hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive


Probably true that <most> seedlings are of known parentage.

But as for parents being known for registered seedlings, not at all
true.  Some top award winners have been from unknown parentage.  Even
from the most respected hybridizers occasionally lose track of where
some of their best seedlings came from.

Not to mention those who don't keep good records or guess at parents and
claim guesses as fact.

<As far as registering any seedling obtained, patented plant parent or
not, the
                   parents must be known.  ...... And  MOST
                   seedlings are of known parentage.>

I wonder how expensive it would be to test.

So if I understand what you are saying, if Neil gets a patent on a
genetically engineered genetic sequence for red genes in iris, gives me
a start of the clone that has it, tells me I can use it for making my
own crosses, I'm ok to do whatever I want with the seedlings.

But if he doesn't explicitly give me permission, I can still make
crosses using his plant, but can't sell them, until the patent expires.

I wonder if a plant would be technically considered "introduced", thus
elligible for awards, if it were advertised to be given away rather than

<the use of the patented plant in breeding is not
                   restricted to the best of my knowledge unless a
patent has been placed on a
                   specific genetic sequence genetically engineered
(placed into the genome)
                   artificially because it does not occur naturally in
the iris genome.   And if
                   a specific genetic sequence were patented and placed
into a patented iris it
                   can also be traced thru to all of it's progeny as to
whether they contain the
                   gene or not.  Thus anyone disputing that a patented
iris was used illegally
                   (against the patent WITHOUT THE PATENT OWNER'S
PERMISSION) could easily test
                   the questionable plants to see if they contain the
gene or not.>
Linda Mann east Tennessee USA zone 7/8
East Tennessee Iris Society <http://www.korrnet.org/etis>
American Iris Society web site <http://www.irises.org>
talk archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-talk/>
photos archives: <http://www.hort.net/lists/iris-photos/>
online R&I <http://www.irisregister.com>

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement