Title: Cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR
Abstract: A novel cotton cultivar, designated DP 449 BG/RR, is disclosed. The invention relates to the seeds of cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR, to the plants of cotton DP 449 BG/RR and to methods for producing a cotton plant produced by crossing the cultivar DP 449 BG/RR with itself or another cotton variety. The invention further relates to hybrid cotton seeds and plants produced by crossing the cultivar DP 449 BG/RR with another cotton cultivar.
Patent Number: 6,953,879 Issued on 10/11/2005 to Burdett, et al.
| Inventors:
|
Burdett; Lawrence (Casa Grande, AZ);
Hugie; William V. (Scott, MS)
|
| Assignee:
|
D&PL Technology Holding Company, LLC (Scott, MS)
|
| Appl. No.:
|
377309 |
| Filed:
|
February 28, 2003 |
| Current U.S. Class: |
800/314; 435/421; 435/427; 435/430; 435/430.1; 435/468; 800/260; 800/265; 800/266; 800/268; 800/269; 800/278; 800/279; 800/300; 800/301; 800/302; 800/303 |
| Intern'l Class: |
A01H 005/00; A01H 005/10; A01H 001/00; A01H 001/02; C12N 005/04 |
| Field of Search: |
800/260,265,266,268,269,278,279,300-303,314
435/421,427,430,430.1,468
|
References Cited [Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Other References
Gutierrez et al. Crop Sci. 42: 1841-1847 (2002).
Kraft et al. Theor. Appl. Genet. 101: 323-326 (2000).
Eshed et al. Genetics. 143: 1807-1817 (1996).
Mishra et al. Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture 73: 21-35 (2003).
Sakhanokho et al. Crop Sci. 41: 1235-1240 (2001).
Allard, R.W., 1960, Selection Under Self-Fertilization, In Principles of Plant
Breeding, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., p. 55.
Eshed, et al., 1996, Less-Than-Additive Epistatic Interactions of Quantitative
Trait Loci in Tomato, Genetics, vol. 143, pp. 1807-1817.
Fehr, W.R., 1987, Principles of Cultivar Development: vol. 1, In Theory and Technique,
McGraw-Hill, Inc., pp. 31-33.
Kraft, et al., 2000, Linkage Disequilibrium and Fingerprinting in Sugar Beet,
Theoretical Applied Genetics, vol. 101, pp. 323-326.
Mishra, Rajiv, et al., 2003, Development of a Highly Regenerable Elite Acala
Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum cv. Maxxa)—a Step Towards Genotype-Independent
Regeneration, Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, vol. 73, pp. 21-35.
Wilson, F. Douglas, 1989, Yield, Earliness, and Fiber Properties of Cotton Carrying
Combined Traits for Pink Bollworm Resistance, Crop Science, vol. 29, pp. 7-12.
|
Primary Examiner: Fox; David T.
Assistant Examiner: Robinson; Keith O.
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Jondle & Associates P.C.
Claims
1. A seed of a cotton cultivar designated DP 449 BG/RR wherein a representative
sample of seed was deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6632.
2. A cotton plant, or a part thereof, of cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR, wherein
a representative sample of seed of said cotton cultivar was deposited under ATCC
Accession No. PTA-6632.
3. Pollen of the plant of claim 2.
4. An ovule of the plant of claim 2.
5. A tissue culture of regenerable cells produced from the plant of claim 2.
6. A tissue culture according to claim 5, wherein said regenerable cells of the
tissue culture are derived from a plant part selected from the group consisting
of leaves, pollen, embryos, cotyledon, hypocotyl, meristematic cells, roots, root
tips, anthers, flowers, seeds, stems and pods.
7. A cotton plant regenerated from the tissue culture of claim 5, wherein the
regenerated plant has all of the morphological and physiological characteristics
of cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR and wherein a representative sample of seed of
said cotton cultivar was deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6632.
8. A method for producing a hybrid cotton seed comprising crossing a first parent
cotton plant with a second parent cotton plant and harvesting the resultant hybrid
cotton seed, wherein said first parent cotton plant or said second parent cotton
plant is the cotton plant of claim 2.
9. A method of producing a transgenic cotton plant wherein the method comprises
transforming the cotton plant, or a part thereof, of claim 2 to produce a transformed
cotton plant, wherein said transformed cotton plant contains a transgene operably
linked to a regulatory element and wherein said transgene confers a trait selected
from the group consisting of herbicide resistance, insect resistance, and disease resistance.
10. A cotton plant according to claim 9, wherein said herbicide resistance is
selected from the group consisting of glyphosate, glufosinate, sulfonylurea, imidazolinone
and protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitor.
11. A method for producing a cotton plant that contains in its genetic material
a transgene, wherein the method comprises crossing the cotton plant of claim 2
with either a second plant of another cotton cultivar which contains a transgene,
or a transformed cotton plant of the cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR, so that the
genetic material of the progeny that result from the cross contains a transgene
operably linked to a regulatory element.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein said transgene confers a trait selected from
the group consisting of herbicide resistance, insect resistance and disease resistance.
13. A cotton plant, or a part thereof, produced by the method of claim 11.
14. A method of introducing a desired trait into cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR
wherein the method comprises:
(a) crossing the DP 449 BG/RR plants, grown from seed deposited under ATCC Accession
No. PTA-6632 with plants of another cotton cultivar that comprise a desired trait
to produce F1 progeny plants, wherein the desired trait is selected from the group
consisting of male sterility, herbicide resistance, insect resistance and resistance
to bacterial, fungal or viral disease;
(b) selecting F1 progeny plants that have the desired trait to produce selected
F1 progeny plants;
(c) crossing the selected F1 progeny plants with the DP 449 BG/RR plants to produce
first backcross progeny plants;
(d) selecting for first backcross progeny plants that have the desired trait
and physiological and morphological characteristics of cotton cultivar DP 449 BG/RR
to produce selected first backcross progeny plants; and
(e) repeating steps (C) and (d) three or more times in succession to produce
selected fourth or higher backcross progeny plants that comprise the desired trait
and all of the physiological and morphological characteristics of cotton cultivar
DP 449 BG/RR as described in the VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION.
15. A plant produced by the method of claim 14, wherein the plant has the desired
trait and all of the physiological and morphological characteristics of cotton
cultivar DP 449 BG/RR as described in the VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION.
16. A transgenic cotton plant produced by the method of claim 9.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a cotton (
Gossypium) seed, a cotton plant,
a cotton variety and a cotton hybrid. This invention further relates to a method
for producing cotton seed and plants.
There are numerous steps in the development of any novel, desirable plant germplasm.
Plant breeding begins with the analysis and definition of problems and weaknesses
of the current germplasm, the establishment of program goals, and the definition
of specific breeding objectives. The next step is selection of germplasm that possess
the traits to meet the program goals. The goal is to combine in a single variety
an improved combination of desirable traits from the parental germplasm. In cotton,
the important traits include higher fiber (lint) yield, earlier maturity, improved
fiber quality, resistance to diseases and insects, resistance to drought and heat,
and improved agronomic traits.
Pureline cultivars of cotton are commonly bred by hybridization of two or
more parents followed by selection. The complexity of inheritance, the breeding
objectives and the available resources influence the breeding method. Pedigree
breeding, recurrent selection breeding and backcross breeding are breeding methods
commonly used in self pollinated crops such as cotton. These methods refer to the
manner in which breeding pools or populations are made in order to combine desirable
traits from two or more cultivars or various broad-based sources. The procedures
commonly used for selection of desirable individuals or populations of individuals
are called mass selection, plant-to-row selection and single seed descent or modified
single seed descent. One, or a combination of these selection methods, can be used
in the development of a cultivar from a breeding population.
Pedigree breeding is primarily used to combine favorable genes into a totally
new cultivar that is different in many traits than either parent used in the original
cross. It is commonly used for the improvement of self-pollinating crops. Two parents
which possess favorable, complementary traits are crossed to produce an F
1
(filial generation 1). An F
2 population is produced by selfing F
1
plants. Selection of desirable individual plants may begin as early as the
F
2 generation wherein maximum gene segregation occurs. Individual plant
selection can occur for one or more generations. Successively, seed from each selected
plant can be planted in individual, identified rows or hills, known as progeny
rows or progeny hills, to evaluate the line and to increase the seed quantity,
or, to further select individual plants. Once a progeny row or progeny hill is
selected as having desirable traits it becomes what is known as a breeding line
that is specifically identifiable from other breeding lines that were derived from
the same original population. At an advanced generation (i.e., F
5 or
higher) seed of individual lines are evaluated in replicated testing. At an advanced
stage the best lines or a mixture of phenotypically similar lines from the same
original cross are tested for potential release as new cultivars.
Descriptions of other breeding methods that are commonly used for different
traits and crops can be found in one of several reference books (e.g., Allard,
1960; Simmonds, 1979; Sneep, et al. 1979; Fehr, 1987).
The single seed descent procedure in the strict sense refers to planting a segregating
population, harvesting one seed from every plant, and combining these seeds into
a bulk which is planted the next generation. When the population has been advanced
to the desired level of inbreeding, the plants from which lines are derived will
each trace to different F
2 individuals. Primary advantages of the seed
descent procedures are to delay selection until a high level of homozygosity (e.g.,
lack of gene segregation) is achieved in individual plants, and to move through
these early generations quickly, usually through using winter nurseries.
The modified single seed descent procedures involve harvesting multiple seed
(i.e., a single lock or a simple boll) from each plant in a population and combining
them to form a bulk. Part of the bulk is used to plant the next generation and
part is put in reserve. This procedure has been used to save labor at harvest and
to maintain adequate seed quantities of the population.
Selection for desirable traits can occur at any segregating generation
(F
2 and above). Selection pressure is exerted on a population by growing
the population in an environment where the desired trait is maximally expressed
and the individuals or lines possessing the trait can be identified. For instance,
selection can occur for disease resistance when the plants or lines are grown in
natural or artificially-induced disease environments, and the breeder selects only
those individuals having little or no disease and are thus assumed to be resistant.
Promising advanced breeding lines are thoroughly tested and compared to
popular cultivars in environments representative of the commercial target area(s)
for three or more years. The best lines having superiority over the popular cultivars
are candidates to become new commercial cultivars. Those lines still deficient
in a few traits are discarded or utilized as parents to produce new populations
for further selection.
These processes, which lead to the final step of marketing and distribution,
usually take from seven to twelve years from the time the first cross is made.
Therefor, development of new cultivars is a time-consuming process that requires
precise forward planning, efficient use of resources, and a minimum of changes
in direction.
A most difficult task is the identification of individuals that are genetically
superior because, for most traits the true genotypic value is masked by other confounding
plant traits or environmental factors. One method of identifying a superior plant
is to observe its performance relative to other experimental lines and widely grown
standard cultivars. For many traits a single observation is inconclusive, and replicated
observations over time and space are required to provide a good estimate of a line's
genetic worth.
The goal of a commercial cotton breeding program is to develop new, unique and
superior cotton cultivars. The breeder initially selects and crosses two or more
parental lines, followed by generation advancement and selection, thus producing
many new genetic combinations. The breeder can theoretically generate billions
of different genetic combinations via this procedure. The breeder has no direct
control over which genetic combinations will arise in the limited population size
which is grown. Therefore, two breeders will never develop the same line having
the same traits.
Each year, the plant breeder selects the germplasm to advance to the next generation.
This germplasm is grown under unique and different geographical, climatic and soil
conditions, and further selections are then made, during and at the end of the
growing season. The lines which are developed are unpredictable. This unpredictability
is because the breeder's selection occurs in unique environments, with no control
at the DNA level (using conventional breeding procedures), and with millions of
different possible genetic combinations being generated. A breeder of ordinary
skill in the art cannot predict the final resulting lines he develops, except possibly
in a very gross and general fashion. The same breeder cannot produce, with any
reasonable likelihood, the same cultivar twice by using the exact same original
parents and the same selection techniques. This unpredictability results in the
expenditure of large amounts of research moneys to develop superior new cotton cultivars.
Proper testing should detect any major faults and establish the level of superiority
or improvement over current cultivars. In addition to showing superior performance,
there must be a demand for a new cultivar that is compatible with industry standards
or which creates a new market. The introduction of a new cultivar will incur additional
costs to the seed producer, and the grower, processor and consumer; for special
advertising and marketing and commercial production practices, and new product
utilization. The testing preceding the release of a new cultivar should take into
consideration research and development costs as well as technical superiority of
the final cultivar. For seed-propagated cultivars, it must be feasible to produce
seed easily and economically.
Cotton,
Gossypium hirsutum, is an important and valuable field crop.
Thus, a continuing goal of plant breeders is to develop stable, high yielding cotton
cultivars that are agronomically sound. The reasons for this goal are obviously
to maximize the amount and quality of the fiber produced on the land used and to
supply fiber, oil and food for animals and humans. To accomplish this goal, the
cotton breeder must select and develop plants that have the traits that result
in superior cultivars.
The development of new cotton cultivars requires the evaluation and selection
of parents and the crossing of these parents. The lack of predictable success of
a given cross requires that a breeder, in any given year, make several crosses
with the same or different breeding objectives.
The cotton flower is monecious in that the male and female structures are in
the same flower. The crossed or hybrid seed is produced by manual crosses between
selected parents. Floral buds of the parent that is to be the female are emasculated
prior to the opening of the flower by manual removal of the male anthers. At flowering,
the pollen from flowers of the parent plants designated as male, are manually placed
on the stigma of the previous emasculated flower. Seed developed from the cross
is known as first generation (F
1) hybrid seed. Planting of this seed
produces F
1 hybrid plants of which half their genetic component is from
the female parent and half from the male parent. Segregation of genes begins at
meiosis thus producing second generation (F
2) seed. Assuming multiple
genetic differences between the original parents, each F
2 seed has a
unique combination of genes.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a cotton seed, a cotton plant, a cotton variety
and a method for producing a cotton plant.
The present invention further relates to a method of producing cotton seeds and
plants by crossing a plant of the instant invention with another cotton plant.
This invention further relates to the seeds of cotton variety DP 449 BG/RR,
to the plants of cotton variety DP 449 BG/RR and to methods for producing a cotton
plant produced by crossing the cotton DP 449 BG/RR with itself or another cotton
line. Thus, any such methods using the cotton variety DP 449 BG/RR are part of
this invention including: selfing, backcrosses, hybrid production, crosses to populations,
and the like.
In another aspect, the present invention provides for single trait converted
plants
of DP 449 BG/RR. The single transferred trait may preferably be a dominant or recessive
allele. Preferably, the single transferred trait will confer such traits as herbicide
resistance, insect resistance, resistance for bacterial, fungal, or viral disease,
male fertility, male sterility, enhanced fiber quality, and industrial usage. The
single trait may be a naturally occurring cotton gene or a transgene introduced
through genetic engineering techniques.
In another aspect, the present invention provides regenerable cells for use in
tissue culture of cotton plant DP 449 BG/RR. The tissue culture will preferably
be capable of regenerating plants having the physiological and morphological characteristics
of the foregoing cotton plant, and of regenerating plants having substantially
the same genotype as the foregoing cotton plant. Preferably, the regenerable cells
in such tissue cultures will be embryos, protoplasts, meristematic cells, callus,
pollen, leaves, anthers, roots, root tips, flowers, seeds, or stems. Still further,
the present invention provides cotton plants regenerated from the tissue cultures
of the invention.
DEFINITIONS
In the description and tables which follow, a number of terms are used. 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:
Lint Yield. As used herein, the term "lint yield" is defined as the measure
of the quantity of fiber produced on a given unit of land. Presented below in pounds
per acre.
Lint Percent. As used herein, the term "lint percent" is defined as the lint
(fiber) fraction of seed cotton (lint and seed).
Gin Turnout. As used herein, the term "gin turnout" is defined as a fraction
of lint in a machine harvested sample of seed cotton (lint, seed, and trash).
Fiber Length (Len). As used herein, the term "fiber length" is defined as 2.5%
span length in inches of fiber as measured by High Volume Instrumentation (HVI).
Uniformity Ratio (Ur). As used herein, the term "uniformity ratio" is
defined as a measure of the relative length uniformity of a bundle of fibers as
measured by HVI.
Micronaire. As used herein, the term "micronaire" is defined as a measure
of the fineness of the fiber. Within a cotton cultivar, micronaire is also a measure
of maturity. Micronaire differences are governed by changes in perimeter or in
cell wall thickness, or by changes in both. Within a variety, cotton perimeter
is fairly constant and maturity will cause a change in micronaire. Consequently,
micronaire has a high correlation with maturity within a variety of cotton. Maturity
is the degree of development of cell wall thickness. Micronaire may not have a
good correlation with maturity between varieties of cotton having different fiber
perimeter. Micronaire values range from about 2.0 to 6.0:
| |
| Below 2.9 |
Very fine |
Possible small perimeter but mature (good fiber), |
| |
|
or large perimeter but immature (bad fiber). |
| 2.9 to 3.7 |
Fine |
Various degrees of maturity and/or perimeter. |
| 3.8 to 4.6 |
Average |
Average degree of maturity and/or perimeter. |
| 4.7 to 5.5 |
Coarse |
Usually fully developed (mature), but larger |
| |
|
perimeter. |
| 5.6+ |
Very |
Fully developed, large-perimeter fiber. |
| |
coarse |
| |
Fiber Strength (T1). As used herein, the term "fiber strength" is defined as
the force required to break a bundle of fibers as measured in grams per millitex
on the HVI.
Fiber Elongation (E1). As used herein, the term "fiber elongation" is defined
as the measure of elasticity of a bundle of fibers as measured by HVI.
Plant Height. As used herein, the term "plant height" is defined as the average
height in inches or centimeters of a group of plants.
Stringout Rating (So). As used herein, the term "stringout rating" is defined
as a visual rating prior to harvest of the relative looseness of the seed cotton
held in the boll structure on the plant.
Maturity Rating (Matur). As used herein, the term "maturity rating" is defined
as a visual rating near harvest on the amount of opened bolls on the plant.
Vegetative Nodes. As used herein, the term "vegetative nodes" is defined
as the number of nodes from the cotyledonary node to the first fruiting branch
on the main stem of the plant.
Seedweight (Sdwt). As used herein, the term "seedweight" is the weight
of 100 seeds in grams.
Fallout (Fo). As used herein, the term "fallout" refers to the rating of
how much cotton has fallen on the ground at harvest.
Lint Index. As used herein, the term "lint index" refers to the weight of lint
per seed in milligrams.
Seed/boll. As used herein, the term "seed/boll" refers to the number of
seeds per boll.
Seedcotton/boll. As used herein, the term "seedcotton/boll" refers
to the weight of seedcotton per boll.
Lint/boll. As used herein, the term "lint/boll" is the weight of lint
per boll.
Lint Percent. As used herein, the term "lint percent" refers to the percentage
of the seed cotton that is lint.
Fruiting Nodes. As used herein, the term "fruiting nodes" is defined as
the number of nodes on the main stem from which arise branches which bear fruit
or bolls.
Essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics.
A plant having essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics
means a plant having the physiological and morphological characteristics, except
for the characteristics derived from the converted trait.
Single trait Converted (Conversion). Single trait converted (conversion) plant
refers to plants which are developed by a plant breeding technique called backcrossing
or via genetic engineering wherein essentially all of the desired morphological
and physiological characteristics of a variety are recovered in addition to the
single trait transferred into the variety via the backcrossing technique or via
genetic engineering.
Disease Resistance. As used herein the term "disease resistance" is defined
as the ability of plants to restrict the activities of a specified pest, such as
an insect, fungus, virus, or bacterial.
Disease Tolerance. As used herein the term "disease tolerance" is defined
as the ability of plants to endure a specified pest (such as an insect, fungas,
virus or bacteria) or an adverse environmental condition and still performing and
producing in spite of this disorder.
VRDP. As used herein the term "VRDP" is defined as the allele designation for
the single dominant allele of the present invention which confers virus resistance.
VRDP designates "Virus Resistance Deltapine".
| |
| VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION |
| |
| |
| Species: |
Gossypium hirsutum L. |
| Areas of Adaptation: |
Eastern, Western, Central, Arizona, Delta |
| |
and Blacklands |
| General: |
|
| Plant Habit |
Intermediate |
| Foliage |
Intermediate |
| Stem Lodging |
Intermediate |
| Fruiting Branch |
Normal |
| Growth |
Intermediate |
| Leaf Color |
Light green |
| Boll Shape |
Length greater than width |
| Boll Breadth |
Broadest at middle |
| Plant: |
| 1st Fruiting Branch (from cotyledonary node) |
16.0 cm |
| No. of Nodes to 1st Fruiting Branch |
6.4 |
| (Excluding cotyledonary node) |
| Mature Plant Height (from cotyledonary node to terminal) |
104.9 cm |
| Leaf (Upper most, fully expanded leaf): |
|
| Type |
Normal |
| Pubescence |
Sparse |
| Nectaries |
Present |
| Stem Pubescence: |
Intermediate |
| Glands: |
| Leaf |
Normal |
| Stem |
Normal |
| Calyx Lobe |
Normal |
| Flower: |
| Petals |
Cream |
| Pollen |
Cream |
| Petal Spot |
Absent |
| Seed: |
| Seed Index (g/100, fuzzy basis) |
9.6 |
| Lint Index (g lint/100 seeds) |
6.4 |
| Boll: |
| Gin Turnout - Picked |
38.6 |
| Number of Seeds per Boll |
30.2 |
| Grams Seed Cotton per Boll |
4.7 |
| Number of Locules per Boll |
4-5 |
| Boll Type |
Open |
| Fiber Properties: |
| Method |
HVI |
| Length |
1.14 inches |
| Uniformity |
84.3% |
| Strength (T1) |
30.9 g/tex |
| Elongation (E1) |
11.3% |
| Micronaire |
4.5 |
| Nematodes, Insects and Pests: |
| Bollworm |
Resistant |
| Pink Bollworm |
Resistant |
| Tobacco Bud Worm |
Resistant |
| |
This invention is also directed to methods for producing a cotton plant by crossing
a first parent cotton plant with a second parent cotton plant, wherein the first
or second cotton plant is the cotton plant from the line DP 449 BG/RR. Further,
both the first and second parent cotton plants may be the cultivar DP 449 BG/RR
(e.g., self-pollination). Therefore, any methods using the cultivar DP 449 BG/RR
are part of this invention: selfing, backcrosses, hybrid breeding, and crosses
to populations. Any plants produced using cultivar DP 449 BG/RR as a parent are
within the scope of this invention. As used herein, the term "plant" includes plant
cells, plant protoplasts, plant cells of tissue culture from which cotton plants
can be regenerated, plant calli, plant clumps, and plant cells that are intact
in plants or parts of plants, such as pollen, flowers, embryos, ovules, seeds,
pods, leaves, stems, roots, anthers and the like. Thus, another aspect of this
invention is to provide for cells which upon growth and differentiation produce
a cultivar having essentially all of the physiological and morphological characteristics
of DP 449 BG/RR.
Culture for expressing desired structural genes and cultured cells are known
in the art. Also as known in the art, cotton is transformable and regenerable such
that whole plants containing and expressing desired genes under regulatory control
may be obtained. General descriptions of plant expression vectors and reporter
genes and transformation protocols can be found in Gruber, et al., "Vectors for
Plant Transformation, in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology & Biotechnology" in
Glich, et al., (Eds. pp. 89-119, CRC Press, 1993). Moreover GUS expression vectors
and GUS gene cassettes are available from Clone Tech Laboratories, Inc., Palo Alto,
Calif. while luciferase expression vectors and luciferase gene cassettes are available
from Pro Mega Corp. (Madison, Wis.). General methods of culturing plant tissues
are provided for example by Maki, et al., "Procedures for Introducing Foreign DNA
into Plants" in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, Glich, et al.,
(Eds. pp. 67-88 CRC Press, 1993); and by Phillips, et al., "Cell-Tissue Culture
and In-Vitro Manipulation" in Corn & Corn Improvement, 3rd Edition; Sprague, et
al., (Eds. pp. 345-387) American Society of Agronomy Inc., 1988. Methods of introducing
expression vectors into plant tissue include the direct infection or co-cultivation
of plant cells with
Agrobacterium tumefaciens, Horsch et al., Science, 227:1229
(1985). Descriptions of Agrobacterium vectors systems and methods for Agrobacterium-mediated
gene transfer provided by Gruber, et al., supra.
Useful methods include but are not limited to expression vectors introduced
into plant tissues using a direct gene transfer method such as microprojectile-mediated
delivery, DNA injection, electroporation and the like. More preferably expression
vectors are introduced into plant tissues using the microprojectile media delivery
with the biolistic device Agrobacterium-medicated transformation. Transformant
plants obtained with the protoplasm of the invention are intended to be within
the scope of this invention.
The present invention contemplates a cotton plant regenerated from a tissue culture
of a variety (e.g., DP 449 BG/RR) or hybrid plant of the present invention. As
is well known in the art, tissue culture of cotton can be used for the in vitro
regeneration of a cotton plant. Tissue culture of various tissues of cotton and
regeneration of plants therefrom is well known and widely published.
When the term cotton plant is used in the context of the present invention,
this also includes any single trait conversions of that variety. The term single
trait converted plant as used herein refers to those cotton plants which are developed
by a plant breeding technique called backcrossing or via genetic engineering wherein
essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological characteristics
of a variety are recovered in addition to the single trait transferred into the
variety. Backcrossing methods can be used with the present invention to improve
or introduce a characteristic into the variety. The term backcrossing as used herein
refers to the repeated crossing of a hybrid progeny back to the recurrent parent.
The parental cotton plant which contributes the trait for the desired characteristic
is termed the nonrecurrent or donor parent. This terminology refers to the fact
that the nonrecurrent parent is used one time in the backcross protocol and therefore
does not recur. The parental cotton plant to which the trait or traits from the
nonrecurrent parent are transferred is known as the recurrent parent as it is used
for several rounds in the backcrossing protocol (Poehlman & Sleper, 1994; Fehr,
1987). In a typical backcross protocol, the original variety of interest (recurrent
parent) is crossed to a second variety (nonrecurrent parent) that carries the single
gene of interest to be transferred. The resulting progeny from this cross are then
crossed again to the recurrent parent and the process is repeated until a cotton
plant is obtained wherein essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological
characteristics of the recurrent parent are recovered in the converted plant, in
addition to the single transferred gene from the nonrecurrent parent.
The selection of a suitable recurrent parent is an important step for a successful
backcrossing procedure. The goal of a backcross protocol is to alter or substitute
a single trait or characteristic in the original variety. To accomplish this, a
gene or genes of the recurrent variety are modified or substituted with the desired
gene(s) from the nonrecurrent parent, while retaining essentially all of the rest
of the desired genetic, and therefore the desired physiological and morphological,
constitution of the original variety. The choice of the particular nonrecurrent
parent will depend on the purpose of the backcross, one of the major purposes is
to add some commercially desirable, agronomically important trait to the plant.
The exact backcrossing protocol will depend on the characteristic or trait being
altered to determine an appropriate testing protocol. Although backcrossing methods
are simplified when the characteristic being transferred is a dominant allele,
a recessive allele may also be transferred. In this instance it may be necessary
to introduce a test of the progeny to determine if the desired characteristic has
been successfully transferred.
Many traits have been identified that are not regularly selected for in the
development of a new variety but that can be improved by backcrossing techniques.
Traits may or may not be transgenic, examples of these traits include but are not
limited to, male sterility, herbicide resistance, resistance for bacterial, fungal,
or viral disease, insect resistance, male fertility, enhanced fiber quality, industrial
usage, yield stability and yield enhancement. These traits are generally inherited
through the nucleus.
The cultivar DP 449 BG/RR is similar to DP 458 B/RR. While similar, there are
numerous differences including: DP 449 BG/RR has significantly lower micronaire,
4.49 versus 4.59 (P>0.001). DP 449 B/RR's uniformity ratio is significantly
higher, 84.34 versus 83.57 (P>0.001). DP 449 B/RR's fiber elongation is significantly
lower, 11.32 versus 12.01 (P>0.001). DP 449 B/RR's plant height is significantly
shorter, 104.9 versus 109.5 (P>0.001).
FURTHER EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
With the advent of molecular biological techniques that have allowed the isolation
and characterization of genes that encode 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 genes, or additional, or modified versions
of native, or endogenous, genes (perhaps driven by different promoters) in order
to alter the traits of a plant in a specific manner. Such foreign additional and/or
modified genes are referred to herein collectively as "transgenes". Over the last
fifteen to twenty years several methods for producing transgenic plants have been
developed, and the present invention, in particular embodiments, also relates to
transformed versions of the claimed variety or line.
Plant transformation involves the construction of an expression vector which
will function in plant cells. Such a vector comprises DNA comprising a gene under
control of or operatively linked to a regulatory element (for example, a promoter).
The expression vector may contain one or more such operably linked gene/regulatory
element combinations. The vector(s) may be in the form of a plasmid, and can be
used alone or in combination with other plasmids, to provide transformed cotton
plants, using transformation methods as described below to incorporate transgenes
into the genetic material of the cotton plant(s).
Expression Vectors for Cotton Transformation: Marker Genes—Expression
vectors include at least one genetic marker, operably linked to a regulatory element
(a promoter, for example) that allows transformed cells containing the marker to
be either recovered by negative selection, i.e., inhibiting growth of cells that
do not contain the selectable marker gene, or by positive selection, i.e., screening
for the product encoded by the genetic marker. Many commonly used selectable marker
genes for plant transformation are well known in the transformation arts, and include,
for example, genes that code for enzymes that metabolically detoxify a selective
chemical agent which may be an antibiotic or a herbicide, or genes that encode
an altered target which is insensitive to the inhibitor. A few positive selection
methods are also known in the art.
One commonly used selectable marker gene for plant transformation is the neomycin
phosphotransferase II (nptII) under the control of plant regulatory signals confers
resistance to kanamycin. Fraley et al.,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 80:4803
(1983). Another commonly used selectable marker gene is the hygromycin phosphotransferase
gene which confers resistance to the antibiotic hygromycin. Vanden Elzen et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol., 5:299 (1985).
Additional selectable marker genes of bacterial origin that confer resistance
to antibiotics include gentamycin acetyl transferase, streptomycin phosphotransferase,
aminoglycoside-3′-adenyl transferase, the bleomycin resistance determinant.
Hayford et al.,
Plant Physiol. 86:1216 (1988), Jones et al.,
Mol. Gen.
Genet., 210:86 (1987), Svab et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol. 14:197 (1990<
Hille et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol. 7:171 (1986). Other selectable marker genes
confer resistance to herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate or broxynil. Comai
et al.,
Nature 317:741-744 (1985), Gordon-Kamm et al.,
Plant Cell 2:603-618
(1990) and Stalker et al.,
Science 242:419-423 (1988).
Other selectable marker genes for plant transformation are not of bacterial
origin. These genes include, for example, mouse dihydrofolate reductase, plant
5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase and plant acetolactate synthase. Eichholtz
et al.,
Somatic Cell Mol. Genet. 13:67 (1987), Shah et al.,
Science 233:478
(1986), Charest et al.,
Plant Cell Rep. 8:643 (1990).
Another class of marker genes for plant transformation require screening
of presumptively transformed plant cells rather than direct genetic selection of
transformed cells for resistance to a toxic substance such as an antibiotic. These
genes are particularly useful to quantify or visualize the spatial pattern of expression
of a gene in specific tissues and are frequently referred to as reporter genes
because they can be fused to a gene or gene regulatory sequence for the investigation
of gene expression. Commonly used genes for screening presumptively transformed
cells include β-glucuronidase (GUS, β-galactosidase, luciferase and
chloramphenicol, acetyltransferase. Jefferson, R. A.,
Plant Mol. Biol. Rep.
5:387 (1987), Teeri et al.,
EMBO J. 8:343 (1989), Koncz et al.,
Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci U.S.A. 84:131 (1987), DeBlock et al.,
EMBO J. 3:1681 (1984).
Recently, in vivo methods for visualizing GUS activity that do not require
destruction of plant tissue have been made available. Molecular Probes publication
2908, Imagene Green™, p. 1-4 (1993) and Naleway et al.,
J. Cell Biol.
115:151a (1991). However, these in vivo methods for visualizing GUS activity
have not proven useful for recovery of transformed cells because of low sensitivity,
high fluorescent backgrounds and limitations associated with the use of luciferase
genes as selectable markers.
More recently, a gene encoding Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) has been utilized
as a marker for gene expression in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. Chalfie et
al.,
Science 263:802 (1994). GFP and mutants of GFP may be used as screenable markers.
Promoters—Genes included in expression vectors must be
driven by nucleotide sequence comprising a regulatory element, for example, a promoter.
Several types of promoters are now well known in the transformation arts, as are
other regulatory elements that can be used alone or in combination with promoters.
As used herein, "promoter" includes reference to a region of DNA upstream from
the start of transcription and involved in recognition and binding of RNA polymerase
and other proteins to initiate transcription. A "plant promoter" is a promoter
capable of initiating transcription in plant cells. Examples of promoters under
developmental control include promoters that preferentially initiate transcription
in certain tissues, such as leaves, roots, seeds, fibers, xylem vessels, tracheids,
or sclerenchyma. Such promoters are referred to as "tissue-preferred". Promoters
which intitiate transcription only in certain tissue are referred to as "tissue-specific".
A "cell type" specific promoter primarily drives expression in certain cell types
in one or more organs, for example, vascular cells in roots or leaves. An "inducible"
promoter is a promoter which is under environmental control. Examples of environmental
conditions that may effect transcription by inducible promoters include anaerobic
conditions or the presence of light. Tissue-specific, tissue-preferred, cell type
specific, and inducible promoters constitute the class of "non-constitutive" promoters.
A "constitutive" promoter is a promoter which is active under most environmental conditions.
A. Inducible Promoters—An inducible promoter is operably linked to a gene
for expression in cotton. Optionally, the inducible promoter is operably linked
to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence which is operably linked to
a gene for expression in cotton. With an inducible promoter the rate of transcription
increases in response to an inducing agent.
Any inducible promoter can be used in the instant invention. See Ward et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol. 22:361-366 (1993). Exemplary inducible promoters include,
but are not limited to, that from the ACEI system which responds to copper (Mett
et al., PNAS 90:4567-4571 (1993)); In2 gene from maize which responds to benzenesulfonamide
herbicide safeners (Hershey et al.,
Mol. Gen Genetics 227:229-237 (1991)
and Gatz et al.,
Mol. Gen. Genetics 243:32-38 (1994)) or Tet repressor from
Tn10 (Gatz et al.,
Mol. Gen. Genetics 227:229-237 (1991). A particularly
preferred inducible promoter is a promoter that responds to an inducing agent to
which plants do not normally respond. An exemplary inducible promoter is the inducible
promoter from a steroid hormone gene, the transcriptional activity of which is
induced by a glucocorticosteroid hormone. Schena et al.,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 88:0421 (1991).
B. Constitutive Promoters—A constitutive promoter is operably linked to
a gene for expression in cotton or the constitutive promoter is operably linked
to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence which is operably linked to
a gene for expression in cotton.
Many different constitutive promoters can be utilized in the instant invention.
Exemplary constitutive promoters include, but are not limited to, the promoters
from plant viruses such as the 35S promoter from CaMV (Odell et al.,
Nature
313:810-812 (1985) and the promoters from such genes as rice actin (McElroy
et al.,
Plant Cell 2:163-171 (1990)); ubiquitin (Christensen et al.,
Plant
Mol. Biol. 12:619-632 (1989) and Christensen et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol. 18:675-689
(1992)); pEMU (Last et al.,
Theor. Appl. Genet. 81:581-588 (1991)); MAS
(Velten et al.,
EMBO J. 3:2723-2730 (1984)) and maize H3 histone (Lepetit
et al.,
Mol. Gen. Genetics 231:276-285 (1992) and Atanassova et al.,
Plant
Journal 2 (3): 291-300 (1992)).
The ALS promoter, Xba1/NcoI fragment 5′ to the
Brassica napus ALS3
structural gene (or a nucleotide sequence similarity to said Xba1/NcoI fragment),
represents a particularly useful constitutive promoter. See PCT application WO96/30530.
C. Tissue-specific or Tissue-preferred Promoters—A tissue-specific promoter
is operably linked to a gene for expression in cotton. Optionally, the tissue-specific
promoter is operably linked to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence
which is operably linked to a gene for expression in cotton. Plants transformed
with a gene of interest operably linked to a tissue-specific promoter produce the
protein product of the transgene exclusively, or preferentially, in a specific tissue.
Any tissue-specific or tissue-preferred promoter can be utilized in the instant
invention. Exemplary tissue-specific or tissue-preferred promoters include, but
are not limited to, a root-preferred promoter—such as that from the phaseolin
gene (Murai et al.,
Science 23:476-482 (1983) and Sengupta-Gopalan et al.,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 82:3320-3324 (1985)); a leaf-specific and
light-induced promoter such as that from cab or rubisco (Simpson et al.,
EMBO
J. 4(11):2723-2729 (1985) and Timko et al.,
Nature 318:579-582 (1985));
an anther-specific promoter such as that from LAT52 (Twell et al.,
Mol. Gen.
Genetics 217:240-245 (1989)); a pollen-specific promoter such as that from
Zm13 (Guerrero et al.,
Mol. Gen. Genetics 244:161-168 (1993)) or a microspore-preferred
promoter such as that from apg (Twell et al.,
Sex. Plant Reprod. 6:217-224
(1993). Signal Sequences for Targeting Proteins to Subcellular Compartments
Transport of protein produced by transgenes to a subcellular compartment
such as the chloroplast, vacuole, peroxisome, glyoxysome, cell wall or mitochondroin
or for secretion into the apoplast, is accomplished by means of operably linking
the nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence to the 5′ and/or 3′
region of a gene encoding the protein of interest. Targeting sequences at the 5′
and/or 3′ end of the structural gene may determine, during protein synthesis
and processing, where the encoded protein is ultimately compartmentalized.
The presence of a signal sequence directs a polypeptide to either an intracellular
organelle or subcellular compartment or for secretion to the apoplast. Many signal
sequences are known in the art. See, for example Becker et al.,
Plant Mol. Biol.
20:49 (1992), Close, P. S., Master's Thesis, Iowa State University (1993),
Knox, C., et al., "Structure and Organization of Two Divergent Alpha-Amylase Genes
from Barley",
Plant Mol. Biol. 9:3-17 (1987), Lerner et al.,
Plant Physiol.
91:124-129 (1989), Fontes et al.,
Plant Cell 3:483-496 (1991), Matsuoka
et al.,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 88:834 (1991), Gould et al.,
J. Cell.
Biol. 108:1657 (1989), Creissen et al.,
Plant J. 2:129 (1991), kalderon,
et al., A short amino acid sequence able to specify nuclear location,
Cell 39:499-509
(1984), Steifel, et al., Expression of a maize cell wall hydroxyproline-rich glycoprotein
gene in early leaf and root vascular differentiation,
Plant Cell 2:785-793 (1990).
Foreign Protein Genes and Agronomic Genes—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 which 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).
According to a preferred embodiment, the transgenic plant provided for
commercial production of foreign protein is a cotton plant. In another preferred
embodiment, the biomass of interest is seed. For the relatively small number of
transgenic plants that show higher levels of expression, a genetic map can be generated,
primarily via conventional RFLP, PCR and SSR analysis, which 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 CRC Press, Boca Raton 269:284 (1993). 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.
Likewise, by means of the present invention, agronomic genes can be expressed
in transformed plants. More particularly, plants can be genetically engineered
to express various phenotypes of agronomic interest. Exemplary genes implicated
in this regard include, but are not limited to, those categorized below:
1. Genes That Confer Resistance to Pests 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 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 encoddes a protein
kinase); Mindrinos et al.,
Cell 78:1089 (1994) (
Arabidopsis RSP2
gene for resistance to
Pseudomonas syringae).
B. A gene conferring resistance to a pest, such as nematodes. See e.g., PCT Application
WO96/30517; PCT Application WO93/19181.
C. 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 δ-endotoxin
gene. Moreover, DNA molecules encoding δendotoxin genes can be purchased
from American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Va., for example, under ATCC Accession
Nos. 40098, 67136, 31995 and 31998.
D. A lectin. See, for example, the disclose by Van Damme et al.,
Plant Molec.
Biol. 24:25 (1994), who disclose the nucleotide sequences of several
Clivia
miniata mannose-binding lectin genes.
E. A vitamin-binding protein such as avidin. See PCT application US93/06487,
the
contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. The application teaches
the use of avidin and avidin homologues as larvicides against insect pests.
F. An enzyme inhibitor, for example, a protease or proteinase inhibitor or an
amylase inhibitor. See, for example, Abe et al.,
J. Biol. Chem. 262:16793
(1987) (nucleotide sequence of rice cysteine proteinase inhibitor), Huub et al.,
Plant Molec. Biol. 21:985 (1993) (nucleotide sequence of cDNA encoding tobacco
proteinase inhibitor I), Sumitani et al.,
Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 57:1243
(1993) (nucleotide sequence of
Streptomyces nitrosporeus α-amylase
inhibitor) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,494,813 (Hepher and Atkinson, issued Feb. 27, 1996).
G. 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.
H. An insect-specific peptide or neuropeptide 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), and Pratt et al.,
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 163:1243
(1989) (an allostatin is identified in
Diploptera puntata). See also U.S.
Pat. No. 5,266,317 to Tomalski et al., who disclose genes encoding insect-specific,
paralytic neurotoxins.
I. An insect-specific venom produced in nature by a snake, a wasp, etc. For example,
see Pang et al.,
Gene 116:165 (1992), for disclosure of heterologous expression
in plants of a gene coding for a scorpion insectotoxic peptide.
J. 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.
K. An enzyme involved in the modification, including the ost-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.
L. 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.
M. A hydrophobic moment peptide. See PCT application WO95/16776 (disclosure of
peptide derivatives of Tachyplesin which inhibit fungal plant pathogens) and PCT
application WO95/18855 (teaches synthetic antimicrobial peptides that confer disease
resistance), the respective contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
N. A membrane permease, a channel former or a channel blocker. For example, see
the disclosure of Jaynes et al.,
Plant Sci 89:43 (1993), of heterologous
expression of a cecropin-β, lytic peptide analog to render transgenic tobacco
plants resistant to
Pseudomonas solanacearum.
O. 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
mosaidc virus, tobacco streak virus, potato virus X, potato virus Y, tobacco etch
virus, tobacco rattle virus and tobacco mosaic virus. Id.
P. 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).
Q. 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.
R. A developmental-arrestive protein produced in nature by a pathogen or a parasite.
Thus, fungal endo α-1,4-D-polygalacturonases facilitate fungal colonization
and plant nutrient release by solubilizing plant cell wall homo-α-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).
S. A development-arrestive protein produced in nature by a plant. For example,
Logemann et al.,
Bioi/Technology 10:305 (1992), have shown that transgenic
plants expressing the barley ribosome-inactivting gene have an increased resistance
to fungal disease.
2. Genes That Confer Resistance to a Herbicide, For Example:
A. A herbicide that inhibits the growing point or meristem, such as an imidazalinone
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.
B. Glyphosate (resistance impaired 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 hy
