R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

A meeting place for rose breeders.

R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Sat Mar 11, 2017 4:49 pm

Hi

Has anyone tried to breed with Rosa 'Highdownensis'? From what I read on HelpMeFind, it should be a pentaploid.
But I am wondering how it will behave. Will it give 3 sets of chromosomes as a seed, or will it give 4? And the same for the pollen: 2x or 1x?

I was thinking of using Duchese de Montebello as a motherplant and use the pollen of Highdownensis, but also make the opposite cross. Maybe even cross Highdownenis with Rosa foetida 'Persian Yellow', or R. 'Paula Vapelle'.

Someone suggested me that I should cross it with a tetraploid, that that should work.

Any suggestions?
Thanks!
Dane.
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:45 am

I guess, what I am wondering about is, would R. 'Highdownensis' (pentaploid) behave like a canina rose does, I mean, like a caninae meiosis?

Did anyone try to work with this rose before?
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby pgeurts » Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:21 pm

Dane,
I had Highdownenis 8 or 9 years ago, but it wasn't hardy enough for my area so it died back every winter. Since it is once blooming that meant it never bloomed for me, so i never got to use it in any crosses. It was also pretty susceptible to black spot. But it's not a dog rose so it would not have the unbalanced meiosis like a Canina rose does. My guess is it would act similar to a triploid except instead of the gametes having 1 or 2 sets of chromosomes they would have 2 or 3 sets. I tried R.moyesii "Geranium" pollen on several plants but none of the pollinations took. I found out later it was sterile.
Paul Geurts
Zone 4 Minnesota
pgeurts
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:26 am
Location: Annandale, Minnesota

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby roseseek » Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:37 am

Interesting... perhaps you should try it with a triploid? Lynnie, Golden Angel, Golden Horizon, etc. are all fertile triploids which can provide some rather interesting results.
Kim
California Central Coast
USDA Zone 9b
Sunset Zone 15
Cooler inland coastal valley with strong marine influence
roseseek
 
Posts: 4702
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Zone 9b Central California, Sunset Zone 15

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:01 am

Thanks for your replies!

I think I will try to use it as a seed plant, as wel as a pollen plant. Probably the seedlings that have Highdownensis as a mother will look more like the mother, because they will get more chromosomes from the mother. That's why I wanted to know, would they get 3 sets or 4 sets of chromosomes from mum...

I'll just give it a try in a few months :-)
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Don » Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:27 am

>> I think I will try to use it as a seed plant, as wel as a pollen plant.

FWIW I never got Moyesii to set seed with a foreign pollen including pollen from f1 x moyesii crosses.
What doesn't kill them makes them stronger.
Don
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Karl K » Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:28 am

dgermeys wrote:... would R. 'Highdownensis' (pentaploid) behave like a canina rose does, I mean, like a caninae meiosis?

The distinctive Caninae Meiosis is not a simple matter of chromosome number. It requires a suppression of chromosome pairing that is presumably under genetic control. For a Caninae pentaploid, this means two sets of chromosome pair normally, while the other three sets (21 chromosomes) remain unpaired.

When Caninae species are pollinated by diploids or regular polyploids, the Caninae system can break down. Blackhurst (1948) reported on this subject.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/Hurst/BLKHURST.HTM

Wylie (1975) discussed a similar case:
"Another example is the tetraploid variety, Carmenetta, from a cross between R. rubrifolia, a tetraploid member of the Caninae, as female parent and R. rugosa as male. This variety forms far more than 7 bivalents at meiosis, so it is again clear that chromosomes derived from the female gamete, which always remain unpaired in R. rubrifolia itself, are pairing in the hybrid."
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/wylie.htm

R. moyesii is a regular hexaploid, so 'Highdownensis' would not behave like a Caninae hybrid at all. How it really behaves depends much upon the affinity of the chromosomes involved. This is also true of triploids. Some are highly fertile, some are partially fertile, some are dead sterile, while a rare few may be fertile or sterile depending on temperature, a Wulff (1959) reported. (Higher temperatures seem to inhibit pairing, somewhat. Lower temperatures can increase pairing, which may increase the number of trivalents (groups of three) when there are stray chromosomes lacking "proper" mates.
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/ ... ploid.html

If someone has 'Highdownensis' and a good microscope, it would be interesting to have a look at the pollen and ova to determine what chromosome numbers are actually present. Still, chromosome number alone does not guarantee results. Some tetraploid hybrids are no more fertile than some triploids.
Karl K
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:28 am

Don wrote:>> I think I will try to use it as a seed plant, as wel as a pollen plant.

FWIW I never got Moyesii to set seed with a foreign pollen including pollen from f1 x moyesii crosses.


Yesterday I learnt that Moyesii as well as rugosa roses are both in the section Cinnamomeae. So I'm guessing that Moyesii would be more receptive for roses in this section than it is for the pollen from our 'garden roses'.

Dane.
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:36 am

Thanks Karl for the references!

I'll check them out later if I can find the time. :-)
I still don't quite entirely understand the Canina meiosis but I found a text in Dutch that has a chapter about propagation so I'm gonna study that one first.

for those who understand Dutch: http://www.ecologischadviesbureaumaes.nl/435.pdf
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Tue Apr 04, 2017 5:45 pm

Karl K wrote:The distinctive Caninae Meiosis is not a simple matter of chromosome number. It requires a suppression of chromosome pairing that is presumably under genetic control. For a Caninae pentaploid, this means two sets of chromosome pair normally, while the other three sets (21 chromosomes) remain unpaired.


Hey Karl, I have been hypothesising... I do believe it is possible that Moyesii "Higdownensis', who is pentaploid, will perform the canina meiosis.
When we take Hurst (1928) http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/Hurst/Hurst_1928.html as well as Yokoya et al. (2000) http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/ ... A2000.html

we see that R. moyesii has a chromosome structure AABBEE (hexaploid). Therefore the mother gamete will be ABE, and the pollen ABE as well.
Since Highdownensis is pentaploid, the father was probably a tetraploid from a modern rose, e.g. a gallica which is AACC, so given the pollen AC.
This would give the chromosome structure of Highdownensis as follows: ABE + AC = AABCE
Therefore, when this rose wants to form gametes, it will have to perfom the canina meiosis, otherwise nothing will result. So the mother gamete will be ABCE and the pollen simply A.

Is there anyone who believes this might be correct?
It is just a hypothesis but it seems to make sense to me.

Dane.
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Warren » Tue Apr 04, 2017 9:11 pm

Hi Dane
I think it is possible for this to happen. I have been working with R.virginiana and have noticed some interesting happenings over the years. R. virg is according to Hurst CCDD and if crossed with a modern containing AACC, the offspring would be a ACCD giving a somatic chromosome count of 4 and a gamete chromosome count of 1. Some here will shake their heads saying it would be impossible because of R. virg being in the R. Cinnamomea . Rosa canina must have evolved from a lower more simple ploidy level to what it is today. I found the F2 virginiana hybrids very receptive to diploid pollen with good hip set and seedling germination. The second hybrid vigour achieved from these F2 crosses with these diploids is very good, as with fertility.
cheers Warren
Warren
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:47 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Don » Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:32 am

Keep in mind that Hurst's genetic concepts are archaic relative to the state of the art and that that Earlinson disproved his septet hypothesis eighty years ago.
What doesn't kill them makes them stronger.
Don
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby philip_la » Wed Apr 05, 2017 11:47 am

All this ACCD and AACC stuff is hard to follow for someone with ADHD. It makes my brain Hurst.
Philip F.
[size=small][color=#669966]Zone 8 / Sunset Zn 30 (Austin, TX -- formerly New Orleans, LA)[/color][/size]
philip_la
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby philip_la » Wed Apr 05, 2017 11:58 am

Pardon me for a tangent, but I'm curious -- Caninae presumably all derived from reticulate evolution (i.e. merging of two ancestral lineages (causing the uneven meiosis?)) as I understand it. Are all the caninae necessarily related, e.g. descended from a common phyllogenetic merging, or is it presumed that reticulate evolution occurred in multiple cases from differing "most recent common ancestors" for the different species in the group, and that the grouping is based less on phylogenetics, and more upon characteristics?

I hope that question makes sense to someone. I think I worded it clumsily.
Philip F.
[size=small][color=#669966]Zone 8 / Sunset Zn 30 (Austin, TX -- formerly New Orleans, LA)[/color][/size]
philip_la
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Don » Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:28 pm

Excellent question. Apparently there were multiple hybridization events involving a putative protocaninae species.

"Our data suggest that the pentaploid Caninae genome originated from different members of nondogroses and the now extinct Protocaninae."

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eok ... WpGOXdnUjg

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eok ... jZoRVhZV1k

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eok ... 09xNmpEa1U

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eok ... kM1VkI5Nms
What doesn't kill them makes them stronger.
Don
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:16 pm

Hi Don,

I did not know that Hurst was disproved. :-(
But still... there might be some truth in his ideas?

Do you know this article already? One interesting insight is that "Bivalent formation appears to involve chromosomes that consistently share the same microsatellite alleles."

Nybom et al. (2006)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 010.x/epdf

Does anyone of you know a good course in rose genetics btw, because it' hard for a non-biologist as me to get a grip on all of this...
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby philip_la » Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:48 pm

Interesting... So the protocaninae was susceptible to merging with other species? I haven't read the articles yet, but I wonder what the mechanism was.
Philip F.
[size=small][color=#669966]Zone 8 / Sunset Zn 30 (Austin, TX -- formerly New Orleans, LA)[/color][/size]
philip_la
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby dgermeys » Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:12 pm

Don wrote:Keep in mind that Hurst's genetic concepts are archaic relative to the state of the art and that that Earlinson disproved his septet hypothesis eighty years ago.


Hey Don,

Appearantly, the idea of septepts was revived.
In 2011 the paper "Application of the Septet Classification System on Rose Cultivars" was published. I have not read this but I think it's worth to have a look! https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 011-0148-y

And another paper from 2003, "Karyotype Analysis of Wild Rose Species Belonging to Septets B, C and D by Molecular Cytogenetic Method"
free download on: https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/js ... 7/_article

Cheers,
Dane.
dgermeys
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Don » Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:48 pm

Karyotyping is a useful tool for distinguishing chromosomes. Beyond that it's phrenology. Perhaps if all you have is a microscope to play with then phrenology is a game you can play.
What doesn't kill them makes them stronger.
Don
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 8:00 pm

Re: R. moyesii 'Highdownensis'

Postby Karl K » Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:57 am

It sometimes annoys me that people will defend or condemn a theory they have not bothered to read, let alone understand. For example:

New Phytol. 37: 72-81. 1938
PHYLOGENY AND POLYPLOIDY IN ROSA
By EILEEN W. ERLANSON, D.Sc.
“In 1925 Hurst put forward what Boulenger designates as ‘sa bizarre classification’ based on the hypothesis of five differential septets of chromosomes in Rosa which were represented in nature by ‘five fundamental diploid species’. It is evident that the number five was adopted because the author already accepted the hypothesis of an extinct ancestral decaploid. The geographic distribution of polyploid and diploid species led Hurst to conclude that modern rose species are all descended from this arctic decaploid.”
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/breeding/ ... y1938.html

She was quite wrong.

Experiments in Genetics (1925)
Charles Chamberlain Hurst
“One looked upon the septets of chromosomes in the spontaneous species of Rosa as sets of seven chromosomes which had in some way been duplicated and reduplicated. But one day when comparing the taxonomic characters of the species in the living collection at Kew, one was struck by the fact that the tetraploid species showed the combined characters of two distinct diploid species, while the hexaploid species showed the combined characters of three distinct diploid species and the octoploid species showed the combined characters of four distinct diploid species.”

“Taxonomic analyses of the 400 forms of Rosa examined cytologically by Tackholm (1922) and myself, from material collected at Kew, Paris, Cambridge and Burbage, fully confirmed the previous observations, except that the characters in the polyploid species were found to be represented in five differential diploid species instead of four, which number (five) corresponds with the five septets of chromosomes found in Rosa.”
http://bulbnrose.x10.mx/Roses/Hurst/HURST2.HTM

In other words, Hurst observed five large and distinct sets of characters in Rosa, which (not coincidentally) correspond with the five sets of chromosomes found in some irregular hexaploids.

I admire what little I have read of Boulenger's work (mostly written in French, which I can't read), in large part because he was a zoologist who brought "fresh eyes" to the study of Rosa after his retirement. But as a zoologist studying mostly fish, reptiles, and amphibians, he was perhaps somewhat unprepared to consider the implications of polyploidy.

Hurst also brought "fresh eyes", considering that some of his earlier work in genetics involved horses, rabbits and Paphiopedilum hybrids. Unlike all the earlier botanists I have read, Hurst took an objective approach by looking at a large collection of species and varieties, examining each for a list of "about one hundred" traits, tabulating the results and then analyzing the data for patterns. He did not assume (like John Lindley) that "shining leaves" vs. "opaque leaves" was a clear distinction between species, whereas the character, number and position of prickles was not. Rather, Hurst saw groups of about 50 traits (half of his original list) that generally hung together in species distributed around the world.

Rosa woodsii, R. foliolosa and R. cinnamomea are not the same, of course, but they are all very much more similar to each other than they are to R. moschata, R. xanthina, R. rugosa, or R. macrophylla.

Hurst's theory is no longer quite acceptable for Rosa, though it works out very nicely for wheat and its relatives. Hexaploid bread wheat, for example, was built up from three distinct species: one Triticum and two Aegilops. It has also been demonstrated that a form of Prunus domestica (hexaploid) can be synthesized by crossing the Sloe (P. spinosa, tetraploid) with the diploid Cherry-plum (P. cerasifera).

There is some differential pairing of chromosomes in hybrids of Rosa species, but this usually does not involve complete sets of seven, which seemed necessary to Hurst back in the 1920s. He (and everyone else at the time) assumed that the traits that distinguished species must be distributed among all the chromosomes. There was already some evidence of gene linkage, but no one yet imagined that large sets of traits could be tied to the genes of one chromosome, and even to a segment of that chromosome which could behave as a "unit" of heredity (supergene).

In discussing Hurst's "Septet Scheme", it is important to distinguish between his theory of differential pairing, and his observation of large sets of traits that remain together in species of Rosa distributed around the world.
Karl K
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Next

Return to Rose Hybridizers Association Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lydia S and 11 guests