|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
|
Nice to have a red climber that does well in SF.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
8 days ago by
 SDShine
|
I'm in the Oakland hills where we get quite a bit of fog at night that settles here. I've got a spot that gets about 6 hrs sun in the AM, and shade in the PM. Based on your experience, do you think Florentina would do well? Thanks so much.
|
REPLY
|
|
Hi!
Yes it should do just fine. No more blackspot than any other healthy roses in our climate.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
yesterday by
SDShine
|
Thank you for your reply! One more question: how’s repeat blooming for you? The description here says occasional repeat later in the summer but bloom frequency is rated ‘excellent’ by reviewers… Thanks again!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
The discoverer's surname is Wathen, not Walthen.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Corrected, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Is this plant very disease resistance or not?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
28 APR 17 by
Jay-Jay
|
When You look at the member ratings for this rose, two members consider this rose excellent, as for disease resistance.
I grow Himmelsauge (in commerce as) and people say it IS Russelliana and that rose is very healthy too.
See "Reviews and Comments" at: http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/l.php?l=2.27983&tab=1
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
yesterday by
Gdisaz10
-
-
|
A United States patent application for Wekmeymo, #11/820,136, in the name of Lawrence E. Meyer and assigned to Weeks, was filed 6/18/2007. It was published 12/18/2008, as US Patent Publication 2008/0313779-P1. The application was initially rejected based on some easily correctable formalities. However, Weeks chose not to pursue the application and abandoned it.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Patent application and further info added, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
|
There is no indication that Weeks abandoned the application due to registration of a similar rose. I originally thought this might be the case, but Yoyo was not cited in the prosecution history by either the applicant or the patent examiner. When they apply for a patent, applicants are required to cite the closest prior art of which they are aware, so they probably were not even aware of its existence. A more likely reason is that there was limited commercial potential for a miniature rose similar to Gizmo.
|
REPLY
|
|
