Here is a picture of seeds that germinated from a Bella Nitida x R. woodsii ‘Kimberley’ cross that I will be transplanting today. So far I’m seeing leaves that, at this stage, appear less rugose than mom. These should be very hardy and disease resistant seedlings. This combines R. rugosa, R. nitida and R. woodsii.
From HMF regarding R.woodsii ‘Kimberly’:
Introduced 1998. A selection of Wood’s rose from the wild near Kimberley, BC, by W. Nicholls, UBC Botanical Garden. This vigorous clone exhibits compact growth with glaucous leaves, red
petioles and young stems, suckering and superior flowering compared with typical forms.
Very nice! Obviously the rugosa must be coming from Bella Nitida. What’s the parentage of Bella Nitida? It’s not on HMF, and I haven’t seen it elsewhere.
I try to make sure that the vermiculite is only damp, not soggy wet. I have very little damp off in the vermiculite but have some when the seedlings are transplanted to potting soil. Not a lot but some.
Not entirely off topic, “E.R.” [presumably Eduard Regel] discussing the forms of Rosa rugosa in Gartenflora 30: 198 (1881) wrote:
Form 5. > nitens > endlich hat dicht bestachelte kahle Zweige und schmälere länglich-elliptische, oberhalb etwas glänzende Blatter (> R. kamtschatica > β. > nitens > Lindl. Bot. reg. tab. 824), ist aber nicht mit der nahe stehenden > R. nitida > Willd. aus Nordamerika zu verwechseln, die sich durch lanzettliche spitze, oberhalb stark glänzende Blätter unterscheidet, vielleicht aber nur die Form Nordamerika’s von > R. rugosa > ist. Jahrg.30 (1881) - Gartenflora - Biodiversity Heritage Library
[Form 5. > nitens> , finally, has densely populated bald twigs and narrow oblong elliptical leaves (> R. kamtschatica> , β. > nitens > Lindl. Bot. Reg., Tab., 824), but is not associated with > R. nitida > Willd. from North America, which is distinguished by lanceolate leaves, which are strongly glossy above, but is perhaps only the North American form of > R. rugosa> .]