variation that I'm wary of trusting them all, so it might (possibly) be one of the polyanthas that I have checked out.
ETA: Aha. There's a 'Pink Eutin' sport of 'Eutin'. No record of it being in Australia, but interesting in that it indicates a variant in the right colour range. Didn't find it at first because it's tagged as Floribunda rather than Polyantha. I suppose I'll have to go through all the floridbundles now.
Also went back and checked out every photo for 'Eutin', and some of those appear show a similar colour range, although obviously I can't be sure how accurate they are for colour. But still, 'Eutin' or a variant is looking closest at the moment.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#12 of 15 posted
1 FEB by
 Plazbo
|
The current understanding by those who've researched it is that it's spread is via grafting/budding on to infected rootstock and doesn't appear to spread from insect or cutting tools. So....may not be risk, just a defect of the plant and it's prior culture/care.
Having said that, when I get newly released roses from the larger sellers and they show RMV (sadly that outcome isn't unusual), I have to question the accuracy of what was studied, if the rose came into Australia already infected or if it's the norm for things to be budded onto infected rootstock.
|
REPLY
|
|
You can find those who will argue until blue in the face that it is easy to spread RMV via various odd and weird ways. Ralph Moore, who owned and operated Sequoia Nursery in Visalia, CA for 70 years (1937 - 2007) stated he had never been able to spread it any other way than budding/grafting, and he had TRIED. The roses you have received infected with RMV could either have been imported already infected, or the stock upon which they were budded there was infected. If they were US imports, particularly of roses created prior to the early 1990's, they very likely were already infected when imported there. RMV was a large issue with the US rose industry for decades. It is still not uncommon to find infected plants in nurseries here.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#14 of 15 posted
3 FEB by
Plazbo
|
I suspect its a domestic propagation issue to some extent, its hard to account for a Kordes bred this century to have it but every now and then Madame Annisette has the yellow squiggle pattern on some leaves. There is a lot of the 90's USA stock too (ie Gemini, Honey Bouquet) which is expected. Its kordes and uk bred roses from this century that leave me questioning where the issue is.
|
REPLY
|
|
It's been estimated that by the late 1980's, upwards of 80% of the US production was infected. By the time the US producers began to honestly admit there was a problem, their fortunes were already dwindling and a short few years later they began bankrupting and being bought out by even less professional and accomplished owners. In all those decades, from the 1920's when RMV symptoms were first written of in the ARS annuals as "Infectious Chlorosis in Roses", through the 1990's, we passed RMV around the world MANY times. There are a number of contract producers remaining in the US which are continuing to infect new varieties as well as simply push out already infected types. I'm fairly confident similar situations exist in Australia, too, perhaps in Europe? I don't know. I haven't read complaints of RMV infection in Europe, which doesn't mean it doesn't exist, simply that I haven't read of it.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
