Search

Crop breeding is the genetic improvement of crops for human benefit. In Korea, crop breeding by hybridization was initiated in the early 1900s. Since the development of the first rice variety ‘Namseon 1’ in 1932, a series of great achievements have been made in most of the crops. Of these, the development of ‘Tongil’ rice, which brought self-sufficiency of the staple food due to its high productivity, was a monumental achievement in Korea’s crop breeding history. Laws for Variety Protection and Seed Industry were established as of June 2013. Until 2018, a total of 7,644 crop varieties were registered for protection in the national variety list that is managed by the Korea Seed and Variety Service. Some Research/Development (R/D) programs for promoting crop breeding studies have been implemented with governmental support. However, domestic seed markets have stagnated for years because of reduced cropping area. Considering the fact that international seed market size has increased at an annual rate of more than 7%, seed export is regarded as a breakthrough measure for the expansion of the Korean seed industry. In order to obtain a competitive power in international seed markets, the Korean seed industry sector should be reinforced with manpower training, R/D investment, an international marketing system, and governmental support. More details are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The grain size and shape have a significant impact on the grain quality and yield of rice. Additionally, due to the globalization of the rice market, there is a demand for rice varieties of various sizes. In this study, we analyzed quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with grain length (GL), grain width (GW), grain thickness (GT) and ratio of length-to-width (RLW) using 149 F2 plants obtained from a cross between Hopum and Basmati 370. To construct a linkage map, we utilized 89 Fluidigm SNP markers, which covered a span of 1,116 cM of F2 population. Nine QTLs associated with four traits were identified on chromosomes 2, 3, 5, and 7. One major QTL on chromosome 3 accounted for 43.2% of the phenotypic variation in GL. Additionally, QTLs named qGW2 and qGW5 on chromosomes 2 and 5 were detected for GW, explaining 10.4% and 18.6% of the phenotypic variation, respectively. Three QTLs for GT were found on chromosomes 2, 5, and 7, explaining 9.9%, 12.9%, and 9.9% of phenotypic variation, respectively. These QTLs offer potential applications in breeding programs using Basmati 370 to develop long and slender grain japonica varieties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To compare agronomic and seed traits of 135 common bean landraces originating from Korea, Bulgaria, and El Salvador, we evaluated 20 morphological traits and performed principal component analysis (PCA). In the PCA, the first and second principal components accounted for 55.15% and 15.97% of the total variance, respectively. The first component showed a strong positive correlation with seed size and 100-seed weight, whereas the second component produced a strong negative correlation with days to flowering and days to maturity, indicating that these traits may explain the differences between landraces originating from different countries. Landraces from Korea showed higher variation in days to flowering and days to maturity; those from Bulgaria produced larger and heavier seeds; those from El Salvador produced smaller and lighter seeds and flowering and maturity occurred earlier. In addition, the landraces from El Salvador had relatively lower diversity compared to those from other countries, as they were grouped within a small cluster in the PCA. These evaluation results may provide important information for selecting breeding materials, and diversity analyses of landraces from different countries provide information for securing genetic resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, several attempts have been undertaken to develop breeding technologies by combining new biotechnologies. Gene-editing technology is currently one of the most interesting areas. The plant breeding methods using this technique have the advantage of greatly improved accuracy and efficiency of the plant genetic correction compared with conventional breeding methods, which has raised expectations for the useful application of this technology as a cutting-edge breeding technology. Although not all countries around the world currently have established appropriate regulation policies on crops developed with gene-editing technology, the number of cases in which GMO regulations are not applied on a case-by-case basis according to the scientific background is growing. However, Korea has not yet established policies on which criteria should be applied to crops generated from the application of gene-editing technology. As the number of cases of crop development and commercialization using gene-editing technology is expected to increase in the near future, it will be necessary to prepare reasonable policies to support developers and seed industries in Korea to ensure harmonization with international regulatory policy trends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eighteen years have passed since Korea introduced plant variety protection (PVP) system. Korea is being considered as one of the countries which introduced PVP system successfully. However, there have been lots of changes in circumstances surrounding PVP system during this period. Regarding future direction of PVP system in Korea, firstly the function and role of three organizations which now independently operate PVP system need to be reorganized to improve efficiency in PVP operation dealing with global issues. Secondly, authorities need to devise more user-oriented application form and process. This is because breeders feel some difficulties in preparing application documents. Thirdly, Korea has to create sound environments which guarantee effective enforcement of breeders' rights and secure reliability of the system against infringement. Regarding decision of infringement, a reasonable threshold should be set up to decide whether certain varieties are different from protected varieties or not using both growing test and DNA test. For essentially derived varieties (EDV), authorities need to establish a reasonable threshold to decide whether there is an essential derivation or not. In addition, to prevent dispute between PVP holders and farmers regarding the use of farm saved seeds in the future, clarification of farm saved seed article in legislation is necessary. Lastly, there might be some contradiction between PVP and Nagoya protocol in disclosure of origin, prior informed consent, benefit sharing, etc. In advance of enactment of domestic ABS law, authority needs to study impact of Nagoya protocol on PVP system to minimize confusion and damage on breeders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community Plant Variety Rights (CPVR) system was introduced in 1995 in European Union. This right guarantees the exclusive exploitation rights for a plant variety and is effective in 28 EU member states through a single application to the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO). The legal basis for the CPVR system is found in the Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 (the Basic Regulation). The scope of protection in the Basic Regulation is extended in the same way in UPOV 1991 convention. However, the protection of harvested material is not sufficiently well-defined in the Basic Regulation resulting in uncertainties and loopholes in the CPVR. By exceptions to the breeder’s right provision, farmers may save seed for some species provided that they pay an appropriate royalty to rights’ holder which is lower than that of equivalent certified seed. CPVR holders currently find it difficult to obtain royalties for farm saved seed (FSS) use, in part due to the difficulty in requesting information from farmers. The provision for ‘Essentially Derived Varieties’ (EDVs) helps to protect against plagiarism of plant varieties that are too similar to one another. However, there is no standardized protocol or threshold developed by CPVO to determine EDVs. The CPVR law provides a harmonized intellectual property regime for plant varieties at EU level, but enforcement varies widely in practice in Member States. And in some cases dispute resolution mechanisms are not easily accessible. This is considered to be one of the biggest problems inhibiting an effective EU-wide plant variety rights system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]