HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
'Dundee Rambler' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
The ‘Dundee Rambler’ page says 17-25 petals. The 1904, 1936, references quote “semi-double”; 1848, 1855, 1860, 1873, 1895, 1895, 1935, 1985, 1986, 1993, 1998, 1999 “double”; 1877 “most double”; 1836, 1993 “very double”.
I have a foundling “Jim’s Rambler” which I am sure is ‘Dundee Rambler’ and I have counted 30 to 40 petals. Before I merge these two roses, does anyone have any thoughts on what the petal count for ‘Dundee Rambler’ should show?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 6 posted
1 DEC 21 by
Lee H.
Patricia, if you receive no more replies, garden.org says: “double: 16-25 petals“. I certainly can’t vouch for the source or accuracy.
|
REPLY
|
You are probably right Lee. I’ll leave it for a couple of more days before merging the files. Thanks for your reply.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 6 posted
1 DEC 21 by
jedmar
The photos of the rose on sale by David Austin has about 30 petals
|
REPLY
|
Many thanks Jedmar. full (26-40 petals seems a more accurate petal count. I’ve merged the files.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 6 posted
1 DEC 21 by
Lee H.
Patricia, your post interested me concerning how we have defined all these terms over the years, and I had always assumed that the petal count alone qualified how we call a blossom full, double, etc. But to my surprise (and perhaps no one else’s) that is putting the cart before the horse. The rows of petals, and remaining stamens determine that, and rosarians over the years have applied “normal” petal counts to those classifications. Does that mean we can possibly have a true “double” blossom with more than 25 petals? I think it does. Brent Dickerson may give us the best explanation I have found in “The Old Rose Adventurer : The Once Blooming Old European Rose, And More”: “Roses are always polypetalous, which is to say that they are composed of more than one petal, never less than five, unless they are abortive; regular, which is to say that they are composed of parts which are similar in form and size. In the corolla, one looks at the number of petals. When they are quite lacking, one says that the flower is apetalous; should there be five, the flower is single; if there are two or three rows of them, it is semi-double; if there are many, but you can still find some stamens in the center, it is double; if there are only a very few stamens, it is very double; finally, if all the pistils and stamens have been metamorphosed into petals, the blossom is full. Collectors of roses complain that these words double, semi-double, very double, etc., do not state with mathematical precision the number of petals in a flower; but as that precision means little to botanists, because they regard double flowers as monstrosities without interest for research, these epithets have been consecrated by usage time out of mind, and have been those used up through the present.”
|
REPLY
|
I too like a simple petal count. HelpMeFind guides with the following: single (4-8 petals) single to semi-double semi-double (9-16 petals) semi-double to double double (17-25 petals) very double full (26-40 petals) moderately full very full (41+ petals
Possibly the 1904 reference which said ‘Dundee Rambler’ was for “rough situations where others will not thrive” gave it such rough conditions that the rose only produced miserable half-starved semi-double blooms.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
I believe "Jim's Rambler (W.A.)" which often shows pink tints, may well be ‘Dundee Rambler’ 1836. I have therefor separated "David Ruston's White Rambler (S.A.)" into its own file as this has apparently never shown any pink at all.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Andrew and Palustrus, (if you watch the daily Q and A forum)' would you take a look at the photos of "Jim's Rambler" please. I am particularly looking for feedback on the cluster shape. The last time I searched my computer, I could not find 'Lady Blanche' entering Australia, but Nancy Steen did say it got to New Zealand.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Would those who grow "Jim's Rambler" or "David Ruston's White Rambler (S.A.)" please take a look at the references for the 1909 'Mme. Portier-Durel'. It is looking quite a feasible identification and it was in Australia prior to 1916.
|
REPLY
|
|
|