b'not retaining all the essential character- MUTANT AND GMOS It suggests a very limited scope of istics thereof, will not be considered EDV.In our view, all mutants and GMO arethe EDV concept, to the disadvan-In CIOPORAs opinion, the degree of theEDVs as long as they are distinct fromtage of the (traditional) breeders of phenotypic similarity and the numbertheir Initial Varieties. They are solely orInitial Varieties;of phenotypic differences should not bepredominantly derived from the InitialIt is at least open for a very narrow taken into consideration while determin- Variety and retain the characteristics ofinterpretation and does not provide ing whether a variety is an EDV or not.the Initial Variety, except for those changesclear guidance, which triggers dis-Instead, the EDV concept should helpthat result from the act of derivation.putes with unpredictable outcome;establish dependency for varieties that I t deprives breeders of the decision are phenotypically distinct and solely oron EDVs.predominantly derived from the IV. WHETHER A PLANTREVISION OF THE EDV DISTINCTION BETWEENVARIETY IS AN EDV, PROVISIONS IN THEMORE IMPORTANT AND LESSUPOV CONVENTION?IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS IS A MATTER FORThe UPOV 1991 Act is almost 30 years In CIOPORAs view, in respect of EDV,BREEDERS ANDold and during this period of time huge no distinction should be made betweenCOURTS changes have occurred, in breeding as important and less important character- well as in production and trade in plants istics. However, a differentiation betweenand plant material. Is the 1991 Act still important and unimportant characteris- up to date? It seems to be difficult to find tics should be made while evaluating dis- DECISIONS ON EDV consensus on the question whether the tinctness of varieties.CIOPORA is of the opinion that the deci- UPOV 1991 Act should be revised. In any sion, whether a variety is an EDV is acase, the text of the EDV provision in the THE ACT OF DERIVATION matter for breeders and courts. The task1991 Act would give good reason to con-If an essential characteristic was changedof PBR Offices is to establish Distinctnesssider, at least a partial, revision.due to an act of derivation, a variety canof an EDV in the course of the variety definitely still be an EDV. The main deci- examination process. Editors Note: Dr Edgar Krieger is sive factor is predominant derivation. TheSecretary General of CIOPORA, the changes resulting from the act of deriva- REVISION OF THE CURRENT UPOVInternational Association of Breeders tion should not be taken into consider- EXPLANATORY NOTE ON EDV of Asexually Reproduced Horticultural ation, be it important or unimportantCIOPORA is of the opinion that the EXNVarieties.changes.on EDV should be revised.computomics machine learning-based data analysisExceed Your Double the AccuracyBreeding Results Double the Genetic GainwithSeedScoreHalve the Breeding CycleMeet us atSchedule your meeting with Ruth Mayes today!rm@computomics.comhttps://computomics.comaccurate performance prediction +49 7071 568 3995 seedscoreEUROPEAN-SEED.COMIEUROPEAN SEED I 25'