HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
Plazbo 
-
-
|
I believe NOA16079 should be merged with NOA16071 Showpiece Lipstick.
The New Zealand Plant Variety Rights grant number 34868 says a commercial synonym for NOA16079 is Showpiece Lipstick.
Double checking before a merge.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 7 posted
19 JUN 22 by
jedmar
|
Noa16071 and Noa16079 are distinct varietal names, and should not be merged. The only reason can be that Noack introduced a different rose as 'Showpiece Lipstick' in NZ, or that the synonym 'Showpiece Lipstick' is incorrect for Noa16071. The latter needs checking.
|
REPLY
|
|
Perhaps member Plazbo can help further, see his comment in 'NOA1112130‘
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 7 posted
19 JUN 22 by
Plazbo
|
Australia PBR has NOA16079 as Showpiece Lipstick
pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/pbr_db/plant_detail.cfm?AID=39362379
noack has Noa16071 as Charisma
noack-rosen.de/produkt/charisma/
if we go to the tesselaar marketing photos for the showpiece line
www.flickr.com/photos/tesselaar/albums/72157718483636093
specifically
www.flickr.com/photos/tesselaar/50993818772/in/album-72157718483636093/
and do a reverse image search
tinyurl.com/yckbnjre
we find that same image being used in europe for Crazy Pink Voluptia eg
www.roseraiebarth.com/fr/rosiers-a-grandes-fleurs/rosier-crazy-pink-voluptia-noa16071.html
different picture showpiece lipstick picture (from the tessellar link above) on the german adr website
www.adr-rose.de/adr-rosen/rose/charismar/
So either someone sent out Noa16071 photos for NOA16079 or NOA16079 is a typo or something. For whatever reason, the marketing photos are the same for both if they aren't the same rose.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 7 posted
19 JUN 22 by
Plazbo
|
Having said that (and because I don't want to edit the previous comment and get escaped html characters, so new comment)
The photo in the Australian PBR for NOA16079 (despite being listed as showpiece lipstick) doesn't look like the pictures on the tessellar site (or what people have posted as showpiece lipstick in australia rose facebook groups)...which is weird in itself. Maybe, Flower Carpet Pty Ltd (as the agent) did a goof and no ones noticed? The pbr photo looks more like showpiece blush, looking at the usa patent picture for showpiece blush show the darker petal base that's obvious on the australia pbr photo
www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.319066
the photo for blush on the australia pbr doesn't look like blush (pigment is too deep)....
pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/pbr_db/plant_detail.cfm?AID=39362376
something goofy going on
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 7 posted
19 JUN 22 by
jedmar
|
What is clear is that if there are two different varietal names, these are distinct roses: So Noa16071 is not Noa16079, even though they may be similar or sister seedlings (very close numbers).
Noa16071 is clearly Charisma, syn. Crazy Pink Voluptia.
According to the Australian PBR Noa16079 is Showpiece Lipstick.
Photo confusion on nursery websites are not proof enough.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 7 posted
19 JUN 22 by
Plazbo
|
Even in the USA patent for NOA16079 uses the same images as is used for Charisma (NOA16071)....interesting paperwork either way since either the USA patent is using images for the wrong rose or the pictures used for Charisma (for german adr and such) aren't pictures of Charisma.
|
REPLY
|
|
Honestly wouldn't be the first time. Poulsen made some booboos in the 1990s.
They clear because there are so few patent examiners for plants, and roses are considered niche.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
16 FEB by
KoryO
|
Available from - Kate Roses
kateroses.com
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
16 FEB by
jedmar
|
The website of this nursery has insufficient information about location, owners and so on.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
19 FEB by
Plazbo
|
Id assume it's the same seller that was running KatesRoseGarden on etsy (only on there it was her "Grandmothers" rose garden....that was somehow selling plants that only released in Japan in like 2020...), they were either being shipped from Japan or propagated in the USA and a lot of the plants were undersize/subpar....just a lot of not great feedback. Believe something potentially questionable legally too, I know I read a post somewhere from one the Japanese breeders saying it was violating their rights, just don't remember where that post was.
|
REPLY
|
|
There are some stunningly beautiful roses from Japan being offered on etsy lately. High prices, and, as you say, one wonders about the legality. I wish the actual Japanese companies would consider selling some of their creations in the USA.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
To be marketed by florists in the U.S. and Canada starting in November 2011. See,
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-worlds-first-blue-rose---blue-rose-applause-129790278.html
|
REPLY
|
|
100% blue pigmented petals, huh? I giggled a bit when I looked at the picture. Doesn't look any bluer to me than Neptune, Blue Girl, or Angel Face. They describe it as having a sweet smell, but methinks I smell something else going on.....
|
REPLY
|
|
I am more impressed with Japan's other mauve roses, which tend to look very ghost-like and romantic, than I am with this rose. It looks so harsh and ... "eh."
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 6 posted
28 APR 17 by
Plazbo
|
Personally I'd be interested to see what breeders could do with it, there's potential there to get far bluer than possible currently.
On the flip side though, given they know a large part of the issue is PH you'd think they'd do a bunch of testing to see if there are cultivars with a more appropriate PH and then either try the procedure again or cross with it rather than just leave it at a point that's already been achieved (or beaten). It's lack of marketting makes me suspicious though.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 6 posted
3 MAY 19 by
CybeRose
|
Breed Sci. 2018 Jan; 68(1): 79–87.
Published online 2018 Feb 17.
Recent advances in the research and development of blue flowers
Naonobu Noda*
"... the research group of Suntory and Florigene developed blue roses by genetic engineering (Katsumoto et al. 2007). Roses that have petals with a high flavonol content and relatively high pH—traits that are considered to be suitable for blue color development—were selected for gene introduction. Among various F3′5′H genes, the pansy F3′5′H gene was found to be effective for producing delphinidin-based anthocyanins in roses. In addition, a Torenia gene encoding anthocyanin 5-aromatic acyltransferase was introduced with pansy F3′5′H, which enabled acylation of anthocyanin with an aromatic organic acid, and the world’s first blue rose, Suntory blue rose Applause was created."
Maybe it is more impressive in person. Otherwise, I think I'd prefer to work with cultivars that are not patented inside as well as out.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 6 posted
4 MAY 19 by
jedmar
|
With all the work they did, it is still not "blue" as claimed
|
REPLY
|
|
Suntory is a MASSIVE corporation in Japan. It is plausible that this was more about proof of concept (genetic manipulation) for other parts of their industry, their stocks, and whatever else they were trying to boost at the time.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
Is there an error in the height listed? I believe this is considered a short rose, under 2'.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 5 posted
27 JUN 21 by
jedmar
|
While European nurseries give the height of 'Blue for You' as 90-100 cm, in Australia it seems to attain 150-200 cm. Who knows why' Different understock, climate?
|
REPLY
|
|
English nurseries list the height as 60-90cm, and that is my experience here, so even smaller!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 5 posted
28 JUN 21 by
Plazbo
|
I assume mostly just the longer growing season. Middle of winter now (and the winter solstice just the other day so days are technically getting more daylight) and many moderns (and china's and polyantha's) like Blue For You are still sending out the occasional flower.
|
REPLY
|
|
Blue for You gets to about four feet in San Diego, growing year round.
|
REPLY
|
|
Yes in Australia mine reached 2.5 mtr high. Very upright strong growth. Does not like heavy pruning.
|
REPLY
|
|
|
