Since Caninae meiosis is a mess to me, can anyone clarify the ploidy of the ‘Carmenetta’?
Does anyone have any experience with it? I’d like to know both of fertility, general health, and cultivation requirements. (I’m in a hot and sometimes muggy climate now.)
Thanks
HMF page shows it was counted tetraploid: 4N. As rugosa pollen is 1N the other 3N are from glauca. Just normal with a 4N caninae that has1N pollen and 3N ovules.
With a caninae cytoplasmm and full maternal gene set on may expect disturbed meiosis and reduced female fertility that is hip set plus seed germination.
In many instances pollen was and is used successfully. ATM a popular parent among us amateur hybridizers.
Thank you, Pierre. I’m not sure why I didn’t see that on HMF.
Do you have any experience with her? My region of Central Texas is certainly a little more extreme than the Riviera, and I don’t know if such a cold-hardy, dark-leaved hybrid would tolerate our extreme heat and potential for high humidity. I also don’t know if one should attempt crosses with diploids or tetraploids given her caninae ancestry.
Are you saying that the pollen frequently passes for diploid? My guess is that the subsequent generation then has very little glauca attributes.
Merci!
IMO Carmenetta as well as glauca/rubrifolia are easy and adaptable. At least here Z9 generally but not allways tempered by the sea. We have both quite hot and quite wet spells eventually together.
glauca/rubrifolia is native from close by mountains that have a lot of climatic contrasts.
Mature foliage is not so dark and just as blue as it is red, the former being sun reflecting.
I do use Carmenetta and rubrifolia in pollen mixes on presumed diploids and some last year seedlings definitely show this influence.
For red and/or blue foliage maximum or different expression some back or sib crosses will do it.
I do not know C pollen ploidy.
Interspecific interploidy crosses often were shown to have mixed ploidies including higher ones.
That’s what I know.
Thanks Pierre.
I do like the deeper, cooler foliage colors.
It could be fun to use with R. fedtschenkoana, or to use an F1 of Carmentetta with an F1 of Fedt. in hopes of getting a rebloomer.
I wonder how many generations would be required to get repeat from Glauca and Fedtschenkoana? I’ve already gotten repeat with silvery foliage in the first generation. Or, at least one long summer flowering.
The Repeat Flowering Orangeade X Fedtschenkoana flowers all spring through fall. [flickr_photo src=http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7195/6908165185_fa4c18fd1f.jpg nsid=67995840@N04 id=6908165185]repeat oade fed (2)[/flickr_photo] More images of the foliage color may be seen on HMF here. Repeat Oadefed new growth Mature foliage.
There is one of the original Dottie Louise X Fedtschenkoana hybrids which spasms flowers most of the summer. Never in the mass of bloom the Repeat Orangeade X Fedtschenkoana will, but definitely more than just one spring or summer flowering. A number of things about this seedling remind me of Gloire des Rosomanes. [flickr_photo src=http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7210/6908178093_beb48f24a4.jpg nsid=67995840@N04 id=6908178093]repeat dlfed (2)[/flickr_photo] The plant is rather open, but will hopefully become more dense with its feet in the ground. [flickr_photo src=http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7064/6908178457_106d95069d.jpg nsid=67995840@N04 id=6908178457]repeat dlfed (3)[/flickr_photo] More of it may be seen on its HMF page here. DLFED 4 Its foliage is quite a bit more refined, though still possesses much of the blue and silver tones from Fedtschenkoana, just “polished” by the Basye’s Legacy genes.
I’d always wanted the marvelous bloom of Basye’s Purple on Fedtschenkoana’s foliage. They hate each other, as evidenced by their complete lack of cooperation in all the attempts I made to cross them. The closest anyone has come to accomplishing that goal is Paul Barden’s Once Flowering Orangeade X Fedtschenkoana crossed with Midnight Blue. 54-08-01
It’s been very interesting noting the heavier the bloom and greater the proclivity to rebloom, the less likely the plant is to sucker. DLFED 4 has not suckered, while its once flowering siblings sucker nearly as densely as Fedtschenkoana itself. Cuttings and suckers of the DLFED series as well as the Orangeade X Fedtschenkoana seedlings are available for the cost of postage. Just let me know.
The OADEFED is very promising, Kim. I don’t know how well she can root from cuttings, but I’m keeping fingers crossed!
Anyone have any sense for how many generations from a caninae species one has to go before the ploidy/meiosis issues are stabilized?
Phil I think the ploidy issue with Caninae offspring depends on whether it was a seed parent or pollinator, with their unusual make up (4+1, 4+2 and 5+1). When using R. Alba L. with its (4+2) and its septet configuration, I reckon by F1. Here is a pic of a seedling cross done a few years back of (Sympathie X Alba Maxima) growth is good and repeats, although not heavily, but I am happy with it.
[attachment 363 19E78F.jpg]
Just throwing this out there. I have “Skinner’s Red Leaf Perpetual” that has runners if anyone would find it useful to work with some of the Fedtschenkoana hybrids. SRLP is reported to possibly be a Carmenetta hybrid with repeat bloom. Mine has yet to repeat bloom. If anyone is interested let me know.
Rob, I would certainly be interested, though I can’t imagine how that puppy will fare in the TX heat.
I might be able to do a trade. You may not be as pressed as I am here to plant – our temps are rising fast and already have hit mid 80’s a couple times – and so if you could wait a little, I should have various rooted cuttings underway. ( I will need to confirm with ‘owners’ that some unreleased roses are OK to share.)
Feel free to send a PM if you are interested. (No, not powdery mildew…)
A 1937 reference on HMF states that glauca has 2n pollen which would not make it Caninae meiosis. Is this definately wrong?
The phylogenetic trees published here: http://www.amjbot.org/content/95/3/353.full.pdf state that glauca is in the section Rubrifoleae. Is this a subset of Caninae?
Sitting in a jar here now are some glauca anthers… is the pollen from it going to be 2n or n? I’m trying to match up ploidies as much as possible this season.
Hi Simon
Yes Rubrifolia is a Caninae and as its pollen hybrids with other diploids are fertile one can suppose pollen is n. At least my experience.
How quickly does Caninae meiosis break down in hybrids? If I put a diploid species onto glauca and it has 3n ovules and 1n pollen, I would expect tetraploid offspring (I did glauca x wichurana this afternoon to try and make a tetraploid species cross with wichurana). If any seedlings eventuate is it likely the Caninae 3:1 (ovules:pollen) meiosis will break down by adding Synstylae to it to make a more conventional meiosis resulting in 2n gametes? This is why I did it but I don’t recall people on here talking about how persistant Caninae meiosis is in hybrids.
Putting a diploid species onto a caninae I fear you should expect little change. With a caninae cytoplasm expected tetraploid offspring you will get will be but little modified caninae as it is this way that the evolutionnary latter coming caninae are supposed to diversify and adapt to new environments. This way caninae meiosis is not supposed to break down. If it was possible colonisation of other roses sp territory by caninae is not supposed to be possible.
Ploidy in the caninae is special. Nyblom and others discussed and documented this in some papers I reviewed in the RHA newsletter several years ago. It looks like only one set of 7 is active in the maternal line, so far as being able to pair with and recombine with the paternal input. The rest of the sets may contribute a lot in the growth of the plant, such as extra copies of proteins, but I don’t think there is clear documentation of that. So Pierre is correct that putting something onto Caninae is trying to change course of one of the great sailing ships using an oar while the rudder is pretty well fixed on which direction it will go. And if there should be recombination, your input will get diluted rapidly. So I think the only viable (excuse pun) option is to use pollen of caninae on others. I don’t think it is established where on the chromosomes the trait of caninae meiosis is located, whether on the active or inactive sets. So I don’t think we can predict how quickly it could break down.
I’ve been told that this paper is a good survey of the peculiarities of caninae. I’ve read it twenty or thirty times and I’m starting to understand it so you all shouldn’t have a problem with it either.
Can anybody tell me what ‘reticulation’ is?
Ok, that makes sense. So, if one set of seven is involved in the maternal line that means, in terms of glauca, the remaining three sets of seven are utilised to make the paternal line and if one of those three sets of seven were from wichurana (an allopolyploid?) then it it would be no different really to doing a cross directly with wichurana. Still, it might make for an interesting F1.
If this pattern of meiosis was on the sets of seven not utilised in the maternal line, wouldn’t that mean it is on the other paternal sets which would mean the pattern would be passed on to hybrids where it was used as pollen? There is still a reference on HMF that states glauca produces 2n gametes. We know that sometimes triploids produce some 2n pollen and some n pollen. Might it therefore be possible that glauca could produce both n, 2n, and even 3n pollen on occassions that may have resulted in someone concluding it was making 2n gametes?
One challenge I have had with putting pollen of Caninae section species on diploid or polyploid roses of other backgrounds is that at least for me the crosses have rarely took, and when they have the seedlings were confused and eventually died. There are some exceptions of course. I have an op seedling of R. setigera that seems to potentially have R. rubiginosa as a male parent. I’ll have to do some more characterization of it. I want to get a cutting going and count its chromosomes. I know its female parent and one of two neighboring potential males. I might be able to get some RAPD markers working at some point to do a paternity test.
I have some roses I enjoy that are crosses of R. pomifera x polyanthas and also (R. rubiginosa x R. pomifera) x a 4x shrub rose. My strategy has kind of leaned towards if I live long enough and can raise enough generations maybe I can keep using these as female parents with other males in order to recover repeat bloom and also hopefully keep the fragrant foliage of R. rubiginosa or R. pomifera.
We have R. alba as a nice model of modified Caninae meiosis. It is a cross supposedly of a 5x Caninae. and a 4x likely R. gallica or closly allied relative. It has 6 sets of chromosomes and the pollen has 2 sets and female 4. Maybe the two sets of R. gallica chromosomes preferentially pair and another Caninae set fills in for two sets of Caninae to pair. I have gotten 4x progeny from 4x female shrubs x 6x Albas.
It would be nice to more readily get Caninae section members to work as males with a greater diversity of females. I would love to successfully cross them onto polyanthas and then more readily recover reblooming hybrids.
New questions… thanks for the article, Don. I’m part-way through reading it and am finding it a really good read as well as very informative. A few related questions popped into my head, all relating to glauca, whilst reading it (which may be answered as I keep reading):
How much segregation is there BEWTEEN the different sets of chromosomes? Do they segregate randomly or is independent segregation only evident within the paternal line whilst the maternal line is kept seperate? If so, if a tetraploid was made (using glauca again) that contained three sets from glauca and one set from wichurana, during segregation of chromosomes in the first stage of meiosis, wouldn’t at least some of the wichurana genes make it into the maternal line and, similarly, if the paternal chromosomes undergo independent segregation and one set of seven was from wichurana, would it not be reasonable to expect that the glauca and wichurana chromosomes would be reshuffled and mixed together? I guess I’m making a pretty large assumption that there is homogeny between the chromosomes too.
Täckholm discovered that dog roses
had »invented« a unique meiotic system
to overcome the genetic burden
of five chromosome sets(11). Only two
chromosome sets pair during meiosis,
while three sets remain univalent and
do not interact in meiosis. The fate of
these univalent chromosome pairs is
different during gamete formation. In
the pollen grain, only the pairing set
is kept, whereas the univalent sets
seem to be eliminated. In the egg cell,
one of the bivalent sets and all univalent
sets are saved.
Wait… now I’m confused… none of what I thought (above) is right… I need to try and understand this bit.
