A recent examination of R. x pteragonis “Cantabrigiensis” in Curtis’ Botanical Magazine reports the plant “was found in the middle of an extraordinary free-flowering bush of the Himalayan R. sericea. On this account it was postulated that R. sericea (distinguished by Hurst as forma floribunda) was the likely mother plant and the presumed father, R. hugonis was growing only a few yards away. It is even noted that the two parents were in flower together and constantly visited by the larger kind of bees, giving every opportunity for cross fertilisation. Hurst also carried out artificial crosses between the parents to test the postulated hybrids.”
There is no mention that his crosses failed or didn’t take and there is much made of the shapes and colors of the maturing hips. “In 1947 E. A. Bowles showed before the Scinetirid Committee of the RHS, 'fruiting shoots from Rosa x cantabrigensis which apparentlyh rarely fruits.” (Proc. RHS 72:lxxvi, 1947) At Cambridge it fruits regularly if not profusely. "
This ‘someplace it fruits, someplaces it doesn’t’ might be enough to encourage more of us to take a chance in case we’re in the ‘someplace it fruits’ group for a lot of the different roses in this group.
The pteragonis in their illustration is a strong yellow color; mine from Pickering is white, and I have no explanation for the difference in color.
it was postulated that R. sericea (distinguished by Hurst as forma floribunda) was the likely mother plant and the presumed father, R. hugonis was growing only a few yards away.
I have scoured the various online herbaria databases and they seem to confirm what is given at HMF for Sericia, R. Omeiensis ptericantha (as supposedly distinct from each other), and R. Hugonis x R. Omeiensis. That is to say, they seem closely related, have multiple phenotypes, have variable expression, and can interbreed. It was informative, too, to plot the collection points on Google Earth (they overlap a lot).
This is not surprising when you look at their close relationship on the phylogenetic trees in the article I posted earlier. Omeiensis, foetida, persica, hugonis and roxburgii cluster near each other being in direct lineal descendencies and therefore are closely related. So we might expect them all to be fertile with each other to some degree.
It is too bad these are such huge bushes. You’d need to own a park to matrix these in a breeding program.
I forgot to mention another roses I have in this family. A few years ago I bought a bundle of seedlings from Lawyer Nursery labeled R. sericea omeiensis, and their description is as follows:
ROSA SERICEA OMEIENSIS (OMEI ROSE)
To 15’, Zone 4. Upright shrub, finely divided fern-like foliage, bristly red
prickles, small white blooms followed by ornamental yellow-red hips.
Interesting collectors item.
Now, when these grew a bit, it was obvious these were not the same as R. sericea ptericantha, and neither did they match the description provided. Very few had the large red thorns, and a large percentage had rather plain looking brown/beige thorns. These appeared to be seed grown, as there was quite a bit of variation among them.
I ended up throwing out most of them because they weren’t what I expected, but I saved two plants that stood out from the rest; two had bluish colored wide thorns. As it happens, these two also bloomed pink, not white. I haven’t done anything with these for breeding since they really aren’t what I was aiming for, but I may try an experiment and cross these with the normal R. sericea ptericantha I have from Pickering and see what happens.
Many of the diploid roses especially have a strong self incompatibility system. I wonder to what extent nurseries and arboreta are aware and consider this. If they don’t isolate their populations or otherwise control pollination the seedlings they share/sell may not be what they anticipate they are.
I may try an experiment and cross these with the normal R. sericea ptericantha I have from Pickering and see what happens.
I would encourage you to do more than that.
After digesting the phylogenetic tree article I posted on a different tread I realized that there is another, perhaps more important, common denominator in Harkness’ success with hulthemia. Canary Bird not only has chinensis ancestry, but it’s immediate parent is R. hugonis.
According to the Bayesian tree in that article, hugonis, hulthemia and omeiensis are closely related.
I think it would be worthwhile to pursue crosses of omeiensis with others in this group, and Canary Bird seems to be an obvious candidate. In fact, Moore’s hulthemias might be even better candidates because they are close to hugonis but also a couple have been bred successfully with modern cultivars. This could cut decades off the process.
Moreover, although some of Moore’s hulthemias have failed in crosses with modern cultivars they might succeed with omeiensis.
By the same token you might also try cultivars with spinosissima, roxburghii or foetida as close ancestors if you have any in your garden. And note too that I did get seed from a cross with an acicularis hybrid, which is not even quite as close to omeiensis as these others.
Your having seedlings may help quite a lot. Cycling through a sexual generation washes out mutations which accumulate over many years of vegetative propagation and could explain some of the infertility issues.
Some efforts at locating recently collected specimens of ptericantha from the wild have been fruitful and someone has volunteered cuttings and seed. They have had problems rooting thier cuttings in the past and so have asked for suggestions. I have none except the usual general references but was hoping maybe someone here does?
If anyone has experience budding this plant I would welcome hearing about that too.
I may have a line on a hugonis x pteracantha hybrid as well and I am wondering if Ann has experience propagating and breeding pteragonis, which is what this cultivar would (night?) be equivalent to. It is not pteragonis, being grown from seed from a cultivated plant in China.
Don, have you read the comments made in Bean about forms of R. hugonis with pteracanthous prickles? I posted the gist of it on HelpMeFind.
“The armature of R. hugonis is very variable…The existence of pteracanthous forms of R. hugonis suggests the possiblity at least that some roses in cultivation which combine translucent wing-prickles with yellow flowers are forms of R. hugonis and not hybrids between it and R. sericea var. pteracantha as usually supposed. Such plants are usually grouped together under the heading R. x pteragonis, this being the name given to a plant raised in Germany and supposed to be R. sericiea var. pteracantha x R. hugonis. One of the roses in question is ‘Hidcote Gold’, of which the original plant grew at Hidcote Manor.”
I have no firsthand experience with R. hugonis to confirm this observation. Bean’s Trees and Shrubs Hardy In the British Isles[/u] has so many detailed and cogent observations about species roses that I never discount it out of hand.
Cass, yes I have read the comments you posted from Bean. I agree, since the phylogenetic tree op. cit. shows definitively that hugonis is a separate species from omeiensis the question is whether the thorns are the result of hybridization or did they survive the speciation event. It is not just an academic question, because if they are cross-compatible they present at least one avenue for hybridization. I am shopping for hugonis, maybe in a few years we will know. Hope springs eternal.
BTW I have uploaded a couple of photos to HMF showing pteracantha in its native habitat. The source of these is a different Don than me, so don’t be confused by the caption.
The ptericantha group is EXTREMELY difficult to propagate from cuttings. Even the most experienced propagators working under ideal conditions have difficulty. Often the cuttings will start to callous and then fail to root. One friend pulls up the cuttings after a couple of weeks and reapplies rooting powder and then puts them back in the rooting medium. Still, she only gets about 20% of them to root. In my experience, that rate is more like 5%, and so I gave up and went to budding them on R. multiflora instead. Budding to multiflora is very easy; most buds take without much effort, and most break into growth almost immediately. (I use Ralph Moore’s inverted Chip Bud method)
Some clones of the ptericantha group appear to be more easily rooted, but none of my clones have been compliant.
I got a shock this afternoon; ONE seed from a group of ‘Joycie’ X R. sericea ptericantha has germinated. This is the first time any cross using ptericantha has resulted in a seedling. We shall see what it grows into.
Paul, It figures it would be Joycie. She doesn’t know any better. I have some seedling of Joycie and filipes derivative right now as well as alabukensis She’ll accept just bout anything it seems.
My attempts have been limited. Mostly, I used assorted Miniatures with ptericantha pollen because some of the Miniatures I use for breeding generally accept ANY pollen given them. I did not use any other species because I wanted to start including repeat blooming genes into the mix.
I worked on ‘Dresden Doll’ for two seasons because it offered two advantages: it is extremely thorny, which may have encouraged thorny offspring, and it had the dwarfism gene, which would reduce the size of many of the offspring. There were other crosses I tried, including using ptericantha as the seed parent, but I’ve forgotten which combinations I tried. I did many of these before I kept good records
If those two don’t have it, then you are out of luck I’m afraid. Michigan Miniatures used to have it but they are defunct now, I believe. There was a Miniatures nursery in British Columbia that may have grown it, but I don’t think they ship to the USA now. I can certainly propagate it for you but that won’t get you a plant till later this Summer. I can however, offer you a couple plants of ‘Golden Angel’ for the cost of postage. It is another excellent Moore breeder, capable of some very good tricks.
I can certainly propagate it for you but that won’t get you a plant till later this Summer.
Let’s plan on this, then, and thanks for the offer. Sequoia has just now responded that they have not licensed it elsewhere and know of no other sources.
I can however, offer you a couple plants of ‘Golden Angel’ for the cost of postage.
I accept this kind offer. I should be able shortly to reciprocate with some fresh pollen from this fellow.
I am having the same problem as Don in obtaining Joycie for myself and my daughter Adair Williams. I have gone to the same sources as has Don, with the same lack of luck. My daughter is setting up a nice sized rose garden and she has joined the RHA and I have rejoined. I have nothing to trade for Joycie because we are just setting up her garden and I made the mistake of selling mine 25 years ago, but I would be willing to pay a substantial premium to get some plants if anyone knows a source. Forgive me for making such a crass proposition on this forum, but she is my only child and I am willing to go above and beyond to indulge her new love, especially since it is so close to my heart. I need a source that can ship to Louisiana. Many thanks, Bob Williams New Orleans, LA Adair Williams, Alexandria, LA.
I am having the same problem as Don in obtaining Joycie for myself and my daughter Adair Williams. I have gone to the same sources as has Don, with the same lack of luck. My daughter is setting up a nice sized rose garden and she has joined the RHA and I have rejoined. I have nothing to trade for Joycie because we are just setting up her garden and I made the mistake of selling mine 25 years ago, but I would be willing to pay a substantial premium to get some plants if anyone knows a source. Forgive me for making such a crass proposition on this forum, but she is my only child and I am willing to go above and beyond to indulge her new love, especially since it is so close to my heart. I need a source that can ship to Louisiana. Many thanks, Bob Williams New Orleans, LA Adair Williams, Alexandria, LA.
