throbber
United States Patent 5
`5,453,564
`Chapman
`Sep. 26, 1995
`[45] Date of Patent:
`
`[11] Patent Number:
`
`001A1
`
`[54]
`
`INBRED CORN LINE PHTE4
`
`[75]
`
`Inventor: Michael A. Chapman, Madison Lake,
`Minn.
`
`[73] Assignee: Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.,
`Des Moines, Iowa
`
`[21] Appl. No.: 186,730
`
`[22] Filed:
`
`Jan. 24, 1994
`
`(51)
`
`Tint, C18ccc esceeee A01M 5/00; AO1M 4/00;
`C12N 5/04
`(52] U.S. Ch. we 800/200; 800/250; 800/DIG. 56;
`435/240.4; 435/240.49; 435/240.5; 47/58;
`47/DIG.1
`
`[58] Field of Search 0.0...ccceeseeeees 435/172.1, 172.3,
`435/240.4, 240.49, 240.5; 536/27; 800/200,
`250, DIG. 52, DIG. 56; 935/18; 47/58.03
`
`[56]
`
`References Cited
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Phillips, et.al. (1988) “Cell/Tissue Culture and In Vitro
`Manipulation”, Com & Corn Improvement, 3rd Ed., ASA
`Publication, No. 18, pp. 345-349 & 356-357.
`Poehlman (1987) Breeding Field Crop, AVI Publication Co.,
`Westport, Conn., pp. 237-246.
`Rao,K. V., et al., “Somatic Embryogenesis in Glume Callus
`Cultures”, Osmania University, Hyberaded, India.
`Sass, John F. (1977) “Morphology”, Com & Corn Improv-
`meni, ASA Publication Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 89-109.
`Songstad, D. D.
`et
`al.
`(1988)
`“Effect
`of ACC
`(1-aminocyclopropane—1—carboxyclic acid), Silver Nitrate
`& Norbonadiene on Plant Regeneration From Maize Callus
`Cultures”, Plant Cell Reports, 7:262-265.
`Tomes,et al. “The Effect of Parental Genotype on Initiation
`of Embryogenic Callus From Elite Maize (Zea Mays L.)
`Germplasm”, Theor. Appl. Genet., vol. 70, pp. 505-509.
`Troyer, et al. (1985) “Selection for Early Flowering in Com:
`10 Late Synthetics”, Crop Science, vol. 25, pp. 695-697,
`Umbeck,et al. “Reversion of Male—Sterile T-Cytoplasm
`Maize to Male Fertility in Tissue Culture”, Crop Science,
`vol. 23, pp. 584-588.
`Wright, Harold (1980) “Commercial Hybrid Seed Produc-
`tion”, Hybridization of Crop Plants, Ch. 8: 161-176.
`3/1989 Segebart .
`4,812,599
`Wych,Robert D. (1988) “Production of Hybrid Seed”, Corn
`5,285,004—2/1994 AMDIOSE 0...ceccseessesenenceceneees 800/200
`and Corn Improvement, Ch. 9, pp. 565-607.
`Green et al. 1975. Crop Science. 15:417-421.
`Mallauer et al. 1988. In Corn and Cor Improvement.
`Sprague et al., eds. CH 8: 463-564.
`Meghji et al. 1984. Crop Science. 24: 545-549.
`Wright. 1980. In Hybridization of Crop Plants. Fehr et al.,
`eds. Ch. 8: 161-176.
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`160390
`
`6/1986 European Pat. Off. .
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`Conger, B. V., et al. (1987) “Somatic Embryogenesis From
`Cultured Leaf Segments of Zea Mays”, Plant Cell Reports,
`6:345-347.
`Duncan, D. R., et al. (1985) “The Production of Callus
`Capable of Plant Regeneration From Immature Embryos of
`Numerous Zea Mays Genotypes”, Planta, 165:322—332.
`Edallo, et al.
`(1981) “Chromosomal Variation and Fre-
`quency of Spontaneous Mutation Associated with in vitro
`Culture and Plant Regeneration in Maize”, Maydica,
`XXVI:39-S6.
`Green, et al., “Plant Regeneration From Tissue Cultures of
`Maize”, Crop Science, vol. 15, pp. 417-421.
`Green, C. E., et al. (1982) “Plant Regeneration in Tissue
`Cultures of Maize” Maize for Biological Research, pp.
`367-372.
`Haliauer, A. R. et al. (1988) “Corn Breeding” Corn and
`Corn Improvement, No. 18, pp. 463-481.
`Meghiji, M. R., et al. (1984). “Inbreeding Depression, Inbred
`& Hybrid Grain Yields, and Other Traits of Maize Geno-
`types Representing Three Eras”, Crop Science, vol. 24, pp.
`545-549.
`
`Wych. 1988. In Com and Corn Improvement. Spragueetal.,
`eds. CH. 9: 565-607.
`
`Primary Examiner—Gary Benzion
`Assistant Examiner—Erich E. Veitenheimer
`Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Pioneer Hi-Bred International,
`Inc.
`
`[57]
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`According to the invention, there is provided an inbred corn
`line, designated PHTE4. This invention thus relates to the
`plants and seeds of inbred corn line PHTE4 and to methods
`for producing a corn plant produced by crossing the inbred
`line PHTE4 with itself or with another corn plant. This
`invention further relates to hybrid corn seeds and plants
`produced by crossing the inbred line PHTE4 with another
`corn line or plant.
`
`5 Claims, 2 Drawing Sheets
`
`
`
`Inari Exhibit 1040
`Inari Exhibit 1040
`Inari v. Pioneer
`Inari v. Pioneer
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 26, 1995
`
`Sheet 1 of 2
`
`5,453,564
`
`VALUE
`
`VARIETY
`
`30
`
`___PHTEA_PHUAG
`B
`: 073
`0.57
`R2:
`0.61
`0,25
`N
`:
`29
`29
`Mo:
`75.2
`63.2
`DMS:
`86.9
`243.0
`
`
`40
`30
`60
`70
`80
`90
`100
`
`REP WEANS
`
`+ PHTRA
`o PHJ40
`—— PREDICTED
`—— PHTE4
`-—-PHJ40
`
`FIG.4
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Sep. 26, 1995
`
`Sheet 2 of 2
`
`5,453,564
`
`VALUE
`
`90
`80
`REP MEANS
`
`100
`
`110
`
`120
`
`130
`
`140
`
`+ PHIEA
`o PHBWE
`— PREDICTED
`—— PHTEA
`
`a
`
`FIG.2
`
`VARIETY
`
`40
`
`3¢
`
`60
`
`70
`
`___PHTE4 _PHBW8
`B
`:
`087
`1.10
`R2:
`0.59
`0.69
`N:
`32
`3
`
`he RS
`_—
`
`

`

`5,453,564
`
`1
`INBRED CORN LINE PHTE4
`
`FIELD OF THE INVENTION
`
`This inventionis in the field of corn breeding, specifically
`relating to an inbred corn line designated PHTE4.
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`Plant Breeding
`
`Field crops are bred through techniques that take advan-
`tage of the plant’s method of pollination. A plant is self-
`pollinated if pollen from one flower is transferred to the
`same or another flower of the same plant. 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 sepa-
`rate male and female flowers on the same plant, located on
`the tassel and the ear, respectively. Natural pollination
`occurs in corn when wind blowspollen from the tassels to
`the silks that protrude from the tops of the incipient ears.
`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 selected inbred lines with
`unrelated inbred lines to produce the hybrid progeny (F,).
`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
`consequence of the homozygosity and homogeneity of the
`inbred lines is that the hybrid between any two inbreds will
`always be the same. Oncethe inbreds that give a superior
`hybrid have been identified, the hybrid seed can be repro-
`duced indefinitely as long as the homogeneity of the inbred
`parents is maintained.
`The objective of commercial maize inbred line develop-
`ment programsis to develop new inbred lines that combine
`to produce high grain yields and superior agronomic per-
`formance in hybrid combination. The primary trait breeders
`seek is yield. However, other major agronomictraits are of
`importance in hybrid combination 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,resis-
`tance to root lodging, grain quality, and disease and insect
`resistance. In addition the lines per se must have acceptable
`performance for parental traits such as seed yields, kernel
`sizes, pollen production,all of whichaffectability to provide
`parental lines in sufficient quantity and quality for hybrid-
`ization. Traits have been shown to be under genetic control
`and many if not all of the traits are affected by multiple
`genes. Thus, to be selected as an inbred line, the inbred must
`be able to combine such that the desired traits are passed to
`the hybrid and also be able to satisfy production require-
`ments as a parental line.
`
`Pedigree Breeding
`
`The pedigree method of breeding is the mostly widely
`used methodology for new inbred line development.
`In general terms this procedure consists of crossing two
`inbred lines to produce the non-segregating F, generation,
`and self pollination of the F, generation to produce the F,
`generationthat segregates for all factors for which the inbred
`
`2
`parents differ. An example of this process is set forth below.
`Variations of this generalized pedigree method are used, but
`all these variations produce a segregating generation which
`contains a range of variation for the traits of interest.
`
`EXAMPLE1
`
`10
`
`Hypothetical example of pedigree breeding program
`Consider a cross between two inbred lines that differ for
`alleles at five loci.
`The parental genotypes are:
`
`Paentl
`Parentt2
`
`A b
`a
`B
`
`C de
`c
`DE
`
`FIA
`fla
`
`b
`B
`
`C
`c
`
`d
`D
`
`ee
`€-E
`
`F
`f
`
`the F, from a cross between these two parentsis:
`
`FL
`
`OA
`
`b
`
`Cc
`
`doc
`
`Fla
`
`Boc DE f
`
`Selfing F, will produce an F, generation including the
`following genotypes:
`
`A
`A
`A
`
`b
`B
`B
`
`c DE
`c De
`c De
`
`fla
`fla
`fla
`
`b
`b
`b
`
`Cc
`C
`C
`
`d
`d
`d
`
`e
`E
`e
`
`F
`F
`F
`
`The number of genotypesin the F, is 3° for six segre-
`gating loci (729) and will produce (2°)-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 combined
`effects of the genes define the performanceofthe inbred and
`its performance in hybrid combination. There is 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 these lines are different and can be uniquely identified on
`the basis of genetically-controlled molecular markers.
`It has been shown (Hallauer, Arnel R. and Miranda,J. B.
`Fo. Quantitative Genetics in Maize Breeding, Iowa 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 shown that over the
`last SO years the rate of genetic progress in commercial
`hybrids has been between 1 and 2% per year.
`The number of genes affecting the trait of primary eco-
`nomic 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 factors make the plant
`breeder’s task more difficult. Compoundingthis is evidence
`that no one line contains the favorableallele at all loci, and
`that differentalleles have different economic values depend-
`ing on the genetic background and field environment in
`which the hybrid is grown. Fifty years of breeding experi-
`ence showsthat there are many genes affecting grain yield
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`60
`
`65
`
`

`

`5,453,564
`
`3
`and each of these has a relatively small effect on this trait.
`The effects are small compared to breeders’ ability to
`measure grain yield differences in evaluation trials. There-
`fore, the parents of the breeding cross must differ at several
`of these loci so that the genetic differences in the progeny
`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
`inbred lines is n, the number of unique genotypes in the F.,,
`generation is 3" (Example 2) and the number of unique
`inbred lines from this cross is {(2”)-2}. Only a very limited
`numberof 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 number of
`segregating loci in F, is somewhere between 20 and 50, and
`that each parent is fixed for half the favorablealleles, it is
`then possible to calculate approximate probabilities of find-
`ing an inbredthat has the favorableallele at {(n/2)-+m} loci,
`where n/2 is the number of favorable alleles in each of the
`parents and m is the numberof additional favorablealleles
`in the new inbred. Sec Example 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
`107or smaller and they are the probabilities that at least one
`genotype with (n/2)+m favorable alleles will exist.
`To put this in perspective the numberof plants grown on
`60 million acres (approximate U.S. corn acreage) at 25000
`plants/acre is 1.5x10??.
`
`EXAMPLE2
`
`Probability of finding an inbred with m of n favorable
`alleles.
`Assume each parent has n/2 of the favorable alleles and
`only % of the combinations of loci are economically useful.
`
`Probability
`no. additional
`no, favorable
`no. of
`segregating
`alleles in
`favorablealleles
`that genotype
`loci (n)
`Parents (n/2)
`in new inbred
`occurs*
`
`20
`10
`14
`3x 10°
`24
`12
`16
`2x 10°
`28
`14
`18
`1x 10°
`32
`16
`20
`8x 10%
`36
`18
`22
`5x 10-6
`40
`20
`24
`3x 10°
`44
`22
`26
`2x 10-6
`48
`24
`28
`1x 10-6
`
`*Probability that a useful combination exists, does not include the probability
`of identifying this combinationif it does exist.
`
`The possibility of having a usably high probability of
`being able to identify this genotype based on replicated field
`testing would be most likely 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 research
`station has a staff of four, and 20 acres of breeding nursery.
`Those researchers plant those 20 acres with 25,000 nursery
`rows, 15,000 yield test plots in 10-15 yieldtest sites, and
`one or two disease-screening nurseries. Employing a tem-
`porary crew of 20 to 30 pollinators, the station makes about
`65,000 hand pollinations per growing season. Thus, one of
`the largest plant breeding programs in the world does not
`have a sufficiently large breeding population to be able to
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`4
`rely upon “playing the numbers” to obtain successful
`tesearch results. Nevertheless, Pioneer’s breeders at each
`station produce from three to ten new inbreds which are
`proposed for commercial use each year. Over the 32 Pioneer
`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 inbreds that
`actually satisfy the performancecriteria for commercial use.
`This is a result of plant breeders using their skills,
`experience and intuitive 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 PHTE4. This invention thus
`relates to the seeds of inbred corn line PHTE4,to the plants
`of inbred corn line PHTE4, and to methods for producing a
`corn plant produced by crossing the inbred line PHTE4 with
`itself or another corn line. This invention further relates to
`hybrid com seeds and plants produced by crossing the
`inbred line PHTE4 with another com 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 following
`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. Thepercentof plants per
`plot that were not barren (lack ears).
`BRT STK=BRITTLE STALKS. This is a measure of the
`stalk breakage near the time of pollination, 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. The ear height is a measure
`from the ground to the highest placed developed car node
`attachment and is measured in inches.
`
`EAR SZ=EAR SIZE. 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
`number of plants that emerge on a per plot basis for the
`inbred or hybrid.
`GDU SHD=GDU TO SHED. The numberof growing
`degree units (GDUs)or heat units required for an inbred line
`or hybrid to have approximately 50 percent of the plants
`shedding pollen and is measured from the time ofplanting.
`Growing degree units are calculated by the Barger Method,
`where the heat units for a 24-hour period are:
`
`GpU- (Max, temp. Mn. temp)
`
`50
`
`The highest maximum temperature used is 86° F. and the
`
`

`

`5,453,564
`
`5
`lowest minimum temperature used is 50° F. For each inbred
`or hybrid it takes a certain number of GDUsto reach various
`stages of plant development.
`GDU SLK=GDU TO SILK. The number of growing
`degree units required for an inbred line or hybrid to have
`approximately 50 percent of the plants with silk emergence
`from time of planting. Growing degree units are calculated
`by the Barger Method as given in GDU SHDdefinition.
`GRN APP=GRAIN APPEARANCE. This is a 1
`to 9
`rating for the general appearanceof the shelled grain asit is
`harvested based on suchfactors 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 moistureis 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 ground to thetip of the tassel in
`inches.
`
`POL SC=POLLEN SCORE.A 1 to 9 visual rating indi-
`cating 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 commences minus
`dry weight from similar tassels harvested after shedding is
`complete.
`through
`It should be understood that the inbred can,
`routine manipulation of cytoplasmic factors, be produced in
`a cytoplasmic male-sterile form which is otherwise pheno-
`typically identical to the male-fertile form.
`PRM=PREDICTED RM. This trait, predicted relative
`maturity (RM), is based on the harvest moisture of the grain.
`The relative maturity rating is based on a known set of
`checks andutilizes standard linear regression analyses andis
`referred to as the Comparative Relative Maturity Rating
`System which is similar to the Minnesota Relative Maturity
`Rating System.
`RT LDG=ROOT LODGING.Root lodgingis the percent-
`ageof plants that do not rootlodge; plants that lean from the
`vertical axis at an approximately 30° angle or greater would
`be counted as root lodged.
`to 9 visual rating
`SCT GRN=SCATTER GRAIN. A 1
`indicating the amountof 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 visual rating
`(1 to 9) 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. The selection index
`gives a single measure of the hybrid’s worth based on
`information for up to five traits. A corn breeder may utilize
`his or her ownset of traits for the selection index. One of the
`traits that is almost always included is yield. The selection
`index data presented in the tables represent the mean value
`averaged acrosstesting stations.
`STA GRN=STAY GREEN. Stay green is the measure of
`plant health near the time of black layer formation (physi-
`ological maturity). A high score indicates better latc-scason
`plant health.
`STK CNT=NUMBER OF PLANTS. This is the final
`stand or number of plants per plot.
`STK LDG=STALK LODGING.Thisis the percentage of
`plants that did not stalk lodge (stalk breakage) as measured
`by either natural lodging or pushing the stalks and deter-
`
`6
`mining the percentage of plants 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 | to 9 visual rating was used
`to indicate the relative size of the tassel. The higher the
`rating the larger the tassel.
`TAS WT=TASSEL WEIGHT. This is 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 numberoftillers per
`plot that could possibly shed pollen wastaken. Datais given
`as percentageoftillers: numberoftillers per plot divided by
`numberof plants per plot.
`TST WT=TEST WEIGHT (UNADJUSTED). The mea-
`sure of the weight ofthe grain in pounds for a given volume
`(bushel).
`TST WTA=TEST WEIGHT ADJUSTED.The measure of
`the weight of the grain in pounds for a given volume
`(bushel) adjusted for percent moisture.
`YLD=YIELD.It is the same as BU ACR ABS.
`
`YLD SC=YIELD SCORE.A I 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 Chlorotic
`Dwarf Virus): Visual rating (1-9 score) where a “1” is very
`susceptible and a “9” is very resistant.
`SLF BLT=Southem Leaf Blight (Bipolaris maydis, Hel-
`minthosporium maydis): Visual rating (1-9 score) where a
`“1” is very susceptible and a “9” is very resistant.
`NLF BLT=Northern Leaf Blight (Exserohilum turcicum,
`H. turcicum): Visual rating (1-9 score) where a ‘‘]” is very
`susceptible and a “9” is very resistant.
`COM RST=CommonRust (Puccinia sorghi): Visual rat-
`ing (1-9 score) where a “1” is very susceptible and a “9”is
`very resistant.
`GLF SPT=Gray Leaf Spot (Cercospora zeae-maydis):
`Visual rating (1-9 score) where a ‘‘1” is very susceptible and
`a “9” is very resistant.
`STW WLT=Stewart’s Wilt (Erwinia stewartii): Visual
`rating (1-9 score) where a “1” is very susceptible and a “9”
`is very resistant.
`HD SMT=Head Smut (Sphacelotheca reiliana): Percent-
`age of plants that did not have infection.
`EAR MLD=General Ear Mold: Visual rating (1-9 score)
`where a “‘]”’ 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 organism, 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 infestation.
`
`15
`
`25
`
`30
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`65
`
`ECB 2SC=European Corn Borer Second Brood (Ostrinia
`nubilalis). Visual rating (1-9 score) of post flowering dam-
`age due to infestation by European Corn Borer. A “1” is very
`susceptible and a “9”is very resistant.
`ECB 1LF=European Corn Borer First Brood (Ostrinia
`
`

`

`5,453,564
`
`7
`nubilalis): Visual rating (1-9 score) of pro-flowering leaf
`feeding by European Corn Borer. A “1” is very susceptible
`and a “9”is very resistant.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`FIGS. 1 and 2 show data for the trait Bushels Per Acre.
`Theresults of FIGS. 1 and 2 compare PHTE4 to PHJ40 and
`PHBW8,respectively.
`
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE
`INVENTION
`
`PHTE4 produces hybrids thatare high yielding and flower
`early. PHTE4 hybrids have above average sccdling vigor,
`test weight and staygreen. PHTE4 hybrids also have above
`average resistance to brittle stalks.
`Inbred corn line PHTE4 is a yellow, dent corn inbred that
`provides an acceptable male parental
`line in crosses for
`producing first generation Fl corn hybrids. PHTE4 also
`provides an acceptable female parental line in crosses for
`producing first generation Fl corn hybrids. PHTE4 is
`adapted to the North Central region of the United States.
`The inbred has shown uniformity and stability within the
`limits of environmental
`influence for all
`the traits as
`described in the Variety Description Information (Table 1)
`that follows. Most of the data in the Variety Description
`information wascollected 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 and inisolated fields
`with continued observation for uniformity. No variant traits
`have been observed or are expected in PHTE4.
`Inbred com line PHTE4,being substantially homozygous,
`can be reproducedby planting seedsofthe line, growing the
`resulting corn plants under self-pollinating or sib-pollinating
`conditions with adequate isolation, and harvesting the result-
`ing seed, using techniques familiar to the agricultural arts.
`
`TABLE1
`
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHTE4
`Type: Dent
`Region Best Adapted: North Central
`
`
`.
`
`A. Maturity: Average across maturity zones.
`Heat Unit Shed:
`1340
`Heat Unit Silk:
`1330
`No. Reps:
`35
`(Max. Temp. (=86° F.) +
`50
`HEAT UNITS = Min. Temp (ean F.)]*
`*If maximumis greater than 86 degrees fahrenheit, then 86
`is used and if minimumis less than 50, then 50 is used.
`Heat units accumulated daily and can notbe less than 0,
`Plant Characteristics:
`
`B.
`
`Plantheight (to tassel tip): 207 cm
`Length of top ear internode: 10 cm
`Numberof ears per stalk: Slight, two-ear tendency
`Ear height(to base of top ear): 66 cm
`Numberof tillers: None
`Cytoplasm type: Normal
`C. Leaf:
`
`Color: (B14) Dark Green
`Angle from Stalk: 30-60 degrees
`Marginal Waves: (WF9) Few
`Number of Leaves (mature plants): 19
`
`8
`
`TABLE 1-continued
`
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHTE4
`Type: Dent
`Region Best Adapted: North Central
`
`Sheath Pubescence: (W22) Light
`Longitudinal Creases: (PA11) Many
`Length (Ear node leaf): 64 cm
`Width (widest point, ear node leaf): 7 cm
`Tassel:
`
`Numberlateral branches: 3
`Branch Angle from central spike: >45 degrees
`Pollen Shed: Heavy based on Pollen Yield Test
`(108% of experiment means)
`Peduncle Length (top leaf to basal branches): 21 cm
`Anther Color: Purple
`Glume Color: Green
`Ear (Husked Ear Data Except When Stated Otherwise):
`
`ft
`
`Length: 14 cm
`Weight: 127 gm
`Mid-point Diameter: 42 mm
`Silk Color: Green
`Husk Extension (Harvest stage): Long (8-10 cm beyond ear
`tip)
`Husk Leaf: short (<8 cm)
`Taper of Ear: Average
`Position of Shank (dry husks): Upright
`Kernel Rows: Straight, Distinct Number = 14
`Husk Color(fresh): Light Green
`Husk Color (dry): Buff
`Shank Length: 10 cm
`Shank (No.of internodes): 8
`Kernel (Dried):
`
`Size (from ear mid-point)
`Length:
`1i mm
`Width:
`8 mm
`Thick:
`4mm
`Shape Grade (% rounds): <20 (18% 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): 27 gm
`Cob:
`
`Diameter at mid-point: 22 mm
`Strength: Strong
`Color: Red
`Diseases:
`
`Corn Lethal Necrosis (MCMV = Maize Chlorotic Mottle
`Virus and MDMV = Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus): Resistant
`Carbonum Leaf Blight (H. carbonum): Resistant
`N.Leaf Biight (Z. mrcicum): Intermediate
`Common Rust (P. sorghi): Resistant
`Gray Leaf Spot (C. zeae): Susceptible
`Stewart’s Wilt (Z. stewartii): Resistant
`Goss’s Wilt (C. Nebraskense) Intermediate
`Common Smut (U. maydis): Highly Resistant
`Head Smut(S. reiliana) Highly Resistant
`Fusarium Ear Mold (F moniliforme): Intermediate
`Gibberella Ear Rot (G. zeae): Intermediate
`Insects:
`
`European Corn Borer-1 Leaf Damage (Preflowering):
`Resistant
`European Corn Borer-2 (Post-flowering): Intermediate
`The above descriptions are based on a scale of1-9, 1
`being highly susceptible, 9 being highly resistant.
`S (Susceptible): Would generally represent a score of 1-3.
`I (Intermediate): 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
`
`25
`
`I
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`a
`
`=
`
`45
`
`50
`
`35
`
`60
`
`65
`
`

`

`5,453,564
`
`9
`
`TABLE 1-continued
`VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
`INBRED = PHTE4
`Region Best Adapted: North Central
`
`J.
`
`Type: Dent
`immune.
`Variety Most Closely Resembling:
`Character
`Inbred
`Maturity
`PHBW8
`Usage
`PHBW8
`PHBW8(PVP Certificate No. 9200079) 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 description information from the maintainingstation.
`
`ELECTROPHORESIS RESULTS
`
`Isozyme Genotypes for PHTE4
`
`Isozyme data were generated for inbred corn line PHTE4
`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 Elec-
`trophoresis of Enzymes from Maize (Zea mays L.)”, Tech-
`nical Bulletin No. 286, North Carolina Agricultural
`Research Service, North Carolina State University, Raleigh,
`N.C. (1988).
`The data in Table 2 compares PHTE4 with its parents,
`PHN15 and PHJ40.
`
`TABLE 2
`ELECTROPHORESIS RESULTS FOR PHTE4
`AND ITS PARENTS PHNIS AND PHI40
`
`LOCI
`
`ACP1
`ADHI
`CAT3
`DIA1
`GOT1
`GOT2
`GOT3
`IDH1
`IDH2
`MDH1
`MDH2
`MDH3
`MDH4
`MDHS
`MMM
`PGM1
`PGM2
`PGD1
`PGD2
`PHIL
`
`PARENTS
`
`PHTE4
`
`PHN15
`
`PHIJ40
`
`AnhaRROOASR
`
`AADRAARARROVAN
`
`eee
`
`EXAMPLES
`
`Inbred and Hybrid Performance of PHTE4
`
`In the examples that follow, the traits and characteristics
`of inbred corn line PHTE4 are given as a line in comparison
`with other inbreds and in hybrid combination. The data
`collected on inbred corn line PHTE4is presented for the key
`characteristics andtraits.
`
`Tabie 3A compares PHTE4 to PHN15. PHTE4has lower
`
`10
`yield and grain harvest moisture but higher test weight
`compared to PHN15. PHTE4 is a shorter inbred and flowers
`(GDU Shed and GDU Silk) earlier than PHN15.
`The data in Table 3B shows PHTE4 has loweryield and
`higher grain harvest moisture than PHNV4. PHTE4 and
`PHNV4havesimilar plant height but PHTE4 has lower ear
`placement. PHTE4 is an earlier flowering (GDU Shed and
`GDUSilk) inbred compared to PHNV4.
`Table 3C compares PHTE4 to PHJ40. PHTE4 hashigher
`yield and grain harvest moisture but lowcr test weight
`compared to PHJ40. PHTE4 hasa larger ear and is taller
`with lower ear placement compared to PHJ40. PHTE4
`flowers (GDU Shed and GDU Silk) later than PHJ40.
`PHTE4 has greater pollen weight than PHJ40. PHTE4 has
`fewer scattergrain, better staygreen and better resistance to
`ear mold andfirst brood European corn borer than PHJ40.
`The data in Table 3D shows PHTE4 has a higher yield
`than PHT46. PHTE4hasa larger ear andis taller with higher
`ear placement compared to PHT46. PHTE4 flowers (GDU
`Shed and GDU Silk) later than PHT46. PHTE4 has a
`significantly greater pollen weight than PHT46. PHTE4 has
`better ear texture and staygreen with better resistance to first
`and second brood European corn borer compared to PHT46.
`Table 3E shows PHTE4 has loweryield and grain harvest
`moisture but higher test weight compared to PHBW8.
`PHTE4 and PHBW8havesimilar ear placement but PHTE4
`is a taller inbred. PHTE4 and PHBW8shed (GDU Shed)
`pollen at approximately at the same time but PHTE4silks
`(GDU Silk) earlier than PHBW8. PHTE4 has better first
`brood European corn borer resistance than PHBW8.
`Table 4A compares PHTE4 to PHNV4 when both were
`crossed to the same inbred testers. The PHTE4 hybrids have
`higher yield and grain harvest moisture compared to the
`PHNV4hybrids. The PHTE4 hybrids have better seedling
`vigor and higher early stand count than the PHNV4 hybrids.
`The PHTE4 hybrids are shorter with lower ear placement
`compared to the PHNV4 hybrids.
`Table 4B compares PHTE4 to PHRE] when both were
`crossed to the same inbred testers. The hybrids yield simi-
`larly but the PHTE4 hybrids have higher grain harvest
`moisture than the PHRE1 hybrids. The PHTE4 hybrids have
`better seedling vigor than the PHRE] hybrids.
`Table 4C compares PHTE4 to PHBW8 when both were
`crossed to the same inbred testers. The PHTE4 hybrids have
`lower yield and grain harvest moisture compared to the
`PHBW8hybrids. The PHTE4 hybrids have better grain
`appearance and seedling vigor than the PHBW8hybrids.
`Table SA compares PHTE4 to PHBW8 when both were
`crossed to the same inbred. The hybrids have similar yield
`and test weight but the PHTE4 hybrid has lower grain
`harvest moisture. The PHTE4 hybridis taller with higher ear
`placement compared to the PHBW8 hybrid.
`Table 5B compares PHTE4 to PHRE1 when both were
`crossed to the same inbred. The hybrids yield similarly but
`the PHTE4 hybrid has significantly higher grain harvest
`moisture than the PHRE1 hybrid. The PHTE4 hybrid has
`better test weight than the PHRE1 hybrid. The hybrids are
`similar in height b

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket