The use of molecular marker data to assist in the determination of essentially derived varieties

Genomics of Plant Genetic Resources: Volume 1. Managing, Sequencing and Mining Genetic Resources

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 49-65

  Smith, J Stephen C ^a   Jones, Elizabeth S ^b   Nelson, Barry K ^a  

^a DUPONT COMPANY   (United States)

^b SYNGENTA BIOTECHNOLOGY INC   (United States)

Author keywords

Agronomic traits; Backcrossing; Burden of proof; Cosmetic breeding; Double Haploid; Essentially Derived Variety (EDV); Genetic conformity; Genetic diversity; Genetic engineering; Germplasm; Intellectual Property Protection (IPP); Molecular marker; Morphology; Mutation breeding; Pedigree; Plagiarism; Plant Breeders Rights (PBR); Plant Variety Protection (PVP); Predominant derivation; Reverse breeding; Transformation; Transgenic

Indexed keywords

EID: 84957685497     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-7572-5_3     Document Type: Chapter

References (61)

1. ASTA (undated) Simple sequence repeat markers. Am seed trade assoc. Alexandria www.amseed.org/news_srr.asp. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
2. Bar-Hen A, Charcosset A, Bougoin M, Guiard J (1995) Relationship between genetic markers and morphological traits in a maize inbred lines collection. Euphytica 84:145-154
3. Barriere Y, Alber D, Dolstra O et al (2006) Past and prospects of forage maize breeding in Europe: II. History, germplasm evolution, and corroborative agronomic changes. Maydica 51:435-449
4. Bernardo R, Kahler AL (2001) North American study on essential derivation in maize: inbreds developed without and with selection from F2 populations. Theor Appl Genet 102:986-992
5. Borchert T, Krueger J, Hohe A (2008) Implementation of a model for identifying essentially derived varieties in vegetatively propagated Calluna vulgaris varieties. BMC Genet doi:10.1186/1471-2156-9-56
6. Burstin J, Charcosset A (1997) Relationship between phenotypic and marker distances: theoretical and experimental investigations. Heredity 79:477-483
7. Court of Appeals (2009) Judgement of the seventh civil court decision of 29 December 2009. In the case of DANZIGER “DAN” FLOWER FARM vs. ASTEE FLOWERS B.V. Court of Appeals in the Hague, The Hague, Netherlands, 15pp
8. CPV5766 (2008) Final report: Management of winter oilseed rape reference collections. National institute of agricultural botany (on behalf of the community plant variety office), Cambridge
9. Dillmann C, Bar-Hen A, Guerin D et al (1997) Comparison of RFLP and morphological distances between maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines. Consequences for germplasm protection purposes. Theor Appl Genet 95:92-102
10. Dillmann C, Guerin D (1998) Comparison between maize inbred lines: genetic distances in the expert’s eye.Agronomie 18:659-667
11. District Court (2008) Van Zanten Plant BV v. Hofland BV summary. The Hague, The Netherlands
12. ESA (2011) Position on concept of EDV ESA_11.0043. Eur SeedAssoc. http://www.euroseeds.org/publications/position-papers/intellectual-property/esa_11.0043.Accessed 22 Oct 2012
13. GHK (2011) Evaluation of the community plant variety right Acquis-Final report. GHK, London
14. Gilliland TJ, Coll R, Calsyn E et al (2000) Estimating genetic conformity between ryegrass (Lolium) varieties. 1. Morphology and biochemical characterization. Mol Breed 6:569-580
15. Gunjaca J, Buhinicek I, Jukic M et al (2008) Discriminating maize inbred lines using molecular and DUS data. Euphytica 161:165-172
16. Hahn V, Blankenhorn K, Schwall M, Melchinger AE (1995) Relationships among early European maize inbreds: III. Genetic diversity revealed with RAPD markers and comparisons with RFLP and pedigree data. Maydica 40:299-310
17. Heckenberger M, van der Voort JR, Melchinger AE et al (2003) Variation of DNA fingerprints among accessions within maize inbred lines and implications for identification of essentially derived varieties: II. Genetic and technical sources of variation in AFLP data and comparison with SSR data. Mol Breed 12:97-106
18. Heckenberger M, Bohn M, Frisch M et al (2005a) Identification of essentially derived varieties with molecular markers: An approach based on statistical test theory and computer simulations. Theor Appl Genet 111:598-608
19. Heckenberger M, Bohn M, Klein D, Melchinger AE (2005b) Identification of essentially derived varieties obtained from biparental crosses of homozygous lines: II. Morphological distances and heterosis in comparison with simple sequence repeat and amplified fragment length polymorphisms. Crop Sci 45:1132-1140
20. Heckenberger M, Bohn M, Melchinger AE (2005c) Identification of essentially derived varieties obtained from biparental crosses of homozygous lines: I. Simple sequence repeat data from maize inbreds. Crop Sci 45:1120-1131
21. ISF (2004a) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation in lettuce. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
22. ISF (2004b) Technical protocol for implementation of the ISF guidelines for the handling of a dispute on EDV in lettuce. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
23. ISF (2005) Essential derivation information and guidance to breeders. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
24. ISF (2006) Use of DNA arkers for DUS testing, essential derivation and identification. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
25. ISF (2007a) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation in Cotton. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
26. ISF (2007b) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation in Oilseed rape. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
27. ISF (2008) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation of Maize lines. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
28. ISF (2009) Guidelines for handling a dispute on essential derivation in Ryegrass. Int Seed Federa, Nyon
29. ISF (2012) ISF View on intellectual property. Int Seed Federa, Nyon. http://www.worldseed.org/cms/medias/file/PositionPapers/OnIntellectualProperty/View_on_Intellectual_Property_2012. pdf. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
30. ISF (undated a) Issues to be addressed by technical experts to define molecular marker sets for establishing thresholds for ISF EDV arbitration. Int Seed Federa, Nyon. www.worldseed.org/cms/medias/file/Rules/EssentialDerivation/Threshold_ISF_EDV_Arbitration.pdf. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
31. ISF (undated b) Essential derivation. Int Seed Fedar, Nyon. http://www.worldseed.org/isf/edv.html. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
32. ISF (undated c) Explanatory notes: Regulation for the arbitration of disputes concerning essential derivation (RED). Int Seed Federa, Nyon. http://www.worldseed.org/cms/medias/file/Rules/Es-sentialDerivation/Explanatory_Notes.pdf. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
33. Kahler AL, Kahler JL, Thompson SA et al (2010) North American study on essential derivation in Maize: II. Selection and evaluation of a panel of simple sequence repeat loci. Crop Sci 50:486-503
34. Kiewiet B (2006) Essentially derived varieties. Community plant variety office, European Union, Angers
35. Lefebvre V, Goffinet B, Chauvet JC et al (2001) Evaluation of genetic distances between pepper inbred lines for cultivar protection purposes: comparison of AFLP, RAPD and phenotypic data. Theor Appl Genet 102:741-750
36. Leigh FJ, Law JR, Lea VJ et al (2005) A comparison of molecular markers for diversity and EDV assessments. In: Tuberosa R, Phillips RL, GaleM (eds) Proceedings of the international congress in the wake of the double helix: From the green revolution to the gene revolution (27-31 May 2003). University of Bologna, Italy
37. Li Y, Ma X, Wang T et al (2011) Increasing maize productivity in China by planting hybrids with germplasm that responds favorably to higher planting densities. Crop Sci 51:2391-2400
38. Maccaferri M, Sanguineti MC, Xie C et al (2007) Relationships among durum wheat accessions: II. A comparison of molecular and pedigree information. Genome 50:385-399. doi:10.1139/G07-017
39. Melchinger AE, Messmer MM, Lee M et al (1991) Diversity and relationships among U.S. Maize inbreds revealed by restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Crop Sci 31:669-678
40. Messmer MM, Melchinger AE, Herrmann RG, Boppenmaier J (1993) Relationships among early European Maize inbreds: II. Comparison of pedigree and RFLP data. Crop Sci 33:944-950
41. MMEDV (1999) Molecular and other markers for establishing essential derivation in crop plants (EDV). EU-AgriNet. http://ec.europa.eu/research/agriculture/projects/qlrt_1999_01499_en.htm. Accessed 18 Oct 2012
42. Plaschke J, Ganal MW, Roder MA (1995) Detection of genetic diversity in closely related bread wheat using microsatellite markers. Theor Appl Genet 91:1001-1007
43. Rodrigues DH, de Alcantara Neto F, Schuster I (2008) Identification of essentially derived soybean cultivars using microsatellite markers. Crop Breed Appl Biotechnol 8:74-78
44. Roldan-Ruiz I, van Eeuwijk FA, Gilliland TJ et al (2001) A comparative study of molecular and morphological methods of describing relationships between perennial ryegrass (Loliumperenne L.) varieties. Theor Appl Genet 103:1138-1150
45. Smith JSC, Hussain T, Jones ES et al (2008) Use of doubled haploids in maize breeding: implications for intellectual property protection and genetic diversity in hybrid crops. Mol Breed 22:51-59
46. Smith JSC, Smith OS (1989) The description and assessment of distances between inbred lines of maize: II. The utility of morphological, biochemical, and genetic descriptors and a scheme for testing distinctiveness between inbred lines. Maydica 34:151-161
47. Smith JSC, Smith OS (1991) Restriction fragment length polymorphisms can differentiate among U.S. maize hybrids. Crop Sci 31:893-899
48. Smith JSC, Smith OS, Bowen SL et al (1991) The description and assessment of distances between inbred lines of maize: III. A revised scheme for the testing of distinctiveness between inbred lines utilizing DNA RFLPs. Maydica 36:213-226
49. Smith OS, Smith JSC, Bowen SL et al (1990) Similarities among a group of elite maize inbreds as measured by pedigree, F1 grain yield, grain yield heterosis, and RFLP’s. Theor Appl Genet 80:833-840
50. Staub JE, Chung S-M, Fazio G (2005) Conformity and genetic relatedness estimation in crop species having a narrow genetic base: the case of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). Plant Breed 124:44-53
51. Tanksley SD, McCouch SR (1997) Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science 277:1063-1066
52. Troyer AF, Rocheford TR (2002) Germplasm ownership: Related Corn inbreds. Crop Sci 42:3-11
53. Tuberosa R, Salvi S (2009) QTL for agronomic traits in Maize production. In: Bennetzen JL, Hake SC (eds) Handbook of Maize: Its biology.Springer, New York, pp 179-204
54. UPOV (1991) International convention for the protection of new varieties of plants. UPOV. http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1991/act1991.htm. Accessed 22 Oct 2012
55. UPOV (2009) Explanatory notes on essentially derived varieties under the 1991 act of the UPOV convention. UPOV/EXN/EDV/1. UPOV, Geneva
56. UPOV BMT (2007) EDV in Corn: Concepts of essential derivation and dependence; Possible use of DNA markers: The Maize case. Ad hoc crop subgroup on molecular techniques for maize, Chicago December 3. BMT-TWA/Maize/2/7-a. UPOV, Geneva
57. UPOV BMT Add (2007) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation of Maize. Addendum to document BMY-TWA/Maize/2/7/-a. BMT-TWA/Maize/2/7/-a Add, Chicago December 3. UPOV, Geneva
58. UPOV BMT (2011) An EDV Court case in wheat in Germany. Presentation by marcel bruins, Secretary general ISF at the UPOV BMT meeting, November 2011
59. van Eeuwijk FA, Baril CP (2001) Conceptual and statistical issues related to the use of molecular markers for distinctness and essential derivation. Acta Hortic 546:35-53
60. van Eeuwijk FA, Law JR (2004) Statistical aspects of essential derivation, with illustrations based on lettuce and barley. Euphytica 137:129-137
61. Wang J, Zhong GY, Chin ECL et al (2002) Identification of parents of F1 hybrids through SSR profiling of maternal and hybrid tissue. Euphytica 124:29-34