I have thought for some time that Fortuniana would do very well in the SW.
Our Fortuniana, on its own roots, is -- well -- a monster.
Now I am hearing that roses are doing well around here on Fort, so I guess my logic was right.

I suspect that Ragged Robin was a very good rootstock in CA, simply because there are so many remaining old, healthy Ragged Robins around.

Multiflora DEFINITELY struggles in our alkaline conditions.

Who KNOWS what Huey would do, were it not virused?

Jeri

Why do different root stocks perform better in different US areas?

The US is a big place! Maine is like the climate of, say Norway and Southern California is like the climate of Greece, while Seattle more resembles the climate of England.

The soil of the eastern US is geologically very old and also filled with millennia of forest litter. The soil of the west is new, being pushed up by the Rocky Mountains and the Sierras in California, with little forest litter. The soil of the Mississippi valley is renewed by massive flooding. There is year-round rain east of the Mississippi while it is always iffy west of it, except the Pacific North West. Based on that, why would one rootstock be expected to work everywhere?

Living in coastal Carolina, I'm obviously East Coast; but then so are gardeners in coastal Maine and those that garden far to the south of me. You've acknowledge a difference between the upper and lower Midwest regions, but mention only one portion of the South -- the 'deep' portion. We tend to think in terms of at least 3 southern regions -- upper, middle and lower (deep). Some add a 4th region to those 3: Florida (portions of which are virtually subtropical).

If I purchase grafted roses from large US vendors, I am limited to plants on Dr Huey rootstock. Canadian vendors (at least the more reliable among them) generally supply plants on Multiflora. Through trial and error (as far as modern roses are concerned), I have come to have a strong preference for plants on Multiflora. Gardeners in the piedmont & far western areas of my state, however, seem to have better results than I do with roses on Dr Huey. In my experience, the determining factor when selecting rootstocks is soil composition (including the presence of soil pests) rather than climate or other variables.

It's like herding cats, to get a straight answer from us.

Pacific northwest: Multiflora, although lots of Dr. Huey is used there. I believe Multiflora is superior.
Upper Midwest: Multiflora or own root - must be very, very hardy, and Multiflora isn't that hardy.
North East: Multiflora
East coast: Multiflora
Lower Midwest: Doh know. Parts e.g. St. Louis, are very cold and need hardy rootstock.
West coast: Divide in half about north of San Francisco, where soil get acid. In northern half, multiflora, Dr. Huey or Manetti. In the southern half, Dr. Huey, Manetti, Odorata, Fortuniana
South west: Dr Huey, Manetti.
Deep south: Manetti, Dr. Huey, Multiflora
South east: depends on where: from Multiflora through Dr. Huey down to Fortuniana in Florida.

Why do different rootstocks perform better in different US areas?
Not only are the soils very diverse, the climates are very diverse. Large parts of the northern part of the USA and much of Canada is very cold, with no Gulf Stream to moderate temps in winter, and rather hot in summer, as they are relatively far south relative to much of Europe. Soils warm very quickly in spring and yet late freezes kill things if the rootstock pushes too early. Vast tracts of the Western USA (from the Rockies to the Pacific Ocean) are a desert, except for the Pacific NW.

In the coldest parts of the continent, the native species roses (which might be expected to be a source of rootstocks) are all in section Cinnamomeae and sucker. As a consequence, there is no regional species-derived rootstock among the hardy rootstocks in North America. Canina and its various forms are not really hardy enough for the coldest parts of North America.

As a practical matter, almost the rose production in the USA moved to the southern part of the country, so they use locally advantageous rootstocks regardless of how those same rootstocks fare in other parts of the country.

Does anyone know what is the best rootstock in Moscow?

How about the Siberian rose (R. Laxia) that Griffith Buck used in his breeding program?

Manetti does well here, but I don't know any vendor who sells on it now (Carlton is where I bought mine).

berndoodle-- thanks, that's a helpful start, except you may be wrong about the hardiness of multiflora. It is cane-hardy, not to say crown-hardy, into zone 3.

I do agree with windeaux that the soil composition in a particular garden is the main consideration. However, if you had a very hardy rose grafted on a very tender rootstock, climate would be a factor.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen for your very helpful answers. It helps me understand the factors determining why different rootstocks do better in different areas of the USA. Pests, Soil PH and hardiness obviously are the main factors determining what rootstock are suitable to use in different areas.

Over the years I have visited different areas in the USA 15 times - It truly is a huge country!( I have always wondered why it takes 3 hours driving 118 miles when driving 60 miles pr hour ;-))) It is always interesting to see how roses grow in different parts of the country (Cape Cod, New York City, New Jersey, Chicago and Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Austin Tx, Anchorage Alaska, Utah, CA from San Francisco to San Diego - and Florida Everglades - Key West. Truly amazing to see how different the soil, the climate, the roses (and the people) are.

I had never heard of Manetti being used as a rootstock? Dr. Huey was used a lot earlier it seems.

Cass: I wonder if R. Laxa wouldn´t be the best rootstock in Moscow? I did come across a website and saw a lady growing beautiful roses in Moscow.

Over here in Europe - own-root roses are very rare. In fact I have only seen Tantau and Poulsen Roses offering some of their roses ownroot - while other major rose companies - Austin, Meilland, Kordes and Guillot only sell bare-root roses. I wonder why own-root roses became so common in USA? To me it seems good bare-root roses are easier to manage - particular when it comes to storing and shipping. I only grow a few own root roses (My cuttings always die from springtails in the soil and rot after 6 weeks even if they leaf out well) - so those I grow are from suckers or "accidents" I discovered when moving roses that didn´t do well (the rootstock had died - but the canes had rooted. So now I have some tiny Meilland Romanticas ( spindly - 1 feet tall!) that has been in the ground for 18 months. I hope they begin to take off this year. Old roses like gallicas, centifolias and damasks sucker well and easy to grow ownroot. I propagate some roses myself by budding them on multiflora rootstock - grown from seeds and in august when the plants are about 15 months old.

I sometimes read posts on russian rose forum and I believe majority of roses in Moscow now come from Europe (Kordez, Austin, Meidiland, etc). No special rootstock. Moscow itself is zone 5 (effect of warm bubble for big scity), but just 20-30 miles outside of city limits there is completely different picture. Most rose growers sriously cover their roses and plant graft below soil. Still there is a lot of losses. I used to grow roses outsid of Moscow warm bubble (I would say 3b/4a), but it was almost 20 years ago. At that time it was impossible to buy roses from Europe. I grew gallicas (with some dieback), albas (no dieback), damasks (serious dieback), rugosas, etc. I also had some HTs, FLs and poliantas. I don't know what the rootstock was, but it was something that never bloomed for me even after several years. I lost many roses during some winters, the rootstok took over and grew very vigorously, but never gave me a single bloom.
Olga

Cup Shaped Roses: Manetti as a rootstock is/was most commonly used for greenhouse-grown florist roses -- at least that was true in the US before the wholesale production of cut flowers ceased to exist here as an industry.

The root structure of Manetti (a large, long tap root with few lateral roots) allows for closer spacing/increased production in a greenhouse setting. However, some gardeners have observed that Manetti's unique root structure provides for less stability in gardens where windy conditions are common. Its preference for warm temperatures is another factor that makes it a good choice for greenhouse culture.

Cup-- ownroot roses are common in the US because the skilled labor to do budding is in short supply. Small boutique nurseries offering old and unusual roses started selling rooted cuttings and suckers because that's the only way they could produce plants themselves. Also many US gardeners grow tender roses in climates much colder than Copenhagen. The winter protection needed to save the graft is onerous unless the plant is buried so deep that the rootstock function is impaired.

As I understand it, Manettii is still preferred for greenhouse roses in the US. However, the root structure in my experience is shallow and nearly horizontal. I have dug many such plants from garden soil.

The winter protection necessary to save the graft in most places is quite easy. The problem is that most people don't have rose growing great grandfathers, who told their rose growing descendants how to do it. Somebody once asked me to find in a book that bud unions should be buried. So I looked in my non-trivial collection of rose books, and couldn't find it. It's incredibly simple information that isn't readily available.

Mad Gallica's comments are absolutely correct - even for rose gardeners in areas far warmer than Eastern NY. Burying the bud union gives the plant the advantage of a jump start (thanks to the graft), PLUS the likelihood that it will eventually develop its own roots.

As for Manetti . . . My observation bears out what Jaxondel had to say about what I (and Robert Martin) refer to as Manetti's 'carrot-root'. Since I garden in an area occasionally visited by hurricane-strength winds, I avoid Manetti rootstock. For the same reason, I avoid Fortuniana - which, in my garden soil, produces an extensive but very shallow root system. Both of those rootstocks have produced good results in my garden. However, I have no interest whatsoever in complicating things by having roses that require staking.

If you read older litterature you will discover that Manetti has been tried and tested many places in Europe, but I only know of it's actual use in Italy.

There are several canina varieties still being used in Europe, maybe pfanders is more popular by some producers. I know of a small producer who only uses this one. I know other some prefere it for certain types of climbers and hybrid perpetuals, and use multiflora and laxa for other roses.

The most commonly used canina varieties are very winter hardy and adjust well to both acid and alcaline soil, better than multiflora on both factors. There must be another reason why other root-stocks do better in America.

I sometimes get suckers from a type of rubiginosa (the apple fragrance), and I really don't know of any of the large producers that use this rose, but it is well mentioned in the older litteratue. When I buy roses I often don't know what they are grafted on.

I have a friend who propagates and used to import roses every spring. Some years there was bulk imports from Eastern Europenan countries, and the roses seemed to be budded on local growing wild roses. It is at least 6 years since the last import now. I remember the rose people was very surpriced when they discovered this.

mad gallica: I checked my rose-books, and all of them mentions how the bud onion are to be buried a few inches below the ground. Now I have to tell I live in Norway and my books are Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, French, German and British. When you buy a rose in a garden center this is the advice all buyers get trown after them.

I don't know how to account for disagreements about the structure of manettii roots. I dug many plants from a decayed public garden that had been planted with HTs from Wayside at the time they sold roses on manettii. The rootstock had taken over some plants and bloomed, identifying itself unmistakably. The plants had long fleshy horizontal roots that traveled 4-6" beneath the surface. The soil was heavy but good and ridged up slightly above grade for drainage. The grade was also slightly sloped. But nothing could have been less like carrot roots. Maybe it behaves differently on greenhouse benches.

Will scraping the bud union on ogrs help produce more basal breaks and what about epson salt.

Stanc

michaelg got me going on the hardiness of Multiflora rootstock, so I contacted my correspondent in Canada. She reports that she gardens in a warm Zone 3 trough that extends from SE of Edmonton down to the USA border. Her winter lows are -35â/-37â, with periodic lows down to -44â twice in a decade. She reports that multiflora is marginal at best, i.e. not hardy. When she receives plants budded onto multiflora, she plants them deep and at a slant to encourage the scion to go own root. She also reports that canina is not hardy either and is even less successful in her part of Canada.

Now I'm not reporting this to say she's right and michaelg is wrong. I'm trying to point out that at temperatures that low, there aren't that many hardy roses, rootstocks included. It's probably worthwhile to compare the North American hardiness map to the European hardiness map to remind ourselves that Canada is one of the colder places on earth.
Here's USA:
http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ushzmap.html?

Here's Canada:
http://www.planthardiness.gc.ca/images/cfs11x8E.jpg

Here's Europe:
http://www.backyardgardener.com/zone/europe1zone.html

And here's Japan, where R. multiflora originated (with Korea)
http://www.jelitto.com/english/japan.htm

Thanks, Cass. I don't know doodly about zone 3 gardening personally. I was referring to a scientific report I read that said R. multiflora as a whole plant is cane-hardy enough to bloom and reproduce somewhere in zone 3 where he tested it. Sorry I don't have the link. Also our guy in zone 3 Alberta uses plants on mf rootstock.

Berndoodle: very interesting points.

Laxa is probably the most hardy of the commonly used root stocks, at least that is what European tests indicate, both in the field and artifical freezer type tests.

The term canina is not that straight forward because it is not the wild specis that is used (well, generally speaking) but several canina hybrids (inermis, pfanders etc). It is usually canina inermis that is used; this variety gives as good growth as multiflora and laxa. Though, I think canina Smith's ideal is still regardes as the most hardy of them all, but gives smaller plants, at least the first year in the fields. Smith's ideal might very likely turn out one of the best root stocks in the coldest zones (-37 C. is really way too cold). I know of only one propagator that uses this rootstock on some roses (Denmark), but there are probably a few more.

There are a few varietis of multiflora too, here most use seed grown multiflora, but some prefere a variety with out torns, multiflora inermis. I think this one is vegetatively propagated; I'm not really shore because the canina inermis is supposed to be seed grown. Maybe it is a resessive gene?