Chicago Peace pollen

General Discussion
1

I used Chicago Peace pollen for a cross that proved hardy and responded well to rooting. Knowing that Chicago Peace is a SPORT, does it count as a pollen parent, or would Peace be the parent? I am considering registering this one.

2 Likes
2

I may be off, but here is my two cents. Chicago Peace is a different rose, with a different genetic capability from Peace. I don’t think that it matters that it is different due to a mutation versus sexual propagation. If it were me, I would list Chicago Peace as the pollen parent and not Peace.

4 Likes
3

Yes indeed, Heather. Sports are distinct varieties from the original and using a sport as a parent-plant IS producing a unique offspring from recombining the genes present, regardless of whether the mutation goes “deeper than the skin” or not. ‘Chicago Peace’ has been used numerous times, and may have unique qualities to pass down…
We don’t know what we don’t know. Since roses sport with fair frequency, it is entirely possible to grow a “technically-mutant” plant and never know it, if none of the visible characteristics are changed by the alterations to the code.
#ThingsThatKeepMeAwakeAtNight

4 Likes
4

Thanks, friends! I believe Chicago Peace gave extra hardiness to this one: two weeks after the last zero Fahrenheit, new green leaves were already thriving. (Northern Colorado)

3 Likes
5

That depends on whether Chicago Peace is a chimera, and if yes, consider whether its L2 is mutated.

3 Likes
6

Hi Heather.
Yes, it is correct to list the parent under its registered/official name, whether it’s a sport or otherwise. We do this for the sake of providing accurate pedigree data.
However, there’s no way of knowing if the mutation includes the tissue that forms the reproductive parts, as Mingwei has hinted at. If the reproductive tissues of the rose are not part of the mutation (a Chimera), then the rose behaves reproductively the same as the variety it sported from. So, you have no way of knowing for certain if your Chicago Peace behaves any differently as a parent than Peace, from which it originated. However, when submitting a rose to the Registrar for naming, you are still expected to list the parents under their registered names.
I hope I didn’t just make that even more confusing than it already was!

7 Likes
7

I believe the issue of sports only comes into play when trying to get a plant patent. There was a question if a sport belongs to the originator of the rose.

8

Sports are certainly not owned by the sport parent’s originator under the terms of a standard U.S. plant patent (the story is quite different when it comes to utility patents). In fact, that would be a rather silly thing to try to justify since the first U.S. plant patent was awarded to a sport of another (albeit necessarily unpatented) rose. In any case, many folks writing patents seem to take to calling their “invention” a discovered “whole-plant mutation,” often of an “unknown variety,” which is definitely something that happens in nature [sarcasm]. Voila, problem solved!

Stefan

3 Likes