Karl is absolutely right on here. This is an unfortunate event and is not infectuous to any other roses in your garden unless they get injured and allow this particular bacteria to enter that wound. I have successfully replanted roses in holes where I had a previous gall infection without incident. I did dispose of all the soil I could when getting rid of an infected rose, replacing it with a mix of good garden soil and native soil in the hole. I have heard that some even treat the spot with a bleach solution, but I think that is a bit extreme and might end up doing more damage to other beneficial organisms in the soil that are necessary for growth of a new rose. John

You're welcome prickles. I'm not advocating BENEFICIAL companioin plantings for crown gall. I'm suggesting digging in your rose beds to plant other plants (perennials, annuals, ground covers, cultivating or working organics into the soil, transplanting roses or even installing new ones) may actually provide the "wounds" necessary for the bacterium to infect the plant. After all, what really IS the difference between ALL of these "wounds"? They all result in the same potential entry for the opportunistic bacteria. Feeder roots of most plants extend out past the plant's drip zone, where rain drips off the foliage canopy of the plant. You know how under a tree is sometimes fairly dry, with all the rain running off the canopy around its circumference? That is the 'drip zone'. Many, if not most, plants' feeder roots proliferate in that zone and beyond as that is where more moisture is likely to be available and where nutrients are likely to be released from organics in the soil due to the higher moisture and greater warmth. If you dig a hole in that area, you are very likely to damage the feeder roots of the plant. That is going to have some effect on the plant due to the reduction of nutrient and moisture uptake lost from the damaged, chopped off roots. How much will depend upon many factors, but there should be some resulting effect from the removal of the roots. Now, include all the potential "wounds" each shovel slice can produce. Each one potentially the entry point needed by the gall bacteria. No, not every garden is going to experience galls because of it. No, not every rose is going to contract gall from chopped off roots. No, not every rose (or other plant) is going to show its disapproval of having its roots reduced. But, gall infection IS possible from other sources as innocent as wanting pansies around your roses. If galls can occur on potted plants in a soil less mix, even ones which have not been grown IN the soil, imagine how easily they may occur from our usual "cultural" practices. Kim

Melissa, I've successfully stopped crown gall on my roses that have become infected with it by carefully digging up the bush then removing the gall(s) and a thin sliver of wood at the point where it was attached. Because it's a bacteria, I spread some cheap generic antibacterial ointment on the wound. I then mix two cups of bleach in a five gallon (19 liters) bucket of water, and pour this over the soil in the hole from which I removed the bush. After the bleach water drains from the hole, I replant the bush from which the gall was removed. I've never lost a crown gall infected bush when I followed this procedure. After replanting. treat as you would any transplanted rose bush.

I grow Nicotiana, flowering tobacco, of many varieties all over the place here and have never seen galls on any. (By the way, if you teach plant biology and want a surefire, fast-acting pollen for pollen-germination exercises, Nicotiana never fails.) The bacteria is around, however, and I have had maybe three roses infected over 13 years here, two of which I discarded. The big (and I mean "big" in every sense of the word) is my 'Mrs. B.R. Cant', which started showing symptoms of crown gall (or something very like it!) about 8 years ago or so -- a big, crusty swelling at the base and then various "tumors" along the canes. My heart sank. I kept meaning to take her out, but delayed and delayed because she occupies a large amount of real estate (being 8' tall and more than 14' wide now) in a prominent position on a hillside, which I would then have to re-do (sigh), plus I absolutely love her. And, anyway, she has never seemed to suffer any decline in growth, bloom, or overall appearance during all this time (which I keep waiting for, but it hasn't happened yet), so there she stays, the exception to the "rule".