HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
DescriptionPhotosLineageAwardsReferencesMember RatingsMember CommentsMember JournalsCuttingsGardensBuy From 
'Rose Edouard' rose Reviews & Comments
Discussion id : 123-553
most recent 4 days ago HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 6 days ago by thebig-bear
I'm curious about the given parentage of this rose - is there any reference that specifically states Quatre Saison x Old Blush rather than Old Blush x Quatre Saison? I would have thought just from casually looking at the way that Quatre Saison is fairly reluctant to set seed (in the much differing climes of England - maybe that is different on Reunion?), or at least not with as much readiness or quantity, compared to the ease with which Old Blush can be pollinated, that it was more likely to be the later. I've seen both ways round mentioned in various books, so is it based on any DNA data that I have somehow missed or something? It puzzles me how we "know" when so much of the origin of this rose is lost, or at least hidden, in the mists of time. Can anyone shed any light on it please?
REPLY
Reply #1 of 4 posted 5 days ago by jedmar
You are quite right in being sceptical. There has been a recent (2019) DNA investigation of 'Rose Edouard' which found alleles corresponding to both 'Quatre Saisons' and 'Old Blush'; however, this analysis cannot determine which one is the seed parent. Also, this crossing would normally result in a triploid rose, but 'Rose Edouard' is tetraploid. So the parentage might be more complicated, involving several steps.
I have always doubted Bréon's story of how he found 'Rose Edouard' in a mixed hedge of 'Quatre Saisons' and 'Old Blush' on the Island of Réunion (Ile Bourbon). The climate of that island is tropical and would not have been at all condusive to growth and seeding of R. damascena, as it would not have the winter chill needed.
My hypothesis is that this rose was brought from southern India to the island - there are many links of families on Ile Bourbon and the former French colonies at Pondichéry, India. Once you are in India, then the actual crossing would certainly have happened in Northern India where the climate is appropriate and you find both R. damascena and R.chinensis. Such a good rose for perfume and ceremonies would then have expanded southward over the continent, possibly in conjunction with the expansion of the Mogul Empire. This would also be an explanation why 'Rose Edouard' is so widespread today in India and nowhere else. Difficult to prove, as there are no records (or couldn't find them yet) prior to European interest in rose breeding.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 4 posted 5 days ago by thebig-bear
What a fantastic answer! And I think that is a very plausible and interesting hypothesis you have come up with that would answer a lot of points. Thank you very much.

Please excuse my ignorance regarding the first part of your answer, but when you say the DNA investigation "found alleles corresponding to both 'Quatre Saison' and 'Old Blush' ", does that mean that they have been identified as being the parents, or as being and/or related to the parents? - I hope you follow me, I haven't explained what I mean very well! Sorry! I haven't come across the word "alleles" before.

Just as an aside, I have tried recreating this cross myself this year, and while I had a 50% success rate re hip set with O.B. x Q. S. ( I should point out that was 1 out of 2!!), I had no success with Q.S. x O.B.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 4 posted 4 days ago by jedmar
I am not a geneticist, but as I understand, the genes on a certain position in the chromosome can have different variants. These variants are called alleles. It is the difference in alleles which determines whether a rose is e.g. pink or white, even when we are talking about the same colour-determining gene.
You can see from the excerpt we quoted from the 2019 study of Pascal Heitzler that he speaks of finding "at least 50% allele identity at each locus" between Rose Edouard and 'Four Seasons'. The "locus" he refers to is the postion on the chromosome I mentioned above. He means that at least 50% of the gene variants (alleles) of Rose Edouard were contributed by Quatre Saisons. All the rest of the allelles apparently correspond to 'Old Blush'. I understand his text so that the share of Quatre Saisons is more than 50%, and inferring from that we might have had several steps of crossings, like (Old Blush x Quatre Saisons) x Quatre Saisons. I will ask his opinion about this next time I see him.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 4 posted 4 days ago by thebig-bear
Ah, I think I understand now. That is very interesting, and would make a lot of sense in that it successfully answers questions about certain things such as the ploidity of Rose Edouard. It might also explain how Rose Edouard has chinensis style rebloom, as I understand that the first time cross (at least theoretically - who knows in the real world!) would not be repeat flowering due to incompatible rebloom genes with 'Quatre Saison', but multiple steps might bring about such a result. Hmmm, this is intriguing!

Thank you, that would be very helpful to hear his opinion.
REPLY
Discussion id : 112-398
most recent 24 JUL 18 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 24 JUL 18 by JasonSims1984
Does this rose set hips? I'm pretty sure it's triploid, but it clearly has a ton of descendents. Probably through pollen? A lot of bourbons are triploid, but I'm sure most of them are at least slightly fertile crossed to tets.
REPLY
Discussion id : 105-921
most recent 8 OCT 17 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 8 OCT 17 by CybeRose
Magazine of Horticulture 3(7): 246-248 (July 1837)
Art. II. Roses—new Varieties.
By An Amateur. (Gideon B. Smith, Esq.)

In one of your numbers of last winter, a correspondent, writing from Philadelphia, mentioned the monthly cabbage rose, that they had in Philadelphia, in such terms that I immediately sent to the person whom I guessed was the writer, for the monthly cabbage rose spoken of, referring to the Magazine for the description. He sent me the rose—and what do you think it proves to be? Why, the Gloria de France; the same we have had for some time, and of which one of our gardeners (Mr. John Feast,) had an abundance of saleable plants, the stock of which he got from Philadelphia. There is no mistake about it—the plants are in bloom, and speak, as loud as full-blown roses can speak, for themselves. Besides which, the label on the plant which I received bears this inscription, (in the hand-writing of the person of whom I obtained it, and who I guess to be the author of the article above alluded to in your Magazine.) The label is "Gloria de France, or Monthly cabbage." Now, sir, what is the object of giving a new name to this rose, but to enable the person to sell them to those who had them before under another name? When your Magazine arrived here with the notice of the monthly cabbage, all our gardeners and many amateurs were on tiptoe to get it. I got the start of them in my hurry to be cheated, and saved them the expense and trouble of getting what they already possessed. The rose is a very fine one, and is not inappropriately called the monthly cabbage; but its other and well known name should have accompanied the new one, to prevent mistakes, and paying dearly for duplicates. By the way, the monthly cabbage sells for something more in Philadelphia than the Gloria de France, which I suppose is to pay for the trouble of giving it a new name.
REPLY
Discussion id : 65-707
most recent 14 AUG 17 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 11 JUL 12 by CybeRose
A Catalogue of Exotic Plants Cultivated in the Island of Mauritius, at the Royal Botanic Garden Pamplemousses, at his Excellency the Governor's Garden at Reduit, at Mon Plaisir, Bois Cheri, &c. p. 23 (1822)

Systematic names: Rosa Borbonica
Native place: Bourbon
Where cultivated: Bot. Garden & Reduit
Time and by whom introduced: Governor Farquhar

It is interesting to note that neither the 1822 nor the 1816 edition mentions Damasks of any kind. Both do include Rosa Centifolia, which was cultivated in India.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 8 posted 14 JUL 12 by jedmar
I agree. I have been looking through contemporary travel books of the early 19th century and there is no evidence of Rosa damascena on Ile Bourbon or Mauritius. The damascena theory was based on a statement by Le Juge in 1760 that he received from Spain a rose that is now cultivated in every garden in the two Iles and that is used to make excellent rose water and that this rose grows so easily that hedges can be formed very rapidly. But R. provincialis was there, R. moschata, and even R. sempervirens.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 8 posted 8 AUG 17 by CybeRose
Jedmar,
I just came across this item:
Journal of Horticulture and Practical Gardening, Volume 36, page 95 (Feb 6, 1879)
A Few Good Old and New Roses
Karl Koch
"According to the recent researches of Mr. Baker of Kew, the Rose of Adrianople is not in reality a Centifolia, but a Damask Rose, which alone supplies the true essence of Roses of Oriental India, Cashmere, and Morocco."
REPLY
Reply #3 of 8 posted 9 AUG 17 by jedmar
This is clear! Here from "Commercial Reports received at the Foreign Office from Her Majesty's Consuls in 1867", p. 252:

"Report by Mr. Vice-Consul Blunt on Kizanlik and on the Manufacture of Attar of Roses in the Vilayet of Adrianople for the Year 1866.
The district of Kizanlik is in the province of Philippopolio, and is included in the vilayet of Adrianople..."

Also, from "Notable Things of our own Time", by John Timbs, 1868, p. 105: "The rose-fields of the vilayet of Adrianople extend over 12,000 or 14,000 acres, and supply by far the most important source of wealth in the district. The season for picking the roses is from the latter part of April to the early part of June...with hundreds of Bulgarian boys and girls gathering the flowers into baskets..."

So, the Rose of Adrianople is actually 'Kazanlik'.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 8 posted 9 AUG 17 by CybeRose
Jedmar,
So now I have to wonder:

Was the Rosa centifolia listed in the catalog of Mauritius (1822) really 'Kazanlik'?

Was the Rosa semperflorens of Breon's catalog of l'ile Bourbon (1820) a perpetual Damask rather than the crimson China?

Ventenat (Cels' Garden) rejected R. semperflorens Bot. Mag. because the name had already been used (Rosa semperflorens. Hort. Mus. Parisiens.) for "la Rose de tous les mois, qui paroît avoir été confondue par Linnaeus avec la Rosa centifolia, quoiqu'elle en diffère par plusieurs caractères."

Karl
REPLY
Reply #5 of 8 posted 10 AUG 17 by jedmar
Karl, I do not think that Kazanlik was distributed outside the area before the 1880s - Dieck speaks about it as a novelty when he brought it to Germany. From the correspondence of the British consuls of the 1860s, we can see that it was known earlier, but the interest seems to have been in the Attar, not the plant. In any case, Rosa damascena was already known since a long time in Europe. There is no confusion with R. centifolia in the publications of Lindley, Vibert, etc. from the 1820s.
Regarding Breon's catalogue, it is difficult to say what he actually identified. I must admit I do not trust him. He made a lot of noise about R. borbonica, and then kept quite silent after his return to France. I have a feeling he used this "find" to ehance his reputation and get an assignment back in the home Country. Just a feeling.
What we see is that R. semperflorens is listed in the 1816 Mauritius catalogue as China rose, and naturalized.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 8 posted 11 AUG 17 by CybeRose
Illustrations of the Botany and Other Branches of the Natural History of the Himalayan Mountains, vol. 1 (1839) p. 203
John Forbes Royle
R. Damascena, goolab and sud-burg of the natives, wurd of the Arabs, is that most highly esteemed, and cultivated in Northern India for making rose-water, and the atter of roses.

If not 'Kazanlik', then some other Damask was grown in India.
Karl
REPLY
Reply #7 of 8 posted 11 AUG 17 by jedmar
That is correct. Kazanlik is the type which is cultivated in Bulgaria and Turkey. I read that in Iran there are 4 different types of R. damascena.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 8 posted 14 AUG 17 by CybeRose
Linnaeus did not distinguish damasks from centifolias. That was left for Miller (1768).
So, those who knew only Linnaeus could call a damask R. centifolia.
And a Frenchman could refer to a perpetual damask as R. semperflorens.
REPLY
© 2020 HelpMeFind.com