Ideals & perspectives of modern breeding programs from molecular biology methods to traditional crossings - in discussion.

Dear Friends of Rose Breeding!

I don’t know if there is already a similar thread.

In my opinion it should be very useful to discuss some fundamentals of modern breeding programs as there had been propagated lots of them in the past and they have been a matter of changings in all that time. …

Why are there changings, - if the goals are “just the” perfect rose? :wink:

Ok, we have moods and waves, but parallel to moods and waves we have to state some “fixed stars” of ideals that nearly seem to be of interest through all of that periods, which are: health, odour, bright colors, reblooming and different lovely flower shapes and intersting definitions of the colorization of the flowers (e.g. “handpainted roses”, or “persica descendants”).

Greetings from Germany,

Arno

(In addition: my personally ideals are health, good odour and then … all of the surplus possibilities! :wink: )

I prefer health and variation of shapes, color and sizes. I consider the landscape as whole where an HT, HMusk and a shrublet could be in the same bed or border. Anything less would be boring to my eye.

Hi Arno,

It sounds like you are proposing a discussion similar to the RHA Fall symposium topic, “The Next Big Thing in Roses”.

Though it may be true that the main goals would seem to endure time and not change that much, the order in which we place our priorities will have an effect on outcomes. Though we can all agree on 10 or so goals, if scent and bloom color are first priorities, you will get a very different result than when good branching habit and cleanliness are put first.

This is good food for thought!

Jim Sproul

That is the beauty of it all, Jim. I love multiplicity :slight_smile:

Hi Jadae!

Thats a good point, I myself plant so called “old” roses together with so called “modern” ones.

Also in breedings I take “old” and modern ones - and wild roses too.

Just as it does make sense to me. Perhaps thats shocking for some people, but I made good experiencies in doing that.

Planting & arranging like this can also increase health in a rose garden.

If some problematic varieties are planted together with those that show good health.

So, I planted even Albas next to modern roses, - no problem in my view!


Hi Jim!

That may be right, I will read that mentioned thread as deeply as possible.

But for now, - as I startet and you did answer, I will at least answer your kind postings here.

Jim, you said: “Though (…) the main goals would seem to endure time and not change that much, the order in which we place our priorities will have an effect on outcomes.”

Yes, well formulated. The main goals vary only in their ranking and they are spread over slightly different gene pools, in time.

I would agree with you in that point.

And this together with some “unusually” species or certain typical forms of hybrids, that might be crossed, this will perhaps give the mentioned outcomes, - that then could be surprisingly different from the roses bred & known before.

E.g., I think of the first complexer bracteata hybrids, I saw in the internet a few years ago. …

And in Sangerhausen they have Schneezwerg x R. bracteata from Luis Lens, well it survives outside, at least. :wink:

Or of the hulthemia efforts, you and some few others are trying to bring into life.

In Germany, otherwise, the so called “English Roses” from Austin seem to “peak” at the moment, as they are not always healthy and their heads often look sadly to the ground (that may come from thinking always of the English weather forecasts, I think :smiley: ).

But one thing is interesting and also connected to these topics. - Some breeders over a long timeline have i something in common, in doing very similar things, and thats what I would remark as very interesting at the moment.

Breedings, that come into my mind and are done by Rudolf Geschwind from Austria, Wilhelm Kordes II from Germany and Louis Lens from Belgium - as also some of the breedings of some less known breeders like, e.g. Dr. Schmadlack from Eastern Germany, they all are done by crossings with Hybrids into wild roses.

So. Perhaps thats really an important thing, - giving way to some more richness of the genomes that are joyning the genepool of our garden roses, in the future.

“HT x HT = HT = O.K.” - that would be the opposite of what I mean, and I think nearly everybody here is smiling a little bit, on that meager formular, once thrown out for commercial breedings … .

When I saw ome of the later Louis Lens Hybrids - some of them without names - I began to think about these topics.

And then I read about Geschwind and talked about him with some experts.

Maybe he is my idol, - I don’t know, maybe its louis Lens.

The idea is nearly the same: Looking whats needed, the Rose Family is like a great Shopping Mall - everything is there and you are out there and have got the credit card of someone who has forgotten about it! :smiley:


Greetings to you from Germany!

  • And now & the next days I will read first, whats already written in your mentioned thread.

I am looking forward to it, allthogh it may take a little time, thanks!

Arno

Hi Arno,

Good thoughts! I should clarify that I wasn’t referring to a thread that was already on this site, but instead to a discussion of articles that will be published in the next RHA Newsletter this Fall 2007.

You should consider sharing your thoughts about, “The Next Big Thing in Roses”, not only here, but in an article that you could write for the RHA Newsletter.

Injecting species genes into modern roses is something that several persons on this forum are doing. I haven’t had as much time for it as I would like. Someday I hope to get Rosa acicularis into my breeding program. Mostly because that was the only rose that grew wild where I lived as a child.

Jim Sproul

Arno

You wrote: Why are there changings, - if the goals are “just the” perfect rose?

Because there are many perfect rose. It is an evolving concept. An ideal reality never can match.

Each one has his perfect rose. It is a concept that varies according to our preferences and circumtancies.

Before the end of XVIII century rose breeders did not know nor could imagine the chinese contribution to our roses.

And why should we have only one perfect rose.

I for one have many and as soon as I find one I look for another.

The perfect rose for me at french Riviera is probably not perfect for i.e. Canada.

Hi Jim,

very nice, now I think I understood what you meant. It would be an honour for me to write down some thoughts on amateur breeding with difficult to cross rose plants for an RHA Newsletter. And if they are funded on specific informations that are unusually combined, it should at least give a posititive stimulating effect, which the philosophers like Daniel Dennet would call an “intuition pump”. :slight_smile:

Now, more explicit: its easier to talk about future plan(t)s, if there are already more results that can be presented, so in two or three years such a statement by me should be (hopefully) more informative. :wink:

I already have some small & good results, from 2005 crossings with different difficult to cross wild roses, but that isn’t enough for an article.

Maybe, otherwise, “The Next Big Thing in Roses” is a bit like a title on “sheep clouds” that are just signs for the storm hours later … .

Understood in this way it should be possible for me to add some helpful or at least interesting notes, yes!

I would then give a summary of my view on the gene pool of todays garden roses and of some of the interesting efforts of some breeders injecting species (and rosa subgeni) genes into roses.

You wrote: “Someday I hope to get Rosa acicularis into my breeding program. Mostly because that was the only rose that grew wild where I lived as a child.”

I like the acicularis too in some ways!

I already did crossings with the japanese form of Rosa acicularis, the “nipponensis”.

I did it because I liked the nice foliage and the shape and color of the buds and flowers.

Then I read that it obviously could serve (at least partly) as a black spot resistancy donator (there are papers on it from japanese researchers awailable).

Lets see.

I send you a mail to ask some aspects!

Greetings from Germany!

Arno

Hi Pierre!

I think you are right, that there are “many perfect roses”.

Thats what I wanted to say in my ironically comment.

So, one should consider, if there are strong specific desires and themes that should be bred into roses for extremely warm and dry climates and for wet and cold climates, that maybe different plants and so “variations of the theme” could help to solve this problem.



And your last point is of course true in the same way!

Perhaps you can have Mermaid and bracteata / clinophylla hybrids without problems!

I know people living on Ibiza who grow Mermaid and its terribly nice.

I would say: No way in norway. :wink:

Greetings!

Arno

It would defy possibility to have a singular perfect rose.

Hi Jadeae,

at least you should be able to have it where you live, someone else might have another good one for his / her place.

Some varieties are broader in their spectrum of tolerancy, but I think none of them will be “the rose”.

Thinking of “Peace” - it is vigorious and parts of its health due to that point.

But even that rose can’t be grown everywhere with same success.

Has anyone ever put Rugosa (or tetraploid descendants) on Peace? Could be quite interesting, that way. :slight_smile:

Greetings!

Arno

Well, my point is 2 fold. The second point you already made. Climate is a huge variable.

The other point is a subjective one.

What if one person perceives perfect as one specific shape, and another person perceives perfect as an entirely different shape. Let’s take Touch of Class, Baby Faurax Baby Love and Geoff Hamilton. All 4 have really good form for what they do, and the “classes” they represent. So, which one has the perfect form? :slight_smile:

And this is just speculating shape! There are so many other variables…

So, in order for a perfect rose to exist, everyone would have to have an identical climate with identical days, no cell mutations going on, and everyone would have to have identical perceptions/judgements that were static (always the same, never changed).

Climate, yes. And fashions and philosophies change. A few decades back, many rosarians would have said, with regard to disease-resistance, “that’s what chemists are here to deal with.” And cabbagey low centered flowers were culled. Roses were grown to cut the perfect HT flower. Landscape roses?? Not in the U.S., at least…

The perfect rose?? It would be easier for women to universally agree on the “perfect black dress” and put fashion designers out of business, but that ain’t gonna happen either.

An interesting question might be, who leads the “fashion tastes” in roses? Is it the consumer? The hybridizer? The seller? Did Austin have to market his roses horribly, or did the Brits find them to be a breath of fresh air?

Knockout has truly been a blockbuster in America. It is heavily marketed now, but did the marketing drive its popularity, or did its success help to drive the dedication of great resources into marketing that one cultivar?

It is interesting to me to note that it is the amateur hybridizers who seem particularly interested, in this country, in introducing species genes and pursuing paths that none of us is likely to live long enough to bring to a conclusion in our own lifetimes. Creating something truly market-worthy from existing species will likely require many generations.

“Has anyone ever put Rugosa (or tetraploid descendants) on Peace?”

Some time ago I wrote elsewhere:

…"Peace right pedigree is Johanna Hill x (Ch.P.Kilhan x Margareth Mac Gredy)…

…There is something about Peace no other rose had before. A personality that remains unmatched even with its ample progeny. Plant habit as much as flower shape and color are quite outstanding so much that debilitated as it is: this seventy years old rose is allways highly praised…

…When I first saw the rugosa hybrid Dr Eckener* I was perplexed considering a feeling about more than some characteristics this rose has in common with Peace and that I do not know in other non related ones. Glossy foliage, flower, receptacle and stems shape. I grew it for a few years and the feeling is still here.

Then the outstanding Peace features eventually could be from an unnoticed rugosa contribution."

And was answered:According to J. H. Nicolas (A Rose Odyssey)that was considering a curious Margaret McGredy sport: we (Sam McGredy & the autor) traced the origin of Margaret McGredy to crosses of Rugosa and Cinnamomea.

Hi Pierre!

Great Thing! I went to helpmefind because I knew Dr Eckener only from Sangerhausen and it was too diffuse in my memory … .

Good idea, I would say! It doesn’t has to be as it is told, concerning Peace’s ancestors.

What about the scent? I have got Climbing Peace and its remarkeable, that the scent changes, its in fact getting better & better as the flower is fading and changing from yellow to creamy white in hot wheater.

That may be due to a “fading” foetida influence, that is overhelmed by other influences, concerning the biochemistry of the petals.

The foetida smell is linked with the yellow colour.

As it goes away, also the smell changes. …

How is that in Dr. Eckener?

Greetings,

Arno

OK: In fact I have some interesting Rosa macrophylla pollen left, from a huge plant, and there’s one flower left on Peace Climbing … lets do the twist! :wink:

My last crossing for this summer-season, I’ ve done it straight this evening & I’ll do it second tomorrow, just prepared the flower and put it there. …

Unfortunately our wheather is a bit bad and fresh. …

Lets see. :wink: Huge it should be.

BHi Philip!

You wrote:

"An interesting question might be, who leads the “fashion tastes” in roses? Is it the consumer? The hybridizer? The seller? Did Austin have to market his roses horribly, or did the Brits find them to be a breath of fresh air?

Knockout has truly been a blockbuster in America. It is heavily marketed now, but did the marketing drive its popularity, or did its success help to drive the dedication of great resources into marketing that one cultivar?

It is interesting to me to note that it is the amateur hybridizers who seem particularly interested, in this country, in introducing species genes and pursuing paths that none of us is likely to live long enough to bring to a conclusion in our own lifetimes. Creating something truly market-worthy from existing species will likely require many generations. "

I think - thoughts like this are setting the frame for thinking about amateur breeding and profit IN-dependency thoughts.

Everyone likes to have money. Seldomly enough its made by doing what makes you feel fun or high!

But furthermore there are interests where it even doesn’t make sense to aim scenarios where floods of money are doing wonders on ones results, - just in the beginning of thinking of some aims … .

For moneymakers I would say: go to China & go to Dubai, there’s the money.

If they got what they seek, they’ll pay, what you want.

Even if you’re an amateur.

That sould happen, go for gold!

My focus is to do what brings just the kick to me.

So I respect (and am interested in) Dubai & China but I know also something about the worth of freedom in doing whats necessary.

Well, as it has been said lots of time: a life is short and breeding roses takes much time.

So, being effective is much more interesting for me than being successful in doing money by breeding!

Ok, thats at least my philosophy.

Everyone who likes to make money with roses should have come to other dedications than that ones I follow an talk about.

Thats perhaps no problem, if both sides (amateurs & profis) meet together and are talking with each other in respect.

Greetings from Germany,

Arno