Breeding that other genus in Rosaceae: Hulthemia
anntn6b
13 years ago
Featured Answer
Sort by:Oldest
Comments (17)
catsrose
13 years agoflaurabunda
13 years agoRelated Discussions
Question about a rose in a tree, not a tree rose
Comments (3)Here's what I found Apples are Kingdom: Plantae Division: Magnoliophyta Class: Magnoliopsida Order: Rosales Family: Rosaceae Subfamily: Maloideae Genus: Malus Species: Malus domestica - domestic apple. Roses are Same except Subfamily = Rosoideae Genus = Rosa Species = Rosa speciosa. Plants of the same botanical genus and species can usually be grafted even if different varieties. Plants of the same genus but different species often can be grafted but the result may be weak or short-lived, or they may not unite at all. Plants of different genera are less successfully grafted, although there are some cases where this is possible. For example, quince, genus Cydonia, may be used as a dwarfing rootstock for pear, genus Pyrus. So I guess I answered my own question. Seemed like a good idea though. I'd like to have a rose hanging from the top of an apple tree....See MoreWhat is an old or antique rose?
Comments (26)The classifications are just a manifestation of the human desire to organize things into groups, and as this involves living things which can crossbreed and/or be selected according to human desires, static groups will continue to find "messiness" as new roses continue to arise through time. Right now, the popular designation starts with three main divisions -- species, garden variety groups created before the hybrid tea class was named (i.e. "old garden roses") and garden variety groups created after that point (i.e. "modern roses"). If this designation was determined a few hundred years ago, perhaps the introduction of the damasks would have heralded in the "modern roses" grouping to distinguish them from the others that were grown previously. And as roses continue to be interbred and selected for new desires, perhaps a new group will be named that is as different from what we now see as hybrid teas were felt to be different from the groups that existed before. It's really arbitrary. On this forum, there is a marked preference for growing roses that have "withstood the test of time" and the general plant characteristics that accompany them. Ironically, when new roses are bred which capture similar characteristics as those (i.e. David Austin's roses), they are also cherished. What is an antique? Well, outside of roses, a common denominator is that it is something of a minimum age, say 100 years. That would include many early hybrid teas, as well as many polyanthas and hybrid musks. What makes a rose something that is cherished by members here? There are several things (from what I've gathered by reading old posts). One might be a nostalgia for the past -- growing something that was passed down for generations in a family, or finding a rose they remember from their childhood in their grandmother's garden. Many people see photographs of old gardens or paintings by the old Dutch masters and seek to emulate that look, choosing plants with similar habits -- this could be done with the same cultivars, or modern reproductions. There is also a preservationist feeling -- we should not let cultivars which were once cherished be lost forever, so we should continue to grow and promote them. Many become so enamored of the process of gardening as an art form that they seek to divert from the bare-bones landscaping with a few token flowers by planting things not commonly seen, and so become attracted to the uncommon old roses. The fact that they require seeking out gives them the allure of precious gems. :-) ~Christopher...See Morerose replant disease
Comments (11)Concerning the rose family subtopic, the following may be of interest: The following article appeared in the 1960 Canadian Rose Annual pages 69-70. Of interest are the several crosses of roses with other members of the Rosaceae family. For educational use only. This copy was made with a scanner. It is possible that critical errors could have been introduced. Please obtain a copy of the original before utilizing in experiments/articles. Although the crosses at that time were sterile, it is possible that with modern techniques such as chromosone doubling fertile plants could be made. Title: Hybridizing Limitations Author: Roy E. Shepherd, Medina, Ohio "It is somewhat difficult to realize that the Rose family (Rosaceae) contains approximately 100 widely distributed and diversified genera of trees, shrubs and herbs. It includes among others, and in addition to roses, such well known and dissimilar subjects as the Spirea, Blackberry, Raspberry, Plum, Peach, Apple and Strawberry. Modern botanists have attempted to place a few of these in other families or to establish entirely new ones, but their endeavors have not been universally accepted. Plant breeders have also made numerous attempts to cross different genera of the family in the hope that distinct and valuable plants may result, but nothing of great importance has been produced. Improvement within a genus has been accomplished, however, by crossing one member with another and to these endeavors we must credit the great variety of apples, roses, etc., that we grow to-day. There is considerable evidence to support the thought that Nature has created several inter-genera hybrids in the past, but man's accomplishments in this field have been comparatively few. Many persons believe that the nectarine, for example, resulted from a man made cross of the peach and the plum, but it is more probable that it is a sport, or mutation, of the peach as nectarine seeds often produce peach trees and vice versa. Although several members of the Rose family have genital organs of similar anatomy Nature has established certain laws that prevent their inter-breeding. Were it not for these restrictions we might have a conglomerated assortment of freak plant material with little practical or esthetic value. On the other hand, there are many combinations that could give us something worth while if they could be effected. Perhaps, however, we should be satisfied with the rose as we now enjoy it, and not anticipate an apple tree bearing rose blossoms or a rose bush on which the blooms were followed by large luscious peaches. In all seriousness though there is a distinct possibility that science may eventually find means of effecting crosses that have failed previously, and inter-genera crosses within the Rosaceae group may become a reality. They should at least be interesting. The writer has succeeded in budding a rose on to an apple branch and in crossing a rose with a member of the blackberry family, but the bud remained dormant and the seeds did not germinate. Dr. J. H. Nicolas, formerly Research Director for Jackson and Perkins, was more successful as he raised three seedlings of a cross between an apple and a rose. They were similar to the latter in general appearance but showed evidence of apple influence in the bark, foliage, and in the peculiarly colored double apple-like blossoms. The latter, incidentally, were somewhat similar to those produced by Bechtels Crab but not as well formed or as large. The plants were barely remontant and after blooming they were inactive until fall when a second spurt took place. Further experience with Rose x Apple and Rose x Hawthorn crosses gave similar results and all proved to be sterile. They were therefore valueless for use as parents in further breeding along this line. Yes, Nature is quite insistent that man does not make 'hash' of her children, and perhaps we should be content with the beautiful supply of plant material she has given us. The ever-present challenge to create plants that are distinct from all others is so great, and intriguing, that man will probably continue to attempt crosses that now seem almost impossible; and who can say that he will not eventually succeed? Unfortunately plants have a tendency to transmit undesirable characteristics more readily than they do the desirable ones, and these hoped for inter-genera hybrids would probably produce blooms and fruits of inferior quality. Insofar as roses themselves are concerned we still possess considerable unexplored possibilities within the genus. There are 333 somewhat distinct species of roses recorded in Modem Roses V, and but eight of these have contributed to the major types of garden roses. Surely the other 325 have some potential and this should undoubtedly be explored before we spend time on intergenera exploration."...See MoreWhat's in a name?
Comments (19)This thread is so much fun! JoeMoose, can you give us some titles? Moose: Alces alces. ;) Ingrid - once upon a time I wrote a 400+ page dissertation on the red wolf. One of the great things about being a grad student in such a small field as zoo-based conservation biology is that your work is cutting edge. I was part of the species recovery planning group for the red wolf for three years running. I had several opportunities to be near/around/in contact with actual red wolves in the breeding program. Other species too. I always felt extremely privileged to be a part of that work. Of course, I also am intimately familiar with less appealing aspects of animal care (i.e. cleaning up after them), but even that made me feel lucky. Funny thing about red wolves - in reality they're not that rare. Species distinctions within the dog family are very difficult to tease out, as wolves by nature range over large areas and most North American species can interbreed. Differences get fuzzy. Although the red wolf is extremely rare in the US (all current animals are descended from a group of just 14 founders), there is a large population of "Eastern grey wolves" near where I live in Canada that have been shown to be genetically indistinguishable from red wolves. The reason they aren't listed as red wolves (Canis rufus) or part of the breeding program is completely arbitrary in terms of nature: different governments, different laws, different conservation programs. It's ridiculous that species management must fall within political boundaries, but there you have it. In fact, it can be argued that species distinctions in general are naught but a human construct... Sorry for the long lecture. I do go on a bit - I'm a mite excitable about these things. I do the same to my non-gardener friends about gardening. And yes, my garden spreadsheets include scientific names. :) Aqua Eyes, I'd bet you're still cute. ;)...See Morecanadian_rose
13 years agoanntn6b
13 years agoalameda/zone 8/East Texas
12 years agoamandahugg
12 years agoroseseek
12 years agokstrong
12 years agoroseseek
12 years agoazurerose
12 years agoroseseek
12 years agoUser
12 years agoroseseek
12 years agoUser
12 years agoroseseek
12 years agojohnstarnes
9 years ago
User