HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
DescriptionPhotosLineageAwardsReferencesMember RatingsMember CommentsMember JournalsCuttingsGardensBuy From 
'R. virginiana' rose Reviews & Comments
Discussion id : 113-560
most recent 22 OCT 18 SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 15 OCT 18 by jedmar
If you check the photos of hips of Rosa virginiana on this page, you will see that some of the pictures show smooth hips, while others prickly hips. In Roessig's 1801 drawing, he differentiates between Rosa lucida (prickly hips) and Rosa virginiana (smooth hips). So, is the synonym incorrect?
REPLY
Reply #1 of 11 posted 16 OCT 18 by Patricia Routley
Jedmar, I have no time right now to do more than say, I found your question so interesting. We have some rain coming up in the next day or so and I really look forward to hunkering down then to look closer at the references and comments. (I only wish I could read those French references).
REPLY
Reply #2 of 11 posted 18 OCT 18 by jedmar
Patricia, I have added the translations from French, but mind that I am no botanist!
REPLY
Reply #3 of 11 posted 19 OCT 18 by Patricia Routley
You are very kind. Thank you for doing that Jedmar.
The complexity of the various references brings home to me that none of us are botanists. Me especially - I am just an old lady gardener.

I recall once, was it Karl? who said that a bush can produce prickles at will, and I have certainly seen this type of behaviour on the odd rose or two in my own garden. Simplifying the names here, I am wondering if R. virginiana / R. lucida also does this from time to time. I didn’t note the hip prickles on my bush for many years until I photographed it, but perhaps I didn’t look closely enough in the early years.

I note that Rossig’s 1801 illustrations show
R. virginiana: a smooth (a little pointed towards the base) hip
R. lucida: a prickly (globular) hip.
Yet in his text he writes of
R. virginiana: “Ovary almost globular, slightly bristly”.
R. lucida: “a Globular, flattened ovary”. (No mention of bristles)

The 1817 reference is a little confusing to me as Thory has written of R. lucida having “Receptacles and pedicels armed with reddish glandular hairs” and “heps depressed globose red”. I can discern the hairs on the top bud in the illustration, but only with a magnifying glass. Knowing that the receptacle is the early stage, from which the hip is formed much later, I can only note that Redoute has drawn a very smooth hip.

In the 1817 reference Thory mentions that the R. lucida blooms do not last for more than several hours. In my 2013 reference I had noted “They seem to have come and gone before I can get the camera out.” I am going to add to my own records the possibility that my rose may be R. Lucida. But I really do not have the knowledge to do more than that. I do notice you pouring in the early references for this rose, and I thank you for your dedication and sharing.
REPLY
Reply #4 of 11 posted 19 OCT 18 by jedmar
I have added Rössig's 1799 descriptions in German. Translations will follow. An important difference seems to me that R. virginiana is stated to have matte foliage, while R. lucida has glossy ones.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 11 posted 20 OCT 18 by Andrew from Dolton
The rose I bought five years ago from David Austin has smooth hips and shiny leaves. The flowers in the picture are lighter pink in reality.

https://www.davidaustinroses.co.uk/r-virginiana
REPLY
Reply #6 of 11 posted 20 OCT 18 by Patricia Routley
Andrew, It would be good to have a close-up photo of the mid-term and ripe hips.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 11 posted 21 OCT 18 by jedmar
I think one of the issues is that different botanists named distinct roses R. virginiana. The references are not consistent in their synonms. Furthermore, there is some mix-up of R. carolina and R. palustris, too. You can see totally different hip forms in the photos of R. palustris, for example.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 11 posted 21 OCT 18 by Andrew from Dolton
Is it possible that lucida could be a subspecies of Rosa carolina?
REPLY
Reply #9 of 11 posted 22 OCT 18 by jedmar
Andrew, I do not know; I am not a botanist. But looking at the references, there seems to be quite some confusion. For the moment, I will be adding relevant references to the North American wild roses, especially also the first descriptions. Comparing these may lead to some conclusions.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 11 posted 22 OCT 18 by Andrew from Dolton
Hillier's Manual of Trees and Shrubs, which is usually very accurate, lists lucida as a synonym of virginiana. Graham Stuart Thomas says the fruits of virginiana are bristly. He says 'Alba' has has shiny leaves. The double form 'Rose d'Amour', looks to be a hybrid or even a different rose.
REPLY
Reply #11 of 11 posted 22 OCT 18 by Andrew from Dolton
William Robinson, The English Flower Garden. 5th edition 1896. Pub. John Murray , Albemarle Street, London.

p.768-9.
R.LUCIDA (Glossy Rose). -- One of the best Wild Roses has leaves of a shining green colour, and just when our native and other early single Roses are passing away this come into bloom in July and goes on for several weeks. Its flowers are large, opening flat, clear rosey-pink, sweet-scented, in clusters of from five to eight, but succeed one another, so that there is not usually more than one flower open at a time in a cluster. The heps are about as large as a Hazel-nut, deep red, and make a bright effect with the fading leaves, which assume autumn tints. The heps hang all the winter, the leafless wood becomes red, and through the dullest time of the year large groups of this Rose are pretty to see. A few plants soon spread into a thick mass as it runs freely underground, and it is so easily increased by its suckers, and that it offers every facility for free planting.

[The spelling of hips and capitals are Robinson's not mine]
REPLY
Discussion id : 95-940
most recent 18 NOV 16 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 18 NOV 16 by Byrnes, Robert L.
The University of Connecticut College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources Plant Database lists R. virginiana as being hardy to zone 3. Could the zone be changed based on this reference? Thank you.

http://www.hort.uconn.edu/plants/detail.php?pid=440
REPLY
Reply #1 of 2 posted 18 NOV 16 by Patricia Routley
Done. Thank you Robert
REPLY
Reply #2 of 2 posted 18 NOV 16 by Byrnes, Robert L.
Thank you!
REPLY
Discussion id : 93-202
most recent 5 JUN 16 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 5 JUN 16 by scvirginia
According to the USDA Plants database, Rosa virginiana Mill. has two subspecies: Rosa virginiana Mill. var. lamprophylla (Rydb.) Fernald and Rosa virginiana Mill. var. virginiana.
Source: http://plants.usda.gov/core/profile?symbol=ROVI2

According to ITIS (Integrated Taxonomic Information System), both of the above subspecies are considered to be obsolete, and should be considered as synonymous with Rosa virginiana Mill.

ITIS gives as synonyms for Rosa virginiana Mill: Rosa virginiana var. lamprophylla (Rydb.) Fernald, Rosa virginiana var. virginiana Mill., Rosa nanella Rydb., Rosa lucida Willd., Rosa gemella Willd. and Rosa lucida var. lamprophylla (Rehder) P.V. Heath.
Source: http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=24810
REPLY
Discussion id : 88-854
most recent 25 OCT 15 HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 24 OCT 15 by Hobbygärtner
The photos and discussions for this rose are exemplary for me as how it should be done for every rose. Ideally there should be photos of every part of the plant, the whole bush, of diseased parts and above all of hips and seeds and if ever possible of seedlings.
For too many roses on help me find there are only photos from the flowers (one I have seen is even with a self portrait of the owner!) and although I haven´t contributed a single yet, I would like to ask for a kind of standard procedure helping members how to give a standard impression of the plant for a newkomer say an alien from betageuze.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 3 posted 24 OCT 15 by Patricia Routley
Yes. I call the multitude of bloom photos "full frontals" as they remind me of the newspaper social pages of young things at the ball showing cleavages and teeth and all looking just the same. One needs some prickles for personality!
Here are my thoughts for the man from Mars. 10 photos per rose:
BUSH - in full bloom.
BUSH - leafless in winter before pruning.
CANE - Below, at a horizontal angle to show curvature of prickles
CANE - Upper " "
LEAF - a typical leaf on your hand (you always have it with you).
BUD - side-on, perhaps just showing colour, a close-up photo which will show absence or presence of glands on pedicel.
BLOOM - full frontal.
BLOOM - side-on
BLOOM - inflorescence, showing typical cluster, spray or single bloom.
HIPS - side-on showing eventual mature colour.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 3 posted 25 OCT 15 by Hobbygärtner
Thanks for the immediate answer Patricia,
I am happy that you had the answer already long before I asked. Will you make this public anywhere as a kind of guide or recommendation?
By the way this could be also categorized in the photo sections like: whole bush, open flowers, buds, hips etc. allthough it might seem complicated for those uploading them (eventually a task for administrators?).

I would like to thank you personally but I feel I should express my gratitude also for men on the mars and from betageuze, I am sure they could enjoy "help me find" even more now.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 3 posted 25 OCT 15 by Patricia Routley
It is a pleasure Hobbygartner. When you do upload a photo or two you will find you are asked to choose from the categories you mentioned. My reply was just cobbled together after reading your question and by putting it on HelpMeFind I have made it public (although how anyone will find it under R. Virginiana will be a problem). To a rosarian it is all just common sense really and there is no copyright on common sense
REPLY
© 2019 HelpMeFind.com