Is R. moschata hardy for you? It starts blooming later, but keeps going until frost. Perhaps that crossed with something cold-hardy, then selfed, would give something that would work. Along those lines is the R. moschata seedling ‘Reverend Seidel’, with ‘The Garland’ as its presumed pollen parent. It repeats, and has less Winter damage (for me) than R. moschata.
~Christopher
Oh, and maybe look at ‘Rose d’Orsay’ – HMF says “once-blooming” but from what I’ve heard from someone who has it, it either “repeats” or has a two-month-long bloom period. Rob Byrnes has it.
~Christopher
Mol Biol Rep 39(4): 3737-46.(Apr 2012)
The Expression Level of Rosa Terminal Flower 1 (RTFL1) Is Related With Recurrent Flowering in Roses
Li-Na Wang, Yun-Feng Liu, Yu-Man Zhang, Rong-Xiang Fang, Qing-Lin Liu
Abstract
We examined the relationship between the recurrent flowering character and the expression patterns of TERMINAL FLOWER 1 (TFL1) homologs in roses, using flower buds of Rosa multiflora, R. rugosa, R. chinensis, and six other rose species and nine rose cultivars. RTFL1 (Rosa TFL1) genes were amplified from rose genomic DNA using a combination of degenerate and gene-specific primers by thermal asymmetric interlaced-PCR and normal PCR, respectively. Their copy numbers in different species were determined by Southern blots. We used real-time PCR to analyze the expression patterns of RTFL1 genes at four developmental stages (pre-sprouting, young, mid-aged, and mature flower buds). Our results show that there are at least three RTFL1 homologs in roses; RTFL1a, RTFL1b, and RTFL1c. The sequences of the homologs were more similar among the same homolog in different species than among the different homologs in the same species. For RTFL1a, we detected two copies in R. multiflora, two copies in R. rugosa, and one copy in R. chinensis. For RTFL1c, we detected one copy in R. multiflora, two copies in R. rugosa, and three copies in R. chinensis. We detected only one copy of RTFL1b in R. chinensis. RTFL1c was expressed at high levels at all four flowering stages in R. multiflora and R. rugosa, which are non-recurrent flowering species, whereas it was barely detected in R. chinensis (a recurrent flowering species) at any stage. These results were further verified in six other non-recurrent flowering species and nine recurrent flowering cultivars. These results suggest that the recurrent flowering habit in roses results from lower expression of RTFL1c, which may be related to recurrent flowering character in roses.
Finding three versions of a given gene that can be present together sure offers insight into some of the puzzling cases. For instance, ‘Mme Norbert Levavasseur’ reblooms freely, even though its reported seed parent (Crimson Rambler) does not. Or not except in the alleged sport ‘Flower of Fairfield’. And Mme Norbert’s peculiar growth habit – some canes being short as expected for a Dwarf Polyantha, while others take off like ramblers before “changing their mind” – begin to make sense.
Please note that the Chinese authors specified that Rosa rugosa (the real one) is non-recurrent.
And a related report from Japan.
Journal of Experimental Botany, 64,(14): 4131-4141 (Nov 2013)
The regulation of seasonal flowering in the Rosaceae
Takeshi Kurokura, Naozumi Mimida, Nicholas H. Battey, Timo Hytönen
Abstract
Molecular mechanisms regulating the flowering process have been extensively studied in model annual plants; in perennials, however, understanding of the molecular mechanisms controlling flowering has just started to emerge. Here we review the current state of flowering research in perennial plants of the rose family (Rosaceae), which is one of the most economically important families of horticultural plants. Strawberry (Fragaria spp.), raspberry (Rubus spp.), rose (Rosa spp.), and apple (Malus spp.) are used to illustrate how photoperiod and temperature control seasonal flowering in rosaceous crops. We highlight recent molecular studies which have revealed homologues of TERMINAL FLOWER1 (TFL1) to be major regulators of both the juvenile to adult, and the vegetative to reproductive transitions in various rosaceous species. Additionally, recent advances in understanding of the regulation of TFL1 are discussed.
Here we see that “juvenile to adult” and “vegetative to reproductive” may be regulated separately.
Karl, thank you for all the information! Gives me a lot to chew on.
Christopher, thanks for the R. Moschata idea. A lot of results from it, especially Lemon. Zen got my attention. That would fit, not with this specific goal, but my more general one. Moschata may have a lot to offer for both.
This brings a question to mind for anyone working in this direction:
Do you prefer to start from scratch with a species?
Start with a hybrid that is in the direction you would like to go?
Or a combination of the two?
Also, what are some factors to consider when establishing an approach to this?
Thanks for any input!
Duane
I just thought of another possibility. Look at ‘Blue Mist’. It is a particular seedling from a batch of “Angel Wings Miniature Rose Seeds” that Ralph Moore grew to see if there was anything in them worth mining. I grew it, and it’s basically a dwarf reblooming Multiflora – if there ever was China in its ancestry, it’s very muted now. There is no red tint to new foliage, and aside from rebloom and flower appearance, it looks like pure Multiflora. You could get ‘Blue Mist’ itself, or just get some “Angel Wings Miniature Rose Seeds” and find something new. It blooms a few months after sowing.
https://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/104555/
Here are some sources:
~Christopher
The Angel Wing seeds are likely to vary from sources and country due to being a seed strain, the parent plants are going to be different for everyone harvesting seed so experiences will vary.
I grew out around 5grams/0.03oz towards the end of last year here, the vast majority were singles, some appear to be evergreen others are bare and wood has turned a reddish brown now that winter is here. They germinate quickly, flower quickly, set seed quickly…only issue really has been most (not all) of them also get spotty here. They are fun to grow out and there’s quite a bit of variety in most aspects of the plant, so I imagine there is value in them if people go looking and select appropriately for their conditions. Just be aware they probably have a lot of potential to be invasive given how much seed can come from one plant and how easily they germinate
I was reading further in The regulation of seasonal flowering in the Rosaceae, and found this:
Control of juvenility in rosaceous trees
Several studies have suggested that TFL1 and FT may control juvenility in rosaceous fruit trees. Consistent with findings in other perennials (Mohamed et al., 2010; R. Wang et al., 2011), the silencing of TFL1 in apple and pear causes a short juvenile phase, with flower initiation occurring in small in vitro plantlets in some cases (Kotoda et al., 2006; Flachowsky et al., 2012; Freiman et al., 2012). Similar phenotypes have also been observed in apples overexpressing FT (Kotoda et al., 2010). These results suggest that TFL1 and FT homologues, or the TFL1/FT ratio, have a role in the control of the juvenile to adult transition in rosaceous fruit trees. Also GA is probably involved in the control of juvenility, since dwarf apple trees have a shorter juvenile phase and exogenous GA application inhibits flowering and promotes vegetative growth in apple (Bangerth, 2009). MiR156 controls juvenility in Populus (Wang et al., 2011), and its role in the Rosaceae should be studied.
It would be useful, I think, to learn whether TFL1 and FT are altered in expression when plants are raised from immature seeds. Early in the 19th century, Van Mons was obliged to collect unripe hips of the roses he had been breeding, or lose them altogether. From this forced decision, he learned that the offspring were actually improved: flowering sooner, forming more compact plants and varying more than plants raised from ripe seeds. He went on to revolutionize the breeding of tree fruits, and some of his pears are still cultivated.
He noted that pear trees growing in the forest might need 10 to 12 years to begin blooming. But in just five generations he had trees flowering in four years from seed, and rarely in just three. Naturally, precocious flowering was associated with smaller trees. I should mention that the quality of the seedlings improved each generation.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/KKing/VanMons.html
Arthur (1890, 1895, 1899) and Goff (1890, 1892), included in the bibliography, demonstrated the same trend towards precocity and increased yield in tomatoes.
The relevant point is that it may not be necessary to seek a special gene to give first-year flowering.
There are some species and cultivars that bloom on new growth, without chilling or other encouragement. The lumpy “Rosa arkansana” complex is famous for this habit, and in some races (R. alcea Greene) are hardy to -60F. Far removed from these in hardiness, the very old “Rosa indica major” reportedly bloomed on new canes the same year. No report on whether they could be forced a second time, but it also (reportedly) bloomed all winter in mild climates.
Hybrid Perpetuals bloom similarly (some, at least) pushing up new canes with blooms, repeatedly.
It seems to me that crossing HPs of this kind with the Arkansana-types would be a better route to ultra hardy rebloomers for the Great White North and similar climates.
American Rose Annual, 22: 47-48 (1937)
The True Dwarf Prairie Rose
Percy H. Wright
Rosa suffulta Greene, otherwise R. pratincola Greene, grows wild over a large area in the American and Canadian plains. It is, perhaps, one of the most drought-withstanding rose species in the world, occurring even on the driest knolls. It is, therefore, naturally a dwarf rose, sometimes blooming when only two to three inches high. The flowers and seed-hips, however, are not dwarf, but rather larger than those of some of the bush species. I have never observed it over a foot high, even on moist lands.
[Note: Greene described Rosa suffulta as native to the southern Rocky Mountains, nowhere near Wright’s home. The name “pratincola” had already been used for a European species, so Greene renamed the American plant Rosa heliophila.]
In my district, at Wilkie, Saskatchewan, about 250 miles north of the international boundary, it is the only rose growing in the open. As winter temperatures here sometimes sink to -60° Fahr., even without snow-covering, the local strain of it is of the utmost hardiness. R. blanda occurs in the ravines in the same area; on cool, northerly slopes, we find R. acicularis.
The flower of this dwarf denizen of the cold prairies varies from deep pink to white, with occasionally a cream tint in the center. Marvel of marvels, this humblest of roses is everblooming! It will normally bloom and bear seed after the infestation of the snout-beetle is over, and so severe is that pest in dry years that sometimes such late blooms will be the only ones to be spared. I have seen this rose in bloom even at the doors of winter, on roadsides, or elsewhere where cultivation had destroyed the early growth. The everblooming habit of this species is surely evidence that the rose genus is not limited but that the everblooming habit is deeply ingrained in it.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/Wright/Wright_suffulta2.html
New Phytol. 37: 72-81. 1938
PHYLOGENY AND POLYPLOIDY IN ROSA By EILEEN W. ERLANSON, D.Sc.
R. arkansana is semi-herbaceous and has a dwarf ecotype R. alcea Greene (Erlanson, 1934) which can withstand 60° below zero Fahrenheit in Canada (Wright, 1937). They are all plants of upland habitats as contrasted with the stream-bank and swamp habitats of the more primitive diploid and hexaploid species. The tetraploids come into flower after the related diploid species and usually continue to produce flowers in terminal corymbs on the season’s turions throughout the season. R. acicularis, R. blanda, R. nutkana and R. Woodsii have a strictly limited flowering period of about 2 weeks.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/Erlanson/ErlansonPhylogeny1938.html
Gardening Illustrated and Rural and Suburban Home, Volume 6: 244 (May 31, 1884)
The China Rose (Rosa Indica) is a strong growing, climbing Rose, with glossy foliage and large bright pink flowers, almost scentless, which open quickly, and fall to pieces as soon as opened; the wood will not stand frost, but if cut down in the autumn it will make rods 4 to 6 feet high in early summer, which flower freely. Its blooming season is too short to make it worth growing. — J.D.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/Rose_Pictures/I/RedouteIndicaMajor.html
House & Garden 55: 90-91, 194, 206, 208 (June 1929)
THE RENAISSANCE OF THE HYBRID PERPETUAL
J. H. NICOLAS
Last summer it was my good fortune to visit Monsieur Cochet, the fifth generation of the great Cochet dynasty of Rose hybridizers and scientists (Cochet the First helped Empress Josephine in establishing her historical Roserie at Malmaison) at his estate of Coubert, about thirty-five miles west of Paris. He took me around to see great fields of Roses grown for the cut flower market of Paris. In that immediate vicinity are over 750 acres owned by 160 independent owners with a selling organization. They grow Hybrid Perpetuals only, and on August 3rd they were still cutting large quantities of Roses as beautiful and perfect as any grown here under glass — and this had been going on daily since the middle of May.
Walking through those fields, I was surprised to see what I thought to be young maidens (first year growth from buds inserted the previous summer). When I asked one of the owners whether these were new plants, he said to my amazement, “This field was planted by my grandfather thirty years ago and but very few plants had to be replaced.” Calling one of the working men, he had him dig around a plant and then I saw a stump several inches in diameter! He explained that each year, in the middle of March, the plants are “mowed” close to the ground; they then grow many new stems three or more feet long ending with splendid flowers; the stems, two eyes below the cuts again sending flower-bearing long stems. I commented on the absence of those long sterile suckers we generally see on Hybrid Perpetuals in midsummer, and my host replied, “The plants are kept too busy blooming to waste their energy on suckers”.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/NicolasHPs1929.html
Years ago, Percy Wright did some experimenting with Rosa foliolosa. I was surprised that this southern species even survived in the Great White North. But you never know until you try.
I think it was Erlanson who commented that R. foliolosa looked rather like a smaller R. palustris. Maybe the reblooming Palustris is expressing what Foliolosa does. Oh, and Erlanson did comment that R. californica, under favorable conditions, can be persuaded to do the reblooming trick … just not as dependably as R. arkansana and R. foliolosa.
It seems a little too obvious, but has anyone tried crossing R. foliolosa with one of the R. arkansana clan, especially the R. alcea Greene that Wright used?
Another note: Recently I was recalling what I read (many years ago) about the Autumn Cherry, Prunus subhirtella autumnalis. I did a bit of googling and quickly learned that this is not a species at all. Rather, it is derived from some very old hybrid between two Japanese species … at least one of which is native to the mountains.
This got me thinking about a paper Tom Silvers wrote about Irises: Rebloom’s Alpine Connections. Again with the hybrids of mountain species somehow giving rise to rebloomers at lower altitudes.
What of rosa spinossisima? Where does that rebloom at the end of the summer comes from?
I wonder where Blush Noisette got its rebloom from… from Old blush or from moschata. Assuming rosa moschata has the KSN_wild, and knowing Old Blush is 1x KSN_null and 1x KSN_copia would BLush Noisette then have
I think it’s a mistake to assume that Rosa moschata has KSN_wild. ‘Champneys’ Pink Cluster’ (which was the original cross between R. moschata and R. chinensis ‘Old Blush’; it has been shown that ‘Blush Noisette’, which was a seedling of CPC, had some unidentified other rose as its pollen parent) got its repeat flowering nature from both parents.
I’ve never seen repeat bloom on any selections of pure R. spinosissima in this part of the world. Maybe there are other forms available that do have some ability to repeat, or possibly it’s a temperature/weather-controlled effect. That being said, even though ‘Harison’s Yellow’ does not repeat (that I have ever seen) and its presumed parents also do not, I’ve gotten everblooming seedlings from crosses between it (as pollen parent) and repeat-blooming roses. There are also repeat-blooming hybrids of ‘Persian Yellow’. There may be something slightly different going on with certain members of that group.
Stefan
I wonder… in the paper A high-quality genome sequence of Rosa chinensis to elucidate ornamental traits | Nature Plants table 2 says that R. Moschata is “recurrent blooming”. It does not say “continuous flowering”. That is why I wonder if moschata has KSN_wild or KSN_something_else
I thought blush noisette was a self from CPC, but if this is not the case, it complicates things…
I know that Above and Beyond has Virginiana and Laxa (not Arkansas, as you mentioned Karl) but it caused me to wonder what it would be like to cross it with a Hybrid Perpetual. I realize it isn’t avoiding china (due to lemon fluff). I also realize it would probably not be repeat blooming? But I wonder what you would get? Especially if choosing a Hybrid Perpetual rated for a zone 4.
Duane
If R. moschata truly did have two copies [note, prior to edit I had said “one copy,” but then I read their supplementary data] of RoKSN_WT as the linked study implies, then there would have to be something else that is permitting its nearly continuous flowering (assuming their R. moschata is correctly identified–historical misidentications of that species have been well-documented, and Loubert sells a variety of plants under that species name, only some of which are listed as being remontant). True R. moschata is actually nearly as continuous-flowering as most China and tea roses overall, at least here, where summers are long and hot–it just starts a bit later, and its architecture is different. ‘Champneys’ Pink Cluster’, the direct hybrid between R. chinensis ‘Old Blush’ and R. moschata, and parent of ‘Blush Noisette’, is also continuous-flowering.
I wish I understood the interactions between the genes in the flowering pathway better… I get confused easily and have to review the basics again when I try to keep straight in my mind the role of RoKSN (aka TFL1), FD, Leafy, etc. Anyways, in 2017 at the rose meetings in Anger Dr. Fabrice Foucher and his team reported that the wild type RoKSN has a guanine at the 181st position in the gene, but in some of these repeat bloomers it is replaced with an adenine. He calls the allele RoKSN A181 versus RoKSN G181 to distinguish it from the wild type. These roses with the A at position 181 include R. moschata, R. fedstchenkoana, the R. rugosa hybrids he looked at, and ‘Stanwell Perpetual’. I wish they reported all the cultivars they surveyed to know all the rugosas they looked at. They report rose cultivars in Europe over the past couple centuries and document the alleles they found and in which ratios at about 25 year increments. The copia allele becomes more prominent from R. chinensis in the cultivars as time goes by is the take home message. The dad of Above and Beyond has some reliable summer/fall repeat and it a bit more pronounced than the R. laxa parent. I wonder with R. laxa so closely allied to R. feds. if Above and Beyond can repeat some due to RoKSN A181 mixed in with the other alleles. There are a lot of A&B seedlings with rebloomers that are basically one time bloomers, so I wonder if the likely true wild type allele (RoKSN G181) from R. virginiana is still there in A&B and as it segregates away maybe from RoKSN G181 it can prevent rebloom more strongly with just the RoKSN copia allele???
As it grows in San Jose, CA, Rosa moschata blooms from about mid-April through October. Maybe later, but I have a pic from October so that is definite.
The plant growing there as ‘Champneys’ Pink Cluster’ reblooms as well as the (alleged) ‘Blush Noisette’. It is apparent that the rebloom of the China parent does not conflict with that of Moschata. And it is worth noting that ‘Marechal Niel’ (Noisette), crossed with Teas, can give Teas. This suggests that ‘Marechal Niel’ is heterozygous for Climbing + Reblooming (Moschata trait) and Dwarf + Everblooming (every shoot ends in an inflorescence; China trait).
Just a bit of trivia. The Rosa moschata we now have does not match the descriptions of the Muck Rose from the 16th through the 18th centuries.
Gerard (1597): “… long leaves, smooth and shining, made up of leaves set upon a middle rib, like the other Roses.”
Parkinson (1629): "… having small darke greene leaves on them, not much bigger then the leaves of Eglantine: "
Hanmer (1659): “… the leaves are long and shining greene.”
Rea (1665): “… dark green shining leaves”
Mortimer (1708): “dark green shining Leaves”
Miller (1724): “… shining dark green Leaves”
Herrmann (1762): “Leaves … dark-green, bright, smooth”
It might help to start by crossing Rosa moschata with a close relative (same section) such as the much hardier R. maximowicziana Jackii from Korea. If both the hardiness and the rebloom could be brought together …
It seems you are right about that. According to the paper Selection of blooming seasonality in rose, Rosa moschata as well as Rosa rugosa problably has KSN_181, not KSN_wild, but both alleles only differ in a very small way from each other.
David, thanks, that is great to know–maybe the study that Dane mentioned above simply couldn’t distinguish between the RoKSN A181 and G181 alleles, then? Otherwise, they may not have used a correctly identified R. moschata. If they vouchered and photographed the plant they used, it would be easier to say more.
“Musk rose” has long been applied to species other than Rosa moschata of Herrmann. The “musk rose” of Shakespeare is widely thought to have been R. arvensis; R. sempervirens was also associated, as Bauhin’s 1623 name of Rosa moschata sempervirens makes clear. The “dark and shining” leaf descriptions would likely refer to the latter species. And, when the R. moschata that we know was largely supplanted in England by R. brunonii, leading to the incorrect assumption that R. moschata was a once-blooming species, it took Graham Thomas’ careful sleuthing to rediscover the true species and then reintroduce it into cultivation there from a single plant. That was not quite the situation in the United States, although the rose had become rather obscure over time, probably being found more often in old southern cemeteries than in gardens until interest was somewhat reignited.
To introduce repeat bloom into more cold-hardy diploid Synstylae species, there are hardier options available to us today than R. moschata, as much as I revere the species, both as a garden plant and for its incredible contribution to rose hybrids throughout history.
Stefan
I must have jumped the track when I made the above list. I copied Grand Perpetual twice, but left off:
Pope’s Cluster Autumnal [Possibly a Noisette]
Portland
Portlandica grandiflora
Quatre Saison rectifié
New Perpetual
Rose Poestana