Just came back in from surveying the damage from heavy rains and not
spraying either fungicide or insecticide since the middle of May, and
it is terrible. I was able to fertilize with some generic three-month
granular at the end of May.

Leaving aside the vole casualties for now, here is what died or is on
its way out:

This season's bare roots, all grafted:

Arizona
Melody Parfume
Outta the Blue
Joseph's Coat
Barbra Streisand
Blue Nile

Other seasons's grafted:

Antigua
Angel Face
Mr. Lincoln
Tiffany

There is advanced borer damage on all the grafted roses, but
especially the dead one (!) that tells me I need to address this
problem. I had thought all I had was the relatively harmless kind, but
apparently not. On the dead grafted roses AND the living ones there
has been terrible canker and cane dieback. The bare roots had been
doing well--maybe half the canes very vigorous. Then they dwindled as
the rain went on.

Question:

What do you all consider good for a bareroot, in terms of how many of
the canes actually live and sprout?

Here is the big surprise, and I will not even pretend to understand
it:

Here in my zone 7B, Raleigh, NC garden, after this two-month deluge,
where I have generally sprayed for both insects and fungus over the
years, and where the soil is rich and black, where I keep the plants
well mulched, and where the temps range from 40F to 100F April to
October, ALL of my own root roses are doing well. ALL of them, from
the ones I ordered from Michael's in 2000 to the ones from Muncy's and
Roses Unlimited that I just put in last fall. Many of these are
Austins. Of all of them, the Austins look the best. Is this because
they are "English" roses and so bred to do the backstroke for a couple
of months and still survive? Or what? All the ownroots are still
green--even the hybrid teas--but all the Austins still have LEAVES.

Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

In m Shiva wrote:
Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

It stumps me too, Shiva. Possibly the grafts are grumbling about
rootstock that is waterlogged, whereas on their own weaker roots the
plant can pace itself better in poor conditions.

I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

In article .com.au,
Daniel Hanna wrote:

In m Shiva wrote:
Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

It stumps me too, Shiva. Possibly the grafts are grumbling about
rootstock that is waterlogged, whereas on their own weaker roots the
plant can pace itself better in poor conditions.

Waterlogged, soil chemistry, susceptibility to nematodes, who knows.
But I've only rarely found own roots to have weak roots. But I only
have a few really modern roses.

I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

(Shiva) writes:

Here in my zone 7B, Raleigh, NC garden, after this two-month deluge,
where I have generally sprayed for both insects and fungus over the
years, and where the soil is rich and black, where I keep the plants
well mulched, and where the temps range from 40F to 100F April to
October, ALL of my own root roses are doing well. ALL of them, from
the ones I ordered from Michael's in 2000 to the ones from Muncy's and
Roses Unlimited that I just put in last fall. Many of these are
Austins. Of all of them, the Austins look the best. Is this because
they are "English" roses and so bred to do the backstroke for a couple
of months and still survive? Or what? All the ownroots are still
green--even the hybrid teas--but all the Austins still have LEAVES.

Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

I'm not sure this is a theory, but maybe a possibility. I assume the own root
roses were potted, not bare root? If so they probably had a better root
structure than the bare root grated roses even after 12-18 months.
Can you break it down further, do you have any grafted roses that were not bare
root? How have they faired?
On the other side, in moving roses I have seen a big difference in the root
structure of own roots vs grafted roses. The own root roses I have moved have
had a large solid mat of small roots near the soil level. The grafted roses
have a much smaller mass of these small roots and a bigger number of larger,
far reaching roots. I know most of the grafted roses I have moved are on
fortuniana, but even the ones on Dr. Huey and multiflora have had similar root
systems. I have found it much easier to move own root roses because I can get
a good root ball and save many of the small feeder roots.
Just some thoughts.

Julie

The primary advantage to grafted roses is for the whosale grower, it allows
them to get a plant to the market place a year earlier than own root plants.
The root structure of a grafted rose is already established when the
grafting is done; this gives the grafted portion of the plant a boost in
establishing new canes.

Root stock is usually selected to perform in the climate and soil conditions
of the whosale grower. The root stock may not perform well in your
location. For example the growers in the SE area of the US use fortuniania
because it does well in the region. Those in the NW usually choose Dr.
Huey.

Some varieties don't do well on their own roots, the breeding program was
based on foliar and bloom performance based upon grafting. Little
consideration was given to the root system of the hybrid and as a result
they may not have a healthy vigorous root system.

Another reason for grafting is to prevent suckering, some old varieties and
species roses have VERY vigorous root systems that sucker readily and can be
a nuisance if they are not grafted. Austrian Copper and Persian Yellow come
to mind. Keep in mind that the primary goal of any organism is survival and
propagation, the species roses were successful because they could perpetuate
them selves, often due to a very robust and vigorous root system. Think
about some of our 'pest' plants, you can cut all the above ground growth and
they return from the root system. Kudzu in the South East US and bind weed
in the west are prime examples.

Just a few thoughts about grafting and roots.

Tim

There is probably a selection
bias involved. A plant that
is vigorous enough to live on its
own roots is probably vigorous enough
to fight of disease etc.

"Cass" wrote in message
.. .
In article .com.au,
Daniel Hanna wrote:

In m Shiva wrote:
Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

There are many roses that I grow own root that
will probably do much better grafted.
Dublin Bay, Kaiserin Aguste Viktoria & Sombreuil
spring to mind.

I saw a 14' monster Som. growing on neighbhors
porch that was grafted and had received
no real consideration while my own root
was euthanized after growing 8" in 2 years.


It stumps me too, Shiva. Possibly the grafts are grumbling about
rootstock that is waterlogged, whereas on their own weaker roots the
plant can pace itself better in poor conditions.

Waterlogged, soil chemistry, susceptibility to nematodes, who knows.
But I've only rarely found own roots to have weak roots. But I only
have a few really modern roses.

I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much
difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

Austins are not particularly more tolerant
of rain. If anything they are less tolerant.
Esp. w/ disease and balling. I've always wondered
how they grow such disease prone roses
in wet england. Do they spray constantly?

Abe Darby spots like crazy. And it actually
had clean clean new dawn as a parent.

--
Theo in Zone 5
Kansas City

There is probably a selection
bias involved. A plant that
is vigorous enough to live on its
own roots is probably vigorous enough
to fight of disease etc.

"Cass" wrote in message
.. .
In article .com.au,
Daniel Hanna wrote:

In m Shiva wrote:
Just an observation, no theories or claims etc. But I am thinking I'm
not going to buy anything but ownroots next year. What do you all
think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

There are many roses that I grow own root that
will probably do much better grafted.
Dublin Bay, Kaiserin Aguste Viktoria & Sombreuil
spring to mind.

I saw a 14' monster Som. growing on neighbhors
porch that was grafted and had received
no real consideration while my own root
was euthanized after growing 8" in 2 years.


It stumps me too, Shiva. Possibly the grafts are grumbling about
rootstock that is waterlogged, whereas on their own weaker roots the
plant can pace itself better in poor conditions.

Waterlogged, soil chemistry, susceptibility to nematodes, who knows.
But I've only rarely found own roots to have weak roots. But I only
have a few really modern roses.

I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much
difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

Austins are not particularly more tolerant
of rain. If anything they are less tolerant.
Esp. w/ disease and balling. I've always wondered
how they grow such disease prone roses
in wet england. Do they spray constantly?

Abe Darby spots like crazy. And it actually
had clean clean new dawn as a parent.

--
Theo in Zone 5
Kansas City

On 05 Jul 2003 23:43:16 GMT, Daniel Hanna
wrote:

think about this? Can anyone offer any theories as to why this is?

It stumps me too, Shiva. Possibly the grafts are grumbling about
rootstock that is waterlogged, whereas on their own weaker roots the
plant can pace itself better in poor conditions.

They all drain well, although we have had an awful lot of rain.



I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

I think it is the own root element, rather than the Austin element. I
also think my problem has been due to fungal disease combined with the
kind of cane borers that can kill roses. I rarely see borer damage on
the thin young canes of my own root roses. The borers seem to like the
thick stumps of the grafted roses. My oldest own roots have thick
canes, but few that have been cut off close to the crown.

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 10:32:37 -0700, Cass
wrote:



Waterlogged, soil chemistry, susceptibility to nematodes, who knows.

We don't have nematodes here. Our local ag folks do not even recommend
fortuniana root stock. The soil is fabulous, full of organic material,
rich and black. The young bare roots that died are all in the new bed,
the one a professional dug and amended for me, and I added to over a
year or so. He drilled under the clay beyond the hardpan into the sand
for drainage. Here is the kicker: right across from the young dead
grafted roses, DOING GREAT are these own-roots, from Muncy's and Roses
Unlimited, planted last fall after hanging around in pots WAYY too
long: Payl Neyron, 2 Abraham Darbys, Golden Celebration, Pat Austin,
and Penelope, Tradescant. They are actually blooming and full of buds.

In one of the other large beds in the back, ownroot Granadas, The
Prince, Tamora, and Radio Times thrive, while older bare roots bought
in 2000-2002 languish. Much dieback, no leaves. Very odd. I'm glad I
at least got the granular food down early in the rain spell. I see
some new foliage now. Also--the new bare roots in the front bed on the
hill are doing great. *Shrug* I have waxed philosophical about
it--always the thing to do during sucky times. I don't have the urge
to replace the dead roses, but to buy some next year that I REALLY
want to grow.



But I've only rarely found own roots to have weak roots. But I only
have a few really modern roses.

I doubt the fact that some of them are Austins makes too much difference.
Bear in mind they are bred primarily for England's wet climate. In
Sydney Australia I find they tend to die MORE easily than HTs and
floribundas, but all mine are grafted anyway.

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 17:40:40 GMT, "Theo Asir"
wrote:


There is probably a selection
bias involved. A plant that
is vigorous enough to live on its
own roots is probably vigorous enough
to fight of disease etc.

Theo, please tell me, when you plant a bare root, how many of the
canes usually make it and how many die? Nobody answered that one. I
thought two or three good ones was fine. Or should they all sprout? I
did care for mine, looked at them every day, did not fert, watered
deeply AND moistened canes, mounded pine straw.

On 06 Jul 2003 19:15:51 GMT, (Unique Too) wrote:

(Shiva) writes:



I'm not sure this is a theory, but maybe a possibility. I assume the own root
roses were potted, not bare root?

Yes!


If so they probably had a better root
structure than the bare root grated roses even after 12-18 months.

The grafted ones that died were mostly this spring's babies, in the
ground for three months or so. A few were older grafted roses, dying
by cankering/dying back one cane at a time. Borers--the bad kind--I
think, as I see the holes. But borers alone have never killed my
grafted roses. Usually it takes canker, too. The borer damage and the
canker seems to work together. ONLY when I do not spray. The last time
this happened was in 2000 when I tried not spraying at all. So MUCH
canker in the garden--it actually killed Moonstone.


Can you break it down further, do you have any grafted roses that were not bare
root? How have they faired?

Good question! Rio Samba, 2nd year potted, 3-gallon, in the ground the
whole two years--going big guns! Dropped its leaves but made more
pronto! Bloomed right through baldness, bless its heart! Gold
Medal--cankered, big time. I removed half of it. It is in its third
year, 3 gallon potted, in the ground the whole time. Antigua--one of
my first roses. Brought it back from a one-cane wonder last year, BIG
basals from applying Mill's mix, so cool! Now--dead. Big borer holes.
Angel Face--finally dead, Yipee! ! 2000 potted, in and out of
theground, borer holes. But ALL of these are in the back bed, not the
new side one. The back one has good mulch, the side no mulch, just the
pine straw I mounded the bare roots with. Also between the back and
the side bed is a row of potted roses, ownroot and grafted, all alive,
some borers, some have dropped all leaves. Lagerfeld, La Paloma, Great
Century, Touch of Class, Europeana, Sonia Rykiel.


On the other side, in moving roses I have seen a big difference in the root
structure of own roots vs grafted roses. The own root roses I have moved have
had a large solid mat of small roots near the soil level. The grafted roses
have a much smaller mass of these small roots and a bigger number of larger,
far reaching roots. I know most of the grafted roses I have moved are on
fortuniana, but even the ones on Dr. Huey and multiflora have had similar root
systems. I have found it much easier to move own root roses because I can get
a good root ball and save many of the small feeder roots.

This is really good to know, thanks. Bear in mind too that all the
roses did just fine in last year's drought when I had to go out and
give them a soaking twice a week.


Just some thoughts.

I appreciate your time.

Julie

In article m, Shiva
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 10:32:37 -0700, Cass
wrote:

who knows.

The soil is fabulous, full of organic material,
rich and black. The young bare roots that died are all in the new bed,
the one a professional dug and amended for me, and I added to over a
year or so. He drilled under the clay beyond the hardpan into the sand
for drainage. Here is the kicker: right across from the young dead
grafted roses, DOING GREAT are these own-roots, from Muncy's and Roses
Unlimited, planted last fall after hanging around in pots WAYY too
long: Payl Neyron, 2 Abraham Darbys, Golden Celebration, Pat Austin,
and Penelope, Tradescant. They are actually blooming and full of buds.

In one of the other large beds in the back, ownroot Granadas, The
Prince, Tamora, and Radio Times thrive, while older bare roots bought
in 2000-2002 languish. Much dieback, no leaves. Very odd. I'm glad I
at least got the granular food down early in the rain spell. I see
some new foliage now. Also--the new bare roots in the front bed on the
hill are doing great. *Shrug* I have waxed philosophical about
it--always the thing to do during sucky times. I don't have the urge
to replace the dead roses, but to buy some next year that I REALLY
want to grow.

Hey, I can't explain it either. But I did read an article in the
American Rose Annual that said argued that since different fruit tree
rootstocks are known to have different effects on the grafted scion and
do differently in different soils - some are dwarfing with other
produce giantism -some are incompatible with particular cultivars -
some are drought resistant - some confer greater resistance to certain
diseases -- so, the article said, if all those effects are know from
fruit tree root stocks, it make perfect sense that the same happens in
roses. I believe it to be true.

I'd say 50% of my budded roses fail or are virused or both. I'd say
under 5 % of my own root roses fail or are virused or both. Nope, I
don't buy the party line about budded and OR being the same. Maybe in
some places or with some roses. Not here and not with all roses.

I have duplicates, budded and OR, of a number of roses I really like,
where my original budded plants are unsatisfactory for a variety of
reasons (awkward, virused, not vigorous). Every one of the OR's is a
superior plant. Period. And yet some of my best roses are budded onto
Huey. And Huey grows like a demon here, suckers from root divisions
everywhere. So I can't say Huey is the problem.

Usually the original canes
get trimmed by me once
the plant has put out a couple of basals.

Graham Thomas & the pilgrim consist
of just two basals each.

Usually I bury the little plant deep
enough to get the first branching node
below ground. But 50% of the time
I lose atleast one of these branches.

In my experience these teeny close to ground
and disease, branches are a pita once
basals are up & established. I nix them in
double quick time.

Properity is the one exception I can think of
since the original cane is now about 3/4" thick.

When I planted george vancouver I had
atleast 8-9 thin canes sticking out. After a couple
of months I was down to 2. But those soon grew
and put out basals.

There is no real way to find out which cane will
Damp off (I feel it is a similar process) but some does
occur. I do spray the little ones w/ a Manzate/Clearys
mixture to prevent a fungal attack at that stage.

A weird thing I've noticed is that my own root loses
when I plant after June 1 are nil. Perhaps the heat
and dryness prevents damping off. Weird.

--
Theo in Zone 5
Kansas City
Who's hoping Eden Rose will put out soon...


"Shiva" wrote in message
s.com...
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 17:40:40 GMT, "Theo Asir"
wrote:


There is probably a selection
bias involved. A plant that
is vigorous enough to live on its
own roots is probably vigorous enough
to fight of disease etc.

Theo, please tell me, when you plant a bare root, how many of the
canes usually make it and how many die? Nobody answered that one. I
thought two or three good ones was fine. Or should they all sprout? I
did care for mine, looked at them every day, did not fert, watered
deeply AND moistened canes, mounded pine straw.