leene_chan (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
leene_chan) wrote2012-06-04 04:27 pm
leene_chan) wrote2012-06-04 04:27 pm
Thrips again.
It looks like "Moondance" has thrips again after all. Not so much to deform the flowers terribly, but I'm disappointed.
I had been talking to Kristen about digging up the bush and moving it. There seems to be something about that spot; it's a damp corner up against the house, and I wonder if it's not a great place to have a rosebush, anyway. It seems to be the kind of place that would harbor insects.
I'm thinking that it'd be better to keep "Moondance" in a large pot until we're sure that the thrips are gone, then transplant it someplace sunnier. I certainly don't want to bring those nasty insects into our new bed. My idea is to dig it up, shake off all the old dirt, pinch the current buds and start anew. I really have a hard time believing that a potted rose is going to be able to maintain a thrips infestation. The problem is in the soil, after all. Damn white roses...
Kristen ended up digging up our poor little "Prairie Sunrise" and potting it up. We've had it since August of last year and it's about three inches tall. She said that in spite of its lack of top growth, it has a pretty impressive root system. I guess it's just not very vigorous!
"Gallicandy" is starting to sprout little red growth nodes all over that ridiculously long single cane. Maybe it'll stop looking like a broom in a few months? The top filled out nicely already.
I'm starting to think that the only rose we have from last year that isn't a little bitch is "Julia Child." In spite of my complaints about its blackspot, it's a good grower that shrugs off insect damage and is currently covered with many perfect flowerbuds.
I had been talking to Kristen about digging up the bush and moving it. There seems to be something about that spot; it's a damp corner up against the house, and I wonder if it's not a great place to have a rosebush, anyway. It seems to be the kind of place that would harbor insects.
I'm thinking that it'd be better to keep "Moondance" in a large pot until we're sure that the thrips are gone, then transplant it someplace sunnier. I certainly don't want to bring those nasty insects into our new bed. My idea is to dig it up, shake off all the old dirt, pinch the current buds and start anew. I really have a hard time believing that a potted rose is going to be able to maintain a thrips infestation. The problem is in the soil, after all. Damn white roses...
Kristen ended up digging up our poor little "Prairie Sunrise" and potting it up. We've had it since August of last year and it's about three inches tall. She said that in spite of its lack of top growth, it has a pretty impressive root system. I guess it's just not very vigorous!
"Gallicandy" is starting to sprout little red growth nodes all over that ridiculously long single cane. Maybe it'll stop looking like a broom in a few months? The top filled out nicely already.
I'm starting to think that the only rose we have from last year that isn't a little bitch is "Julia Child." In spite of my complaints about its blackspot, it's a good grower that shrugs off insect damage and is currently covered with many perfect flowerbuds.