.
`.
`United States Patent
`Noble, Jr.
`
`[19]
`
`ACCA
`US005444178A
`[11] Patent Number:
`5,444,178
`[45] Date of Patent:
`Aug. 22, 1995
`
`Meglyi et al. (1986) Crop Science 24:545-549.
`
`INBRED CORN LINE PHHB4
`[54]
`chapt 9:565~607 Hallauer et al. (1988) IBID chapter
`.
`8:463-564.
`Inventor:
`[75]
`Stephen W. Noble, Jr. Polk County, Gen et al. (1975) Crop Science 15:419-424.
`[73] Assignee:
`Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.,
`Des Moines, Iowa
`[21] Appl. No.: 189,004
`[22] Filed:
`Jan, 24, 1994
`—‘[57]
`ABSTRACT
`[51] nt. CLS wooceesseccssecssssssciee AO1H 5/00; AOiH 4/00;
` 2000%dingto the invention, thereis provided an inbred
`[52] US. Ob veusmnnmsemnenn-s800/200;800/250,
`corn line, designated PHHB4. This invention thus re-
`40.49.
`"ates to the plants and seeds ofinbred corn line PHHB4
`Mane ei aatetos47/5,
`and to methods for producing a corn plant produced by
`'
`w-?
`.
`[58] Field ofoeer Omaaa,rer n crossing the inbred line PHHB4 with itself or with
`eee
`vo
`eee
`another corn plant. This invention further relates to
`[56]
`References Cited
`hybrid corn seeds and plants produced by crossing the
`PUBLICATIONS
`inbred line PHHB4 with another corn line or plant.
`
`Primary Examiner—Gary Benzion
`fitorney,Agentor Firm—Pioneer Hi-Bred
`a
`
`Wych (1988) In Corn & Corn Improvement. Editor G.
`F. Sprogue et al. ASA publication #18, 3rd edition.
`
`8 Claims, 3 Drawing Sheets
`
`138
`
`118
`
`98
`
`78
`
`08
`
`38
`
`>=
`
`5=
`
`
`
`REP1EAN5
`
`_— PHHB4_PHWS2
`B
`: bu i
`R2;
`0,
`99
`ek
`DMS: 2734
`332.
`
`+ PHHB4
`o PHWO2
`— PREDICTED
`ie
`
`Inari Exhibit 1039
`Inari Exhibit 1039
`Inari v. Pioneer
`Inari v. Pioneer
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug, 22, 1995
`
`Sheet 1 of 3
`
`5,444,178
`
`VALUE Otep4
`
`8
`eaNS
`
`FIG.1
`
`o PHW52
`
`+ PHBE
`—PREDICTED
`—— PHHB4
`-—-PHWS2
`
`VARIETY
`
`f,
`
`.
`
`_—BAA
`R2 :
`ity A
`:
`‘
`;
`:
`MS: it i
`D
`ou—
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug, 22, 1995
`
`Sheet 2 of 3
`
`5,444,178
`
`VALUE
`
`VARIETY
`
`+ PHHBA
`6 PHP38
`2 PHPaE
`—PHBA
`-~-PHP3B
`
`5 te PH
`B.
`>
`LOT
`1.05
`Rm: Ob)
`06
`Nt hy
`as
`DWS : 2682
`2848
`
`~ FIG.2
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 22, 1995
`
`Sheet 3 of 3
`
`5,444,178
`
`
`30040 0D 70
`BD
`0—s00ss0s e130
`___ PHHBA—PHRGL
`REP MEANS
`+ PHHBA
`b> 1m
`OST
`© PHR6|
`R2:
`069
`(O49
`— PREDICTED
`No: BB
`— PHBA
`Meo:
`86.3
`BI,
`ad
`~~ PHRG|
`308.9
`DMS:
`191.7
`
`|
`
`FIG.3
`
`

`

`1
`
`INBRED CORN LINE PHHB4
`
`FIELD OF THE INVENTION
`
`This inventionis in the field of corn breeding, specifi-
`cally relating to an inbred corn line designated PHHB4.
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`Plant Breeding
`Field crops are bred through techniques that take
`advantage ofthe plant’s method ofpollination. A plant
`is self-pollinated if pollen from one floweris transferred
`to the same or another flowerof the sameplant. A plant
`is cross-pollinated if the pollen comes from a flower on
`a different plant.
`Corn plants (Zea mays L.) can be bred by both self-
`pollination and cross-pollination techniques. Corn has
`separate male and female flowers on the same plant,
`located on the tassel and the ear, respectively. Natural
`pollination occurs in com when wind blows pollen
`from the tassels to the silks that protrude from the tops
`of the incipientears.
`The development of a hybrid corn variety involves
`three steps: (1) the selection of plants from various
`germplasm pools; (2) the selfing of the selected plants
`for several generations to produce a series of inbred
`lines, which, although different from each other, breed
`true and are highly uniform; and (3) crossing the se-
`lected inbred lines with unrelated inbred lines to pro-
`duce the hybrid progeny (F1). During the inbreeding
`process in corn, the vigor of the lines decreases. Vigor
`is restored when two unrelated inbred lines are crossed
`to produce the hybrid progeny. An important conse-
`quence of the homozygosity and homogeneity of the
`inbred lines is that the hybrid between any two inbreds
`will always be the same. Once the inbreds that give a
`superior hybrid have been identified, the hybrid seed
`can be reproducedindefinitely as long as the homogene-
`ity of the inbred parents is maintained.
`The objective of commercial maize inbred line devel-
`opment programs is to develop new inbred lines that
`combine to produce high grain yields and superior ag-
`ronomic performance in hybrid combination. The pri-
`mary trait breeders seek is yield. However, other major
`agronomic traits are of importance in hybrid combina-
`tion and have an impact on yield or otherwise provide
`superior performance in hybrid combinations. Such
`traits include percent grain moisture at harvest,relative
`maturity, resistance to stalk breakage, resistance to root
`lodging, grain quality, and disease and insect resistance.
`In addition the lines per se must have acceptable perfor-
`mance for parental traits such as seed yields, kernel
`sizes, pollen production, all of which affect ability to
`provide parental lines in sufficient quantity and quality
`for hybridization. Traits have been shown to be under
`genetic control and manyif not all of the traits are
`affected by multiple genes. Thus, to be selected as an
`inbredline, the inbred must be able to combine such that
`the desired traits are passed to the hybrid and also be
`able to satisfy production requirements as a parental
`line.
`
`20
`
`25
`
`45
`
`50
`
`Pedigree Breeding
`The pedigree method of breeding is the mostly
`widely used methodology for new inbred line develop-
`ment.
`
`65
`
`In general terms this procedure consists of crossing
`two inbred lines to produce the non-segregating F
`
`5,444,178
`
`2
`generation, and self pollination of the Fi generation to
`producethe F; generation that segregates for all factors
`for which the inbred parents differ. An example ofthis
`processis set forth below. Variationsof this generalized
`pedigree method are used, but all these variations pro-
`duce a segregating generation which contains a range of
`variation for the traits of interest.
`
`Example 1.
`Hypothetical example of pedigree breeding program
`Consider a cross between two inbred lines that differ
`for alleles at five loci.
`
`Parent 1
`Parent 2
`
`AbCde F/AbCdeF
`a Be DEffa BC DEf
`
`the F; from a cross between these two parentsis:
`
`Fi AbCdeFABcDEf
`
`Selfing F1 will produce an F2 generation including the
`following genotypes:
`
`ABcDEf/fabCdeF
`ABcDe ffabCdEF
`ABcDe ffabCdeF
`
`The numberof genotypesin the F>is 36 for six segre-
`gating loci (729) and will produce (26)-2 possible new
`inbreds, (62 for six segregating loci).
`Each inbred parent which is used in breeding crosses
`represents a unique combination of genes, and the com-
`bined effects of the genes define the performance of the
`inbred and its performance in hybrid combination.
`Thereis published evidence (Smith, O.S., J. S. C. Smith,
`S. L. Bowen, R. A. Tenborg and S. J. Wall, TAG
`80:833-840 (1990)) that each of theselines are different
`and can be uniquely identified on the basis of genetical-
`ly-controNled molecular markers.
`It has been shown (Hallauer, Arnel R. and Miranda,
`J.B. Of. Quantitative Genetics in Maize Breeding, lowa
`State University Press, Ames Iowa (1981)) that most
`traits of economic value in maize are under the genetic
`control of multiple genetic loci, and that there are a
`large number of unique combinations of these genes
`present
`in elite maize germplasm.
`If not, genetic
`progress using elite inbred lines would no longer be
`possible. Studies by Duvick and Russell (Duvick, D. N.
`Maydica 37:69-79 (1992); Russell, W. A. Maydica
`XXIX:375-390 (1983)) have shownthat overthe last 50
`years the rate of genetic progress in commercial hybrids
`has been between 1 and 2% peryear.
`The number of genes affecting the trait of primary
`economic importance in maize, grain yield, has been
`estimated to be in the range of 10-1000. Inbred lines
`which are used as parents for breeding crosses differ in
`the number and combination of these genes. These fac-
`tors make the plant breeder’s task more difficult. Com-
`pounding this is evidence that no oneline contains the
`favorableallele at all loci, and that different alleles have
`different economic values depending on the genetic
`backgroundandfield environment in which the hybrid
`is grown. Fifty years of breeding experience showsthat
`there are many genesaffecting grain yield and each of
`
`

`

`5,444,178
`
`3
`these has a relatively small effect on this trait. The ef-
`fects are small compared to breeders’ ability to measure
`grain yield differences in evaluation trials. Therefore,
`the parents of the breeding cross must differ at several
`of these loci so that the genetic differences in the prog-
`eny will be large enough that breeders can develop a
`line that increases the economic worth of its hybrids
`over that of hybrids made with either parent.
`If the numberof loci segregating in a cross between
`two inbredlines is n, the number of unique genotypes in
`the F2 generation is 3% (Example 2) and the number of
`unique inbredlines from this cross is {(2") —2}. Only a
`very limited number of these combinations are useful.
`Only about 1 in 10,000 of the progeny from F»’s are
`commercially useful.
`By way of example,if it is assumed that the numberof
`segregating loci in F2 is somewhere between 20 and 50,
`and that each parent is fixed for half the favorable al-
`leles, it is then possible to calculate approximate proba-
`bilities of finding an inbred that has the favorableallele
`at {(n/2)+m}loci, where n/2 is the number of favor-
`able alleles in each of the parents and m is the numberof
`additional favorable alleles in the new inbred. See Ex-
`ample 2 below. The number m is assumed to be greater
`than three because each allele has so small an effect that
`evaluation techniques are not sensitive enough to detect
`differences due to three or less favorable alleles. The
`probabilities in Example 2 are on the order of 10-5 or
`smaller and they are the probabilities that at least one
`genotype with (n/2)+m favorable alleles will exist.
`To putthis in perspective the numberof plants grown
`on 60 million acres (approximate U.S. corn acreage) at
`25000 plants/acre is 1.5 10!2.
`
`Example 2.
`Probability of finding an inbred with m of n favorable
`alleles.
`
`Assume each parent has n/2 of the favorable alleles
`and only 4 of the combinations of loci are economically
`useful.
`
`Probability
`no. additional
`no. favorable
`no. of
`that genotype
`favorable alleles
`alleles in
`segregating
`occurs*
`in new inbred
`Parents (n/2)
`loci (n)
`3x 07>
`14
`10
`20
`2x 10-9
`16
`12
`24
`1x 10-5
`18
`14
`28
`8 x 10-6
`20
`16
`32
`5x 10-6
`22
`18
`36
`3x 107-6
`24
`20
`40
`2x 1076
`26
`22
`44
`1x 10-6
`28
`24
`48
`*Probability that a useful combination exists, does not include the probability of
`identifying this combinationif it does exist.
`7
`
`Thepossibility of having a usably high probability of
`being able to identify this genotype based on replicated
`field testing would be mostlikely smaller than this, and
`is a function of how large a population of genotypesis
`tested and how testing resources are allocated in the
`testing program.
`At Pioneer Hi-Bred International, a typical corn re-
`search station has a staff of four, and 20 acres of breed-
`ing nursery. ‘Those researchers plant those 20 acres with
`25,000 nursery rows, 15,000 yield test plots in 10~15
`yield test sites, and one or two disease-screening nurser-
`ies. Employing a temporary crew of 20 to 30 pollina-
`tors, the station makes about 65,000 hand pollinations
`per growing season. Thus, one of the largest plant
`
`4
`breeding programs in the world does not havea suffi-
`ciently large breeding population to be able to rely upon
`“playing the numbers” to obtain successful research
`results. Nevertheless, Pioneer’s breeders at each station
`produce from three to ten new inbreds which are pro-
`posed for commercial use each year. Over the 32 Pio-
`neer research stations in North America, this amounts
`to from about 100 to 300 new inbreds proposedforuse,
`and less than 50 and more commonly less than 30 of
`these inbredsthat actually satisfy the performancecrite-
`ria for commercial use.
`This is a result of plant breeders using their skills,
`experience andintuitive ability to select inbreds having
`the necessary qualities.
`SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`
`According to the invention, there is provided a novel
`inbred corn line, designated PHHB4. This invention
`thus relates to the seeds of inbred corn line PHHB4,to
`the plants of inbred corn line PHHB4, and to methods
`for producing a corn plant produced by crossing the
`inbred line PHHB4withitself or another corn line. This
`invention further relates to hybrid corn seeds and plants
`produced by crossing the inbred line PHHB4 with an-
`other corn line.
`
`DEFINITIONS
`
`In the description and examples that follow, a number
`of terms are used herein. In order to provide a clear and
`consistent understanding of the specification and claims,
`including the scope to be given such terms, the follow-
`ing definitions are provided. ABS is in absolute terms
`and % MNis percent of the mean for the experiments in
`which the inbred or hybrid was grown.
`BAR PLT=BARREN PLANTS.The percent of
`plants per plot that were not barren (lack ears).
`BRT STK=BRITTLE STALKS.Thisis a measure
`of the stalk breakage near the time ofpollination, and is
`an indication of whether a hybrid or inbred would snap
`or break near the time of flowering under severe winds.
`Data are presented as percentage of plants that did not
`snap.
`BU ACR=YIELD (BUSHELS/ACRE). Actual
`yield of the grain at harvest in bushels per acre adjusted
`to 15.5% moisture.
`DRP EAR=DROPPED EARS. A measure of the
`number of dropped ears per plot and represents the
`percentage of plants that did not drop ears prior to
`harvest.
`EAR HT=EAR HEIGHT.Theear height is a mea-
`sure from the ground to the highest placed developed
`ear node attachment and is measured in inches.
`EAR SZ=EARSIZE.A 1 to 9 visual rating of ear
`size. The higher the rating the larger the ear size.
`EST CNT=EARLY STAND COUNT.This is a
`measure of the stand establishment in the spring and
`represents the numberof plants that emerge on a per
`plot basis for the inbred or hybrid.
`GDU SHD=GDU TO SHED. The number of
`growing degree units (GDUs)or heat units required for
`an inbred line or hybrid to have approximately 50 per-
`cent of the plants shedding pollen and is measured from
`the time of planting. Growing degree units are calcu-
`lated by the Barger Method, where the heat units for a
`24-hour period are:
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`30
`
`35
`
`45
`
`30
`
`65
`
`

`

`5
`
`GDU = (Max. temp. + Min. temp)
`
`50
`
`5,444,178
`
`The highest maximum temperature used is 86° F. and
`the lowest minimum temperature used is 50° F. For
`each inbred or hybrid it takes a certain number of
`GDwUsto reach various stages of plant development.
`GDU SLK=GDUTO SILK.The number of grow-
`ing degree units required for an inbred line or hybrid to
`have approximately 50 percent of the plants with silk
`emergence from timeof planting. Growing degreeunits
`are calculated by the Barger Method as given in GDU
`SHD definition.
`GRN APP=GRAIN APPEARANCE.Thisis a 1 to
`9 rating for the general appearanceof the shelled grain
`as it is harvested based on such factors as the color of
`the harvested grain, any mold on the grain, and any
`cracked grain. High scores indicate good grain quality.
`MST=HARVEST MOISTURE. The moisture is
`the actual percentage moisture of the grain at harvest.
`PLT HT=PLANT HEIGHT.This is a measure of
`the height of the plant from the groundto thetip of the
`tassel in inches.
`POL SC=POLLEN SCORE.A 1 to 9 visual rating
`indicating the amount of pollen shed. The higher the
`score the more pollen shed.
`POL WT=POLLEN WEIGHT.This is calculated
`by dry weight of tassels collected as shedding com-
`mences minus dry weight from similar tassels harvested
`after shedding is complete.
`It should be understood that the inbred can, through
`routine manipulation of cytoplasmic factors, be pro-
`ducedin a cytoplasmic male-sterile form whichis other-
`wise phenotypically identical to the male-fertile form.
`PRM=PREDICTEDRM.Thistrait, predicted rela-
`tive maturity (RM), is based on the harvest moisture of
`the grain. The relative maturity rating is based on a
`knownset of checks and utilizes standard linear regres-
`sion analyses and is referred to as the Comparative
`Relative Maturity Rating System which is similar to the
`Minnesota Relative Maturity Rating System.
`RT LDG=ROOT LODGING.Rootlodging is the
`percentage of plants that do not root lodge; plants that
`lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30° angle
`or greater would be counted as root lodged.
`SCT GRN=SCATTER GRAIN. A 1 to 9 visual
`tating indicating the amount of scatter grain (lack of
`pollination or kernel abortion) on the ear. The higher
`the score the less scatter grain.
`SDG VGR=SEEDLING VIGOR.This is the vi-
`sual rating (1 to of the amount of vegetative growth
`after emergence at the seedling stage (approximately
`five leaves). A higher score indicates better vigor.
`SEL IND=SELECTION INDEX.Theselection
`index gives a single measureof the hybrid’s worth based
`on information for up to five traits. A corn breeder may
`utilize his or her ownsetoftraits for the selection index.
`Oneof the traits that is almost always includedisyield.
`The selection index data presented in the tables repre-
`sent the mean value averaged across testing stations.
`STA GRN=STAY GREEN.Stay green is the mea-
`sure of plant health near the time of black layer forma-
`tion (physiological maturity). A high score indicates
`better late-season plant health.
`STK CNT=NUMBER OF PLANTS.This is the
`final stand or numberof plants per plot.
`STK LDG=STALK LODGING.This is the per-
`centage of plants that did not stalk lodge (stalk break-
`
`5
`
`30
`
`45
`
`60
`
`65
`
`6
`age) as measured by either natural lodging or pushing
`the stalks and determining the percentage ofplants that
`break below the ear.
`TAS BLS=TASSEL BLAST. A 1 to 9 visual rating
`was used to measure the degree of blasting (necrosis due
`to heat stress) of the tassel at time of flowering. A 1
`would indicate a very high level of blasting at time of
`flowering, while a 9 would have notassel blasting.
`TAS SZ=TASSELSIZE.A 1 to 9 visual rating was
`used to indicate the relative size of the tassel. The
`higher the rating the larger thetassel.
`TAS WT=TASSEL WEIGHT.Thisis the average
`weight of a tassel (grams) just prior to pollen shed.
`TEX EAR=EAR TEXTURE.A | to 9 visual rating
`was used to indicate the relative hardness (smoothness
`of crown) of mature grain. A 1 would be very soft
`(extreme dent) while a 9 would be very hard (flinty or
`very smooth crown).
`TILLER=TILLERS. A count of the number of
`tillers per plot that could possibly shed pollen was
`taken. Data is given as percentageoftillers: number of
`tillers per plot divided by numberofplants per plot.
`TST WT=TEST WEIGHT (UNADJUSTED).
`The measure of the weight of the grain in poundsfor a
`given volume (bushel).
`TST WTA=TEST WEIGHT ADJUSTED. The
`measure of the weight ofthe grain in poundsfor a given
`volume (bushel) adjusted for percent moisture.
`YLD=YIELD.It is the same as BU ACR ABS.
`YLD SC=YIELD SCORE.A 1 to 9 visual rating
`was used to give a relative rating for yield based on plot
`ear piles. The higher the rating the greater visual yield
`appearance.
`MDM CPX=Maize Dwarf Mosaic Complex
`(MDMV=Maize
`Dwarf Mosaic
`Virus
`&
`MCDV =Maize Chiorotic Dwarf Virus): Visual rating
`(1-9 score) where a “1” is very susceptible and a “9”is
`very resistant.
`SLF BLT=Southern Leaf Blight (Bipolaris maydis,
`Helminthosporium maydis): Visual rating (1-9 score)
`where a “1” is very susceptible and a “9”is very resis-
`tant.
`
`NLF BLT=Northern Leaf Blight (Exserohilum tur-
`cicum, H. turcicum): Visual rating (1-9 score) where a
`“1” is very susceptible and a “9” is very resistant.
`COM RST =CommonRust (Puccinia sorghi): Visual
`tating (1-9 score) where a “1”is very susceptible and a
`“9” is very resistant.
`GLF SPT=Gray Leaf Spot (Cercospora zeae-may-
`dis): Visual rating (1-9 score) where a “1” is very sus-
`ceptible and a “9” is very resistant.
`STW WLT=Stewart’s Wilt (Erwinia stewartii): Vi-
`sual rating (1-9 score) where a “1” is very susceptible
`and a “9” is very resistant.
`HD SMT =Head Smut (Sphacelothecareiliana): Per-
`centage of plants that did not have infection.
`EAR MLD=General Ear Mold: Visual rating (1-9
`score) where a “1” is very susceptible and a “9” is very
`resistant. This is based on overall rating for ear mold of
`mature ears without determining specific mold organ-
`ism, and may not be predictive for a specific ear mold.
`ECB DPE=Dropped ears due to European Corn
`Borer (Ostrinia nubilalis): Percentage of plants that did
`not drop ears under second brood corn borer infesta-
`tion.
`ECB 2SC=European Corn Borer Second Brood
`(Ostrinia nubilalis): Visual rating (1-9 score) of post
`
`

`

`7
`flowering damage due to infestation by European Corn
`Borer. A “1” is very susceptible and a “9” is very resis-
`tant.
`ECB 1LF=European Corn Borer First Brood (Os-
`trinia nubilalis): Visual rating (1-9 score) of pre-flower-
`ing leaf feeding by European Corn Borer. A “1”is very
`susceptible and a “9”is very resistant.
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`FIGS.1-3 show data for the trait Bushels Per Acre.
`The results of FIGS. 1-3 compare PHHB4 to
`PHW52, PHP38 and PHR61, respectively.
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE
`INVENTION
`
`15
`
`PHHB¢4brings together more yield in hybrids than
`either parental line. In hybrid combination PHHB4 has
`desirable plant and ear height, resistanceto brittle stalk,
`and resistance to common rust. Hybrids of PHHB4 do
`well in both dry and wet years comparedto the closest
`prior art, but are especially better in wet years.
`Inbred corn line PHHB¢4is a yellow, dent corn inbred
`and provides an acceptable female parental
`line in
`crosses for producing first generation F1 corn hybrids.
`PHHB4is adapted to most regions of the United States
`but does best in Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois and Indiana.
`Theinbred has shownuniformity and stability within
`the limits of environmental influence forall the traits as
`described in the Variety Description Information
`(Table 1) that follows. Most of the data in the Variety
`Description information was collected at Johnston,
`Iowa. The inbred has been self-pollinated and ear-
`rowed a sufficient number of generations with careful
`attention paid to uniformity of plant type to ensure
`homozygosity and phenotypic stability. The line has
`been increased both by hand andin isolated fields with
`continued observation for uniformity. No varianttraits
`have been observed or are expected in PHHB4.
`Inbred corn line PHHB4, being substantially homo-
`zygous, can be reproduced by planting seedsofthe line,
`growingthe resulting corn plants under self-pollinating
`or sib-pollinating conditions with adequate isolation,
`and harvesting the resulting seed, using techniques fa-
`miliar to the agricultural arts.
`TABLE1
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHHB4
`
`
`Region Best Adapted: Most Regions
`Type: Dent
`A. Maturity: Average across maturity zones. Zone: 0
`Heat Unit Shed: 1510
`Heat Unit Silk: 1540
`No. Reps: 50
`
`HEAT UNITS =
`
`(Max. Temp. (<—82° F.) +
`Min. Temp (> — 50° F.)]*
`2
`
`— 50
`
`*If maximum is greater than 86 degrees fahrenheit,
`then 86 is used and if minimum is less than 50, then 50is
`used.
`Heat units accumulated daily and can not be less than 0.
`. Plant Characteristics:
`Plant height (to tassel tip): 227 cm
`Length of top ear internode: 11 cm
`Numberof ears perstalk: Single
`Ear height (to base of top ear): 69 cm
`Numberoftillers: None
`Cytoplasm type: Normal
`Leaf:
`Color: (WF9) Medium Green
`Angle from Stalk: 30-60 degrees
`Marginal Waves: (HY) None
`
`45
`
`30
`
`35
`
`65
`
`5,444,178
`
`8
`TABLE1-continued
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHHB4
`
`Numberof Leaves (mature plants): 21
`Sheath Pubescence: (W22) Light
`Longitudinal Creases: (OH56A) Few
`Length (Ear node leaf): 73 cm
`Width (widest point, ear node leaf): 9 cm
`. Tassel:
`Numberlateral branches: 1
`Branch Angle from central spike: >45 degrees
`Pollen Shed: Light based on Pollen Yield Test
`(26 % of experiment means)
`Peduncle Length (top leaf to basal branches): 19 cm
`Anther Color: Pink
`.
`Glume Color: Green
`. Ear (Husked Ear Data Except When Stated Otherwise):
`Length: 16 cm
`:
`Weight: 151 gm
`Mid-point Diameter: 48 mm
`.
`Silk Color: Green
`Husk Extension (Harvest stage): Medium (barely
`covering ear)
`Taper of Ear: Slight
`Position of Shank (dry husks): Upright
`Kernel Rows: Straight, Distinct Number = 14
`Husk Color (fresh): Light Green
`Husk Color (dry): Buff
`Shank Length: 1] cm
`Shank (No. of internodes): 8
`. Kernel (Dried):
`Size (from ear mid-point)
`Length: 12 mm
`Width: 9 mm
`Thick: 5 mm
`Shape Grade (% rounds): 40-60 (42% medium round
`based on Parent Test Data)
`Pericarp Color: Colorless
`Aleurone Color: Homozygous Yellow
`Endosperm Color: Yellow
`Endosperm Type: Normal Starch
`Gm Wt/100 Seeds (unsized): 37 gm
`. Cob:
`Diameter at mid-point: 27 mm
`Strength: Strong
`Color: Red
`. Diseases:
`Corn Lethal Necrosis (MCMV = Maize Chlorotic Mottle
`Virus and MDMV = Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus):
`Intermediate
`Maize Dwarf mosaic Complex (€MDMV & MCDV = Maize
`Dwarf Virus): Susceptible
`Anthracnose Stalk Rot (C. graminicola): Intermediate
`S. Leaf Blight (B. maydis): Resistant
`Carbonum Leaf Blight (H. carbonum). Intermediate
`N. Leaf Blight (E. turcicurm): Intermediate
`Common Rust (P. serghi): Resistant
`Gray Leaf Spot (C. zeae): Susceptible
`Stewart’s Wilt (E. stewartii): Resistant
`Common Smut (U. maydis): Highly Resistant
`Head Smut (S. reiliana): Highly Resistant
`Fusarium Ear Mold (F. moniliforme): Intermediate
`Gibberella Ear Rot (G. zeae): Intermediate
`I. Insects:
`European Corn Borer-! Leaf Damage (Preflowering):
`Susceptible
`European Corn Borer-2 (Post-flowering): Susceptible
`The above descriptions are based on a scale of 1-9, 1
`being highly susceptible, 9 being highly resistant.
`S (Gusceptible): Would generally represent a score of 1-3.
`I Untermediate): Would generally represent a score of 4-5.
`R (Resistant): Would generally represent a score of 6-7.
`H (Highly Resistant): Would generally represent a score of
`8-9. Highly resistant does not imply the inbredis
`immune.
`J. Variety Most Closely Resembling:
`Character
`Inbred
`Maturity
`PHW52
`Usage
`PHW52
`PHWS2(PVPCertificate No. 8800215) is a Pioneer Hi-Bred
`International, Inc. proprietary inbred.
`Data for Items B, C, D, E, F, and G is based primarily on a
`maximum of two reps from Johnston, Iowa grown in 1992, plus
`
`

`

`5,444,178
`
`9
`TABLE 1I-continued
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHHB4
`
`description information from the maintaining station.
`
`ELECTROPHORESIS RESULTS
`
`Isozyme Genotypes for PHHB4
`Isozyme data were generated for inbred corn line
`PHHB4 according to the procedures described in
`Stuber, C.W., Wendel, J. F., Goodman, M. M., and
`Smith, J. S. C., “Techniques and Scoring Procedures
`for Starch Gel Electrophoresis of Enzymes from Maize
`(Zea mays L.)”, Technical Bulletin No. 286, North
`Carolina Agricultural Research Service, North Caro-
`lina State University, Raleigh, N.C. (1988).
`The data in Table 2 compares PHHB4 with its par-
`ents, PHW52 and PHV94.
`TABLE 2
`ELECTROPHORESIS RESULTS FOR PHHB4
`AND ITS PARENTS PHW52 AND PHV94
`PARENTS
`PHWS52
`2
`
`PHHB4
`
`LOcI
`ACPI
`ADHI
`CAT3
`DIAI
`GOT1
`GOT2
`GOT3
`IDHI
`IDH2
`MDHI
`MDH2
`MDH3
`MDH4
`MDHS5
`MMM
`PGMI
`PGM2
`PGD1
`PGD2
`PHIL
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`iRMUANRORDDHDAARKAAANADO
`
`PHV94
`
`petpetatPUNROARNHAAAKRELAEROSOOAL
`
`
`
`weeePUNYPORNNAAAA&HwOOOSh
`
`10
`The data in Table 3B shows PHHB4 and PHP38 have
`similar yield and test weight but PHHB4 has lower
`grain harvest moisture. PHHB4 has a larger ear and is
`taller with lower ear placement PHP38. PHHB4 flow-
`ers (GDU Shed and GDU Silk) later than PHP38.
`PHHB4 has better Stewart’s wilt
`resistance than
`PHP38.
`Table 3C compares PHHB4 to PHR61. The data
`shows PHHB4has higher yield and lower test weight
`than PHR61. PHHB4 has a larger ear and is a shorter
`inbred with lower ear placement than PHR61. PHHB4
`flowers later (GDU Shed and GDUSilk) than PHR61.
`PHHB4has better staygreen than PHR61.
`Table 44 compares PHHB4 to PHW52 when both
`were crossed to the same inbred testers. The PHHB4
`hybrids have higher yield and test weight but lower
`grain harvest moisture compared to the PHW52 hy-
`brids. The hybrids have similar ear placement but the
`PHHB4 hybrids are taller.
`Table 4B compares PHHB4 to PHP38 when both
`were crossed to the same inbred testers. The PHHB4
`hybrids have higher yield than the PHP38 hybrids. The
`PHHB4 hybrids shed (GDU Shed) later than the
`PHP38 hybrids.
`Table 4C compares PHHB4 to PHR6! when both
`were crossed to the same inbred testers. The PHHB4
`hybrids have higher yield and grain harvest moisture
`compared to the PHR61 hybrids. The PHHB4 hybrids
`shed (GDU Shed) later than the PHR61 hybrids. The
`PHHB4 hybrids have better grain appearance and are
`taller with lower ear placement compared to the
`PHR61 hybrids.
`Table SA compares PHHB4 to PHW52 when both _
`were crossed to the same inbred. The data showsthe
`PHHB4 hybrid is higher yielding with lower grain
`harvest moisture compared to the PHW52 hybrid. The
`PHHB4 hybrid has better test weight and grain appear-
`ance than the PHW52 hybrid. The PHHB4 hybrid is
`taller with higher ear placement and sheds (GDU Shed)
`later than the PHW52 hybrid.
`Table 5B compares PHHB4 to PHR61 when both
`were crossed to the same inbred. The PHHB4 hybrid
`has higher yield and grain harvest moisture compared
`to the PHR61 hybrid. The hybrids have similar plant
`height but the PHHB4 hybrid has lower ear placement
`than the PHR61 hybrid. The PHHB4 hybrid sheds
`(GDUShed)later than the PHR61 hybrid.
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`FIG. 1 compares the yield of PHHB4 to PHW52.
`PHHB4is lower yielding than PHW52 and has below
`average yield in low yield environments.
`FIG. 2 compares the yield of PHHB4 and PHP38.
`PHHB4 has loweryield across all environments com-
`pared to PHP38.
`FIG. 3 compares the yield of PHHB4 and PHR61.
`PHHB4 has below average yield except in the most
`extreme high yield environments. Compared to PHR61,
`PHHB4is higher yielding in high yield environments
`but lower yielding in low yield environments.
`
`Examples
`INBRED AND HYBRID PERFORMANCE OF
`PHHB4
`
`45
`
`In the examplesthat follow, the traits and characteris-
`tics of inbred corn line PHHB4 are given as a line in
`comparison with other inbreds and in hybrid combina-
`tion. The data collected on inbred corn line PHHB4is
`presented for the key characteristics and traits.
`Table 3A compares PHHB4 to PHW52. PHHB4¢has
`lower yield and grain harvest moisture but higher test
`weight than PHW52. PHHB4is a taller inbred with
`higher ear placement compared to PHW52. PHHB4 has
`better seedling vigor and sheds (GDU Shed) later than
`PHW52. PHHB4 has good ear texture but morescatter-
`grain compared to PHW52. PHHB4has better resis-
`tance to Stewart’s wilt and first brood European corn 60
`borer than PHW52.
`
`TABLE 3A
`PAIRED INBRED COMPARISON DATA
`VARIETY #1 - PHHB4
`VARIETY #2 - PHW52
`YLD
`EAR
`sc
`SZ
`
`VAR
`
`BU
`ACR
`
`BU
`ACR
`
`MST
`
`BAR
`PLT
`
`PLT
`HT
`
`EAR
`HT
`
`SDG_
`VGR
`
`EST
`CNT
`
`

`

`j1
`
`5,444,178
`
`12
`
`TABLE 3A-continued
`PAIRED INBRED COMPARISON DATA
`VARIETY #1 - PHHB4
`
`VARIETY #2 - PHW52
`DEPT
`#
`ABS %MN ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`-.ABS-
`ABS
`TOTAL SUM 1
`16.3
`96
`5.5
`17.9
`58
`920
`84.5
`283
`5.5
`37.3
`2
`82.9
`106
`63
`21.2
`58
`939
`75.6
`263
`49
`39.7
`LOcS 30
`30
`19
`43
`17
`$7
`53
`53
`55
`78
`REPS
`78
`78
`20
`92
`17
`90
`92
`88
`82
`145
`DIFF
`6.6
`10
`0.8
`3.4
`a1
`1.9
`8.9
`21
`0.6
`2.3
`PROB .098*
`.093*
`028+
`.000#
`.842
`204
`000#
` .000#
` .0034%
` .000#
`DRP
`TIL
`GDU. GDU POL
`TAS
`TAS
`TEX
`TST
`GRN
`VAR
`EAR
`LER
`SHD
`SLK_
`SC
`BLS
`SZ
`EAR WT
`APP
`DEPT
`#
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`
`TOTAL SUM 1
`99.5
`0.8
`1451
`1480
`24
`9.0
`2.8
`6.6
`$8.8
`6.1
`2
`99.9
`0.9
`1441
`1479
`6.2
`9.0
`6.0
`53.9
`57.0
`5.6
`Locs
`8
`54
`55
`52
`18
`1
`21
`14
`28
`14
`REPS
`16
`80
`65
`57
`20
`1
`23
`14
`72
`27
`DIFF
`04
`0.2
`10
`O1
`3.8
`0.0
`3.2
`0.7
`1.8
`0.5
`PROB .209
`.599
`055*
`922
`.O00#
`000#
`0354+
`000#
`.312
`EAR
`SCT
`STA
`STK
`RT
`NLF
`STW ECB
`ECB
`VAR GRN GRN
`LDG LDG MLD BLT WLT
`1LF
`28C
`
`DEPT
`#
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`TOTALSUM 1
`5.6
`$2
`948
`98.2
`74
`43
`5.8
`3.8
`4.6
`2
`6.8
`5.7
`890
`981
`75
`39
`04.0
`3.1
`4.1
`8
`Locs
`19
`32
`23
`14
`16
`13
`4
`19
`14
`REPS
`20
`53
`51
`25
`17
`20
`4
`24
`0.4
`DIFF
`1.2
`0.5
`5.8
`0.1
`0.1
`04
`18
`0.7
`
`PROB .017+=.153 -012+ .883 872 293 O06# .062* 514
`
`
`
`
`
`
`*=10%SIG +=5%SIG # = 1% SIG
`
`TABLE 3B
`PAIRED INBRED COMPARISON DATA
`VARIETY #1 - PHHB4
`VARIETY #2 - PHP38
`
`BU
`BU
`YLD
`EAR
`BAR
`PLT
`EAR
`SDG_
`EST
`MST
`ACR
`ACR
`SC
`SZ
`PLT
`HT
`HT
`VGR
`CNT
`VAR
`ABS
`ABS
`JoMN ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS:
`#
`DEPT
`175
`5.3
`95
`54
`58
`92.2
`84.5
`283
`5.5
`37.8
`TOTAL SUM 1
`18.7
`17.1
`99
`53
`52
`916
`812
`293
`5.8
`40.0
`2
`47
`33
`33
`20
`17
`60
`53
`53
`55
`83
`Locs
`80
`66
`66
`21
`7
`81
`81
`81
`15
`132
`REPS
`1.2
`1.8
`4
`0.1
`0.6
`0.6
`3.3
`1.0
`0.3
`2.4
`DIFF
` .0OO#
`PROB .599
`487
`.785
`.096*
`657
`.0O0#
`.050*
`113
`.002#
`DRP
`TiL
`GDU GDU POL
`TAS
`TAS
`TEX
`TST
`GRN
`VAR
`EAR
`LER
`SHD
`SILK
`SC
`BLS
`SZ
`EAR WT
`APP
`DEPT
`#
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS-
`ABS
`
`TOTAL SUM 1
`99.5
`0.7
`1450
`1479
`2.5
`9.0
`2.8
`6.6
`58.6
`6.1
`2
`99.2
`L1
`1426
`1440
`5.4
`9.0
`5.2
`69
`58.8
`6.6
`LocsS
`8
`58
`60
`57
`22
`1
`22
`14
`31
`15
`REPS
`16
`79
`68
`62
`24
`1
`24
`14
`62
`29
`DIFF
`0.3
`0.3
`24
`39
`2.9
`0.0
`2.4
`0.3
`0.2
`0.5
`PROB .406
`325
`000F#
`.000#
` .000#
`0O0#
`414
`463
`.056*
`EAR
`SCT
`STA
`STK
`RT
`NLF
`STW ECB
`ECB
`VAR GRN GRN LDG LDG MLD BLT WLT
`1LF
`2SC
`#
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`ABS
`DEPT
`TOTALSUM 1
`5.7
`5.2
`48°
`982
`14
`43
`5.8
`3