Does anyone know the ploidy of Pompom de Bourgogne?
According to HMF, tetraploid. Look on the second page of the References tab for the source.
Roger,
If miniature is a dominant trait then it is possible for a miniature to carry full size so when crossed with another full size you can get both minis and full size. I think it comes back to your selection of mini parent. If you look at Rise n Shine on HMF it shows 140 descendants in the first generation (see link) and, whilst I haven’t been through all 140 of them yet, I have been trying to work my way through looking at crosses between RnS and large roses and so far have not found any recorded large sized progeny. I’m not saying it doesn’t because the large ones may well have been discarded (though if they were good too I would find it difficult to understand why they would be…), but the way it looks on HMF maybe it is homozygous for mini (it is from a mini x mini itself so there is a good chance it is I guess). I’m hoping to put a mini with Ballerina over the next few days to try for a miniature version of Ballerina (like Baby Ballerina: 'Baby Ballerina' Rose)
To add to what Larry said about it not being completely dominant… there are also polygenes, or modifying genes, that affect the degree to which some genes are expressed. To make it simple for me I think about them as either a ‘+’ or a ‘-’ with + polygenes increasing the expression and - polygenes decreasing expression. So… if a dipolid variety, where mini is given the symbol M and full size m, has a hypothetical set of 3 loci at which polygenes affecting the expression of M was found then a micro-mini might be MM – – – and a tall mini might be MM (or Mn) ++ ++ ++ with any variation in between (e.g. MM ± – ++) and the + and - polygenes act in a cummulative manner. I don’t know if this is real or not but it seems like an effective model on which to base the selection of parents or to explain the range of expression in any given cross. What we might interpret as inbreeding depression might actually just be the progressive homozygosity of either the + or the - polygenes. I haven’t quite got this model right in my head yet for polyploidy but imagine it would work in a simialr way to what Larry as well as the cummulative effect of multiple sets of polygenes…hmmm
Link: www.helpmefind.com/plant/pl.php?grpLst=1.2.3.4.5.6&n=5216&tab=21&lstTyp=256&grp%5B1%5D=1
1 Like
Thanks Peter
I had presumed it to be tetraploid, but someone on this site listed it under diploids. As the book in question is from 1937, newer information might be different. Either way it’s not a problem as it appears to be fertile with different ploidies. I have a short mini/rugosa cross that might work with it if their bloom times coincide.
Great ideas on this thread.
“I’m hoping to put a mini with Ballerina over the next few days to try for a miniature version of Ballerina (like Baby Ballerina: 'Baby Ballerina' Rose)”
Playgold x Bukavu would be nice. Or, as another example, Bukavu x Baby Love (you will get pink blends from this cross from BL. Hell, I got a lot of pinks from New Year x Baby Love…). I mention Bukavu over Ballerina because it is far healthier, superior in every way and sets larger hips.
Larry, you just reminded me that Ralph Moore once wrote that the shortened internodes are at least one of the most critical features of true miniatures (again, using my shaky memory). Maybe I would have better luck quantifying the outcome of crosses using that trait. Leaf and flower size seem to intergrade a lot between large and miniature.
Larry and Simon, the weird thing about the crosses I mentioned is that nearly all of both the F1 and R2 are miniatures (the F1 are only miniatures if you base the definition on flowers, not plant size).
I believe that it is safe to say that every plant that has been studied has been found to have a lot of genes that can make it small. In corn, there were several even before DNA work began. In some, the dwarf allele (gene form) was dominant, and it was recessive in others (different alleles at different loci). They where all called
1 Like
Leting things wander a bit- I grew OP seedlings of Little Darling back around 1980, and kept several of them- I think it was three- for more than 15 yr. They all had vari-colored, small flowers of excellent form, relatively long internodes so the whole plant was abt 2 ft. I suppose I discarded lots of poor ones but that’s so long ago I have no notes. Anyway L.D. has smallish flowers in the offspring, but not a particularly small- for floribunda- plant, thougth certainly much smaller than some of the typical ones that realy are as big bush-wise as any HT, just with smaller more clustered flowers. that’s the problem with classifying on only one trait for sales and promotion purposes.
I’ll check my old data to see if I recorded full size plants out of Carefree Beauty x Rise N shine. I used to keep most everything for a year and score it for color, petalage and perhaps bush size.
My feeling for Rise N shine is that it has two conventional mini genes in a tetraploid. I guess growing out some selfs would answer that one.
‘October Moon’ = ‘Rise ‘N’ Shine’ X ‘Its Showtime’. ‘October Moon’ is a 3 X 3 foot shrub with 3 to 3.5 inch blooms.
‘Its Showtime’ = ‘Joycie’ X ‘Bone Silene’
Just to illustrate that ‘Rise ‘N’ Shine’ does produce a percentage of full sized offspring.
"0-47-19 (Rosa wichurana/wichuraiana
Paul, do you think Baby Austin, which is 1/4 R. soulieana, is of similar idea to 0-47-19?
Roger, have you looked at the lineage of Dresden Doll? I know I mentioned it before, but it is not only loaded with a lot of various OGR’s, but it also isnt that far from Tom Thumb, as well as multiple influences of polyantha… In fact, it is line bred from these sources.
“Paul, do you think Baby Austin, which is 1/4 R. soulieana, is of similar idea to 0-47-19?”
Not really, no. I actually have the pollen parent of ‘Baby Austin’* and it is nothing at all like the R. soulieana parent. You’d look at it and think it was just another pale pink miniature/polyantha type shrub. It tends to breed very dwarf shrubby minis in very pale colors, but I can’t say I have used it extensively. Its offspring often produce a remarkable quantity of bloom.
*the pollen parent is ‘Anytime’ X R. soulieana.
Thanks again everybody, for the information.
Paul, I recently wrote an article examining the inheritance of recurrence that will be published in the special rose issue of the journal FOB that David is guest-editing (he posted a note on this forum some time ago about it). For that, I only recorded whether or not seedlings were
If you want the OGR flower types, use Renae. I have two seedlings using its pollen on Sutter’s Gold and Carefree Sunshine. In fact, they’re so full of petals that they don’t have stamins and pollen is very hard to find-- and although it’s produced other roses with OGR looking flowers such as Renny and Kim’s seedling.
I’m thinking of pollinating it on Baby Love, which makes single petaled roses quite often. I want to see how these two roses would combine… I’m looking for a way to use Renae seedlings. I will try to use the one with Sutter’s Gold as a parent next year on Queen Elizabeth.
Thought it would be good to dig this thread up since the RHA Newsletter has just arrived…
I was thinking about this the other day because I’ve been collecitng the Flower Carpet series of roses (just need to add ‘Amber’ to the collection though haven’t been really impressed with the stock in the nurseries), which are small flowered and leafed but don’t seem to have conventional miniatures in their background and I was wondering how some of the smaller polyantha could be dwarf-like without miniatures in their background… I just put it down to polygenes and in the same way there are tall and short people that don’t have dwarfing genes there are also tall and short, large and small, etc roses. If there is more than one dwarfing gene then that would also explain why ‘The Fairy’ is relatively mini (thanks to R. wichuraiana I guess). I also have ‘Baby Faraux’ that I’ve put ‘Ebb Tide’ pollen on hoping for purple minis… guess they would be due to polyantha dwarfing too not conventional miniaturisation? We did a breeding program with rabbits regarding dwarfism… there is a dwarfing gene, which interestingly in the homozygous form is lethal creating babies called peanuts that are unable to feed and never lived longer than 3-4weeks, but we were able to breed very small rabbits without the dwarfing gene just by selecting progressively smaller and smaller stock (the same was true in the opposite direction for things like Flemish Giants, French Lops, anbd British Giants which are massive rabbits).
On a separate note I have a few really fat hips from ‘Scabrosa’ x ‘Black Jade’, ‘Scabrosa’ x ‘Gold Coin’ and ‘Scabrosa’ x ‘Magic Carrousel’ developing now which I am really excited about and by the sounds of things I will need to keep the best F1s and do F1 crosses to bring out the true miniature then. I was assuming all these F1s would be triploid miniatures and so possibly have less fertility (as seed parents at least).