NURSERY PERFORMANCE OF ROSE ROOTSTOCKS MUHAMMAD ASLAM AND DAUD AHMAD KHAN* ‘The nursery performance of five different rose rootstocks wan studied. Observations on rooting success, plant height and the budding success were secorded. The ‘Edward’ stock, gave the maximum percentage of rooting sucocss and height of the plants, Rooting success was quite negligible {fess than 3.0 per gent) in cage of two wild stocks collected from Mucree Hills, For budding three rootstecks, ‘Edward’, Rosa demascena and ‘Gruss an teplitz tried Were at par. Among cultivars, “Flamenco” and ‘Fashion’ gave higher budding success than “MoGredy’s Sunset’ and Queen Elizabeth’, Considering all factors, “Edward? took proved t0 be the best rootstock in aursery performance. INTRODUCTION ° ‘The rootstocks are considered to be of fundamental fmportance in the rose industry. From the commercial viewpoint it is easy to see the advantage gained Crom using a rootstodk. ‘The nse of bud wood as oppased to cuttings silts in ennsideceble saving, whilst the fand cequired to plant large umber Of stock plaots for taking cuttings can be made available for the production of saleable plants, A good tootstock imparts cortain desirable features to the elon cultivar, The features include 2 root system which has the ability to withstand drought, or undue checking caused by transplanting, adaptability to, 2 wide range of soil types. A knowledge of the nursery performance of root Stocka can benefit the mureery men ag well ax amatcure growers in’ raiting the best plants with Lenst cost by judicious application of the knowledge -thus gained. : REVIEW OF LITERATURE Lyle (1957) stated that few roses were grown ‘on their own roots because. ff slow and usually ‘aferior rooting of niost varieties from cuitings, Garner (195) reported that horticultural varieties of roses were Propagsted by gyafting and budding on the young reotstocks, usually Rosa canirta seedlings sind alsa cca maneti, Hacimann and Kester (1960) mentioned that selected wpapartenans of Horeleulture, University ef Aarteuleure, tyelipur: 403104 PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL Sciences varieties of coses were commonly propagated by budding on the vigorous rootstocks, although the use of soft wood or hard wood cuttings, grafting, layering or the use of suckers was also sometimes practiced. Some of the rooistocks commonly used are Rosa multiflord, Rosa canina and Resa higotnis. Rowley’ (i961) stated that Rosa rmuhifiora gave the best all round performance. Roberts (1951) reported. that the use of selected strains of Rosa multifiora rootstocks . could sigoificantly increase the percentage of successfyl union and reduced bud failure. Edland (1963) poiowd out that purpose of budding cultivated rose ou the wild rose was to provide it more quickly wih a vigorous root system, According to Ticknor and Roberts (1968), the rootstock varieties exert a strong influence on the performance of scion variety. This effect is more pronounced on weak “ growing tcion varieties which tand to. be more apecific in rqotstock requicements than strong seion. varieties. Edwards (1953) reported that Rasa caning types “Broy’ and Pfander’ gave the weakest, growth while Rosa canina ‘Pollmeriana’ showed. most vigotous growth, generally even more than Rosa mudiflora followed by Resa canina ‘Kauth’, Rosa canine, Heinsohn. Rosa canina Sahmidos ideal _ and ‘Rosa canine’ Senit? gave about medium growth. Celjadigova and Kukoley {1985} reported that the highest levels of starch iu ‘the stem and bud _tisaue, the highest percentage strike and the most vigorous growth occured in cuttings planted in autumn or early winter wheo the soil was moist and average daily temperature ranged from 5-10 C. “Stanko and Mithajlov (1966) favnd Rosa caninato ba a suitable root. stock for bush and standard rose. It was vigorous with compact wood, It dié not sucker readily and had opty few thorn. In rootstock selection, - Leemans (1967) considered the following growth characters as of majoc im- portance: * (a) survival after’ planting in the field; {b) the percentage of ruccessful bid unions, (c) the percentage of saleable plants, (d) averago plant quality and (e) susceptibility to plant diseases and weather damage. MATERIALS AND METHODS These studies were carried aut on two sets of experiments during the year 1968-69.in Horticultuze Department of West Pakistan Aguicultural Uni- vertity, Lyallgur. ‘The experiments were laid out according to randomized complete block design. Five rootstocks, ‘Edward’, Rosa damasceng’, Gruss an Teplitz’, and two different croses Wi and W2 growing wild in the Murree Hills tentatively identificd as Rosa macrophylla’, and Rosa sericea’ were used in this experiment, A brief description of these rootstocks is. given below,NURSERY OF ROSES . 303 ()) ‘Edward’ Ite botanical identity could not be traced. It grows up to def ft. It is an evergreen seandent shrub armed with curved prickles Leaflets are dark green with the upper surface shining. Stipules are free Tubulate and of deciduous type. It is locally kaown as ‘Lahori’. It flowers duringn spring oly. Flowers aré medium,smail, double and of pink colour. Tt bears in clusters. (id) ‘Rosa damascena’ is a prostrate shrub armed with curved unequal size prickles mixed with prickly and glandutar bristles, Leaflets age: usually Sin numbers, simply serrate, Cultivated commonly in gardens (or its ftmg- tant Gowers, which are usually light pink in colour and imperfectly donble. It is locally known as ‘Gulkendi’. If also hears in clusters during spring season, Gii) ‘Gruss am Teplite’ has Tmparipianate compound leaf, adaate stipules spiny rachis, leafteta usually $ in numbers, 2nd 1} inches long, with serrate, margin acute apex, glabrous surface and whitish green below and pale glen above. Stem ia cylindrical, groen, solid and branchisg with normal prickles, [tis locally known as ‘Surkbs’, It bears profusely in clusters, almost throughout the year. Flowers are of deep -pink colour, (iv) Wild 1, Ieis tentatively identified asa strain of Rosa macrophylia Leaves are 2 40 8 inches long, petiole are pubescent often glandular on the margids, broad and spreading leaflets, 1-1} inches long, elliptic, usually nearly plabrous, pale bencath, finally simple serrate simost from the base, Jt bas an efect otein with numerous prickles, It bears in clusters in spring. Flowera are of medium smali size und single. (v) Wild 11. It sctms to belotig to the species, Rosa serieca'. Leaves are Z to 12 inches long, petioles are pubescent, rarely prickly, stipules adnate to the petiole, articulate, uauaily Hot glandulac. Leafiets are usually oblong, toothed only toward the blunt apex, glabzous above aud rarely vilbus on both eurfaces, Stem is golid, cylindrical and branching with uovmal prickles. Tt bens in clustens in epring. Single light pink flowers art of medivin small ize, Inall, (800 cuttings of five rootstocks, described above were planted on 2nd February 1968, Nine.inch cuttings were inserted in the soil so that only one third top portion of the cuttings waa left above ground, Thus, 200 cuttings of exch roctatacks were randomized in nine blocks. Each block contained 5 unite.and each unit consained 40 cuttings, spaced ons ft apart in rows, 1} ft. apart, All the plants received normal cultural operations.i06. PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SclaNCES Four scion cultivars, ‘Queen Elizabeth’, ‘Flemanco’, ‘Fashion’ and “MeGredy’s Stinset’ were budded on ‘Edward’, ‘Rosa damascena’ and ‘Gruss 4n Teplitz’ in the middle of October, 1968 by T-budding method. The data on rooting of cuttings, growth rate of plants raised from: cuttings, and budding success of scion cultivars were recorded periodically. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Footing of Cuttings. The daca on the oumber of planta raised-from the cuttings of the varions rootstocks which survived till middle of September is Presented in Table 1. Analysis of vatiance of the data revealed highly signi ficant differeaces among various rootstocks. Maximum rooting success of 80.98 per cent was recorded for ‘Edward’ and 77.1 for ‘Gruss an Teplitz’. Both were statistically ‘at par with each other. These wete followed by ‘Rosa damascena' (74.40%) statistically similar to ‘Gruss.an Teplita’ but inferior to ‘Edward’. Rooting success was quite negligible, less than 3.0 per cent in the witd stocka ‘The differences in rooting suceéss among various roolszocks could be dus fo mony factors, The cuttings of ‘Edward’, ‘Gruss an Teplit’ and ‘Rosa'damascena’ were collected from the plants grown at Lyallpur. The wild stocks used in these atudics, grow naturally in the Murree Hills and their cuttings were collected ftom there. Obviously, the cuttings from the vwo locations, Lyallpur and the Murtee Hills were in different physiological conditions. Ithas also been established that species and cultivars differ widely in their capability of rooting of cuttings. A relationship between rooting of cuttings and the starch contents of the cuitings af the time of their planting hau been indicted. TABLE 1: Percentage. of plants raised from the cuttings -of five different rootstacks, which survived till she budding time. . Rootstocks success: (pet centy Edward 80.954 Gruss an Teplitz T7.16ab, Rose damascena 74.40ab Rosa maérophylla 2.900 Rosa sericea O.1adNURSERY OF ROSES 7 Plant Height. The data on final height of the plants as recorded o0 119-68 is given in Table 2. ‘The plants of “Edward’ rootstock were compart- tively taller in the beginning aad kept this supetiority during their growth peried. The plants of ‘Rosa damascena’ were next in order and taller than those of ‘Gruss an Tepliiz'. These differences in the height of three footstocks were obsorved throughout the period of growth. Tans 2: Height of rlams of three different rootstocks raised fram cuttings. Rootstocks Height (ems) ~ Edward ”~*~«SO Rosa damasceaa 64278 Gruss an Teplitz : 46.796 According to the analysis of variance the differences were highly significant. The maximum mean height of 82.53 cms, for ‘Edward’ was significantly better than ‘Gruss an Toplitz’ (46.79 cm). However, ‘Rota damascena’ (64.27 cm) and ‘Gruss an Teplitz’ were statistically at par with each other. Alam (1968) reported that the maximum height was measufed for ‘Edward’ stack followed by ‘Damascena’, ‘Gola’ and ‘Gruss an Teplitz’, Asa matter of fact, height alone does not give the true indication of ‘the total growth of the rose plants. Many specicticultivars grow erect while others may be semi erect or sprawling, Similarly many species/eultivars ptoduce large aumber of branches, while ia others the apical dominance is so great that only fow branches are thrown by the plant. These chatacteristies of the plants are determined by the genotype-envionment relations, Agcord- ing to Abrams (1962), the growth habit and vigour of the cootstocks must influence its ability to absorb water and essential chemical elements from the soil by determining the volume of soil with which it is in contact. Budding success of scion cultivars on vatious rootstocks. Tho atatistical analysis of the data on budding success of various rootstocks as presented {a Table 3 has revealed non-significant differences among the various Tootstocks, However, ‘Fashion’ and ‘Flamenco” cultivars showed compara- tively ‘higher budding success: ie. 79.1% and 76.4%, respectively than “McGredy’s Sunset’ (64.779) and ‘Queen Elizabeth’ (67.2%) on all the rootstocks, Roberts (1962) argued thas che significant influence of stock and scion on number of successful unions must be attributed to differences .in the108 PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES Tante 3: Budding success af four scion cultivars on three different rootstocks peterpan Rootstocks Caltivars Mean budding succes "er cent) Edward ‘Queen Elizabeth’ 75.0 ‘Flemanco’ 914 ‘Faghion* 921 “McGredy's Sunset’ 335 Rosa damascana ‘Queen Elizabeth? a ‘Flemanco’ 79.1 “Fashion” 93,6 “MeGredy's Sunset” 95.4 Gruss an Teplitz ‘Quoen Elizabeth’ ‘Flemanco' "Fashion" ‘MeGredy’s Sunset" physiological conditions of the t¥o plant components at the time of budding rather than to incompatibility, technique of budding of adverse environ- meatal relationship, . It cam be concluded from the results of these studics that on the basis ‘of nursery petformance, ‘Edward’ stock proved to be the best. LITERATURE CITED Abrams, G. J. Yon, 1962, Rootsteck. Amer, Rose Annu. 47 ; 96-102. Alam, Z, 1968. Studies on the influence of different rootstocks on vegetative growth, productivity and flower quality in roses. MLSo. thesis, WPAU., Lyallpur. Brase, K.D., 1989. Root growth and flower production of roses in soil and soil peat mixture of varying moisture contents. Proc, Amer, Soc. Hort. Soi, 37 : 963-972, Celjadinova, VI, and P.A. Kukoley, 196$. The biological basis for the Propagation of essentia) bearing rose by moans of hard wood cuttings. Agrobiclogia, 3: 431437, Edwards, RE., 1955, A survey of rootstock for rosei, University of Nottinghum, 1955. (unpublished. dissertation) .NURSERY OF ROSES 109 Bdland, H, 1963. Encyclopedia of roses in naturel colour. St. Martin's Press New York. Garocc, RE, 1958. The grafter’s hand book, Faber atd Faber. Ltd. 24 Russel Squar, London, Hartmano; HAT, and D.E, Kester, 1960. Plumt propagation, principles and practices. “Prestic Hall, Micotporated, Engl wood Califfa. NJ. Lemans, J.A., 1967. The telationship between the habit of growth and the quatity of tose rootstocks, Medad, Inst. Vered. Tuinbougew Wageningen, 262, PP. 8. Roberts, A.N.,° $937. Inipartaace of rose rootetocks selection. Amer. Rose Annu. 42: 62—68. Rowley, G.D., 1961. Rose rootstocks. A first eld trial. J. Hort. Sei, 36: 160—7, (Hort, Abst. 32; 1278. Tickner, R.L., and A.N. Roberts, 1968. Bloom production on selected garden rose rootstocks. Proc. Int. Plant Prop. Soo. 17 (Author's typed script).