Golden Vale nursery here lists their R.Foliolosa as … “foliolosa species 1880 USA mid pink…” … they can supply me with one plant! Lucky! I have no idea what to cross it with LOL.
George,
Rugosas, of course.
You could try with other species roses… I have a few seedlings with R. blanda.
I’m going to see if I can cross that with The Fairy, Pearl De Or, or Cecil Brunner.
Fair enough guys…
George,
Odds are what you acquire will be a diploid, so it might be helpful to aim to maintain its ploidy in the first generation, to make moving forward as easy as possible. So, if you can, find other diploids to mate it with. With that in mind, last year I crossed my R. foliolosa with Therese Bugnet and have obtained some very interesting offspring with great vigor and most unique foliage. (None have flowered yet, they are too young still)
R. wichurana and its immediate descendants might be something to mate it with as well.
The Foliolosa we grow could be a selection of an outstanding, but unusual, bloom, not a hybrid. I updated the HMF references on R. foliolosa:
They list the following petal colors: white, rarely light pink, light red [meaning rose red, often used in German], rosy pink, rich pink, deep pink, pink, cardinal red, bright rosy white, bright pink, and apparently rose-color.
The website contending this species is primarily white is listed as a reference. I could not verify all of its cited authorities. I added everything I could find, including an outstanding 1890 illustration that matches the clone in commerce much more closely than the photo in Texas.
Differing bloom colors don’t convince me that we’re dealing with hybrids. It isn’t rare for a species to produce blooms in a range of forms/colors (e.g. R. arkansana, rugosa, canina, spinosissima, minutifolia, setigera) and/or petal counts. Multiple causes explain pink and white blooms, including fading, variability of the genome, and hybridity.
In the realm of wild speculation…the illustration of R. carolina in Shinners’ Mahler’s Illustrated Flora of North Central Texas shows the leaflets cup down into a convex shape. They don’t fold up into a “V” like our Foliolosa. I know, I know, the hips aren’t the right shape, but I’ve been spoiled by R. californica, which has every conceivable hip shape.
Just for fun, compare it to the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower photo labeled R. foliolosa:
Illustrated Flora of North Central Texas is linked below. The key to Rosa starts at page 954. llustrations of Carolina and Foliolosa are on page 955.
Just to refresh memories, here is my specimen of seed grown “R. foliolosa”:
Thanks for the additional ideas on crossing this lovely species, Paul.
Foliolosa from the trade here Europe is purplish roses red flowered, brighter than rugosa darker pinks to said red. Its leaves are dull, not shiny at all, if with the distinctive long narrow leaflets. A suckering not too big erect divergent shrub.Very self sterile.
In year 2OOO I put mixed pollen on a little plant and got ample seeds that germinated easily. Allmost all were from rugosa pollen. A few from nitida. Both had full fertility. A very few from diploid synstilae/chinensis vars : all these progenies had very little fertility.
Foliolosa x rugosa are larger plants than parents with foliolosa erect divergent architecture. Wider not rugose leaves. Large brighter colored flowers.
What about mixing foliolosa with tetraploid, directly?