(en)A novel hybrid maize variety designated 33D11 and seed, plants and plant parts thereof, produced by crossing two Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. proprietary inbred maize lines. Methods for producing a maize plant that comprises crossing hybrid maize variety 33D11 with another maize plant. Methods for producing a maize plant containing in its genetic material one or more traits introgressed into 33D11 through backcross conversion and/or transformation, and to the maize seed, plant and plant part produced thereby. This invention relates to the hybrid seed 33D11, the hybrid plant produced from the seed, and variants, mutants, and trivial modifications of hybrid 33D11. This invention further relates to methods for producing maize lines derived from hybrid maize variety 33D11 and to the maize lines derived by the use of those methods.

1.ApplicationNumber: US-4782205-A
1.PublishNumber: US-2005114947-A1
2.Date Publish: 20050526
3.Inventor: CARLONE MARIO R.JR.

4.Inventor Harmonized: CARLONE MARIO R JR(US)

5.Country: US
6.Claims:
(en)A novel hybrid maize variety designated 33D11 and seed, plants and plant parts thereof, produced by crossing two Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. proprietary inbred maize lines. Methods for producing a maize plant that comprises crossing hybrid maize variety 33D11 with another maize plant. Methods for producing a maize plant containing in its genetic material one or more traits introgressed into 33D11 through backcross conversion and/or transformation, and to the maize seed, plant and plant part produced thereby. This invention relates to the hybrid seed 33D11, the hybrid plant produced from the seed, and variants, mutants, and trivial modifications of hybrid 33D11. This invention further relates to methods for producing maize lines derived from hybrid maize variety 33D11 and to the maize lines derived by the use of those methods.

7.Description:
(en)FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates generally to the field of maize breeding, specifically relating to hybrid maize designated 33D11.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Plant Breeding
The goal of plant breeding is to combine, in a single variety or hybrid, various desirable traits. For field crops, these traits may include resistance to diseases and insects, tolerance to heat and drought, reducing the time to crop maturity, greater yield, and better agronomic quality. With mechanical harvesting of many crops, uniformity of plant characteristics such as germination, stand establishment, growth rate, maturity, and plant and ear height is important. Traditional plant breeding is an important tool in developing new and improved commercial crops.
Field crops are bred through techniques that take advantage 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 sib pollinated when individuals within the same family or line are used for pollination. A plant is cross-pollinated if the pollen comes from a flower on a different plant from a different family or line. The term “cross pollination” and “out-cross” as used herein do not include self pollination or sib pollination.
Plants that have been self-pollinated and selected for type for many generations become homozygous at almost all gene loci and produce a uniform population of true breeding progeny. A cross between two different homozygous lines produces a uniform population of hybrid plants that may be heterozygous for many gene loci. A cross of two plants each heterozygous at a number of gene loci will produce a population of heterogeneous plants that differ genetically and will not be uniform.
Maize ( Zea mays L. ), often referred to as corn in the United States, can be bred by both self-pollination and cross-pollination techniques. Maize has separate male and female flowers on the same plant, located on the tassel and the ear, respectively. Natural pollination occurs in maize when wind blows pollen from the tassels to the silks that protrude from the tops of the ears.
The development of a hybrid maize variety in a maize plant breeding program involves three steps: (1) the selection of plants from various germplasm pools for initial breeding crosses; (2) the selfing of the selected plants from the breeding crosses for several generations to produce a series of inbred lines, which, individually breed true and are highly uniform; and (3) crossing a selected inbred line with an unrelated inbred line to produce the hybrid progeny (F1). After a sufficient amount of inbreeding successive filial generations will merely serve to increase seed of the developed inbred. Preferably, an inbred line should comprise homozygous alleles at about 95% or more of its loci.
During the inbreeding process in maize, the vigor of the lines decreases. Vigor is restored when two different inbred lines are crossed to produce the hybrid progeny (F1). An important consequence of the homozygosity and homogeneity of the inbred lines is that the hybrid between a defined pair of inbreds may be reproduced indefinitely as long as the homogeneity of the inbred parents is maintained. Once the inbreds that create a superior hybrid have been identified, a continual supply of the hybrid seed can be produced using these inbred parents and the hybrid corn plants can then be generated from this hybrid seed supply.
33D11 may be used for grain production or to produce a double cross hybrid or a three-way hybrid. A double cross hybrid is produced from four inbred lines crossed in pairs (A×B and C×D) and then the two F1 hybrids are crossed again (A×B)×(C×D). A three-way cross hybrid is produced from three inbred lines where two of the inbred lines are crossed (A×B) and then the resulting F1 hybrid is crossed with the third inbred (A×B)×C. In each case, pericarp tissue from the female parent plant will be a part of and protect the seed produced on that plant.
Large scale commercial maize hybrid production, as it is practiced today, requires the use of some form of male sterility system which controls or inactivates male fertility. A reliable method of controlling male fertility in plants also offers the opportunity for improved plant breeding. This is especially true for development of maize hybrids, which relies upon some sort of male sterility system. There are several ways in which a maize plant can be manipulated so that is male sterile. These include use of manual or mechanical emasculation (or detasseling), cytoplasmic genetic male sterility, nuclear genetic male sterility, gametocides and the like.
Hybrid maize seed is often produced by a male sterility system incorporating manual or mechanical detasseling. Alternate strips of two inbred varieties of maize are planted in a field, and the pollen-bearing tassels are removed from one of the inbreds (female) prior to pollen shed. Providing that there is sufficient isolation from sources of foreign maize pollen, the ears of the detasseled inbred will be fertilized only from the other inbred (male), and the resulting seed is therefore hybrid and will form hybrid plants.
The laborious detasseling process can be avoided by using cytoplasmic male-sterile (CMS) inbreds. Plants of a CMS inbred are male sterile as a result of genetic factors in the cytoplasm, as opposed to the nucleus, and so nuclear linked genes are not transferred during backcrossing. Thus, this characteristic is inherited exclusively through the female parent in maize plants, since only the female provides cytoplasm to the fertilized seed. CMS plants are fertilized with pollen from another inbred that is not male-sterile. Pollen from the second inbred may or may not contribute genes that make the hybrid plants male-fertile, and either option may be preferred depending on the intended use of the hybrid. The same hybrid seed, a portion produced from detasseled fertile maize and a portion produced using the CMS system can be blended to insure that adequate pollen loads are available for fertilization when the hybrid plants are grown. CMS systems have been successfully used since the 1950's, and the male sterility trait is routinely backcrossed into inbred lines. See Wych, p. 585-586, 1998.
There are several methods of conferring genetic male sterility available, such as multiple mutant genes at separate locations within the genome that confer male sterility, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,654,465 and 4,727,219 to Brar et al. and chromosomal translocations as described by Patterson in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,861,709 and 3,710,511. These and all patents referred to are incorporated by reference. In addition to these methods, Albertsen et al., of Pioneer Hi-Bred, U.S. Pat. No. 5,432,068, describe a system of nuclear male sterility which includes: identifying a gene which is critical to male fertility; silencing this native gene which is critical to male fertility; removing the native promoter from the essential male fertility gene and replacing it with an inducible promoter; inserting this genetically engineered gene back into the plant; and thus creating a plant that is male sterile because the inducible promoter is not “on” resulting in the male fertility gene not being transcribed. Fertility is restored by inducing, or turning “on”, the promoter, which in turn allows the gene that confers male fertility to be transcribed.
These, and the other methods of conferring genetic male sterility in the art, each possess their own benefits and drawbacks. Some other methods use a variety of approaches such as delivering into the plant a gene encoding a cytotoxic substance associated with a male tissue specific promoter or an antisense system in which a gene critical to fertility is identified and an antisense to that gene is inserted in the plant (see Fabinjanski, et al. EPO 89/3010153.8 Publication No. 329,308 and PCT Application PCT/CA90/00037 published as WO 90/08828).
Another system useful in controlling male sterility makes use of gametocides. Gametocides are not a genetic system, but rather a topical application of chemicals. These chemicals affect cells that are critical to male fertility. The application of these chemicals affects fertility in the plants only for the growing season in which the gametocide is applied (see Carlson, Glenn R., U.S. Pat. No. 4,936,904). Application of the gametocide, timing of the application and genotype specificity often limit the usefulness of the approach and it is not appropriate in all situations.
The use of male sterile inbreds is but one factor in the production of maize hybrids. The development of maize hybrids in a maize plant breeding program requires, in general, the development of homozygous inbred lines, the crossing of these lines, and the evaluation of the crosses. Maize plant breeding programs combine the genetic backgrounds from two or more inbred lines or various other germplasm sources into breeding populations from which new inbred lines are developed by selfing and selection of desired phenotypes. Hybrids also can be used as a source of plant breeding material or as source populations from which to develop or derive new maize lines. Plant breeding techniques known in the art and used in a maize plant breeding program include, but are not limited to, recurrent selection, mass selection, bulk selection, backcrossing, making double haploids, pedigree breeding, open pollination breeding, restriction fragment length polymorphism enhanced selection, genetic marker enhanced selection, and transformation. Often combinations of these techniques are used. The inbred lines derived from hybrids can be developed using plant breeding techniques as described above. New inbreds are crossed with other inbred lines and the hybrids from these crosses are evaluated to determine which of those have commercial potential. The oldest and most traditional method of analysis is the observation of phenotypic traits but genotypic analysis may also be used. Descriptions of breeding methods can also be found in one of several reference books (e.g., Allard, Principles of Plant Breeding, 1960; Simmonds, Principles of Crop Improvement, 1979; Fehr, “Breeding Methods for Cultivar Development”, Production and Uses, 2 nd ed., Wilcox editor, 1987).
Backcrossing can be used to improve inbred lines and a hybrid which is made using those inbreds. Backcrossing can be used to transfer a specific desirable trait from one line, the donor parent, to an inbred called the recurrent parent which has overall good agronomic characteristics yet that lacks the desirable trait. This transfer of the desirable trait into an inbred with overall good agronomic characteristics can be accomplished by first crossing a recurrent parent to a donor parent (non-recurrent parent). The progeny of this cross is then mated back to the recurrent parent followed by selection in the resultant progeny for the desired trait to be transferred from the non-recurrent parent. Typically after four or more backcross generations with selection for the desired trait, the progeny will contain essentially all genes of the recurrent parent except for the genes controlling the desired trait. But the number of backcross generations can be less if molecular markers are used during the selection or elite germplasm is used as the donor parent. The last backcross generation is then selfed to give pure breeding progeny for the gene(s) being transferred.
Backcrossing can also be used in conjunction with pedigree breeding to develop new inbred lines. For example, an F1 can be created that is backcrossed to one of its parent lines to create a BC1. Progeny are selfed and selected so that the newly developed inbred has many of the attributes of the recurrent parent and yet several of the desired attributes of the non-recurrent parent.
Recurrent selection is a method used in a plant breeding program to improve a population of plants. The method entails individual plants cross pollinating with each other to form progeny which are then grown. The superior progeny are then selected by any number of methods, which include individual plant, half sib progeny, full sib progeny, selfed progeny and topcrossing. The selected progeny are cross pollinated with each other to form progeny for another population. This population is planted and again superior plants are selected to cross pollinate with each other. Recurrent selection is a cyclical process and therefore can be repeated as many times as desired. The objective of recurrent selection is to improve the traits of a population. The improved population can then be used as a source of breeding material to obtain inbred lines to be used in hybrids or used as parents for a synthetic cultivar. A synthetic cultivar is the resultant progeny formed by the intercrossing of several selected inbreds. Mass selection is a useful technique when used in conjunction with molecular marker enhanced selection.
Molecular markers, which includes markers identified through the use of techniques such as Isozyme Electrophoresis, Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLPs), Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs), Arbitrarily Primed Polymerase Chain Reaction (AP-PCR), DNA Amplification Fingerprinting (DAF), Sequence Characterized Amplified Regions (SCARs), Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms (AFLPs), Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) and Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) may be used in plant breeding methods utilizing 33D11.
One use of molecular markers is Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL) mapping. QTL mapping is the use of markers, which are known to be closely linked to alleles that have measurable effects on a quantitative trait. Selection in the breeding process is based upon the accumulation of markers linked to the positive effecting alleles and/or the elimination of the markers linked to the negative effecting alleles from the plant's genome.
Molecular markers can also be used during the breeding process for the selection of qualitative traits. For example, markers closely linked to alleles or markers containing sequences within the actual alleles of interest can be used to select plants that contain the alleles of interest during a backcrossing breeding program. The markers can also be used to select for the genome of the recurrent parent and against the markers of the donor parent. Using this procedure can minimize the amount of genome from the donor parent that remains in the selected plants. It can also be used to reduce the number of crosses back to the recurrent parent needed in a backcrossing program. The use of molecular markers in the selection process is often called Genetic Marker Enhanced Selection.
The production of double haploids can also be used for the development of inbreds in a breeding program. Double haploids are produced by the doubling of a set of chromosomes (1N) from a heterozygous plant to produce a completely homozygous individual. For example, see Wan et al., “Efficient Production of Doubled Haploid Plants Through Colchicine Treatment of Anther-Derived Maize Callus”, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 77:889-892,1989 and U.S. Application 2003/0005479. This can be advantageous because the process omits the generations of selfing needed to obtain a homozygous plant from a heterozygous source.
Hybrid seed production requires elimination or inactivation of pollen produced by the female parent. Incomplete removal or inactivation of the pollen provides the potential for self-pollination. This inadvertently self-pollinated seed may be unintentionally harvested and packaged with hybrid seed. Also, because the male parent is grown next to the female parent in the field there is the very low probability that the male selfed seed could be unintentionally harvested and packaged with the hybrid seed. Once the seed from the hybrid bag is planted, it is possible to identify and select these self-pollinated plants. These self-pollinated plants will be genetically equivalent to one of the inbred lines used to produce the hybrid. Though the possibility of inbreds being included in a hybrid seed bag exists, the occurrence is very low because much care is taken by seed companies to avoid such inclusions. It is worth noting that hybrid seed is sold to growers for the production of grain and forage and not for breeding or seed production. By an individual skilled in plant breeding, these inbred plants unintentionally included in commercial hybrid seed can be identified and selected due to their decreased vigor when compared to the hybrid. Inbreds are identified by their less vigorous appearance for vegetative and/or reproductive characteristics, including shorter plant height, small ear size, ear and kernel shape, cob color, or other characteristics.
Identification of these self-pollinated lines can also be accomplished through molecular marker analyses. See, “The Identification of Female Selfs in Hybrid Maize: A Comparison Using Electrophoresis and Morphology”, Smith, J. S. C. and Wych, R. D., Seed Science and Technology 14, pages 1-8 (1995), the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated herein by reference. Through these technologies, the homozygosity of the self pollinated line can be verified by analyzing allelic composition at various loci along the genome. Those methods allow for rapid identification of the invention disclosed herein. See also, “Identification of Atypical Plants in Hybrid Maize Seed by Postcontrol and Electrophoresis” Sarca, V. et al., Probleme de Genetica Teoritica si Aplicata Vol. 20 (1) pages 29-42.
Another form of commercial hybrid production involves the use of a mixture of male sterile hybrid seed and male pollinator seed. When planted, the resulting male sterile hybrid plants are pollinated by the pollinator plants. This method is primarily used to produce grain with enhanced quality grain traits, such as high oil, because desired quality grain traits expressed in the pollinator will also be expressed in the grain produced on the male sterile hybrid plant. In this method the desired quality grain trait does not have to be incorporated by lengthy procedures such as recurrent backcross selection into an inbred parent line. One use of this method is described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,704,160 and 5,706,603.
There are many important factors to be considered in the art of plant breeding, such as the ability to recognize important morphological and physiological characteristics, the ability to design evaluation techniques for genotypic and phenotypic traits of interest, and the ability to search out and exploit the genes for the desired traits in new or improved combinations.
The objective of commercial maize hybrid line development resulting from a maize plant breeding program is to develop new inbred lines to produce hybrids that combine to produce high grain yields and superior agronomic performance. One of the primary traits breeders seek is yield. However, many other major agronomic traits 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, resistance 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 which affect ability to provide parental lines in sufficient quantity and quality for hybridization. These traits have been shown to be under genetic control and many if not all of the traits are affected by multiple genes.
A breeder uses various methods to help determine which plants should be selected from the segregating populations and ultimately which inbred lines will be used to develop hybrids for commercialization. In addition to the knowledge of the germplasm and other skills the breeder uses, a part of the selection process is dependent on experimental design coupled with the use of statistical analysis. Experimental design and statistical analysis are used to help determine which plants, which family of plants, and finally which inbred lines and hybrid combinations are significantly better or different for one or more traits of interest. Experimental design methods are used to assess error so that differences between two inbred lines or two hybrid lines can be more accurately determined. Statistical analysis includes the calculation of mean values, determination of the statistical significance of the sources of variation, and the calculation of the appropriate variance components. Either a five or one percent significance level is customarily used to determine whether a difference that occurs for a given trait is real or due to the environment or experimental error. One of ordinary skill in the art of plant breeding would know how to evaluate the traits of two plant varieties to determine if there is no significant difference between the two traits expressed by those varieties. For example, see Fehr, Walt, Principles of Cultivar Development, pages 261-286 (1987) which is incorporated herein by reference. Mean trait values may be used to determine whether trait differences are significant, and preferably the traits are measured on plants grown under the same environmental conditions.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
According to the invention, there is provided a hybrid maize plant, and its parts designated as 33D11, produced by crossing two Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. proprietary inbred maize lines GE752309 and GE2120257. These lines, deposited with the American Type Culture Collection, (ATCC), Manassas, Va. 20110, have Accession Number ______ for GE752309 and Accession Number ______ for GE2120257. This invention thus relates to the hybrid seed 33D11, the hybrid plant and its parts produced from the seed, and variants, mutants and trivial modifications of hybrid maize 33D11. This invention also relates to processes for making a maize plant containing in its genetic material one or more traits introgressed into 33D11 through backcross conversion and/or transformation, and to the maize seed, plant and plant part produced by such introgression. This invention further relates to methods for producing maize lines derived from hybrid maize 33D11 and to the maize lines derived by the use of those processes. This hybrid maize plant is characterized by high yield and good drought tolerance.
Definitions
Certain definitions used in the specification are provided below. Also in the 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. NOTE: ABS is in absolute terms and % MN is percent of the mean for the experiments in which the inbred or hybrid was grown. PCT designates that the trait is calculated as a percentage. % NOT designates the percentage of plants that did not exhibit a trait. For example, STKLDG % NOT is the percentage of plants in a plot that were not stalk lodged. These designators will follow the descriptors to denote how the values are to be interpreted. Below are the descriptors used in the data tables included herein.
ABTSTK=ARTIFICIAL BRITTLE STALK. A count of the number of “snapped” plants per plot following machine snapping. A snapped plant has its stalk completely snapped at a node between the base of the plant and the node above the ear. Expressed as percent of plants that did not snap.
ADF=PERCENT ACID DETERGENT FIBER. The percent of dry matter that is acid detergent fiber in chopped whole plant forage.
ALLELE. Any of one or more alternative forms of a genetic sequence. Typically, in a diploid cell or organism, the two alleles of a given sequence typically occupy corresponding loci on a pair of homologous chromosomes.
ALTER. The utilization of up-regulation, down-regulation, or gene silencing.
ANTHESIS. The time of a flower's opening.
ANT ROT=ANTHRACNOSE STALK ROT ( Colletotrichum graminicola ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Anthracnose Stalk Rot. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
BACKCROSSING. Process in which a breeder crosses a hybrid progeny line back to one of the parental genotypes one or more times.
BARPLT=BARREN PLANTS. The percent of plants per plot that were not barren (lack ears).
BREEDING. The genetic manipulation of living organisms.
BREEDING CROSS. A cross to introduce new genetic material into a plant for the development of a new variety. For example, one could cross plant A with plant B, wherein plant B would be genetically different from plant A. After the breeding cross, the resulting F1 plants could then be selfed or sibbed for one, two, three or more times (F1, F2, F3, etc.) until a new inbred variety is developed. For clarification, such new inbred varieties would be within a pedigree distance of one breeding cross of plants A and B. The process described above would be referred to as one breeding cycle.
BRTSTK=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.
CELL. Cell as used herein includes a plant cell, whether isolated, in tissue culture or incorporated in a plant or plant part.
CLDTST=COLD TEST. The percent of plants that germinate under cold test conditions.
CLN=CORN LETHAL NECROSIS. Synergistic interaction of maize chlorotic mottle virus (MCMV) in combination with either maize dwarf mosaic virus (MDMV-A or MDMV-B) or wheat streak mosaic virus (WSMV). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Corn Lethal Necrosis. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
COMRST=COMMON RUST ( Puccinia sorghi ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Common Rust. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
CP=PERCENT OF CRUDE PROTEIN. The percent of dry matter that is crude protein in chopped whole plant forage.
CROSS POLLINATION. A plant is cross pollinated if the pollen comes from a flower on a different plant from a different family or line. Cross pollination excludes sib and self pollination.
CROSS. As used herein, the term “cross” or “crossing” can refer to a simple X by Y cross, or the process of backcrossing, depending on the context.
D/D=DRYDOWN. This represents the relative rate at which a hybrid will reach acceptable harvest moisture compared to other hybrids on a 1 to 9 rating scale. A high score indicates a hybrid that dries relatively fast while a low score indicates a hybrid that dries slowly.
DIPERS= DIPLODIA EAR MOLD SCORES ( Diplodia maydis and Diplodia macrospora ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Diplodia Ear Mold. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
DIPLOID PLANT PART. Refers to a plant part or cell that has the same diploid genotype as 33D11.
DIPROT= DIPLODIA STALK ROT SCORE. Score of stalk rot severity due to Diplodia ( Diplodia maydis ). Expressed as a 1 to 9 score with 9 being highly resistant.
DM=PERCENT OF DRY MATTER. The percent of dry material in chopped whole plant silage.
DRPEAR=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.
D/T=DROUGHT TOLERANCE. This represents a 1 to 9 rating for drought tolerance, and is based on data obtained under stress conditions. A high score indicates good drought tolerance and a low score indicates poor drought tolerance.
EARHT=EAR HEIGHT. The ear height is a measure from the ground to the highest placed developed ear node attachment and is measured in centimeters.
EARMLD=GENERAL EAR MOLD. Visual rating (1 to 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 the specific mold organism, and may not be predictive for a specific ear mold.
EARSZ=EAR SIZE. A 1 to 9 visual rating of ear size. The higher the rating the larger the ear size.
EBTSTK=EARLY BRITTLE STALK. A count of the number of “snapped” plants per plot following severe winds when the corn plant is experiencing very rapid vegetative growth in the V5-V8 stage. Expressed as percent of plants that did not snap.
ECB1LF=EUROPEAN CORN BORER FIRST GENERATION LEAF FEEDING ( Ostrinia nubilalis ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to preflowering leaf feeding by first generation European Corn Borer. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
ECB2IT=EUROPEAN CORN BORER SECOND GENERATION INCHES OF TUNNELING ( Ostrinia nubilalis ). Average inches of tunneling per plant in the stalk.
ECB2SC=EUROPEAN CORN BORER SECOND GENERATION ( Ostrinia nubilalis ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating post flowering degree of stalk breakage and other evidence of feeding by second generation European Corn Borer. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
ECBDPE=EUROPEAN CORN BORER DROPPED EARS ( Ostrinia nubilalis ). Dropped ears due to European Corn Borer. Percentage of plants that did not drop ears under second generation European Corn Borer infestation.
EGRWTH=EARLY GROWTH. This is a measure of the relative height and size of a corn seedling at the 2-4 leaf stage of growth. This is a visual rating (1 to 9), with 1 being weak or slow growth, 5 being average growth and 9 being strong growth. Taller plants, wider leaves, more green mass and darker color constitute a higher score.
ELITE INBRED. An inbred that contributed desirable qualities when used to produce commercial hybrids. An elite inbred may also be used in further breeding for the purpose of developing further improved varieties.
ERTLDG=EARLY ROOT LODGING. The percentage of plants that do not root lodge prior to or around anthesis; plants that lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30 degree angle or greater would be counted as root lodged.
ERTLPN=EARLY ROOT LODGING. An estimate of the percentage of plants that do not root lodge prior to or around anthesis; plants that lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30 degree angle or greater would be considered as root lodged.
ERTLSC=EARLY ROOT LODGING SCORE. Score for severity of plants that lean from a vertical axis at an approximate 30 degree angle or greater which typically results from strong winds prior to or around flowering recorded within 2 weeks of a wind event. Expressed as a 1 to 9 score with 9 being no lodging.
ESTCNT=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.
EYESPT=EYE SPOT ( Kabatiella zeae or Aureobasidium zeae ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Eye Spot. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
FUSERS= FUSARIUM EAR ROT SCORE ( Fusarium moniliforme or Fusarium subglutinans ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Fusarium ear rot. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
GDU=Growing Degree Units. Using the Barger Heat Unit Theory, which assumes that maize growth occurs in the temperature range 50 degrees F.—86 degrees F. and that temperatures outside this range slow down growth; the maximum daily heat unit accumulation is 36 and the minimum daily heat unit accumulation is 0. The seasonal accumulation of GDU is a major factor in determining maturity zones.
GDUSHD=GDU TO SHED. The number of 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 of planting. Growing degree units are calculated by the Barger Method, where the heat units for a 24-hour period are:
GDU = ( Max . ⁢ temp . + Min . ⁢ temp . ) 2 - 50

The highest maximum temperature used is 86 degrees F. and the lowest minimum temperature used is 50 degrees F. For each inbred or hybrid it takes a certain number of GDUs to reach various stages of plant development.
GDUSLK=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 SHD definition.
GENE SILENCING. The interruption or suppression of the expression of a gene at the level of transcription or translation.
GENOTYPE. Refers to the genetic constitution of a cell or organism.
GIBERS= GIBBERELLA EAR ROT (PINK MOLD) ( Gibberella zeae ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Gibberella Ear Rot. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
GIBROT= GIBBERELLA STALK ROT SCORE. Score of stalk rot severity due to Gibberella ( Gibberella zeae ). Expressed as a 1 to 9 score with 9 being highly resistant.
GLFSPT=GRAY LEAF SPOT ( Cercospora zeae - maydis ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Gray Leaf Spot. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
GOSWLT=GOSS' WILT ( Corynebacterium nebraskense ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Goss' Wilt. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
GRNAPP=GRAIN APPEARANCE. This is a 1 to 9 rating for the general appearance of the shelled grain as it is harvested based on such factors as the color of harvested grain, any mold on the grain, and any cracked grain. High scores indicate good grain quality.
H/POP=YIELD AT HIGH DENSITY. Yield ability at relatively high plant densities on a 1 to 9 relative rating system with a higher number indicating the hybrid responds well to high plant densities for yield relative to other hybrids. A 1, 5, and 9 would represent very poor, average, and very good yield response, respectively, to increased plant density.
HAPLOID PLANT PART. Refers to a plant part or cell that has the same haploid genotype as 33D11.
HCBLT= HELMINTHOSPORIUM CARBONUM LEAF BLIGHT ( Helminthosporium carbonum ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Helminthosporium infection. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
HD SMT=HEAD SMUT ( Sphacelotheca reiliana ). This score indicates the percentage of plants not infected.
HSKCVR=HUSK COVER. A 1 to 9 score based on performance relative to key checks, with a score of 1 indicating very short husks, tip of ear and kernels showing; 5 is intermediate coverage of the ear under most conditions, sometimes with thin husk; and a 9 has husks extending and closed beyond the tip of the ear. Scoring can best be done near physiological maturity stage or any time during dry down until harvested.
INBRED. A line developed through inbreeding or doubled haploidy that preferably comprises homozygous alleles at about 95% or more of its loci.
INC D/A=GROSS INCOME (DOLLARS PER ACRE). Relative income per acre assuming drying costs of two cents per point above 15.5 percent harvest moisture and current market price per bushel.
INCOME/ACRE. Income advantage of hybrid to be patented over other hybrid on per acre basis.
INC ADV=GROSS INCOME ADVANTAGE. Gross income advantage of variety #1 over variety #2.
INTROGRESSION. The process of transferring genetic material from one genotype to another.
KSZDCD=KERNEL SIZE DISCARD. The percent of discard seed; calculated as the sum of discarded tip kernels and extra large kernels.
LINKAGE. Refers to a phenomenon wherein alleles on the same chromosome tend to segregate together more often than expected by chance if their transmission was independent.
LINKAGE DISEQUILIBRIUM. Refers to a phenomenon wherein alleles tend to remain together in linkage groups when segregating from parents to offspring, with a greater frequency than expected from their individual frequencies.
LOCUS. A defined segment of DNA.
UPOP=YIELD AT LOW DENSITY. Yield ability at relatively low plant densities on a 1 to 9 relative system with a higher number indicating the hybrid responds well to low plant densities for yield relative to other hybrids. A 1, 5, and 9 would represent very poor, average, and very good yield response, respectively, to low plant density.
LRTLDG=LATE ROOT LODGING. The percentage of plants that do not root lodge after anthesis through harvest; plants that lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30 degree angle or greater would be counted as root lodged.
LRTLPN=LATE ROOT LODGING. An estimate of the percentage of plants that do not root lodge after anthesis through harvest; plants that lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30 degree angle or greater would be considered as root lodged.
LRTLSC=LATE ROOT LODGING SCORE. Score for severity of plants that lean from a vertical axis at an approximate 30 degree angle or greater which typically results from strong winds after flowering. Recorded prior to harvest when a root-lodging event has occurred. This lodging results in plants that are leaned or “lodged” over at the base of the plant and do not straighten or “goose-neck” back to a vertical position. Expressed as a 1 to 9 score with 9 being no lodging.
MDMCPX=MAIZE DWARF MOSAIC COMPLEX (MDMV=Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus and MCDV=Maize Chlorotic Dwarf Virus). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Maize Dwarf Mosaic Complex. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
MST=HARVEST MOISTURE. The moisture is the actual percentage moisture of the grain at harvest.
MSTADV=MOISTURE ADVANTAGE. The moisture advantage of variety #1 over variety #2 as calculated by: MOISTURE of variety #2−MOISTURE of variety #1=MOISTURE ADVANTAGE of variety #1.
NLFBLT=NORTHERN LEAF BLIGHT ( Helminthosporium turcicum or Exserohilum turcicum ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Northern Leaf Blight. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
OILT=GRAIN OIL. Absolute value of oil content of the kernel as predicted by Near-Infrared Transmittance and expressed as a percent of dry matter.
PEDIGREE DISTANCE. Relationship among generations based on their ancestral links as evidenced in pedigrees. May be measured by the distance of the pedigree from a given starting point in the ancestry.
PERCENT IDENTITY. Percent identity as used herein refers to the comparison of the alleles of two plants or lines as scored by matching loci. Percent identity is determined by comparing a statistically significant number of the loci of two plants or lines and scoring a match when the same two alleles are present at the same loci for each plant. For example, a percent identity of 90% between hybrid 33D11 and another plant means that the two plants have the same two alleles at 90% of their loci.
PERCENT SIMILARITY. Percent similarity as used herein refers to the comparison of the alleles of two plants or lines as scored by matching alleles. Percent similarity is determined by comparing a statistically significant number of the loci of two plants or lines and scoring one allele match when the same allele is present at the same loci for each plant and two allele matches when the same two alleles are present at the same loci for each plant. A percent similarity of 90% between hybrid 33D11 and another plant means that the two plants have 90% matching alleles.
PLANT. As used herein, the term “plant” includes reference to an immature or mature whole plant, including a plant that has been detasseled or from which seed or grain has been removed. Seed or embryo that will produce the plant is also considered to be the plant.
PLANT PARTS. As used herein, the term “plant parts” includes leaves, stems, roots, seed, grain, embryo, pollen, ovules, flowers, ears, cobs, husks, stalks, root tips, anthers, pericarp, silk, tissue, cells and the like.
PLTHT=PLANT HEIGHT. This is a measure of the height of the plant from the ground to the tip of the tassel in centimeters.
POLSC=POLLEN SCORE. A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the amount of pollen shed. The higher the score the more pollen shed.
POLWT=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.
POP K/A=PLANT POPULATIONS. Measured as 1000s per acre.
POP ADV=PLANT POPULATION ADVANTAGE. The plant population advantage of variety #1 over variety #2 as calculated by PLANT POPULATION of variety #2−PLANT POPULATION of variety #1=PLANT POPULATION ADVANTAGE of variety #1.
PRM=PREDICTED RELATIVE MATURITY. This trait, predicted relative maturity, is based on the harvest moisture of the grain. The relative maturity rating is based on a known set of checks and utilizes standard linear regression analyses and is also referred to as the Comparative Relative Maturity Rating System that is similar to the Minnesota Relative Maturity Rating System.
PRMSHD=A relative measure of the growing degree units (GDU) required to reach 50% pollen shed. Relative values are predicted values from the linear regression of observed GDU's on relative maturity of commercial checks.
PROT=GRAIN PROTEIN. Absolute value of protein content of the kernel as predicted by Near-infrared Transmittance and expressed as a percent of dry matter.
RESISTANCE. Synonymous with tolerance. The ability of a plant to withstand exposure to an insect, disease, herbicide or other condition. A resistant plant variety will have a level of resistance higher than a comparable wild-type variety.
RTLDG=ROOT LODGING. Root lodging is the percentage of plants that do not root lodge; plants that lean from the vertical axis at an approximately 30 degree angle or greater would be counted as root lodged.
RTLADV=ROOT LODGING ADVANTAGE. The root lodging advantage of variety #1 over variety #2.
SCTGRN=SCATTER GRAIN. A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the amount of scatter grain (lack of pollination or kernel abortion) on the ear. The higher the score the less scatter grain.
SDGVGR=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 maize breeder may utilize his or her own set 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 across testing stations.
SIL DMP=SILAGE DRY MATTER. The percent of dry material in chopped whole plant silage.
SELF POLLINATION. A plant is self-pollinated if pollen from one flower is transferred to the same or another flower of the same plant.
SIB POLLINATION. A plant is sib-pollinated when individuals within the same family or line are used for pollination.
SLFBLT=SOUTHERN LEAF BLIGHT ( Helminthosporium maydis or Bipolaris maydis ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Southern Leaf Blight. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
SOURST=SOUTHERN RUST ( Puccinia polysora ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Southern Rust. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
STAGRN=STAY GREEN. Stay green is the measure of plant health near the time of black layer formation (physiological maturity). A high score indicates better late-season plant health.
STARCH=PERCENT OF STARCH. The percent of dry matter that is starch in chopped whole plant forage.
STDADV=STALK STANDING ADVANTAGE. The advantage of variety #1 over variety #2 for the trait STK CNT.
STKCNT=NUMBER OF PLANTS. This is the final stand or number of plants per plot.
STKLDG=STALK LODGING REGULAR. This is the percentage of plants that did not stalk lodge (stalk breakage) at regular harvest (when grain moisture is between about 20 and 30%) as measured by either natural lodging or pushing the stalks and determining the percentage of plants that break below the ear.
STKLDS=STALK LODGING SCORE. A plant is considered as stalk lodged if the stalk is broken or crimped between the ear and the ground. This can be caused by any or a combination of the following: strong winds late in the season, disease pressure within the stalks, ECB damage or genetically weak stalks. This trait should be taken just prior to or at harvest. Expressed on a 1 to 9 scale with 9 being no lodging.
STLLPN=LATE STALK LODGING. This is the percent of plants that did not stalk lodge (stalk breakage or crimping) at or around late season harvest (when grain moisture is below 20%) as measured by either natural lodging or pushing the stalks and determining the percentage of plants that break or crimp below the ear.
STLPCN=STALK LODGING REGULAR. This is an estimate of the percentage of plants that did not stalk lodge (stalk breakage) at regular harvest (when grain moisture is between about 20 and 30%) as measured by either natural lodging or pushing the stalks and determining the percentage of plants that break below the ear.
STRT=GRAIN STARCH. Absolute value of starch content of the kernel as predicted by Near-Infrared Transmittance and expressed as a percent of dry matter.
STWWLT=Stewart's Wilt ( Erwinia stewartii ). A 1 to 9 visual rating indicating the resistance to Stewart's Wilt. A higher score indicates a higher resistance.
TASBLS=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 the time of flowering. A 1 would indicate a very high level of blasting at time of flowering, while a 9 would have no tassel blasting.
TASSZ=TASSEL SIZE. A 1 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.
TDM/HA=TOTAL DRY MATTER PER HECTARE. Yield of total dry plant material in metric tons per hectare.
TEXEAR=EAR TEXTURE. A 1 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 are given as a percentage of tillers: number of tillers per plot divided by number of plants per plot.
TST WT=TEST WEIGHT (UNADJUSTED). The measure of the weight of the grain in pounds for a given volume (bushel).
TSWADV=TEST WEIGHT ADVANTAGE. The test weight advantage of variety #1 over variety #2.
WIN M %=PERCENT MOISTURE WINS.
WIN Y %=PERCENT YIELD WINS.
YIELD BU/A=YIELD (BUSHELS/ACRE). Yield of the grain at harvest in bushels per acre adjusted to 15% moisture.
YLDADV=YIELD ADVANTAGE. The yield advantage of variety #1 over variety #2 as calculated by: YIELD of variety #1−YIELD variety #2=YIELD ADVANTAGE of variety #1.
YLDSC=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.
Definitions for Area of Adaptability
When referring to area of adaptability, such term is used to describe the location with the environmental conditions that would be well suited for this maize line. Area of adaptability is based on a number of factors, for example: days to maturity, insect resistance, disease resistance, and drought resistance. Area of adaptability does not indicate that the maize line will grow in every location within the area of adaptability or that it will not grow outside the area.
Central Corn Belt: Iowa, Illinois, Indiana
Drylands: non-irrigated areas of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado and Oklahoma
Eastern U.S.: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia
North central U.S.: Minnesota and Wisconsin
Northeast: Michigan, New York, Vermont, and Ontario and Quebec Canada
Northwest U.S.: North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Utah, and Idaho
South central U.S.: Missouri, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas
Southeast U.S.: North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana
Southwest U.S.: Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona
Western U.S.: Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, and California
Maritime Europe: Northern France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands and Austria


DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
All tables discussed in the Detailed Description of the Invention and Further Embodiments section can found at the end of the section.
Maize hybrids need to be highly homogeneous, heterozygous and reproducible to be useful as commercial hybrids. There are many analytical methods available to determine the heterozygous nature and the identity of these lines.
The oldest and most traditional method of analysis is the observation of phenotypic traits. The data is usually collected in field experiments over the life of the maize plants to be examined. Phenotypic characteristics most often observed are for traits associated with plant morphology, ear and kernel morphology, insect and disease resistance, maturity, and yield.
In addition to phenotypic observations, the genotype of a plant can also be examined. A plant's genotype can be used to identify plants of the same variety or a related variety. For example, the genotype can be used to determine the pedigree of a plant. There are many laboratory-based techniques available for the analysis, comparison and characterization of plant genotype; among these are Isozyme Electrophoresis, Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLPs), Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs), Arbitrarily Primed Polymerase Chain Reaction (AP-PCR), DNA Amplification Fingerprinting (DAF), Sequence Characterized Amplified Regions (SCARs), Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms (AFLPs), Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) which are also referred to as Microsatellites, and Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs).
Isozyme Electrophoresis and RFLPs as discussed in Lee, M., “Inbred Lines of Maize and Their Molecular Markers,” The Maize Handbook , (Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc. 1994, at 423-432) incorporated herein by reference, have been widely used to determine genetic composition. Isozyme Electrophoresis has a relatively low number of available markers and a low number of allelic variants. RFLPs allow more discrimination because they have a higher degree of allelic variation in maize and a larger number of markers can be found. Both of these methods have been eclipsed by SSRs as discussed in Smith et al., “An evaluation of the utility of SSR loci as molecular markers in maize ( Zea mays L. ): comparisons with data from RFLPs and pedigree”, Theoretical and Applied Genetics (1997) vol. 95 at 163-173 and by Pejic et al., “Comparative analysis of genetic similarity among maize inbreds detected by RFLPs, RAPDs, SSRs, and AFLPs,” Theoretical and Applied Genetics (1998) at 1248-1255 incorporated herein by reference. SSR technology is more efficient and practical to use than RFLPs; more marker loci can be routinely used and more alleles per marker locus can be found using SSRs in comparison to RFLPs. Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms may also be used to identify the unique genetic composition of the invention and progeny lines retaining that unique genetic composition. Various molecular marker techniques may be used in combination to enhance overall resolution.
Maize DNA molecular marker linkage maps have been rapidly constructed and widely implemented in genetic studies. One such study is described in Boppenmaier, et al., “Comparisons among strains of inbreds for RFLPs”, Maize Genetics Cooperative Newsletter, 65:1991, pg. 90, is incorporated herein by reference.
Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 is characterized by high yield and good drought tolerance. Hybrid 33D11 further demonstrates good stay green, short plant stature with average ear placement. The hybrid also exhibits good tolerance to Gray Leaf Spot, good tolerance to Northern Leaf Blight and good Fusarium Ear Rot tolerance. The hybrid is particularly suited to the Central Corn Belt, Eastern, Western and Drylands regions of the United States.
Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 is a single cross, yellow endosperm, dent maize hybrid. Hybrid 33D11 has a relative maturity of approximately 112 based on the Comparative Relative Maturity Rating System for harvest moisture of grain.
The hybrid has shown uniformity and stability within the limits of environmental influence for all the traits as described in the Variety Description Information (Table 1, found at the end of the section). The inbred parents of this hybrid have been self-pollinated and ear-rowed a sufficient number of generations with careful attention paid to uniformity of plant type to ensure the homozygosity and phenotypic stability necessary for use in commercial hybrid seed production. The line has been increased both by hand and in isolated fields with continued observation for uniformity. No variant traits have been observed or are expected in 33D11.
Hybrid 33D11 can be reproduced by planting seeds of the inbred parent lines, growing the resulting maize plants under cross pollinating conditions, and harvesting the resulting seed using techniques familiar to the agricultural arts.
Comparisons for Pioneer Hybrid 33D11
A breeder uses various methods to help determine which plants should be selected from segregating populations and ultimately which inbred lines will be used to develop hybrids for commercialization. In addition to knowledge of the germplasm and plant genetics, a part of the selection process is dependent on experimental design coupled with the use of statistical analysis. Experimental design and statistical analysis are used to help determine which plants, which family of plants, and finally which inbred lines and hybrid combinations are significantly better or different for one or more traits of interest. Experimental design methods are used to assess error so that differences between two inbred lines or two hybrid lines can be more accurately evaluated. Statistical analysis includes the calculation of mean values, determination of the statistical significance of the sources of variation, and the calculation of the appropriate variance components. Either a five or a one percent significance level is customarily used to determine whether a difference that occurs for a given trait is real or due to the environment or experimental error. One of ordinary skill in the art of plant breeding would know how to evaluate the traits of two plant varieties to determine if there is no significant difference between the two traits expressed by those varieties. For example, see Fehr, Walt, Principles of Cultivar Development, pages 261-286 (1987). Mean trait values may be used to determine whether trait differences are significant. Trait values should preferably be measured on plants grown under the same environmental conditions, and environmental conditions should be appropriate for the traits or traits being evaluated. Sufficient selection pressure should be present for optimum measurement of traits of interest such as herbicide, insect or disease resistance. Similarly, an introgressed trait conversion of 33D11 for resistance, such as herbicide resistance, should not be compared to 33D11 in the presence of the herbicide when comparing non-resistance related traits such as plant height and yield.
In Table 2 (Table 2, found at the end of the section), data from traits and characteristics of hybrid 33D11 per se are given and compared to other maize hybrids. The following are the results of these comparisons. The results in Table 2 show hybrid 33D11 has significantly different traits compared to other maize hybrids.
Comparisons of characteristics for Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 were made with Hybrid 33B50, 34H31, 34N43 and 34M94.
Table 2A compares Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 and Hybrid 33B50, a hybrid with a similar area of adaptation. The results show Hybrid 33D11 has significantly different yield, number of growing degree units to pollen shed, stay green score, late season stalk lodging resistance and resistance to Gray Leaf Spot compared to Hybrid 33B50.
Table 2B compares Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 and Hybrid 34H31, a hybrid with a similar area of adaptation. The results show Hybrid 33D11 differs significantly over multiple traits including yield, number of growing degree units to pollen shed and to silk emergence and stay green score when compared to Hybrid 34H31.
Table 2C compares Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 and Hybrid 34N43, a closely related hybrid with a similar area of adaptation. The results show Hybrid 33D11 differs significantly from 34N43 in a number of traits including yield, number of growing degree units to pollen shed and to silk emergence, stay green score, late season stalk lodging, resistance to Gray Leaf Spot and stalk lodging resistance.
Table 2D compares Pioneer Brand Hybrid 33D11 and Hybrid 34M94, a hybrid with a similar area of adaptation. The results show Hybrid 33D11 differs significantly from 34M94 in a number of traits including yield, plant height, stay green score and resistance to Northern Leaf Blight.
Further Embodiments of the Invention
This invention also is directed to methods for producing a maize plant by crossing a first parent maize plant with a second parent maize plant wherein either the first or second parent maize plant is Pioneer Brand hybrid 33D11. In one embodiment the parent hybrid maize plant 33D11 will be crossed with another maize plant, sibbed, or selfed, to generate an inbred which may be used in the development of additional plants. In another embodiment, double haploid methods may be used to generate an inbred plant. Further, this invention is directed to methods for producing a hybrid 33D11-progeny maize plant by crossing hybrid maize plant 33D11 with itself or a second maize plant and growing the progeny seed, and repeating the crossing and growing steps with the hybrid maize 33D11-progeny plant from 1 to 2 times, 1 to 3 times, 1 to 4 times, or 1 to 5 times. Thus, any such methods using the hybrid maize plant 33D11 are part of this invention: selfing, sibbing, backcrosses, hybrid production, crosses to populations, and the like.
All plants produced by the use of the methods described herein and that retain the unique genetic or trait combination of hybrid maize plant 33D11 as a parent are within the scope of this invention, including plants derived from hybrid maize plant 33D11. Progeny of the breeding methods described herein may be characterized in any number of ways, such as by traits retained in the progeny, pedigree and/or molecular markers. Combinations of these methods of characterization may be used. This includes varieties essentially derived from variety 33D11. Breeder's of ordinary skill in the art have developed the concept of an “essentially derived variety”, which is defined in 7 U.S.C. § 2104(a)(3) of the Plant Variety Protection Act and is hereby incorporated by reference. Varieties and plants that are essentially derived from 33D11 are within the scope of the invention. This also includes progeny plant and parts thereof with at least one ancestor that is hybrid maize plant 33D11 and more specifically where the pedigree of this progeny includes 1, 2, 3, 4, and/or 5 or cross pollinations to a maize plant 33D11, or a plant that has 33D11 as a progenitor. Pedigree is a method used by breeders of ordinary skill in the art to describe the varieties. Varieties that are more closely related by pedigree are likely to share common genotypes and combinations of phenotypic characteristics. All breeders of ordinary skill in the art maintain pedigree records of their breeding programs. These pedigree records contain a detailed description of the breeding process, including a listing of all parental lines used in the breeding process and information on how such line was used. Thus, a breeder of ordinary skill in the art would know if 33D11 were used in the development of a progeny line, and would also know how many breeding crosses to a line other than 33D11 or line with 33D11 as a parent or other progenitor were made in the development of any progeny line. A progeny line so developed may then be used in crosses with other, different, maize inbreds to produce first generation (F 1 ) maize hybrid seeds and plants with superior characteristics.
Specific methods and products produced using hybrid maize plant in plant breeding are encompassed within the scope of the invention listed above. One such embodiment is the process of crossing hybrid maize plant 33D11 with itself to form a homozygous inbred parent line. Hybrid 33D11 would be sib or self pollinated to form a population of progeny plants. The population of progeny plants produced by this method is also an embodiment of the invention. This first population of progeny plants will have received all of its alleles from hybrid maize plant 33D11. The inbreeding process results in homozygous loci being generated and is repeated until the plant is homozygous at substantially every loci and becomes an inbred line. Once this is accomplished the inbred line may be used in crosses with other inbred lines, including but not limited to inbred parent lines disclosed herein to generate a first generation of F1 hybrid plants. One of ordinary skill in the art can utilize breeder notebooks, or molecular methods to identify a particular hybrid plant produced using an inbred line derived from maize hybrid plant 33D11, in addition to comparing traits. Any such individual inbred plant is also encompassed by this invention.
These embodiments also include use of these methods with transgenic or backcross conversions of maize hybrid plant 33D11. Another such embodiment is a method of developing a line genetically similar to hybrid maize plant 33D11 in breeding that involves the repeated backcrossing of an inbred parent of, or an inbred line derived from, hybrid maize plant 33D11 to another different maize plant any number of times. Using backcrossing methods, or even the tissue culture and transgenic methods described herein, the backcross conversion methods described herein, or other breeding methods known to one of ordinary skill in the art, one can develop individual plants, plant cells, and populations of plants that retain at least 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 61%, 62%, 63%, 64%, 65%, 66%, 67%, 68%, 69%, 70%, 71%, 72%, 73%, 74%, 75%, 76%, 77%, 78%, 79%, 80%, 81%, 82%, 83%, 84%, 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 99.5% genetic similarity or identity to maize hybrid plant 33D11, as measured by either percent identity or percent similarity. The percentage of the genetics retained in the progeny may be measured by either pedigree analysis or through the use of genetic techniques such as molecular markers or electrophoresis. In pedigree analysis, on average 50% of the starting germplasm would be expected to be passed to the progeny line after one cross to a different line, 25% after another cross to another line, and so on. Actual genetic contribution may be much higher than the genetic contribution expected by pedigree, especially if molecular markers are used in selection. Molecular markers could also be used to confirm and/or determine the pedigree of the progeny line. The inbred parent would then be crossed to a second inbred parent of or derived from hybrid maize plant 33D11 to create hybrid maize plant 33D11 with additional beneficial traits such as transgenes or backcross conversions.
One method for producing a line derived from hybrid maize plant is as follows. One of ordinary skill in the art would obtain hybrid maize plant 33D11 and cross it with another variety of maize, such as an elite inbred variety. The F1 seed derived from this cross would be grown to form a population. The nuclear genome of the F1 would be made-up of 50% of hybrid maize plant 33D11 and 50% of the other elite variety. The F1 seed would be grown and allowed to self, thereby forming F2 seed. On average the F2 seed nuclear genome would have derived 50% of its alleles from the parent hybrid plant 33D11 and 50% from the other maize variety, but many individual plants from the population would have a greater percentage of their alleles derived from the parent maize hybrid plant (Wang J. and R. Bernardo, 2000, Crop Sci. 40:659-665 and Bernardo, R. and A. L. Kahler, 2001, Theor. Appl. Genet. 102:986-992). Molecular markers of 33D11, or its parents identified from routine screening of the deposited samples herein could be used to select and retain those lines with high similarity to 33D11. The F2 seed would be grown and selection of plants would be made based on visual observation, markers and/or measurement of traits. The traits used for selection may be any 33D11 trait described in this specification, including the hybrid maize plant 33D11 traits of high yield, drought tolerance, stay green, short plant stature with average ear placement, resistance to Gray Leaf Spot, resistance to Northern Leaf Blight, Fusarium Ear Rot resistance, and particularly suited to the Central Corn Belt, Eastern, Western and Drylands regions of the United States.
Such traits may also be the good general or specific combining ability of 33D11, including its ability to produce backcross conversions, or other hybrids. The 33D11 progeny plants that exhibit one or more of the desired 33D11 traits, such as those listed above, would be selected and each plant would be harvested separately. This F3 seed from each plant would be grown in individual rows and allowed to self. Then selected rows or plants from the rows would be harvested individually. The selections would again be based on visual observation, markers and/or measurements for desirable traits of the plants, such as one or more of the desirable 33D11 traits listed herein.
The process of growing and selection would be repeated any number of times until a 33D11 progeny plant is obtained. The 33D11 progeny inbred plant would contain desirable traits in hybrid combination derived from hybrid plant 33D11. The resulting progeny line would benefit from the efforts of the inventor(s), and would not have existed but for the inventor(s) work in creating 33D11. Another embodiment of the invention is a 33D11 progeny plant that has received the desirable 33D11 traits listed above through the use of 33D11, which traits were not exhibited by other plants used in the breeding process.
The previous example can be modified in numerous ways, for instance selection may or may not occur at every selfing generation, the hybrid may immediately be selfed without crossing to another plant, selection may occur before or after the actual self-pollination process occurs, or individual selections may be made by harvesting individual ears, plants, rows or plots at any point during the breeding process described. In addition, double haploid breeding methods may be used at any step in the process. The population of plants produced at each and any cycle of breeding is also an embodiment of the invention, and on average each such population would predictably consist of plants containing approximately 50% of its genes from inbred parents of maize hybrid 33D11 in the first breeding cycle, 25% of its genes from inbred parents of maize hybrid 33D11 in the second breeding cycle, 12.5% of its genes from inbred parents of maize hybrid 33D11 in the third breeding cycle, 6.25% in the fourth breeding cycle, 3.125% in the fifth breeding cycle, and so on. In each case the use of 33D11 provides a substantial benefit. The linkage groups of 33D11 would be retained in the progeny lines, and since current estimates of the maize genome size is about 50,000-80,000 genes (Xiaowu, Gai et al., Nucleic Acids Research, 2000, Vol. 28, No.1, 94-96), in addition to non-coding DNA that impacts gene expression, it provides a significant advantage to use 33D11 as starting material to produce a line that retains desired genetics or traits of 33D11.
Another embodiment of this invention is the method of obtaining a substantially homozygous 33D11 progeny plant by obtaining a seed from the cross of 33D11 and another maize plant and applying double haploid methods to the F1 seed or F1 plant or to any successive filial generation. Such methods substantially decrease the number of generations required to produce an inbred with similar genetics or characteristics to 33D11.
A further embodiment of the invention is a backcross conversion of 33D11 obtained by crossing inbred parent plants of hybrid maize plant 33D11, which comprise the backcross conversion. For a dominant or additive trait at least one of the inbred parents would include backcross conversion in its genome. For a recessive trait, each parent would include the backcross conversion in its genome. In each case the resultant hybrid maize plant 33D11 obtained from the cross of the parents includes a backcross conversion or transgene.
33D11 represents a new base genetic line into which a new locus or trait may be introgressed. Direct transformation and backcrossing represent two important methods that can be used to accomplish such an introgression. The term backcross conversion and single locus conversion are used interchangeably to designate the product of a backcrossing program.
A backcross conversion of 33D11 occurs when DNA sequences are introduced through backcrossing (Hallauer et al., 1988), with a parent of 33D11 utilized as the recurrent parent. Both naturally occurring and transgenic DNA sequences may be introduced through backcrossing techniques. The term backcross conversion is also referred to in the art as a single locus conversion. A backcross conversion may produce a plant with a trait or locus conversion in at least one or more backcrosses, including at least 2 crosses, at least 3 crosses, at least 4 crosses, at least 5 crosses and the like. Molecular marker assisted breeding or selection may be utilized to reduce the number of backcrosses necessary to achieve the backcross conversion. For example, see Openshaw, S. J. et al., Marker-assisted Selection in Backcross Breeding. In: Proceedings Symposium of the Analysis of Molecular Data, August 1994, Crop Science Society of America, Corvallis, Oreg., where it is demonstrated that a backcross conversion can be made in as few as two backcrosses.
The complexity of the backcross conversion method depends on the type of trait being transferred (single genes or closely linked genes as vs. unlinked genes), the level of expression of the trait, the type of inheritance (cytoplasmic or nuclear) and the types of parents included in the cross. It is understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that for single gene traits that are relatively easy to classify, the backcross method is effective and relatively easy to manage. (See Hallauer et al. in Corn and Corn Improvement, Sprague and Dudley, Third Ed. 1998). Desired traits that may be transferred through backcross conversion include, but are not limited to, waxy starch, sterility (nuclear and cytoplasmic), fertility restoration, grain color (white), nutritional enhancements, drought resistance, enhanced nitrogen utilization efficiency, altered nitrogen responsiveness, altered fatty acid profile, increased digestibility, low phytate, industrial enhancements, disease resistance (bacterial, fungal or viral), insect resistance, herbicide resistance and yield enhancements. In addition, an introgression site itself, such as an FRT site, Lox site or other site specific integration site, may be inserted by backcrossing and utilized for direct insertion of one or more genes of interest into a specific plant variety. The trait of interest is transferred from the donor parent to the recurrent parent, in this case, an inbred parent of the maize plant disclosed herein. In some embodiments of the invention, the number of loci that may be backcrossed into 33D11 is at least 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 and/or no more than 6, 5, 4, 3, or 2. A single loci may contain several transgenes, such as a transgene for disease resistance that, in the same expression vector, also contains a transgene for herbicide resistance. The gene for herbicide resistance may be used as a selectable marker and/or as a phenotypic trait. A single locus conversion of site specific integration system allows for the integration of multiple genes at the converted loci. Further, SSI and FRT technologies known to those of skill in the art in the art may result in multiple gene introgressions at a single loci.
The backcross conversion may result from either the transfer of a dominant allele or a recessive allele. Selection of progeny containing the trait of interest is accomplished by direct selection for a trait associated with a dominant allele. Transgenes transferred via backcrossing typically function as a dominant single gene trait and are relatively easy to classify. Selection of progeny for a trait that is transferred via a recessive allele, such as the waxy starch characteristic, requires growing and selfing the first backcross generation to determine which plants carry the recessive alleles. Recessive traits may require additional progeny testing in successive backcross generations to determine the presence of the locus of interest. The last backcross generation is usually selfed to give pure breeding progeny for the gene(s) being transferred, although a backcross conversion with a stably introgressed trait may also be maintained by further backcrossing to the recurrent parent with selection for the converted trait.
Along with selection for the trait of interest, progeny are selected for the phenotype of the recurrent parent. While occasionally additional polynucleotide sequences or genes may be transferred along with the backcross conversion, the backcross conversion line “fits into the same hybrid combination as the recurrent parent inbred line and contributes the effect of the additional gene added through the backcross.” See Poehlman et al. (1995, page 334). A progeny comprising at least 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99%, 99.5% and 99.9% genetic identity to hybrid 33D11 and comprising the backcross conversion trait or traits of interest, is considered to be a backcross conversion of hybrid 33D11. It has been proposed that in general there should be at least four backcrosses when it is important that the recovered lines be essentially identical to the recurrent parent except for the characteristic being transferred (Fehr 1987, Principles of Cultivar Development). However, as noted above, the number of backcrosses necessary can be reduced with the use of molecular markers. Other factors, such as a genetically similar donor parent, may also reduce the number of backcrosses necessary.
Hybrid seed production requires elimination or inactivation of pollen produced by the female inbred parent. Incomplete removal or inactivation of the pollen provides the potential for self-pollination. A reliable method of controlling male fertility in plants offers the opportunity for improved seed production. There are several ways in which a maize plant can be manipulated so that it is male sterile. These include use of manual or mechanical emasculation (or detasseling), use of one or more genetic factors that confer male sterility, including cytoplasmic genetic and/or nuclear genetic male sterility, use of gametocides and the like. All of such embodiments are within the scope of the present claims. The term manipulated to be male sterile refers to the use of any available techniques to produce a male sterile version of maize line 33D11. The male sterility may be either partial or complete male sterility.
Hybrid maize seed is often produced by a male sterility system incorporating manual or mechanical detasseling. Alternate strips of two maize inbreds are planted in a field, and the pollen-bearing tassels are removed from one of the inbreds (female). Provided that there is sufficient isolation from sources of foreign maize pollen, the ears of the detasseled inbred will be fertilized only from the other inbred (male), and the resulting seed is therefore hybrid and will form hybrid plants.
Such embodiments are also within the scope of the present claims. This invention includes hybrid maize seed of 33D11 and the hybrid maize plant produced therefrom. The foregoing was set forth by way of example and is not intended to limit the scope of the invention.
This invention is also directed to the use of hybrid maize plant 33D11 in tissue culture. As used herein, the term “tissue culture” includes plant protoplasts, plant cell tissue culture, cultured microspores, plant calli, plant clumps, and the like. As used herein, phrases such as “growing the seed” or “grown from the seed” include embryo rescue, isolation of cells from seed for use in tissue culture, as well as traditional growing methods.
Duncan, Williams, Zehr, and Widholm, Planta , (1985) 165:322-332 reflects that 97% of the plants cultured which produced callus were capable of plant regeneration. Subsequent experiments with both inbreds and hybrids produced 91% regenerable callus which produced plants. In a further study in 1988, Songstad, Duncan & Widholm in Plant Cell Reports (1988), 7:262-265 reports several media additions which enhance regenerability of callus of two inbred lines. Other published reports also indicated that “nontraditional” tissues are capable of producing somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration. K. P. Rao, et al., Maize Genetics Cooperation Newsletter, 60:64-65 (1986), refers to somatic embryogenesis from glume callus cultures and B. V. Conger, et al., Plant Cell Reports, 6:345-347 (1987) indicates somatic embryogenesis from the tissue cultures of maize leaf segments. Thus, it is clear from the literature that the state of the art is such that these methods of obtaining plants are, and were, “conventional” in the sense that they are routinely used and have a very high rate of success.
Tissue culture of maize, including tassel/anther culture, is described in U.S. Application 2002/0062506A1 and European Patent Application, Publication EPO1 60,390, each of which are incorporated herein by reference for this purpose. Maize tissue culture procedures are also described in Green and Rhodes, “Plant Regeneration in Tissue Culture of Maize,” Maize for Biological Research (Plant Molecular Biology Association, Charlottesville, Va. 1982, at 367-372) and in Duncan, et al., “The Production of Callus Capable of Plant Regeneration from Immature Embryos of Numerous Zea Mays Genotypes,” 165 Planta 322-332 (1985). Thus, another aspect of this invention is to provide cells which upon growth and differentiation produce maize plants having the genotype and/or physiological and morphological characteristics of hybrid maize plant 33D11.
The utility of hybrid maize plant 33D11 also extends to crosses with other species. Commonly, suitable species will be of the family Graminaceae, and especially of the genera Zea, Tripsacum, Coix, Schlerachne, Polytoca, Chionachne, and Trilobachne, of the tribe Maydeae. Potentially suitable for crosses with 33D11 may be the various varieties of grain sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench.
Transformation of Maize
The advent of new molecular biological techniques has allowed the isolation and characterization of genetic elements with specific functions, such as encoding specific protein products. Scientists in the field of plant biology developed a strong interest in engineering the genome of plants to contain and express foreign genetic elements, or additional, or modified versions of native or endogenous genetic elements in order to alter the traits of a plant in a specific manner. Any DNA sequences, whether from a different species or from the same species, which are inserted into the genome using transformation are referred to herein collectively as “transgenes”. In some embodiments of the invention, a transformed variant of 33D11 may contain at least one transgene but could contain at least 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and/or no more than 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, or 2. Over the last fifteen to twenty years several methods for producing transgenic plants have been developed, and the present invention also relates to transformed versions of the claimed hybrid 33D11 as well as combinations thereof.
Numerous methods for plant transformation have been developed, including biological and physical plant transformation protocols. See, for example, Miki et al., “Procedures for Introducing Foreign DNA into Plants” in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology , Glick, B. R. and Thompson, J. E. Eds. (CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, 1993) pages 67-88 and Armstrong, “The First Decade of Maize Transformation: A Review and Future Perspective” (Maydica 44:101-109, 1999). In addition, expression vectors and in vitro culture methods for plant cell or tissue transformation and regeneration of plants are available. See, for example, Gruber et al., “Vectors for Plant Transformation” in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology , Glick, B. R. and Thompson, J. E. Eds. (CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, 1993) pages 89-119.
The most prevalent types of plant transformation involve the construction of an expression vector. Such a vector comprises a DNA sequence that contains a gene under the control of or operatively linked to a regulatory element, for example a promoter. The vector may contain one or more genes and one or more regulatory elements.
A genetic trait which has been engineered into the genome of a particular maize plant using transformation techniques, could be moved into the genome of another line using traditional breeding techniques that are well known in the plant breeding arts. These lines can then be crossed to generate a hybrid maize plant such as hybrid maize plant 33D11 which comprises a transgene. For example, a backcrossing approach is commonly used to move a transgene from a transformed maize plant to an elite inbred line, and the resulting progeny would then comprise the transgene(s). Also, if an inbred line was used for the transformation then the transgenic plants could be crossed to a different inbred in order to produce a transgenic hybrid maize plant. As used herein, “crossing” can refer to a simple X by Y cross, or the process of backcrossing, depending on the context.
Various genetic elements can be introduced into the plant genome using transformation. These elements include, but are not limited to genes; coding sequences; inducible, constitutive, and tissue specific promoters; enhancing sequences; and signal and targeting sequences. For example, see the traits, genes and transformation methods listed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,118,055 and 6,284,953, which are herein incorporated by reference. In addition, transformability of a line can be increased by introgressing the trait of high transformability from another line known to have high transformability, such as Hi-II. See U.S. Patent Application Publication US2004/0016030 (2004).
With transgenic plants according to the present invention, a foreign protein can be produced in commercial quantities. Thus, techniques for the selection and propagation of transformed plants, which are well understood in the art, yield a plurality of transgenic plants that are harvested in a conventional manner, and a foreign protein then can be extracted from a tissue of interest or from total biomass. Protein extraction from plant biomass can be accomplished by known methods which are discussed, for example, by Heney and Orr, Anal. Biochem. 114:92-6 (1981).
A genetic map can be generated, primarily via conventional Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLP), Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) analysis, Simple Sequence Repeats (SSR) and Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) that identifies the approximate chromosomal location of the integrated DNA molecule. For exemplary methodologies in this regard, see Glick and Thompson, Methods In Plant Molecular Biology And Biotechnology, 269-284 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1993).
Wang et al. discuss “Large Scale Identification, Mapping and Genotyping of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms in the Human Genome”, Science, 280:1077-1082, 1998, and similar capabilities are becoming increasingly available for the corn genome. Map information concerning chromosomal location is useful for proprietary protection of a subject transgenic plant. If unauthorized propagation is undertaken and crosses made with other germplasm, the map of the integration region can be compared to similar maps for suspect plants to determine if the latter have a common parentage with the subject plant. Map comparisons would involve hybridizations, RFLP, PCR, SSR and sequencing, all of which are conventional techniques. SNPs may also be used alone or in combination with other techniques.
Likewise, by means of the present invention, plants can be genetically engineered to express various phenotypes of agronomic interest. Through the transformation of maize the expression of genes can be altered to enhance disease resistance, insect resistance, herbicide resistance, agronomic traits, grain quality and other traits. Transformation can also be used to insert DNA sequences which control or help control male-sterility. DNA sequences native to maize as well as non-native DNA sequences can be transformed into maize and used to alter levels of native or non-native proteins. Various promoters, targeting sequences, enhancing sequences, and other DNA sequences can be inserted into the maize genome for the purpose of altering the expression of proteins. Reduction of the activity of specific genes (also known as gene silencing, or gene suppression) is desirable for several aspects of genetic engineering in plants.
Many techniques for gene silencing are well known to one of skill in the art, including but not limited to knock-outs (such as by insertion of a transposable element such as mu (Vicki Chandler, The Maize Handbook ch. 118 (Springer-Verlag 1994) or other genetic elements such as a FRT, Lox or other site specific integration site, antisense technology (see, e.g., Sheehy et al. (1988) PNAS USA 85:8805-8809; and U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,107,065; 5,453,566; and 5,759,829); co-suppression (e.g., Taylor (1997) Plant Cell 9:1245; Jorgensen (1990) Trends Biotech. 8(12):340-344; Flavell (1994) PNAS USA 91:3490-3496; Finnegan et al. (1994) Bio/Technology 12:883-888; and Neuhuber et al. (1994) Mol. Gen. Genet. 244:230-241); RNA interference (Napoli et al. (1990) Plant Cell 2:279-289; U.S. Pat. No. 5,034,323; Sharp (1999) Genes Dev. 13:139-141; Zamore et al. (2000) Cell 101:25-33; and Montgomery et al. (1998) PNAS USA 95:15502-15507), virus-induced gene silencing (Burton, et al. (2000) Plant Cell 12:691-705; and Baulcombe (1999) Curr. Op. Plant Bio. 2:109-113); target-RNA-specific ribozymes (Haseloff et al. (1988) Nature 334:585-591); hairpin structures (Smith et al. (2000) Nature 407:319-320; WO 99/53050; and WO 98/53083); MicroRNA (Aukerman & Sakai (2003) Plant Cell 15:2730-2741); ribozymes (Steinecke et al. (1992) EMBO J. 11:1525; and Perriman et al. (1993) Antisense Res. Dev. 3:253); oligonucleotide mediated targeted modification (e.g., WO 03/076574 and WO 99/25853); Zn-finger targeted molecules (e.g., WO 01/52620; WO 03/048345; and WO 00/42219); and other methods or combinations of the above methods known to those of skill in the art.
Exemplary nucleotide sequences that may be altered by genetic engineering include, but are not limited to, those categorized below.
1. Transgenes That Confer Resistance To Insects or Disease And That Encode:
(A) Plant disease resistance genes. Plant defenses are often activated by specific interaction between the product of a disease resistance gene (R) in the plant and the product of a corresponding avirulence (Avr) gene in the pathogen. A plant variety can be transformed with cloned resistance gene to engineer plants that are resistant to specific pathogen strains. See, for example Jones et al., Science 25 266:789 (1994) (cloning of the tomato Cf-9 gene for resistance to Cladosporium fulvum ); Martin et al., Science 262:1432 (1993) (tomato Pto gene for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato encodes a protein kinase); Mindrinos et al., Cell 78:1089 (1994) ( Arabidopsis RSP 2 gene for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae ); McDowell & Woffenden, (2003) Trends Biotechnol. 21(4):178-83 and Toyoda et al., (2002) Transgenic Res. 11(6):567-82. A plant resistant to a disease is one that is more resistant to a pathogen as compared to the wild type plant.
(B) A Bacillus thuringiensis protein, a derivative thereof or a synthetic polypeptide modeled thereon. See, for example, Geiser et al., Gene 48:109 (1986), who disclose the cloning and nucleotide sequence of a Bt delta-endotoxin gene. Moreover, DNA molecules encoding delta-endotoxin genes can be purchased from American Type Culture Collection (Rockville, Md.), for example, under ATCC Accession Nos. 40098, 67136, 31995 and 31998. Other examples of Bacillus thuringiensis transgenes being genetically engineered are given in the following patents and patent applications and hereby are incorporated by reference for this purpose: U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,188,960; 5,689,052; 5,880,275; WO 91/14778; WO 99/31248; WO 01/12731; WO 99/24581; WO 97/40162 and U.S. application Ser. Nos. 10/032,717; 10/414,637; and 10/606,320.
(C) An insect-specific hormone or pheromone such as an ecdysteroid and juvenile hormone, a variant thereof, a mimetic based thereon, or an antagonist or agonist thereof. See, for example, the disclosure by Hammock et al., Nature 344:458 (1990), of baculovirus expression of cloned juvenile hormone esterase, an inactivator of juvenile hormone.
(D) An insect-specific peptide which, upon expression, disrupts the physiology of the affected pest. For example, see the disclosures of Regan, J. Biol. Chem. 269:9 (1994) (expression cloning yields DNA coding for insect diuretic hormone receptor); Pratt et al., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 163:1243 (1989) (an allostatin is identified in Diploptera puntata ); Chattopadhyay et al. (2004) Critical Reviews in Microbiology 30 (1):33-54 2004; Zjawiony (2004) J. Nat. Prod. 67(2):300-310; Carlini & Grossi-de-Sa (2002) Toxicon, 40(11):1515-1539; Ussuf et al. (2001) Curr. Sci. 80(7):847-853; and Vasconcelos & Oliveira (2004) Toxicon 44(4):385-403. See also U.S. Pat. No. 5,266,317 to Tomalski et al., who disclose genes encoding insect-specific toxins.
(E) An enzyme responsible for a hyperaccumulation of a monterpene, a sesquiterpene, a steroid, hydroxamic acid, a phenylpropanoid derivative or another non-protein molecule with insecticidal activity.
(F) An enzyme involved in the modification, including the post-translational modification, of a biologically active molecule; for example, a glycolytic enzyme, a proteolytic enzyme, a lipolytic enzyme, a nuclease, a cyclase, a transaminase, an esterase, a hydrolase, a phosphatase, a kinase, a phosphorylase, a polymerase, an elastase, a chitinase and a glucanase, whether natural or synthetic. See PCT Application WO 93/02197 in the name of Scott et al., which discloses the nucleotide sequence of a callase gene. DNA molecules which contain chitinase-encoding sequences can be obtained, for example, from the ATCC under Accession Nos. 39637 and 67152. See also Kramer et al., Insect Biochem. Molec. Biol. 23:691 (1993), who teach the nucleotide sequence of a cDNA encoding tobacco hookworm chitinase, and Kawalleck et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 21:673 (1993), who provide the nucleotide sequence of the parsley ubi4-2 polyubiquitin gene, U.S. application Ser. Nos. 10/389,432, 10/692,367, and U.S. Pat. No. 6,563,020.
(G) A molecule that stimulates signal transduction. For example, see the disclosure by Botella et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 24:757 (1994), of nucleotide sequences for mung bean calmodulin cDNA clones, and Griess et al., Plant Physiol. 104:1467 (1994), who provide the nucleotide sequence of a maize calmodulin cDNA clone.
(H) A hydrophobic moment peptide. See PCT Application WO 95/16776 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,580,852 (disclosure of peptide derivatives of Tachyplesin which inhibit fungal plant pathogens) and PCT Application WO 95/18855 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,607,914 (teaches synthetic antimicrobial peptides that confer disease resistance).
(I) A membrane permease, a channel former or a channel blocker. For example, see the disclosure by Jaynes et al., Plant Sci. 89:43 (1993), of heterologous expression of a cecropin-beta lytic peptide analog to render transgenic tobacco plants resistant to Pseudomonas solanacearum.
(J) A viral-invasive protein or a complex toxin derived therefrom. For example, the accumulation of viral coat proteins in transformed plant cells imparts resistance to viral infection and/or disease development effected by the virus from which the coat protein gene is derived, as well as by related viruses. See Beachy et al., Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 28:451 (1990). Coat protein-mediated resistance has been conferred upon transformed plants against alfalfa mosaic virus, cucumber mosaic virus, tobacco streak virus, potato virus X, potato virus Y, tobacco etch virus, tobacco rattle virus and tobacco mosaic virus. Id.
(K) An insect-specific antibody or an immunotoxin derived therefrom. Thus, an antibody targeted to a critical metabolic function in the insect gut would inactivate an affected enzyme, killing the insect. Cf. Taylor et al., Abstract #497, Seventh Int'l Symposium On Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions (Edinburgh, Scotland, 1994) (enzymatic inactivation in transgenic tobacco via production of single-chain antibody fragments).
(L) A virus-specific antibody. See, for example, Tavladoraki et al., Nature 366:469 (1993), who show that transgenic plants expressing recombinant antibody genes are protected from virus attack.
(M) A developmental-arrestive protein produced in nature by a pathogen or a parasite. Thus, fungal endo alpha-1,4-D-polygalacturonases facilitate fungal colonization and plant nutrient release by solubilizing plant cell wall homo-alpha-1,4-D-galacturonase. See Lamb et al., Bio/Technology 10:1436 (1992). The cloning and characterization of a gene which encodes a bean endopolygalacturonase-inhibiting protein is described by Toubart et al., Plant J. 2:367 (1992).
(N) A developmental-arrestive protein produced in nature by a plant. For example, Logemann et al., Bio/Technology 10:305 (1992), have shown that transgenic plants expressing the barley ribosome-inactivating gene have an increased resistance to fungal disease.
(O) Genes involved in the Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR) Response and/or the pathogenesis related genes. Briggs, S., Current Biology, 5(2):128-131 (1995), Pieterse & Van Loon (2004) Curr. Opin. Plant Bio. 7(4):456-64 and Somssich (2003) Cell 113(7):815-6.
(P) Antifungal genes (Cornelissen and Melchers, PI. Physiol. 101:709-712, (1993) and Parijs et al., Planta 183:258-264, (1991) and Bushnell et al., Can. J. of Plant Path. 20(2):137-149 (1998). Also see U.S. application Ser. No. 09/950,933.
(Q) Detoxification genes, such as for fumonisin, beauvericin, moniliformin and zearalenone and their structurally related derivatives. For example, see U.S. Pat. No. 5,792,931.
(R) Cystatin and cysteine proteinase inhibitors. See U.S. application Ser. No. 10/947,979.
(S) Defensin genes. See WO 03/000863 and U.S. application Ser. No. 10/178,213.
(T) Genes conferring resistance to nematodes. See WO 03/033651 and Urwin et al., Planta 204:472-479 (1998), Williamson (1999) Curr Opin Plant Bio. 2(4):327-31.
2. Transgenes That Confer Resistance To A Herbicide, For Example:
(A) A herbicide that inhibits the growing point or meristem, such as an imidazolinone or a sulfonylurea. Exemplary genes in this category code for mutant ALS and AHAS enzyme as described, for example, by Lee et al., EMBO J. 7:1241 (1988), and Miki et al., Theor. Appl. Genet. 80:449 (1990), respectively. See also, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,605,011; 5,013,659; 5,141,870; 5,767,361; 5,731,180; 5,304,732; 4,761,373; 5,331,107; 5,928,937; and 5,378,824; and international publication WO 96/33270, which are incorporated herein by reference for this purpose.
(B) Glyphosate (resistance imparted by mutant 5-enolpyruvl-3-phosphikimate synthase (EPSP), and aroA genes, respectively) and other phosphono compounds such as glufosinate (phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (PAT) and Streptomyces hygroscopicus phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (bar) genes), and pyridinoxy or phenoxy proprionic acids and cycloshexones (ACCase inhibitor-encoding genes). See, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,940,835 to Shah et al., which discloses the nucleotide sequence of a form of EPSPS which can confer glyphosate resistance. U.S. Pat. No. 5,627,061 to Barry et al. also describes genes encoding EPSPS enzymes. See also U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,566,587; 6,338,961; 6,248,876 B1; 6,040,497; 5,804,425; 5,633,435; 5,145,783; 4,971,908; 5,312,910; 5,188,642; 4,940,835; 5,866,775; 6,225,114 B1; 6,130,366; 5,310,667; 4,535,060; 4,769,061; 5,633,448; 5,510,471; Re. 36,449; RE 37,287 E; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,288; and international publications EP1173580; WO 01/66704; EP1173581 and EP1173582, which are incorporated herein by reference for this purpose. Glyphosate resistance is also imparted to plants that express a gene that encodes a glyphosate oxido-reductase enzyme as described more fully in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,776,760 and 5,463,175, which are incorporated herein by reference for this purpose. In addition glyphosate resistance can be imparted to plants by the over expression of genes encoding glyphosate N-acetyltransferase. See, for example, U.S. Application Serial Nos. US01/46227; 10/427,692 and 10/427,692. A DNA molecule encoding a mutant aroA gene can be obtained under ATCC Accession No. 39256, and the nucleotide sequence of the mutant gene is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,769,061 to Comai. European Patent Application No. 0 333 033 to Kumada et al. and U.S. Pat. No. 4,975,374 to Goodman et al. disclose nucleotide sequences of glutamine synthetase genes which confer resistance to herbicides such as L-phosphinothricin. The nucleotide sequence of a phosphinothricin-acetyl-transferase gene is provided in European Patent No. 0 242 246 and 0 242 236 to Leemans et al. De Greef et al., Bio/Technology 7:61 (1989), describe the production of transgenic plants that express chimeric bar genes coding for phosphinothricin acetyl transferase activity. See also, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,969,213; 5,489,520; 5,550,318; 5,874,265; 5,919,675; 5,561,236; 5,648,477; 5,646,024; 6,177,616 B1; and 5,879,903, which are incorporated herein by reference for this purpose. Exemplary genes conferring resistance to phenoxy proprionic acids and cycloshexones, such as sethoxydim and haloxyfop, are the Acc1-S1, Acc1-S2 and Acc1-S3 genes described by Marshall et al., Theor. Appl. Genet. 83:435 (1992).
(C) A herbicide that inhibits photosynthesis, such as a triazine (psbA and gs+genes) and a benzonitrile (nitrilase gene). Przibilla et al., Plant Cell 3:169 (1991), describe the transformation of Chlamydomonas with plasmids encoding mutant psbA genes. Nucleotide sequences for nitrilase genes are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,810,648 to Stalker, and DNA molecules containing these genes are available under ATCC Accession Nos. 53435, 67441 and 67442. Cloning and expression of DNA coding for a glutathione S-transferase is described by Hayes et al., Biochem. J. 285:173 (1992).
(D) Acetohydroxy acid synthase, which has been found to make plants that express this enzyme resistant to multiple types of herbicides, has been introduced into a variety of plants (see, e.g., Hattori et al. (1995) Mol. Gen. Genet. 246:419). Other genes that confer tolerance to herbicides include: a gene encoding a chimeric protein of rat cytochrome P4507A1 and yeast NADPH-cytochrome P450 oxidoreductase (Shiota et al. (1994) Plant Physiol. 106(1):17-23), genes for glutathione reductase and superoxide dismutase (Aono et al. (1995) Plant Cell Physiol. 36:1687, and genes for various phosphotransferases (Datta et al. (1992) Plant Mol. Biol. 20:619).
(E) Protoporphyrinogen oxidase (protox) is necessary for the production of chlorophyll, which is necessary for all plant survival. The protox enzyme serves as the target for a variety of herbicidal compounds. These herbicides also inhibit growth of all the different species of plants present, causing their total destruction. The development of plants containing altered protox activity which are resistant to these herbicides are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,288,306 B1; 6,282,837 B1; and 5,767,373; and international publication WO 01/12825.
3. Transgenes That Confer Or Contribute To An Altered Grain Characteristic, Such As:
(A) Altered fatty acids, for example, by
(1) Down-regulation of stearoyl-ACP desaturase to increase stearic acid content of the plant. See Knultzon et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:2624 (1992) and WO099/64579 (Genes for Desaturases to Alter Lipid Profiles in Corn), (2) Elevating oleic acid via FAD-2 gene modification and/or decreasing linolenic acid via FAD-3 gene modification (see U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,063,947; 6,323,392; 6,372,965 and WO 93/11245), (3) Altering conjugated linolenic or linoleic acid content, such as in WO 01/12800, (4) Altering LEC1, AGP, Dek1, Superal1, mi1ps, various Ipa genes such as Ipa1, Ipa3, hpt or hggt. For example, see WO 02/42424, WO 98/22604, WO 03/011015, WO02/057439, WO03/011015, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,423,886, 6,197,561, 6,825,397, and U.S. Application Serial Nos. US2003/0079247, US2003/0204870, and Rivera-Madrid, R. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 92:5620-5624 (1995).

(B) Altered phosphorus content, for example, by the
(1) Introduction of a phytase-encoding gene would enhance breakdown of phytate, adding more free phosphate to the transformed plant. For example, see Van Hartingsveldt et al., Gene 127:87 (1993), for a disclosure of the nucleotide sequence of an Aspergillus niger phytase gene. (2) Up-regulation of a gene that reduces phytate content. In maize, this, for example, could be accomplished, by cloning and then re-introducing DNA associated with one or more of the alleles, such as the LPA alleles, identified in maize mutants characterized by low levels of phytic acid, such as in Raboy et al., Maydica 35: 383 (1990) and/or by altering inositol kinase activity as in WO 02/059324, US2003/000901 1, WO 03/027243, US2003/0079247, WO 99/05298, U.S. Pat. No. 6,197,561, U.S. Pat. No. 6,291,224, U.S. Pat. No. 6,391,348, WO2002/059324, US2003/0079247, WO98/45448, WO99/55882, WO01/04147.

(C) Altered carbohydrates effected, for example, by altering a gene for an enzyme that affects the branching pattern of starch, a gene altering thioredoxin (See U.S. Pat. No. 6,531,648). See Shiroza et al., J. Bacteriol. 170:810 (1988) (nucleotide sequence of Streptococcus mutans fructosyltransferase gene), Steinmetz et al., Mol. Gen. Genet.200: 220 (1985) (nucleotide sequence of Bacillus subtilis levansucrase gene), Pen et al., Bio/Technology 10:292 (1992) (production of transgenic plants that express Bacillus licheniformis alpha-amylase), Elliot et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 21:515 (1993) (nucleotide sequences of tomato invertase genes), Søgaard et al., J. Biol. Chem. 268:22480 (1993) (site-directed mutagenesis of barley alpha-amylase gene), and Fisher etaal., Plant Physiol. 102:1045 (1993) (maize endosperm starch branching enzyme II), WO 99/10498 (improved digestibility and/or starch extraction through modification of UDP-D-xylose 4-epimerase, Fragile 1 and 2, Ref1, HCHL, C4H), U.S. Pat. No. 6,232,529 (method of producing high oil seed by modification of starch levels (AGP)). The fatty acid modification genes mentioned above may also be used to affect starch content and/or composition through the interrelationship of the starch and oil pathways.
(D) Altered antioxidant content or composition, such as alteration of tocopherol or tocotrienols. For example, see U.S. Pat. No. 6,787,683, US2004/0034886 and WO 00/68393 involving the manipulation of antioxidant levels through alteration of a phytl prenyl transferase (ppt), WO 03/082899 through alteration of a homogentisate geranyl geranyl transferase (hggt).
(E) Altered essential seed amino acids. For example, see U.S. Pat. No. 6,127,600 (method of increasing accumulation of essential amino acids in seeds), U.S. Pat. No. 6,080,913 (binary methods of increasing accumulation of essential amino acids in seeds), U.S. Pat. No. 5,990,389 (high lysine), WO99/40209 (alteration of amino acid compositions in seeds), WO99/29882 (methods for altering amino acid content of proteins), U.S. Pat. No. 5,850,016 (alteration of amino acid compositions in seeds), WO98/20133 (proteins with enhanced levels of essential amino acids), U.S. Pat. No. 5,885,802 (high methionine), U.S. Pat. No. 5,885,801 (high threonine), U.S. Pat. No. 6,664,445 (plant amino acid biosynthetic enzymes), U.S. Pat. No. 6,459,019 (increased lysine and threonine), U.S. Pat. No. 6,441,274 (plant tryptophan synthase beta subunit), U.S. Pat. No. 6,346,403 (methionine metabolic enzymes), U.S. Pat. No. 5,939,599 (high sulfur), U.S. Pat. No. 5,912,414 (increased methionine), WO98/56935 (plant amino acid biosynthetic enzymes), WO98/45458 (engineered seed protein having higher percentage of essential amino acids), WO98/42831 (increased lysine), U.S. Pat. No. 5,633,436 (increasing sulfur amino acid content), U.S. Pat. No. 5,559,223 (synthetic storage proteins with defined structure containing programmable levels of essential amino acids for improvement of the nutritional value of plants), WO96/01905 (increased threonine), WO95/15392 (increased lysine), US2003/0163838, US2003/0150014, US2004/0068767, U.S. Pat. No. 6,803,498, WO01/79516, and WO00/09706 (Ces A: cellulose synthase), U.S. Pat. No. 6,194,638 (hemicellulose), U.S. Pat. No. 6,399,859 and US2004/0025203 (UDPGdH), U.S. Pat. No. 6,194,638 (RGP).
4. Genes that Control Male-sterility:
There are several methods of conferring genetic male sterility available, such as multiple mutant genes at separate locations within the genome that confer male sterility, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,654,465 and 4,727,219 to Brar et al. and chromosomal translocations as described by Patterson in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,861,709 and 3,710,511. In addition to these methods, Albertsen et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,432,068, describe a system of nuclear male sterility which includes: identifying a gene which is critical to male fertility; silencing this native gene which is critical to male fertility; removing the native promoter from the essential male fertility gene and replacing it with an inducible promoter; inserting this genetically engineered gene back into the plant; and thus creating a plant that is male sterile because the inducible promoter is not “on” resulting in the male fertility gene not being transcribed. Fertility is restored by inducing, or turning “on”, the promoter, which in turn allows the gene that confers male fertility to be transcribed.
(A) Introduction of a deacetylase gene under the control of a tapetum-specific promoter and with the application of the chemical N-Ac-PPT (WO 01/29237). (B) Introduction of various stamen-specific promoters (WO 92/13956, WO 92/13957). (C) Introduction of the barnase and the barstar gene (Paul et al. Plant Mol. Biol. 19:611-622,1992).

For additional examples of nuclear male and female sterility systems and genes, see also, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,859,341; 6,297,426; 5,478,369; 5,824,524; 5,850,014; and 6,265,640; all of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
5. Genes that create a site for site specific DNA integration. This includes the introduction of FRT sites that may be used in the FLP/FRT system and/or Lox sites that may be used in the Cre/Loxp system. For example, see Lyznik, et al., Site-Specific Recombination for Genetic Engineering in Plants, Plant Cell Rep (2003) 21:925-932 and WO 99/25821 which are hereby incorporated by reference. Other systems that may be used include the Gin recombinase of phage Mu (Maeser et al., 1991; Vicki Chandler, The Maize Handbook ch. 118 (Springer-Verlag 1994), the Pin recombinase of E. coli (Enomoto et al., 1983), and the R/RS system of the pSR1 plasmid (Araki et al., 1992).
6. Genes that affect abiotic stress resistance (including but not limited to flowering, ear and seed development, enhancement of nitrogen utilization efficiency, altered nitrogen responsiveness, drought resistance or tolerance, cold resistance or tolerance, and salt resistance or tolerance) and increased yield under stress. For example, see: WO 00/73475 where water use efficiency is altered through alteration of malate; U.S. Pat. No. 5,892,009, U.S. Pat. No. 5,965,705, U.S. Pat. No. 5,929,305, U.S. Pat. No. 5,891,859, U.S. Pat. No. 6,417,428, U.S. Pat. No. 6,664,446, U.S. Pat. No. 6,706,866, U.S. Pat. No. 6,717,034, U.S. Pat. No. 6,801,104, WO2000060089, WO2001026459, WO2001035725, WO2001034726, WO2001035727, WO2001036444, WO2001036597, WO2001036598, WO2002015675, WO2002017430, WO2002077185, WO2002079403, WO2003013227, WO2003013228, WO2003014327, WO2004031349, WO2004076638, WO9809521, and WO9938977 describing genes, including CBF genes and transcription factors effective in mitigating the negative effects of freezing, high salinity, and drought on plants, as well as conferring other positive effects on plant phenotype; US2004/0148654 and WO01/36596 where abscisic acid is altered in plants resulting in improved plant phenotype such as increased yield and/or increased tolerance to abiotic stress; WO2000/006341, WO04/090143, U.S. application Ser. Nos. 10/817483 and 09/545,334 where cytokinin expression is modified resulting in plants with increased stress tolerance, such as drought tolerance, and/or increased yield. Also see WO0202776, WO2003052063, JP2002281975, U.S. Pat. No. 6,084,153, WO0164898, U.S. Pat. No. 6,177,275, and U.S. Pat. No. 6,107,547 (enhancement of nitrogen utilization and altered nitrogen responsiveness). For ethylene alteration, see US20040128719, US20030166197 and WO200032761. For plant transcription factors or transcriptional regulators of abiotic stress, see e.g. US20040098764 or US20040078852.
Other genes and transcription factors that affect plant growth and agronomic traits such as yield, flowering, plant growth and/or plant structure, can be introduced or introgressed into plants, see e.g. WO97/49811 (LHY), WO98/56918 (ESD4), WO97/10339 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,573,430 (TFL), U.S. Pat. No. 6,713,663 (FT), WO96/14414 (CON), WO96/38560, WO01/21822 (VRN1), WO00/44918 (VRN2), WO99/49064 (GI), WO00/46358 (FRI), WO97/29123, U.S. Pat. No. 6,794,560, U.S. Pat. No. 6,307,126 (GAI), WO99/09174 (D8 and Rht), and WO2004076638 and WO2004031349 (transcription factors).
Genetic Marker Profile Through SSR
The present invention comprises a hybrid corn plant which is characterized by the molecular and physiological data presented herein and in the representative sample of said hybrid and of the inbred parents of said hybrid deposited with the ATCC.
To select and develop a superior hybrid, it is necessary to identify and select genetically unique individuals that occur in a segregating population. The segregating population is the result of a combination of crossover events plus the independent assortment of specific combinations of alleles at many gene loci that results in specific and unique genotypes. Once such a line is developed its value to society is substantial since it is important to advance the germplasm base as a whole in order to maintain or improve traits such as yield, disease resistance, pest resistance and plant performance in extreme weather conditions. Backcross trait conversions are routinely used to add or modify one or a few traits of such a line and this further enhances its value and usefulness to society. The genetic variation among individual progeny of a breeding cross allows for the identification of rare and valuable new genotypes. Once identified, it is possible to utilize routine and predictable breeding methods to develop progeny that retain the rare and valuable new genotypes developed by the initial breeder.
Phenotypic traits exhibited by 33D11 can be used to characterize the genetic contribution of 33D11 to progeny lines developed through the use of 33D11. Quantitative traits including, but not limited to, yield, maturity, stay green, root lodging, stalk lodging, and early growth are typically governed by multiple genes at multiple loci. A breeder will commonly work to combine a specific trait of an undeveloped variety of the species, such as a high level of resistance to a particular disease, with one or more of the elite agronomic characteristics (yield, maturity, plant size, lodging resistance, etc.) needed for use as a commercial variety. This combination, once developed, provides a valuable source of new germplasm for further breeding. For example, it may take 10-15 years and significant effort to produce such a combination, yet progeny may be developed that retain this combination in as little as 2-5 years and with much less effort. 33D11 progeny plants that retain the same degree of phenotypic expression of these quantitative traits as 33D11 have received significant genotypic and phenotypic contribution from 33D11. This characterization is enhanced when such quantitative trait is not exhibited in non-33D11 breeding material used to develop the 33D11 progeny.
As discussed, supra, in addition to phenotypic observations, a plant can also be described by its genotype. The genotype of a plant can be described through a genetic marker profile which can identify plants of the same variety, a related variety or be used to determine or validate a pedigree. Genetic marker profiles can be obtained by techniques such as Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLPs), Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs), Arbitrarily Primed Polymerase Chain Reaction (AP-PCR), DNA Amplification Fingerprinting (DAF), Sequence Characterized Amplified Regions (SCARs), Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms (AFLPs), Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) which are also referred to as Microsatellites, and Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs). For example, see Berry, Don, et al., “Assessing Probability of Ancestry Using Simple Sequence Repeat Profiles: Applications to Maize Hybrids and Inbreds”, Genetics, 2002, 161: 813-824, and Berry, Don et al., “Assessing Probability of Ancestry Using Simple Sequence Repeat Profiles: Applications to Maize Inbred Lines and Soybean Varieties”, Genetics, 2003,165:331-342, which are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.
Particular markers used for these purposes are not limited to the set of markers disclosed herein, but may include any type of marker and marker profile which provides a means of distinguishing varieties. In addition to being used for identification of inbred parents, hybrid variety 33D11, a hybrid produced through the use of 33D11 or its parents, and the identification or verification of pedigree for progeny plants produced through the use of 33D11, the genetic marker profile is also useful in breeding and developing an introgressed trait conversion of 33D11.
Means of performing genetic marker profiles using SSR polymorphisms are well known in the art. SSRs are genetic markers based on polymorphisms in repeated nucleotide sequences, such as microsatellites. A marker system based on SSRs can be highly informative in linkage analysis relative to other marker systems in that multiple alleles may be present. Another advantage of this type of marker is that, through use of flanking primers, detection of SSRs can be achieved, for example, by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), thereby eliminating the need for labor-intensive Southern hybridization. The PCR™ detection is done by use of two oligonucleotide primers flanking the polymorphic segment of repetitive DNA. Repeated cycles of heat denaturation of the DNA followed by annealing of the primers to their complementary sequences at low temperatures, and extension of the annealed primers with DNA polymerase, comprise the major part of the methodology.
Following amplification, markers can be scored by gel electrophoresis of the amplification products. Scoring of marker genotype is based on the size of the amplified fragment, which may be measured by the base pair weight or molecular weight of the fragment. While variation in the primer used or in laboratory procedures can affect the reported molecular weight, relative values should remain constant regardless of the specific primer or laboratory used. When comparing lines it is preferable if all SSR profiles are performed in the same lab. An SSR service is available to the public on a contractual basis by DNA Landmarks in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec, Canada.
Primers used for the SSRs suggested herein are publicly available and may be found in the Maize GDB on the World Wide Web at maizegdb.org (sponsored by the USDA Agricultural Research Service), in Sharopova et al. (Plant Mol. Biol. 48(5-6):463-481), Lee et al. (Plant Mol. Biol. 48(5-6):453-461). Primers may be constructed from publicly available sequence information. Some marker information may be available from DNA Landmarks.
A genetic marker profile of a hybrid should be the sum of its inbred parents, e.g., if one inbred parent is homozygous for allele x at a particular locus, and the other inbred parent is homozygous for allele y at that locus, the F1 hybrid will be x.y (heterozygous) at that locus. The profile can therefore be used to identify the inbred parents of hybrid 33D11. The determination of the male set of alleles and the female set of alleles may be made by profiling the hybrid and the pericarp of the hybrid seed, which is composed of maternal parent cells. The paternal parent profile is obtained by subtracting the pericarp profile from the hybrid profile.
In addition, plants and plant parts substantially benefiting from the use of 33D11 in their development, such as 33D11 comprising an introgressed trait through backcross conversion or transformation, may be identified by having an SSR molecular marker profile with a high percent identity to 33D11, such as at least 80%, 81%, 82%, 83%, 84%, 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 99.5% identity to 33D11.
The SSR profile of 33D11 also can be used to identify essentially derived varieties and other progeny lines developed from the use of 33D11, as well as cells and other plant parts thereof. Progeny plants and plant parts produced using 33D11 may be identified by having a molecular marker profile of at least 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 61%, 62%, 63%, 64%, 65%, 66%, 67%, 68%, 69%, 70%, 71%, 72%, 73%, 74%, 75%, 76%, 77%, 78%, 79%, 80%, 81%, 82%, 83%, 84%, 85%, 86%, 87%, 88%, 89%, 90%, 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%, 95%, 96%, 97%, 98%, 99% or 99.5% genetic contribution from hybrid maize plant 33D11, as measured by either percent identity or percent similarity.
Recurrent Selection and Mass Selection
Recurrent selection is a method used in a plant breeding program to improve a population of plants. 33D11 is suitable for use in a recurrent selection program. The method entails individual plants cross pollinating with each other to form progeny. The progeny are grown and the superior progeny selected by any number of selection methods, which include individual plant, half-sib progeny, full-sib progeny, selfed progeny and topcrossing. The selected progeny are cross pollinated with each other to form progeny for another population. This population is planted and again superior plants are selected to cross pollinate with each other. Recurrent selection is a cyclical process and therefore can be repeated as many times as desired. The objective of recurrent selection is to improve the traits of a population. The improved population can then be used as a source of breeding material to obtain inbred lines to be used in hybrids or used as parents for a synthetic cultivar. A synthetic cultivar is the resultant progeny formed by the intercrossing of several selected inbreds.
Mass selection is a useful technique when used in conjunction with molecular marker enhanced selection. In mass selection seeds from individuals are selected based on phenotype and/or genotype. These selected seeds are then bulked and used to grow the next generation. Bulk selection requires growing a population of plants in a bulk plot, allowing the plants to self-pollinate, harvesting the seed in bulk and then using a sample of the seed harvested in bulk to plant the next generation. Instead of self pollination, directed pollination could be used as part of the breeding program.
Mutation Breeding
Mutation breeding is one of many methods that could be used to introduce new traits into 33D11. Mutations that occur spontaneously or are artificially induced can be useful sources of variability for a plant breeder. The goal of artificial mutagenesis is to increase the rate of mutation for a desired characteristic. Mutation rates can be increased by many different means including temperature, long-term seed storage, tissue culture conditions, radiation; such as X-rays, Gamma rays (e.g. cobalt 60 or cesium 137), neutrons, (product of nuclear fission by uranium 235 in an atomic reactor), Beta radiation (emitted from radioisotopes such as phosphorus 32 or carbon 14), or ultraviolet radiation (preferably from 2500 to 2900 nm), or chemical mutagens (such as base analogues (5-bromo-uracil), related compounds (8-ethoxy caffeine), antibiotics (streptonigrin), alkylating agents (sulfur mustards, nitrogen mustards, epoxides, ethylenamines, sulfates, sulfonates, sulfones, lactones), azide, hydroxylamine, nitrous acid, or acridines. Once a desired trait is observed through mutagenesis the trait may then be incorporated into existing germplasm by traditional breeding techniques, such as backcrossing. Details of mutation breeding can be found in “Principles of Cultivar Development” Fehr, 1993 Macmillan Publishing Company, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. In addition, mutations created in other lines may be used to produce a backcross conversion of 33D11 that comprises such mutation.
Industrial Applicability
Maize is used as human food, livestock feed, and as raw material in industry. The food uses of maize, in addition to human consumption of maize kernels, include both products of dry- and wet-milling industries. The principal products of maize dry milling are grits, meal and flour. The maize wet-milling industry can provide maize starch, maize syrups, and dextrose for food use. Maize oil is recovered from maize germ, which is a by-product of both dry- and wet-milling industries.
Maize, including both grain and non-grain portions of the plant, is also used extensively as livestock feed, primarily for beef cattle, dairy cattle, hogs, and poultry.
Industrial uses of maize include production of ethanol, maize starch in the wet-milling industry and maize flour in the dry-milling industry. The industrial applications of maize starch and flour are based on functional properties, such as viscosity, film formation, adhesive properties, and ability to suspend particles. The maize starch and flour have application in the paper and textile industries. Other industrial uses include applications in adhesives, building materials, foundry binders, laundry starches, explosives, oil-well muds, and other mining applications.
Plant parts other than the grain of maize are also used in industry: for example, stalks and husks are made into paper and wallboard and cobs are used for fuel and to make charcoal.
The seed of the hybrid maize plant, the plant produced from the seed, a plant produced from crossing of maize hybrid plant 33D11 and various parts of the hybrid maize plant and transgenic versions of the foregoing, can be utilized for human food, livestock feed, and as a raw material in industry.
References
Aukerman, M. J. et al. (2003) “Regulation of Flowering Time and Floral Organ Identity by a MicroRNA and Its APETALA2-like Target Genes” The Plant Cell 15:2730-2741
Berry et al., “Assessing Probability of Ancestry Using Simple Sequence Repeat Profiles: Applications to Maize Hybrids and Inbreds”, Genetics 161:813-824 (2002)
Berry et al., “Assessing Probability of Ancestry Using Simple Sequence Repeat Profiles: Applications to Maize Inbred Lines and Soybean Varieties” Genetics 165:331-342 (2003)
Boppenmaier, et al., “Comparisons Among Strains of lnbreds for RFLPs”, Maize Genetics Cooperative Newsletter, 65:1991, p. 90
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 Frequency of Spontaneous Mutation Associated with in Vitro Culture and Plant Regeneration in Maize”, Maydica, XXVI: 39-56
Fehr, Walt, Principles of Cultivar Development, pages 261-286 (1987)
Green, et al. (1975) “Plant Regeneration From Tissue Cultures of Maize”, Crop Science , Vol.15, pages 417-421
Green, C. E., et al. (1982) “Plant Regeneration in Tissue Cultures of Maize” Maize for Biological Research , pages 367-372
Hallauer, A. R. et al. (1988) “Corn Breeding” Corn and Corn Improvement , No.18, pages 463-481
Lee, Michael (1994) “Inbred Lines of Maize and Their Molecular Markers”, The Maize Handbook , Ch. 65:423-432
Meghji, M. R., et al. (1984) “Inbreeding Depression, Inbred & Hybrid Grain Yields, and Other Traits of Maize Genotypes Representing Three Eras”, Crop Science , Vol. 24, pages 545-549
Openshaw, S. J., et al. (1994) “Marker-assisted selection in backcross breeding”, pages 41-43. In Proceedings of the Symposium Analysis of Molecular Marker Data. Aug. 5-7, 1994. Corvallis, Oreg., American Society for Horticultural Science/Crop Science Society of America
Phillips, et al. (1988) “Cell/Tissue Culture and In Vitro Manipulation”, Corn & Corn Improvement, 3rd Ed., ASA Publication, No.18, pages 345-387
Poehlman et al (1995) Breeding Field Crop, 4th Ed., Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa., pages 132-155 and 321-344
Rao, K. V., et al., (1986) “Somatic Embryogenesis in Glume Callus Cultures”, Maize Genetics Cooperative Newsletter , No. 60, pages 64-65
Sass, John F. (1977) “Morphology”, Corn & Corn Improvement , ASA Publication, Madison, Wis. pages 89-109
Smith, J. S. C., et al., “The Identification of Female Selfs in Hybrid Maize: A Comparison Using Electrophoresis and Morphology”, Seed Science and Technology 14, 1-8
Songstad, D. D. et al. (1988) “Effect of ACC(1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboyclic acid), Silver Nitrate & Norbonadiene on Plant Regeneration From Maize Callus Cultures”, Plant Cell Reports, 7:262-265
Tomes, et al. (1985) “The Effect of Parental Genotype on Initiation of Embryogenic Callus From Elite Maize ( Zea Mays L. ) Germplasm”, Theor. Appl. Genet ., Vol. 70, p. 505-509
Troyer, et al. (1985) “Selection for Early Flowering in Corn: 10 Late Synthetics”, Crop Science , Vol. 25, pages 695-697
Umbeck, et al. (1983) “Reversion of Male-Sterile T-Cytoplasm Maize to Male Fertility in Tissue Culture”, Crop Science , Vol. 23, pages 584-588
Wan et al., “Efficient Production of Doubled Haploid Plants Through Colchicine Treatment of Anther-Derived Maize Callus”, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 77:889-892, 1989
Wright, Harold (1980) “Commercial Hybrid Seed Production”, Hybridization of Crop Plants , Ch. 8:161-176
Wych, Robert D. (1988) “Production of Hybrid Seed”, Corn and Corn Improvement, Ch. 9, pages 565-607
Deposits
Applicant has made a deposit of at least 2500 seeds of hybrid maize 33D11 with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), Manassas, Va. 20110 USA, ATCC Deposit No. ______. The seeds deposited with the ATCC on ______ were taken from the deposit maintained by Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., 7100 NW 62nd Avenue, Johnston, Iowa 50131-1000 since prior to the filing date of this application. Access to this deposit will be available during the pendency of the application to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks and persons determined by the Commissioner to be entitled thereto upon request. Upon allowance of any claims in the application, the Applicant will make available to the public, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.808, sample(s) of the deposit of at least 2500 seeds of hybrid maize 33D11 with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), 10801 University Boulevard, Manassas, Va. 20110-2209. This deposit of seed of hybrid maize 33D11 will be maintained in the ATCC depository, which is a public depository, for a period of 30 years, or 5 years after the most recent request, or for the enforceable life of the patent, whichever is longer, and will be replaced if it becomes nonviable during that period. Additionally, Applicant has satisfied all the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §§1.801-1.809, including providing an indication of the viability of the sample upon deposit. Applicant has no authority to waive any restrictions imposed by law on the transfer of biological material or its transportation in commerce. Applicant does not waive any infringement of their rights granted under this patent or rights applicable to Hybrid Maize 33D11 under the Plant Variety Protection Act (7 USC 2321 et seq.).
Tables
TABLE 1 VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION 33D11 AVG STDEV N 1. TYPE: (Describe intermediate types in comments section) 1 = Sweet, 2 = Dent, 3 = Flint, 4 = Flour, 5 = Pop and 2 6 = Ornamental. Comments: Dent-Flint 2. MATURITY: DAYS HEAT UNITS Days H. Units Emergence to 50% of plants in silk 63 1,303 Emergence to 50% of plants in pollen shed 63 1,309 10% to 90% pollen shed 2 47 50% Silk to harvest at 25% moisture 3. PLANT: Plant Height (to tassel tip) (cm) 309.3 15.72 15 Ear Height (to base of top ear node) (cm) 123.5 16.69 15 Length of Top Ear Internode (cm) 22.7 2.50 15 Average Number of Tillers per Plant 0.0 0.01 3 Average Number of Ears per Stalk 1.0 0.02 3 Anthocyanin of Brace Roots: 1 = Absent, 2 = Faint, 1 3 = Moderate, 4 = Dark 4. LEAF: Width of Ear Node Leaf (cm) 11.0 1.20 15 Length of Ear Node Leaf (cm) 96.4 5.65 15 Number of Leaves above Top Ear 6.0 0.93 15 Leaf Angle: (at anthesis, 2nd leaf above ear to 26.4 7.20 15 stalk above leaf) (Degrees) *Leaf Color: V. Dark Green Munsell: 7.5GY36 Leaf Sheath Pubescence: 1 = none to 9 = like peach fuzz 6 5. TASSEL: Number of Primary Lateral Branches 5.9 1.83 15 Branch Angle from Central Spike 16.5 8.51 15 Tassel Length: (from peduncle node to tassel tip), (cm). 66.5 4.82 15 Pollen Shed: 0 = male sterile, 9 = heavy shed 7 *Anther Color: Light Red Munsell: 7.5RP48 *Glume Color: Light Green Munsell: 2.5GY76 *Bar Glumes (glume bands): 1 = absent, 2 = present 1 Peduncle Length: (from top leaf node to lower florets or 26.1 4.90 15 branches), (cm). 6a. EAR (Unhusked ear) *Silk color: Pale Yellow Munsell: 5Y86 (3 days after silk emergence) *Fresh husk color: Med. Green Munsell: 5GY68 *Dry husk color: White Munsell: 10YR92 (65 days after 50% silking) Ear position at dry husk stage: 1 = upright, 2 = horizontal, 1 3 = pendant Husk Tightness: (1 = very loose, 9 = very tight) 4 Husk Extension (at harvest): 1 = short(ears exposed), 2 2 = medium (<8 cm), 3 = long (8-10 cm), 4 = v. long (>10 cm) 6b. EAR (Husked ear data) Ear Length (cm): 17.7 0.98 15 Ear Diameter at mid-point (mm) 49.5 1.51 15 Ear Weight (gm): 232.7 31.27 15 Number of Kernel Rows: 18.7 1.45 15 Kernel Rows: 1 = indistinct, 2 = distinct 2 Row Alignment: 1 = straight, 2 = slightly curved, 3 = spiral 2 Shank Length (cm): 9.5 1.55 15 Ear Taper: 1 = slight cylind., 2 = average, 3 = extreme 1 7. KERNEL (Dried): Kernel Length (mm): 13.6 0.63 15 Kernel Width (mm): 7.2 0.41 15 Kernel Thickness (mm): 4.4 0.51 15 Round Kernels (shape grade) (%) 20.6 3.19 3 Aleurone Color Pattern: 1 = homozygous, 2 = segregating 1 *Aleurone Color: Yellow Munsell: 10YR814 *Hard Endo. Color: Yellow Munsell: 10YR612 Endosperm Type: 3 1 = sweet (su1), 2 = extra sweet (sh2), 3 = normal starch, 4 = high amylose starch, 5 = waxy starch, 6 = high protein, 7 = high lysine, 8 = super sweet (se), 9 = high oil, 10 = other Weight per 100 Kernels (unsized sample) (gm): 34.0 2.65 3 8. COB: *Cob Diameter at mid-point (mm): 24.8 0.86 15 *Cob Color: Red Munsell: 10R38 10. DISEASE RESISTANCE: (Rate from 1 = most-susceptable to 9 = most-resistant. Leave blank if not tested, leave race or strain options blank if polygenic.) A. LEAF BLIGHTS, WILTS, AND LOCAL INFECTION DISEASES Anthracnose Leaf Blight ( Colletotrichum graminicola ) Common Rust ( Puccinia sorghi ) Common Smut ( Ustilago maydis ) Eyespot ( Kabatiella zeae ) Goss's Wilt ( Clavibacter michiganense spp. nebraskense ) 5 Gray Leaf Spot ( Cercospora zeae-maydis ) Helminthosporium Leaf Spot ( Bipolaris zeicola ) Race: 6 Northern Leaf Blight ( Exserohilum turcicum ) Race: Southern Leaf Blight ( Bipolaris maydis ) Race: Southern Rust ( Puccinia polysora ) Stewart's Wilt ( Erwinia stewartii ) Other (Specify): B. SYSTEMIC DISEASES Corn Lethal Necrosis (MCMV and MDMV) Head Smut ( Sphacelotheca reiliana ) Maize Chlorotic Dwarf Virus (MDV) Maize Chlorotic Mottle Virus (MCMV) Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus (MDMV) Sorghum Downy Mildew of Corn ( Peronosclerospora sorghi ) Other (Specify): C. STALK ROTS Anthracnose Stalk Rot ( Colletotrichum graminicola ) Diplodia Stalk Rot ( Stenocarpella maydis ) Fusarium Stalk Rot ( Fusarium moniliforme ) Gibberella Stalk Rot ( Gibberella zeae ) Other (Specify): D. EAR AND KERNEL ROTS Aspergillus Ear and Kernel Rot ( Aspergillus flavus ) Diplodia Ear Rot ( Stenocarpella maydis ) 6 Fusarium Ear and Kernel Rot ( Fusarium moniliforme ) Gibberella Ear Rot ( Gibberella zeae ) Other (Specify): 11. INSECT RESISTANCE: (Rate from 1 = most-suscept. to 9 = most-resist., leave blank if not tested.) Corn Worm ( Helicoverpa zea ) Leaf Feeding Silk Feeding Ear Damage Corn Leaf Aphid ( Rophalosiphum maydis ) Corn Sap Beetle ( Capophilus dimidiatus ) European Corn Borer ( Ostrinia nubilalis ) 1st. Generation (Typically whorl leaf feeding) 2nd. Generation (Typically leaf sheath-collar feeding) Stalk Tunneling cm tunneled/plant Fall armyworm ( Spodoptera fruqiperda ) Leaf Feeding Silk Feeding mg larval wt. Maize Weevil ( Sitophilus zeamaize ) Northern Rootworm ( Diabrotica barberi ) Southern Rootworm ( Diabrotica undecimpunctata ) Southwestern Corn Borer ( Diatreaea grandiosella ) Leaf Feeding Stalk Tunneling cm tunneled/plant Two-spotted Spider Mite ( Tetranychus utricae ) Western Rootworm ( Diabrotica virgifrea virgifrea ) Other (Specify): 12. AGRONOMIC TRAITS: 5 Staygreen (at 65 days after anthesis; rate from 1-worst to 9-excellent) % Dropped Ears (at 65 days after anthesis) % Pre-anthesis Brittle Snapping 17 % Pre-anthesis Root Lodging 19 % Post-anthesis Root Lodging (at 65 days after anthesis) 28 % Post-anthesis Stalk Lodging 12,506.0 Kg/ha (Yield at 12-13% grain moisture) *Munsell Glossy Book of color, (A standard color reference). Kollmorgen Inst. Corp. New Windsor, NY.






TABLE 2A





HYBRID COMPARISON

Variety #1: 33D11

Variety #2: 33B50














YIELD
YIELD
MST
EGRWTH
GDUSHD
GDUSLK


BU/A 56#
BU/A 56#
PCT
SCORE
GDU
GDU

Stat
ABS
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
197.8
104.7
107.4
80.2
100.3
99.9

Mean2
187.9
99.5
106.3
99.8
98.1
99.6

Locs
136
136
136
26
30
23

Reps
157
157
157
29
41
33

Diff
9.8
5.1
−1.1
−19.6
2.2
0.3

Prob
0.000
0.000
0.155
0.006
0.000
0.477




STKCNT
PLTHT
EARHT
STAGRN
STKLDG
STLLPN


COUNT
CM
CM
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
100.0
97.0
101.1
121.4
110.6
100.7

Mean2
99.4
95.8
94.8
96.8
31.2
83.4

Locs
237
40
35
41
1
28

Reps
337
50
38
44
2
52

Diff
0.6
1.1
6.3
24.5
79.3
17.4

Prob
0.123
0.066
0.000
0.000

0.009




DRPEAR
TSTWT
GLFSPT
NLFBLT
SLFBLT
GOSWLT


% NOT
LB/BU
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE

Stat
% MN
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
100.8
56.0
4.9
5.7
4.5
7.8

Mean2
100.8
56.1
3.7
4.9
6.3
7.8

Locs
1
89
8
9
2
2

Reps
1
101
13
14
4
4

Diff
0.0
−0.1
1.3
0.8
−1.8
0.0

Prob

0.407
0.002
0.065
0.090
1.000




ANTROT
CLN
FUSERS
GIBERS
DIPERS
ECBDPE


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
4.5
4.0
5.5
7.3
5.0
99.0

Mean2
3.6
4.3
5.8
5.3
5.5
97.2

Locs
4
1
5
2
2
3

Reps
8
3
9
4
4
3

Diff
0.9
−0.3
−0.3
2.0
−0.5
1.9

Prob
0.102

0.208
1.000
0.705
0.393




ECB2SC
HSKCVR
GIBROT
DIPROT
BRTSTK
HD SMT


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
5.2
5.4
2.3
3.3
99.5
80.8

Mean2
3.6
4.6
2.5
3.8
99.6
86.8

Locs
3
8
2
2
14
9

Reps
5
8
3
4
17
21

Diff
1.7
0.8
−0.3
−0.5
0.0
−5.9

Prob
0.130
0.080
0.500
1.000
0.972
0.102











ERTLPN
LRTLPN
STLPCN



% NOT
% NOT
% NOT


Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS





Mean1
89.0
78.5
78.5


Mean2
91.9
93.2
69.2


Locs
8
18
28


Reps
9
23
33


Diff
−2.9
−14.7
9.3


Prob
0.785
0.020
0.058

































































































TABLE 2B





HYBRID COMPARISON

Variety #1: 33D11

Variety #2: 34H31














YIELD
YIELD
MST
EGRWTH
GDUSHD
GDUSLK


BU/A 56#
BU/A 56#
PCT
SCORE
GDU
GDU

Stat
ABS
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
199.3
104.0
106.8
80.8
100.9
100.3

Mean2
188.3
98.6
102.4
89.7
98.9
98.3

Locs
185
185
185
32
38
27

Reps
245
245
245
40
55
39

Diff
10.9
5.5
−4.4
−8.8
2.0
2.0

Prob
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.044
0.000
0.000




STKCNT
PLTHT
EARHT
STAGRN
STKLDG
STLLPN


COUNT
CM
CM
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
100.0
97.6
101.5
124.1
110.6
99.1

Mean2
100.4
97.8
96.1
95.8
81.7
105.5

Locs
297
54
48
58
1
33

Reps
466
75
61
74
2
66

Diff
−0.4
−0.2
5.3
28.3
28.8
−6.4

Prob
0.203
0.716
0.000
0.000

0.308




DRPEAR
TSTWT
GLFSPT
NLFBLT
SLFBLT
GOSWLT


% NOT
LB/BU
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE

Stat
% MN
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
100.8
55.9
4.8
5.7
3.6
7.8

Mean2
99.4
58.1
5.0
6.0
4.5
7.8

Locs
1
123
8
12
5
2

Reps
1
158
14
22
8
4

Diff
1.4
−2.1
−0.2
−0.4
−0.9
0.0

Prob

0.000
0.670
0.479
0.001
1.000




ANTROT
CLN
FUSERS
GIBERS
DIPERS
ECBDPE


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
4.5
4.0
5.6
7.3
5.0
99.0

Mean2
4.6
4.7
5.7
6.8
5.8
98.6

Locs
4
1
8
2
2
3

Reps
8
3
19
4
4
3

Diff
−0.1
−0.7
−0.2
0.5
−0.8
0.4

Prob
0.761

0.698
1.000
0.500
0.702




ECB2SC
HSKCVR
GIBROT
DIPROT
BRTSTK
HD SMT


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
5.2
5.4
2.3
3.3
99.6
80.8

Mean2
4.9
5.6
2.3
5.8
97.8
93.7

Locs
3
13
2
2
16
9

Reps
5
15
4
4
23
21

Diff
0.3
−0.2
0.0
−2.5
1.8
−12.9

Prob
0.667
0.406
1.000
1.000
0.106
0.019











ERTLPN
LRTLPN
STLPCN



% NOT
% NOT
% NOT


Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS





Mean1
83.0
82.2
72.5


Mean2
91.0
92.3
86.4


Locs
10
29
42


Reps
12
43
58


Diff
−8.0
−10.2
−13.9


Prob
0.486
0.029
0.008

































































































TABLE 2C





HYBRID COMPARISON

Variety #1: 33D11

Variety #2: 34N43














YIELD
YIELD
MST
EGRWTH
GDUSHD
GDUSLK


BU/A 56#
BU/A 56#
PCT
SCORE
GDU
GDU

Stat
ABS
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
203.4
104.5
107.5
82.0
100.9
100.2

Mean2
191.9
98.8
103.8
109.5
96.8
97.0

Locs
152
152
152
30
33
24

Reps
202
202
202
37
49
35

Diff
11.4
5.8
−3.7
−27.6
4.1
3.2

Prob
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000




STKCNT
PLTHT
EARHT
STAGRN
STKLDG
STLLPN


COUNT
CM
CM
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
100.0
97.6
102.1
122.1
110.6
95.6

Mean2
100.3
93.5
93.9
79.2
48.1
78.3

Locs
251
48
42
53
1
26

Reps
402
67
53
68
1
55

Diff
−0.3
4.1
8.2
42.9
62.5
17.3

Prob
0.356
0.000
0.000
0.000

0.010




DRPEAR
TSTWT
GLFSPT
NLFBLT
SLFBLT
GOSWLT


% NOT
LB/BU
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE

Stat
% MN
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
100.8
55.8
4.8
5.7
4.5
7.8

Mean2
98.0
56.3
4.0
5.1
6.0
6.3

Locs
1
98
9
12
2
2

Reps
1
126
15
22
4
4

Diff
2.8
−0.5
0.8
0.6
−1.5
1.5

Prob

0.002
0.010
0.126
0.205
1.000




ANTROT
CLN
FUSERS
GIBERS
DIPERS
ECBDPE


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
4.5
4.0
5.4
7.3
5.0
99.3

Mean2
3.0
5.0
6.3
7.0
4.3
97.9

Locs
3
1
6
2
2
2

Reps
6
3
16
4
4
2

Diff
1.5
−1.0
−0.8
0.3
0.8
1.3

Prob
1.000

0.033
0.500
0.205
0.510




ECB2SC
HSKCVR
GIBROT
DIPROT
BRTSTK
HD SMT


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
5.2
5.4
2.3
3.3
99.6
80.8

Mean2
5.8
5.1
3.3
3.3
99.7
84.6

Locs
3
8
2
2
16
9

Reps
5
8
4
4
23
21

Diff
−0.6
0.3
−1.0
0.0
−0.1
−3.8

Prob
0.630
0.517
0.626
1.000
0.823
0.343











ERTLPN
LRTLPN
STLPCN



% NOT
% NOT
% NOT


Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS





Mean1
78.8
82.3
78.4


Mean2
80.7
92.8
62.9


Locs
8
23
35


Reps
10
36
46


Diff
−1.9
−10.6
15.5


Prob
0.895
0.074
0.009

































































































TABLE 2D





HYBRID COMPARISON

Variety #1: 33D11

Variety #2: 34M94














YIELD
YIELD
MST
EGRWTH
GDUSHD
GDUSLK


BU/A 56#
BU/A 56#
PCT
SCORE
GDU
GDU

Stat
ABS
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
201.8
104.6
107.3
82.0
101.0
100.3

Mean2
191.8
99.4
97.6
91.9
100.8
99.7

Locs
171
171
171
30
39
28

Reps
224
224
224
37
56
40

Diff
10.0
5.2
−9.6
−9.9
0.2
0.6

Prob
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.041
0.715
0.255




STKCNT
PLTHT
EARHT
STAGRN
STKLDG
STLLPN


COUNT
CM
CM
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN
% MN



Mean1
100.1
97.6
101.7
122.6
110.6
99.1

Mean2
99.9
99.8
96.3
92.2
125.0
107.7

Locs
285
54
48
56
1
33

Reps
447
74
60
71
2
66

Diff
0.1
−2.2
5.4
30.4
−14.4
−8.6

Prob
0.572
0.001
0.000
0.000

0.244




DRPEAR
TSTWT
GLFSPT
NLFBLT
SLFBLT
GOSWLT


% NOT
LB/BU
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE

Stat
% MN
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
100.8
56.0
4.8
5.7
4.5
7.8

Mean2
100.8
56.3
5.9
3.3
5.5
6.8

Locs
1
109
8
12
2
2

Reps
1
138
14
22
4
4

Diff
0.0
−0.3
−1.1
2.3
−1.0
1.0

Prob

0.044
0.003
0.000
0.500
1.000




ANTROT
CLN
FUSERS
GIBERS
DIPERS
ECBDPE


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
4.5
4.0
5.5
7.3
5.0
99.0

Mean2
4.5
4.7
6.0
7.8
5.3
95.4

Locs
4
1
7
2
2
3

Reps
8
3
17
4
4
3

Diff
0.0
−0.7
−0.5
−0.5
−0.3
3.6

Prob
1.000

0.395
1.000
0.500
0.296




ECB2SC
HSKCVR
GIBROT
DIPROT
BRTSTK
HD SMT


SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
SCORE
% NOT
% NOT

Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS
ABS



Mean1
5.2
5.4
2.3
3.3
99.6
80.8

Mean2
4.3
6.0
5.0
3.5
99.4
92.0

Locs
3
8
2
2
16
9

Reps
5
8
4
4
23
21

Diff
0.9
−0.6
−2.8
−0.3
0.2
−11.2

Prob
0.270
0.049
0.272
0.874
0.749
0.009











ERTLPN
LRTLPN
STLPCN



% NOT
% NOT
% NOT


Stat
ABS
ABS
ABS





Mean1
83.0
85.1
78.6


Mean2
86.1
77.2
73.9


Locs
10
26
36


Reps
12
41
48


Diff
−3.1
7.9
4.7


Prob
0.687
0.164
0.362




























































































All publications, patents and patent applications mentioned in the specification are indicative of the level of those skilled in the art to which this invention pertains. All such publications, patents and patent applications are incorporated by reference herein for the purpose cited to the same extent as if each was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference herein.
The foregoing invention has been described in detail by way of illustration and example for purposes of clarity and understanding. As is readily apparent to one skilled in the art, the foregoing are only some of the methods and compositions that illustrate the embodiments of the foregoing invention. It will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that variations, changes, modifications and alterations may be applied to the compositions and/or methods described herein without departing from the true spirit, concept and scope of the invention.