Finally, A True Blue Rose Exists

(sciencenews.org)

42 points | by bookofjoe 1 day ago

10 comments

  • lol8675309 3 minutes ago
    GOOD NEWS EVERYBODY. FINALLY ROSES ARE ALSO BLUE.

    NOW MAYBE BACK TO CANCER?

  • kaonwarb 2 hours ago
    Source article is better, and refers to them as “violet-blue roses” https://www.suntory.com/sic/story/20260911/
  • QuantumNomad_ 16 minutes ago
    The Glass Menagerie by Tennessee Williams, anyone? :)
  • rmnclmnt 59 minutes ago
    « Hey Coop’! I guess Blue Roses occur in nature now! »

    « Damn good news, Gordon! »

  • mcherm 3 hours ago
    Any article on this topic is unsatisfactory if it lacks a color photo.
    • dao- 2 hours ago
      There is a color photo, but the rose isn't actually blue.
  • sajithdilshan 2 hours ago
    Are the scientists color blind? The rose is purple.
    • whizzter 1 hour ago
      Bad translation, see the other top-level comment with the origin link that referes to them as violet-blue.
  • rik314159 3 hours ago
    Not actually blue though is it? Kinda purple.
    • frederikvs 2 hours ago
      I would've called it "a sickly kind of purple"
  • jimnotgym 55 minutes ago
    Finally! What we have all been waiting for. Phew.

    I mean asking us to use different flowers to get our blue colours was just too much.

    • jfengel 16 minutes ago
      Weren't we the ones who breathlessly await any progress on the Riemann hypothesis? A theorem of pure number theory, with no applications.

      Breeders pursued it as a challenge. Doing it via genetic engineering probably feels like cheating to them, but the biochemists do it to learn genetic techniques.

      From the picture nobody is going to be putting these in a bouquet any time soon. But the accomplishment is neat. And even if it's not. I'm not gonna yuck their yum.