(2004)  Page(s) 313-314.  Includes photo(s).
 
A true, verified sample of “Bremo Double Musk” was obtained from The Center for Historic Plants at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello estate and compared with other known musk varieties (Fig. 1A). The banding patterns seen in the new sample were identical to other known musk varieties, indicating that “Bremo Double Musk,” is, in fact, a true musk rose

(2004)  Page(s) 314-315.  
 
[RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of numerous varieties of roses. Utilizing ‘Katie Bell’s Devonianthus’, it was determined that roses grown today as “Tradd Street Yellow” and ‘Devoniensis’ are very likely the real, original, ‘Devoniensis’.]
‘Devoniensis’ is a historic Tea rose variety introduced in its shrub form in 1838 by Foster and the nursery Prince & Company, and in the climbing form in 1858 by Pavitt and Curtis (Cairnes, 1993). Growers in England and California have what they believe to be the original ‘Devoniensis’, and sell it as such. The rose currently grown appears to match old paintings and descriptions, but there has been no solid historic link to prove it to be the “real” thing. Charles Walker (North Carolina State University, Raleigh) grew a rose that Katie Bell had gotten from her mother, who had always called it “Devonianthus,” undoubtedly a mispronunciation of ‘Devoniensis’. Since the original rose was introduced in 1838, the further back in time a person can be found growing the rose under its name, the stronger the evidence becomes to believe that the rose is correctly named. Katie Bell’s family had been growing that rose prior to 1884 (C. Walker, personal communication). Another rose found in Charleston, SC, by Ruth Knopf, called “Tradd Street Yellow,” appears to be identical to the California form of ‘Devoniensis’ obtained from Vintage Rose Gardens, Sebastopol, Calif. All three varieties were analyzed via RAPD-PCR. As shown in Fig. 3A, each band in “Katie Bell’s Devonianthus” was found in both “Tradd Street Yellow” and ‘Devoniensis’. This leads to the conclusion that all three are the same rose and supports the idea that the rose grown commercially is the real ‘Devoniensis’.
 

(2004)  
 
RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of certain varieties of roses.
The question of the identity of ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’/‘Bloomfield Abundance’ was investigated, indicating that the plant currently grown under both names is truly a sport of ‘Cecile Brunner’, and should be classified as ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’.

Complete article is available online – see publication listing for URL

(2004)  
 
[RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of certain varieties of roses.
The question of the identity of ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’/‘Bloomfield Abundance’ was investigated, indicating that the plant currently grown under both names is truly a sport of ‘Cecile Brunner’, and should be classified as ‘Spray Cecile Brunner’.]

The predominantly American view has been that there are three forms of ‘Cécile Brunner’: ‘Cécile Brunner’, a small growing shrub in the Polyantha class cultivated since 1881 (Cairns, 1993); ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’, a much larger growing rose with huge sprays of flowers that repeats well; and ‘Climbing Cécile Brunner’, an even larger rose that usually is once-flowering in the spring. The British consider the ‘Spray’ form actually to be ‘Bloomfield Abundance’, a hybrid of ‘Sylvia’ and ‘Dorothy Page-Roberts’ made by Thomas in 1920 (Cairns, 1993) and classified as a Floribunda. If this view is correct then the DNA profiles of ‘Bloomfield Abundance’ should be dramatically different from the ‘Cécile Brunner’ varieties, as they would be totally different classes of roses (Floribunda versus Polyantha). The RAPD profiles of these varieties show tremendous similarities between the shrub and the climbing form (Fig. 3B). Examination of the profile of ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’/‘Bloomfield Abundance’ shows an almost identical profile to the shrub variety (Fig. 3B). Therefore ‘Spray Cécile Brunner’ is most likely a sport of ‘Cécile Brunner’ and is probably unrelated to ‘Sylvia’ and ‘Dorothy Page-Roberts’.

Complete article is available online – see publication listing for URL

(2004)  Page(s) 314-315.  
 
[RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of numerous varieties of roses. Utilizing ‘Katie Bell’s Devonianthus’, it was determined that roses grown today as “Tradd Street Yellow” and ‘Devoniensis’ are very likely the real, original, ‘Devoniensis’.]
‘Devoniensis’ is a historic Tea rose variety introduced in its shrub form in 1838 by Foster and the nursery Prince & Company, and in the climbing form in 1858 by Pavitt and Curtis (Cairnes, 1993). Growers in England and California have what they believe to be the original ‘Devoniensis’, and sell it as such. The rose currently grown appears to match old paintings and descriptions, but there has been no solid historic link to prove it to be the “real” thing. Charles Walker (North Carolina State University, Raleigh) grew a rose that Katie Bell had gotten from her mother, who had always called it “Devonianthus,” undoubtedly a mispronunciation of ‘Devoniensis’. Since the original rose was introduced in 1838, the further back in time a person can be found growing the rose under its name, the stronger the evidence becomes to believe that the rose is correctly named. Katie Bell’s family had been growing that rose prior to 1884 (C. Walker, personal communication). Another rose found in Charleston, SC, by Ruth Knopf, called “Tradd Street Yellow,” appears to be identical to the California form of ‘Devoniensis’ obtained from Vintage Rose Gardens, Sebastopol, Calif. All three varieties were analyzed via RAPD-PCR. As shown in Fig. 3A, each band in “Katie Bell’s Devonianthus” was found in both “Tradd Street Yellow” and ‘Devoniensis’. This leads to the conclusion that all three are the same rose and supports the idea that the rose grown commercially is the real ‘Devoniensis’.

(2004)  Page(s) 314.  
 
RAPD-PCR analysis was used to answer questions regarding the identity of numerous varieties of roses.... 
The suspected pollen parent is ‘Fragrant Cloud’, a rose grown in close proximity to ‘Carefree Beauty’. DNA analysis of all three varieties was used to investigate parentage. If ‘Xanadu’ resulted from a cross-pollination of ‘Carefree Beauty’ with ‘Fragrant Cloud’, then half of the bands resulting from the ‘Xanadu’ RAPD-PCR analysis would match with ‘Carefree Beauty’, and the other half would match with ‘Fragrant Cloud’. As seen in Fig. 1B, every band in ‘Xanadu’ was found in ‘Carefree Beauty’, and, while some bands did match up between ‘Xanadu’ and ‘Fragrant Cloud’, there were no bands that were unique to these two varieties and not to ‘Carefree Beauty’. Therefore, it appears that ‘Xanadu’ is not a hybrid of ‘Fragrant Cloud’, but a result of a self-pollination of ‘Carefree Beauty


Complete article is available online – see publication listing for URL