William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

Post a reply


In an effort to prevent automatic submissions, we require that you complete the following challenge.

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF

Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by ZMWT01 » Fri Aug 30, 2019 8:09 am

This is the second cultivar bred from William Shakespeare 2000 and the same pollen parent. Grows on own roots for several years already. Beautiful mid pink to magenta colour (according to weather), delicious pure Damask (old rose) scent. Flowers are 6-8 cm in diameter, fully double rosette shape (as per this photo). As the other cultivar mentioned above, this one is a vigorous, almost thornless shrub. Both are very healthy, no issues with them.
Image

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by bvanderhoek » Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:54 pm

Beautiful!

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by ZMWT01 » Thu Aug 29, 2019 9:03 pm

This cultivar is a direct descendant from William Shakespeare 2000. It grows on own roots for several years now. The pollen parent is a bit of a secret right now, as I wish to explore this parent a bit more, to evaluate its merits. The growth of this cultivar is upright but bushy and the canes are arching up (instead of shooting straight). Leaves are mid-green. The plant has a few thorns only, the blooms are flat rosettes, fully double, red-crimson. The scent is strong Damask with unusual orange fruit overtones (rather than more usual lemon).
Image

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by mntlover » Wed Aug 28, 2019 4:38 pm

Thanks for resurrecting this thread and the info!

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by ZMWT01 » Wed Aug 28, 2019 7:55 am

And old thread, but worth resurrecting.
Yes, WS2000 is fertile. For best results use it as a seed parent. I have, and it produced some amazing cultivars.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, Sydney Australia (??equivalent climate to USDA Zone 10a/b) » Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:00 am

Thx Jadae :0)

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Jadae (zone 8b) » Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:00 am

The best way to deal with that is to soak to bound ball in water for a day and then wriggle all of the soil matter off of the root structure while it is still in the water/bucket.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, Sydney Australia (??equivalent climate to USDA Zone 10a/b) » Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:00 am

Yet ANOTHER of a long list of roses that have lived in my garden and now can R.I.P

:0)

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, Sydney Australia (??equivalent climate to USDA Zone 10a/b) » Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:00 am

UPDATE..

My WS2000 plant had started to behave weirdly, to say the least.. It kept wilting on me lately despite adequate watering, and cooler weather..Other roses in the same plot had been planted in mid-summer and at least one month later into the summer, without any such troubles..

I got sick of this, and pulled WS2000 out a few days ago, to see what was going on underneath...

The rootball was as dry as a chip, and there was absolutely no new root growth.. (no surprise LOL!!)..

An example of how the rootball of potbound potted plants repells water, if allowed to dry out in the pot over time. Such a rootball WILL NOT RE-WET easily as a result (I would love to throw this rose back at the grower, but I pitty him for his poor culturing skills)....So I threw it in the bin.

So looking back at what I had done, I had unwittingly plonked the water-repelling rootball into the Earth, without actually LOOKING first at the rootball and what was going on with it...I should have hit the rootball and dislodged all of hte the potting mix, and soaked the darned thing in a bucket of water for a few hours at least, before planting in the ground..lesson learnt!! :(

One professor at university once taught me the following very simple idea...."More is missed by not looking than by not knowing"..wise words, sir!

BTW, I am not going to bother with WS2000 in rose breeding for the time being, all the "signs" are telling me not to bother.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, (Sydney Australia zone 10a/b equiv.) » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:00 am

Paul, and Robert, this is quite fascinating to hear about. How weird?!

Some time in the future I hope to revisit this thread and report further observations on WS2000, along the lines you suggest, here!

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Robert Neil Rippetoe » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:00 am

"the late ones suddenly support formation of anthers"

So true.

Believe it or not I've got a young seedling from 'Out of the Night' created from just such a fluke.

I hope it lives.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by paul barden » Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:00 am

George,

I suggest that if you find what you think might be stigmas, then put some pollen on 'em and see what happens. What have you got to lose?? You may be able to provide the rest of us with some definitive information on the "breedability" of this rose!

By the way, many roses do not produce anthers during the first half of the growing season, but something changes as the season wears on and they make anthers later. I find this tends to happen with very double flowers; early blooms are far more double than the late season blooms, and the late ones suddenly support formation of anthers. With plants that I know this to be true of, I plan on collecting pollen very late in the season and freezing it to be used at the appropriate time the next Spring. (Dry the pollen thoroughly before freezing, of course) So, you may want to continue searching 'William Shakespeare 2000' through to the very end of the season, expecting to save that pollen for the following year. I have an entire drawer in my freezer filled with containers of rose pollen, waiting to be put to use in May!

Good luck,

Paul

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, (Sydney Australia zone 10a/b equiv.) » Sun Feb 07, 2010 1:00 am

No anthers were found on 4 flower buds of my WS2000, when I looked yesterday. Earlier here, I noted what I thought to be an absence of easily discernible stigma at the centre of the flower, however I looked really close at the ends of the styles this time with the webcam, and could see tiny stigma at the ends.

Are these rudimentary/non-functional, or is it impossible to say based on the tiny size they have?

Has anybody actually TRIED to pollinate WS2000, here?

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Robert Neil Rippetoe » Sun Feb 07, 2010 1:00 am

These conversations do tend to drift.

Long story short, not all roses are going to work in all climates.

In the end we shouldn't worry about it and grow what works best for us.

I'm guessing the "Fairy" roses will also be another option for you Simon.

I tend to try to take the road less traveled, mainly because I find it more interesting and have the luxury of doing so.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Simon » Sun Feb 07, 2010 1:00 am

Very similar crosses... hmmm... only one generation further from gigantea... bet that's what is affecting the density of the branching too... wish we had 'Oakington Ruby' readily available... maybe that would be a good cross. I have a plant being marketted here as chinensis 'minima' on order for this season... maybe that would be a simialr option to also do what you are doing if the LL x 'Mutabilis' line falls though... ahyway... as how about that 'Chianti' huh LOL

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Robert Neil Rippetoe » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:00 am

Simon I used the same strategy with 'Amber Cloud'.

Unfortunately the only surviving seedling primarily took after the seed parent in terms of growth habit.

I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

Link: www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.121954

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Simon (Australia) » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:00 am

I have hips forming on 'Lorraine Lee' this year with 'Mutabilis'. I was looking at increasing the branching with this.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, (Sydney Australia zone 10a/b equiv.) » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:00 am

good luck :0)

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by Robert Neil Rippetoe » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:00 am

It sets OP hips and they contain seed. I'm sure it's fertile.

The growth habit is open and floppy. If I carry it forward I'll probably try it with a mini to try to increase branching.

Winter flowering is good which is one of the things I'm breeding for. Too many roses and too many tangents to explore.

We'll see.

Re: William Shakespeare 2000... is it fertile?

by George, (Sydney Australia zone 10a/b equiv.) » Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:00 am

Have you had a chance to assess RBXLOL for fertility, Robert?

Top