Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

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: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by aimbeault » Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:32 am

A big thank you Karl for this information and for the references, it is much appreciated! I will see next year if the same phenomenon repeats itself, then I can multiply the sport.

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by Karl K » Fri Aug 30, 2019 1:55 am

Propagating patented plants is technically illegal, but the patent owner is responsible for prosecuting. No Patent Police, as far as I know. Besides, you must propagate your sport, just to be sure it is stable.

Oh, and looking through the old Rec.gardens.roses archives I came across this item.

rec.gardens.roses 2/26/97
Who in the name of heavens is going to prosecute someone for propagating a few plants for his own garden? Not me!

Thorny subject. It's more fun to get back to roses!

Sam McGredy

In years past, propagating plants was common practice just to correct some of the problems that come from improper bud selection. Cultivars that were popular would be propagated from any twig or bud that could be salvaged. It could take a few years of proper bud selection to recover a specimen that represented the cultivar at its best.

For example,
American Rose Magazine 2(9): 152 (May-June 1938)
On Selecting Budwood
James W. Blanks
Some time ago I received a letter from an Oregon "Proof of the Pudding" correspondent, taking me to task for a report on Rouge Mallerin, and in defending myself I struck up quite a correspondence. I found out that he operated a nursery, and because I liked the way he talked, and I, too, wanted to try some plants from the rose heaven of Oregon, I ordered several from him. When they came they were the most magnificent plants I had ever received. Everyone who sees them comments on their vigor. I wrote and asked him how he did it, and his reply was, "Bud selection."

One of these plants, a Mrs. Pierre S. du Pont is planted in the middle of some Mrs. du Ponts from one of our larger, much-advertised, mass-production nurseries. (The one whose test-gardens I travel about 300 miles each year to see.) The difference is so apparent that a visitor to my garden before the plants had bloomed, who knew nothing about this affair, asked why I planted a Radiance in a bed of Mrs. du Pont!
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/ ... d1938.html

Another:
American Rose Annual 22: 124-126 1937
The Nurseryman's Rose Responsibility
P. R. Bosley
I began to notice that Rev. F. Page-Roberts was just an ordinary yellow rose—a long way from the beautiful two-toned rose it is pictured. We set about to find the most highly colored blooms, and to cut bud-wood from only those very sticks. Continuing this over a number of years, Rev. F. Page-Roberts began to look like its color illustration. President Herbert Hoover has not been with us long, but already it has shown signs of degenerating. We budded 100 bushes from the best blooms of "Hoover," to find that only about six of this 100 were very superior, and from this six we began to rebuild our strain. Texas Centennial, just introduced, is beginning to show slight signs of variation, but with careful selection of bud-wood it can live with us as an outstanding rose variety. (Some sorts, like Radiance, seem so firmly fixed that all efforts to improve the strain seem useless. Many times we have found improvement on members of the Radiance group, only to find, next year, that it went back to the type again.)
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/ ... n1937.html

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by aimbeault » Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:43 pm

Kim
Thank you Kim for this encouraging information. I cross my fingers for positive fertility and germination!?

Margit
I agree with you Margit that it should be a nice plant. I thought too to do something with this cane, probably some hardwood cuttings at the end of the season. If not, it will be next summer with softwood cuttings.
André

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by Margit Schowalter » Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:14 pm

You might want to try rooting a cutting from that cane. It would be neat if the new double flowers carried through to make a whole plant.

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by roseseek » Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:26 am

You're welcome, Andre. That could well be the case. Ralph Moore's Crested Sweetheart was so double, it didn't produce any stamen nor anthers nor did it set any fruit, until a fertile branch on one of the huge old plants at Sequoia Nursery mutated and began setting hips. Unfortunately nothing ever came from any of its seeds, but it at least showed it was possible.

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by aimbeault » Sun Aug 04, 2019 10:02 am

Thank you very much Kim for this clarification. I will follow up its development. As Prairie Sweetheart does not set fruits, I hope that the sport will be able to produce some. If not, at least its pollen will be more accessible.
André

Re: Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by roseseek » Sat Aug 03, 2019 10:29 pm

A sport is when the original type changes its expression. A reversion is when a sport reverts to its sport parent. If this portion of the plant continues flowering like this, I would be inclined to call it a sport. Had Prairie Sweetheart arisen as a very double sport from this, your rose would be the reversion.

Prairie Sweetheart «Sport»?

by aimbeault » Sat Aug 03, 2019 4:07 pm

My Prairie Sweetheart is just finishing its first flowering, and already new grows show their buds. But on a new 5 feet stem that sprouts from the base of the plant, the flowers are different. They are double instead of very double and quartered (see photo). Can we say that it is a »sport» or maybe a «reversion»? What is a difference between these expressions?
Attachments
Prairie Sweetheart (Sport) 5096.JPG
DSC_5164.JPG

Top