|
Rhododendrons
for Cold Climates:
Hybrids of R. dauricum sempervirens
by Dr. J. Breuckner
Mississauga, Ontario
Reprinted from The RSC Bulletin 1981
Vol. 10 No. 1
A well known British personality summed up his opinion of
a group of rhododendron hybrids which lacked quality and good
flower colours simply with two eight letter words: "Coloured
Cabbages". Odd as it may sound, my first reaction when I
came across his remark was that I would be glad to grow any of
these hybrids, if only they would survive. This was not long
after we have moved from one of the most magnificent rhododendron
growing areas of New Zealand and, perhaps, of the world, to New
Brunswick, by no means in the coldest part of Canada, though
not in the mildest either.
As years went by, and after a more thorough appraisal of the
climate and detailed studies of the genus, I came to realize
that we can do much better than that, much better than to grow
"Coloured Cabbages". Even amongst the older hybrids
several of the better ones could, in my trials, tolerate the
cold winters of southern New Brunswick. I am thinking of such
fine rhododendrons as 'Mrs. C.S. Sargent', 'Catawbiense Album',
and some others. Then came the new hybrids: 'Ramapo', 'P.J.M.',
'Janet Blair', 'Evangeline' to mention a few, gems in any garden
anywhere.
It is not surprising that at that stage of experimentation
the thought comes to one's mind: why not push it to its limits?
Why not attempt to create rhododendron hybrids of the greatest
tolerance to cold possible to achieve at all?
It is well to remember, right here, that crossing the hardiest
of species, even with each other, is not necessarily an assurance
for obtaining hybrids of similar, maximum, hardiness. Conversely,
a cross of two relatively tender rhododendrons may on occasion
lead to a surprisingly hardy hybrid.
However, and not withstanding what was said, one can hardly
escape the logic that employing species of greatest winter hardiness
is still likely to present us with the best chance of breeding
plants which will have the greatest tolerance to low winter temperatures.
Hardiness is obviously a very significant goal in breeding
rhododendrons for cold climates. Another guideline, equally important
to me, is the aesthetic aspect. Only those hybrids should be
saved (and propagated) which are as good or better than the non-hardy
parent and which are hardier or more attractive than existing
hybrids.
It took some time to collect a selection of rhododendrons,
almost all species, suitable for a breeding programme of this
kind. Some species had to be gathered from the wild because not
even a botanical garden had them in their collections. Gradually
it was possible to assemble the following:
A. Hymenanthes (Elepidotes)
1. R. catawbiense, including the typical form, var. 'Catalgla',
var. compactum, var. rubrum and hardy catawbiense hybrids
2. R. aureum (chrysanthum)
3. R. nikomontanum
4. R. brachycarpum, ssp.tigerstedtii
5. R. maximum
6. R. yakusimanum, several clones
7. R. smirnowii
R. aureum as a parent was used in a limited way only, since,
with one or two exceptions, it did not perform well for me. The
hybrids seemed to lack resilience and durability. As years went
by they just simply vanished from the garden. Neither could R.
aureum itself (at least forms from the Lake Baikal area and northeastern
Siberia) tolerate the climate of South Ontario, though they survived
somehow in New Brunswick. I had better experience with R. nikomontanum
for breeding hardy, dwarf hybrids.
It is my opinion that of all rhododendrons in Sect. Hymenanthes
the Tigerstedt subspecies of R. brachycarpum does have the greatest
tolerance to cold winter temperatures, in spite of growing in
nature at lower altitudes and in less extremes of cold than R.
aureum. The Tigerstedt subspecies is a tall shrub, several meters
high, definitely reaching out of the snow cover, something which
can not be said of the prostrate growing R. aureum.
B. Rhododendron and Rhodorastrum
(Lepidotes) contain species which bear a very realistic
promise of having the potential for yielding truly hardy hybrids
for even the coldest of locations.
1. R. carolinianum, pink and white clones
2. R. ferrugineum
3. R. kotschyi
4. R. lapponicum
5. R. ledebourei
6. R. dauricum
Perhaps the foremost in my efforts of producing hardy hybrids
was the Canadian R. lapponicum from the Great Slave Lake area.
In contrast to the prostrate growing clones, this erect growing
form must at times reach above the rather scanty snow cover where
temperatures can dip to -55C or lower.
R. dauricum, another arctic and subarctic rhododendron was
also used extensively, mainly in three forms. One was collected
from the wild, north-west of Lake Baikal, by Vladimir Vasak.
Another form was grown from seeds, which were an offshoot of
Dr. Mehlquist's genetic studies. He crossed in his studies a
white clone of R. dauricum ('Arctic Pearl') with a dwarf magenta
flowered form. The third is the evergreen R. dauricum sempervirens.
The rest of this article will deal only with hybrids obtained
by using this clone as one of the parents.
As far as I know, the R. dauricum sempervirens which I used
comes, via Moscow, from Siberia. Its foliage, flowers and growth
pattern fit perfectly the description given for this shrub by
Dr. Leach in his book 'Rhododendrons of the World', therefore,
the reader can be spared any further taxonomic characterization.
R. dauricum sempervirens is a very hardy, well- behaved plant,
attractive in itself all year round, but especially in early
spring when covered with flowers. It seemed to me to have all
the potentials of being an excellent parent for creating cold-
tolerant hybrids. How excellent in reality it proved to be I
came to realize only within the last few years. As it appears,
R. dauricum sempervirens imparts cold-hardiness to its offspring,
but comparatively little of its morphological characteristics.
The size and growth habit of the other parent, the foliage,
the size and colour of flowers come through in the hybrids to
a marked extent, a trait which I have noticed in other forms
of R. dauricum, though not as pronounced as here. Although a
coincidence of several factors being responsible for this phenomenon
can not be excluded, at least until proof by genetic studies
is obtained, the opinion as expressed on the basis of my observations
seems to me of having foremost viability.
Because of its early flowering the evergreen R. dauricum was
almost exclusively the pollen parent. It will be noted where
not.
The crosses which were made with R. dauricum semper-virens
and which were successful are discussed below, under the name
of the other parent:
1. R.'Augustinii Hybrid'. This cross produced hybrids
which have flowers of light to medium violet-blue. So far, of
all R. dauricum sempervirens hybrids, I like the light blue form
of this cross best. It has widely funnel-shaped flowers, 5 to
6 cm across, of a delicate colour (Violet-Blue Group 91 or 92C,
Lobelia Blue). The leaves are oblong-lanceolate, 1.5-2 x 6-7
cm. It is a hardy, robust growing shrub, likely to be tall when
mature. Covered with flowers it is a conspicuous sight in the
Spring garden, appearing not unlike R. augustinii itself.
2. R. campylogynum, form with claret coloured flowers.
Of all hybrids the characteristics of the pollen parent are most
noticeable in this cross.
3. R. fastigiatum. Somewhat taller growing with less
glaucous to medium green leaves. Flowers are larger than those
of the mother plant and of pleasant shades of bluish purple.
4. R.impeditum,the type. Size of plants as well as
of flowers are somewhat larger than that of the seed parent.
Flower colours are from light to medium dark shades of purplish
blue.
5. R. impeditum, a clone of very dwarf growth. These
hybrids are rather typical for the pattern of inheritance, as
postulated. They are, as the mother plant, dense, compact, small
shrubs with comparatively large medium dark purplish violet flowers.
Leaves deviate most from those of the seed parent, being I to
1.5 cm long and almost oval.
6. R. patulum, The exact identity of this species (?)
is in some doubt, since in my opinion it also has several of
the characteristics of R. pemakoense. Much the same can be said
for its hybrids as was said for those under 5.
7. R. russatum, a low growing, somewhat twiggy form
with deep violet flowers. The hybrids are on the leggy side,
growing taller than the mother plant. Flowers are larger, good
shades of deep to medium violet, rather more attractive than
those of the seed parent. Leaves are broadly elliptic, 2 to 4
cm long.
8. R. moupinense. It was R. dauricum sempervireas which
was the seed parent in this cross. All seedlings were lost. Most
perished within a year, as they were unfortunately transplanted
next to a black walnut tree. The remaining few were devoured
by a rabbit; no doubt a gourmet's delight.
9. Open pollinated seedlings of R. dauricum sempervirens.
The seedling plants look like a 'semi-deciduous R. mucronulatum',
hardly reminiscent of R. dauricum. Since a R. mucronulatum was
planted next to the seed parent one must assume that a natural
cross occurred. These open pollinated seedlings are the most
rampant growing rhododendrons I have ever seen. They developed
from seed in less than four years into shrubs 110 to 120 cm tall.
The abundant flowers are quite large, over 5 cm across, in shades
of light lavender pink to Purple Group 78 B-D.
The climate of southern Ontario is mild in comparison to the
rest of Canada except for coastal British Columbia. All hybrids
of R. dauricum sempervirens were plant and bud hardy here, in
Plant Hardiness Zone 6, where they withstood, without damage,
temperatures as low as -25C. This, in spite of being planted
in a fairly open location, without any particular shade and Winter
protection and with hardly any snow cover during the last two
Winters. Although this may be remarkable in itself for a R. augustinii
hybrid, since this species is rather on the tender side, all
hybrids will have to undergo much harsher testings and further
observations in order to ascertain the limits of what they can
endure and before appropriate appraisals can be made.
Reprinted from:
The RSC Bulletin 1981, Vol. 10 No. 1
Back to Top
Back to Feature Articles
Index
|