Until quite recently I thought HMF stated that ‘Complicata’ was a R. gallica x R. canina (or closely related species from section ‘Caninae’). I’ve noticed it’s been updated to R. gallica x R. glauca complicata.
I know old genetic research had concluded it to be R. gallica x R. canina. Someone up to speed with these (recent?) updates. New genetic research maybe?
I’m using Complicata in some of my crossings. I find it to be an interesting rose with a nice and healthy habit. Nice green leaves also and few prickles. Sets hips readily also. So I just wondered if anyone had some story about this ancestry
On the references tab, Museo Giardino della Rosa Antica, has the info. Doesnt seem to be glauca in the sense of what we call glauca today and there was a potential mix up as the current complicata plant doesn’t match early descriptions.
In my head I hadn’t stored R. glauca as being one of the Caninae section, but it appears it does. I really should double check before posting
There is reference that de “R. reuteri” could even be R. dumalis. But mainly looking at the shape of the leaves and stems of R. glauca, I can see the slight resemblance. The text also states that ‘Complicata’ would be more closely related to R. gallica. So it could be a back cross maybe? i.e. R.gallica x (R. gallica x R. glauca).