I'll hold out for blue roses first - so far that has failed completely, despite a lot of money spent and insistence that it is possible.

Jackie

Although I like all kinds of things that light up I'm not sure I want my garden to glow in the dark. Sounds kind of eerie to me, lol.

I'm kind of wavering between eerie glow and intriguing glow--but if glowing roses increase visits by the deer, count me out. I have enough problems with them already. Diane

Funny -- I'm a little bothered by glowing roses.

That's probably irrational on my part, because I've recently heard of a glow-in-the dark substance coming on the market for roads.

A gently glowing line along our lane seems like a nice replacement for the ugly streetlight that I loathe. So, why DON'T I want glowing roses????

Jeri

I am instinctively wary of cross genetic mixing so I suspect I would find a glowing rose to be very much against my acceptance of what consitutes 'beauty' (our aesthetic values are always mediated by social and cultural imperatives).
I had always considered bio-luminescence a fleeting phenomenon, much tied to environmental conditions......maintaining stability of phyto-luminescence might be a bit more tricky......which removes utility from the equation too so, nope, probably not for me.

There you are -- THAT's probably why I instinctively shy away from the idea. Thanks Campanula. :-)

Jeri

Actually if they could bio-engineer bioluminescence, why not improve disease/pest resistance, cold hardiness, and/or heat tolerance instead?

Also, blue roses may failed but why not try black roses? It should be easier since some roses look dark enough to be black under low lighting. Conceptually, all they have to do is saturate the color of a dark enough rose to make it look black even in bright light, but they'd also probably have to increase its heat tolerance so its petals don't burn in the sun though.

Improved disease/pest resistance, cold hardiness, and/or heat tolerance would be far more useful, IMHO.

Jeri

I suspect it will be a long time before we have to worry about glowing roses. I read the Kickstarter project. It is still very experimental. They are starting with Arabidposis and won't guarantee that will even be successful. But it's a great way to fund a research project and educate and involve the community at the same time. I like the idea of sustainable energy, but the idea of modifying genes is spooky. It promises to be another area in man's technology is far ahead of his wisdom to use it. I'm glad Europe is so strict on genetically modified plants. I wish the US were.

I think I would rather stock up on Solar Lights.

The idea of something I eat having pollen on it from stuff that glows in the dark is not comforting

I am sure one day,roses would be engineered to bloom 4 seasons, glow in the dark, totally bullet proof and have all the attributes that one' heart desires. But I don't look forward to those roses. I garden because I enjoy being connected with simple, but essential things missing from my work like (sun, rain, dirt, sweat) as well as a bit of history and personalities of our plants. For gardenning, I will stay low tech and, yes, I find glowing roses disturbing.

For those who are M. Atwood fans, didn't she write about roses that glow in the dark in Year of the Flood?

I still think mutations like sports are the best form of genetic modification from nature.

Who knows? Maybe one day those failed blue roses will sport and we'll get a true blue one.

Also, bullet-proof roses! lol! That made my day.