I've seen a lot of different opinions, from different places, on the own root vs. grafted debate. Although burying grafts is a pain (sometimes literally) for cold-zoners, we all agree that some roses have to be grafted to really be worth any garden space. Some are preferred as grafted roses because they do a little too well on their own roots (I'm looking at you, Charles "Chuck 'The Thug'" de Mills). Then there is the question of what rootstock is best, and this varies - the South has 'Fortuniana' as an option, there's the ubiquitous 'Dr. Huey', some places swear by multiflora, and others.

So, for your area, what do you recommend in these categories:

1. Own-root or grafted. Doesn't need the extra vigor, but the graft is a nice head-start.

2. Grafted for vigor. Needs to be grafted in your area to have any size or any respectable amount of blooms.

3. Grafted for less vigor. What roses try to take over your garden beds, your property, and the county if left unchecked?

4. Do you bury the grafts? Do you have to on every rose, or are some hardy enough to spare a cold-zoner a 2 foot deep hole?

5. Is Rose Mosaic Virus an issue for you? This tends to be of more concern for cold-zoners, as our roses need already have enough against them; one more thing can be the difference between a thriving plant and a knee-high one-cane wonder.

If applicable, grafted onto what? Some Kordes cultivars have gained a reputation of getting too vigorous and going vegetative on multiflora. Fortuniana will croak in zones colder than 7. Europeans report issues with laxa/canina and 'rose replant disease' (my apologies, I can't remember which one it is). And then there's the nigh-unkillable Dr. Huey, bane of cold-zoners with the rootstock shanks most growers give us.

A great subject for a thread! We've discussed these matters at least a hundred times in this forum, but I think the discussions always grew out of discussions of other topics and were never on a dedicated thread.

1. I live in zone 9, so I don't need the graft for a head-start.

2. I do buy more grafted roses than own-root ones, however, and it has less to do with my area than with the types of roses I prefer. I've lost literally hundreds of own-root hybrid teas, so it just makes sense to look for grafted versions. Floribundas and shrub roses might do a little better than hybrid teas on their own roots, but I still prefer the grafted ones. In fact, when Wayside Gardens was a respectable nursery many years ago, they sold wonderful collections of OGRs, which were always grafted. Those grafted teas, bourbons, gallicas, etc. are much more vigorous in my garden than their own-root counterparts.

3. Grafted for less vigor? Queen Elizabeth. The own-root counterpart can climb 10-12 feet and require a helicopter to see the tops of the blooms. Also Cardinal de Richelieu and Charles de Mills, which spread through the garden on a takeover mission if they're left on their own roots.

4. I leave the grafts 2 inches above the ground in most cases, but 4 inches above for fortuniana-grafted roses.

5. Many of my roses have RMV, but it isn't an issue for me. Some of them are at least 30 years old and still going strong.

Fortunately, I've found that all of the different rootstocks perform well in my zone, although canina tends to send up suckers more than the others. The big difference is in their gopher appeal. Own-root roses and roses grafted onto Dr. Huey or Manetti have to be planted in gopher-proof cages in my garden. The rest don't need this protection because they don't appeal to gophers.

I didn't know that about gopher preference! That would certainly be a good reason to choose grafted roses on their least favorite roots. Why do you leave the fortuniana-grafted roses so high?

'Cardinal de Richelieu', you say? I'll add that to my 'avoid these gallicas unless you have a forty acre garden' list. But in seriousness, that's good to know - fighting suckers is no fun, and no one likes to dig twice.

The 4 inches for fortuniana is advice someone gave me long ago, but I can't remember who it was. It might have been K&M's James Mills. It works well, at least in my garden.

Oh, I just remembered. It wasn't James Mills. It was Cliff Orent, and he actually recommended 4-6 inches above the ground, but I thought 6 would be excessive.

ac91z6 said: - fighting suckers is no fun, and no one likes to dig twice.

Part of the problem there is that budded roses are not prepared by the growers as well as they used to be in the past.

If the shank of the rootstock below the bud union has been properly de-eyed, the root stock is less likely to send out suckers.

Lyn, we were talking about suckers that own-root roses produce. Cardinal de Richelieu and Charles de Mills can spread aggressively by means of suckers if they're grown on their own roots. The grafted ones don't do this.

Sorry, Zuzu, but I thought you were talking about suckers both from own-root and grafted roses.

In this garden, nothing suckers. I am gardening in rock ...

The other kind might have been mentioned, but not in that sentence you quoted.

That is true about the lack of preparation on the growers' or vendors' part. A couple of the bare-root grafted roses in my last order from Rosemania a few years ago already had numerous canes growing from below the graft. Those canes were already about 4 inches long, and shipping from Rosemania to my house doesn't take long, so the canes had to have been quite visible when my roses were selected for shipping. There was no growth above the graft yet because these were bare-root roses.

zuzu said:The other kind might have been mentioned, but not in that sentence you quoted.

That is true about the lack of preparation on the growers' or vendors' part. A couple of the bare-root grafted roses in my last order from Rosemania a few years ago already had numerous canes growing from below the graft. Those canes were already about 4 inches long, and shipping from Rosemania to my house doesn't take long, so the canes had to have been quite visible when my roses were selected for shipping. There was no growth above the graft yet because these were bare-root roses.

Zuzu ... they would have been visible before the rose was harvested and processed ! The de-eyeing step is done before a rose is budded to the root stock.

That's what I mean! Obviously, they were visible for a very long time, so why did the vendor not take one look at them and recoil in horror instead of sending them to me in that condition?

"That's what I mean! Obviously, they were visible for a very long time, so why did the vendor not take one look at them and recoil in horror instead of sending them to me in that condition?"

SLOPPY SLOPPY SLOPPY.

And, let me say this as delicately as I can . . . There are, very likely, far fewer really skilled budders these days than there were long ago. It's dreadful, hard, horrible work -- and the children of budders grew up, went to college, and became lawyers, and teachers, and . . . ANYTHING but budders, working on their knees in wet earth.

Most of what Zuzu describes goes for me.

ANYTHING planted in the ground in my conditions is Gopher Chow. (Yes. They will eat Huey quite happily) At least an own-root plant can grow new roots!


I'd love it if roses on Fortuniana were more widely available, because it's a great rootstock here. And I avoid Huey because, let's face it, most of it is virused as all getout.

I grow own root. I grow quite a few old roses, polyanthas and hybrid musks with a dash of Buck, Easy Elegance, Kordes, minis, and miscellaneous shrubs. These grow OK own root. That way I don't have to worry about having to bury the graft in thin soil and rock. Fortuniana is only border-line hardy here. I'd never knowingly bring multiflora onto my property considering what it takes to get rid of it around here and the very real problem with RRV. I'm not happy, either, about adding virused Dr.Huey to the mix of the many problems roses here already have. (BTW, voles here don't mind the flavor of Dr. Huey.) I can't advise anyone else here what to do, only what works for me.

@Kesroses ....

You don't need to worry about multiflora root stock. RRD is transmitted by a mite. The root stock is buried and is not vulnerable to the mite.

If the root stock has been properly prepared, you will not have suckers. Therefore, none of the multiflora root stock is vulnerable to RRD.

As far as I know, the top growth of all roses, budded or own root, are vulnerable to RRD infection by the mite.

I am just passing this along so that you don't have to worry about roses budded to multiflora.

I'm so sorry that I was really unclear!

About multiflora roses- Multiflora roses are an exotic invasive here as I'm sure they are in many places in the east. They spread not just into pastures, fields and vacant lots but also into national parklands. There is a pasture less than a mile away where I notice that it has a foothold. It can be spread by runners from the parent plant. It can be spread by birds. It grows fast and has no natural enemies here. Removal is difficult once you have it. Even without RRV in the picture, this is a problem. I have had difficulty getting rid of rootstock after the grafted rose was gone. The ****** stuff spreads underground and can come up in unexpected places. Maybe out of an abundance of caution, I'm not interested in bringing something into my garden that is so hard to remove once it gets a foothold and that could possibly cross my property line.

About RRV- Multiflora rose is highly susceptible to the rose rosette virus. There is even some talk that it was intentionally introduced into some areas to get rid of multiflora roses. Sadly, multiflora roses aren't the only roses affected by RRV. It can spread to all other roses in the area.
As an example, remember how during flu season, the warning is given that children, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems will be especially susceptible. That doesn't mean that everyone else will not get the flu. Unless someone is vaccinated or has natural immunity to the flu, anyone can get it. Like children, elderly and those with compromised immune systems, multiflora roses are in the highly susceptible group to RRV. However, there is no vaccine for RRV and there are no known roses with natural immunity. Any rose could be infected.
The mite that acts as a vector for this disease travels on the wind. Because of the mode of travel, the underground part of a rose will not be the first to become affected. After infection, the virus will then spread throughout the plant. That is why all parts of an infected rose, including the root system, must be removed. Own-root roses are no less likely to become infected than grafted roses since what is above ground will be infected first. I suppose it's possible that roses may be grafted to rootstock infected with RRV. Of course this would mean that the whole rose would then be infected. I hope this never happens. It would be devastating to growers, nurseries and their customers..
Large untended areas of roses, whether pasture and fields of multiflora or knockout roses planted by the city for landscaping purposes, are magnets for this disease and will then be "ground zero" so to speak, for its spread into the rest of the community. I've lost roses to RRV. I try to stay observant and informed. With multiflora in pastures and fields nearby, this won't go away soon for me.

I'm so sorry that I gave the wrong impression and hope my explanation helps clear things up. I'm not trying to scare anyone who has roses grafted to mutiflora. This isn't a one-size-fits-all problem. Multiflora rose may be nonexistent where they live, except as rootstock for their roses. I think that some areas of our country are even free of RRV. None of what I said applies to them and I apologize.

If you read the really old rose books and journals, you know that rosarians used to experiment with all kinds of stocks to see which would suit various popular roses best.

The correspondence sections of various gardening journals hosted an ongoing discussion of which stocks were best for growing 'Maréchal Niel', and just when it might seem that there was some agreement ('Isabella Gray'!), there would appear reports of complete failure.

Some rosarians thought all roses should be budded on 'Manetti' or on Briar seedlings, while others felt that the vigor of the stock needed to matched to that of the scion- being somewhat more vigorous than the scion, but not too much more.

I recently discovered that Rosa laevigata (the Cherokee Rose) was used as a stock in Florida for a good while in the early-to-mid- 20th century. I'm not sure if it is still used; it seems like most Floridian rose-growers want their roses budded onto Fortuniana, and it's not clear if Fort was actually always better, or if it was just simpler to use one stock for everything.

The budded versus own-root debate has been going on for at least a century, and there have been vocal proponents of each approach, but I think sensible gardeners have always realized that a one-size-fits-all approach is needlessly limiting.

With my own peculiar circumstances, I only have own-root plants. If I were ever to try "Jesse Hildreth" again (and I probably won't because I suspect he's really too tender, and not fond of our humidity), I would only do so if he were budded.

Virginia

I know I'm still looking for the best rootstock. I believe that generally, the roses that grow well on their own roots do better in my garden than roses that do not. But that may simply be because such roses are generally more vigorous.

Where I live in the mountains of Arizona the soil has a high pH and multiflora rootstock - which starts out quite vigorous - will often fade away after a year or two. My experiments adding powdered sulfur have not changed this materially, Not yet. I also have pocket gophers that nibble on rootstock. I've been told that gophers prefer Dr. Huey. So I'm not sure its a good choice. I've lost to gophers own root roses, roses on multiflora rootstock, and roses on Dr. Huey rootstock. I think the total is around six or eight with roughly equal numbers on each stock. So maybe Dr Huey is not worse than other rootstocks in this location. If one does the statistics, I think one will find it to be at least as good as multiflora.

Dr Huey is blamed, too, for spreading PNRV. People who grow roses in places that every summer get above 110F claim that the virus is not a problem. Viruses tend to break down at such temperatures and if I remember correctly holding roses at such temperatures has been used to rid some roses of PNRV. But studies in other locations suggest material lack of vigor can be an effect of the virus. The PNRV issue was a big thing in the 1980s and 1990s, but the advent of so many good own-root nurseries has meant that much less attention has been focussed on it recently. And certain nurseries have worked very hard to eliminate the problem from their stock.

I've been told that it's too cold in the winter here for Manetti or Fortuniana rootstock. But I have also been led to believe that in slightly warmer climates fortuniana is the best. At least when HT roses are concerned. I've come close to doing the experiment for myself.

So far, I have yet to find a rootstock that is suitable for my kind of high pH soil, frosts, and heavy feeding by gophers. My garden houses something upwards of 200 rose plants, and I spend quite a lot of time obsessing over how to manage gophers, drought, high pH, and other soil fertility problems.

My own opinion is that the first question in selecting rootstock is whether a rose cultivar is available and will do very well in a location on its own roots. If the answer is "yes" and the plant does not sucker, then it seems to me that - at least provisionally - the answer is to start with a plant on its own roots. Usually, one simply does not know; and if one does the experiment, too often one will find the answer is "no." I have a six year old Sheila's Perfume on its own roots that has not yet reached eight inches high. It is precisely the size it was when I took it out of its pot in 2012. It is my understanding that - especially with hybrid tea roses bred in the twentieth century - the primary reason to buy a rose on budded rootstock is to make it possible for the thing to actually grow. And that is the reason I buy HT roses on Dr. Huey rootstock. I also buy David Austin roses on Dr Huey rootstock because most cultivars are a little hard to come by on their own roots. And as a practical matter, if a rose is unavailable on the rootstock of choice, then one must choose between not growing it or growing it on a less than perfect rootstock choice.

A second issue is whether rose suppliers can reliably and competently produce rose plants on the rootstock they use and deliver those roses alive to your property. Each year the answer seems a little different. Palatine almost always does a flawless job of budding onto multiflora rootstock. (But longevity proves a problem here with soil pH above 8.0) Edmunds does a very good job budding onto Dr Huey and growing the plants to a large size before selling them; but they store their roses under such poor conditions, (based on 2017 experience), that fully a third of the plants are stone cold dead on arrival. And more than half of the rest need daily attention for three months until established. Many of those that live prove to be stunted things, clearly not proving the benefit of budded rootstock. Two years ago I got some good budded roses from J&P. This year, the batting average is closer to zero for six.

Two decades ago own root roses shipped from (then) Heirloom Old Garden Roses were barely rooted cuttings, and were not viable unless they spent a full year in a pot in a nursery. Vintage Gardens own root roses were about ten times as big on arrival, but although I bought many dozens, only a handful survive; and none of the hybrid tea roses have. The own root roses I've gotten in the last two years from Rogue Valley Roses have generally done quite well in pots. A few have been planted out and continued doing well. I have had some good fortune with own root roses from Antique Rose Emporium, especially with old garden roses and with Kordes roses. The three or four roses from Chamblees have done even better.

The only HT roses I have on their own roots are Beloved, Chrysler Imperial, and Joyfulness. Joyfulness has just enough vigor to actually grow, slowly and tentatively. The other two, not so much. Some of the reason for success with roses from RVR, ARE, and Chamblees is that the cultivars they sell tend to be materially easier to grow here than HT roses, regardless of rootstock.

Last year I lost probably half the budded roses I planted despite daily attention. This year I lost most of the budded roses that did not originate at Palatine. I find that it is slightly less disspiriting to lose my roses more slowly due to a long series of local insults such as dry weather, frost, six kinds of nibbling animals, and occasional neglect than it is to lose half a large order within weeks of delivery mostly to lack of adequate care on the part of the supplier. So I've started to shift my focus to own root plants, especially in cases when the rose is not a hybrid tea rose. (Obviously not every HT rose is the same and it may be that in some cases own root HT roses will do as well as budded ones. If so, I'd be happy to know which ones,)

I think it's just incredibly silly to imagine that there is one "best" solution for every single cultivar, location, climate, soil, and so on. ARS publishes the top ten best cultivars for each of its half dozen or dozen different geographical areas. Some cultivars make several lists, but in general, each cultivar has benefits and drawbacks that make it well suited to one location and less so to another. In much the same way, I think different rootstocks may have different advantages in different places. I am, however, still waiting to discover the right one for growing HT roses in my area.

So much to catch up on after having my niece for several days over the holiday week! She's 7, so plenty of energy to burn - keeps Aunt AC busy!

Lots of good information so far! Kesroses, we have the same issue with multiflora invasiveness here. If any of my roses from Hortico make it, I'll try to pay attention for multiflora suckers. I've already lost two, but that's due to our weather being cold forever and me getting sick when they first came so they got to sit in a water bucket in the garage for longer than was probably good for them.

Roseblush, I did read somewhere on Gardenweb (from Henry, if any other Gardenweb escapees recognize the resident scientist) that some research had shown a correlation between multiflora grafts and RRD susceptibility, but it wasn't definitive - more a 'we found something that warrants further research'. I don't think I'd let it scare me away from multiflora rootstock, especially as my only other real choice is Huey. I'm burying deep enough they'll probably go own-root at some point, and the study didn't look at whether the roses had gone own-root (how long could the increased risk last?) or (and I'm suspecting this, given what Kesroses said about multiflora suckering) if the rootstock had suckered and the rose caught RRD from those stems.

Scvirginia, I think you're right about it being simpler to just use one rootsock, even if two or three work well for your area in general. Some roses may have done better on R. laevigata than R. fortuniana, to use your examples, but unless they sold well enough for a nursery to maintain separate rootstock fields they would just fall out of commerce. Might explain why some roses vanished from some regions.

Steve, you make a good point about taking whatever rootstock is available I've experienced the issue of bareroots struggling in cold zones due to being kept so long in storage - it's a good argument for just starting with plants. Do you think ARE's own-roots do better because they are two gallon, or that under-performers would just be culled from their offerings by a nursery growing them on that long?

Zuzu, I think you've won the 'grafted rose horror story of the year' - Holy quality control Batman, that's terrible. I hope they gave you a refund for that rose lemon. I did want people to list experience with rootstock and scion/variety suckering - I'd like any newbies to know what options they have and what to expect, and for more experienced rosarians to have a heads up about any about other classes and older/antique roses they haven't tried yet.

Jerijen, that's good point - budded roses have declined in quality because good grafters are in short supply, and it's a labor intensive process to debud properly. I can't imagine trying to grow anything with gophers around - I think I'd be on the news for resorting to dynamite! Kudos to all you rosarians who garden in spite of the little pests.

The only consensus across regions I'm seeing for budded classes are HTs (for vigor, mostly from the 20th century) and Gallicas (for containment). For own-root it's other OGRs and some from a few breeders - Buck, Kordes, and Ping Lim (who is behind many of the Easy Elegance series).

For rootstocks I'm seeing Multiflora is good for naturally acidic-to-neutral soil, Fortuniana for warm zones. I don't have a lot of experience myself with Huey, but several experienced rosarians on HelpMeFind have commented that it does well in wet and clay soils.

Are any other rootstocks used anymore? I've read about 'Manetti', but only in historical information, and I think I've seen posts about people getting roses on 'Pink Cloud'/'Pink Clouds' or something like that - does anyone know of any sources that use something other than The Big Three?

@ac91z6 ....

Roseblush, I did read somewhere on Gardenweb (from Henry, if any other Gardenweb escapees recognize the resident scientist) that some research had shown a correlation between multiflora grafts and RRD susceptibility, but it wasn't definitive - more a 'we found something that warrants further research'. I don't think I'd let it scare me away from multiflora rootstock, especially as my only other real choice is Huey. I'm burying deep enough they'll probably go own-root at some point, and the study didn't look at whether the roses had gone own-root (how long could the increased risk last?) or (and I'm suspecting this, given what Kesroses said about multiflora suckering) if the rootstock had suckered and the rose caught RRD from those stems.

Henry often posts links to studies with indefinite findings. Sometimes, the links are to well-designed studies and sometimes, the links are to poorly designed studies. I haven't read the one you are referring to above.

A lot of root stocks sucker. The reason the roses used were chosen as root stock is that they are very, very good at growing roots.

When I read @Kesroses post, I thought the reason he really didn't want to use multiflora budded roses is that if the scion of the budded rose dies, getting rid of the multiflora root stock takes heroic effort. Kes ... please correct me if I am wrong ...

The same is true for Dr. Heuy. Just break one of those roots as you are digging out the old root stock and you have created a new growth point. That's Dr. H. In a way, fighting a root stock is like fighting bindweed ..

I don't think roses budded to multiflora are more vulnerable to RRD. Do I know this ? No. It's just my opinion based on what I have read about RRD over the years. I think any rose, at this point in time, is susceptible. The mites may incubate in multiflora roses, but they spread RRD beyond multiflora stands. Also, there are thickets of multiflora that will never be infected by RRD because the winds are such that the mites never reach those thickets.

I grow both own root roses and roses budded to Dr. H. I have had two own root roses fail to thrive and that is because they didn't like my garden conditions. Those two roses do very well in other gardens as own root plants.

For me, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference if a rose is budded. I'll still pot it up to allow the rose to grow roots before I plant it into the ground.

I am pretty much strictly an own root girl. My Candice is not own root but every cutting I took from her rooted and now I have five of this plant and they are all thriving.
My reason for own root is simple. I have very limited garden space (read tiny urban garden). My initial roses that were not on own root started to have Dr. Huey show up in the beds. I had to get rid of all of my roses in that bed as several of them had reverted back to root stock. I replaced them with own root only (but still do find an occasional Dr. Huey left over that I get to try to remove). I just can't afford to replace plants, especially ones that I find do well in my climate if the root stock takes over. While Dr. Huey is a pretty rose, I don't choose to grow it intentionally.
I have also had the good fortune to have roses that "don't do well" on their own root, do well in my yard. Wedding Cake is an example of that. It took a long time for it to get big enough to plant (two years), but it has been going strong ever since.
I too plant up any new rose I get in a pot for a bit until I can plant it (or it may stay in a pot forever as I don't have garden space to plant it). It gives me time to make sure it is the right rose and see how it does in my climate conditions. I had ordered Peppermint Parfait (another great rose) from a nursery and they sent me Paul's Himalayan Musk instead. Didn't think the flowers looked right. The nursery confirmed and sent me the plant I requested. Gave Paul to a friend who has a farm where that rose can grow to be it gargantuan self. No space here for that! I call that rose the house eater rose!