|
|
'Rosa woodsii 'Kimberley'' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
Initial post
11 APR 21 by
Rosebev
|
HMF lists Rosa woodsii 'Kimberley' as a species/wild rose, but if it was truly a wild rose, the single quotes around 'Kimberley' usually designate a cultivated variety, not a true species. If it was a true species, wouldn't 'Kimberley' be latinized somehow? (e.g. Kimberleyii in italicized print). Or is this a rose that was found by Nicholls and introduced to the world? Or did Nicholls hybridize it or change it somehow so that it became a cultivar? Or is it a sport of the original R. woodsii? I'm so confused..... Thanks for any light that can be shed on this rose.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
15 APR 21 by
 Margit Schowalter
|
Hi Bev
There is an article in the HMF Ezine discussing “How To Write a Rose Name” by Crenagh Elliott that may be useful. Crenagh states: “If there is a particular type of a species selected it may either have a latin descriptor added i.e. lutea yellow, alba white, plena double, etc. or a name in single quotes i.e. Rosa moyesii 'Geranium' or 'Lipstick' or 'Sealing Wax' all of which are colour selections from a species with a wide colour range.”
Hope this helps.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
15 APR 21 by
Margit Schowalter
|
The University of British Columbia Botanical Garden page describes Kimberley as:
Rosa woodsii subsp. Ultramontana ‘Kimberley’
Accession: 1989-0761 Origin: Canada Provenance: Wild
Kimberley has been propagated by Bylands Nursery in British Columbia and commonly is seen for sale at Canadian Tire Stores.
|
REPLY
|
|
