If they are not sterile, these 'Grootendorst' Rose might make good source for some frilling on (hopefully) disease resistant and hardy plants.
It would be good to have a look at the Grootendorsts before you decide to add them. The architecture is such that they throw out six to eight foot limbs straight as a javelin, have minimal branching but still get wide enough to need a full berth.
There are other options for fringed petals. We discussed a few here at some point, Fimbriata comes to mind.
The other morphological features of these are, as a rule, also somewhat primitive so you’ll need time and patience to tease the frills out of them into modern roses. They have no carotenoids and their anthocyanins appear to be simple (no glycosylation). Iirc, there are few-to-no offspring so the fertility is in doubt as well.
They are diploids so you might map out a route that includes chromosome doubling early on which could (theoretically) improve fertility against tetraploids.
If you live near the coast then you could also consider scouting out candidate R. rugosa breeders and try direct crosses with moderns to save yourself twenty or thirty years of work in the refinery. This would allow for genetic diversity in downstream crosses with other F1/F2 rugosas like Magseed and Linda Campbell, which would be good prospective mates anyway for the Grootendorsts or Fimbriata.
We used to have the Grootendorsts and Fimbriata at Elizabeth Park but they succumbed to a brutal, incompetent pruning several years ago. It’s the biggest reason I didn’t pursue these as I lack the room for them on my own spread.
Maybe it would be worth putting Grootendorst pollen on minis, but Fimbriata does seem a better alternative- it sets hips and has a nice-ish shape.The china Fimbriata is somewhat compact and a repeater, perhaps Fimbriata rugosa x Fimbriata china? They are both triploids, so the ploidity of the seedlings could be 2n, 3n or 4n, or other, wierder combinations. (I assume fertile triploids are 1+2n or 2+1n) This might introduce some reducing of thorns, but the most likely result is a few seeds leading to weak, chimeral seedlings that die after a few months. Maybe one day…
One reason why I considered grootendorst is that rugosas in general adore my climate. Not all roses do, HT’s and descendants of foetida die from chronic blackspot.
I agree Fimbriata is probably the better choice than Grootendorst. I’m pretty sure that Grootendorst is sterile but people have had some luck using Fimbriata pollen. You should do a search on the forum for both as there have been numerous discussions about them over the years. Whichever one you try, it may be possible that the frilliness of the petals is a result from incompatibility of the genes because of the wide cross and not from certain genes, so that trait may or may not be passed on to the offspring.
I live in Staten Island.
Nah. It gets cold, but it depends on what you compare it to. It feels that way in the summer, but this summer was better. Either way rugosas grow like weeds. Actually, they are weeds. They are listed as invasives.
Marie Bugnet has a Grootendorst parent. I am unimpressed with it. johannes