HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
|
Is there any indications that this could be Lindee?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I feel stupid asking this, as Excelsa is wichurana / luciae and Turner's Crimson is multiflora, but would someone who grows both please post comparison photos? Trying to ID a foundling. It has feathery stipules, but so does what I assume to be Hiawatha (luciae) from the same roadside patch.
|
REPLY
|
|
Quit feeling stupid. You’re LOOKING at a rose and that is smart. It is well known that most multifloras have feathery stipules, but in my garden most wich’s ALSO have this trait. Just take a look at the parentage tree of ‘Excelsa’ and you will see where the feathery stipules come from.
I think basically, a multi has matt leaves and a wich has shiny. Ignore the word luciae - just concentrate on multi and wich. You might also like to read the 2008 reference for ‘Turner’s Crimson Rambler’ which may help you know what sort of bush it is.
|
REPLY
|
|
Hello Margaret,
Here are leaves from 'Excelsa' and 'Turner's Crimson'. 'T C' has a more shrub like grow whilst 'E' shoots are quite brambly with its Wichurana blood. 'T C' often has two little leaflets by the stipule facing the opposite way to the other leaves. There is a good picture that Patricia has posted of 'T. C'. 'T. C' leaves are paler and generally not so shiny as 'E'. Both have featery stipules but 'T. C' are particularly bristly.
Regards Andrew.
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.147304
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Andrew. I have the impression from your photo that Excelsa's leaves are slightly rounded, compared to Turner's Crimson.
Ramblers are survivors here, reflecting their ability to root down (layer themselves). I'm adding a couple of photos of what I think is Excelsa, where it can't have been watered for decades. The first has Excelsa in the foreground, Hiawatha climbing the tree; fortunately both just reach the road verge now, because you don't walk into places like that in summer. The second photo is an old country churchyard, which I like for the horse-trough in the foreground.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes, 'Turner's Crimson' leaves are much more pointed and multiflora like. I found my 'Turner's Crimson' in a derelict mill along with what I believed to be 'Paul Ricault' but it now appears to be 'Paul Perras'. I know you aren't having anymore roses but 'Turner's Crimson' is such a historically important rose, and pretty as well.
|
REPLY
|
|
I am not sure if this will help - the photo might be too small. I have included some ‘Mlle Cecile Brunner’ buds to help discern the ‘Dorothy Perkins’ pink colour.
|
REPLY
|
|
Maybe not! It makes Turner's Crimson's leaves look rounded. Thank you anyway.
I'm collecting cuttings of ramblers to try to make sure one nursery has a full house as far as those in SA go. Very few nurseries selling heritage roses are left in Aus now. I need to make sure I get them right.
|
REPLY
|
|
Here is a picture of a foundling rose that was later identified as 'Turner's Crimson', it shows the slight puckering of the leaves (Bullate?) quite well.
http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/l.php?l=21.319991
Ed. The member Palustris has many good pictures of these types of ramblers including 'Excelsa'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 16 posted
2 days ago by
 Palustris
|
Andrew, that plant can't be 'Turner's Crimson Rambler'. Look at the pedicels: they should be covered with tiny hairs. I can't believe I don't have any good photos of it. Next year I'll take some good photos.
|
REPLY
|
|
Oh! That's interesting. I wonder what this rose could be!? The plant I took my cuttings off would have been planted around 70 years ago and is grown in other gardens in the village too.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#11 of 16 posted
2 days ago by
Palustris
|
I'm not certain, but the color looks about right for TCR.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 16 posted
2 days ago by
Palustris
|
'Excelsa' and 'Turner's Crimson Rambler' are quite distinct once you have had the opportunity to see them both in full flower. TCR has much more maroon flowers than 'Excelsa' whose flowers are red fading to a dull pink. However, the absolutely easiest method it to look at the pedicels. On TCR they are absolutely covered with a profusion of tiny hairs.
This can be easily seen in Patricia's photo: http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.187524
It can also be seen in the picture from the book: Rosenbuch für Gartenliebhaber by J. Hoffmann, Berlin
Once the plants are out of flower, identifying them may be more difficult.
|
REPLY
|
|
I think I have (access to) both, flowering at present on roadsides. On the left, near the restored bootmaker's shop from 1904 at Mylor, is what I think is Turner's Crimson Rambler, based on what I'm told about the pedicels. It grows in shade for at least half of the day, and has quite a bit of mildew. Some petals develop an ugly mauve tinge as it fades. On the right is the one about 5km away, at Bradbury, which I think is Excelsa, growing in full sun. The watsonia, and bracken and blackberry in a previous photo, are declared weeds.
|
REPLY
|
|
I doubting whether my 'Excelsa' is correct now as well.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#14 of 16 posted
yesterday by
Palustris
|
Margaret, please look at my photos of 'Excelsa' that show the pedicels, peduncles, and small stems:
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.263202
I think that the mildewed rose in your photo could be 'Excelsa'. Notice that the pedicels of TCR are completely covered by the tiny hairs, but on 'Excelsa' they are much fewer and they sparsely populate the pedicels.
|
REPLY
|
|
It's complicated when both are found roses, and I think Patricia's are too. I should check at a nursery (which is going out of business) has named plants and re-photograph them.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes you should. Take the book 'Tea Roses' and photograph an average coloured bloom on page 206.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Why are Roselover's two photos contained under 'Talisman'?
|
REPLY
|
|
I believe when she uploaded the photos in November 2014, she was under the impression they were ‘Sutter’s Gold’.
Later her comment on April 1, 2015 says ‘Talisman’, so it seems as though her photos were moved from wherever they originally were, to Talisman. (take a look at the comments attached to her photo with her grandson). Ideally she needs to correct the caption containing the ‘Sutter’s Gold’ words.
|
REPLY
|
|
When I posted the two photos of what I thought was Talisman in 2014, I had no idea this Rose was Sutter’s Gold. I even bought a talisman and planted it in my garden. But when it bloomed, it was not the rose two blocks away. I have a Sutter’s Gold plant, it has been a favorite of mine for over 25 years. This past year, I sent photos of this very large rose to a friend who is a well known Rosarians and can identify most roses. Right off the bat, he said Sutter’s Gold. By then, I was thinking the same from the fragrance and how it bloomed. It is the first rose to bloom in my garden and this year I had 4 bloom cycles. I then changed what I wrote about Talisman.
Joan Goff
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
yesterday by
Darrell
|
Hello Joan,
From the photos it was obvious the rose is not Talisman, not only in color but in size. Talisman grows at most three and a half feet high. Thanks for the correction.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Rose Listing Omission
Dr. John Laconte
From the Cox Seed co. catalogue for 1907, page 64:
Dr. John Laconte (T.) Color rich golden yellow shaded with copper; long pointed buds; very full in bloom; plant strong and vigorous. A wonderfully beautiful blended sort. Raised by Mr E. Gill, Berkeley, Cal.
|
REPLY
|
|
‘Dr. John Laconte’ added. Thanks HubertG
|
REPLY
|
|
|
