|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
Initial post
2 days ago by
 GoldBeardThePirate
|
will this ever be imported to the US? It's incredibly beautiful.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
yesterday by
Nastarana
|
Possibly, if you are open to making a deal with your local, ahem, alternative businessperson.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
yesterday by
GoldBeardThePirate
|
? underground rose dealer.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
today by
Margaret Furness
|
Don't. The risk isn't worth it. If you could see how chilli thrips have nearly destroyed rose-growing in Western Australia in the last four years, you would know that it's in all our interests to keep pests out of places they haven't reached yet.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
26 JUL 15 by
mmanners
|
I wonder if it may be time to split the 'Bloomfield Abundance' listing into two parts, perhaps with a Wiki-type "disambiguation," in that 'Spray Cecile Brunner' is the rose traditionally called by that name, yet Fred Boutin has found apparently the "real" thing, and it's quite a different rose. I see no current way, for example, to list which one grows (we have both in the FSC gardens).
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
27 JUL 15 by
Patricia Routley
|
We do have two separate files for
Bloomfield Abundance Thomas 1920 and
Spray Cecile Brunner Howard, 1941.
There are many photos of 'Spray Cecile Brunner' in the 'Bloomfield Abundance' file but I am not volunteering to move them. Hopefully, members will take up the baton and move them themselves.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 3 posted
yesterday by
Lance Mellon
|
I would say that the many photos of (as you say) Spray Cecile Brunner) in the Bloomfield Abundance file are actually not Spray Cecil Brunner but the actual original Bloomfield Abundance. See some of the black and white photos in the file with the extral long sepels not existent on the Cecil Brunner. Here is my rebuttal to this misnamed rose next to my photo in the file:
Rose photo courtesy of Lance Mellon
Peter Beales and many others conclude that Cecile Brunner and Bloomfield Abuindance are NOT the same rose. We have both and my Bloomfield Abundance has been growing here for over 70 years old. Bloomfield has the long sepels. These are missing from Cecil Brunner. Bloomfield Abundance blooms about a month later than Cecil Brunner. There are many other differences and most experts agree the two roses are different AND that the large pink rose mentioned by some is not Bloomfield Abundance. We hope this will be changed in your database.
Uploaded 21 AUG
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
today by
Margaret Furness
|
Spray Cecile Brunner was shown by Malcolm Manners' group to be almost identical with Mlle Cecile Brunner by DNA comparison, and therefore must be a sport of it. The original Bloomfield Abundance has very different parentage (wichurana x HT), and could not possibly be very similar to Mlle Cecile Brunner on DNA comparison.
So: four roses.
Mlle Cecile Brunner
Cl Cecile Brunner
Spray Cecile Brunner (originally called a climber, which it isn't, in Australia), and sold for decades in many countries as Bloomfield Abundance (which it isn't). As someone said, it grows like a triffid (makes a huge bush), has long sepals, and starts flowering later than the above two.
The above three are very similar in DNA comparisons.
Bloomfield Abundance, HT, lost for many years, unrelated to the above three, possibly rediscovered.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
yesterday by
PatProfessor
|
The US patent application (12/923,828) was abandoned 12/26/2013. The application lists Alain A. Meilland as the inventor. The application, and all current ARS publications of which I am aware, say the rose is a floribunda.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
yesterday by
Kathy Strong
|
Yep. Passionate Kisses has always been a florrie in the States.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
2 days ago by
fenriz
|
some roses are quite red here, even the german nursery where i bought my plant »corrected« the photo of their flowers into a dark-red with no slight blue or violet tint. but my roses almost never got direct sun and the plant itself is quite freshly planted, but i don’t believe this would add or eliminate the purple colour as a whole. the controversy never stops!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 4 posted
yesterday by
Kathy Strong
|
Just a question here. How did you get this site to post a picture in the comment? When I try to do that, the whole post gets rejected.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 4 posted
yesterday by
Lee H.
|
Kathy, you have to post the comment first. Then you will see a new button “Add Photo” by your comment, when you look at it from your account posts.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 4 posted
yesterday by
fenriz
|
is this feature limited in time? as i can no longer add anything.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 4 posted
yesterday by
Kathy Strong
|
That button is not there anymore. Used to have it, but it went away sometime earlier this year. Which is why I was surprised to see that it worked for somebody else now.
|
REPLY
|
|
