Abstract

Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) is an intellectual property system introduced in 1961 by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) for safeguarding the investment and rewarding innovation in developing new plant varieties. Despite the rapid advancement in our understanding of crop biology over the past 60 years, the DUS system has changed little and is still largely dependent upon a set of morphological traits for testing candidate varieties. As the demand for more plant varieties increases, the barriers to registration of new varieties become more acute and thus require urgent review to the system. To highlight the challenges and remedies in the current system, we evaluated a comprehensive panel of 805 UK barley varieties that span the entire history of DUS testing. Our findings reveal the system deficiencies such as inconsistencies in DUS traits across environments, limitations in DUS trait combinatorial space, and inadequacies in currently available DUS markers. We advocate the concept of genomic DUS and provide evidence for a shift towards a robust genomics-enabled registration system for new crop varieties.

Highlights

  • Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) is an intellectual property system introduced in 1961 by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) for safeguarding the investment and rewarding innovation in developing new plant varieties

  • UPOV currently requires the use of molecular markers only when they correlate with the DUS traits perfectly[20], which does not reflect the advances in genotyping technologies and understanding of DUS trait genetics

  • We suggest the idea of genomic DUS for overcoming various issues in the current DUS system and demonstrate its advantages in plant variety registration

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) is an intellectual property system introduced in 1961 by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) for safeguarding the investment and rewarding innovation in developing new plant varieties. Our analysis included marker data for 805 varieties from the IMPROMALT collection (http:// www.barleyhub.org/projects/impromalt/), of which 710 had DUS trait data. Regardless, with the reduction in DUS trait combinatorial space as measured by shrinkage in DUS trait Manhattan distances over time (Fig. 1c & d), especially in spring barley, small trait score differences can complicate variety identification.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call