HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
'Fée Opale' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
|
Does anyone please have a picture of this actual rose apart from 'Parks' Yellow Tea Scented China, in commerce as' which people believe are one and the same?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
We are now selling False Parks as this rose.
|
REPLY
|
|
We've added this synonym and listed your nursery.
|
REPLY
|
|
Admin. John is meaning 'Parks' Yellow Tea-scented China (in commerce as)' when he says 'False Parks'. The 'False Parks' name should be deleted. I also think the 'Parks' Yellow Tea-scented China (in commerce as)' could be merged with 'Fee Opale', but that is a big step and despite my 2013 reference in 'Fee Opale', other opinions are definitely required before this is done.
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you Patricia.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes, Patricia is correct, we havn't come to a quick decision on this as you can see my comments of 2009 on the 'Parks' Yellow Tea-scented China (in commerce as)' comments page
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Could you list this as an HG too please
|
REPLY
|
|
John, with all due respect, do you have a REFERENCE to put up on HMF to justify this additional classification?
With Regards,
Lyn
|
REPLY
|
|
No problem, It's a cross with 'fortunes double yellow'. I know some have classed FDY as a noisette but Once flowering and being a chinese found rose with a history from before the noisettes make this impossible. I have no doubt that FDY is an HG and crossing with another rose (probably a tea) would reasonably then be classed as an HG unless the Tea becomes dominant (repeat blooming)
|
REPLY
|
|
Presuming FDY is a Hybrid Gigantea, and this resulted from a Tea cross, couldn't equal arguments be made for classifying it as either Hybrid Gigantea or as a Tea Hybrid or Tea? Wouldn't that all depend upon whether you classify based predominantly upon blood lines, instead of characteristics?
I believe what Lyn is asking for is a foot note to printed documentation for your requested classification change. Lyn, it appears the reference you would have would probably be just John's explanation of what the breeding potentially is and how that would determine the possible classification.
John, I agree whole heartedly with you about it being impossible for FDY to be called a Noisette, for the reasons you state. Kim
|
REPLY
|
|
Hello Kim, Yes possibly a Tea hybrid but I don't think this is a common classification. As there are no once blooming teas I don't think a tea this would be appropriate. As far as written info, Everthing stems from 'Fortunes double yellow'. This found chinese rose is now regarded as a HG by most as this is the most reasonable classification. HMF shows roses by type and include different classifications for the same rose and I think HG would be a reasonable addition here. For me, I noticed this was missing when doing a search under HG's (I'm considering the possibility that Parks yellow is this rose)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 10 posted
22 DEC 10 by
 jedmar
|
Yes, John. This is a prime candidate for "Park's Yellow (in commerce)". Foliage and canes of FDY and PY are very similar (see my photos). Look also at 'Rosabelle', a further FDY cross by Bruant, with similar, though deep pink, blooms to PY. I wish we had photos of Rosabelle's foliage.
|
REPLY
|
|
Etienne Bouret may have some 'Rosabelle' shots with foliage, I will have something in 2011 when my plant gets going.
|
REPLY
|
|
Hi John, there is precedence for primarily spring or summer bloom "Climbing Teas", though most are fairly to very good repeat blooming. I would imagine they would have originally been as variable in rebloom as the climbing sports of Hybrid Teas. I had occasion to be quite a bit too intimately involved with Souv. de Madame Leonie Viennot here in Los Angeles for a few years. Tremendous growth (once she got her feet under her) with a large early summer flush and absolutely no repeat flowering. Lots of prickles, wood, mildew and frustration.
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.33111 Madame Levet spring with occ. repeat
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.6215.1 Paul's Tea Rambler spring or summer
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.5895 Souvenir de Madame Léonie Viennot HMF says occ. repeat, in Los Angeles, it doesn't repeat.
I'm in complete agreement with you about the apparent validity of a HG classification for FDY.
|
REPLY
|
|
Billy said once that there appear to be two forms of Mme Leonie around, one of which repeats and one of which doesn't. See my photo of one in full flight at Ross Roses midwinter; and see Patricia's comment under Souv de Mme Leonie Viennot. Mine too is rarely without a flower.
|
REPLY
|
|
That makes perfect sense. Mutations occur more frequently than we imagine. Early on, there were several Cl. Icebergs. At least one was spring flowering only. Fortunately, it has been replaced by the perpetual flowering one. There are many documented cases of climbing sports of the same HT with widely varying flowering habits. Reading the old ARS annuals and Modern Rose editions point out what and for whom they occurred. If I remember correctly, Jack Harkness also commented on this subject in Roses.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 10 posted
22 DEC 10 by
jedmar
|
John, 'Fée Opale' could be classed as an HG, if we accept that FDY is one. However, is that so? One could argue that all Teas are HGs, too. Have a look at the article "Volatile Components in Chinese Roses": FDY's VOC seems to consist of DMMB and TMB. While DMMB's origins seem to be R. gigantea, other VOCs typical in R.gigantea are missing in FDY. The nearest similarity is with Sanguinea (china) and Etoile de Lyon (tea). Did they have the right roses in the test?
Also, Fortune apparently found this rose in Ningpo (near Shanghai), i.e. far from the natural habitat of R. gigantea in the west, and was told it originated in the north of China. Which doesn't seem to be the right climate for FDY. Confu(ciu)sing!
I wish there were a VOC resp. DNA study which analyzes important rose parent links rather than the usual across the board comparisons.
A word to Noisettes: While these should be per se descendants of the Charleston crossing, we cannot overrule that R. moschata was "exported" to China in earler times. We will find that R.moschata was distributed within the Persian and Mogul Empires, which had lively trading with China, on which they bordered. So, a Moschata-China hybrid ex China could theoretically be possible.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
