Judging from how much fruit trees of different genera (e.g. prunus, malus or citrus) are affected by the rootstock, I can believe that and more.

Very interesting. Personally, I prefer own-root, but that's because I view the roses as entire plants. 'Marechal Niel' was previously more often grown as a "greenhouse crop" than a garden plant, and so experiments with rootstocks would have been made so as to find the best for maximizing that crop. This also applies to Nik's example of fruit trees -- if your primary concern is fruit production, look for the best rootstock for your conditions and for the size plant you want. The first roses I got for my Long Island garden were Austins on 'Dr. Huey', but here they're own-root. Yeah, the budded plants were more substantial their first year, but in terms of overall plant shape, I personally prefer the own-root versions now. 'Golden Celebration' sends up lots of from-the-roots new canes, and 'Tamora' is actually beginning to form a little thicket, probably showing its Rugosa ancestry. Because I'm lucky enough not to "need" budded versions of the roses I like for my conditions, I'm able to make that choice. It's really just a personal preference.

To throw something else into the pot about 'Marechal Niel', I recall reading a reference about there once being two different "versions" in commerce soon after it was released. One, I think, was considered inferior as far as bloom quality. This was mentioned as a possible explanation for why the rose did well for some, but poorly for others. I found the reference on HelpMeFind, from Journal of Horticulture, Cottage Garden and Country Gentleman 1867, page 236:

Marechal Niel Rose.
Much dissatisfaction has been expressed, and still more felt, at the
very unfavourable results obtained by the numerous cultivators of this
variety of yellow Rose. On the other hand, there are many who have been
more successful, and who are, therefore, not without reason ready to
affirm that the causes of discontent are groundless. This has till
lately been inexplicable.

When this Rose was first announced in the glowing and rather exaggerated
way in which the French growers are accustomed to put forth their
novelties, hopes were entertained that it might prove a really valuable
addition to our yellow Roses, a colour so very popular with us among
Roses, as much, perhaps, from the very distinct character it adds to the
exhibition-stand and to the bouquet, as from its own peculiar merits
combined with form, as seen in Triomphe de Rennes and Celine Forestier.
But when the first glorious blooms of it were seen, as exhibited by Mr.
Mitchell, Messrs. Paul & Son, Mr. Keynes, and others, it was
received with admiration, such as has never before been accorded to any
single nose. As ar matter of course, not only rosarians and Rose
growers, but the horticultural world generally, were in a fever of
anxiety to possess it, and the propagation of it was, and is still, an
important business with nurserymen. Thousands of plants have been
distributed, and pleasure and disappointment have both followed.

The Marechal Niel is really a very beautiful yellow Rose, now so well
known as not to need description; nevertheless, to the Rose critic it
has a slight defect in form which a thorough-going Rosarian must
acknowledge, and hope that before long another kind will appear that
will yield symmetry of shape with the glorious colour of the Marechal.
Whence have arisen the discrepancies that now perplex the possessors of
this fine Rose? It has for some time been suspected that there are in
commerce two Roses under the name of Marechal Niel; and comparison of
plants, or even foliage, leaves not only no doubt, but even leads to
conviction, that there are really two different Roses that have keen
sent out under this name, and that difference in results arises from
this fact. Nor is it in England alone that these circumstances have been
noted, for I hear that in France disappointments on the one hand, and
favourable accounts on the other, have also been expressed; and there
also it is asserted that there are two Marechal Niels in commerce. It is
furthermore accounted for in this way. I give the statement as I
received it, without being able to vouch for its correctness further
than that it came from an authority who would not give it currency
without sufficient foundation.

Maréchal Niel Rose was raised by a young gardener named Pradel,
somewhere in the south of France. M. Eugene Verdier, of Paris, became
the possessor of the stock, or original plant. It is said that Pradel
sent to M. Verdier two seedlings without distinguishing them. In the
belief that both of these plants were of the same kind, propagation was
proceeded with from them indiscriminately; hence arose the confusion,
for which M. Verdier is responsible, if not to blame. Be it as it may,
great annoyance has been felt, and it is but due to the public that some
explanation should be offered to clear away the uncertainty at present
existing. Should this statement be even an approximation to the truth,
it will be quite evident that our nurserymen are quite free from any
blame attached to the distribution of the wrong kind. It will also be
remembered that the manner in which Marechal Niel was first sent out was
not altogether unobjectionable.

The pseudo Marechal Niel may be distinguished from the true one by its
habit, foliage, and flowers. The habit is less robust and more
straggling; the foliage of a deeper green, resembling that of Isabella
Gray; the leaves smaller and more pointed; the flowers are smaller, hard
in opening, but when open of a deeper yellow, but in no point so good
as the right variety.

—Adolphus H. Kent.

I wonder if this error has continued to the present.

:-)

~Christopher

'Fruit production' of man made hybrids is dependent on affinity to climate, soil conditions, blooming, vigorousness, resistance to disease etc etc. None of the above do I find very irrelevant to garden rose growing although, of course, tolerance is much greater than growing something for living.

Interesting about the two versions of Marechal Niel. We are at the mercy of proper labeling and how easy is it for labels to get misplaced. In this case assuming two plants are one in the same and they weren't. Part of the mystery and intrigue of the rose world. "Will the real Marechal Niel please stand up".

Very interesting! Yes, keeping an open mind about trying different stocks that might be better for your climate/zone is useful.

Caldwell Pink & Spray Cecile Brunner are very good here. Remains to be seen how budded plants do over the years, but when I'm trying to preserve & push hard to get scions they've been great.

Pink Clouds, too--and it has a long history of being used at Sequoia. Very easy to use, easy to root & pushes well.

And, for what it's worth, the old one--Ragged Robin--is a lot better for me, at least in the speed it pushes buds into canes--than the Dr. Huey that replaced it commercially.

Multiflora may be fine for many areas but it hates, hates, hates our alkaline soil & water.

sure, I'm trying on the other popular stocks, too, & especially working to budding on VI stocks, but some of the non standard things are working very well.

I would like to think it was the inferior MN that made the journey down-under, but I think the fault lay with me positioning the rose in the wrong place.

Bluegirl, have you tried Fun Jwan Lo (R. indica major) as a rootstock? It's an old China stock, drought tolerant, which does very well in alkaline conditions but it's not good for zones less than 8. Unfortunately it often seems to carry a heavy virus load here in Europe so it's not used much any more. Seed propagated species stocks are prefered for this and bulk propagation reasons.

No, but that does sound interesting--thanks for mentioning it--sounds perfect for my conditions. Chinas are probably the easiest roses of all to grow here.

I've just been playing around with budding the past couple of summers. When I started, I didn't have standard commercial stocks ready & slapped buds on anything handy, to learn & to experiment.

The "Caldwell Pink" found rose grows wildly well here & even trimmings discarded on the ground will root, so it first caught my eye as a possibility--though thorny, it roots so easily.

The Spray Cecile Brunner offers nice long green canes with lots of smooth interstitial areas between thorns & it's extremely vigorous, so that's another.

Both have been great, even with my clumsy skills--they take almost anything & push it rapidly into healthy growth.

Ragged Robin was the third that I had available at the start & it's very good, too. First thing I tried on it was a bud from a wimpy Talisman & it pushed it into almost a foot of growth very rapidly.

Since then, I've been collecting & trying the more standard stocks, plus working to establish VI plants of anything I want to use. But even so, I'm still very happy with Pink Clouds, CP, SC & Ragged Robin. For what it's worth, in my limited experience & with my primitive skills, all of those have so far been better than even the VI Huey I now have, though I understand the desirability of the VI Huey.

I'll try to hunt down a clean Fun Jwan Lo.

If you can't find a clean plant of 'Fun Jwan Lo', you could also consider raising seedlings of it. From what I understand, there already are several forms of it going around which were seed-raised.

:-)

~Christopher

Interesting!

Makes you wonder even more if "Caldwell Pink" does have Wichuraiana in it. Roseseek has said he thinks so, & ARE, which has carried it forever, comments on it possibly having that or multiflora genes.

But it's exceeding healthiness here in alkaline soils & drought & the favorable comments above on R. wich. make me wonder about wichuraiana. It does have a wonderful root system--a little gallon cutting with just a few switches on top, dumped out, will have a solid mat of fine roots, almost like that of a big clump of native prairie grass. It has never required extra water or care anywhere or anyway I've grown it--just trucks along, flowering all through the warm season.

I don't grow "CP", but it does seem likely from your description that there's some R wich. heritage there. Do you think "Caldwell Pink" really is 'Pink Pet'?

Sounds like R. setigera is also inclined to look after itself with no expectation of pampering, though I don't know if it's likewise tolerant of alkaline conditions.

Virginia

Setigera does very well here where the soil is a bit too alkaline for multiflora. No idea how high it can go, however.

VMR -- Caldwell Pink and "Pink Pet" as grown in the Southeast are surely identical in all ways, and are likely not the original 'Pink Pet'. Rather, the name 'Pink Pet' was used by mid-20th-century Florida rose growers for that rose, so they could "legitimately" show it in a judged American Rose Society rose show. They simply found a historic name for a small, pink rose, and attached it to this foundling, with no evidence at all for it being the real thing.

Thanks for the 'word' on "Pink Pet/ "Caldwell Pink"... That explains a lot.

Virginia

Back to rootstocks: We used to grow some roses on 'Fun Jwan Lo', and true, it survives well in our hot, wet climate. But it is far less vigorous and less floriferous than 'Fortuniana'-rooted plants. McFadden, back in the early 1960s, in his research on rootstocks, came to the same conclusion -- it's a survivor, but not a producer, at least in Florida.

We've grown 'Marechal Niel' on 'Fortuniana', as well as its own roots. I don't recall noticing any differences in color -- I must remember to look closely. What I do see is incredibly more vigor on the grafted plants. Indeed, 'Marechal Niel' on 'Fortuniana' is the single most vigorous rose I've ever grown, normally throwing canes approaching 20 feet in length, and developing a trunk as thick as your arm in a couple years. It does make a huge overgrowth at the union, but that seems not to damage it for many years, if ever.

I wonder how many people tried to prevent their 'Marechal Niel' roses from getting canker by budding 'MN' on 'Isabella Gray'?

"Rose Marechal Niel and canker.

I sent a short note to the "Rose Annual, 1906," of the National Rose Society about the freedom from canker of an old Marechal Niel grown by a neighbour of mine. Its freedom from this pest he attributed to the fact of its being budded on Isabella Gray, which I pointed out was one of the reputed parents of Marechal Niel. I have lately had a letter from a Mr. Kemp of Clapton, who said he had been told that the parents of this our best yellow Rose were Isabella Gray and Solfaterre. Certainly, from my memory of the latter's perfume and habit, this pedigree would not be unlikely. Can any of your readers give me any information on this interesting subject ? Perhaps Mr. Kemp when he sees this letter may be able to add to the information he gave me. To the best of my recollection Isabella Gray had a most pernicious habit of splitting, and, like several Roses of that date, frequently came with a green centre and had the same rather full, rounded calyx as the Marechal. —J. T. Strange,

Sulhamslead, Berks."

From 'The Garden', 22 Aug 1908, p.407

Good luck finding 'Isabella Gray'.

http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.19358&tab=17

:-/

~Christopher

Nah- I don't need to go to Belgium; just to Bermuda... ;>)

http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.255444

Virginia