Yard & Garden Line News
Volume 8 Number 18                                                               December 1, 2006
Features this issue:

Right Plants for Our Place: Woody Landscape Plant Breeding and Genetics at the U--The History
Right Plants for Our Place: Woody Landscape Plant Breeding and Genetics at the U--Looking Ahead
The Insatiable Appetite for New Plant Introductions- Forces behind the frenzy
Black Widows in Minnesota
2007 Minnesota Gardening Calendar
Editorial Notes

Right Plants for Our Place: Woody Landscape Plant Breeding and Genetics at the U--The History
Stan Hokanson, Professor, Horticultural Science

'Autumn Spendor' buckeye flowers
Photo: Dave Hansen
Introduction

In 2004, the Woody Landscape Plant Breeding Project at the University of Minnesota 'celebrated' 50 years of active breeding and development of cold-hardy woody landscape plants. Initiated in 1954, the project is a latecomer relative to other horticultural plant breeding efforts at the University of Minnesota, with fruit breeding beginning in 1888, vegetables in 1901, and flowers in the early 1930s. Like all of the horticultural breeding efforts at the University, the Woody Landscape Plant Breeding Project was initiated to breed and develop woody landscape plants capable of thriving in Minnesota's harsh winter climates which range from USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 4B in the south to Zone 2B in certain locations in the north.

In 50 years, the project has been responsible for the release of over 40 plant cultivars and has certainly contributed to the development of a $2.1 billion state nursery and landscape industry.

History

People. Evaluations and selection for cold hardy, adapted landscape plant materials has been ongoing at the University of Minnesota at least since 1888. Professor Samuel B. Green, who was hired as the head of the Department of Horticulture in that year, planted trees and shrubs on the new (1883) St. Paul campus of the University of Minnesota to evaluate cold hardiness and landscape quality.

The first directed breeding work on woody landscape plants can be dated to 1942 when Dr. Louis E. Longley, who was hired at the University in 1929 and started the chrysanthemum breeding project, began making some crabapple and rose crosses. Longley is credited with releasing four roses, 'Pink Rocket', 'Red Rocket', 'L.E. Longley' and 'White Dawn', in 1949 and developing the 'Radiant' crabapple. In 1942, Robert A. Phillips, who was hired to assist Dr. Longley and teach landscape classes, continued to make rose hybridizations after Longley's retirement in 1949. Two additional rose cultivars, 'Prairie Fire' and 'Viking Queen' are attributable to Phillip's efforts.

The Woody Landscape Plant Breeding Project's true beginnings vary according to source. Dr. W.H. Alderman cites 1952 as the formal organization of the project, with leadership of the project attributed to Dr. Leon C. Snyder. Snyder cites the formal initiation of the project as occurring in 1954. The 1954 date is the one most generally recognized within the University. Most of the information concerning the early years of the project originates from Snyder's own accounts. Interestingly, although Alderman cites Snyder as being the original leader of the project, Snyder does not attribute any personal role in the Woody Landscape Breeding Project in his own accounts. However, without doubt, Snyder was the driving force behind the early efforts in the project. Woody landscape plant breeding would have been the logical extension of his legendary interest in evaluating plants for potential use in the Minnesota landscape.

At the formal inception of the project in 1954, Snyder had also become the third head of the Horticultural Science department upon Alderman's retirement in 1954. Given his increased administrative duties, Snyder certainly had to delegate much of the responsibility for day-to-day breeding and evaluation activities. Richard Stadther was hired by the University in 1954 as an instructor in ornamentals and was cited as working for the Woody Landscape Plant Breeding Project until he left the University in 1961. Dr. Robert Mullin was hired in 1963 to replace Stadther, and is credited by Leon Snyder as working on the project in the early years. Like Stadther, Dr. Mullin was stationed on the St. Paul campus and thus physically removed from the day-to-day breeding and evaluation work which has always been carried out at the Horticultural Research Center in Excelsior, Mn.

Redbud flowers-northern strain
Photo: Dave Hansen
In 1957, Albert Johnson was hired to work on the breeding project at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. Until his untimely death in 1977, Johnson carried on the day-to-day activities of the project. In 1957, Johnson made the first crosses that signaled the beginning of an effort that largely defines the project to this day, the "Lights' azaleas.

Johnson's activities extended far beyond the Arboretum proper as he scoured the state and the region in search of new and unique woody plant materials. Many of these 'hunting' trips were done in collaboration with extension agents Mike Zins and Mervin Eisel who spotted much of the plant material in their extension travels throughout the state and region. To this day the project continues to evaluate plant materials collected by this enterprising group of 'plant hounds', including a columnar form of bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa) and a hardy genotype of Kentucky wisteria (Wisteria macrostachys). The gardeners and the nursery and landscape industry throughout Minnesota and the region owe much to these largely unheralded individuals and their ceaseless efforts to bring new plants into commerce. In 1978, Dr. Harold Pellett assumed leadership of the project. Pellett had been on the faculty since 1967 working in the area of nursery production and whole plant physiology. Under his leadership the project truly blossomed with over 30 woody landscape plants being named and released as cultivars. In addition to productive efforts in cultivar development, Pellett also collaborated in some pioneering research regarding woody plant cold hardiness. Dr. Pellett retired from the University in 2001 and Dr. Stan Hokanson was hired to take over leadership of the project.

Plants. Over 40 cultivars have been released by the University and Woody Landscape Plant Breeding Project. The list includes several flowering crabapples, apricots, and plums released in the 1920's, 30's and 40's, predating any directed efforts at woody landscape plant breeding or selection. These early releases were 'byproducts' of the fruit breeding program which was initiated in 1888.

The woody landscape plants released by the project can be categorized into five groups: large trees, small flowering trees, shrubs, deciduous azaleas, and roses. The diversity of cultivars released from the project reflect early efforts to identify woody plants with meritorious landscape characteristics and the capacity to survive Minnesota winters. Simply stated, the objective was to expand the pallet of landscape plant offerings for the state and environs. Early efforts largely involved evaluation of vegetatively propagated genotypes and seedling populations arising from plant taxa, genotypes and/or populations of interest.

Aside from the short-lived rose and crab apple breeding programs of the 1940's, no purposeful hybridization programs were undertaken with woody landscape plants until the onset of the formal breeding program in 1954. In 1957, Al Johnson crossed Rhododendron x kosterianum (Mollis azalea) with R. prinophyllum (Roseshell azalea), initiating the most well-known work of the project, development of the 'Lights' series of deciduous azaleas. The first cultivar, 'Northern Lights', was released in 1978 . To date, 13 named cultivars have been released by the project. The overriding objective of the azalea breeding program has been development of USDA Zone 4 hardy azaleas in a range of colors. Although nearly commonplace in Minnesota landscapes today, the range of colors and flower forms represented by the 'Lights' azaleas were unknown even as recently as the mid 1980's when some of the richer yellow, orange and multi-hued cultivars began to find their way into the landscape. It would be an understatement to say the program has been a success.

Fifty Years of Releases

Trees
1980 ‘Northwood’ red maple Acer rubrum
1980 ‘Autumn Splendor’ buckeye Aesculus x arnoldiana
1992 ‘Autumn Spire’ red maple Acer rubrum
1995 ‘Stately Manor’ Kentucky coffeetree Gymnocladus dioicus
1996 ‘His Majesty’ Amur corktree Phellodendron amurense
2001 ‘Firefall’ maple Acer x freemanii
2001 ‘Summertime’ Amur maackia Maackia amurensis

Small Flowering Trees
1923 ‘Manitou’ Flowering almond Prunus triloba
1923 ‘Newport’ Cherry plum Prunus cerasifera
1934 ‘Flame’ Crabapple Malus sp.
1958 ‘Radiant’ Crabapple Malus sp.
1963 ‘Vanguard’ Crabapple Malus sp.
1969 ‘Sparkler’ Crabapple Malus sp.
1986 ‘Princess Kay’ double flowered wild plum Prunus nigra
1992 ‘Minnesota Strain’ Redbud Cercis Canadensis

Shrubs
1971 ‘Isanti’ Red osier dogwood Cornus sericea
1982 ‘Northern Sun’ Forsythia Forsythia ovata
1986 ‘Cardinal’ Red osier dogwood Cornus sericea
1986 ‘Freedom’ Honeysuckle Lonicera x tatarica
1994 ‘Honey Rose’ Honeysuckle Lonicera korolkowii
1994 ‘Emerald Triumph’ Viburnum Viburnum lantana
1995 ‘Northern Pearls’ Pearlbush Exochorda serratifolia
2001 ‘Garden Glow’ Shrub dogwood Cornus hessei

Roses
1949 ‘L.E. Longley’ Hybrid tea rose .
1949 ‘Pink Rocket’ shrub rose .
1949 ‘Red Rocket’ shrub rose .
1949 ‘White Dawn’ large-flowered climber .
1959 ‘Prairie Fire’ shrub rose .
1963 ‘Viking Queen’ large-flowered climber .

Deciduous azaleas
1978 ‘Northern Lights’ .
1984 ‘White Lights’ .
1984 ‘Rosy Lights’ .
1984 ‘Pink Lights’ .
1986 ‘Orchid Lights’ .
1986 ‘Golden Lights’ .
1987 ‘Spicy Lights’ .
1992 ‘Mandarin Lights’ .
1994 ‘Northern Hi-Lights’ .
1996 ‘Lemon Lights’ .
2001 ‘Tri Lights’ .
2002 ‘Lilac Lights’ .
2002 ‘Candy Lights' .


Right Plants for Our Place: Woody Landscape Plant Breeding and Genetics at the U--Looking Ahead
Beth Jarvis, Yard & Garden Line

Stan, Kathy and Steve Photo: Beth Jarvis
The Woody Landscape Plants Breeding Project (WLPBP) is home-based at the Horticulture Research Center (HRC) in Excelsior with additional test sites at the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum and the North Central Research and Outreach Center in Grand Rapids, the West Central Research and Outreach Center in Morris, and U-More Park in Rosemount. Stan Hokanson is the project leader. Steve McNamara and Kathy Zuzek are scientists who work with Hokanson. This article is the result of conversations with McNamara, Hokanson, and Zuzek.

We love our maples!

Japanese maples delight many Minnesotans yet these dainty, dwarf trees are not reliably hardy in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 4 locations. (The Arboretum's Japanese maples over-winter in cool storage.) Korean maples (Acer pseudosieboldianum) however, might prove to be a hardy, suitable substitute. The project is currently evaluating approximately 350 seedlings for cold hardiness and horticultural characteristics. Hokanson wrote about this effort in these pages in September 2003 http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/YGLNews/YGLN Sept1503.html#acer.

Acer xfreemanii, called "Freeman maples" were first described as naturally occurring hybrids of red and silver maples. Plant breeders have purposefully crossed the species to produce Acer xfreemanii cultivars. These include 'Sienna Glen', 'Autumn Blaze', 'Celebration', 'Marmo' and 'Scarlet Sentinel'. Like silver maples, these trees are vigorous, fast growing and site-adaptable; they inherited brilliant fall color from the red maple parent. Unfortunately, in northern Minnesota, the Freeman maples don't reliably color up before frost. In hopes of obtaining earlier fall color, the WLPBP is crossing some of the existing Freeman maples back to themselves or to red maples. 'Firefall' is the U's first generation controlled cross.

McNamara admits sugar maples are among his favorites. Yet, he notes that they're trees for the cool, shaded edges of woodlands, not the sun-baked center of a yard. Subdivision soils are often clay soil in a mishmash with the topsoil. Sugar maples grow poorly in this soil type. The WLPBP is now crossing local-source sugar maples with Caddo maple, a southwestern eco-type. Caddo maples, native to the Caddo Mountains in Oklahoma, are more drought resistance and heat tolerant. Our researchers are hoping the offspring will have an improved ability to cope with disturbed sites.

Asian maple species are being evaluated for hardiness and for the role they could play in future crosses. The project is currently evaluating several hybrids of Shantung maple (Acer truncatum) and Norway maple (A. platanoides). Shantung maple, a medium-sized, dome-shaped tree native to China, Korea, and Manchuria is very drought tolerant. It produces interesting purple foliage in the spring and can develop attractive fall color. By hybridizing this species with more upright Norway maples, researchers hope to develop attractive shade trees suitable for use on tough urban sites.

Fall color on spicebush.
Photo: Beth Jarvis
Birches, other trees and shrubs

River birch, (Betula nigra) long touted as a replacement for paper birch due to its improved bronze birch borer resistance, develops chlorotic leaves when planted in alkaline soils. For a number of years, HRC researchers have been screening seedling populations of river birch in search of plants with greater tolerance of high pH soils. Several selections have been made and are currently undergoing additional evaluation.

In recent years, many new cultivars of weigela have appeared on the market. However, many of these selections originated from Europe and little is known about their cold tolerance. The WLPBP is currently evaluating the hardiness of many of these cultivars in both field and laboratory freezing trials. The project is also breeding Weigela in an attempt to develop small-statured varieties with attractive flowers and superior cold hardiness. Approximately 3,000 seedlings are currently in field trials with more seedlings scheduled to be planted out for evaluation next spring.

Pagoda dogwood (Cornus alternifolia) is our native tree dogwood. One of the reasons it has not become a staple in the landscape plant palette is its susceptibility to golden canker, incited by Cryptodiaporthe corni. The WLPBP in collaboration with Dr. Robert Blanchette, U of MN Plant Patholgy, has isolated and cultured the fungus. Using the cultured pathogen, the group hopes to develop a seedling screening protocol that will allow them to develop canker resistant cultivars.

Clove currant, Ribes aureum var. villosum (formerly R. odoratum), a deliciously fragrant, under-used shrub is a new interest for the project. A large collection of open-pollinated seedlings obtained from the National Clonal Germplasm Repository in Corvallis, OR is currently being evaluated for disease resistance and horticultural characteristics, including size and flower density. A compact, heavily flowering cultivar from the species could prove to be an exciting, early season flowering shrub for the landscape.

Spicebush (Lindera benzoin) is a USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 5 understory shrub with small clusters of yellow flowers, brilliant red fruit, yellow fall leaf color, and fragrant, spicy-smelling foliage. The WLPBP has been making seed collections, primarily in Michigan, in order to evaluate the species for horticultural characteristics. The first determination to be made is, are there genotypes that will survive a Minnesota Zone 4 winter?

The project is probably most well-known for the development of the 'Lights' series of deciduous azaleas. In the 52 years of the project's existence, 13 azalea cultivars have been released. Current goals for the program include the development of a true red flowered cultivar, powdery mildew resistant foliage, and cultivars that flower later into June and possibly even July.

Three New Roses
Three new roses.
Photo: Beth Jarvis
It's been 43 years since a new rose has been released from the U. In 2008, you should be able to find three new, super-hardy shrub roses in your garden centers. These new roses came from 1997 crosses that were selected as potential releases in 2002 and have been in trials since.

Kathy Zuzek says these polyantha roses are being propagated at Bailey's, just awaiting names. They die back to the crown in winter but by June are two feet tall, full of blooms then continue to grow to almost three feet tall while covered in a profusion of blooms the entire season. Zuzek says they are real best performers in the trials in Grand Rapids where they survived a winter with a low temperature of -47ºF and with consistent snow cover. USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 3 gardeners have a real treat in store!

They include a fragrant camellia flower type in white and oh-so-delicate pink, one with single white petals with ruffled pink edges (but little fragrance) and an almost cabbage rose in mauves and pinks ranging to hot pink. (This is the most fragrant of the three.)

(Zuzek wrote about the shrub rose breeding program in: Shrub Rose Breeding Program Blooms http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/YGLNews/YGLN-Feb0103.html#roses )

It's Not Cold Enough Outside!

University plant breeders are about the only Minnesotans who complain about mild winters. If your work demands that temperatures dip down to 30°F below, it's not been cold enough for you in southern Minnesota for the last five or six years.

So what do winter hardiness researchers do when Mother Nature doesn't come through? They put cuttings into the deep freeze. This deep freeze is not the same as field trials but it provides a controlled means of testing. Research freezers are a bit different from the one in your basement. They can be programmed to shift down to a specific temperature and hold that temperature for a specific amount of time. They can ramp down a number of times over a specified time period. After the chilling experience, the cuttings are planted in sand in a warm greenhouse to see if the buds survived.

Before the freezer trials, the plants are stored outside where they undergo normal winter acclimation. Over the course of the winter, cutting are taken and exposed to the target test temperatures via the freezer. This give scientists an idea how quickly and completely the plants shut down for winter as well as whether they survive. Weigela and Clethra cultivars are among those being evaluated over winter to see how well they cope.

Many new plants are being introduced from Europe as well as other breeding programs. It's really hard to be certain what is truly hardy; catalogs don't have definitive information on newer plants. Nurseries really don't always know how cold-hardy some of their offerings are, hence confusion reigns in catalogs. The only way to be certain is for researchers to try to freeze the plants to death.

Thanks to our northern climate, we assume that the WLPBP's focus will be on cold-hardy trees and shrubs. But that's not the only criterion. Given this last summer's drought, the scarce rainfall in the last few autumns, and recent milder than average winters, it's understandable why the program's focus is on overall environmental adaptability--improved cold hardiness, drought tolerance, heat tolerance, as well as disease and insect resistance.

Baldcypress for trials.
  Photo: Beth Jarvis
The general approaches are controlled breeding and mass screening of non-hardy species for cold-hardy variants. Redbud is the "poster plant" for the mass screening approach as the hardy Minnesota strain of redbud was discovered in a population of seedlings planted at the HRC many years ago. Some of the original plants from that effort live on at the HRC and are currently being used to make crosses with less hardy cultivars such as 'Forest Pansy' and 'Oklahoma' that have attractive foliage characteristics. Meanwhile mass-screening for cold hardiness continues with a number of species including American smoketree (Cotinus obovatus), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), baldcypress (Taxodium distichum), lacebark elm (Ulmus parvifolia), and Katsura tree (Cercidiphyllum japonicum). These species are being screened for cold tolerance at the Horticultural Research Center and at the North Central Research and Outreach Center in Grand Rapids USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 3. Individual seedlings that exhibit exceptional hardiness are propagated and evaluated in additional trials.

American smoketree (Cotinus obovatus) is a small-statured tree which naturalizes on limestone outcroppings in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 5/6 locations in the mid-southern region of the U.S. The project has evaluated stem samples from seedlings in controlled freezer tests which tested to -47°F. In 2004, seedlings were taken to Grand Rapids for cold hardiness trials. The team likes to trial in Grand Rapids due to the reliably cold winters. Unfortunately, that winter, Grand Rapids reached a record all time low of 50°F. While the plants all suffered freeze damage, some survived.

Two-edged sword

Survivability is a two-sided sword. The very same traits that foster survivability for landscape plants may also make that plant invasive. Of 235 non-native woody plants that have naturalized in North America, 85% hopped the garden fence from where they'd originally been landscape plants.

But what constitutes unacceptable weediness, nay, invasiveness? In the October 2006 issue of the Scoop, the Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association's newsletter, Hokanson points out many evaluations are based on casual observation, may be tempered by environmental factors and a weedy proliferation may, over time, die out. In short, a weedy shrub in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 6 might not be a problem in zone 4. There is clearly a need for quantitative evaluations.

The Minnesota Nursery and Landscape Association is funding research to characterize what environmental factors allow a species to become established, how they propagate and by doing so, quantify which plants have a tendency to become weedy.

Tatarian maple (Acer tataricum), Amur maple (A. tataricum ssp. ginnala) and Norway maple (A. platanoides) are being evaluated for the ability to establish seedlings under different landscape conditions, such as under a tree canopy, in mulch, etc. to determine the conditions under which seedlings of these non-native species are most likely to establish and thrive (and those conditions in which the seedlings will not establish). Results will be compared to four native maples, red maple (A. rubrum), sugar maple, (A. saccharum), silver maple (A. saccharinum) and boxelder, (A. negundo).

This research will not only compare the introduced species to the native species to define some quantifiable distinctions and similarities, but also establish some "best use" guidelines. Additional research will be conducted using modeling software to gauge invasive risk.

*****
A few notes:
For years, hybrids were noted as Acer x freemanii with the x not in italics and standing alone. The newer convention is to append the x to the species name.
***
Rhododendron is the genus name for both rhododendrons and azaleas. In common parlance, azalea refers to the deciduous members of the genus Rhododendron and rhododendron refers to those that hold their leaves through the winter, such as 'PJM'.

The Insatiable Appetite for New Plant Introductions- Forces behind the frenzy
David C. Zlesak, Regional Extension Educator, Horticulture

Tidal Wave petunias--taller and wider. Photo: PanAmerican Seeds
Excitement over the new and/or improved plant variety offerings is a strong force driving the horticultural industry. To stay on top of the game and offer what customers are looking for, garden centers and nurseries need to know what the marketers of plants are promoting. New, "hot", must-have plants for the upcoming season often top the list of what managers and employees involved in retail garden centers want to learn about during pre-season, educational workshops. The topic also receives considerable attention every year in both industry and consumer horticulture magazines. Perhaps there would ultimately be greater customer satisfaction if retailers instead emphasized topics like ways keep plants healthy in the retail environment before sale or tools to efficiently provide pertinent gardening information to the consumer during the spring rush. In addition, consumers could focus more of their interest on learning about plant culture and matching the right plant to the right place. What are the forces behind the insatiable appetite for the new and "improved"? Can the market sustain the current pace of new plant introductions?

The increased frenzy of new plant cultivars has been fueled by a number of converging factors in recent years. They include the protection offered by intellectual property rights (plant patents), an environment of increased competition, a global economy, improved transportation, and aggressive marketing campaigns.

Plant patent benefits and costs

The United States Plant Patent Act of 1930 paved the way for breeders/developers of new varieties to reap a financial return for their efforts. In subsequent years other countries or regions of the world have developed their own form of intellectual property rights for plants. It takes significant resources and time to develop and bring a truly unique and valuable plant to the marketplace, and having the potential for compensation is an incentive that has helped to fuel the frenzy of modern plant development. A United States plant patent allows the breeder/developer to retain the propagation rights (vegetative/clonal propagation) for a period of 20 years within the jurisdiction of the United States, after which time anyone may propagate the plant. The breeder/developer can limit the propagation of the plant within the United States or the entry of their propagated plant from outside of the United States from coming into the United States. A large nursery with their own breeding program can use a plant patent to be the exclusive source of a cultivar and restrict all others from propagating their plant. More commonly, written agreements are entered into between the patent holder and various nurseries wishing to propagate and sell the plant as licensees. Within the license agreement financial compensation in the form of a defined fee per plant (royalty), minimum number of plants to be sold, and when the fees are to be paid are typically spelled out. Additional points regarding method of propagation or distribution can also be defined within the agreement by the parties involved.

Plant patents are expensive to obtain and may cost more than $3,000 after considering the United States Patent and Trademark Office application fees and fees of patent attorneys. Either the breeder/developer or a licensed patent attorney can file the plant patent with the US government. If the breeder/developer can take the botanical data, photos, and write and submit a well-written and acceptable patent without the aid of a patent attorney, the cost will be considerably less and involve less than $1,000 in application fees. If the breeder/developer can meet the UPTPO requirements of being a "small entity", there can also be a reduction in patent application fees. Although the royalty is negotiated within each license agreement, annuals may receive around $0.04, perennials around $0.10, shrubs around $0.25, and trees less than $0.50 per plant. The amount of a royalty is typically associated with the demand of a plant, the overall quantity sold, and individual value of a plant. Since there are typically fewer trees sold than annuals and an individual tree takes more resources to grow than an annual, the royalty on a tree is typically higher than that of an annual. In the end, the breeder/developer of an annual or tree will hopefully be fairly compensated for their efforts, having their patent and development costs covered and hopefully some profit as well.

Oriental poppy. Photo: Viva!
Patent costs get passed along

At the retail level patented plants may cost more than non-patented plants and the difference in cost is often greater than the royalty fee paid to the breeder/developer. Wholesale propagators may charge their customers more per plant than the royalty fee to cover marketing costs for newer plants and also generate greater profit by having a higher demand product. Often newer plants are in limited supply and a nursery or garden center may be willing to pay a premium price to have such plants. The retail garden center or nursery may also choose to have a greater mark up on patented plants to also take advantage of the potential for increased profits due to the greater demand. A greater mark up may also occur to cover increased losses for more expensive plants when some become damaged in the retail setting or otherwise do not sell. Without the control of propagation, and indirectly distribution, afforded by a plant patent, there is much less incentive to make the large investment in widespread marketing of a new plant.

In order to recoup an investment of a plant patent and begin to receive compensation for development costs, considerable numbers of plants need to be sold. For instance, to cover $3,000 in patent costs for a new herbaceous perennial with a $0.10 per plant royalty, 30,000 plants are needed. It may take multiple years to reach such a quantity. No wonder there are aggressive marketing efforts for specific new plant cultivars, new series of cultivars, and other branding efforts to promote increased demand and sales!

Increase in rate of granted US Plant Patents

The rate of plant patents being sought and granted over the past 25 years has increased, and this parallels the increased rate of new varieties being introduced to the marketplace (Table 1). The rate of plant patents granted has more than quadrupled between the five year period between 1980-1984 and 2000-2004! Even in adjacent years between 1995-1999 and 2000-2004 the number of granted plant patents has doubled! The first plant patent was issued in 1930 on the climbing rose 'New Dawn' and now we are up to plant patent #17,200 as of November 7, 2006 on a diascia plant named `Dala Rossa`! Plant patents are publicly accessible and can be viewed on-line at www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html.

Table 1. Approximate number of granted United States Plant Patents over time.
Years Approximate number of granted plant patents
1980-1984 900
1985-1989 1700
1990-1994 1950
1995-1999 2150
2000-2004 4300
2005-Nov. 2006 1700

Setting oneself apart from the competition

Competing wholesale suppliers trying to set themselves apart in the marketplace help to fuel the rise in new plant cultivars as they aim to entice customers with unique and sought-after products. There is a growing trend in the horticultural industry for mass market advertisements already common for fast food, personal hygiene, and entertainment products. For instance, in the 1990's the Flower Carpet® roses (www.tesselaar.com) and Wave® petunias (www.wave-rave.com) became widely recognizable because of broad multi-media advertisement campaigns and have set the stage for the current environment. These products were advertised on radio, television and in widely-read magazines as well as within the local garden center with the use of bill boards and colorful pots with recognizable logos and gardening information printed on them. During the 1990's, the brand Proven Winners® (www.provenwinners.com/main.cfm) also became well-known and associated with a wide array of superior-performing, vegetatively-propagated annuals. Proven Winners® is unlike the other two mentioned marketing campaigns because those are associated with only a single plant species. More and more widespread and expensive branding and marketing efforts have hit the market since. Some have endured, while others have vanished due to products that did not live up to expectations or corporate difficulties. Some more recent branding and marketing efforts include Easy Elegance® roses (www.easyeleganceroses.com), Viva!® (www.vivagarden.com), Endless Summer® hydrangea (http://endlesssummerblooms.com/en/home), The Flower Fields® (www.theflowerfields.com/), Blooms of Bressingham® (www.bloomsofbressingham.com/), Dream® roses (appears extinct), Fantastic FlowersTM, and Fantastic FoliageTM (www.panamseed.com/MP_Fantastics.aspx). Some brands such as Viva!®, sold at The Home Depot®, are very general and include a wide variety (annuals, perennials, herbs, vegetables…) of often commonly available plants. The main feature of the Viva!® plants are packaging in a colorful theme pot with marketing/cultural information printed on it, some plants are grown to a more substantial size than typical, and also The Home Depot® as the primary source to obtain them. Successful brands such as Proven Winners®® is also following the trend to become more generalized in product offering by expanding beyond their original niche (vegetative annuals) to also include varieties of shrubs, herbaceous perennials, and even hard goods such as fertilizer.

Plant introduction in the global marketplace

Aalsmeer, Holland--World's largest plant auction, ships plants worldwide, overnight.
Photo: Beth Jarvis
Many horticultural firms have international connections through mergers or choosing to partner together because their product lines or markets complement each other. Because of this, new cultivars transcend borders more freely than ever. Often international firms choose to utilize the same cultivars in as many international markets as profitable. In addition, many firms have off-shore propagation facilities for annuals and herbaceous perennials. They are located in favorable climates with inexpensive labor such as Costa Rica, Mexico, and China. Unrooted cuttings are harvested at growing facilities in these places and shipped by fast and efficient transportation to the US and other countries for rooting and finishing. Improved transportation and international business is making the horticultural industry more global than ever. Breeders living in other regions of the world can file United States plant patents and control propagation within and import into the United States, and United States breeders can file for the comparable forms of protection in Europe, Japan, Canada, and elsewhere.

Each form of intellectual property rights protection in the world has its own stipulations, fees, and timeframes for application and for what specifically is protected. In Canada and Europe plants need to be tested and compared with similar varieties in governmental-sponsored trials in order to document that the new plants are unique and of value. Data from such trials can be accessed through various outlets such as The Plant Varieties Journal published by Agriculture Canada. Fees in these countries are generally high and recurring. The greater investment of time and income to obtain and maintain protection in these regions relative to a US Plant Patent tends to limit the number of cultivars protected and released in these regions. In the United States there is a narrow timeframe (one year) that a new cultivar can be disclosed to the public (sale of a plant and/or disclosure through marketing) and a US plant patent applied for. For a United States plant patent no government-supported comparative trial needs to occur and a cultivar just needs to be different than what is already on the market along with a few stipulations on its origin and that the traits it possesses are stable across vegetatively-propagated propagules. This situation pushes some plants developed and sold in Europe or elsewhere to have a United States plant patent applied for before the cultivar is well tested for suitability in US climates. Waiting would result in missing the window of opportunity for acquiring a US plant patent. Plants developed in foreign countries are often brought to market in the United States quickly hoping that the cultivar will perform well in the United States and patent costs can begin to be covered and profits generated. Hopefully such plants will live up to the reputation they have gained in other parts of the world. Because of the risk involved in bringing minimally tested plants to market quickly, some firms choose to place some separation between their company name and the plants they are marketing. Additionally, such companies may choose to keep their marketing of different lines of plants separate as well. If one product line flops the overall company name will hopefully not be tarnished and affect the reputation of the company or the company's other product lines.

Wholesale and even retail nurseries are becoming savvier than ever in today's business environment to attract and retain customers. They hope exclusive, well-known cultivars with a proven track record along with a continual flow of new, "hot" products will keep business strong. For plant materials where a competitor currently has an edge because they do not have an established exclusive or something new, such nurseries may be persuaded to try to obtain a license agreement and pay the cost to produce their competitor's cultivars. Alternatively, such a nursery may hope that an older cultivar (non-patented or expired patent) or a mediocre newer cultivar they can patent (a "me too" or "copy cat" cultivar) will be adequate to retain a part of the market share. The desire of a nursery is that customers will come to them to obtain the great exclusive cultivars (hopefully at a premium price) and subsequently choose to purchase additional, perhaps more common items in order to save time, transportation expenses, and potentially receive volume discounts.

Sorting through the options

Moondance rose-a spicy-fragrant AARS winner. Photo:David Zlesak
New cultivars constantly flooding the market can become disheartening to producers/consumers after experiencing some that do not live up to their lofty claims. Times of increased numbers of new cultivars has occurred in history before. For instance, after the Plant Patent Act of 1930 the market became relatively flooded with new rose introductions, many of which were marginal performers. In response to this, in 1938 All-America Rose Selections (AARS) was formed by rose nursery members with the objective of establishing an awards program to highlight the best of the newer cultivars. This awards program continues to this day and evaluates upcoming rose cultivars in over 25 locations across the nation over two growing seasons. Over 50 entries are typically made per year and out of them usually one to three earn the award. Another award program developed for seed-propagated flower and vegetable crops is the All-America Selections award. Seed-propagated crops are not eligible for plant patents, but another form of intellectual property rights called Plant Variety Protection (PVP). In addition, some vegetatively-propagated crops such as potatoes and strawberries have been included with seed-propagated crops and are eligible for PVP rather than United States plant patents.

In today's fast-paced market, nurseries are hesitant to enter new plant materials into awards programs because it can delay introduction. Even in the AARS program many superior-performing roses are pulled after one year of evaluation in order to allow their introduction to occur before otherwise stipulated by the AARS program. Greater hesitancy to delay cultivar introduction in order to conduct extensive trials has led to the development of more university and industry-sponsored evaluation programs that evaluate recently-released cultivars. Although performance data may be generated and communicated years after a cultivar is originally introduced, such data is still useful as horticultural professionals and consumers make cultivar selection decisions. Examples of such programs include Minnesota Tough and TerrificTM Perennials (http://www.florifacts.umn.edu/FinalReport2005.doc), Texas SuperstarsTM (http://texassuperstar.com/plants.html), and PlantsPlus® (http://www.plantplus.nl/home.asp?type=B). PlantsPlus® is a Dutch evaluation program helping growers and consumers identify and promote recent cultivars that display superior performance and are also available in sufficient quantities to meet public demand. Other valuable programs include the Plant Evaluation Notes sponsored by the Chicago Botanical Garden (http://www.chicagobotanic.org/research/research/penotes.html). In the Plant Evaluation Notes program leading cultivars of a particular species or genera are grown over multiple years in a common location. Performance data is collected and summarized as a "Note" and reported for all cultivars tested.

Some University-sponsored breeding programs suffer in the current plant introduction climate

The fast-paced horticulture market with a myriad of new plants being introduced annually has been detrimental to many University-based breeding programs. Such programs have gained a strong reputation due to extensive cultivar testing before release to ensure only the most well-adapted and outstanding cultivars are made available and promoted. The vast competition from industry and amateur breeders and the often sensational marketing frenzy of new plants has led to University-based breeding program introductions to just be one of many voices. Flashy ads can drown out legitimate trial information that should be viewed as having greater merit. Perhaps there are more ways universities can invest in advertising to help their products have greater recognition.

Universities have initiated plant development programs because the private sector was not able or willing to invest the time and resources necessary to develop and test new cultivars. Having new and better adapted cultivars was important enough to the general economy to justify public support and continuation of public breeding programs. Perhaps the frenzy of new cultivar releases will settle down and people may see the value of ongoing, structured, programs with well-developed testing protocols. When that happens it may be surprising how few of them actually remain. The rose breeding program at the University of Minnesota is being phased out due to budget cuts and the azalea breeding project will be scaled back. Several of the small fruit breeding projects are being phased out as well. Great strides have been made to identify disease resistant and hardy plant germplasm and understand and overcome reproductive and genetic obstacles to painstakingly develop core collections of parents. It is unfortunate that the resources are not available to continue this work. Very few, if any, amateur or professional breeders have such developed plant germplasm resources or are willing to invest the resources to keep such a collection going into the future. When new diseases and insects attack our crops or other forces warrant new cultivars with improved characteristics, where will the resources be to conduct the work?

Weighing the information and making purchasing decisions

As consumers we have more plant choices now than ever. It is exciting to be wooed by so many marketers and envision the plant material choices we have at our disposal. Only time will tell how long the current rate of introductions can sustain itself. There is a finite group of customers and only so much patent and marketing costs that can be borne for plant development to be profitable. Nurseries will need to consider if their inventory list is manageable with the current number/turnover of cultivar choices and maybe more conservatively address the risk/benefit of introducing each new cultivar. As consumers we need to carefully sort through the messages we are hearing about new cultivar choices in order to distinguish what is a reasonable description, general hype, or possibly exaggeration. As consumers we have resources to help us we may not even realize at our disposal. We can observe new cultivars donated or sold to local public display gardens and read about their performance in independently run university or industry trials. Taking into account the retail cost of the new plants we are interested in, the purpose we want them to serve, and the performance information we can find on them, we can weigh our risks and make wiser purchasing decisions.

Black Widows in Minnesota
Jeffrey Hahn, Assist. Extension Entomologist


Black widow spider, Latrodectus sp. Photo: Jeff Hahn
There are a handful of spiders whose bites are dangerous to people. The widow spiders, Latrodectus spp., are among the best known in this group. There are actually five species of widow spiders in the U.S. The most common and widespread species is the black widow spider, Latrodectus mactans. This is the species that people will most likely encounter and be bitten by. Others species are the northern black widow, L. variolus, the western black widow, L. hesperus, the brown widow, L. geometricus, and the red widow, L. bishopi.

A black widow is moderately sized, with a body about 1/2 inch long (1 1/4 - 1 1/2 inch long including the legs). It is black and has a conspicuous red hourglass shape on the underside of its abdomen. The other species are very similar in appearance. However, not all species are black, some are actually brown. The hourglass marking also varies with different species; in some species the marking may be reduced to one or two bands. There can be much variation within a species, making it challenging to correctly identify the specific widow spider you may encounter.

Don't confuse black widows with other spiders in the family Theridiidae, also known as the comb-footed spiders or cobweb weavers. This very common group of spiders gets their name from the serrated bristles on the tarsi on the fourth pair of legs. However, this characteristic is very small and you need magnification to see it. You can usually recognize this group of spiders from their bulbous or spherical-shaped abdomen and their eight eyes arranges in two rows. They also construct a tangled, irregular looking web in which they hang upside down.

A black widow is shy and generally lives dark, protected sites, especially near the ground. This can include logs, animal burrows, firewood, and piles of brush and stones. Sometimes webs may be constructed higher off the ground on shrubs and other plants. Egg sacs, containing 200 - 250 eggs, are suspended in their webs. Interestingly, the habit of female black widow spiders eating males after mating is not true, although it has been observed under laboratory conditions.

Black widow spiders are rare in Minnesota. The northern widow is actually native here, although it is only found in the southeast corner of the state where it is commonly found in rodent burrows. This widow is rarely discovered in buildings and it's unlikely that people will encounter this species.

Other widow species, although not native to Minnesota, are occasionally found in the state as the result of being accidently transported here. For example, a black widow was recently found in the Twin Cities associated with a bag of grapes. This is not the first time black widows have been associated with produce, especially grapes. Grapes may be preferred because it offers a type of cavity that black widows can use as a protected, sheltered area. The grapes are harvested and spiders are moved along with the produce.

Widow spiders have been accidently moved into Minnesota under other circumstances. A few years ago, a widow spider (probably a brown widow) was found associated with a Norfolk island pine that was presumably shipped up from Florida. In an other case, a black widow was discovered in a box of assembly parts shipped from Mexico. In one of the stranger cases from earlier this summer, a black widow was found in a mailbox (escaped from a piece of delivered mail?!).

People fear a black widow because of its bite. Widow venom in a neurotoxin that affects a person's nervous system. Fortunately black widows are not aggressive but they will bite to defend themselves. Fortunately death is very rare due to a black widow bite, although it can be painful. The initial bite may cause a mild burning or a quick sharp pain although some people do not feel anything. You may see a small bluish red spot with a white center at the site of the bite. Symptoms include general muscle soreness, sweating, nausea, increased blood pressure, and vomiting. More severe symptoms can include muscle spasms, tremors, severe myalgia (pain in one or more muscles), abdominal rigidity, and chest tightness. In extreme cases, paralysis, stupor, and convulsions can result.

I am not aware of any black widow bites that have occurred in Minnesota. People usually are quick to recognize a black widow and take steps to avoid receiving a bite. However, in the unlikely event that you encounter and are bitten by a black widow, the best first aid is to clean the wound and apply ice to slow down the absorption of venom into your body. Then see a physician as soon as possible so they can treat your bite. Save the spider, if possible, in case there is any doubt whether it is a black widow spider. Because comb-footed spiders are common in Minnesota, you may encounter a related spider but one that is not dangerous to people.

Get the low down on this month's insect pests at Insects
http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/EntWeb/Ent.htm


2007 Minnesota Gardening Calendar
Nancy Rose, Regional Extension Educator, Horticulture

2007 Calendar Available Photo: U of M Extension
Looking for a great gift for gardening friends and relatives? Check out the 2007 Minnesota Gardening calendar. Measuring a handsome 9 x 12 inches it won't quite fit in a stocking but it will make a lovely present to your host or hostess at holiday gatherings. The stunning peony photo on the front cover even makes gift wrap unnecessary!

As always each month's page is loaded with great gardening tips written by Deb Brown, horticulture professor emeritus. You'll find out how to keep poinsettias looking fresh for months, when to apply that crabgrass preventer, and how to conserve water in summer heat among many other helpful tips. And the 2007 special feature is all about "Gardening for the Birds", including great lists of fruit, seed, and nectar plants that will help make your garden a bird haven.

The gorgeous full-color photos include lush conservatory scenes, blooming public gardens in Duluth and Rosemount, seasonal plant portraits, and recent U of M plant introductions including a juicy cluster of Zestar!™ apples.

Look for the 2007 Minnesota Gardening calendar in bookstores, garden centers, and Extension offices. It can also be ordered online. Go to http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/horticulture/DG8240.html to see more of the calendar and to place an order.

Editorial Notes

Fall color of a "Lights" azalea and highbush cranberry.
Photo: Beth Jarvis
This issue is my last because my job is ending. Nancy Rose, a frequent contributor here, will be taking over as editor for Jan. 1. When we started this back in 1999, I remember thinking I had ideas for stories for maybe 5 or 6 issues then what? Now, as I'm finishing the 122th issue, I'm so very grateful to the folks who have taken the time to share their expertise here.

In 2007, David Zlesak will write about caring for gift plants--are they worth saving, if so how to get them to rebloom, etc. Nancy Rose will write about the trees of the family Fabaceae (bean trees). Bob Mugaas will be reviewing the latest on the corn gluten meal as pre-emergent weed control studies.

Please feel free to cut and paste any of the articles for use in your own newsletters. All we ask is that you give our authors credit.

Back issues Yard & Garden Line News are on the Yard & Garden Line home page at www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/.

Deb Brown will be answering a few gardening questions with Cathy Wurzer on MPR, the first Friday of the month during the fall and winter, between 8:30 and 9:00 a.m. Then in spring, she'll be back at her regular schedule, 10 a.m. the first Friday of each month. The program is broadcast on KNOW 91.1 FM, and available state-wide on the MPR news radio stations. (Scroll down for map.)

For plant and insect questions, visit http://www.extension.umn.edu/askmg. Thousands of questions have been answered, so try the search option in the black bar at the top left of the board for the fastest answer.

If you would like to receive an e-mail reminder when the next issue of the Yard & Garden Line News is posted to the web, just send an e-mail to: listserv@lists.umn.edu (note: the second E in listserve is omitted), leave the subject line blank, then in the body of the message, type: sub yglnewslist or to unsubscribe, enter: unsub yglnewslist

It's been fun!

Beth Jarvis
Yard & Garden Line Project Coordinator


icon Previous Page
iconUniversity of Minnesota Extension Service Home Page
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this material is available in alternative formats upon request.  Please contact your University of Minnesota county extension office or, outside of Minnesota, contact the Distribution Center at (612) 625-8173.

The University of Minnesota Extension Service is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation.