The red is normal. The yellow splotches look like RMV, but I can't be sure. Can you post a few more and also the backs of the leaves?

Red is normal leaf pigmentation. The yellow streaks are a sign of Rose Mosaic Virus. There's nothing you can do about it, and it won't significantly impact the health and performance of the rose, although I'm sure there will be one or two Chicken Little rebuttals to that statement.

However, since it is a newly acquired rose, you may want to go back to the nursery and have a talk with them and find out what their policy is regarding virused roses. Not all nurseries respond in the same way, so ask. They may offer a refund or replacement. (Although it is almost 100% guaranteed that all their inventory of that variety will also be virused.)

If a rose was just planted around Mother's Day, I would be hesitant to diagnose the cause of your leave(s). Particularly with you not giving any of the history of the rose such as: bare root, or purchased already growing in a container.
Concerning the statement about the significance of a virus infection: "it won't significantly impact the health and performance of the rose".

Please note that no documentation was given for that statement which is not surprising since there are now at least 17 known rose viruses and there are roses that have been found to be infected with more than one virus
. Lets look at one of the common rose viruses in the U.S. - PNRSV.
This is what has been reported in a recent reviewed published scientific paper:
"Prunus necrotic ringspot virus (PNRSV) belongs to the genus Ilarvirus and the family Bromoviridae. PNRSV is the causal agent of many economically important diseases in most cultivated Prunus species worldwide. Apart from almond, apricot, peach, plum, sour- and sweet-cherry trees, roses are also attacked by this virus (Németh 1986). PNRSV is the most commonly found rose virus in the United Kingdom, France and Poland (Thomas 1981, 1984a, b; Moury et al. 2000, 2001; Paduch-Cichal 2003). Some field-grown rose cultivars show no symptoms of PNRSV infection, whereas others develop line patterns, ringspots or yellow nets on leaves (Thomas 1981, 1984a; Curtis and Moran 1986; Wong and Horst 1988; Paduch-Cichal 2003). PNRSV infected roses flower earlier than healthy plants, but produce deformed flowers. The virus infection influences many flower traits, e.g., a significant reduction in number and diameter of the flowers, their fresh and dry weight, as well as reduction in number, diameter, and length of the shoots or in the number of flower petals was observed (Thomas 1982; Moran et al. 1988; Paduch-Cichal and Sala-Rejczak 2007)."
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11738-011-0775-z/fulltext.html

Here is a link that might be useful: link for above

Queue the Chicken Little soundtrack....

"Queue the Chicken Little soundtrack...."

HAHAHAHA!!!! :-)

While I would prefer on the whole to have a rose virus-free, I will grow a virused copy if no virus-free plants exist.

And in many cases, that is the case.

If you lived in a very very cold-winter zone, virused plants could be a problem, in that they might be more vulnerable to frigid winters. But if you are in 8b, you likely have nothing to worry about.

In your zone, unless the rose is particularly stressed for some other reason, you will probably rarely if ever see any signs of the virus. In cold zones it CAN, but I've found rarely does, weaken a roses hardiness. I have roses that are decades old and I know are virused and they even wintered through last years hellish conditions. Ignore it and enjoy your rose!

jerijen also does not document her answer, nor does she discuss the recent reviewed published scientific paper that I presented.

The well respected rose web site Help-Me-Find states the following:

"Symptoms of RMV can include bright yellow banding, yellow netting, unequal leaf margins and leaf distortion, less winter hardiness than virus-free specimens, diminished flower production, reduced plant size and reduced vigor. Strains of viruses differ in their virulence. Infection by some strains is almost symptomless."

http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/gl.php?n=293
----------------------------------------------------------
The Help-Me-Find article provides a link to a University of New Mexico web page on the subject. The link does not work, but this one does:
http://aces.nmsu.edu/ces/plantclinic/documents/rose-mosaic-virus-_od-9__final.pdf
It states:
Because the disease often occurs on only one cane or a few leaves, it is mistakenly thought to be relatively harmless. However infected plants have decreased vigor, produce fewer flowers on shorter stems, have poorer transplant survival rates, and are more susceptible to winter-kill."
---------------------------------------------------
jerijen has an article about rose viruses on Paul Barden's website. The website includes the following statements:

"Rose Mosaic Virus Disease does not kill a rose. It is said, however, to be cause lack of vigor, distorted blooms, scanty bloom production, or smaller blooms than are typical for their variety. It is thought that the disease causes stems that are thin and weak where they emerge from the bud union, reduces plant survival rates. Virus may impede a plant from establishing itself, after transplanting."

Later the article states:

"There is also the undeniable fact that not all virused roses are bad roses. In my own garden, I can point to numerous bushes, CLEARLY virused, which grow like a house afire and bloom their fool heads off. I've seen old bushes, thirty years, forty years old, and older, which are healthy and productive despite age and virus. Still, some roses in our garden DO lack vigor, and in some cases I blame Rose Mosaic Virus. I'll accept virused plants where nothing else is available - but I'd really prefer "clean" ones, when and if they are available."

-----------------------------------------------
Regarding Seil's comments about what I assume is mainly her inherited virused roses. I ask: how many virused roses did her parents purchase that died in cold winters or were replaced due to a lack of satisfactory growth? Her present statement is consistent with the New Mexico statement that:
"Strains of viruses differ in their virulence. Infection by some strains is almost symptomless."
----------------------------------------------
The University of Oregon has a very respected Horticulture program. Their rose virus information is very recent 2014 date).
"Flower distortion, reduction in flower production, flower size, stem caliper at the graft union, winter survival, and early leaf drop, and increase susceptibility to cold injury have all been reported. Some infected cultivars may not show any symptoms at all."

Of particular interest (to me) are the pictures that carry the caption: "Each of these leaves were from the same plant."

http://pnwhandbooks.org/plantdisease/node/3883/print

--------------------------------------------
Please note that since the present symptoms appeared so quickly after planting, I still feel it is premature to conclude that the symptoms were caused by a virus..

Here is a link that might be useful: link to article by jerijen

Facebook is very annoying -- but there is ONE thing FB does right.

They allow you to hide, or to delete a post. You can even block posts from annoying people completely.

People you have, thus, blocked can post away, all they like, and you will never see anything they write.

" 'tis a consummation devoutly to be wished."

"People you have, thus, blocked can post away, all they like, and you will never see anything they write."

If only......

I have to chuckle. We have this same squabble EVERY spring when someone posts a photo of a virused leaf. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And I think sharing opposing opinions isn't a bad thing. It gives novices the whole picture and not just one side or the other. Then it's up to them to decide what they want to do.

I'm a realist and know that there are many roses out there you can't find any other way BUT virused. With the declining number of nurseries and sources for virus free roses scarce (and pricey) I take what I can find and move on. And I don't tend to panic quickly over every little spot or blemish on my roses. So a few lightning bolts on a few leaves every now and then doesn't bother me at all.

In the bunch of Austin's I currently grow along with a few HT's, I have to assume all are virused. Not that they have a single zigzag leaf, just that they are Austin's or HT's.

The only thing falling from the sky here is jacadranda flowers.... sky is fine.

I had one rose that was virused and eventually died. It was Iceberg Climber and I bought it as a body bag. It did last many years and bloomed wonderfully. I don't know that the virus killed it. It was knocked down by a hurricane and suffered blackspot badly and eventually didn't come back one spring.

I did have some very interesting looking leaves on my Heritage last year. Definitely virused. Did I dig it up and dispose of it? Of course not. If I did that, I would probably eventually have no roses left.

Well,

I am going to dig up and discard a virused America climber. I should have discarded it last Winter.

It was communicated that there are many strains of the virus. Absolutely, that resides within the realm of normal for a Virus and it was communicated in a clear and simple fashion. These varying strains could impact a plant differently.

When RMV is present, a gardener up front never knows what they will get in terms of rose performance, but do we ever have any guarantees with any plant in terms of health and vigor? So much depends upon the immune system of the plant AND external factors.

I have 3 rose bushes that "without a doubt" are virused because it has revealed itself. Two of the rose bushes have and continue to flourish, the Climbing America with RMV cannot withstand even the heat that is occurring now. From May until September it goes naked and then begins to grow leaves again when temperatures decrease. It is one of two climbing Americas in that bed. The other likely has RMV, performs fine, but could have a stronger immune system, or carries a different strain, which could be the case for the majority of my roses. As long as my roses continue to perform in an acceptable fashion, they remain. One climbing America WILL be discarded this year.

I agree with Seil that it is good to receive information from various credible sources, and let the reader choose to ignore, decipher or use the information.

Lynn

This post was edited by desertgarden561 on Sat, Jun 14, 14 at 10:39

"As long as my roses continue to perform in an acceptable fashion, they remain."

*** Right on.

The link below takes one to an abstract that allows one to link to Supplementary Material (1).

The Supplementary Material (1) is a WordPad document that describes the virus symptoms observed for each virused rose that they observed. It would of been nice if they included pictures. but until someone does that for all 17 known rose viruses this is probably the best information available. Also, please notice the number of roses that have more than one infection.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13313-012-0191-x

Here is a link that might be useful: link to abstract - needed to look at supplement

Just a note to everyone. Thank you all so much for your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and knowledge. The rose in question has lots of buds on it now so after reading everything I can, I've decided to keep it as long as I'm happy with its' performance. I'm excited to see the blooms! Again, thank you to each of you who took the time to help me.