Monday, May 11, 2009

Today's big pollen donor.

'Gloire des Rosomanes, by Plantier circa 1825 and introduced by Vibert in 1836. It is sometimes listed as a China, a Bourbon or even a primitive Hybrid Perpetual. Fully remontant, relatively disease free in most climates, and a lovely scent. It is a known triploid, and yet contrary to popular mythology it is highly fertile. In fact, it is responsible for numerous hybrids, involved in the pedigree of 7264 unique hybrids to date. Most of these came down through 'General Jacqueminot', the famous "red" Hybrid Perpetual. Today, I have been slapping 'Gloire des Rosomanes' pollen on numerous plants, to see what variety of results I get using it on modern hybrids. Its the "old dog, new tricks" school of thought.

Anyway, very busy day for me, I have been up since 5:30 AM and have been pollinating since 6:30 (through till 12:30 PM!). And now, I must go attend to watering chores. Ta!


  1. I've been interested in this rose too... but was put off by the lack of 'body' in the plant itself. What kind of things have you been putting it on to try and bulk up the bush? The reason I was looking at it was three-fold... it was a popular rootstock so stikes easily fom cuttings and grows well on its own roots so may help produce varieties of roses that don't need grafting AND doesn't suffer from disease like 'Dr Huey' does. My bush has a very open habit though with long lax canes and is vicously thorny (actually the most difficult of all my roses to weed around because the thorns are small, numerous, super sharp, with just the right amount of curve in them to catch smooth skin *ouch*).

  2. The specimens I have seen are generally quite robust, self-supporting and attractive, so I am not familiar with this "problem" habit you speak of. That said, I always tend to select at least one parent that has good architecture, which will hopefully be passed on to the progeny. In this case I am using 'Mary Rose', 'Sequoia Ruby' and my own 174-02-17 (see: ) as seed parents. I think I put it on L83 as well, and some others. Have to review my notes!

    I'm not at all sure what I'll get by doing this, but I have often found that older varieties that have long been disregarded as breeders can still perform interesting tricks when matched with new cultivars.

    Oh, and I put it on 'Midnight Blue' as well. That rose is producing some magnificent colors for me.

  3. Actually... I have doubts mine is actually 'GDR'. It seems more pink than red to me, HMF says 'GDR' is almost thornless (though Botanica says it is thorny???), and the leaves on mine look smaller and more narrow than the ones on HMF are. It doesn't set OP hips, and its sepals aren't as long as the photos on HMF show. I was assuming it was 'GDR' because I only know of three of these type of roses that were used as understocks; 'Dr Huey', 'GDR', and 'Amadis'. I have 'Dr Huey' and it isn't that. I also have 'Amadis' (an old Boursault) and it is pretty much thornless and mostly non-remontant (but it has the same colour as 'Amadis'). My one that I was thinking was 'GDR' is also remontant (but not very freely after late spring/early summer). So... any ideas what other rose might have been used as a commercial understock that has the look of these but has more of a pink tinge with long lax canes that are quite sparsly foliated??? I do have a photo but only of the flower and buds, not leaves other more reliable features.

  4. I'd have to see your photos to be able to respond to that. My 'Gloire des Rosomanes' is not thornless, but only moderately prickly. It is a pinkish red, not a clear, true red. More of a lighter Crimson, really. Here is one clue to identifying 'Gloire des Rosomanes': gently rub the flower buds between your fingers and then smell. They will have a distinct sweet-ish Frankincense-like fragrance. Its unmistakable. And yes, the sepals are quite long, extending at least 1/2 inch above the top of the bud.

    Let me know where I can see your photo(s) and I'll see if it looks familiar. :-)

  5. No worries... I added a page to CHR blog.