report on a desktop study to investigate the current world...

Report on a desktop study to investigate the current world resources in

Rosaceous fruit breeding programmes

July 2005

V.H. KnightK.M. Evans

D.W. SimpsonK.R. Tobutt

East Malling ResearchNew Road

East MallingKent

ME19 6BJ

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 3....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

APPROACHES .....................................................................................5

DESKTOP STUDY SURVEY RESULTS .....................................................6

1. Apple Scion Breeding Programmes ................................................................62. Apple Rootstock Breeding Programmes ...................................................... 113. Pear Scion Breeding Programmes ................................................................144. Pear Rootstock Breeding Programmes .........................................................185. Sweet Cherry Breeding Programmes ...........................................................226. Domestic Plum Breeding Programmes ....................................................... 26 7. Raspberry Breeding Programmes ............................................................... 328. Blackberry Breeding Programmes .............................................................. 399. Strawberry Breeding Programmes .............................................................. 43

CASE STUDIES ON METHODS OF RELEASE ......................................... 52

1. Apple ...........................................................................................................522. Sweet Cherry ...............................................................................................553. Domestic Plum ............................................................................................ 564. Raspberry ................................................................................................... 565. Strawberry .................................................................................................. 57

CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................59

APPENDIX

I. Sample survey .............................................................................................61II. Varieties released from East Malling ............................................................63III. Visiting workers and students trained at East Malling .................................68IV. Joint international papers .............................................................................74

2

INTRODUCTION

Background

Defra is currently supporting strategic programmes underpinning breeding of a range of Rosaceous fruit crops at East Malling Research (EMR). Rosaceous fruit crops are economically important in many countries in the world and most crops are traded as world commodities. The major Rosaceous fruit crops are: the pome fruits, apples and pears; the stone fruits, apricots, cherries, nectarines, peaches and plums; and the soft or small fruits, blackberries, raspberries and strawberries. Apricots, nectarines and peaches are not produced commercially in the UK and there are no breeding programmes at EMR. Breeding and trialling new fruit cultivars takes from 10-20 years and breeding programmes need to anticipate the future requirements of the market. New and developing areas of production use existing cultivars initially, often bred in different countries or continents. As these industries develop and generate interest and income, they look to improve their production, profitability or market share by producing their own cultivars. In most countries with an expanding fruit industry, much of the crop is exported to the USA or Western Europe and the industry has been developed by international companies. In this situation new breeding programmes are generally private or international collaborative programmes.

The Study

This desktop study to investigate the current world resources in Rosaceous fruit breeding programmes has focused on the important public and private breeding programmes, where information on the latter has been forthcoming. The study has compared the major breeding targets of the different programmes and their scale of operation. It also looked at their current funding sources (public, industry, private and/or royalty returns) and expectation of funding in the next five years. The study has compared the output of the different programmes in terms of numbers of cultivars released in the last 20 years, numbers of older cultivars which were considered a commercial success and the estimated numbers of cultivars likely to be released within the next 5 years. Lastly the study indicates where there has been an exchange of germplasm between EMR and other programmes in the world. Thus this desktop study illustrates how the UK fruit breeding effort fits in to the international context and compares the output of the EMR programmes with other larger, similar or smaller programmes.Within this report, we have produced:1. An extended and current network of useful international links to other

Rosaceous fruit breeding programmes.2. A comprehensive reference document for Defra and other interested parties,

outlining the state of play of current Rosaceous fruit breeding programmes in the UK and the rest of the world.

Overview of Findings

The fruit breeding team at EMR has used its contacts with many well established breeding programmes around the world. However some breeding programmes have been reduced or terminated in countries where production has declined or state funding is no longer available. Before the collapse of communism there were many breeding programmes in the former USSR and Eastern Europe but many of these countries are facing financial difficulties and EMR’s former contacts are no longer full-time breeders. Several of the programmes in Eastern

3

Europe reported a reduction on funding. With the exception of one strawberry breeding programme, no active breeders in Russia, Belarus, Moldova or the Ukraine, responded to the questionnaires sent from EMR.

This study showed that Rosaceous fruit breeders have a long list of breeding objectives and that fruit quality, pest and disease resistance, yield and regularity of cropping were universally very important. Resistance to individual diseases varied in importance in different countries, depending on which were the most damaging locally. Rosaceous fruit crops evolved in temperate regions and colder or hotter regions have different problems which are important targets in these regions.

The study showed that Rosaceous fruit breeding in general is strongly supported by governments, especially those in Australia, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, UK and USA. Programmes in the Czech Republic, France, New Zealand and South Africa also receive significant government support but sometimes only half the cost of the programmes. There are a number of totally private programmes in the soft fruits, strawberry (6), raspberry (2) and blackberry (1). Private and collaborative programmes expect level or increasing funding in the next 5 years but many public programmes forecast a decrease in funding.

There is a wide range of staffing levels in the various programmes ranging from nine full time equivalents (FTEs) in the University of California strawberry programme to 0.01% FTEs on pear rootstocks in Australia and Lithuania. With pome and stone fruit (scions and rootstocks) one individual is often responsible for three or four commodities. Rootstock breeding is decreasing and there are very few active programmes left. All established programmes have released several cultivars in the last 20 years and expect to release more in the next 5 years. The strawberry programmes released the highest number of cultivars and seven programmes in UK, Italy, Poland, Australia and USA have released between 16 and 33 cultivars since 1985. Pear scion and rootstock programmes have released the fewest cultivars. It takes years for the reputation of new fruit cultivars to be established, a few years in the case of strawberries but decades in the case of rootstocks. All programmes have released new cultivars which have been a commercial success in their country of origin but relatively few cultivars have had an international impact. Many of the pome and stone fruit scions and rootstocks released in the last 20 years have not yet been evaluated fully in the country of origin, far less overseas. Particularly important breeding institutes, in terms of current commercial cultivars, are those located in East Malling (apple rootstocks, pear scions, raspberries and strawberries), Cornell, USA (apple scions and rootstocks), Angers, France (pear rootstocks), British Columbia (cherries and raspberries) and California (strawberries and raspberries). In addition EMR has trained and collaborated with many fruit breeders from overseas and has published many international publications on collaborative work.

4

APPROACHES

This desktop study was undertaken as follows:

1. Up to date information was obtained in order to identify the principal breeding programmes by:

Literature searches using plant breeding journals, Plant Breeding Abstracts and proceedings from recent conferences and international meetings; mainly those organized by the International Society for Horticultural Science (ISHS), Eucarpia and the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI).

Attendance at international meetings or discussion with colleagues following their attendance e.g. the 2004 ISHS meetings on plums and strawberries; the IPGRI meeting on Prunus in Sweden.

2. An appropriate standard letter was designed and distributed requesting information from principal breeding contacts and followed up by email or telephone.

3. The information received was collated and assimilated with information from other sources.

4. The results were presented by summarizing the key breeding programmes worldwide in the major Rosaceous fruit crops and putting the UK breeding programmes in context. The report is divided into sections covering each crop separately as the questions asked and the responses given were, to some extent, crop specific. For each crop, the report contains, as available:

List of contacts of the key breeding programmes investigated Major breeding targets of each programme Scale of the programme, their funding and their medium to long

term outlook Estimated number of releases in the next 5 years, number of

releases in the last 20 years and number of successful older releases

Whether or not germplasm has been exchanged with East Malling Research

5. A description of how various cultivars have been released and commercialised by different programmes was prepared.

6. How the EMR programmes compare and relate to the other Rosaceous breeding programmes in the world was summarized briefly.

7. In addition the report contains four Appendices: A sample survey illustrating the information requested. A complete list of cultivars released from the East Malling breeding

programmes and an indication of their relative success, nationally and internationally.

A list of visitors and students who have been trained by the fruit breeding team at East Malling and an indication of how many individuals are still active in the discipline.

A complete list of joint international publications

5

DESKTOP STUDY SURVEY RESULTS

1. Apple Scion Breeding Programmes

Table 1.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes investigatedCountry

Institute Code Contact details Reply

Europe1 UK East Malling Research EMR Kate Evans

[email protected]

2 Belgium Better3Fruit, Leuven LUE Inge de [email protected]

3 Czech republic

Research and Breeding Institute of Pomology, Holovousy

HOL Jan [email protected]

France Delbard Nurseries, Malicorne [email protected]

4 France INRA Angers ANG Francois [email protected]

5 Latvia Dobele Horticultural Plant Breeding Experimental Station

DOB Lalia [email protected]

6 Lithuania

Lithuanian Institute of Horticulture, Babtai

BAB Bronius [email protected]

Rest of the worldAustralia

Manjimup Horticultural Research Centre [email protected]

.auChina Laiyang Agricultural

College, ShandongHongyi [email protected]

Japan Aomori Apple Experimental Station, Kennan Fruit Tree Research Centre

[email protected]

Japan National Institute of Fruit Tree Science, Morioka

Kazuyuki [email protected]

New Zealand

HortResearch, Havelock North

Richard [email protected]

7 South Africa

ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Stellenbosch

STE Iwan [email protected]

8 USA Cornell University, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, NY

GEN Susan [email protected]

USA Purdue University, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, and the University of Illinois

Schuyler [email protected]

6

mailto:[email protected]


The level of response from other breeders was generally quite disappointing, particularly outside Europe. This could be partly explained by the fact that there have been several questionnaires circulated by other breeders within the last year, including one from EMR asking about different cultural methods for fruit assessment plots.

Table 1.2 Major breeding targets

Breeding target

Apple breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

BELLEU

CZEHOL

FRAANG

LATDOB

LITBAB

SASTE

USAGEN

Fruit Quality Flavour 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Sugar level 1 Acidity 2 Texture 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Juiciness 1 1 1Attractiveness 1 1 1 1 1 1Non-browning flesh 2Higher vitamin C or antioxidant 1Freedom from storage disorders 1 1 3 2 1Storage ability 1 1 1 2 1 1 Shelf-life 1 3 Consistent quality 1 1 1Disease and Pest Resistance Resistance to Scab (Vf +) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2Resistance to Powdery mildew 2 1 1 2 2 3 2 Resistance to Fire blight 2 2 Resistance to Rosy apple aphid 3 2 Resistance to Nectria canker 3 2 3 Resistance to Phytophthora 2 Resistance to Phyllosticta 3 Multiple resistance 2 2 2Plant habit Precocity 1 2 Regular cropping 1 2 1 2 1Low chilling 1 Self thinning 2 2 3 Late flowering 3 Winter-hardiness 1 Resistance to spring frosts 2 Bearing type 3 * Vigour 2 Increased vegetative budbreak 2 Spindle-shaped * Easy training 2 2 1 Columnar-type apple 2 1 2 * Yield/Season

7

Medium to High productivity 1 2 1 2 1Middle /late season 1 * 1 * Summer / early season 3 2 * Whole season – range 3

1 = very important, 3= low importanceThe major breeding targets of the apple scion breeding programmes are, as expected, fairly similar when looking at fruit quality. All programmes, including EMR, focus on flavour (or sugar and acidity), and the majority also select for attractiveness, texture and storage ability. The importance of other more specific characters, such as high vitamin C or antioxidant levels, are more restricted, in this case to the USA.

All expressed an interest in resistance to pests and/or diseases; however with the exception of scab (Venturia inaequalis) resistance which is of high to medium importance to all the programmes, the range of resistances varies between the different programmes, most probably reflecting the problems of the local fruit industries. The reduced importance of breeding for resistance within the EMR apple breeding programme reflects the views of the funders, the Apple & Pear Breeding Club. Although they are keen for the programme to continue to produce resistant varieties, they have suggested keeping these crosses to less than half of the total of the programme.

Responses were much more varied towards plant habit and pomological traits, some of these again reflect the localised problems of the fruit industry particularly towards climate. For example, winter-hardiness and resistance to spring frosts are obviously problems in Latvia; however the South African programme is working towards varieties with a low chilling requirement. Four of the eight programmes expressed an interest in breeding for columnar-type habit.

Breeding for medium to high yield is generally of interest but there was little agreement about the importance of cropping season.

8

Table 1.3 Scale of the programme and medium to long term outlook

Apple scion breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

BELLEU

CZEHOL

FRAANG

LATDOB

LITBAB

SASTE

USAGEN

Staffing (number of FTE*)

0.8 4 2.5 1.6 1 2 5 2

Number of crosses per year

20 40 10 - 15

every 2nd year

20 to 30

20 + 4 to 20

Number of seedlings raised per year

12000-

15000

10000

5000 10000-

15000

2000- 3000

5000- 7000

1500- 20000

3000-7500

Number of selections for 1st stage trialling per year

500 100 50 20-30 15-20 40% 10 1-10%

Current funding: State 25% 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 25%RegionPrivate 90% 75% 50% 50% 25%Industry 10% 50% 50%

Future funding stable stable stable stable stable stable increasing

decreasing

* FTE = full time equivalents

The staffing levels of the programmes varied from five FTEs in South Africa right down to 0.8 FTEs in the EMR commercial breeding programme. Interestingly, the staffing levels do not appear to reflect the number of seedlings raised per year which is perhaps a more accurate indication of the scale of the programmes.

The large variation in the number of selections for first stage trialling per year could either reflect the differing selection protocols and growing systems of the breeders or could merely be an artefact due to misunderstanding of the question posed.

Sources of current funding are primarily from the state, with all of the programmes that responded receiving at least 25% of their funding from the state apart from the EMR commercial apple breeding programme. Only Latvia and Lithuania are still 100% state funded. Future outlooks appear to be generally stable apart from the South African programme where an increase in funding is expected and the Cornell, USA programme who are expecting a reduction in funding from the state but are hoping to fill the gap with more University or industry support.

9

Table 1.4 Release of varieties and germplasm exchange

Apple scion breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

BELLEU

CZEHOL

FRAANG

LATDOB

LITBAB

SASTE

USAGEN

Estimated number of new releases (in 5 yrs)

1? 5 5? 3? 5 - 7 30 - 40 1 5+

Number of releases in last 20 years 9 2 17 8 7 4 3 3Number of older releases 2 0 4 2 3 2 0 2

The number of releases (both previous and estimated future releases) varies widely across the programmes. Many of the programmes breed primarily for their local industry with very few of their varieties achieving any level of success elsewhere. Some of the programmes are also now restricted in terms of numbers of release due to the cost of protecting the varieties with a reasonable level of Plant Variety Rights or Patents. It would be very surprising if the proposed 30-40 releases from the Lithuanian programme (6) were all protected.

From the releases annotated in the table, there are perhaps only the two from the programme at Cornell University, USA (8), ‘Jonagold’ and ‘Empire’ that have had any sort of worldwide impact.

In terms of germplasm exchange, many of the programmes worldwide received some of the early disease resistant breeding lines from the programme at East Malling and have based many crosses on the same material. In more recent years, as with the apple rootstocks and the pear scions and rootstocks, advanced selection germplasm from the EMR Apple & Pear Breeding Club has been widely circulated to trial sites within the Club plus some external assessors however exchange of material for breeding has been restricted due to the commercial funding behind the programme. Some of the programmes however have benefited from the columnar apple breeding lines which are not held within the agreement between EMR and the Apple & Pear Breeding Club.

Some of the Czech material has been trialled at East Malling with a particular interest for use in organic production systems and ‘Julia’ has been used in the breeding programme. Two self-thinning breeding lines were recently received from INRA and both ‘Jonagold’ and ‘Empire’ from Cornell have also been used for crossing. As with the apple rootstock breeding programme, several selections have been incorporated into EMR breeding lines from the apple repository at Geneva, New York.

10

2. Apple Rootstock Breeding Programmes

Table 2.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes investigatedCountry Institute Cod

eContact details Reply

Europe1 U.K. East Malling Research EMR Kate Evans

[email protected]

2 Poland Research Institute of Pomology and Floriculture, Skierniewice

SKI Edward [email protected]

Rest of the WorldCanada Agriculture and Agri-

Food Canada, QuebecShahrokh [email protected]

Japan National Institute of Fruit Tree Science, Morioka

Kazuyuki [email protected]

3 New Zealand


HN Mike [email protected]

4 U.S.A. Plant Genetic Resources Unit USDA , Cornell University, Geneva, NY

GEN Gennaro [email protected]

There are very few active apple rootstock breeding programmes left and, with the exception of the programme at Geneva New York, they are generally staffed at a very low level with the breeders having other key areas of responsibility as is the case at East Malling Research.


Breeding targetApple rootstock breeding programmes

1 2 3 4UK

EMRPOLSKI

NZHN

USAGEN

Precocity 1Vigour, plant architecture modification 1 1 1 1Good anchorage 2 Nutrient uptake 3Propagation characters 2 2 2 2Freedom from spines 2 2 Freedom from suckers 2 Yield Efficiency 1 1Tolerance to fire blight 2 1 1Tolerance to Replant disease 1Tolerance to mildew 3 2 Tolerance to scab 3 3 Tolerance to Phythophtora cactorum 3 1 Tolerance to Woolly apple aphid 1 1 2Tolerance to Dysaphis devecta 3 Tolerance to Drought 2 2

11

Winter-hardiness 1 1= very important, 3= low importanceNot surprisingly, vigour and plant architecture modification are of primary importance to all four programmes, and propagation characters, although of lesser importance is again common to all four. Many of the other characters were mentioned as important to two or three of the four programmes and as with the apple scion programmes, much of the variation in major breeding targets can be explained by the difference in the local climate and pest and disease populations. The East Malling Research programme combines most of the objectives of the other three programmes but adds selection for freedom from suckers.

Table 2.3 Scale of the programme and funding

Apple rootstock breeding programmes1 2 3 4

UKEMR

POLSKI

NZHN

USAGEN

Staffing (number of FTE)

0.3 0.45 0.4 4


3 10 - 20 ? 3 - 5


500 2000 - 3000 10000 5000 - 20000


6 40 - 50 1000 100 - 400

Current funding: State 80% 90% 50% 100%Region Private 15% 10% 50% Industry 5%

Future funding probably

decreasingstable stable


There is a large variation in the size of the programmes; that of Geneva, New York, is considerably bigger than either EMR, Skierniewice or HortResearch. This is reflected in the estimated number of releases in the next five years. All four programmes receive at least half of their funding from the state. The lengthy timescale involved in producing new rootstocks limits the interest of private funders.


Apple rootstock breeding programmes1 2 3 4

UKEMR

POLSKI

NZHN

USAGEN

Estimated number of new releases (in 5yrs) 2 10 ? 15

Number of releases in last 20 years 1 12 0 7

12

Number of older releases 3 4 0 3As mentioned above, the large number of estimated releases in the next five years from Geneva New York (programme 3) reflects the greater size of the programme. To a smaller programme, the cost of fully testing and then releasing such a large number of rootstocks with a reasonable level of Plant Variety Rights or Patent cover would be prohibitive.

Judging the level of success of a rootstock is something that can only be carried out over decades rather than years, hence few of the rootstocks that have been released in the last 20 years are actually internationally known.

In more recent years, as with the apple scions and the pear scions and rootstocks, advanced selection germplasm from the EMR Apple & Pear Breeding Club has been widely circulated to trial sites within the Club plus some external assessors however exchange of material for breeding has been restricted due to the commercial funding behind the programme. The other three programmes have used some of the older East Malling releases (including M.9, M.26, M.27 and MM.106) in their breeding lines.

As with the apple scion breeding programme, several selections have been incorporated into EMR breeding lines from the apple repository at Geneva New York. Seven of the Geneva ‘G’ series of rootstocks have been trialled at EMR along with six of the ‘P’ series from Skierniewice however they have not yet been used in the breeding programme. Two of the Japanese ‘JM’ series rootstocks that are reported to be dwarfing and easy to propagate with a novel gene for Woolly apple aphid resistance are currently in quarantine at EMR prior to trialling.

13

3. Pear Scion Breeding Programmes


eContact details Repl

yEurope1 U.K. East Malling

ResearchEMR Kate Evans

[email protected]

France Delbard Nurseries, Malicorne

[email protected]

Italy Istituto Sperimentale per la Frutticoltura, Forli

Lorenza [email protected]

2 Lithuania Lithuanian Institute of Horticulture, Babtai


Rest of the World3 Australia Institute for

Horticultural Development, Knoxfield Centre

KNO Graeme [email protected]

4 Canada University of Guelph, Dept of Plant Agriculture, Ontario

ONT D.M. [email protected]

5 New Zealand


HN Lester [email protected]

6 South Africa

ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij, Stellenbosch

STE Taaibos [email protected]

U.S.A. Zaigers Genetics, Rosemore, California

Floyd [email protected]

7 U.S.A. USDA-ARS Appalachian Fruit Research Station, Kearneysville

KEA Richard [email protected]

Although there are generally fewer breeding programmes on European pear scions (Pyrus communis) than on apple, the number of responses to the questionnaire was only one less, however, for pear, these came primarily from the rest of the world rather than Europe. There were no programmes to target in Asia as there the pear industry focuses on other Pyrus species rather than P. communis.

14


Breeding target

Pear scion breeding programmes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

UKEMR

LITBAB

AUSKNO

CANONT

NZHN

SASTE

USAKEA

Fruit Quality Appearance 1 1 1 1 2 Colour 1 1 Knobbliness of fruit 2 Fresh quality 1 1 2 Processing quality 1 3 Taste 1 1 1 1 1 1Texture 1 * 1 1 1 1Flesh grit 1 1Fruit size 1 Storage ability 1 2 2 1 1 1Shelf life 1 1 Resistance to physiological disorders 1Disease and Pest Resistance Resistance to Fire blight 2 3 1 1 1Resistance to Pear scab 1 1 2 1 3Resistance to Powdery mildew 2 Resistance to Pear psylla 2 1Resistance to Caliroa cerasi 3 Resistance to Fabraea maculata 3Plant habit Precocity 1 2 2 1 1Self-fertility 3 3Cold tolerance 1 3Low chilling 1 Regular bearing 1 * 1Fruiting habit * * 3 2 3Bearing on 1 year wood 3 Ease of training 3 * 2 Reduced stature (dwarfing) 2Branching habit (crotch angles, etc.) 3 3Spindle-shaped * Yield/Season Yield 1 * 1 1 1Season 2 * 2 2 1 2Others P.communis x Asiatic spp hybrids * *

1 = very important, 3 = low importance

As with apple scions, the main breeding targets for fruit quality are generally consistent between the programmes, with appearance, taste, texture and storage ability being the most important. Other fruit quality traits such as processing quality are much more specific to programmes where there is the specific localised industry demand, in this case, Canada. Although still rated as

15

important, resistance to diseases and pests is slightly less of an issue with the pear scions than the apple scions. This could be because there are fewer well-documented sources of resistance in pear than in apple but also because there are generally more undesirable fruit quality traits to overcome. Precocity in pears is a main objective for many programmes. Pears can be considerably slower than apples to come into cropping which can have a major impact on the economics of cultivation. In a similar vein, yield is obviously important to the majority of programmes.

Both the New Zealand and Australian programmes have an interest in producing hybrids between Pyrus communis and some of the Asiatic pyrus species. In the case of New Zealand, the breeders have also been selecting Chinese germplasm to release straight onto the market without inter-crossing with Pyrus communis first.

Table 3.3 Scale of the programme and medium to long term outlook

Pear scion breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7

UKEMR

LITBAB

AUSKNO

CANONT

NZHN

SASTE

USAKEA

Staffing (number of FTE*)

0.2 0.4 3.6 2.2 1.8 1.4 2.25


5-10 10-15

40 60 22 15 - 20 30


1000-

2000

1000-

2000

3000 - 4000

10000 6000 - 8000

6000 - 10000

4000


50 8-10 30 up to 10

45 - 60

20 - 30 50 - 100

Current funding: State 100

%85% 95% 35% 100%

Region Private 100

% 5% 100%

Industry 15% 35% Royalties 30%

Future funding stable

stable

decreasing

stable stable stable to decreasin

g

decreasing


In terms of full-time equivalents, the commercial pear scion programme at EMR is by far the smallest. This reflects the different levels of interest in new pear scions of members of the Apple & Pear Breeding Club. However, the number of seedlings raised per year is just sufficient to maintain the programme’s viability.

The programme in Australia is relatively new, hence the large staff input with the lack of releases (shown below); commercial assessment of material only started two years ago. Again, as with apple scions, the variation in numbers of seedlings selected for first stage trials per year probably reflects differing selection

16

protocols and growing systems of the breeders or could merely be an artefact due to misunderstanding of the question posed.

Sources of funding vary but the majority of programmes still receive a large proportion (if not all) their funding from the state. Future funding is not looking too good as Australia, South Africa and the UDSA-ARS programme in the USA are all forecasting a decrease.


Pear scion breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7

UKEMR

UTBAB

AUSKNO

CANONT

NZHN

SASTE

USAKEA

Estimated number of new releases (in 5yrs)

2 0 2 ? 4 3 - 4 4

Number of releases in last 20 years

0 8 4 2 3

Number of older releases

1 2 2

The small number of releases from all the programmes reflects the difficulty in breeding and selecting new pear varieties. With the added problem of lack of precocity, as mentioned above, the length of time from cross to release is probably the longest of all of the fruit breeding programmes reported here (with the exception of rootstocks). Of the releases reported by the breeders above, very few have had a commercial impact yet away from the local industry of the programme. ‘Concorde’, although released in 1984 from East Malling and receiving the Royal Horticultural Society’s Award of Garden Merit in 1993, has only just started to be planted widely in the USA; 150,000 trees planted in 2003 in the Pacific north west. ‘Magness’ and ‘Moonglow’ from the USDA-ARS programme (7) in the USA are probably the best known of these newer pears but are still not really making any sort of commercial impact.

In terms of germplasm exchange, ‘Concorde’ is currently being used as a parent in the New Zealand programme. In more recent years, as with the apple scions and rootstocks and the pear rootstocks, advanced selection germplasm from the EMR Apple & Pear Breeding Club has been widely circulated to trial sites within the Club plus some external assessors; however, exchange of material for breeding has been restricted due to the commercial funding behind the programme.

‘Magness’ and ‘Moonglow’ have both been used in the EMR programme as sources of resistance to fireblight although it has been reported more recently that ‘Magness’ is susceptible. Several varieties from the Delbard programme in France (who unfortunately did not respond to the survey) have also been used as parents to increase fruit quality at EMR.

17

4. Pear Rootstock Breeding Programmes



yEurope1 UK East Malling

ResearchEMR Kate Evans

[email protected]

2 France INRA Angers ANG M.H. [email protected]

Germany

Forschungsanstalt Geisenheim

H. [email protected]

Italy Istituto di Biometeorologia, Bologna

Stephano [email protected]

3 Lithuania

Lithuanian Institute of Horticulture, Babtai


Rest of the World4 Australia Institute for

Horticultural Development, Knoxfield centre

KNO Graeme [email protected]

USA Southern Oregon Experimental Station, Oregon State University

David [email protected]

Pear rootstock breeding is complicated by the fact that both quince and Pyrus rootstocks are used in commercial pear production. To date, quince rootstocks provide better vigour control than Pyrus stocks however there can be some problems with graft compatibility between certain pear scion varieties and the quince rootstocks. They are also less tolerant of winter-chilling than Pyrus. Many nurseries throughout the world still use pear seedling rootstocks rather than actual rootstock varieties, however the Apple & Pear Breeding Club recognise the value of a good rootstock for pear and hence are continuing the programme at EMR which focuses on both quince and Pyrus.

As with apple rootstocks, finding pear rootstock programmes that are still active is rather difficult. Of the programmes which responded, both the Lithuanian and the Australian programmes are now only evaluating previously produced material. Neither are actively still breeding pear rootstocks.

18


Breeding target

Pear rootstock breeding programmes1 2a 2b 3 4

UKEMR

FRAANG

FRAANG

LITBAB

AUSKNO

Induction of precocity 1 Vigour control 1 1 2 * *Graft-compatibility 1 1 1 Good ability to propagate 1 1 1 * *Good productivity 1 2 1 Tolerance to fire blight 2 2 2 Tolerance to iron chlorosis 1 Tolerance to drought 2 2 Winter-hardiness *

1= very important, 3= low importance

The INRA programme (2) is a collaborative programme with Spain, hence the two different sets of major breeding targets seen above. Both programmes select for a good ability to propagate but 2a represents the Northern European breeding programme which focuses on dwarfing pear rootstocks with tolerance to fire blight, and 2b represents the Southern European programme which focuses on rootstocks with high iron chlorosis tolerance and good productivity.

In fact, good ability to propagate, vigour control and graft-compatibility are the most important breeding targets of the programmes that responded to the questionnaire, closely followed by the induction of good productivity. Tolerance to fireblight is also of reasonable importance to both the INRA programmes and that of EMR. Other targets are more specific such as the winter-hardiness in Lithuania and the tolerance to iron chlorosis in Spain. Induction of precocity is another major breeding target for the EMR programme as determined by the Apple & Pear Breeding Club.

19


Pear rootstock breeding programmes1 2 3 4

UKEMR

FRAANG

LITBAB

AUSKNO

Staffing (number of FTE*) 0.15 1.2 <0.01 <0.01

Number of crosses per year 1 to 2 every ~2/3

years

2 to 4 every ~3

years

0 0


~400 ~800 0 0


? ? 0 0

Current funding: State 90% 0 83%Region 10% 0 Private 90% 0 Industry 10% 0 17%

Future funding stable stable 0 Decreasing* FTE = full time equivalents

The programmes are all fairly small with two of the four now inactive apart from further selection work on previous crosses. The EMR and INRA programmes (1 & 2) follow a similar system of producing new crosses approximately every three years as the selection process for new pear rootstocks is lengthy and it can therefore be very easy to produce more new seedlings than can be practically managed.

Sources of funding are obviously very different, with EMR’s commercial pear rootstock breeding programme funded by the Apple & Pear Breeding Club and the INRA programme being primarily state funded. The Australian programme was officially only breeding rootstocks for five years so the decreasing amount of funding now only supports a continued level of screening of promising selections.


Pear rootstock breeding programmes1 2 3 4

UKEMR

FRAANG

LITBAB

AUSKNO

Estimated number of new releases (in 5yrs)

2? 0 ? ?


1 1 0 0


7 2 0 0

The numbers of releases from these programmes reflects the amount of time and effort required to produce and thoroughly test pear rootstocks. The seven rootstocks from the East Malling programme date back to the 1920/30’s when

20

Quince A to G were characterised. Much of the pear industry worldwide has since been based on Quince A and C with some plantings in more recent years using the INRA stocks, ‘BA29’ and ‘Sydo’. Both of the recent releases in the table above, ‘EMH’ (quince) from EMR and ‘Pyriam’ (Pyrus) from INRA are still in their infancy in rootstock terms having been released in 2001 and 1997 respectively. Possible new releases from the EMR programme include both a quince and a Pyrus rootstock.

As with the apple scions and rootstocks and the pear scions, advanced selection germplasm from the EMR Apple & Pear Breeding Club has been widely circulated to trial sites within the Club plus some external assessors however exchange of material for breeding has been restricted due to the commercial funding behind the programme. However, germplasm from other programmes e.g. ‘Pyrodwarf’ from Geisenheim and the Brossier stocks from INRA, has been trialled at East Malling although so far not incorporated into the breeding programme. Several of the OHF (Old Home × Farmingdale) series from Oregon, USA have been used in the EMR programme over many years as have two of the ‘B’ series of rootstocks from Stellenbosch, South Africa.

21

5. Sweet Cherry Breeding Programmes

Table 5.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes surveyed Country Institute Code Contact details Repl


ResearchEMR Kenneth Tobutt

[email protected]

Bulgaria Inst of Fruit GrowingKyustendil

M. [email protected]

2 Czech Republic

Research & Breeding Institute of Pomology Holovousy


3 France INRA Bordeaux -UREFV

BOR Jacques [email protected]

4 Germany BAZ Dresden DRE Mirko [email protected]

5 Hungary Research Institute for Fruit Growing and OrnamentalsBudapest

BUD Zsuzsanna [email protected]

6 Italy Institute of Pomology University of Bologna

BOL Silviero [email protected]

Romania Research Institute For Fruit Growing Pitesti-Maracineni

Sergiu [email protected]

Romania Fruit Growing Faculty of Horticulture - USAMV Iasi

Gica [email protected]

Turkey Ataturk Central Horticultural Research Institute, Yalova

Masum Burak [email protected]

Rest of the world7 Australia

PIRSA-SARDI Lenswood Research Centre

LENAndrew [email protected]

8 Canada Agriculture CanadaResearch Station Summerland, BC

SUM Frank [email protected]

USA Washington State University

Greg [email protected]

22










mailto:[email protected]%20





The level of response from other breeders was satisfactory, especially from the institutes with whom EMR is in regular contact. There are thought to be few cherry breeding programmes in Asia.

23


Breeding target

Sweet Cherry Breeding Programme1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

CZEHOL

FRABOR

GERDRE

HUNBUD

ITABOL

AUSLEN

CANSUM

Fruit QualityFruit size 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Fruit firmness 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 1Fruit colour- black 1 2 2 2 2Fruit colour- white 1 3 3Fruit flavour 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2Cracking tolerance 1 2 3 1 1 1

ResistanceMonilinia laxa – brown rot 3 2 3 2 2Blumeriella jaapii - leaf spot 2 3 2 2 1Pseudomonas syringae - canker 3 3 1 3 3 3Stigmina carpophila – shot hole 1 3 3Myzus cerasi - blackfly 1 1 3 3

Plant habitUpright 1 3 3Spreading 1 3 1 2Compact 1 2 3

Yield /Crop/ SeasonYield 1 1 1 1 1 3 1Early ripening time 1 2 1 1 1 2Late ripening time 1 1 1 3 1 1 1

Others Mechanical harvesting 1 2 3Tolerance to spring and winter frost 3 3 2 3Self compatibility 1 3 2 1 1 1Late flowering 1 2


Fruit size, flavour and firmness are targets of all the breeding programmes and most mentioned resistance to cracking. Regarding colour, most programmes concentrate on black flesh, though a minority aim at white.

Most of the European programmes aim at resistance to brown rot, leaf spot and canker and, to a lesser extent, shothole and blackfly. The non-European programmes were far less concerned with these – presumably a reflection of few pest and disease problems in their home countries. (A consequence may be that

24

cultivars bred in, e.g., Australia may be less resistant to pests and diseases encountered in the UK.)

Spreading tree habit is an aim of most, but not all, programmes. A minority aim for upright or for compact habit.

Yield is important to most. Both early and late ripening are aims in all programmes except EMR’s. In the UK, early season is less important for home-grown fruit as the market is well supplied from warmer countries.

Regarding other qualities, self-compatibility is an aim for most programmes and a minority mentioned mechanical harvesting, frost tolerance and late flowering.


Sweet Cherry Breeding Programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

CZEHOL

FRABOR

GERDRE

HUNBUD

ITABOL

AUSLEN

CANSUM

Staffing (number of FTEs)*

0.2 1.5 1 1.5 2 5 2.2 3


~ 10 15 6 to 10 ~20-30 10 ~ 15-20

~ 20 10-20

Number of seedlings raised for screening and selection per year

~ 500 50-200

500 ~400 4-500 ~150-180

2-3000 800-1000

Number of seedlings selected for multiplication for further observations/first stage trial per year

~5 20 5-10 ~10 ~ 20 ~20 1-5 30-50

Current funding:

State ~ 90% 50% 80% 100% 80% 30% 100%Region 10% 85% 50%Private ~10% 50% 10% 20% 15%Other 20%

Future funding stable stable stable decreasin

gdecreasin

g stablestable to decreasin

g *FTE = full-time equivalents

25

The staffing levels ranged from 0.2 full-time equivalents (FTEs) at EMR to three in Canada. However, in recent years, the EMR programme has benefited from PhD students, etc., who have greatly increased our capacity for genetic work.

Perhaps the best measure of the scale of the programme is the number of seedlings raised each year. Generally, this is around the EMR average of 500 per annum. However, the range is from ~150 seedlings per annum at INRA Bordeaux and at the University of Bologna, to 2,500 per annum at SARDI Lenswood.

If efficiency is regarded as the number of seedlings per FTE, this ranges from 2,500 for EMR to fewer than 100!

Most of the programmes select about 1% or 2% for trial. The main exceptions were the two smallest programmes, which select about 13%, and the largest programme, which selects about 0.2%.

Most of the programmes receive at least 85% of their funding from national or regional governments. The main exception is the Czech programme, which receives 50% private funding. Future prospects are of stable or decreasing funding.


Sweet Cherry Breeding Programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UKEMR

CZEHOL

FRABOR

GERDRE

HUNBUD

ITABOL

AUSLEN

CANSUM


3 4 5 1 5 15-20

1 or 2

?


1 9 10-12

11 15 8 5 10?

Number of older releases successful internationally

1 2 0 3 3 0 1

Most programmes envisage releasing 1 to 5 cultivars in the next five years. Surprisingly, the smallest programme in terms of seedlings raised (generating 150-180 seedlings p.a.), but the largest in terms of FTEs, envisages releasing 15 to 20 cultivars!

Regarding releases in the past 20 years, the number generally ranged from 5 to 12. EMR, as the youngest programme and only 20 years old, was the exception. We released our first cultivar, ‘Penny’, which is performing very well, in 2001.

A consequence of the relative youth of the EMR programme is that our cultivars and selections have not yet been used in other breeding programmes. However, several programmes have used material from the forerunner of the EMR programme at the John Innes Institute. In addition, we have recently sent breeding lines to BAZ Dresden, with whom we are collaborating closely. The

26

cultivars we have used in our breeding programme come mostly from the John Innes Institute or from Summerland, Canada.

27

6. Domestic Plum Breeding Programmes

Table 6.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes surveyed Country Institute Cod



ResearchEMR Kenneth Tobutt

[email protected]

2 Bulgaria Fruit Growing Institute, Plovdiv

PLO Valentina [email protected]

Croatia Faculty of Agriculture University of Zagreb

ZAG Zlato [email protected]

3 Czech Republic

Research & Breeding Institute of Pomology Holovousy


4 Germany Institute for Crop Research, University of Hohenheim

HOH Walter [email protected]

Germany Geisenheim Research Institute, Department of Pomology

Helmut [email protected]

Hungary Central Food Research Institute

Estelle [email protected]

Hungary Fruit Research Institute

Dezso [email protected]

Norway Planteforsk UllensvangResearch Centre

Eivind Vangdal [email protected]

Norway Planteforsk Division

Stein Harald [email protected]

5 Poland Research Institute of Pomology and Floriculture, Skierniewice

SKI Anna Lisek [email protected]

6 Romania Research Institute for Fruit Growing, Pitesti

PIT Madalina [email protected]

7 Romania Fruit Growing Research Station, Valcea

VAL Mihai [email protected]

8 Serbia Fruit and Grape Research Centre, Čačak

CAC Dobrivoje [email protected]

Rest of the world9 Canada Research Station,

VinelandVIN Jayasankar Subramanian

[email protected]

1 USA Department of CAL Carolyn DeBuse

28

















0 Pomology, University of California

[email protected]

The level of response from other breeders was satisfactory. In part, this was a consequence of contacts made at the ISHS Plum Symposium held in Norway in September 2004. It should be noted that “plum” breeding programmes in warmer regions of the world and in east Asia are generally of Prunus salicina, a species not cultivated in the UK, and were thus excluded from this survey.


Breeding target1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

UKEMR

BULPLO

CZEHOL

GERHOH

POLSKI

ROMPIT

ROMVAL

SERCAC

CANVIN

USACAL

Fruit QualityDessert 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Processing 1 3 1 1 1 1 1Fruit size 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2Blue skin 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2Red skin 1 2Yellow-greenish 1Yellow-orange flesh 2 3 2 1 2 2Fruit flavour 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1Firmness of flesh 3 2 1Free stone 2 3 1 1 1 2Shelf life 1ResistanceMonlinia 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 3Plum Pox Virus 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Aphids 3 1Russet scab 3Tranzschelia discolor 3Polystigma rubrum 2 2Plant habitSpreading 2 2 1 1Upright 1 1 1 2 2Compact 1Weeping 2Spurring 1Yield /Crop/ SeasonYield 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1Early and late ripening varieties 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1Precocity 2 1 3Tolerance to spring frost 2 2 2Others

29


Self compatibility 2 1 2 1 2 1 2Late flowering 1 2Winter hardness 2Easy machine harvested 3

1 = very important, 3 = low importanceAll but one of the respondents breeds plum as a dessert fruit and most also breed it for processing.

Fruit size is a target of all the programmes and fruit flavour of most of them. All are aiming for blue plums, except EMR specifying red plums for dessert, and one not indicating either colour. (So overseas breeders are unlikely to provide the red plums preferred by the UK trade.) Several mentioned flesh colour – generally yellow-orange, but yellow-green in the case of Poland. Free stone and firm flesh were mentioned as targets by a minority of respondents.

Resistance to Monilinia is a target of all the programmes, and resistance to Plum Pox virus a target for all the European programmes. Resistance to aphids and to Leaf Blotch was mentioned by just two European respondents and resistance to Russet Scab and to Rust just by the American respondent.

About half the programmes are aiming at spreading habit and half at upright habit. In addition, compact habit, spur habit and weeping habit were each mentioned by one respondent.

Yield is a target of nearly all the programmes and all are aiming at both early and late cultivars. Precocity and resistance to spring frost were mentioned by a minority of respondents.

Regarding other characteristics, self-compatibility is a target of most of the programmes. Winter hardiness and late flowering had one or two mentions.

30

Table 6.3 Scale of programme and funding

1 2 3 4 5UK

EMRBULPLO

CZEHUL

GERHOH

POLSKI


0.1 4 0.8 1 1/5 breeder and 0.4

technicianNumber of crosses per year

5 (not every year)

~20 ~5-10 30 20-40


200 200-300 250 1000 ~ 1000


2 5 20 20 ~5

Current funding: State 80% 20% 50% 80% Region 20%Private 50%Others 20% 80%

(earnings)80% from university

20% (other resources)

Future funding stable stable stable stable decreasing6 7 8 9 10

ROMPIT

ROMVAL

SERCAC

CANVIN

USACAL


2 2 3 0.4 1


30 20 (more than

15000 pollinated flowers)

10-40 3 35-40


500 1000-1500 150-3500 100-300 1000-2000


50 25-30 0-15 5-30 25-40

Current funding: State 60% 100% 60% 60%Region 20%Private 20%Others 40% (own 40%

resources)100% from California

Dried Plum

31

Board Future funding decreasing stable decreasing stable unknown

With one exception, the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) working on the programme ranged from 0.4 to 4. The exception was EMR – 0.1 FTE – where plum breeding is just a minor part of the stone-fruit improvement project, which concentrates on cherry.

Regarding the numbers of seedlings raised per year, the smaller programmes are those in EMR, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic and Romania (Pitesti) with a maximum of 500. The larger programmes, in Germany, Poland, Romania (Valcea), Serbia and USA produce a minimum of 1,000.

In terms of numbers of seedlings produced per FTE, the most efficient programmes are those in Poland (2,500) and EMR (2,000), whereas that in Bulgaria apparently generates only 80 seedlings per person. With one exception, the percentage of seedlings selected for further observation or initial trial was in the range of 0.5% to 10%.

Most of the programmes are largely state-funded. The exceptions are the American programme (to breed plums for processing), which is entirely supported by the Californian Dried Plum Board, and, in Europe, the Bulgarian and Czech programmes, which receive 80% and 50% non-state funding, and the German programme, which receives 80% of its funding from the Hohenheim University.

Concerning future prospects, the outlooks are ‘stable’ or ‘decreasing’.


Domestic Plum Breeding Programmes1 2 3 4 5

UKEMR

BULPLO

CZEHOL

GERHOH

POLSKI


2 ~20 2 5 ~ 5-10


2 0 1 8 4


0 3 3 0

Domestic Plum Breeding Programmes6 7 8 9 10

ROMPIT

ROMVAL

SERCAC

CANVIN

USACAL


5 4-5 4-5 2-4 1-2


14 3 6 4 3


8 0 4 3 0

32

Most of the programmes envisage releasing from two to ten cultivars in the next five years, although the Bulgarian programme, one of the smallest, is more optimistic and expects to release about 20.

Releases in the last 20 years range from 0 for the Bulgarian programme, which started less than 20 years ago, to 14. None of the cultivars released from the overseas institutes responding have been planted in the UK – to some extent a consequence of the UK’s preference for red over blue plums. However, one cultivar from Germany, ‘Jojo’, is of interest on account of its reported immunity to Plum Pox virus and has been used in the EMR breeding programme.

None of these corresponding institutes has used either of the two East Malling plum cultivars, ‘Avalon’ and ‘Excalibur’, in their breeding programmes. To some extent, this may be because these cultivars have red skin rather than the blue favoured overseas. The East Malling programme has mostly used traditional English cultivars, and ‘Avalon’ and ‘Excalibur’ in its programme and more recently ‘Jojo’, as mentioned above.

33

7. Raspberry Breeding Programmes

Table 7.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes investigatedCountry

Institute Code Contact details Reply

Europe1 UK East Malling

ResearchEMR Vicky Knight

[email protected]

2 UK Scottish Crop Res. Institute, Dundee

DUN Nikki [email protected]

France Jacques Marionnet, Soings-en-Solongne

Laurent [email protected]

3 Hungary

Fertöd Research Institute of Fruit Growing, Sarrod

FER László Kollányikollanyig@hotmail/com

Latvia Horticultural Plant Breeding Experiment Station, Dobele

Sarmite [email protected]

Norway Planteforsk Njos, Leikanger

Dag [email protected]

Poland Research Institute of Pomolgy, Brzezna

Jan [email protected]

Romania

Fruit Research Institute, Pitesti-Maracineni

Paula Mladinicpp [email protected]

4 Serbia Fruit and Viticulture Research Institute, Čačak

CAC Aleksander [email protected]

Sweden Balsgard-Department of Plant Breeding, Kristianstad

Bo [email protected]

Rest of the world5 Canada Pacific Agri-Food

Research Centre, Agassiz, BC

BC Chaim [email protected]

New Zealand

HortResearch, Motueka

Harvey [email protected]

6 USA Cornell University, Geneva, NY

GEN Courtney [email protected]

7 USA Driscoll Ltd, Watsonville, CA

DRI Carlos [email protected]

8 USA Five Aces Breeding, Maryland University, MD

MD Harry [email protected]

9 USA Northwest Centre for Small Fruit Research,

COR Chad [email protected]

34



Corvallis, OR10

USA Washington State University, Puyallup, WA

PUY Pat [email protected]

Most raspberry breeding is carried out in Europe and North America and this study concentrates on the most important programmes. The majority of the raspberry breeders, who were approached directly, responded and 13 out of 16 questionnaires were returned. There was no reply from HortResearch, New Zealand, or Poland, both of which are important programmes. All attempts to contact any Russian breeders failed.

Twenty years ago, there were raspberry breeders in Moscow, St Petersburg, Bryansk (central Russia), Barnaul (Siberia) and Kiev (Ukraine), but it is impossible to say if any or all of these programmes are continuing. Chinese Rubus spp. have been collected and are being evaluated in China and N. America, but there appears to be no raspberry breeding as such.

Five Aces Breeding is an American company which has arisen out of the privatization of the public co-operative Rubus programmes of the University of Maryland/Rutgers/ Wisconsin/Virginia Tech. and River Falls. It has several client companies (including BerryWorld in the UK) which owns and grows Five Aces Breeding-produced seedlings and several private co-operators who partially own the seedlings and their IP. Five Aces Breeding are breeding for Hortifrut in Chile but Hortifrut considered the information requested to be confidential. The breeder in New Zealand also runs a private breeding programme in Washington State but did not return a questionnaire.

The senior breeder at Driscoll, California, explained that much of the information requested was commercially sensitive, but the Driscoll programme has been included because it is so important. The Driscoll raspberry programme (formerly Sweetbriar) has developed rapidly in the last 10-15 years and is very significant in terms of the number of cvs that it has produced and the extent of its co-operative programmes in Europe, including with KG Fruits in the UK.

Programmes with less than one full-time breeder (France, Latvia, Norway, Romania and Sweden) were not included in the results.

35

Table 7.2 Major breeding targetsRaspberry breeding programmes

Breeding target1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

UKEMR

UKDUN

HUNFER

SERCAC

CANBC

USAGEN

USADRI

USAMD

USACOR

USAPUY

Fruit QualityColour 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1Flavour 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1Size 1 2 1 2 2 1Firmness/cohesion 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Regular outline 1 2Brix/soluble solids/acidity 2 2Shelf life 1 1 1 2Suitability for IQF 2Suitability for shipping 1Alternative colours 2Disease and Pest ResistanceAphids 1 1 1 2 2 1Phytophthora root rot 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1RBDV 1 2 1 1 2Cane diseases 2 3 1 2Cane Botrytis and cane spot 2Cane blight and midge blight 1Virus diseases 2 2 2Pre- and post-harvest rots 1 2Verticillium 1 1-3Crown gall 2Bacterial blight 2Late season leaf rust 2Two-spotted spider mites 2

Plant habitEase of plugging 2 2 1Upright canes 2 2 2 1 1Well attached laterals 1 2 2Good presentation 2 2 1Cane vigour 2 2 3 2Short internodes 2 1Absence of spines 2 1 2 1 3

Yield/SeasonHigh and consistent yields 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Early and very early SF 1 1 1 2 2 1Late and very late SF 1 1 2 1Early PF 1 1

OtherWinter hardiness 1 1Machine harvestability 2 1 1 1Sun tolerance 2


36

Slightly over half of the raspberry breeding programmes are breeding summer fruiting (SF) and primocane fruiting (PF) types. Of the key programmes East Malling, Cornell, Driscoll, Five Aces and Corvallis are breeding PF types; plus programmes in Australia, Chile, France, Poland, Sweden and Switzerland. SCRI, British Columbia, Corvallis, Washington State and New Zealand are breeding for machine harvesting. SCRI, which had been 100% geared to producing machine harvesting types in the recent past, moved back to hand-picked, fresh market types in 2003. A very high proportion of the crop in the Pacific North West is picked by machine for processing and machine harvestability remains a high priority and an early selection criterion for British Columbia, Corvallis and Washington State. Driscoll, who ship very large quantities of fresh fruit from California and Mexico to N. America and Europe, have one breeder based in Washington State who is breeding summer fruiting mechanical harvesting types. Allegedly the NZ raspberry effort, which has concentrated on machine harvesting in the last 10-15 years, has been reduced recently.

Cornell and Corvallis are currently breeding black raspberries or ‘black caps’ (R. occidentalis) and breeding for Verticillium wilt is a high priority in both programmes. At present Corvallis is reducing its red raspberry programme and “making a hard but short duration push to see what they can achieve in a few years.” Approximately half of the seedlings raised/year at present are black raspberries and more blacks than reds have been selected for trialling recently.

Every programme rated fruit quality targets as very important, and in particular, colour, flavour, size, texture and shelf life. Suitability for shipping or IQF corresponded to their prospective use.

Resistance to aphids (sometimes conferring virus avoidance), Phytophthora root rot and raspberry bushy dwarf virus (RBDV) are rated important or very important in many programmes. Some breeders are actively screening for resistance while others are eliminating susceptibles in the field. Resistance to other cane and root diseases reflect what are important problems in different locations. It is interesting that no-one mentioned resistance to raspberry beetle. This is an extremely damaging pest in Europe but resistance has only been found in species material and has been very difficult to maintain in later generations.

All aspects of plant habit relate to yield or picking efficiency. All breeders are selecting for cultivars which can be managed and picked readily. Reasonably high yields are essential to any commercial operation but the timing of fruit production is also very important. Most programmes are aiming to produce cultivars which crop outside their main summer fruiting peak.

37


Raspberry breeding programmes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

UKEMR

UKDUN

HUNFER

SERCAC

CANBC

USAGEN

USADRI

USAMD

USACOR

USAPUY

Staffing (number of FTE*) 1.3 2 3 1 2 1.5 4.5 5 2.7 4

Number of crosses per year 30-40 100 10-20 10-15 30-50 50-60 150-250 15 100


12,000-15,000

10,000-12,000 400-600 2,000-

2,5006,000-8,000

2,000-2,500 25,000 1,800 6,000

Number of seedlings selected for 1st stage trialling per year

40-50 20-30 10-20 5-6 40-50 50-65 30-40 5-6 60

Current funding:

State 72% 49% 20% 100% 70% 60% 90% 80%

Industry 28% 51% 20%

Private 30% 100% 100%

Other 80% 40% 10%

Future funding stable stable decreasing stable stable

stable-decreasin

gstable increasin

g stable stable


38

In terms of numbers of staff (FTE) and number of seedlings raised per year, the biggest programmes are probably Five Aces Breeding, Driscoll, EMR and SCRI, but the figures presented hide a wealth of detail. For example, of the five staff listed as breeding raspberries at Five Aces Breeding, only one is directly at Five Aces Breeding, while four are at client companies. Raspberry breeders in the UK, USA and Canada (and almost certainly elsewhere) have student or casual help for fruit picking in the summer but these were not included in the number of FTEs. Numbers of seedlings raised equates to numbers planted in some programmes but not in others. For example, EMR and SCRI screen for aphid resistance and spinelessness prior to planting so the number planted is less than half the number raised. Driscoll did not provide figures but theirs is a substantial programme.

Most breeders reported stable funding but the general trend was a decrease in public funding (state, region) and an increase in funding from industry/private or other sources. Only Čačak, Latvia and Norway reported 100% state funding. Again the figures are open to interpretation; grower and commodity commissions were classified as ‘other’ income in N. America, whereas in the UK this type of funding is called industry funding. Interestingly, none of the raspberry breeders indicated significant funding being returned to their programme via royalties or plant patents.


Raspberry breeding programmes

1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10UK

EMRUK

DUNHUNFER

SERCAC

CANBC

USAGEN

USADRI

USACOR

USAPUY

Estimated number of new releases (in 5 yrs) 2-4 1-3 2-3 4-6 3 7-10 2 2-4Number of releases in last 20 years 10 8 6 7 4 16 8 4 5Older releases which have been successful in commercial production in country of origin

7 2 4 8 7 1 5 2 1

Releases which have been successful internationally

4 2 1 1 ?1-3 1

Germplasm exchange with EM

Approximately 110 SF and 50 PF cultivars have been released in the last 25 years and all programmes are expecting to release more new cultivars in the next 5 years. All programmes release cultivars which come to nothing. This happens in breeding perennial crops where the final selection is full-scale commercial production over several years. However, all the key programmes have produced cultivars which have been commercially successful in their country of origin and most have produced cultivars which have been widely grown in other countries. Included in this group of internationally successful cultivars are ‘M. Jewel’, ‘M. Promise’, ‘M. Exploit’, ‘Autumn Bliss’, ‘Glen Ample’, ‘Glen Lyon’, ‘Tulameen’, ‘Heritage’, ‘Isabel’, ‘Holyoke’, ‘Tola’ and ‘Meeker’. Driscoll turn over new cultivars very quickly because they have short-lived plantations which are only in the

39

ground for 18 months, plus they have total control of all aspects of propagation and production.

All the key programmes, plus other programmes in Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Norway, Poland, Romania and Sweden have received germplasm from East Malling in the past. Numerous cultivars and EM selections have been given to other programmes and the following were listed as having been used as parents – ‘M. Promise’, ‘M. Exploit’, ‘M. Admiral’, ‘M. Delight’, ‘Leo’, ‘Augusta’, ‘Julia’, ‘M. Minerva’ (SFs); ‘Autumn Bliss’, ‘Autumn Britten’ and ‘Autumn Cascade’ (PFs) and selections with R. spectabilis, R. crataegifolius and other species in their background. ‘Autumn Bliss’ has been the most widely used as a parent in other programmes. In turn, East Malling has received material from SCRI, British Columbia, Corvallis, Poland, Redeva (formerly Medway Fruits) and Washington State. Germplasm was exchanged freely between public-funded programmes in the past but is now greatly reduced due to the number of private or semi-private programmes which restrict exchange and the increased costs associated with importing material from overseas and getting it through quarantine.

40

8. Blackberry Breeding Programmes


eContact details Reply

Europe1 UK Scottish Crop Research

Institute, DundeeDUN Nikki Jennings

[email protected]

Rest of the worldNew Zealand

HortResearch, Nelson Research Centre, Motueka

Harvey [email protected]

2 USA Arkansas University, Dept. of Horticulture and Food Science, AR

ARK John [email protected]

3 USA Five Aces Breeding, University of Maryland, MD

MD Harry [email protected]

4 USA USDA-ARS, Northwest Centre for Small Fruit Research, Corvallis, OR

COR Chad [email protected]

Blackberries are worth much less than raspberries as a commodity and, consequently, there is much less effort going into blackberry breeding worldwide. The American public-funded programme in Arkansas is the only Rubus breeding programme which is devoted entirely to blackberries. Blackberries are a significant part of the Rubus programme in Oregon, but a minor part of the programmes in Scotland, Poland, Serbia, Sweden and at Five Aces Breeding. The Arkansas programme is breeding erect summer fruiting (SF) and primocane fruiting (PF) blackberries. The breeder in Arkansas is also involved in a co-operative programme in Brazil. Oregon and Five Aces Breeding are breeding erect and trailing SF blackberries, PF blackberries and Rubus hybrid berries. SCRI only have a small programme on erect blackberries, but are included as a key programme in this review because theirs is the only UK programme.

The New Zealand programme is a key programme but unfortunately did not respond to the questionnaire. The main focus of the New Zealand programme was to produce thornless, machine-harvestable Boysenberry types. These are a type of Rubus hybrid which, by definition, includes some raspberry and some blackberry in its background.

41


Blackberry breeding programmes

Breeding target1 2 3 4

UKDUN

USAARK

USAMD

USACOR

Fruit Quality Colour 1 1Flavour 1 1 1 1Size 2 2 1Attractiveness 1 2Firmness/cohesion 1 1 2 2Absence of bleeding 1 2High soluble solids and acidity 1Shelf life 1Suitability for shipping 1Seed size 2

Disease & Pest ResistanceAnthracnose (dryberry, cane spot) 1 2Botrytis 2 2Purple blotch (Septocyta ruborum) 2Cane and leaf rust (Kuehneola uredinis) 3 2Septoria leaf spot (Septoria rubi) 2Double blossom/ rosette 2RBDV 2

Plant habitErect primocanes 2 1 2Cane vigour 2Branching of primocanes (in PF types) 1Absence of thorns 1 2 1Trailing primocanes (for machine harvesting) 1

Yield/SeasonHigh yields 1Early ripening 1 1Primocane fruiting 1Range of seasons in floricane types 1 1Range of seasons in primocane types 1 1

OtherMachine harvestability (MH) 1MH small fruit for bakery market 2Heat tolerance 2


All four key programmes rated flavour and texture as very important; other important or very important fruit quality targets were size, colour, attractiveness and absence of bleeding. High soluble solids, shelf life, suitability for shipping and seed size were rated as important by individual programmes.There was less importance placed on pest and disease resistance. Resistance to dryberry disease, caused by Elsinoe veneta, was rated very important in

42

Arkansas and important in Oregon. However the breeder in Oregon explained that all his resistance screening was passive rather than active, i.e. genotypes which showed severe disease symptoms were discarded rather than any deliberate breeding and screening for resistance in blackberry seedling populations. Erect primocanes are desirable for hand picking, so that the new cane is out of the way of the pickers. However in Oregon, where they are breeding also for machine harvesting, they find that trailing primocanes are less damaged by the harvester than erect primocanes. When they are breeding for primocane fruiting in Arkansas they are selecting for branched primocanes to increase yield potential. Where programmes are interested in SF and PF types then a range of ripening seasons is very important.

The absence of thorns is either important or very important in most programmes. It was not listed a target in Arkansas but this was possibly an oversight. One of the forerunners of Five Aces Breeding programme was the USDA programme at the University of Maryland, Beltsville, which produced the first thornless, erect blackberry cultivars in the mid 1960s derived from ‘Merton Thornless’ from the UK. The Arkansas programme has released several thornless, upright blackberries between ‘Navaho’ in 1989 and ‘Ouachita’ in 2003, using thornless material which originally came from the USDA programme and goes back to ‘Merton Thornless’.


Blackberry breeding programmes

1 2 3 4UK

DUNUSAARK

USAMD

USACOR

Staffing (number of FTE*) 0.1 6 0.1 1.3Number of crosses per year 4 40-50 10-30 100Number of seedlings raised per year 300-700 3,000-15,000 2,000 6,000Number of seedlings selected for 1st stage trialling per year

2-4 30-100 10 10

Current funding: State majority 90%IndustryPrivate 100% 100%Other minor 10%

Future funding stable stable increasing stable * FTE = full time equivalents

The breeder at SCRI reported that approximately 20 blackberry crosses were made 1,500-2,000 seedlings raised every five years, but the figures are presented as per year in order to be comparable to the other programmes. The Five Aces Breeding programme appears to be producing a large number of seedlings per year for 10% of one breeder so it is possible that there are other people involved in associated companies (like there are in their raspberry

43

programme). Five Aces are hoping to see their funding increase in the next five years. The breeder in Arkansas reported that the other income was from royalties or IP and that this was likely to increase in the next five years. He hoped that, if the royalty income increases, that the state income will remain stable but it is possible that the state income will decrease.


Blackberry breeding programmes1 2 3 4

UKDUN

USAARK

USAMD

USACOR

Estimated number of new releases(in next 5 years) 1 2-4 1-2 2-4

Number of releases in last 20 years 4 10 4+1 9Older releases which have been successful in commercial production in country of origin

2 2 4

Releases which have been successful internationally 1

Between 55 and 60 blackberry/hybrid cultivars have been released in the last 25 years and approximately 40 of these have come from the five key programmes listed in Table 8.1. SCRI has released two blackberries and two hybrid berries; New Zealand has released one blackberry and 11 hybrid berries while the Arkansas programme has released eight SF and two PF blackberries. The USDA programme at Beltsville, Maryland and, subsequently the combined Universities programme, released four blackberries up to 2000 (Table 8.4). Since the privatization of this programme as the Five Aces Breeding programme, one hybrid berry has been released. The co-operative programme between Arkansas and Brazil has named and released three blackberries for growing in Brazil and exporting the fruit to the USA. The other cultivars have come from the more minor programmes in the UK, Hungary, Poland, Serbia, Sweden, Australia, some of which are no longer breeding blackberries.

A few blackberry selections have been made from the wild in Quebec, Indiana and West Virginia and a somoclonal variant of ‘Thornless Evergreen’ has been released as ‘Everthornless’ by the University of Illinois. It is too early to judge whether any of these selections or somaclones will be a commercial success.

It can take a long time for cultivars to show their true worth and then they can be grown for years, and not only in the country of origin. The most widely grown blackberry in the world is Marion, released from Oregon in 1956. Similarly Boysenberry, which is still commercially important in New Zealand, was released from California in 1935.

Blackberry breeding has been very minor at East Malling in the past and the only release was ‘Malling Sunberry’ (a hybrid berry). The most significant germplasm movement amongst blackberry breeders has been the transfer of ‘Merton Thornless’ to the USDA programme at Beltsville and its subsequent use by other breeders. Also important has been the transfer of very different East and West coast N. American blackberry and hybrid berry material to New Zealand and

44

Australia, where it was the basis of their new breeding programmes 20-30 years ago.

45

9. Strawberry Breeding Programmes

Table 9.1 Key contacts of the breeding programmes investigated Country Institute or

CompanyCode

Contact details Reply

Europe1 UK East Malling Research EMR David Simpson

[email protected]

2 UK Edward Vinson Ltd VIN Peter [email protected]

3 Finland MTT, Plant Production Research, Horticulture

MTT Tarja [email protected]

4 France Centre Interregional de Recherche et d’Experimentation de la Fraise (CIREF)

CIF Philippe [email protected]

5 France Darbonne Pepiniere DAR Jean-Pierre CaruelJean-Pierre.Caruel@darbonne .fr

6 France Marionnet Sarl Laurent Chaussetlaurent.chausset@marionnet .co m

7 Holland Plant Research International

Bert Meulenbroekbert.meulenbroek@wur .nl

8 Italy Istituto Sperimentale per la Frutticoltura, Forli

ISF Walther [email protected]

9 Italy Consorzio Italiano Vivaisti

CIV Alessio Martinelli civ.international@civ .it

10

Italy New Fruits NFR Danilo [email protected]

11

Poland Research Institute of Pomology and Floriculture, Skierniwice

SKI Agnieszka [email protected]

12

Spain Andalusian Institute for Agricultural Research

AND Jose-Manuel [email protected]

13

Spain PLANASA PLA [email protected]

14

Spain Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Agrarias

Rafael [email protected]

Rest of the world15

Australia

Maroochy Research Station, Queensland

QLD Mark [email protected]

16

Canada Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Nova Scotia

NSC Andrew [email protected]

17

Canada Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Quebec

QBC Shahrokh [email protected]

18

Chile University of Santiago Marina [email protected]

19

China Forestry and Pomology Institute of Beijing

BEI Zhang [email protected]

20

China Institute of Horticulture, Jiangsu Academy of

JIA Zhao [email protected]

46













mailto:civ.international@civ


mailto:bert.meulenbroek@wur

mailto:laurent.chausset@marionnet

mailto:Jean-Pierre.Caruel@darbonne


mailto:tarja.hietaranta@mtt



Agricultural Science

Table 9.1 cont.Country Institute or Company Cod

e Contact details Reply21

Israel Fertiseeds Ltd? Shamay [email protected]

22

Japan KONARC/NARO KON Tatsuya [email protected]

23

Russia All Russian Research Institute of Horticultural Breeding

IHB Dina [email protected]

24

Turkey University of Çukurova, Faculty of Agriculture

ÇUK Sevgi [email protected]

25

USA University of California UCD Doug [email protected]

26

USA USDA-Agricultural Research Service

ARS Kim [email protected]

27

USA Driscoll Strawberry Associates

DRI Tom [email protected]

28

USA University of Florida Craig [email protected]

A very good response was received from the breeders contacted, with 22 from 28 returning the questionnaire. Responses were received from all the major strawberry producing countries that are known to have breeding programmes, with the exception of Chile. The other notable absence is Holland as, historically, the programme at PRI has been very important in developing cultivars that have been successful in northern Europe. ‘Elsanta’, which is the cultivar most widely grown in the UK and north-west Europe, was released from this programme in the early 1980s, but there have been relatively few releases since then and none has been particularly successful.

47




Breeding targetStrawberry Breeding Programme

1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13UK

EMRUKVIN

FINMTT

FRACIF

FRADAR

ITAISF

ITACIV

ITANFR

POLSKI

SPAAND

SPAPLA

Flowering typeShort-day Day-neutral Fruit QualityFlavour & sweetness 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1Firmness & texture 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Appearance & colour 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1Shelf life 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1AntioxidantsDisease and Pest ResistanceBlack spot (Colletotrichum acutatum) 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1Crown rot (Phytophthora cactorum) 2 3 2 1 3 3 3 2 1Red core (Phytophthora fragariae) 3 3Powdery mildew (Sphaerotheca macularis) 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2Verticillium wilt (Verticillium dahliae) 1 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 2 1Grey mould (Botrytis cinerea) 2Angular leaf spot (Xanthomonas fragariae) 2 1Resistance to replant disease 1Plant habit and ProductionPlant shape and fruit position 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 2Winter hardiness 1 1Cropping season 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1Yield 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1Fruit size 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1Ease of harvest 2 1 1 1


48

Table 9.2 continued

Breeding target15 16 17 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27

AUSQLD

CANNSC

CANQBC

CHIBEI

CHIJIA

JAPKON

RUSIHB

TURÇUK

USAUCD

USAARS

USADRI

Flowering typeShort-day Day-neutral Fruit QualityFlavour & sweetness 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Firmness & texture 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Appearance & colour 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Shelf life 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 3 1 1Antioxidants 1 2 2 2Disease and Pest ResistanceBlack spot (Colletotrichum acutatum) 3 3 2 1 2 1 1Crown rot (Phytophthora cactorum) 3 1 3 3 2 3 2Red core (Phytophthora fragariae) 3 2 1 3 3 3 2Powdery mildew (Sphaerotheca macularis) 3 2 1 1 1

1 31 2 1

Verticillium wilt (Verticillium dahliae) 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 1Fusarium wilt (Fusarium oxysporum) 1Grey mould (Botrytis cinerea) 1Angular leaf spot (Xanthomonas fragariae) 3 2 2Other leaf diseases 1 2Plant habit and productionPlant shape and fruit position 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 1Winter hardiness 1 1Cropping season 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Yield 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Fruit size 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1Ease of harvest 1 3 1


49

All programmes are breeding short-day types (June–bearers) and 15 from 22 are also breeding day-neutrals or everbearers. There are no programmes breeding only day-neutrals. Most programmes have similar targets in terms of fruit quality with firmness, texture and flavour always having high or medium priority. It is interesting that, within Europe, six programmes consider firmness to be a higher priority than flavour. All programmes are aiming for high levels of sweetness but some, such as Driscolls and the Japanese programme, are seeking sweet berries with low background acidity whereas many others are aiming for a good sugar:acid balance, with high levels of both. Attractive appearance is important in all programmes but the aims vary reflecting the regional preferences of consumers. For example the Italian programmes are aiming for an elongated shape, whereas a regular conical shape is preferred in most other countries. There are also regional differences for optimum colour, with many countries preferring a darker red colour compared to what is popular in the UK. The importance of shelf life varies greatly and this reflects the different ways in which the berries are handled and marketed. Shelf life has a high priority in regions where fruit is exported and/or sold through supermarkets, whereas this trait has low priority when the berries are sold locally or as pick-your-own. Levels of vitamin C and antioxidants are targets in some programmes but none of these is in Europe.

Disease resistance is a priority in most of the programmes. Several programmes carry out resistance screening experiments under controlled conditions for important pathogens but some rely solely on observation following natural infection in the seedling population or during early stages of trialling. The disease rated as ‘very important’ in the largest number of programmes is powdery mildew (Sphaerotheca macularis), followed by black spot (Colletotrichum acutatum), both of which are airborne fungal diseases that are difficult to control using chemical fungicides. Resistance to both these diseases is a target for the EMR programme. In the UK the disease currently causing most concern is wilt (Verticillium dahliae) as it can only be controlled by soil sterilisation and methyl bromide, the most effective fumigant, will soon become completely unavailable. Resistance to wilt has a high priority at EMR but only five other programmes rated it as ‘very important’. Resistance to red core (Phytophthora fragariae) was once a target for many breeding programmes in Europe and North America but currently only two programmes in Europe are seeking resistance and both of these consider it a target of low importance. Crown rot, caused by Phytophthora cactorum is now a more widespread objective for resistance breeding. Breeding for pest resistance is not widespread but two programmes did report work on particular target pests. In Russia (23) resistance to tarsonemid mite (Phytonemus pallidus) has high priority while the Driscoll programme (27) is seeking resistance to two-spotted mite (Tetranychus urticae).

All programmes attach either high or moderate importance to improving yield and fruit size. Cropping season is also important but here the objectives vary depending on the region and market requirements. For most countries with a Mediterranean-type climate it is important to advance the season or increase the early yield but for other regions there is much more variation in the target production period. Improvement of plant habit and vegetative traits is of lower priority, although for the more northerly programmes winter hardiness is clearly very important.

50

Table 9.3 Scale of the programme and fundingStrawberry Breeding Programme

1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13UK

EMRUKVIN

FINMTT

FRACIF

FRADAR

ITAISF

ITACIV

ITANFR

POLSKI

SPAAND

SPAPLA

Staffing (number of FTE*) 4.5 2 2 3 3 4 1.8 3 2 4 4Number of crosses per year 200 260 150 150 60 300 40-60 20 100-140 300-

400 60Number of seedlings per year 18000 33000 7000 10000 8000 40000 20000 -

40000 4000 12000– 18000

11000-12000 15000

Number of selections for 1st stage trialling per year 150 280 30-40 100 150 700 250-

350 120 100-150 200 100Current funding:

State 38 100 49 50 100 50Region 16 30Private 50 100 16 100 20 100 100 50 100

Other (royalties, levies, etc.) 12 19

Future funding stable stable stable decreasing stable decreasing stable stable decreasin

g stable stable

15 16 17 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27AUSQLD

CANNSC

CANQBC

CHIBEI

CHIJIA

JAPKON

RUSIHB

TURÇUK

USAUCD

USAARS

USADRI

Staffing (number of FTE*) 3 2.7 1 4 4 5 2 2 9 4 4.5Number of crosses per year

60 50 100 100 10-2050 15-30 200 210-

250 70-80 500Number of seedlings raised per year 15000 800

2000 - 3000 10000 10000

5000 5000 – 15000

5000 22000 - 25000

12000 – 14000 75000

Number of selections for 1st stage trialling per year 250 25 100 150 30 100 15-30 30-50 500-

600 100 600Current funding:

State 50 100 50 20 20 90 100 100 20 100Region 80 80 20Private 50 100

Other (royalties, levies, 50 10 60

51

etc.)

Future funding increasing stable

decreasing

increasing decreasing stable stable decreasin

gincreasin

gincreasin

gincreasin

g* FTE = full time equivalents

52

The scale of the programmes varies enormously in terms of seedlings raised per annum, from 3,000 (Quebec, Canada, decreasing) to 75,000 (Driscoll, California, increasing). The majority of programmes are in the range 10,000 to 20,000 seedlings per annum but five are larger than this. For four of these large programmes the common factor is that they are effectively multinational: the Vinson programme (2) is breeding in both UK and Spain but also has trials in several other European countries; the CIV programme (9) is based in Italy but has an extensive European trials and marketing network; the University of California programme (25) selects seedlings in different environments within California but has trials throughout the world at latitudes where their material is adapted; the Driscoll programme (27) operates by forming strategic partnerships in many different countries, where seedlings are raised and selections made that are adapted to that region. The other very large programme at ISF (8) is based in Forli in Italy but is raising and selecting seedlings in north, central and southern Italy. These are three very different environments where different types of cultivars are required and it is almost equivalent to three separate programmes.

The staffing levels vary considerably between programmes and there is not much correspondence between the number of FTEs and the scale of the programme in terms of seedling numbers. This is probably partly due to different interpretations of the question about staffing levels but in some cases also reflects a different approach to breeding. Some programmes use an empirical approach where a large number of crosses are made each year resulting in a large seedling population which is evaluated by a small number of experienced breeders. In many other programmes there is a strong research element running in parallel with the breeding work (as at EMR) and this requires greater staff resources.

Six of the programmes are 100% privately funded, eight are funded entirely from public money and the remaining eight receive funding from a mixture of sources. Six programmes are expecting funding to decrease in the future with five increasing and the remainder stable.

53

Table 9.4 Release of cultivars and germplasm exchange

Strawberry Breeding Programme1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13UK

EMRUKVIN

FINMTT

FRACIF

FRADAR

ITAISF

ITACIV

ITANFR

POLSKI

SPAAND

SPAPLA


5 4 1-4 7 3 5 4-6 3 10 3 3


16 4 2 7 11 19 20 5 20 5 6

Successful older releases

1 3

Germplasm exchange with EMR

n/a

Strawberry Breeding Programme15 16 17 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27AUSQLD

CANNSC

CANQBC

CHIBEI

CHIJIA

JAPKON

RUSIHB

TURÇUK

USAUCD

USAARS

USADRI


4 2-3 2 5-10 2 3 3-5 4 5 1-3 15


16 8 12 2 6 7 20 11 33

Successful older releases

2 4 4 3 6 2

Germplasm exchange with EMR

All programmes are expecting to release some new cultivars in the next five years but there is considerable variation in numbers and this does not necessarily reflect the scale of the programmes. The breeders in Poland (11) and China (19) are anticipating a large number of releases but this probably reflects a greater need for new cultivars in these countries due to ongoing expansion and modernisation of their strawberry industries.

54

Nearly all the programmes have made releases during the last 20 years and in each case some of these cultivars have been successful in the geographical region where the programme is based. A small number of programmes have had wider international success, most notably the University of California. UCal cultivars are grown in many regions of the world, wherever the climate is similar to California or can be manipulated to suit these cultivars. In Europe this includes the Mediterranean countries, particularly Spain and Italy, but these cultivars are also widely grown in North Africa, Turkey, Australia and parts of Central and South America. Cultivars bred in cool temperate regions do not have such wide adaptation and usually are successful only in the local region.

Ten programmes have used EMR germplasm for breeding and with several of these there has been an active two-way exchange. In addition to germplasm exchange there have also been exchange visits by scientists, including some training placements at EMR for overseas breeders (Appendix 3).

55

CASE STUDIES ON METHODS OF RELEASE

1. Apple

The following two case studies on methods of release are particularly interesting as they focus on two apple varieties that were raised at the same time but have had very different methods of release and consequently, very different levels of success.

Case Study on ‘Pink Lady’

The apple

‘Pink Lady’ originated from a cross between ‘Lady Williams’ and ‘Golden Delicious’ made at the Stoneville Horticultural Research Station near Perth, Western Australia in 1973 by J. Cripps. The aim of the cross was to combine the sweet, superficial-scald-free fruit of ‘Golden Delicious’ with the firm long-storing fruit of ‘Lady Williams’ (a Western Australian chance seedling). The ‘Cripps Pink’ (‘Pink Lady’) seedling was selected in 1979 and propagated for advanced testing in 1980. It was released to the industry for commercial evaluation in 1986.

‘Pink Lady’ is by no means an easy apple to grow. As a juvenile tree, it produces knobbly fruit and once it matures, it is labour-demanding. The tree is so vigorous that it needs considerable fruitlet thinning in order to achieve marketable fruit size. To produce the renowned pink colour, trees have to be propped open and the upper leaves from each branch removed to allow the fruit to receive maximum sunlight. The fruit is described as distinctive, with a crisp and juicy texture and a sweet-sharp ‘fizz’.

Development of a marketing strategy

In the late 1980s, eight Australian growers set up the QA Group (Quality Assurance) to develop ‘Pink Lady’ as a premium apple, designed for the top end of the market, in response to increased competition from other countries with lower labour costs. When they visited London in the early 1990s, it was only Marks and Spencer who found room for such an expensive premium apple. However other retailers soon followed prompting the Australian Apple and Pear Board to establish the first ever worldwide trademark for an apple variety. This means that the variety can be grown around the world under the ‘Pink Lady’ name, only to the Board’s exacting specifications.

For the privilege of cultivating it, growers have to pay a royalty for each tree planted. Another royalty is levied on the company that supplies it to the retailer. Each ‘Pink Lady’ grower needs to insure that any nursery supplying the ‘Pink Lady’ brand of ‘Cripps Pink’ is in fact an authorized nursery. There is also a level of responsibility on the part of the packer who needs to verify that each grower providing ‘Cripps Pink’ apples is in fact licensed to grow and sell apples under the ‘Pink Lady’ trademark.

‘Pink Lady’ is known as a bi-coloured apple and fruit not meeting the required 45% pink to 55% green is passed over. The Australian packing industry rose to the challenge of ‘Pink Lady’, with the stringent quality levels meaning another 30% are rejected at the pack house (and go for juice). Finally the smaller ones are withheld from export and only sold on the home market. ‘Pink Lady’ also has

56

to be handled delicately or it bruises and breaks, prompting considerable investment in packing technology to accommodate it.

Publicity

Following the trademark, the ‘Pink Lady’ brand has been developed internationally with the formation of the International Pink Lady Alliance and there are now several websites dedicated to its promotion, for example, the U.K. site www.pinkladyapples.co.uk. Much of the information given on the website is true for all apple varieties but is cleverly used here to further ‘Pink Lady’s promotion. The fact that they share a heart-shaped logo with the British Heart Foundation has allowed the ‘Pink Lady’ group to benefit from the five-a-day campaign.

“One Pink Lady® apple counts as one portion of fruit and eating one or two Pink Lady® apples a day is an excellent way to help you chalk up your five plus quota:

An apple a day keeps the doctor away!

Eating Pink Lady® apples on a regular basis could certainly be good for your health because apples can help:

Lower blood cholesterol Improve bowel function Reduce risk of stroke, prostate cancer, type II diabetes and asthma

Pink Lady® apples are virtually fat-free and, being made up of around 85 per cent water, are low in calories. Each apple contains about 50 calories.

Pink Lady® apples are virtually fat-free and sodium free and contain no artificial colours or flavourings.

Pink Lady® apples contain good amounts of vitamin C.”

The ‘Pink Lady’ apple brand is managed in the UK by a company called Coregeo Ltd, based in Kent. Last year, the company had sales of 1.4 million 13 kilo cartons which gave them an 8% market share with a planned increase of 2% over the next five years. They claim to have the third best known apple brand in the UK behind Cox and Cape. Much of this success has been down to well-planned and sustained publicity. The ‘Pink Lady’ apple group has invested in sponsorship, for example the Ocean Row 2004 Atlantic record, even going so far as to provide the crew with dried ‘Pink Lady’ apples “as part of their nutritional intake during the row. The apples will help the team to maintain a healthy, balanced diet and to ensure that they maintain their vitamin and fibre intake requirements.” Other promotions include a poetry competition and a £10,000 prize for a winning Bride and Bridegroom in a magazine competition.

Comments

Although a highly successful way to promote a variety of this sort, things have not gone totally to plan for the original Australian group as demand has far outstretched the Australian supply. Last year, Australia supplied a mere 100 tonnes to Europe compared to 4,500 tonnes that came from Chile. However, a

57

http://www.pinkladyapples.co.uk/

proportion of the fruit coming from Chile is now being marketed under the name ‘Cripps Pink’ in a deal with Walmart who favour the cheaper price.A cautionary note was issued in a report from the Auditor General for Western Australia in 2002, commenting that “DAWA (Department of Agriculture of Western Australia) could have better managed the IP and commercialisation of the Cripps Pink apple variety”. Illegal propagation of the variety has been a problem. One result of this is that DAWA now registers its apple varieties for Plant Breeders Rights (regardless of the cost) prior to undertaking off-site testing and have also recently taken advantage of advances in DNA ‘fingerprinting’ technology by fingerprinting all their advanced selections. DNA fingerprinting is now a standard step taken by DAWA to secure the identity of its genetic material and to protect its associated IP.

Coregeo Ltd and the International Pink Lady Alliance invest more money proportionally into public relations, point of sale and overall marketing of the ‘Pink Lady’ brand than any of their competitors, facilitated by the high level of royalties claimed. This combined with the tight control of fruit quality has resulted in the successful establishment of ‘Pink Lady’ apples on to the marketplace.

Case Study on ‘Fiesta’

The apple

‘Fiesta’ originated from a cross between ‘Cox’s Orange Pippin’ and ‘Idared’ made at East Malling in 1972 by F. H. Alston. The aim of the cross was to produce an ‘improved Cox’. The ‘Fiesta’ seedling was selected in 1979 for independent trial at the National Fruit Trials (NFT), Brogdale and propagated for advanced testing. The NFT co-ordinated grower trials at 13 sites in 1983 and 1984 which all yielded promising results; yield, fruit size, appearance and quality were generally good. The 1986 crop from these sites was collected and stored by NFT for small-scale market tests in collaboration with Home Grown Fruits (a marketing co-operative organisation which subsequently became Enfru Ltd). ‘Fiesta’ was awarded Plant Breeders Rights for the UK in 1984. The National Seed Development Organisation (NSDO) distributed 21,000 trees for planting in winter 1986/87 to provide fruit for large-scale market trials planned for 1991 or 1992.

‘Fiesta’ is a precocious, high yielding regular cropping variety which consistently out-yields ‘Cox’. It is a moderately vigorous tree with wide branch angles and gives high percentages of Class I fruit from CA stores. ‘Fiesta’ is recognised as a Cox-type apple with skin of a yellow (or green) background with red stripes. Skin finish is good, with little russeting. The flesh is creamy, sweet and aromatic. On young trees, the fruit is rather flat but as trees grow older (from year 3-4), the fruit becomes rounder.

Development of a marketing strategy

The Plant Breeder’s Rights for ‘Fiesta’ were sold by the UK Government to Unilever in 1986 along with the NSDO and the Plant Breeding Institute, which were subsequently amalgamated and renamed ‘Plant Breeding International’ (PBI). By March 1992, PBI were claiming that ‘Fiesta’ occupied the greatest area planted of any of the recently introduced varieties and that extensive plantings were also taking place in Northern Europe and New Zealand. However there was still a lot of uncertainty about background colour specification for the fruit and

58

whether restricting its marketing until the post-Cox season (March to May) was the best position.

In April-May 1994, PBI and HGF collaborated with J Sainsbury plc to determine consumer preferences about ‘Fiesta’. Sainbury’s sensory panel evaluated samples of English CA stored fruit picked in September 1993 and samples of ‘Fiesta’ from New Zealand, picked and shipped in March-April 1994. The panel preferred a green-yellow background colour covering about 25% of the area. Much of the English fruit was too yellow in appearance; in contrast, some of the New Zealand fruit was too green and consequently acidic. It took another two years for a colour ‘blueprint’ to be produced for growers to follow.

Following the results of a large consumer survey by English Apples and Pears in Spring 1996, English ‘Fiesta’ was relaunched as ‘Red Pippin’ together with a defined set of standards for growers to meet.

The Plant Breeders Rights were acquired by Somersby Treefruit in 2000 from Monsanto who had acquired PBI.

Publicity

PBI initiated the Fiesta Club in 1995 with the aim of boosting sales and plantings of ‘Fiesta’ by pooling knowledge about production and storage and by focusing and enhancing the variety’s image. They (or Somersby Treefruit in more recent years) also funded the prize for the ‘Fiesta’ class at the annual National Fruit Show (until 2002).

The relaunch as ‘Red Pippin’ achieved coverage in the national papers as it was timed to coincide with National Apple Day in 1996. Subsequent publicity has been negligible.

Comments

One of the fundamental problems of introducing a new variety to the UK growers was the resistance to anything that could be seen as competition to ‘Cox’. All UK had the chance to grow ‘Fiesta’, though no royalties were ever channelled back to East Malling to support further breeding. Despite the fact that ‘Fiesta’ was bred was a replacement for ‘Cox’, the marketers artificially restricted it to a very short period of marketing in the post-‘Cox’ season.

The re-launch of ‘Fiesta’ as ‘Red Pippin’ could have been just what was needed however in practice it caused confusion in the industry. The name was not protected and the fruit quality standards were not strictly adhered to. There was very little if any further publicity perhaps because apples were peripheral to PBI’s main interest and, later, because of the limited funds of the licensee. By all objective standards, ‘Fiesta’ was a very good variety which, in effect, was let down buy the inconsistent marketing. The current ‘Fiesta’ plantings are only 79 hectares and fruit production for 2004 was around 1200 tonnes.

Due to the dominance of the multiples on the fresh fruit market in the UK, it is difficult to see how any new variety can become established without the market ‘pull’ of exclusivity to one particular multiple unless alternative funds can be found to launch successfully and maintain the market’s interest.

59

2. Sweet Cherry

The range of cherry cultivars grown is wider than that of apple and most are less than forty years old. Moreover, the cultivar name is not an important factor in retailing the fruit. It may be for these reasons that the marketing of cherry cultivars, compared to apple, is relatively straightforward, with little attention to branding, ‘clubs’, etc.

For new cultivars to be marketed in Europe, once they have been identified in trial as worthy of release, it is customary to enter them for European Plant Breeders Rights. Then one or more licensees are appointed to undertake propagation and distribution. As just noted it is rare for much effort to be expended on branding – apart from a modest launch and provision of technical leaflets that may lead to favourable comment in the trade press. A royalty is typically levied and returned to the institute or, in some cases, shared between the institute and licensee.

EMR’s cultivar ‘Penny’ – large, late, firm, black fruit and resistant to canker - was released in this fashion with a launch at the Fruit Focus trade show in 2001. Demand for trees from UK growers is high and exceeding supply. Interest from continental growers is increasing as favourable reports appear in the press – but the UK growers should have had a good ‘head start’ before continental plantings become significant.

The John Innes cultivar ‘Summersun’ provides an example of an interesting deviation from the general scheme outlined above. The trial trees at Brogdale were never netted – because of the irregular shape of the trial plot – and thus no reliable yield figures were collected. The selection was actually rejected by the trials committee but several growers who also had trial trees were so convinced of its reliable cropping that they lobbied for it to be released. The John Innes Institute was, by then, no longer involved in plant breeding and did not seek breeders rights and the variety entered the public domain.

A contrasting exception is provided by recent cultivars from Summerland, Canada. These are released through the Okanagan Plant Improvement Co (PICO) owned by the British Columbian Fruit Growers Association. This has recently adopted a “Canada first” policy to safeguard domestic and export markets for Canadian growers by careful timing of release of cultivars in countries outside Canada. This policy was triggered by the imminent release of the very late cherry ‘Staccato’ which the Canadians feared would be grown extensively in Washington State. One consequence is that PICO has licensed propagation of ‘Staccato’ in southern Europe but not in northern Europe, including the UK. It is unclear to what extent PICO can legally prevent the cultivation of the cultivar in northern Europe, but meanwhile UK growers are unable to grow ‘Staccato’.

3. Domestic plum

The market for plum cultivars is not very competitive and they tend to be released in accord with the generalised scheme presented for cherry above.

4. Raspberry

The method of release and subsequent commercialisation of new raspberry cultivars has changed over the years for several reasons. Firstly 100% public-

60

funded programmes often had another public-funded body who automatically took on all the releases from the government breeding programmes, handled PVR or IP issues and issued propagation licences to any interested party. Although this system meant that all propagators could, in theory, get new cultivars at the same time, it was not really in anyone’s interest to promote new cultivars. As the world market for raspberries has expanded and production has become more competitive, growers are more aware of the value of new, improved cultivars and are keener to plant new cultivars as soon as possible.

Secondly, in many countries the level of public funding has declined and breeding programmes have only been able to sustain their activity by attracting some element of private funding to supplement the government or state funding. Some private funders are attracted by the potential royalty income but this has rarely lived up to expectations with perennial fruit plants. Different routes to commercialisation are illustrated below.

‘Tulameen’, bred in British Columbia, was released just before Plant Variety Rights legislation was passed in Canada. As a consequence of this, ‘Tulameen’ was widely available in many countries and the canes were slightly cheaper than those of protected cultivars. It is an excellent variety but its take-up worldwide was rapid, partly because it was not protected by PVR.

The release of ‘Autumn Bliss’ in 1983 and ‘Polka’ in 2001 illustrate how much things changed during that time frame. ‘Autumn Bliss’ was given to most of the other breeders in Europe, Russia, Canada, USA and Mexico when it was a numbered EM selection or shortly after it was named and became a founding clone of many PF breeding programmes. Fruit growers first planted it in 1985 and it was taken up very rapidly in the UK. It went on to be planted in northern Europe and N. America because it bridged the gap between the summer fruiters and ‘Heritage’. It was also planted in countries which have insufficient winter chilling to grow SF types successfully and played an important part in expanding raspberry production worldwide.

When ‘Polka’ (which has ‘Autumn Bliss’ twice in its parentage) was released the breeder set up a propagators’ ‘Polka’ club with six members in Europe. Hargreaves Plants has exclusive propagation rights for ‘Polka’ in the UK and was promoting it as the No.1 PF cultivar for the UK in 2003 and 2004. Hargreaves produced and sold 125,000 canes in 2003 and 500,000 canes in winter 2004/05. They were planning to produce one million canes for 2005/06 in anticipation of demand. However ‘Polka’ has not been planted and evaluated in any independent trials in the UK so the growers have not had an opportunity to see it for themselves. Some growers in southern Germany have rejected it because their supermarkets say it is too dark.

The Driscoll programme in California is 100% private and their cultivars can only been grown by members of their company in the USA or growers in other countries which belong to a marketing company who have a close agreement with Driscoll. In this situation the marketing company have their own trials and recommend which cultivars their growers should plant.

5. Strawberry

The method for release and subsequent commercialisation of new cultivars varies according to whether the programme is private or publicly funded. The majority

61

of private programmes are associated with large nurseries (2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13) that develop new cultivars and then promote them to their existing customers, who may also be involved in the advanced trials. The nursery involved will have exclusivity of the cultivars and if they are successful this attracts new customers. These nurseries will often have relationships with propagators in other countries, with whom they are not competing, and may issues licences to these third parties to allow them to propagate and sell plants in different regions, thus increasing the income back to the original breeder. A second type of private programme is one that develops cultivars for the exclusive use of growers belonging to one company, marketing group or cooperative. In this case the objective is to give these growers a competitive advantage by having better cultivars rather than to maximise the sales of plants. The most successful example of this approach is the Driscoll programme in California (27). There are now some other programmes following this model but the majority are relatively new and very few cultivars have been released to date.

For programmes that have part or total funding from the public sector, it is not usual to offer exclusivity to any nurseries or grower organisations in the country of origin but these types of deals may be done in other countries. Usually, when a new cultivar is released all the nurseries in the country of origin will have the opportunity to propagate and sell plants and all growers will be able to buy them. This usually results in a slower take-up because the non exclusivity means that these cultivars are marketed less aggressively. However, good cultivars with the right characteristics to suit the growers and market will succeed and there are many examples of successful varieties that have been commercialised by this route. A good example is the EMR cultivar ‘Florence’, which was launched in 1997 and originally propagated by a consortium of nine UK propagators who sold 600,000 plants in the first year. By 1999 UK sales had exceeded 3 million per annum and overseas sales began with 350,000 plants sold by nurseries in Germany and Holland. Since then there has been a steady increase in sales and in 2004 over 13 million plants were sold. ‘Florence’ is now being commercially propagated in six European countries and is undergoing trials in Australia, Canada, South Africa and USA.

62

CONCLUSIONS

There was a good level of response to the questionnaires sent out by the EMR breeders, apart from the apple breeders, who had received several previous questionnaires within the last 18 months. There was no response from a few key programmes e.g. the Dutch strawberry programme and the New Zealand Rubus programme, although the breeders concerned are in regular contact with the EMR breeders. Apart from one strawberry programme, no contact was made with any programme in Russia, Belarus, Moldova or Ukraine. There were breeding programmes in these countries until relatively recently and the chances are most of them are continuing, but it proved impossible to make contact with the appropriate people in the time available.

In most crops the fruit quality targets were similar across all programmes. The major exception was skin colour in plums and fruit colour in cherries. Only the UK is breeding red-skinned, dessert plums; all the eastern European programmes were breeding blue-skinned plums. Most cherry programmes were concentrating on black cherries but white cherries were a target in the Czech Republic and France and the Canadian programme was interested in both colours. There were minor differences in what are considered the optimal colour in other fruits and all breeders target the preferred colour in their country.

Disease and pest resistance targets reflected regional problems with those most difficult to control being rated as ‘very important’. Countries currently using soil sterilisation rated soil-borne diseases as less important. Similarly countries with a range of effective fungicides were able to rate some fungal diseases as less important but all this will change with the loss of soil sterilants and certain fungicides. Some overseas programmes are less concerned with disease and pest resistance than the EMR programmes; so if more overseas cultivars were to be introduced into the UK in the future they could be very susceptible to some diseases and pests. For example, the strawberry and raspberry cultivars from Driscoll, California are generally susceptible to Verticillium wilt and when the UK growers lose methyl bromide, these cultivars will be more difficult to grow. The EMR programmes are, or have been in the past, active in searching for sources of resistance, determining the heritability of resistance and actively screening seedling populations for resistance. Several overseas programmes reported that they were passively selecting for limited susceptibility as opposed to actively screening for resistance.

Yield was universally important but always one of many targets. The season of cropping was much more important in most soft fruit programmes. Winter hardiness, chilling requirements, frost, drought or sun tolerances were all a reflection of the local climate. Again these aspects of local adaptation might be considered fairly minor in the country of origin but can make a big difference when cultivars are grown on other continents.

The questionnaire (Appendix I) asked how many full-time equivalent (FTE) staff (breeders and assistants) were employed on the breeding programme and all respondents provided this information. The breeders at EMR and elsewhere often have student or casual help with harvesting but these short-term individuals were not included in the staffing numbers. The amount of support received from institute field and glasshouse staff is likely to vary to some extent between programmes but this information was not collected. The numbers of FTEs in the Tables throughout the report refers to breeders and their assistants, but does not

63

represent everyone who contributes to the breeding programmes. The scale of the EMR programmes compared to the other programmes was very interesting and very big differences in FTEs and outputs were reported. The EMR programmes were never the largest in terms of FTEs but were very respectable in terms of numbers of seedlings raised per year etc. The EMR strawberry programme with 4.5 FTEs raises 18,000 seedlings p.a. compared to the University of California which raises 22,000-25,000 with 9 FTEs. At the other extreme 0.1 FTE at EMR raises 200 plum seedlings p.a. which is similar to that raised by 4 FTEs in Bulgaria. There are eight breeders in the EMR team covering eight crops and all the programmes are very efficient.

The timescale for breeding the different crops discussed in this report and the time taken to evaluate fully new material and judge the commercial success of new cultivars varies enormously between crops. However all the programmes at EMR are planning to release new cvs in the next five years and all, except pear scions, have released cvs in the last 20 years. In terms of FTEs the number of new releases from all the EMR programmes has been much higher than that of most other programmes. The full list of EMR cultivars, given in Appendix 2, illustrates the numbers released in the past and their success. A few programmes are relatively new and so it is inappropriate to make comparisons on the basis of older cultivars or cultivars released in the last 20 years but several other programmes have been running for many years.

Reciprocal germplasm exchange has benefited the EMR programmes in the past and continues to do so. In terms of breeding lines with resistance and material derived from related wild species EMR has generally distributed more valuable material than it has received in some crops. However all EMR programmes have benefited greatly from the germplasm received from all over the world and many introduced breeding lines and cultivars have been valuable parents in the EMR programmes.

Finally, it can be seen from Appendix 3 that EMR has played a major role in training perennial crop breeders from many countries. In the UK and overseas there are fewer and fewer university and college courses on plant breeding and horticulture, and East Malling has played a significant part in training other breeders and pomologists. Several people who have spent time at EMR are now senior researchers or experienced breeders in other countries and everyone had benefited from the experience and the contacts maintained. Lastly many joint papers have been published as a result of collaborative work (Appendix 4).

64

APPENDIX I – Sample survey

DESKTOP STUDY TO INVESTIGATE THE CURRENT WORLD RESOURCES IN ROSACEOUS FRUIT BREEDING PROGRAMMES

1. Commodities

Which areas within your commodity are you currently breeding in?E.g. Dessert applesCulinary apples

2. Main objectives Please list your main objectives when making crosses and selecting within your apple scion breeding programme. Also, please assign a level of importance (1, 2 or 3) to each point, where 1=very important and 3=low importance. Please add extra lines where appropriate.

Level of importanceFruit Quality

Resistance e.g. Venturia inaequalis

Plant habit

Yield/Season

Others

3. Scalea. Number of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff (breeders and assistants) working on your programme. ………………….

65

b. Number of crosses per year…………………………….c. Total number of seedlings raised for screening and selection per year………………d. Number of seedlings selected for multiplication for further observation/first stage trials per year…………………………….

4. Releasesa. Please estimate how many selections you expect to be releasing from your programme in the next 5 years.

b. Please list the cultivars released from your programme in the last 20 years, giving the year of release.

c. Please list any older cultivars (>20 years) from your programme which are or have been particularly successful commercially.

5. Germplasm exchangeHave you used selections or cultivars from East Malling in your breeding programme in the last 20 years?If so, please list the most important ones.

6. Funding and prospectsa. What proportion of your funding comes from:

State Region Private Other

b. How do you see the future of your funding over the next 5 years? Stable Increasing Decreasing

66

APPENDIX II - Varieties released from East Malling

Crop Name Parents

Rights granted or released

Level of success 1

Apple rootstocks M.1 to 16 1912-

1914****

Plum rootstock Myrobalan B 1920 **

Plum rootstock Damas C 1920 *

Plum rootstock St Julien A 1920 ****

Quince rootstock for pear

Quince A, B, and C 1920

****

Apple rootstocks M.17 to 24 1924 ***

Cherry rootstock F12/1 1924 ****

Raspberry Malling Enterprise

Preussen x (Pyne’s Royal x Lloyd George) 1943 ****

Raspberry Malling Landmark Preussen x Baumforth A 1943 **

Raspberry Malling Promise

Newburgh x (Lloyd George x Pyne’s Royal) 1945 ****

AppleTydeman’s Early Worcester

McIntosh x Worcester Permain 1945

***

Apple Tydeman’s Late Orange

Laxton’s Superb x Cox’s Orange Pippin 1945 *

Apple Michaelmas Red

McIntosh Red x Worcester Permain 1945 *

Raspberry Malling Notable Preussen x Lloyd George 1947 **

Raspberry Malling Jewel Preussen x (Pyne’s Royal x Lloyd George) 1949 ****

Raspberry Malling Exploit Newburgh x (Lloyd George x Pyne’s Royal) 1949 ****

Apple rootstock M.25 Northern Spy x M.2 1952 ***

Apple rootstock MM.104 M.2 x Northern Spy 1952 *

Apple rootstock MM.106 Northern Spy x M.1 1952 ****

Apple rootstock MM.109 M.2 x Northern Spy 1952 **

Apple rootstock MM.111 Northern Spy x Merton

793 1952 ****

Apple rootstock M.26 M.16 x M.9 1959 ****

67

Crop Name Parents


Level of success 1

Apple rootstock M.27 M.13 x M.9 1975 ****

Dessert apple Suntan Cox x Court Pendu Plat 1975 ***Dessert apple Kent Cox x Jonathan 1975 *

Raspberry Leo

Complex parentage inc. M. Landmark, Lloyd George, Pyne’s Royal, Norfolk Giant, Burnetholm and Cumberland (Rubus occidentalis)

1975

**

Plum rootstock Pixy St. Julien d’Orleans

open-pollinated 1977 ***

Cherry rootstock Colt Prunus avium F299/2 x

P. pseudocerasus 1977 ****

Dessert apple Greensleeves James Grieve x Golden Delicious 1977 *

Dessert apple JesterWorcester Pearmain x Starkspur Golden Delicious

1979*

Raspberry Joy

Complex parentage includes M. Promise, M. Landmark, Burnetholm, Pyne’s Royal, Lloyd George, Norfolk Giant and Cumberland

1980

*

Cherry rootstock Cob Prunus avium F299/2 x

P. pseudocerasus 1980 *

Dessert apple Jupiter Cox x Starking Delicious 1981 *Dessert apple Redsleeves Exeter Cross x TSR15T3 1983 *Culinary apple Bountiful Cox open-pollinated 1983 *

Raspberry Autumn Bliss

Complex parentage includes Lloyd George, Rubus arcticus, R. occidentalis and R. idaeus strigosus

1983

****

Rubus hybrid-berry Sunberry Rubus ursinus x Malling

Jewel (4x) self 1983 *

Pear Concorde Comice x Conference 1984 ***Dessert apple Fiesta (Red

Pippin) Cox x Idared 1984 ***

Cherry rootstock Charger Prunus avium F1/3 open

pollinated 1986 ***

Dessert apple Falstaff James Grieve x Golden Delicious 1986 ***

Columnar dessert apple

Telamon (Waltz)

McIntosh Wijcik x Golden Delicious 1986 ***

68

Crop Name Parents


Level of success 1

Columnar dessert apple Trajan (Polka) Golden Delicious x

McIntosh Wijcik 1986 ***

Columnar dessert apple

Tuscan (Bolero)

McIntosh Wijcik x Greensleeves 1986 ***

Ornamental columnar apple

Maypole McIntosh Wijcik x Malus baskatong 1986

***

Raspberry Augusta

Complex parentage includes Burnetholm, Preussen, Pyne’s Royal, Lloyd George, Newburgh and Joy

1988

*

Strawberry Pandora (Von Humboldt x Redstar) x Merton Down 1988 ***

Plum Excalibur Count d’Althans Gage open pollinated 1989 ***

Plum Avalon Reeves open pollinated 1989 ***Columnar culinary apple Charlotte McIntosh Wijcik x

Greensleeves 1989 ***

Strawberry Pegasus Redgauntlet x Gorella 1989 ****

Raspberry Autumn Cascade

Complex parentage includes Lloyd George, Zeva Herbsternte, Rubus arcticus, R. idaeus strigosus, R. occidentalis and R. odoratus

1990

*

Strawberry Calypso Rapella x Selva 1991 *Strawberry Tango Rapella x Selva 1992 *Columnar dessert apple

Obelisk (Flamenco)

(Cox x Court Pendu Plat) x McIntosh Wijcik 1992 ***

Raspberry Autumn Britten

Complex parentage; sib of Autumn Bliss 1993 ****

Raspberry Autumn Cygnet

Complex parentage; sib of Autumn Cascade 1993 ***

Strawberry Marshmello Honeoye x Hapil 1995 @

Raspberry Gaia

Complex parentage includes Burnetholm, Ll.oyd George, Norfolk Giant, M. Landmark, Pyne’s Royal, Preussen, Reid’s Seedling, Latham, Newburgh, Canby and R. occidentalis

1995

*

Raspberry Julia Complex parentage includes Burnetholm, Devon, Lloyd George, M.

1995 *

69

Crop Name Parents


Level of success 1

Jewel, Landmark, Promise, Norfolk Giant, Preussen, Pyne’s Royal, Chief, Newburgh, Viking and R. occidentalis

Strawberry Emily Honeoye x Gea 1995 ***Ornamental columnar apple

Totem(Ottawa 521 x M. zumi open pollinated) x Maypole

1996*

Strawberry Laura Complex pedigree EM147 x EM86 1996 *

Strawberry Eros Elsanta ×Allstar 1997 ***Strawberry Florence Complex pedigree EM20

×LA657 1997 ****

Strawberry Sophie (Hapil × Streamliner) × Kent 1997 *

Strawberry Perfection Complex × Rainier 1998 @

Apple Saturn PRI 1235 ×tarkspur Golden Delicious 1998 *

Strawberry BoleroComplex parentage includes Redgauntlet, Wiltguard, Gorella, Cardinal and Selva

1999**

Strawberry Rosie Honeoye ×ITA 80-52-1 (complex) 1999 *

Raspberry Autumn Byrd

Autumn Bliss × EM5326/1 (complex; BC3 R. spectabilis plus arcticus, odoratus, idaeus strigosus, occidentalis and crataegifolius ancestors)

1999

***

Apple Meridian Cox’s Orange Pippin × Falstaff 1999 *

Strawberry Alice Complex pedigree EM474 × EM478 2000 *

Cherry Penny Colney ×Inge 2001 ***Apple rootstock M.116 MM.106 ×M.27 2001 ***

Quince rootstock EMH C51 open pollinated 2001 *

Raspberry Octavia Complex pedigree Glen Ample ×EM 5928/114 2002 **

Raspberry Valentina Complex pedigree EM6225/11 ×EM5588/81 2002

@

Apple Park Farm Pippin Falstaff ×A 409-21 2002 *

70

Crop Name Parents


Level of success 1

Strawberry Flamenco Evita ×EMR77 2002 **Strawberry Mae Rosie ×Marmolada 2003 *Pear Nuvar®

AnniversaryWilliams x Conference 2005 *

Pear Nuvar® Celebration

Conference x Packhams Triumph 2005 *

Strawberry Judibell Complex pedigree EM533 x EM580 2005 *

Strawberry Malling Pearl Complex pedigree EMR153 x EM707 2005 *

Strawberry Malling Opal Complex pedigree EMR153 x EM707; sib of Malling Pearl

2005 *

Raspberry Malling Minerva

Complex parentage includes M. Promise, R. crataegifolius, R. occidentalis, R. idaeus strigosus and SCRI 69/67

2005 *

Raspberry Malling Juno

Complex parentage includes M. Promise, M. Delight, Glen Moy, R. crataegifolius and R. spectabilis

2005 *

Undication of relative success 1 Has been or is currently:

widely planted internationally ****limited planting internationally ***widely planted nationally **limited planting nationally *amateur market only @

71

APPENDIX III - Visiting workers and students trained at East Malling

Year Visiting worker/ student Length

of stay Main crops Training at East Malling and subsequent contribution to fruit breeding

Co-author

of papers

1964

Nallathamby T. Arasu, Malaysia 3 years Ribes

MSc entitled 'Overcoming self- and cross-sterility in fruit crops'

1965

Dr Hanna Schmidt, Germany 10 months

Apples, cherries

Top fruit and cherry breeder at Geissen and Ahrensburg, participant in EU apple mapping project

Yes

1969

George Lockwood, UK 6 months Top fruit Went on to breed cocoa at the Cocoa research Institute, Ghana

1973 Dr Giancarlo Roselli, Italy 3 months Rootstocks Fruit breeder in Florence

1974

Dr Yves Lespinasse, France 3 months Apples Top fruit breeder at Angers, later Head of Fruit Breeding and then Director of INRA, Angers

Yes

1974

Chandra M. B. Ratnayake, Sri Lanka

3 years Apple rootstocks

PhD entitled ' Physiological and genetical characteristics of apple (Malus) rootstocks in relation to size control'

1980 Astrid Lampe, Holland 3 months

1982

Dr Smaragdi Petropolou, Greece

3 years Apples PhD entitled 'Temperature related factors as selection criteria in apple breeding'

Yes

1983 Aymeric Berling, France 1 month Fruit breeder at INRA, Bordeaux

1983 Dr F. Denardi, Brazil 3 months Fruit breeder at Estacao Experimental de Cacador

1984

Dr Sakis Manganaris, Greece 3 years Apples PhD entitled 'Isoenzymes as genetic markers in apple breeding', apple breeder at Naoussa, participant in EU mapping and DARE project; currently Professor of Horticulture at University of Thessolonika

Yes

1985

Dr Vladislav Ognjanov, Yugoslavia

6 months Top fruit Fruit breeder in Novi Sad and later Director of Institute and past Chairman of Eucarpia

1986 Dr Thomas Nessel, Germany 3 months Cherries Cherry breeder, Geissen

1986

Dr Mihailo Nikolic, Yugoslavia 5 months Top fruit Fruit breeder in Cacak and later Professor of Horticulture, University of Belgrade

72



Co-author

of papers

1987 Tim Bailey, UK 6 months Banana breeder for the ODA in the Caribbean

1987

Luke Ramsay, UK 6 months Raspberries Went on to do a PhD in plant breeding at SCRI, Dundee and now a molecular plant breeder at SCRI

1987 Dieu Huynh, Korea 1 month Top fruit

1987

Dr Hilde Nybom, Sweden 1 month Top fruit Fruit breeder at Balsgard and now Director at Balsgard Institute of Plant Breeding

1987 Valerie Christinet 6 months Top fruit Fruit breeder at Wädenswil

1988 Julie Dickensen, New Zealand 1 month Top fruit Fruit breeder with HortResearch

1988

Dr Ignacio Batlle, Spain 3 years Apples PhD entitled 'Linkage of isoenzymic genes wirh agronomic characters in apple', top fruit breeder in IRTA, Reus

Yes

1990

Hongyi Dai, China 10 months

Top and soft fruit

Fruit breeder and Professor of Horticulture at Laiyang Agricultural College, Shandong. Returned for 6 months in 1999

Yes

1991

Dr Radovan Boskovic, Yugoslavia

13 years with some breaks

Prunus PhD entitled 'Study of inheritance and linkage of isoenzymes in cherry and of incompatibility of Rosaceous tree crops by analysis of stylar ribonucleases'

Yes

1991

Nicole Seglias, Switzerland 6 months Top fruit Top fruit breeder at Wädenswil/plant pathologist in Zurich and participant in EU apple mapping and DARE projects

1992 Maria-Luiga Maltoni, Italy 6 months Strawberries

Strawberry breeder at Istituto Sperimentale di Fruticoltura, Forli Yes

1992

Dr Chris Winterbottom, USA 4 months Strawberries Strawberry breeder at University of Davis, California and later Research Director of the California Strawberry Commission

Yes

1992 Ernst Gubler 1 year Apples Top fruit breeder at Wädenswil

1993

Dr Demetri Pashkoulov, Bulgaria 2 months

73



Co-author

of papers

1993 Leigh Flori, USA 2 months

1993 Dr Jerzy Hortynski, Poland 6 months Strawberries

Strawberry breeder, Professor of Horticulture, University of Lublin

1993 Dr Sevgi Paydas, Turkey 2 months Strawberries Strawberry breeder, Çukurova University, Turkey

1993 Roberta Dradi, Italy 5 months Strawberries

Strawberry breeder at Istituto Sperimentale di Fruticoltura, Forli Yes

1993 Dr Wendy Durrant 3 months Strawberries Went on to do a PhD

1993

Dr Yoong Lim 4 years Rubus Went on to Queen Mary College, University of London as a molecular cytologist

Yes

1994

Dr Simon Vaughan 11 years Apples, Prunus and soft fruit

Breeding placement followed by pomology and then contract on transformation. PhD at EM on GM in strawberry. Cherry biodiversity contract at EM. Currently in Hawaii working on GM.

Yes

1994 Christelle Lefebvre, France 3 months Strawberries

1994 Dr Elzbieta Piekarska, Poland 6 months Strawberries Strawberry breeder at Lublin

1994 Costanza Zavalloni, Italy 6 months Strawberries Went on to do a PhD

1994

Dr Vassilios Choularis, Greece 1.5 years Top fruit MSc on apple and pear markers, went on to do PhD on citrus at Thessoloniki

1994 Gianluca Savini, Italy 2 months Prunus Fruit breeder in Ancona

1994 Adelheid Birmelin, Germany 5 months

Top and soft fruit Graduated in Horticulture on her return to Germany

1994 Dr Igor Bartish, Ukraine 2 months Prunus Studied mapping in Prunus

1994 Anna Radovic, Serbia 3 months Prunus Studied mapping in Prunus

1995 Raphe Favre, Switzerland 6 months Apple Horticulture student

74



Co-author

of papers

1995 Wojciech Sobieranski, Poland 3 months Apple Horticulture student

1995 Nelly Claeyman, France 5 months

Top and soft fruit

1995 Vincenza Bono, Italy 3 months Raspberries

1995 Rastko Stojic, Serbia 3 months Prunus

1995 Franke Stockrahm, Germany 1 month Apples

1995 Hamish Selby, New Zealand 1 month Top fruit Technical Officer, FIPIA New Zealand Ltd

1995 Sawsan Amin, Jordan 3 months

Top and soft fruit Studied micropropagation before going to Wye College

1996 James Townsend, UK 6 months Apple

Now a plant molecular biologist at Rothamsted Research

1996 Stephanie Bandelier, France 3 months Top fruit Studied tissue culture and Prunus mapping

1996 Delphine Deleignies, France 3 months Top fruit Studied tissue culture and Prunus mapping

1996

Dr Till Pellny, Germany 5 years Farm woodlands

PhD on metabolic signalling in plants; currently a molecular biologist working in cancer research

1996

Jessica Oosterhof, Holland 4 months Top and soft fruit

1996

Dr Tineke Sonneveld, Holland 7 years with one break

Prunus Started PhD in 2000, thesis entitled 'The molecular genetics of self-incompatibility in sweet cherry (Prunus avium)', now doing research at the University of Nottingham

Yes

1996 Sabina Magnani, Italy 1 month Strawberries Strawberry breeder at ISF, Forli

1996 Sophie Boutillier, France 5 months Rubus

1996

Ksenja Gasic, Serbia 3 months Prunus Isoenzyme mapping in cherry, returned in 1997/98; currently senior research specialist in Agriculture,

Yes

75



Co-author

of papers

University of Illinois, USA199

6 Antonio Palumbo, Italy 3 months Prunus Studied mapping in cherry199

7Peter Mercer, UK 7 years

with breaks

Strawberries Work placements at EM around studies at Hadlow. Contract as strawberry breeding assistant at EM.

1997 Tiziana Centofanti, Italy 6 months Raspberries Leonardo student

1997

Sladana Nidzovic, Serbia 4 months Prunus Returned for 3 months in 1999 and 2004 working on apple mapping; molecular breeder at the Fruit and Grape Research Centre, Cacak

1997 Marcello Airo, Italy 3 months Strawberries Returned in 1998 to do micropropagation for 6 weeks

1997 Dr Radosav Cerovic, Serbia 2 months Prunus Returned in 1998 for 6 weeks

1997 Manuel Cornille, France 3 months Top fruit ENSAM funded, from Montpellier

1997 Sebastien Pesteur, France 3 months Top fruit ENSAM funded, from Montpellier

1997 Yildiz Kacar, Turkey 3 months Top fruit

1997 Eminie Tanriver, Turkey 3 months Top fruit

1997 Dr Koji Kawagishi, Japan

10 months Strawberries Strawberry breeder in Hokkaido

1998 Mirco Stefanti, Italy 5 months Top fruit Apple industry advisor in Ferrara

1998 Biljana Lazovic, Serbia 2 months Prunus

1998 Parascovia Sava, Moldova 3 months Strawberries Strawberry breeder in Moldova

1998 Alberto Forte, Italy 3 months Strawberries Researcher at Universita Politecnica delle Marche

199 Michele Rismondo, Italy 3 months Raspberries Leonardo student

76



Co-author

of papers

8199

8Claire Senner, UK 4 months Raspberries

and applesReturned for 3 months in 1999 and 2000, went on to do a PhD in medical genetics in London

1998 Pilar Nieto, Spain 2 months Chestnuts

1998 Madelena Cruz, Chile 1 month Apple Fruit breeder at INIA, Chillan

1999

Dr Bruce Sutherland, UK 4 years Plums Registered to do a PhD at University of Nottingham in 1999, thesis entitled on molecular genetics of incompatibility in plum; now working on biodiversity of broad-leaved trees at EMR

Yes

1999

Olga Pasat, Moldova 3 months Top fruit Funded by the World Bank

1999 Valda Laugale, Latvia 1 month Strawberries

Soft fruit breeder at Dobele Horticultural Plant Breeding Station

1999

Dr Dan Sargent, UK 4 years Strawberries Sandwich student in 1999, returned for 3 months in 2000 and 2001. Registered to do a PhD at University of Reading in 2001.Thesis entitled 'A genetic investigation of diploid Fragaria' submitted in January 2005. Employed as molecular biologist on EMR staff in January 2005.

Yes

1999

Emily Buck, UK 6 years Farm woodlands

Worked on Prunus microsatellites, started a PhD in 2000, registered at University of Bangor, on genetic diversity in European Chestnut; part of an EU Chestnut diversity project; now apple molecular biologist for HortResearch, New Zealand

Yes

1999 Macarena Blanco, Spain

6 months Raspberries Leonardo student

1999

Dr Valentina Kormanovskaya, Russia

3 months Raspberries Raspberry breeder at the Vavilov Institute of Plant Industry, St. Petersburg; study visit funded by The Royal Society

2000

Silke Lesemann, Germany 6 weeks Strawberries Returned in 2001 for 6 months, currently doing a PhD on apple pathology at Dresden

Yes

200 Christino Centanni, Italy 3 months Strawberries

77



Co-author

of papers

0200

0 Luca Girolomini, Italy3 months Ornamentals

2000

Rachel Crossley, UK 6 months Raspberries Returned in 2001 for 3 months, went on to do a PhD on Campylobacter at Food research Institute, Norwich

2001

Encarna Ortega, Spain 3 months Almond Worked on microsatellite markers in almond, returned in 2002

Yes

2001 Vittoria Perticone, Italy

6 months Raspberries Leonardo student

2001 Dr Raul de la Rosa, Spain

1 year Olive Olive breeder in Cordoba, Spain; came as a Marie Curie Fellow

Yes

2001 Laura Copolla, Italy

3 months Strawberries

2001

Dr Eiichi Inoue, Japan 1 year Pear Professor of Horticultural Science, Ibaraki University

2002

Dr Annalisa Marchese, Italy 3 years Prunus Registered at the University of Palermo, Sicily and doing a PhD entitled 'Impiego di microsatelliti ai fini della caratterizzazione molecolare e della mappatura genica di specie arboree da frutto delle zone temperate'

Yes

2002

Catherine Herrod, UK 6 months Apples and soft fruit

Graduated with BSc in Crop Production from Writtle and is a cauliflower breeder in Kent

2002

James Williams 6 months Raspberries Graduated from Manchester Met., now a molecular biologist at the University of Sheffield

2002

Jesus Garcia-Alonso, Spain 3 months Top and soft fruit

Leonardo student

2002 Suad Azrooei, Kuwait

2 monthsReturned in 2003 for 1 month

2003

Zsuzanna Bekefi, Hungary 3 months Cherries Pursuing PhD on cherry breeding and incompatibility in Budapest

Yes

2003

Ana Delia Gisbert, Spain 3 months Top fruit Currently doing a PhD on genetic improvement of loquat (Eriobotrya japonica) at Valencia

2003 Vincent Heulin, France

4 monthsTop fruit

78



Co-author

of papers

2004 Nenad Magazin, Serbia

6 monthsStrawberries Soft fruit researcher at Novi Sad, Serbia

2004 Nada Surbanovski, Serbia

3 monthsTop fruit Returned in 2005 for 4 weeks

2004

Maria Rodriguez-Blanco, Spain

7 months Top and soft fruit Leonardo student

2004 Jose Alonso Marcos, Spain

3 monthsTop fruit Leonardo student

2004

Dr Jeong-Hwan Hwang, Rep of Korea

3 months Apple Apple breeder in Korea (British Council, Korea funded visit)

79

APPENDIX IV - Joint international publications

Lespinasse, Y., Alston, F.H. & Watkins, R. (1976) Cytological techniques for use in apple breeding. Annals of Applied Biology, 82: 349-353.

Manganaris, A.G. & Alston, F.H. (1988) The acid phosphatase gene ACP-1 and its linkage with the endopeptidase gene ENP-1 and the pale green lethal gene 1 in apple. Acta Horticulturae, 224: 177-184.

Manganaris, A.G. & Alston, F.H. (1989) Glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase isoenzymes in apple cultivars and rootstocks. Journal of Horticultural Science, 64: 9-15.

Simpson, D.W. & Blanke, M. (1989). 'Pandora' die neue erdbeersort aus East Malling ('Pandora' the new strawberry cultivar from East Malling). Erwerbsobstbau, 31, Jg. 19-21.

Alston, F.H. & Kellerhals, M. (1990) Breeding apples to develop integrated production. Acta Horticulturae, 285: 135-141.

Manganaris, A.G. & Alston, F.H. (1992) Genetics of leucine aminopeptidase in apple. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 83: 345-352.

Manganaris, A.G. & Alston, F.H. (1992) Genetics of esterase isoenzymes in Malus. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 83: 467-475.

Manganaris, A.G. & Alston, F.H. (1993) Peroxidase isoenzyme genes in the identification of apple cultivars and Malus species. Journal of Horticultural Science, 68: 775-781.

Batlle, I. & Alston, F.H. (1994) Isoenzymic aided selection in the transfer of mildew (Podosphaera leucotricha) resistance from Malus hupehensis to the cultivated apple. Euphytica, 77: 11-14.

Manganaris, A.G., Alston, F.H., Weeden, N.F., Aldwinckle, H.S., Gustafson, H.L. & Brown, S.K. (1994) Isoenzyme locus Pgm-1 is tightly linked to a gene (Vf) for scab resistance in apple. Journal of the American Society of Horticultural Science, 119: 1286-1288.

Simpson, D.W. & Blanke, M. (1994). Calypso und Tango - remontierende Erdbeersorten mit Verticillium-Resistenz aus East Malling. (Calypso and Tango - everbearing strawberry cultivars from East Malling with resistance against Verticillium wilt). Erwerbsobstbau, 36 (5): 121-123

Simpson, D.W., Winterbottom, C.Q., Bell, J.A. and Maltoni, M.L. (1994). Resistance to a single UK isolate of Colletotrichum acutatum in strawberry germplasm from northern Europe. Euphytica, 77: 161-164.

Batlle, I., Alston, F.H. & Evans, K.M. (1995) The use of isoenzyme marker Got-1 in the recognition of incompatibility S alleles in apple. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 90: 303-306.

Dai, H. & Alston, F.H. (1995) Chilling and post-dormant heat requirement of quince and pear as rootstocks for pear. Acta Horticulturae, 403: 150-160.

80

Hancock, J.F. & Simpson, D.W. (1995). Methods of extending the strawberry season in Europe. HortTechnology, 5(4): 286-290.

Alston, F.H., Kellerhals, M., Goerre, M. & Rapillard, C. (1996) Resistance breeding of apples and pears: 10 years of collaboration between East Malling, Wadenswil and Fougeres. Obst und Weinbau, 132: 668-670.

Batlle, I. & Alston, F.H. (1996) Genes determining leucine aminopeptidase and mildew resistance from the ornamental apple ‘White Angel’. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 93: 303-306.

Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (1996). Inheritance of stylar ribonuclease zymograms with incompatibility alleles in sweet cherry. Euphytica 90: 245-250.

Faedi, W., Simpson, D.W., Dradi, R., Maltoni, M.L. & Persano, S. (1996). Influenza dell' ambiente sulla espressione del caraterre rifiorenza in fragola. (Environmental influence on the day-neutral trait in strawberry). Italus Hortus, 3 (3): 30-36.

Simpson, D.W. & Blanke, M.M. (1996). Tango, Eros und Emily - Die neuen erdbeersorten von HRI East Malling. (Tango, Eros and Emily - The new strawberry varieties from HRI East Malling.) Obstbau, 7/96: 339-340.

Simpson, D.W. & Blanke, M.M. (1996). Eros oder Emily? - Die neuen erdbeersorten von HRI East Malling. (Eros or Emily? The new strawberry varieties from HRI East Malling.) Erwerbsobstbau, 38(2): 55-57.

Bošković, R., Russell, K. & Tobutt, K. R. (1997). Inheritance of stylar ribonucleases in cherry progenies, and reassignment of incompatibility alleles in two incompatibility groups. Euphytica 95: 221-228.

Bošković, R., Tobutt, K. R., Battle, I. & Duval, H. (1997). Correlation of ribonuclease zymograms and incompatibility genotypes in almond. Euphytica 93: 129-143.

Bošković, R., Tobutt, K. R & Nicoll, F.J. (1997). Inheritance of isoenzymes and their linkage relationships in two interspecific cherry progenies. Euphytica 93: 129-143.

Lim, K. Y., Knight, V. H., Bennett, M. D., Leitch, I. J., Mezzetti, B., Landi, L. & Leitch, A. R. (1997). The application of genome ‘painting’ in polyploid Rubus. Italian Botanical Society Symposium, June 1997, Ancona, Italy.

Roche, P.A., Alston, F.H., Maliepaard, C., Evans, K.M., Vrielink, R., Dunemann, F., Markussen, T., Tartarini, S., Brown, L.M., Ryder, C. & King, G.J. (1997) RFLP and RAPD markers linked to the rosy leaf curling aphid resistance gene (Sd1) in apple. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 94: 528-533.

Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (1998). Inheritance and linkage relationships of isoenzumes in two interspecific cherry progenies. Euphytica 103: 273-286.

81

Lim, K. Y., Landi, L., Mezzetti, B., Knight, V. H. & Leitch, A. R. (1998). Genomic characterisation and the detection of introgressed chromatin in polyploid Rubus L. Poster presented at the Fourth International Chromosome Conference, September 1998, Ancona, Italy.

King, G.J., Alston, F.H., Brown, L.M., Chevreau, E., Evans, K.M., Dunemann, F., Janse, J., Laurens, F., Lynn, J.R., Maliepaard, C., Manganaris, A.G., Roche, P.A., Schmidt, H., Tartarini, S., Verhaegh, J. & Vrielink, R. (1998) Multiple field and glasshouse assessments increase the reliability of linkage mapping of the Vf source of scab resistance in apple. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 96: 699-708.

Maliepaard, C., Alston, F.H., van Arkel, G., Brown, L.M., Chevreau, E., Dunemann, F., Evans, K.M., Gardiner, S., Guilford, P., van Heusden, A.W., Janse, J., Laurens, F., Lynn, J.R., Manganaris, A.G., den Nijs, A.P.M., Periam, N., Rikkerink, E., Roche, P., Ryder, C., Sansavini, S., Schmidt, H., Tartarini, S., Verhaegh, J.J., Vrielink-van Ginkel, M. & King, G.J. (1998) Aligning male and female linkage maps of apple (Malus pumila Mill.) using multi-allelic markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 97: 60-73.

Petropoulou, S.P. & Alston, F.H. (1998) Selecting for improved pollination at low temperatures in apple. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 73: 507-512.

Bošković, R. Tobutt, K. R., Duval, M., Battle, I., Dicenta, F. & Vargas, F.J. (1999). A stylar ribonuclease assay to detect self-compatible seedlings in almond progenies. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 99: 800-810.

Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (1999). Correlation of stylar ribonuclease isoenzymes with incompatibility alleles in apple. Euphytica 107: 29-43.

Durel, C.E., Lespinasse, Y., Chevalier, M., Chevreau, E., den Nijs, A.P.M., Djouvinov, V., Dunemann, F., Evans, K.M., Fischer, C., Gessler, C., Kellerhals, M., Laurens, F., Manganaris, A.G., Parisi, L., Sansavini, S., Schmidt, H., Schouten, H.J. & Schreiber, H. (1999). Genetic dissection of apple resistance regarding pathogen variability: co-ordination of European research programmes. Acta Horticultura,. 484: 435-442.

Maliepaard, C., Vrielink, R., Van Heusden, S., Verhaegh, J.,Janse, J., Den Nijs, A., Brown, L. M., Ryder, C. D.,Periam, N. W., Lynn, J. R., King, G. J., Roche, P., Evans, K. M., Alston, F. H., Tartarini, S., Sansavini, S. & Dunemann, F., Schmidt, H., Chevreau, E., Laurens, F., Manganaris, A. G. & Gardiner, S. (1999). The European Apple Map. Acta Horticulturae, 484: 325-330.

Roche, P.A., Brown, L.M., King, G.J., Alston, F.H., Evans, K.M., Maliepaard, C., Van Heusden, S., Vrielink, R., Laurens, F., Dunemann, F., Markussen, T. & Tartarini, S. (1999). Identification and development of markers linked to aphid resistance in apple. Acta Horticulturae, 484: 519-522.

Rosati, P., Mezzetti, B., Knight, V.H., Lim, K.Y., Trajkovsky, V., Sjostedt, B., Greco, I., Martelli, G., Lionakis, S., Stavroulakis, G., Ciorda, M. & Polledo, A. (1999). Expanding the adaptation and area of production of Rubus in Europe. Acta Horticulturae, 505: 39-46.

82

Bošković, R., Russell, K., Tobutt, K. R & Ridout, M.S. (2000). An isoenzyme marker linked to the incompatibility locus in cherry. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 100: 512-518.

Bošković, R., Tobutt, K. R., Schmidt, H. & Sonneveld, T. (2000). Re-examination of (in)compatibility genotypes of two John Innes self-compatible sweet cherry selections. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 101: 234-240.

Dai, H., James, C.M. & Tobutt, K.R. (2000) Identification of molecular markers for four characters of apple from bulked DNA. In: Molecular Markers for Characterising Genotypes and Identifying Cultivars in Horticulture (Abstracts, International Symposium under the aegis of the Commission of Biotechnology of ISHS, AGRO, Montpellier, 6-8 March 2000) (no pp)

Evans, K.M., Lespinasse, Y., Parisi, L., Laurens, F. & Durel, C.E. (2000) Durable resistance to scab and mildew in apple – a European project. Pesticide Outlook, 11(3): 84-87.

King, G.J., Maliepaard, C., Lynn, J.R., Alston, F.H., Durel, C.E., Evans, K.M., Griffon, B., Laurens, F., Manganaris, A.G., Schrevens, E. & Tartarini, S. (2000) Quantitative genetic analysis and comparison of physical and sensory descriptors relating to fruit flesh firmness in apple (Malus pumila Mill.) Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 100(7): 1074-1084.

Pashkoulov, D.T., Tobutt, K. R. & Bošković, R. (2000). Comparison of isoenzymes in Prunus avium separated by two different electrophoretic techniques. Plant Breeding 119: 153-156.

Tobutt, K.R., Bošković, R. & Roche, P. (2000) Incompatibility and resistance to woolly apple aphid. Plant Breeding, 119: 65-69.

Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (2001). Genotyping cherry cultivars assigned to incompatibility groups, by analysing stylar ribonucleases. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 103: 475-485.

Sonneveld, T., Robbins, T.P., Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (2001). Cloning of six cherry self-incompatibility alleles and development of allele-specific PCR detection. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 102: 1046-1055.

Webster, A.D., Evans, K.M, Spencer, J. & Adam, S. (2001) Pear rootstock breeding and selection at HRI-East Malling. Proceedings of VI International Symposium on Pears, Ferrara, Italy. Sept 2000. Acta Horticulturae, (in press)

Bošković, R., Tobutt, K. R., Battle, I., Duval, H., Martinez-Gomez, P., & Gradziel, T.M. (2002). Stylar ribonucleases in almond: correlation with and prediction of incompatibility genotypes. Plant Breeding 122: 70-76.

De la Rosa, R., James, C.M. & Tobutt, K. R (2002). Isolation and characterisation of polymorphic microsatellites in olive (Olea europea L.) and their transferability to other genera in the Oleaceae. Molecular Biology Notes 2: 265-267.

83

Dicenta, F., Ortega, E., Martinez-Gomez, P., Bošković, K. & Tobutt, K. R (2002). Comparison of homozygous and heterozygous self-compatible seedlings in an almond breeding programme. Euphytica 124: 23-27.

Durel, C-E., Lespinasse, Y., Calenge, F., Van de Weg, E., Koller, B., Dunemann, F., Thiermann, M., Evans, K., James, C. & Tartarini, S. (2002). Four years of the European DARE project: numerous results on apple scab and powdery mildew resistance gene mapping. PAG-X. San Diego Jan. 2002.

Finn, C. & Knight, V. H. (2002). What's going on in the world of Rubus breeding? Acta Horticulturae, 585 (1): 31-38.

Parisi, L., Laurens, F., Didelot, F., Evans, K., Fischer, C., Fouillet, V., Kemp, H., Lateur, M., Patocchi, A., Schouten, H, Tartarini, S. & Tsipouridis, C. (2002) Geographical distribution of V. inaequalis strains virulent to the Vf gene in Europe. IOBC August 2002.

Torre, F. & Evans, K.M. (2002) Multivariate calibration of sensory data with instrumental measurements: towards the analysis of apple flavour. 7 th

European Conference on Food Industry and Statistical Methods, Lille, France, 16-18 January 2002.

Zanetto, A., Maggioni, L., Tobutt, K. R & Dosba, F. (2002). Prunus genetic resources in Europe: achievement and perspectives of a networking activity. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 49: 331-337.

Bošković, R., Tobutt, K. R., Battle, I., Duval, H., Martinez-Gomez, P. & Gradziel, T.M. (2003). Stylar ribunucleases in almond: correlation with and prediction of incompatibility genotypes. Plant Breeding 122: 70-76.

Marchese, A., Tobutt, K.R., Caruso T. (2003). Caratterizzazione molecolare di cultivar di pesco [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] del germoplasma autoctono della Sicilia. Atti del IV Convegno Nazionale sulla Peschicoltura Meridionale, Campobello di Licata & Agrigento, Italy, 11-12 September. pp. 145-148.

Sonneveld, T., Tobutt, K. R. & Robbins, T.P. (2003). Allele-specific PCR detection of sweet cherry self-incompatibility (S) alleles S1 to S16 using consensus and allele-specific primers. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 107: 1059-1070.

Clarke, J.B., Ortega, E., Sutherland, B., Marchese, A., Tobutt, K.R. (2004). Some new cherry microsatellites and their transferability to other stone-fruits. Acta Horticulture, 663: 83-86.

Geibel, M, Roudeillac, P., Masny, A., Trajkovski, K., Coman, M. & Simpson, D.W. (2004). The European strawberry database and building up a European core collection. Acta Horticulturae, 649: 41-44.

Marchese, A., Tobutt, K. R., Caruso T. (2004).Indagine sulla variabilità molecolare del germoplasma del pesco autoctono della Sicilia, mediante l’uso di SSRs (Simple Sequence Repeats). Atti delle VII Giornate Scientifiche SOI, Naples, Italy, 4-6 May. pp. 390-391.

84

Parisi, L., Fouillet, V., Schouten, H., Groenwold, R., Laurens, F., Didelot, F., Evans, K., Fischer, C., Gennari, F., Kemp, H., Lateur, M., Patocchi, A., Thissen, C. & Tsipouridis, C. (2004) Variability of the pathogenicity of Venturia inaequalis in Europe. Acta Horticulturae, 663: 107-114.

Sargent, D.J., Davis, T.M., Tobutt, K.R., Wilkinson, M.J., Battey, N.H., & Simpson, D.W. (2004). A genetic linkage map of microsatellite, gene specific and morphological markers in diploid Fragaria. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 109: 1385-1391. DOI 10.1007/s00122-004-1767-9

Sargent, D.J., Geibel, M,. Hawkins, J.A., Wilkinson, M.J., Battey, N.H. & Simpson, D.W. (2004). Morphological traits in diploid Fragaria for the study of the genetic basis of phenotypic differences between species. Annals of Botany, 94: 787-796; DOI:10.1093/aob/mch217

Simpson, D.W., Hammond, K.J., Lesemann, S. & Whitehouse, A.B. (2004). Pathogenicity of UK isolates of Colletotrichum acutatum and relative resistance among a range of strawberry cultivars. Proceedings of the 5 th

ISHS Strawberry Symposium, Queensland, Australia, September 6-10, 2004. Acta Horticulturae,

Tobutt, K. R, Bošković, R., Ceroviċ, R., Sonneveld, T. & Ružic, D. (2004). Identification of incompatibility alleles in the tetraploid species sour cherry. Theoretical & Applied Genetics 108: 775-785.

De Cuyper, B., Sonneveld, T. & Tobutt, K. R. (2005). Determing self-incompatibility genotypes in Belgian wild cherries. Molecular Ecology 14: 945-955

Marchese, A., Tobutt, K. R., Caruso T. (2005). Molecular characterisation of Sicilian Prunus persica cultivars using microsatellites. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 80: 121-129.

Marchese, A., Bošković, R. I., Clarke, J., Motisi, A., Raimondo, A., Tobutt, K. R., Caruso, T. (2005). Fingerprinting of Sicilian cherry germplasm with Simple Sequence Repeats and incompatibility (S) locus primers. Abstract of First International Conference on Crop Wild Relative Conservation and Use, Agrigento, Italy, 14-17 September.

Marchese, A., Tobutt, K. R., Caruso, T. (2005). The Sicilian peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) germplasm: evaluation of the genetic diversity using SSRs. Abstract of VI ISHS International Peach Symposium, Santiago, Chile, 9-14 January.

Ortega, E., Sutherland, B.G., Dicenta, G., Bošković, R. & Tobutt, K. R. (2005). Determination of incompatibility genotypes in almond using first and second intron consensus primers: detection of new S alleles and correction of reported S genotypes. Plant Breeding 124: 188-196.

Raimodo, A., Campisi, G., Cutuli, M., Marchese, A., Motisi, A., Tobutt, K. R., Zappia, R., Caruso, T. (2005). Variability of pomological and molecular (by SSR markers) traits of Sicilian cherry (P. avium L.) germplasm. Abstract of V ISHS International Cherry Symposium, Bursa, Turkey, 6-10 June.

85

Sonneveld, T., Tobutt, K. R, Vaughan, S. P. & Robbins, T.P. (2005). Loss of pollen-S function in two self-compatible selections of Prunus avium is associated with a deletion/mutation of an S haplotype-specific F-Box gene. The Plant Cell 17: 1-15.

86

report on a desktop study to investigate the current world...

Documents