HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
Initial post
2 days ago by
 Ericchn
|
Silver Medal Kortrijk 2025
inagro.be/sites/default/files/media/files/2025-06/Internationale%20rozenkeuring%20samengevoegd.pdf
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Is this the same rose as KO13/3921-01?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 4 posted
yesterday by
Ericchn
Reply
#3 of 4 posted
today by
jedmar
|
Thank you! Is 'Spicy' perhaps a sister seedling of 'Zauberhaft'?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 4 posted
today by
Ericchn
|
I don’t think so as Spicy’s parental combination is coded as 3920, and Zauberhaft’s is 3921, they should be half siblings who share the same mother or father.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
1 JUL 13 by
goncmg
|
Immeasurably important rose considering not only that it begat Queen Elizabeth lines (and appears in many 60's-70's miniatures along with R. Wichuriana), but also the clear vermillion color, very unique for 1945. Foliage is lovely: bright and glossy, the plant often produces huge trusses of bloom and the scent is notable for me, rather spicey. Downside is the addiction to blackspot. Tantau was known for not disclosing a lot of his breeding parentages and I have always wondered if the cross that resulted in Floradora was not more complex, Baby Chateau x R. Roxburghii SEEDLING or something. Seems very odd that with that father as listed the plant would look so modern, everything about it, and that there wouldn't have been some non-recurrent grandchildren (Queen E's generation).....??? Does anyone have any opinions on this or any information?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 11 posted
2 JUL 13 by
Patricia Routley
|
I too have been a bit interested in 'Floradora' but it has never come my way. I've spent an hour or so gathering reference page numbers for both 'Floradora' and 'Floradora Cl.' in case I ever get the impetus or need to look closer at the rose.
In the 1950 'Australian Rose Annual', C. H. Isaac, Victoria. said the parentage of 'Floradora' was 'Baby Chateau) (Hyb Poly) x Rosa Multibracteata (Species). So far it was the only mention of a parentage I've seen, but my search has only been a perfunctory one.
Patricia
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 11 posted
27 OCT 15 by
Michael Garhart
|
If I had to guess, I would hypothesize that the Rosa roxbughii pollen was not truly accepted, and that it prompted the female parts of 'Baby Chateau' to double itself into fertile seed. I have used a relative of R. roxburghii on 'Belle Epoque', which was pollinated between rains, removed of any male parts prior to pollen release, and then covered. The likelihood of impurity was really low, and the likelihood of an impure seed germinating was even lower. The only surviving seedling came out as a near clone of 'Belle Epoque', except strong in color, completely seed sterile, and extremely thin. It was a very weird occurrence. Vigor was oddly strong.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 11 posted
27 OCT 15 by
goncmg
|
Really interesting, Michael! Looking at Floradora I think you may have nailed it!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 11 posted
1 FEB 18 by
CybeRose
|
Michael,
Another possibility is that Floradora and its siblings are partial hybrids. Pollination occurs in the usual way, but the paternal chromosomes are mostly eliminated. This phenomenon has been observed in other genera, such as Helianthus, Solanum, etc.
Wulff (1954) wrote: "There is another remarkable fact to note. Without going into details I may state here that the three roses 'Floradora', 'Käthe Duvigneau', and 'Cinnabar', as well as the hybrid 46534, did not show any traces of the male parent Rosa Roxburghii in their morphology. The first three roses are true hybrid polyanthas, the latter is a true hybrid tea, indicating thus that the genes which are responsible for the respective characters of growth habit and for many characters of shape and size of flowers, fruits, leaves and spines are dominant to the allelic genes of R. Roxburghii. Only anatomical studies revealed a certain similarity and relationship to the latter species."
It would have been helpful if he had given us more information about those anatomical studies.
Karl
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 11 posted
2 FEB 18 by
Michael Garhart
|
Hi, Karl,
Interesting. You're right. That just begs for more information, with questions to follow.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 11 posted
3 FEB 18 by
CybeRose
|
Michael,
I have a list of possible examples of partial hybridization ... some old, some new ... that are suggestive at least.
If you are interested in the subject.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Heredity/King/ExceptionalCrosses.html
Karl
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#7 of 11 posted
3 FEB 18 by
Michael Garhart
|
Thank you!!!
I bookmarked them for nighttime hours.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 11 posted
6 APR 19 by
Michael Garhart
|
link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s001220100746
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 11 posted
3 SEP 21 by
Plazbo
|
I agree with the more info about those anatomical studies would have been nice. I've not found the thorns to be particularly recessive with my Baby Faurax x R. Roxburghii Normalis seedlings. Granted they are still quite young and may change but they look more rox hybrid (growth shape) than Baby Faurax. Will be interesting to see what happens with the flowering and hips when they mature enough. Flakey bark (not just browning/woody like in this picture attached) seems to be appearing on some of them around the base where they are thickest (all still very thin wood, small plants) but I may be jumping the gun on that.
I can't put too much focus on the leaflets, while BF typically has 5-7 and the seedlings 9-11, 9 isn't out of the typical realm for multiflora....may increase with maturity, will find out sooner or later.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#10 of 11 posted
today by
HubertG
|
I found the following early reference giving the multibracteata pedigree in the 'American Nurseryman' of March 1, 1943, page 35.
"Rose Registrations. [...] Floradora. Hybrid polyantha. A seedling, cross of Baby Chateau x multibracteata, originated by Mathias Tantau, Ueterson, Germany, and to be introduced by the Conard-Pyle Co. in 1943. Plant described as bushy, upright, with abundant large, leathery foliage, vigorous and hardy. Cupped blooms two and one-half to two and three-fourths inches across, with fifty to fifty-five petals of red. Slight spicy fragrance. Moderate growth. Blooms singly and several together, continuously."
The American Rose Magazine of Jan-Feb 1943 on page 35 records that it won a Certificate of Merit in the A.R.S. Test Garden Awards for 1942, with no mention of pedigree other than its classification as a Hybrid Polyantha.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#11 of 11 posted
today by
jedmar
|
Reference and award added, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
today by
Bug_girl
|
The fragrance is really lovely!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
today by
Hamanasu
|
This rose has been in constant production for a month. We’ve been having unusually warm temperatures by British standards, so that may be the reason, but I’m impressed, much more so that, judging by the canes it’s been producing, with many buds per stem, the best is yet to come. I have been puzzling over how to describe the scent, which is sweet, deep, and vaguely fermented in the best possible way, without any tart notes at all. Charles Quest Ritson describes it as fruity and musky, but I don’t get the fruity notes and am not sure I have yet figured out what the musk scent exactly is (though I occasionally use the word myself to describe scents similar to Golden Jubilee’s!)... I think I finally found a way to pin down the fragrance of this rose: years ago I grew, for a single season, philadelphus delavayi melanocalyx, or it may have been p. purpurascens (closely allied). I had to get rid of it because it grew far too fast and too large for my patio. Golden Jubilee’s scent, though less intense, shares the same quality as the distinctive fragrance of this p. delavayi/purpurascens (which, by the by, smells nothing like other mock oranges)
|
REPLY
|
|
|
