For those roses that form a considerable number of hips, prompt deadheading will lead to more blooms and faster vegetative growth. I guess the repeat bloom might be faster.

You don't need to fuss over deadheading--just prevent the hips from forming. They consume a lot of the plant's energy.

On roses that don't seem to set hips, I can't really detect a difference.

Jeri

Agreed with the above comments, but I'll add further -- there are some varieties that, here in central Florida, are great rebloomers if deadheaded promptly, but which are pretty much once-bloomers if not. 'Dortmund' and 'Paul Neyron' are two such roses. If I deadhead on time, I can get 4 or 5 good flushes of bloom out of them in a season; otherwise one. Malcolm

Well, since the ones I am primarily interested in are chinas and teas that do not set hips, I will probably save myself time and effort and let them rebloom as they will.
Thanks for the information, which is, as always, so timely, succinct and honest.
Molly

Malcolm, that is how New Dawn was here. Unless religiously dead headed, it would NOT rebloom. It set hips from every flower and was totally satisfied just to sit there mildewing and pregnant. Kim

You've already been given excellent advice but I just wanted to mention that one of the reasons I like to deadhead is to drop the spent blooms under the bush as added mulch and nourishment. It's free and easy and I'm sure the roses appreciate it.

Ingrid

Now, that is true, Malcolm.

Benny Lopez and De la Vina mystery are good examples, but they both tend to set hips, so . . .

Jeri

You can slow it down too, by taking off more stem. For example a Tea that will produce another bloom just an inch or two below the last one. Take off a foot or 18" and it wonders what happened for a while.

Must have something to do with the auxin thing.

The Generous Gardener is another that only repeats if it is promptly deadheaded (but YMMV).

Hoovb, I think you are on to something when you mention slowing down rebloom by cutting lower into the branch. I've always suspected that with Safrano and Monsieur Tillier,both of which are taking more room than I can spare, so I usually dead head blooms pretty far down the branch and I am thinking that is why they don't pump out blooms right away. I'm not sure if that is the case, but I am going to conduct a little "deadheading" trial on these two.
Molly

"Blooming" is ovulation. The entire reason for a flower is to reproduce and perpetuate the species. Roses rely upon bees to pollinate them (as well as self pollination) and the bees are the most active up where the sun shines, where it's warm. Wasting flower production energy deep within the plant (which does sometimes happen) reduces the potential for cross pollination. Apical dominance pushes sap pressure highest at the terminal ends. With that sap, all the auxins, hormones and nutrients concentrate in those ends to promote and push ovulation and hip formation (pregnancy). So, yes, dead heading or pruning farther down the cane does waste those substances necessary for faster ovulation. It also requires pushing buds which are laying more dormant into maturity, growth, ovulation and then pregnancy. Kim

Kim,
I've often wondered why Lady Hillingdon' is the most constant blooming rose I've ever documented during my rose cycle studies. A plant of that cultivar has bloomed for 187 days truly continually, with never less than 33% of peak bloom each day during that time, before taking a months break and then blooming again through the Autumn. All this without deadheading.

It continues to bloom heavily even after setting nearly a dozen hips per square yard of canopy.

Lux.

Sounds beautiful, Lux, congratulations! Why do Rugosas set copious hips yet continue flowering in many climates? There are exceptions to every rule. I'm surprised your Hillingdon sets hips as none have ever set either self or deliberately pollinated hips for me. A client's neighbor had a bed of Hillingdon the lady who designed both gardens installed many years ago. In all the years I walked near them to get to the outside of my client's side bed so I could reach in from the neighbor's side yard to dead head, I never noticed any hips on them. I wouldn't know if it's specific to that variety or if it is specific to YOUR plant in its precise location. Perhaps yours is immensely happy in its micro climate? Perhaps yours thinks it's going to die and is valiantly attempting to "perpetuate the species" before it succumbs? I dunno, but it DOES sound like a glorious sight! Thanks. Kim

Molly and Hoovb, I have had the sae experience when I cut a large boquet from a young bush. It happens to be a friend's favorite rose in the garden..so I guess I cut off too mJeannieuch. He sulked for a couple of months. My friend didn't.

"totally satisfied just to sit there mildewing and pregnant."

Kim, that is SUCH a visual! Hilarious...

Thanks, minflick, glad you enjoyed the visual! I wish New Dawn could have been half as enjoyable here. Kim

That phrase brought a smile to my face as well.

Not a fan of 'New Dawn', which I did grow for a few years. I simply could not figure out what the fuss was all about.

The value of 'New Dawn' is good blackspot resistance and hardiness, compared to other repeating roses. But those things are of no value in most of California.

RE New Dawn: "It set hips from every flower and was totally satisfied just to sit there mildewing and pregnant"....Ahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa! That really REALLY made me laugh. I'm STILL laughing.

I have always dead-headed all of my roses, because my grandmother taught me to do that. She hated seeing dried up brown stems left from spent flowers, and insisted that it would make the plant re-bloom faster, and I continue to do so in my own garden, for sentimental reasons. My favorite child-hood gardening job consisted of snapping off the dead flowers of 'Peace' 'Tropicana' (that horrible color) & 'Queen Elizabeth'(which required a step-ladder). Misty watercolor memories...LOL.