|
-
-
Thank you for these photos. An absolutely fascinating rose. I think I may have to try it.
|
REPLY
|
Amazing, like an Hibiscus.
|
REPLY
|
Funny - not depreciating the achievements of those who pioneered these crosses, but if you cross a rose with something that isn't a rose, what do you get? Something that doesn't look like a rose.
|
REPLY
|
What makes you think it was crossed with something that wasn't a rose? Hulthemia persica is just an outdated synonym for Rosa persica.
|
REPLY
|
Oui, Cyrus est un joli Rosier !! Maurice
|
REPLY
|
Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. People still call these roses hulthemia hybrids.
|
REPLY
|
J’ai vu j’ai écrit sous la forme x Hulthemosa
I have seen it written as x Hulthemosa
|
REPLY
|
It used be in a separate genus, but then the botanists decided it was a rose after all.
So does it look like a rose now?
|
REPLY
|
I think x Hulthemosa is the Latin name for the bigenetic hybrid between Hulthemia and Rosa.
|
REPLY
|
Hulthemia doesn't exist anymore - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_persica
"Rosa persica is an anomalous species of rose that at one time was placed in a separate genus Hulthemia"
That classification is obsolete, at least to botanists.
|
REPLY
|
Yes, the lumpers made Hulthemia part of Rosa.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#12 of 12 posted
10 SEP 17 by
jedmar
I think these crosses would not have succeeded if Hulthemia were not Rosa. Otherwise, I would like to have the Rosa x tulipa in spring!
|
REPLY
|
See reply number 1.
|
REPLY
|
|