Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle, Illustrations of the botany of the Himalayan Mountains; 1833 208, t.42,f.2 1835. (syn: Rosa alaica Juz.; Rosa alticola Boulenger; Rosa caraganifolia Sumnev.; Rosa dawoensis Pax & K.Hoffm.; Rosa ellenae Chrshan.; Rosa epipsila Sumnev.; Rosa fedtschenkoana Regel; Rosa fedtschenkoana var. glandulosa Regel; Rosa fedtschenkoana var. lageniformis Regel; Rosa fedtschenkoana var. ovata Regel; Rosa fedtschenkoana var. pubescens Regel; Rosa glanduligera Kult.; Rosa hausimardonica Vassilcz.; Rosa hissarica Slobodov; Rosa holotricha Sumnev.; Rosa kirsanovae Sumnev.; Rosa korschinskiana Boulenger; Rosa kosingiana G.Don; Rosa krylovii Sumnev.; Rosa lavrenkoi Sumnev.; Rosa leiophylla Sumnev.; Rosa lipschitzii Sumnev.; Rosa maracandica Bunge; Rosa minusculifolia Sumnev.; Rosa nanothamnus Boulenger; Rosa nudiflora Sumnev.; Rosa oligacantha Sumnev.; Rosa pycnantha Sumnev.; Rosa pyricarpa Sumn.; Rosa reverdattoi Sumnev.; Rosa rubens Sumn.; Rosa tytthantha Sumn.; Rosa tytthotricha Sumn.; Rosa unguicularis Bertol.; Rosa vvedenskyi Korotkova; Rosa webbiana var. genuina Crép.; Rosa webbiana var. latifolia Crép.; Rosa webbiana var. microphylla Crép.);
.
Tibet, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan (Badakshan, Wakhan, Baghlan, Bamyan, Kabul, Kunar / Nuristan, Laghman, Logar, Wardak, NAH, Paktia / Khost, Parwan), Pakistan (Chitral, Kurram, Dir, Swat), Pakistani Kashmir (Gilgit, Baltistan), N-India, Myanmar [Burma], Jammu & Kashmir (Dras, Ladakh, Nubra, Zanskar), W-Nepal as per Catalogue of Life;
.
Webb’s Rose, Wild rose, Thorny rose;
.
Looking similar to R. macrophylla but with smaller lesser leaflets, shorter calyx tips and shorter ovoid hips without glands.
.
Shrub with thin flexuous twigs; yellowish-brown twigs; prickles uniform or mixed with bristles, usually in pairs, straight or or ascending, absent on flowering stems; leaves with leaflets 5-9, simply or doubly serrulate, 1-2 cm long, elliptic to obovate; flowers solitary or 3-5 in a cluster, 3-5 cm diam., red, pink or white, pedicel often with stalked glands; sepals entire, shorter, persistent; hip oblong-ovoid, 1-2 cm in diam, ovoid or globose, glabrous, red when mature.
.
Rosa webbiana: Leaflets usually 5-7, usually less than 25 mm long, lateral veins 5-8 on each side, margin serrate; fruit usually globose without a distinct neck, usually smooth.
Rosa macrophylla: Leaflets usually 9-11, mostly 20-50 mm long, lateral veins more than 8; margin serrulate (mostly doubly); calyx lobes with usually foliaceous tip; fruit usually pyriform with distinct neck, often glandular.
.

Rosa webbiana ??? in full bloom from Nubra valley. Pl validate

Yes .. One of the commonest shrubs on hilly slopes of Harwan, where I worked for my Ph. D. thesis.


Yes you are right sir common in Ladakh


Yes, these images do seem to fit Rosa webbiana– a common xerophytic rose in Ladakh.


BUT the common shrub on hilly slopes of Harwan is probably Rosa nanothamnus– which Stewart recognised as a separate species from R.webbiana– he gave R.webbiana var. microphylla as a synonym).
R.nanothamnus is currently an Accepted Name, see:
http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl1.1/record/rjp-15354



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20webbiana%203.jpg
Rosaceae Week – Rosa webbiana (NSJ-03/10/11 -02):
Rosa webbiana from Hunder, Nubra Valley, Ladakh (Photo taken in June 2011)


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1334.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1336.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_1333.jpg
Happy and Prosperous Diwali with Rosa webbiana from Lahual Valley Himachal:
Rosa webbiana
Recorded from lahul Valley Himachal Pradesh
Elevation: 3000 m


Do you have any close ups of Leaves and calyx, or fruit?. R. macrophylla looks much similar.


I didn’t have the photos of leaves and calyx or fruit.


I think this probably is Rosa webbiana but one should be aware that xerophytic forms of R.macrophylla are found in Lahaul and can be difficult to distinguish from R.webbiana



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20sps%20-1-.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20sps%20-2-.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20sps%20-3-.JPG

Rosa sps from Leh.
Rosa webbiana?


yes


It is Rosa webbiana


Yes, this does seem to come within Rosa webbiana– as far as I know, xerophytic forms of R.macrophylla have not been recorded from Ladakh.


.


Rosaceae Week:: Rosa webbiana from Ladakh (NSJ-08) : 2 posts by 2 authors. Attachments (3)
Rosa webbiana from Hunder, Nubra Valley, Ladakh (Photo taken in June 2011)

Very beautiful pictures of a lovely wild rose, thanks for showing …



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6015.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6013.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6008.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6010.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6011.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_6016.JPG
Rosaceae Sp – at Dras region-J&K- July-PKA-32 : 5 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (6)

Wild Rose (Rosaceae Family) was seen in Dras sector enroute Leh.
Sharing few pics of the same..


Brilliant!!!


It is Rosa webbiana, a beautiful species that turns the entire landscape pink in Dras-Kargil-Leh section during May-June.


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa-webbiana-above%20Cheshmashahi-IMG_4635-Kashmir-6.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa-webbiana-Upper%20Munda-DSC00676-Kashmir-7.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa-macrophylla-Chopta%20Mandal%20Road-IMG_3136-Uttarakhand-1.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa-macrophylla-Gulmarg-DSC07547-Kashmir-5.jpg
Flowers look larger, please also check for Rosa macrophylla.
Rosa webbiana: Leaflets usually 5-7, usually less than 25 mm long, lateral veins 5-8 on each side, margin serrate; fruit usually globose without a distinct neck, usually smooth.
Rosa macrophylla: Leaflets usually 9-11, mostly 20-50 mm long, lateral veins more than 8; margin serrulate (mostly doubly); calyx lobes with usually foliaceous tip; fruit usually pyriform with distinct neck, often glandular.
Here are crucial photographs for comparison. Attachments (4)- 2 each of both species. 


1. Can a definitive opinion be arrived at: are … pixs R. webbiana or R. macrophylla?
2. Are both these species found through Drass-Kargil-Ladakh-Siachen?
3. Any other rose species found in this larger region?

Beautiful photographs, …
These two species can be very easily differentiated on the basis of peculiar hip/fruit shapes.
Thank you, … for posting photographs of fruits of both. I have photographs only of R. macrophylla with me.


In this photo from …, from Drass, the fruits do not seem to have neck?
So, is this R. webbianna?


The shrub in question definitely is Rosa webbiana, and matches the wonderful field characters given by … Since the species is known to grow upto 4000 m asl, and with no other wild rose species reported from the area, idea to name the glacier ‘Siachen’ must have come from this species. Only a guess!


I think this probably (or more accurately, MUST) be Rosa webbiana.   The only other possibility are xerophytic forms of R.macrophylla,
which has not been recorded for Ladakh.
As far as I know, Rosa webbiana is the rose found at the snout of the Siachen glacier.

.


I have just gone through, INITIALLY, the entries under Rosa webbiana– which ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ describes as the common pink-flowered rose of the W.Himalaya. One MIGHT have expected ALL entries to be correctly identified.
However, I found that the images from the Kashmir Valley seem to be Rosa nanothamnus (which ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ does not include) whilst the roses photographed in Lahaul & Spiti, I was not sure if they were xerophytic forms of R.macrophylla.
I have seen what I understand to be R.macrophylla, above Koksar, in Lahaul.
This shows that I really SHOULD continue to check entries for all Himalayan genera on eFI.
It is a mistake in plant identification to ASSUME a plant you see automatically belongs to a ‘common’ species. This applies both in the field (wild) and data-bases.


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20webbiana-P1050458.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20webbiana-P1050459.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Rosa%20webbiana-September%202011-Kinnaur.JPG

Rosaceae Fortnight-Rosa webbiana from Himachal-GSG04/Sept 2015 : 3 posts by 3 authors. 3 images.
The last of the four species of native Rose found wild in Himachal Pradesh.
Rosa webbiana, found mainly in trans-Himalayan region in the State. The following pics are from Kinnaur, Lahaul Spiti with one pic also from Ladakh.


Thanks, … Your postings are out of the world.


Fine photographs but are they actually a xerophytic form of Rosa macrophylla, rather than R.webbiana?  I am uncertain.


In my opinion, it should be Rosa webbiana.
In R. macrophylla, fruits are flask-shaped with bristles and upto 5cm, while in R. webbiana, fruits are smaller (upto 3.5cm) and not bristly.
Fruits of R. macrophylla attached.
Attachments (1)


KEY FROM FLORA OF KULLU DISTRICT
Leaves 8-15 cm long, leaflets 7-11:  R. macrophylla
Leaves 2-3 cm long, leaflets 5-9:  R. webbiana


I am in agreement that the image you sent does fit what I CURRENTLY understand to be Rosa macrophylla.
Having said that and bearing in mind my recent posts about the complexities of Rosa (i.e. is Rosa a critical genus in the Himalaya), it would come as no surprise if at some stage it is decided that what has been understood to be R.macrophylla may in fact belong to a different taxon or be subdivided into a number of taxa.
As for Rosa webbiana, much the same may come to pass.
You will see from postings on eFI that some Indian botanists understood the xerophytic rose @ 1500-2700m in the Kashmir Valley was Rosa webbiana when it was in fact Rosa nanothamnus – which now some authorities consider to be a different species.
The keys used in the past to distinguish between R.webbiana and R.macrophylla are thus out-of-date and I doubt they are of much use.
Flowers of the Himalaya (itself now out-of-date) described the hips of Rosa webbiana as ovoid to flask-shaped. The authors also said of R.macrophylla, “there are many forms, some hardly distinguishable from R.webbiana”.
I doubt very much if e.g. the key in ‘Flora of Lahaul-Spiti’ which separates the two solely on the basis of length of leaves and number of leaflets was ever valid.  Too simplistic.
So I feel that further study of Roses in the Himalaya is required. The local floras cannot be relied upon.


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_0724-9-0.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_0727-1-5.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_0725-1.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC_0726-7-5-9.JPG

Rosa webbiana Wall. (accepted name) ??? : 6 posts by 3 authors. Attachments (4)
Location: Nubra Valley, Leh
Altitude:  10000 ft.
Date: 22 August 2014

The common xerophytic rose in Ladakh in Rosa webbiana.
Dickore & Klimes only record this pink-flowered species (plus some yellow-flowered ones) in Ladakh. There is a prominent yellow-flowered rose in the Miyah Nullah, Lahoul during the treks I led there in the mid-1980s, which I understood to be R.foetida but has been confused with R.eglanteria. Will need to check what the current thinking is?
I think these images fit satisfactorily this species but one has to be aware of the possibility of Rosa macrophylla (like Rosa sericea, this varies a good deal when growing under different conditions).
Stewart describes R.webbiana as the beautiful, pink, very spiny xerophytic rose of N.Pakistan & Ladakh (he does not record it from Kashmir Valley) @ 1500-4050m. He found it sometimes hard to distinguish from R.macrophylla. Koelz stated that R.webbiana does not spread by suckers but that R.macrophylla does.
I have seen what I consider to be Rosa macrophylla on the Rohtang and above Koksar in Lahaul.
I must admit to wondering if the xerophytic rose I came across in the Mustang District of the Upper Kali Gandaki, on my first visit to Nepal was a form of Rosa webbiana I was unfamiliar with- it was in fact Rosa sericea.
The forms of Rosa webbiana in the Kashmir Valley look a bit different to those in Ladakh and there is a dwarf variant which I saw on the hill (mountain) above Dal Lake, known at one time as Rosa nanothamnus Boulenger but included with R.webbiana by some authors, to consider.  Stewart lists this from N.Pakistan & Kashmir @ 1500-2700m, saying it is replaced by R.webbiana in the dry inner valleys.
There are a number of roses both cultivated and perhaps wild, in Kashmir I am uncertain about.
Since a link was provided to Rosa webbiana entries on eFI, I think it will be worthwhile if I take a quick look at these and give my INITIAL thoughts.
I suspect it may be worthwhile me posting what images I have of roses in the Himalaya. 


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_1857-1.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_1854.jpg
Rosaceae week- Rosa webbiana: 4 images.

Sharing Photographs of Rosa webbiana  (Got to see both flowers and fruits).
Location: Hemis Monastory, Ladakh
Date/Time: 15-09-2011 / 03:30PM
Habitat: Wild
Plant habit: Shrub.

This is Rosa macrophyllaPlease note longer calyx lobes and larger leaflets.


I am in agreement that this rose approaches Rosa macrophylla. Clearly, some forms of Rosa webbiana and some xerophytic forms of R.macrophylla are difficult to tell apart.

I have gone through different comments posted by the authors. As flower colour appears white in the centre and presence of many number of red rose hips and its size the species resemble to Rosa webbiana only. However I am unable to confirm it with my present available records. Rosa macrophylla is not very common in Ladakh and reported in the lower altitudes only but Rosa webbiana is abundantly found in Nubra, Suru (Kargil) and Leh valleys upto higher reaches.  Rosa webbiana is also reported with dropping prickly branched bush while R. macrophylla is tall shrub with long thorn. I am also agree with … that R. webbiana and high altitude forms of R. macrophylla can not be easily distinguished and only with pictures it is more difficult.


Thanks for your input …
Dickore & Klimes (2005) do not list Rosa macrophylla from Ladakh. They list R.webbiana, tuschetica, oxyodon, multiflora. The latter, I understand to be a double pink introduced from China or Japan. Stewart did not list either R.oxyodon or R.tuschetica.
What about Rosa oxyodon – which pressed specimens of and some of the photos available on the internet (bearing in mind they may or may not be correctly identified) are close to the form of what I understand to be R.macrophylla? Need to look into this further.
Have any other group members heard of Rosa oxyodon in Ladakh?
Much the same applies to Rosa tuschetica…..   These roses are known from such places as Georgia.
I have seen material above Khoksar in Lahoul that I HAD considered to be within R.macrophylla but have thought most of the material I have come across or seen photos of in Ladakh as coming within Rosa webbiana.
It would be informative if we were able to obtain the thoughts of a Rosa specialist as to how ‘critical’ or not the genus is in the Himalaya?
ASSUMING that the identifications of R.oxyodon and R.tuschetica are correct will be an example the DANGERS of always attempting to FIT a plant seen into the EXISTING species recorded in a region.

 


After perusing all threads in efi site, I feel it is more closer to images at Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle rather than those at Rosa macrophylla


what a lot of vitamin c hanging on a plant



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSCN1200%20Manali95%20Rosa%20webbiana.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSCN1202%20Manali%2095%20Rosa%20webbiana.jpg
near Kaza Dist Spiti H.P.(Himalayas) Altitude 3800 m;

 

PLANT FOR ID 95 SMP JUN 09 Spiti valley H.P. – indiantreepix | Google Groups


Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle, Ill. Bot. Himal. Mount. 208. t. 42. f. 2. 1839.
Shrub with thin flexuous twigs; yellowish-brown twigs; prickles uniform or mixed with bristles, usually in pairs, straight or or ascending, absent on flowering stems; leaves with  leaflets 5-9, simply or doubly serrulate, 1-2 cm long, elliptic to obovate; flowers solitary or 3-5 in a cluster, 3-5 cm diam., red, pink or white, pedicel often with stalked glands; sepals entire, shorter, persistent; hip oblong-ovoid, 1-2 cm in diam,  ovoid or globose, glabrous, red when mature.
Looking similar to R. macrophylla but with smaller lesser leaflets, shorter calyx tips and shorter ovoid hips without glands.
Photographed from above Cheshmashahi in Srinagar, Kashmir first week of July

Stewart considered this to be Rosa nanothamnus Boulenger – which I see is AN ACCEPTED NAME
See: http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl1.1/record/rjp-15354.
Stewart records it from N.Pakistan & Kashmir @ 1500-2700m incl. Jhelum Valley, Ganderbal, above Dal Lake and Pahlgam.

.


Rosaceae Week: Rosa webbiana from Srinagar, Kashmir:

Rosa webbiana Wall. ex Royle, Ill. Bot. Himal. Mount. 208. t. 42. f. 2. 1839.
Shrub with thin flexuous twigs; yellowish-brown twigs; prickles uniform or mixed with bristles, usually in pairs, straight or or ascending, absent on flowering stems; leaves with  leaflets 5-9, simply or doubly serrulate, 1-2 cm long, elliptic to obovate; flowers solitary or 3-5 in a cluster, 3-5 cm diam., red, pink or white, pedicel often with stalked glands; sepals entire, shorter, persistent; hip oblong-ovoid, 1-2 cm in diam,  ovoid or globose, glabrous, red when mature.
Looking similar to R. macrophylla but with smaller lesser leaflets, shorter calyx tips and shorter ovoid hips without glands.
Photographed from above Cheshmashahi in Srinagar, Kashmir first week of July

This seems to be Rosa nanothamnus.


.


Fwd: Rosa nanothamnus Boulenger : 4 posts by 2 authors.
Having checked in response to an inquiry about Rosa webbiana in Ladakh,
I note that R.nanothamnus is an accepted name, see: http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl1.1/record/rjp-15354
I plan to post images I have of a dwarf form of this rose taken in the Kohli Memorial Botanical Garden – showing delightful pastel pink shades.
I consider this DISTINCT from Rosa webbiana.

Further on checking, Catalogue of Life shows it as a synonym of Rosa giraldii Crép. with distribution as China (Gansu, Henan, Hubei, Shaanxi, Shanxi, Sichuan), C-Asia, Pamir, Alai, Pakistan (Kurram, Chitral, Swat), Pakistani Kashmir (Baltistan), Jammu & Kashmir (Kashmir)


Thanks for checking this.
I have to say that my INITIAL thoughts are that I have my doubts as to the validity of including R.nanothamnus under R.giraldii.  The latter rose species certainly has a wide distribution.
Given the ‘critical’ nature of Rosa in many parts of the world and the likelihood of its complexities, then how can the authors be certain?
A quick look at the pressed specimens under this name (collected in the early 20th Century in China) do not match well what I understand to be R.nanothamnus from Kashmir.
Whatever the reality, it is further evidence of the complexity of the genus.  Should we be preparing ourselves to be informed that what we thought was R.macrophylla throughout the Himalaya is in fact a different taxon or a number of different taxa?
I shall post separately about Rosa sericea in the Eastern Himalaya.
This is also further evidence to tell us we must be ALERT to both taxonomic changes and nomenclatural changes for ALL genera in the Himalaya!  Talk about “shifting sands”…
Such changes must seem DAUNTING to many members of this group.
PLANT IDENTIFICATION is NOT as quick, easy and straightforward as is widely believed.

 


.

References:
POWO

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.