Once again the greenhouse breeding plants are in full swing and I am offering pollen from a number of them, including AgCan’s L83, and Ralph Moore’s “Everbloom 1” and “Orange Moss”. I may be able to offer limited amounts of ‘Suzanne’ as well. Let me know if there is anything you’d like, and ask if there’s something I haven’t mentioned that you might be looking for.
Paul B.
If the Suzanne pollen has not been looked at with a microscope, I would like to look at some (only small amount needed) to see what ploidy the diameter suggests.
Henry,
this is widely quoted as being a tetraploid. Do you have a reason to suspect otherwise?
Paul,
I would like some Everbloom1 pollen. I read that it is thornless. Is that true?
Daniel
Paul, see: http://www.rosehybridizers.org/forum/message.php?topid=22120#22197
for my experience.
Link: www.rosehybridizers.org/forum/message.php?topid=22120#22197
Henry,
In the thread you quote two people chimed in to state that their tests showed ‘Suzanne’ to be a tetraploid, and so I would have to question the identity of the plant you looked at. I know for a fact that there are many, many roses in public gardens and in commerce that are misidentified. Perhaps the plant you studied isn’t really ‘Suzanne’.
Daniel,
Yes, “Everbloom 1” is totally thornless. Email me privately with mailing info and I will send you pollen.
Yes, it is possible that the Ohio bush is mislabeled; but it is also possible the diploid and/or tetraploid bush is/are not the original. I was curious as to which ploidy your “Suzanne” is.
Henry,
I can send you a small sample of pollen if you want to look at it, but in my opinion, a root tip squash is more likely to give clear results. Pollen diameter varies depending on time of year, climate influence etc, does it not?
Pollen observation with a microscope will tell if more than one size pollen are present (like for a triploid) and give an indication of what percentage of the pollen are fertile.
Dave’s paper summarizes this technique:
http://www.globalsciencebooks.info/JournalsSup/images/0906/FOB_3(SI1)53-70o.pdf
I should of asked who is the source of your Suzanne. If it was Dave or Peter, then there is no reason for my looking at the pollen. If is another source, the results may be useful in determining if a root tip determination should be the next step.
How is it behaving in hybridization?
Link: www.globalsciencebooks.info/JournalsSup/images/0906/FOB_3(SI1)53-70o.pdf
Do you have any of these available Paul R. nitida, R. nutkana, Aicha, Kakwa, R-15 or Opelia? I known a lot of these are available in commerce but with my lack of room I can not get everything I want to try.
Adam,
I have multiple variants of R. nutkana available to me, but none in bloom yet. I have R-15 but don’t expect to see blooms till next year. I’m not sure if R. nitida grows around here, I will have to investigate.
Henry,
My ‘Suzanne’ came from Gregg Lowery at Vintage. However, without knowing anything about where Gregg got it, that doesn’t mean a whole lot. I will send you a small sample ASAP.
I have yet to get any seedlings from it, so I know nothing about its behavior as a breeder yet. (I just got it a year ago)
Anything that you can send would be appreciated.
Henry
I can take at look at the ‘Suzanne’ pollen for you this spring. Or I could send you some. Almost all the R. laxa David Zlezak has tested are diploid and the spins are tetraploid. There should be tetraploid R. laxa’s. It seems likely Skinner’s R. laxa was tetraploid. I’d think ‘Red Dawn x Suzanne’ is tetraploid given its use in the Explorer rose program. I grow it and can check the pollen size. An interesting test we can do is to check the ‘Suzanne x Red Dawn’ which Hugh Skinner still has. According to my father’s notes, Simonet did the cross both ways. He noted that the ‘Red Dawn x Suzanne’ cross was a better rose.
Paul, the pollen arrived. Thanks very much.
Don