HELPMEFIND PLANTS COMMERCIAL NON-COMMERCIAL RESOURCES EVENTS PEOPLE RATINGS
|
|
|
-
-
|
An excellent rose that will tolerate a shaded situation. Very hardy, no disease. Continuous flowering.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
14 JUL 12 by
Roselee
|
My Wisely2008 is about two years old and is a nice healthy arching shrub, but has only had a very few blooms on the ends of its long stems throughout its lifespan.. Did you, or anyone else, find this variety to be a slow starter, or did I get a dud? I live in SW Texas. It's hot and dry here, but the rose in planted in good soil and gets plenty of water.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
11 days ago by
okdb
|
Old thread, but I’d be interested to hear any update on this. Given that DA themselves call this rose “shade tolerant”, and they live in a country that has only heard of truly hot sun, I imagine it may actually do better with some shade in hot climates. I’ve just bought it myself for a shadier spot (long arms of an old apple sitting overhead) but I live in a z10b subtropical climate with an ozone hole nearby, so here’s hoping.
Anyone had any recent observations?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
21 NOV by
okdb
|
Hi guys -- anyone know how to reliably tell Anais Segales (NZ) from De la Grifferaie? I discovered a set of suckering rootstocks under a blanket of weeds at our new property; the flowers vary somewhat, but I think it's likely location rather than different varieties. (Even the thorniness varies from cane to cane!) A nurserywoman suggested they were likely De la Grifferaie, as it was a common rootstock found around old houses. The flowers seem to match up, at least to some of the photos I've seen, albeit a more blue-leaning pink rather than red-leaning; the shrubby-yet-rambling habit also seems to match.
I also bought an Anais Segales, which has flowered for the first time this year: they're remarkably similar! In fairness these were its first flowers, and the first flowers are often atypical here. Honestly it's hard to tell. In the long run it may matter, as AS is said to sucker widely but only to 3ft tall, while DlaG can apparently get to 6ft or taller. Any ideas anyone?
|
REPLY
|
|
Lots of confusion. Three suckering roses probably used as understocks, once-flowering, and with mauve flowers.
Some people use the name De la Grifferaie for another rose that is widespread and has many study names: you'll find photos under "Mrs Something" (and some in the De la Grifferaie file, eg Bonita's pictures). Whether it's Gaspard Monge is a matter of ongoing debate.
DlG is not a rose I'm familiar with.
"Anais Segalas in Australia" will grow taller in shade, and will scramble up through other bushes.
I think you'll have to wait and watch to see what you've got.
|
REPLY
|
|
Please see my 2011 Members Comment in "Mrs Something" where I tried to sort out the confusion between 'De la Grifferaie' and "Mrs Something".
I wouldn't mind betting "Anaïs Ségalas (In Australia)" is in fact 'De la Grifferaie'. I have a rose which I believe to be 'De la Grifferaie' - this foundling is in HelpMeFind as "Veg Gdn - South".
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 6 posted
24 NOV by
okdb
|
Thanks -- I figured that would probably be the answer. That's the problem with these untidy plants that are all unique from seed! Guess I'll just have to wait and see, though whether I'll ever work it out is doubtful :-/ Could always grown corn instead ...
|
REPLY
|
|
Perhaps if you, and other growers, keep adding photos of specific characteristics to the "Anaïs Ségalas (In Australia)" page (yes, I know you are in New Zealand) it would help a lot in identifying the Australian foundlings. I grow none of the other five foundlings so cannot help any further.
I am ever hopeful that people who know exactly what 'De la Grifferaie' looks like will contribute to that page.
|
REPLY
|
|
Alas, I've given away the Trevor Griffiths books that, with Deane Ross's books, introduced me to heritage roses. What we grow as Anais Segalas was mentioned in one, and I assume there were photos too. Could someone check that please, and whether De la Grifferaie was mentioned as a different rose? Are either or both in the Trevor Griffiths garden (in NZ)?
|
REPLY
|
|
Trevor Griffiths didn’t list ‘De la Grifferaie’ in his two ‘My World of Old Roses’ books.
He did include an excellent photo of ‘Anais Segales’ in his gallica section and this brief 1983 reference is in HelpMeFind.
If his photo of the neat button-eyed ‘Anais Segales’ influenced Australians to determine that the foundlings were ‘Anais Segales’, then I would now think that the foundlings are not in fact the rather messy-bloomed ‘De la Grifferaie’.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
10 SEP 04 by
Unregistered Guest
|
Rosa longicuspis is a very different species to Rosa mulliganii. I have both growing side by side and they are not one and the same species.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 5 posted
14 MAY by
okdb
|
Hi there — it’s been 20 years, but does anyone know the difference between R. longicuspis and mulliganii? The Friends of Vintage Roses guide (from California) lists it as being once-flowering, with top marks for fragrance and gives a date of 1917. It states: “Famous from the White Garden at Sissinghurst Castle, where Vita Sackville-West planted it in the 1940s, and knew it under the name Rosa longicuspis. Tiny white flowers in dense broad panicles lace the air with the scent of tropical fruits. A house eater, good on a large arbor.”
Is this correct? I’ve seen R.longicuspis for sale here in NZ but would be interested to know whether it could instead be mulliganii — if there’s a difference, of course. There seems to be a lot of confusion with old rose identification in NZ lol
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 5 posted
14 MAY by
 Lee H.
|
There is a difference. Graham Stuart Thomas details both species under chapter “Ramblers Derived From the Musk Or Synstylae of Genus Rosa”, if you have access to his book “Species Roses and Modern Shrub Roses”. But they are apparently very close, and he admits to once having distributed mulliganii as longicuspis.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 5 posted
21 MAY by
okdb
|
Thanks for that! I’ll try track it down sometime. Been trying to choose a couple of tree-climbers for our small orchard — to ramble up some big non-fruiting trees around the edges and bring the bees in. Himalayan musks seemed a good idea - single flowers, lots of hips, highly scented. The species longicuspis, helenae and brunonii are available here, though it sounds like brunonii would swallow the whole section, let alone the orchard. Reports vary on the first two — apparently longicuspis is manageable by comparison, but I also read it could be the parent of Wedding Day (which is rampant!) … while helenae is listed as both smaller and larger than longicuspis depending on the reference (though all agree it’s lovely) … it’s a puzzle!
As an aside, apparently when I was born my Mum planted Wedding Day to run along our 50-60’ front fence. After 4 years we moved out, at least partly to get away from it. Unsurprisingly a bit wary of that one.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 5 posted
22 MAY by
Lee H.
|
It may not be what you're looking for, but for a tree climber, I can heartily recommend 'New Dawn'. Even in Zone 6, it scrambled to the top of an 8m dogwood in less than 3 years, and seems to never be without new blooms.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 5 posted
22 MAY by
okdb
|
New Dawn does look lovely! I wouldn’t mind it for a different spot actually — I need another tree climber for a dead tree elsewhere — but in this case I’m aiming for the single flowers in spring(ish) + hips in autumn combo. Feeds the bees when the trees are flowering and keeps the birds distracted while they’re fruiting. That’s the idea anyway … we’ll see if it works! :-)
|
REPLY
|
|
|
