Fermanagh Species Accounts

These species accounts have been prepared by Dr Ralph Forbes, Vice County Recorder for County Fermanagh and co-author of the Flora of Fermanagh.

To search within the text, please use ctrl + F, or Command + F on Mac.

Introductory remarks on Roses

The Fermanagh recording experience has taught RHN and the current author (RSF) that roses are difficult plants to identify for at least two reasons: their breeding system, which involves polyploidy, and the extent of their hybridisation, which regularly produces partially fertile plants and introgression of genes from crossing taxa producing intermediate morphological characteristics. Old Floras interpreted the variation and deviations that these two factors produced by naming very large numbers of separate varieties, but recognising very few hybrids. Little or no serious work has been done on Fermanagh's roses until recently, although Meikle and his co-workers collected carefully during their 1945-53 survey and the referee, Mr N.Y. Sandwith, checked many of their records. The poor treatment of the genus Rosa in the 6th edition of Webb's An Irish Flora (1977) is possibly a reflection of the confusion in rose taxonomy that was partially created by the Klastersky treatment of it in Flora Europaea 2 (Tutin et al. 1968). Prof Webb was heavily involved in this important taxonomic exercise, as one of the editors and as a major contributor to Flora Europaea. Melville's paper of 1967, which drew attention to rose hybrids and the problems of species classification, together with his treatment of the hybrids published in Stace's Hybridization (1975), may have also played a part, helping to underline the difficulties recorders face making correct identifications in this plant group.

Whatever the historical and scientific reasons were, the Irish field guide Flora in use over the major period when the vascular plants of Co Fermanagh was being surveyed was An Irish Flora (1977) and it provided a particularly poor, indecisive treatment of the genus Rosa. This was especially the case in the handling of Rosa canina s.l. The outcome of this is that most botanical recorders working in Fermanagh simply did not bother to try to identify the majority of the roses they encountered.

The publication in 1991 of Stace's New Flora of the BI and of the BSBI Roses Handbook in 1993, appeared at first to offer a better treatment of all our roses. However, for the extremely variable Section Caninae in particular and, more generally, on account of the very brief and inadequate descriptions that these two new standard works provide, recorders have unfortunately been left with many rose specimens that fall into no clear cut taxon – hybrid or otherwise.

The fact that ripe or late season fruit characters are sometimes required to reach a definitive identification also means that field identification of some specimens may be impossible on a single visit, which is usually all that most visiting field workers can manage to a particular site and rose bush. Regrettably, for these reasons, a very large collection of undetermined Fermanagh rose records have accumulated, of little value to anyone. Much work remains to be done to sort out the roses in Fermanagh.
Four rose species in B & I reproduce sexually in the normal way: Rosa arvensis, R. multiflora, R. rugosa and R. spinosissima. The remaining species in B & I are often referred to as 'unbalanced polyploids', most often pentaploids (2n=35) but also tetraploids and hexaploids (2n=28, 42) (Stace et al. 2015). The hybrid progeny of these species inherit more sets of chromosomes from the female (seed) parent, than from the pollen parent and thus are described as 'matroclinal' (or sometimes, 'matriclinal'). Because of this, it is often possible to judge with reasonable certainty in which direction a cross has occurred, ie which parent was the female. In roses, by convention, the female parent is listed first (R. Melville, in Stace 1975, p. 213). The recognition of directional hybrids is regularly feasible in first generation crosses, but subsequent secondary crossing and resultant introgression of genes and associated recognisable characters complicates the picture, giving rise to rose complexes of indeterminate ancestry (Roses Handbook, p. 13). Directional and non-directional records of rose hybrids are never of this complexity, but in the latter case, the field recorders have been unable to decide which parent was the female.