HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
-
-
|
Does anyone grow both 'Barbra Streisand' and 'Neptune'? I wish to know how their fragrance compare. I heard that BS has a strong old rose fragrance, does Neptune approach it in terms of fragrance? or Should I just get both?
|
REPLY
|
|
Barbara is likely to be more fragrant than Neptune. I grew Neptune this year (new plant) and yes it has fragrance but I would not describe my Neptune as very fragrant. Maybe that will change with time as the bush matures.
|
REPLY
|
|
never smelled Barba but my Neptune is easily the strongest smelling rose in my garden, right next to scentimental. You can easily smell it form across the yard! Both Neptune and Scentimental are favorites of mine, their scents are to me pretty similar, but Neptune has a distinctive difference... im not so good with describing scents! but either way Neptune is a 10/10 all around rose for me!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Looks more like Munstead Wood
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Very ornamental in its own right!
|
REPLY
|
|
Yeah :) . They kind of look like large cherry blossoms during spring. But they seldom bloom for me in the tropics.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 6 posted
17 DEC 21 by
Hamanasu
|
True, I hadn't thought of the cherry blossom similarity. Rather like Shirofugen.
|
REPLY
|
|
This is how it looks up-close (it was blooming in a hill nearby, it kind of blooms continuously with the cooler temperatures there). I also once saw this rose climb up and cover a dead tree in full flowery fury, it was spectacular.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 6 posted
17 DEC 21 by
Hamanasu
|
That's so beautiful. It should be in every rose catalogue. It seems to me the distinctiveness of it is in the flat and perfectly round shape of each individual flower. That's why it looks so much like some varieties of cherry blossom. The shade of pink is also very fresh. I can see some leaves are black, presumably with fungal disease? But the vigour and floriferousness of the plant (from the pictures and your description) seems unaffected.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes. It looks quite pretty, both up close and seen as clusters from a climbing specimen. It also grows 'wild', I did mention that it's used as a 'rootstock' right? Unfortunately, for me, in the tropics, it won't even bloom once :( . It is quite resilient, it does have blackspot in that picture but I've seen an entire arbor covered with this rose up in the mountains. The leaves were are all suffering under a heavy case of blackspot, but it was still covered completely with blooms.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 6 posted
19 DEC 21 by
styrax
|
At the end of my growing season, many of my polyantha's leaves gunk up like that: it has a different spotting pattern than blackspot, and I suspect it's just a rather ugly form of leaf senescence. They're clean for the rest of the season, though.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
is there a reliable way to tell whether a found rose is La Reine, or Anna de Diesbach?
|
REPLY
|
|
Good suggestion. We need more photos of the canes of both roses, to show the prickles.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 9 posted
9 NOV 21 by
 Le_Not
|
I've uploaded a photo of the canes of my 'La Reine', in hopes that might be helpful. But I think she's thornier than described on HelpMeFind -- in fact, 'La Reine' is one of the thornier roses in my (admittedly small, mostly "thornless") garden.
|
REPLY
|
|
I see what you mean! Thanks for posting the photo. In fact the early illustrations are in keeping with your photo.
I'm back to the same problem - how do I tell the difference. We have quite a few name-lost roses in old gardens in Australia which could be one or the other - obviously it was widely-planted in its time, and is a survivor. Probably La Reine, as the earlier of the two, and the one with a name more likely to interest people here. At present I'm just calling them all "La Reine family".
|
REPLY
|
|
I've not grown either, but in the pictures on HMF, it seems to me that AdD sits down among the foliage more than LR, and the latter seems to rise a bit above the bush. I have seen AdD described as a Portland in some sources.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 9 posted
10 NOV 21 by
Lee H.
|
Margaret, did you notice the comment in references from the The Rose Annual of 1974? “'La Reine' ... blooms early and repeats well, a feature noticeable in its seedlings,'Anna de Diesbach’ (1858) and 'Francois Michelon’ 1891) . Both are in varying shades of pink. Plant-wise too, they show close affinity to ‘La Reine’, but with a deeper cup and a lesser petallage than ‘La Reine' which averages 78, they are less inclined to ball in damp conditions.”
Also, I find that my La Reine does seem to be relatively thornless (at least here in Z6 Indiana)
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you, I missed that one.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 9 posted
12 NOV 21 by
Lee H.
|
Margaret, I thought I might add one more small clue that I chanced upon quite by accident yesterday while referencing Ethelyn Keays’ “Old Roses”:
“La Reine became the head of a big family of which many survive. Her descendants have, generally, the semiglobular form, are very large, fragrant, and show lilac in the pink or rose-color and maintain a close resemblance to the funnel-shaped calyx.
Anna de Diesbach, 1858, is from La Reine and an unknown variety. This rose has a lovely bloom of a deep carmine-pink shade, very large and full, intensely fragrant; one of the most delightful and most satisfactory of this class. The funnel-shaped calyx is slightly strangled at the top; probably the “unknown” did that. It’s sepals are long, pointed or foliated. Anna is just a bit dressier than La Reine. In lasting quality and profusion of bloom it has proved to be better, with us.”
|
REPLY
|
|
That's very useful, thanks. I'll need to check the finer details but I don't think any of our foundlings would be called deep carmine-pink. La Reine rather than Anna de Diesbach, then.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
