This landscape covers use of a gene for selection that converts a neutral or toxic compound to a growth-promoting molecule. See also technical information for one mechanism that can be improved cooperatively.
Authored by Wei Yang and Marie Connett Porceddu. Assistance with some of the text and figures was provided by Shoko Okada and Leon Smith. An attorney opinion on one of the critical path patents was provided to CAMBIA by Foley and Lardner. We are grateful for technical assistance from Dr Nick dos Remedios and Neil Bacon for the web version and the development of software for biological sequence linking. We also thank Heidi Loder for proofreading the whole document. The preparation of this technology landscape was partially supported by a grant from Horticulture Australia Limited (Grant No.: HG03034). We welcome updates and inputs by others through the comments interface available on every page of this version of the technology landscape.
The positive selection approach has been of interest to address some issues associated with currently used negative selection methods and selectable marker genes:
However, the use of both positive selection and certain negative selectable markers is constrained in certain jurisdictions by broad patents owned by companies that do not license them widely. Patents and patent applications with claims covering positive selection are described in this landscape.
For genetic transformation of plants, when transformation frequencies are low, selectable markers are often used. The expression of a selectable marker gene results in a product that allows the survival of the transformed cells in the presence of a selective agent that prevents regeneration of the non-transformed cells.
Selectable markers mainly fall into two categories, according to the mode of action of the selectable gene product: either conferring resistance to transformed cells by enzymatic detoxification of the selective agent, or providing a growth advantage to transformed cells over non-transformed cells. Selection methods based on the former mechanism are generally refered to as "negative selection", whereby the transformed cells are able to tolerate as substance which inhibits the growth of or even kills non-transformed cells. These include selection based on antibiotics and herbicides, as described in details in the technology landscapes "Antibiotic resistance genes and their uses in genetic transformation, especially in plants" and "Resistance to Phosphinothricin". Selection methods based on the latter mechanism are referred to as "positive selection", the subject of this technology landscape.
Rather than conferring resistance to a negative or toxic substance, positive selection involves conferring onto the transformed cell a metabolic advantage such as the capability of sugar consumption, or other competitive advantages for stimulating cell growth over nontransformed cells such as response to hormone and adaptation to extreme temperature. Positive selection systems in the purest sense identify and select genetically transformed cells without damaging or killing the non-transformed cells in the population, and without co-introduction of antibiotic or herbicide resistance genes.
|
The claims are the most important part of a patent. Not the title, not the text, not the examples, and not the figures. |
It is the claims that define the boundaries of the patent owner's rights. Remember that the patent owner's rights are exclusionary: (s)he may exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell, and importing the patented invention (e.g. a product or a process), and from importing a product made by a process patented in the importing country. To determine if someone is infringing a patent, (i.e. making, using the invention, etc. without the patent owner's permission), the allegedly infringing product or process is compared only to the claims of that patent.
Claims cannot to be interpreted in a vacuum. Although claims define the invention, the scope of the claimed invention is not always clear from reading the plain language of the claim. Claim interpretation can be difficult; a proper analysis is done by reading the claims in the context of the specification and in the context of the "prosecution history" (the back and forth negotiations between the patent applicant and the patent office regarding the claim language), and no particular interpretation may be binding unless and until there is litigation. Thus, although claims in this technology landscape were analyzed from the plain language and the specification, scope of the claimed inventions may not have always been precisely determined.
|
A patent application is NOT the same as a patent. Claims in a published patent application have not been examined by a national patent office and may not be representative of a scope that will ultimately be granted. |
In the countries where the patents analysed in this landscape were filed, patent specifications are published 18 months after the earliest filing. The publications contain the claims of the application as filed. Often, the claims in the application are written much more broadly than is actually patentable. As the application is examined by a patent office and claim language negotiated, the claims may shrink in scope. The specification of a granted patent will usually be the same as when published, but it also may change as the result of a successful opposition or re-examination.
|
There is no such thing as an international patent. |
A patent is awarded by the government of a country and is valid only within its territorial boundaries. To obtain a patent that is valid in a particular country, a request must be made in that country's patent office.
Confusion and misunderstanding about "international patents" arises sometimes from the process of pursuing patents through the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). When looking at a WO ("World") published patent application, many people erroneously, but understandably, conclude that it is an application for a patent that will be valid in multiple countries. However, it is not a patent, and indeed it may never reach the national application phase or become a patent in any country.
|
The international (PCT) application is a "placeholder" application for national filings. |
Through an international treaty (Paris Convention Treaty), a group of countries agreed to offer patent applicants in these countries a one-year period in which to file an application in one of the other countries without losing the benefit of their filing date. The advantage is that any "art" (related technology) that became known after the original filing date in the home country but before the filing date in another country could not be cited against the application. Thus, for example, an application filed in Canada could wait up to one year before filing the application in Mexico under the same "priority date". This would give an applicant time to decide whether the costs of filing in other countries is justified.
Later, a second treaty (Patent Cooperation Treaty, PCT) established another route to delay the additional filings in other countries. In this method, an international office was set up ((WIPO) to receive and process the applications. But now, the applicant has one year to file at the WIPO office, preserving rights and original filing date in those designated countries without having to go to the expense of actually filing in each country. Eventually to obtain a patent in these countries, the application does need to be filed in the national patent offices (the process is called "conversion"), pay fees, have translations done and comply with the regulations of each individual office. Depending on some procedural issues and fee payments, the applicant may have up to 30 months from the original filing date (the date the application was filed in the home country) to decide whether or not to file and undergo these expenses in each of these other countries.
The legal owner of a patent is designated as the "Assignee" on United States patents and as the "Applicant" on patents in the rest of the world.
Patent law gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, and importing the patented product and from using the patented process, as well as using, offering for sale, selling, or importing a product obtained directly from a patented process. These rights are tradeable. The typical form of trade is a license, in which some or all of the rights may be transferred. For example, the patent owner may license only some of the claims in a patent, all of the claims but only in a particular field of research, all of the rights but only in certain countries, or the right to make and use but not the right to sell. The cost may vary from nil to high, and licenses may be exclusive or non-exclusive.
The holder of an exclusive license can control the rights in much the same way as the "owner" of the patent. However, unlike the ownership of a patent, which is a matter of public record, licenses in most countries can be private. Unless the parties to a license choose to reveal the relationship, it can be impossible to obtain information about it.
In this paper, the legal owner of record is noted. The cautionary note is that the legal owner may not be the party that is in control of the rights you want access to.
In our experience, the intellectual property landscape in biotechnology areas is often not very well understood by the research community, especially the public sector. All too often rumours and misstatements about patents are passed along from researcher to researcher. This is an unfortunate situation; however, it is understandable as scientists are not generally familiar with reading and understanding patents.
With the increasing importance and emphasis on patents, it is becoming necessary for scientists to be versed in the field of intellectual property. To assist researchers and others in gaining an overview and understanding of relevant intellectual property, we are preparing a series of white papers in chosen topic areas of agricultural biotechnology.
As mentioned in the preface, positive selection systems used in plant biotechnology have certain advantages over negtive selection systems. Some of the positive selection systems have been applied to the transformation of not only the model plants such as Arabidopsis, but also the crops of agricultural importance such as maize, rice, wheat, patato, cassava, sugarbeet, orange and pearl millet. Many patents and patent applications concerning technology in the transformation of plant cells by positive selection of transformants hace been granted or filed.
With this paper and others now present on or planned for the Patent Lens, we strive to provide a readable and understandable overview of patents in some key areas of biotechnology. In this way, we hope to contribute to the public awareness of intellectual property issues that surround these key biotechnological tools. The information in the white papers is not exhaustive, but consists of selected documents found to broadly encompass the area. To satisfy the myriad questions and issues raised by the research or the interests of each person who visits this site would require a host of attorneys and an enormous amount of time. Instead, this paper is provided in order to open the door into the patent world and furnish platform knowledge from which additional self-directed investigation can be performed.
Because we believe that there is a great deal of value to tapping a broad knowledge base and collaborative problem-solving, we'd love to have your comments as we explore this landscape. Our comment interface allows you to weigh in. We are expecially interested in your thoughts on prior art, information on the status of the patent (for example, whether it's expired, been abandoned or allowed to lapsed or if it's the subject of a litigation), and information about licensing (Is it currently licensed? Exclusively? Non-exclusively? Who's the licensing contact for the patent owner?) and other information or ideas you'd like to share about the technical subject matter of the patent.
This technology landscape is mainly focused on positive selection methods based on enzymes for the metabolism of different carbon or nitrogen sources. However, we reckon that positive selection can have a broden meaning as long as a selection system is based on favouring transgenic cells while keeping the growth pattern of the non-transgenic cells rather than killing the non-transgenic cells. These selection systems include:
This technology landscape on positive selection systems of plants presents basic scientific aspects, as well as the key intellectual property aspects, of the selection systems used in plant transformation that differentiate the transformed cells from the non-transformed cells by providing growth advantages to the transformed cells.
The Technology Overview section provides some historical perspective and basic scientific information about each paticular technology included in this landscape analysis. The IP Issues section comprises serach strategy, an overview on key patents and patent applications encompassing the technology and a table with detailed information on each patent and patent application including bibliographic data, independent claims and a summary of the claimed invention. Wherever possible, nucleic acid and peptide sequences claimed in the independent claims of granted patents from USPTO or some from EPO, and some of the PCT applications, are linked to the NCBI patent sequence database.
Examples on the analysis of patent claims for validity issues were given for certain patent families.
|
This white paper is not intended to make the reader an expert in patents nor will it serve as a legal opinion for the reader's particular issues. It should not be substituted for legal advice. More information |
To learn more about patents and patentability, please visit our companion tutorial, "How to read a patent" and web sites such as the web site of the United States Patent Office and the web site of the World Intellectual Property Organization. Other resource sites may be found on the Links page.
The user should note that we do not analyze patents directed to methods of using growth inhibitory substances such as certain amino acids for selection. Some of these patents may dominate the agricultural patents discussed on this site. As well, we present only a selected set of patents and applications. The set represents what we consider to be key in the field. It is inevitable that others would have a different opinion about what is key and, as a result, may well have chosen a different set of patents.
Furthermore, the nature of the patenting systems worldwide means that new patents and patent applications may appear at anytime. Similarly, patents may lapse or patent applications may expire or be replaced by new applications. So, although we have tried to give the best coverage of the intellectual property surrounding positive selection systems, this landscape should not be viewed as a comprehensive coverage of the subject. We would encourage those interested readers to offer comments on this work - with the view to improving the structure and content for all.
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
25/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Novartis" in applicant "Positive selection" in abstract |
|
Results |
21 hits |
|
Comments |
Only US 5994629 and EP 601092 B1 are relevant patents on positive selection |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
30/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Syngenta" in applicant "Positive selection" in abstract |
|
Results |
14 hits |
|
Comments |
No relevant patent found |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
30/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Sandoz" in applicant "Positive selection" in abstract |
|
Results |
21 hits |
|
Comments |
No relevant patent found |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
31/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Danisco" in applicant "Positive selection" in abstract |
|
Results |
1 hit |
|
Comments |
WO 1993/005163 A1 |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
31/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Positive selection transformation cell" in abstract |
|
Results |
117 hits |
|
Comments |
This search results in patents from several patent families that related to the positive selection topic: 1. the Syngenta family represented by WO 1993/05163 2. the "University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc." family represented by US 7005561 titled "Arabitol or ribitol as positive selectable markers". 3. the"The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Argriculture" family represented by WO 2004/61128 titled " Selection procedure for identifying transgenic cells, embryos, and plants without the use of antibiotics". This patent family claims methods for selection of transgenc cells using temperature sensitive marker proteins. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
05/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
Positive NEAR/1 selection NOT cloning |
|
Results |
1563 hits |
|
Comments |
Still too many irrelevent hits although the big number of patents on cloning vectors are excluded. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
05/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
Positive NEAR/1 selection AND transformation NOT recombination |
|
Results |
2612 hits |
|
Comments |
By checking the first 80 listed patents, two new Danisco families related to positive selection , represented by AU 739067 and US 6924145 were found. AU 739067: Title - Selection method for transgenic plants US 6924145: Title - Selection method |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
06/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
Positive NEAR/1 selection AND transformation NOT device |
|
Results |
3954 hits ( I found that many of patents/applications are repeated in the the search result with different relevance scores. Greg said that he was aware of that and would fix this problem soon. After this problem is fixed, the actual hits will be a lot less). I checked the first 400 hits and obtained the following patents/applications:
|
|
Comments |
Apart from the patents/applications I have obtained before, the following patents/applications in the list are relevant or could be included in this ladscape: US 6806085 and AU 748489: Title - 2-deoxyglucose-6-phosphate (2-DOG-6-P) phosphatase DNA sequences as selection markers in plants; by IPK Gatersleben. WO 2000/52168: Title - Method of selecting transformed cells and tissues; by ANU. WO 2001/77366: Title - Positive selection method, compounds, host cells and uses thereof; by CUBIST PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. US 2005/250107: Title - Selectable gene marker system based on expression of N-acetyllactosaminide 3-alpha galactosyltransferase; by Newlinks Genetics Corporation. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
7/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"selecting transformed cells" in title |
|
Results |
30 hits |
|
Comments |
The following patents/applications worth further looking into: |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
8/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"selecting transformed cell" in abstract |
|
Results |
1486 hits |
|
Comments |
The following patents/applications worth further looking into: |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
09/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
(growth near/5 advantage) AND (plant near/5 growth) AND ((transformed near/1 cell) in claims) |
|
Results |
19 hits |
|
Comments |
The following new docs are relevant to positive selection:
US
2004/166563: Wuschel (WUS) gene homologs; by PIONEER HI-BRED |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
09/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
(growth near/5 advantage) AND (plant near/5 growth) AND ((transformed near/2 cell) in claims) |
|
Results |
38 hits |
|
Comments |
The following new docs are relevant to positive selection: : Compositions and methods for identifying transformed cells; by PIONEER
HI-BRED |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
09/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
(growth near/5 support) AND (plant near/5 growth) AND ((transformed near/2 cell) in claims) |
|
Results |
56 hits |
|
Comments |
The following new doc is relevant to positive selection: US 2005/76409: Selective plant growth using d-amino acids; by BASF |
The general method of positive selection could use any growth-promoting catabolite precursor, and was first illustrated using various sugars that do not promote growth until altered by an enzyme for which the gene was the transformation marker. The first patents were opposed by many parties on the basis that the idea had been described sufficiently prior to the patent filing that the grant of a monopoly to a different party was not justified, but after many appeals and some amendments these patents are still in force.
Syngenta Participations AG owns two patent families (here named as A and B) on positive selection systems. The assignments were previously to Novartis AG, one of the precursor companies that formed Syngenta (info), which had acquired certain patents from Danisco.
The patent family A, analysed in depth below, contains broad patents directed to a general method of selecting genetically transformed cells from a population of transformed and non-transformed cells by introducing a nucleotide sequence into plant cell so that the transformed cells have a competitive advantage in utilizing a compound; if covered by the claims, the introduced nucleotide sequence is not a marker gene for toxin, antibiotic or herbicide resistance, which are found in the "prior art".
The patent family B, analysed on a following page, is much less broad. It is directed more specifically to a method of selecting genetically transformed cells from a population of transformed and non-transformed cells by transforming cells with a gene coding for an enzyme involved in mannose or xylose metabolism and selecting on a medium supplied with a compound that only the transformed cells are able to utilize. Such enzymes include xyloisomerases and phosphomanno-isomerases (such as mannose-6-phosphate isomerase and mannose-1-phosphate isomerase), phosphomanno mutase, mannose epimerases (those which convert carbohydrates to mannose or mannose to carbohydrates such as glucose or galactose); phosphatases (such as mannose-6-phosphatase and mannose-1-phosphatase), and permeases which are involved in the transport of mannose, or a derivative, or a precursor thereof into the cell.
This patent family has patents on positive selection granted in the United States, Europe, Canada, Australia and some other jurisdictions, as indicated in the patent information table at the bottom of this page.
Following Novartis' application for the European patent (EP 601092 B1) (and the US patent 5994629), oppositions were lodged in Europe by CAMBIA, BASF AG and Unilever PLC (opposition is not a process currently available in the United States). Information that was presented in the European opposition for invalidating some of the claims in EP 601092 is provided here relative to the claims of US 5994629 (this example of validity analysis on patent claims was provided for CAMBIA by Foley and Lardner).
The US 5994629 patent is a continuation-in-part of Application No. 08/505, 302, filed on 3 October 1995, now U.S. Patent US 5767378. The US patents 5994629 and 5767378 each claim priority to GB 9304200 filed on 2 March 1993.
The US 5994629 patent is also a continuation-in-part of Application No. 08/378, 996, filed on 27 January 1995, now abandoned. Application No. 08/378, 996, claims priority to application No. 08/196, 152, now abandoned, which was originally filed as application PCTIDK92/00252 on 27 August 1992. The US 5994629 patent, application No. 08/378, 996, application No. 08/196, 152 and PCT /DK92/00252 all claim priority to DK 1522/91, filed on 28 August 1991. For the relationships between the applications, see diagram below.

According to the prosecution history of the US 5994629 patent, the applicants amended each of claims 1 and 7. During prosecution in the USPTO, the applicants deleted "induces a positive effect" and "and" from claim 1. Also in claim 1, the applicants added the limitations"...expression or transcription of...and...that only the transformed cells are able to utilize...". In claim 7, the applicants deleted "a positive effect induced by" and added "...that only the transformed cells are able to utilize...". In support of the amendments, the applicants argued, "claims 1, 7 and 26 are amended to clarify that the competitive advantage of transformed cells is due to the expression or transcription of the co-introduced nucleotide sequence. Claims 1 and 7 are further amended to clarify that only transformed cells are able to utilize the 'supplied compound' by expression or transcription of the co-introduced nucleotide sequence and therefore have a competitive advantage."
The amendments to the claims are significant because the deletion of the limitation "induces a positive effect" broadens the scope of the claims such that the claims are open to negative effects. However, the addition of the limitation "that only the transformed cells are able to utilize" narrows the scope of the claims by excluding compounds that may be used to a lesser extent by non-transformed cells, as compared to transformed cells.
During the prosecution of the US 5994629 patent, the applicants' attorney cited 3 references. The examiner cited no references and included a form PTO-892 with "NONE" written across its face. None of the references from the parent applications of the US 5994629 patent or from the International Search Report or International Preliminary Examination Report of PCT /DK92/00252 were cited by either the examiner or the applicants in the prosecution of the US 5994629 patent.
The following prior art references are relevant to the validity analysis:
Doc1: Jefferson, R. A. (1990), Gene Manipulation and Plant Improvement II, "New approaches for agricultural molecular biology: from single cells to field analysis," pp. 365-400., which qualifies under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as prior art because it described the invention claimed in the US 5994629 patent in a printed publication in 1990, more than one year prior to 27 August 1992, the earliest effective U.S. filing date for the US 5994629 patent.
Doc2: Budar et al. (1986) "Introduction and expression of the octopine T-DNA oncogenes in tobacco plants and their progeny," Plant Science 46:195-206, which qualifies as prior art against the US 5994629 patent under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because it was published in 1986, more than one year prior to 27 August 1992.
Doc3: Jefferson R. A. (filed: 8 December 1989; earliest priority: 11 November 86) U.S. Patent 5268463 issued 7 December 1993, which qualifies as prior art against the US 5994629 patent under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(e), because although issued after the earliest priority date for the US 5994629 patent, it was filed in the U.S. prior to 28 August 1991.
Doc4: Sreekrishna et al. (filed 23 July 1986; earliest priority: February 1984) U.S. Patent No. 4857467 issued: 15 August 1989, which qualifies as prior art against the US 5994629 patent under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because it was published in 1989, more than one year prior to 27 August 1992.
Doc5: Liijestroem et al. (14 October 1987) EPO 0241044 published application, which qualifies as prior art against the US 5994629 patent under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because it was published in 1987, more than one year prior to 27 August 1992.
Doc6: von Schaewen et al. (1990) "Expression of a yeast-derived invertase in the cell wall of tobacco and Arabidopsis plants leads to accumulation of carbohydrate and inhibition of photo synthesis and strongly influences growth and phenotype of transgenic tobacco plants," EMBO Journal 9:3033-3044, which qualifies as prior art under the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because it described the invention in a printed publication in 1990, more than one year prior to 27 August 1992.
For convenience, claim 1 of US 5994629 was broken into the following individual elements (the reason this is useful will be clear in the analysis of prior art, Section C below):
[1.1] Genetically transformed plant cells comprising
[1.2] a desired nucleotide sequence and
[1.3] a co-introduced nucleotide sequence
[1.4] wherein expression or transcription of the co-introduced nucleotide sequence in the transformed cells gives said transformed cells a competitive advantage
[1.5] when a population of cells including the transformed and the non-transformed cells is supplied with a compound
[1.6] that only the transformed cells are able to utilize, and
[1.7] the desired nucleotide sequence codes for a gene other than a toxin, antibiotic or herbicide resistance gene.
Likewise, claim 7 was broken into the following individual elements:
[7.1] A method of selecting genetically transformed cells from a population of cells comprising the steps of:
[7.2] a) introducing into the genome of a plant cell a desired nucleotide sequence and
[7.3] a co-introduced nucleotide sequence
[7.4] wherein said desired nucleotide sequence or co-introduced nucleotide sequence codes for a sequence other than a toxin, antibiotic or herbicide resistance gene;
[7.5] b) obtaining transformed cells;
[7.6] c) supplying to the population of cells a compound
[7.7] that only transformed cells are able to utilitize
[7.8] wherein said transformed cells have a competitive advantage over non-transformed cells due to the expression or transcription of the desired nucleotide sequence or co-introduced nucleotide sequence in the presence of the compound; and
[7.9] d) selecting said transformed cells from the population of cells.
All of the elements of claim 1 are taught by the Jefferson article.
With regard to element 1.1, the Jefferson article discloses genetically transformed plant cells. Specifically, the Jefferson article discloses transformed tobacco plants. (p. 396, 1st full paragraph, lines 10-12).
With regard to elements 1.2 and 1.3, the Jefferson article discloses tobacco plants transformed with a CaMV 35S - GUS fusion. (p. 396, 1st full paragraph, lines 10-12) and further describes a gene fusion as "DNA constructions in which DNA sequences from two (or more) genes are combined." (p. 369, 2nd full paragraph, lines 1-4).
With regard to element 1.4, the Jefferson article discloses an experiment wherein the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over non-transformed cells. Specifically, the transformed cells which incorporate the GUS fusion can use tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source, and the non-transformed cells cannot (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). Since the transformed cells can use at least one more compound as an auxin source as compared to the non-transformed cells, the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over the non¬transformed cells.
With regard to element 1.5, the Jefferson article describes an experiment wherein non-transformed cells and transformed cells are supplied with tryptophyl-A-glucuronide (p. 396, 1st full paragraph).
With regard to element 1.6, the Jefferson article, in the same experiment states that tryptophyl-A-glucuronide "shows no auxin activity ... when assayed using untransformed cells," and indicates that the transformed cells "remained green and healthy," thus indicating that the transformed cells used the tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source (p. 396, 1st full paragraph).
With regard to element 1.7, the Jefferson article discloses that the GUS gene "catalyzes hydrolysis of a very wide variety of A-glucuronides" and further discloses that "gene fusions are DNA constructions in which DNA sequences from two (or more) genes are combined such that the coding sequences of one gene (the responder)," e.g. here the GUS gene, "are transcribed and/or translated under the direction of another gene(s) (the controller)," i.e. here the CaMV 35S sequence (p. 371, 1st full paragraph, lines 5-6). Thus, "the desired nucleotide sequence" directs transcription or translation of the GUS gene and does not code for a "toxin, antibiotic or herbicide resistance gene."
All of the elements of claim 1 are taught by the Budar et al. article.
With regard to element 1.1, the Budaret al. article discloses the introduction of genes into tobacco cells by transformation and "normal transformed plants." (Abstract).
With regard to elements 1.2 and 1.3, the Budar et al. article discloses that "genes 1, 2, and 4. . . were cloned and introduced into tobacco cells by...leaf disk transformation." (Abstract)
With regard to element 1.4, the Budar et al. article discloses that the "product of genes 1 and 2 are involved in the production of the auxin ..." (p. 195, 2nd column, 1st full paragraph, lines 6-14).
With regard to elements 1.5 and 1.6, the Budar et al. article discloses that "our data show that genes 1 and 2 together ... can be used for positive and negative selections. One can select for the expression of gene 2 in plant cells if α-naphthalene acetamide is provided in the medium instead of an active auxin," (p. 205, 1st column, 4th full paragraph, lines 1-7).
Unless a cell population contained both transformed cells and non-transformed cells, there would be no need for selection. Further, if the non-transformed cells were able to use the α-naphthalene acetamide, there would be no way to select the transformed cells which, as noted, are able to use the α-naphthalene acetamide. Therefore, the disclosure of the Budar article sets forth providing a population of transformed and non-transformed cells with a compound that only the transformed cells are able to utilize.
With regard to element 1.7, the Budar et al. article discloses that "the protein encoded by gene 1 catalyzes the formation of indole-3-acetamide which is converted to IAA by the product of gene 2" (p. 195, 2nd col., 1st full paragraph, lines 6-14). IAA, indole acetic acid, is an auxin (p. 195, 2nd full paragraph, lines 6-14). "The product of gene 2 also catalyzes the formation of naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) when alpha-naphthalene acetamide is provided" (p. 195, 2nd col., 1st full paragraph, lines 6-14).
All of the elements of claim 1 are taught by U.S. Patent 5268463.
With regard to element 1.1, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses "plants transformed with a highly expressed CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion." (col. 56, lines 2-3).
With regard to elements 1.2 and 1.3, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses "a gene fusion comprising a GUS encoding nucleic acid under the control of a promoter/enhancer element, X, could be used to generate a transgenic plant. Tissue-specific activity of promoter X would be detectable by the observation that GUS activity was expressed in some plant tissue, but not others" (col. 20, lines 4-10). Specifically U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses a CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion, i.e. a desired nucleotide sequence and a co-introduced nucleotide sequence.
With regard to element 1.4, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses an experiment in which "in the absence of auxin, leaf discs from control plants and CaMV 35S/GUS-transformed 'GUS plants' became chlorotic and died over a 7 week period (Fig. 18) ... on media in which tryptophyl glucuronide was the sole auxin source, only those leaves which expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 15-25).
With regard to element 1.5, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses that "leaf discs from nontransformed and CaMV 35S/GUS transformed plants were exposed to media containing cytokinin and (i) no auxin, (ii) 1 μM tryptophyl-glucuronide, or (iv) 10 μM tryptophyl glucuronide." (co1. 56, lines 1-7). Thus, transformed and non-transformed cells were supplied with a compound.
With regard to element 1.6, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses, in describing the outcome of the above mentioned experiment (iv) that "only those leaves that expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (coI. 56, lines 22-25).
With regard to element 1.7, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses "a gene fusion comprising a GUS encoding nucleic acid under the control of a promoter/enhancer element, X, could be used to generate a transgenic plant. Tissue-specific activity of promoter X would be detectable by the observation that GUS activity was expressed in some plant tissue, but not others" (col. 20, lines 4-10). Specifically U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses a CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion, e.g. a desired nucleotide sequence and a co-introduced nucleotide sequence. (col. 56, lines 1-4). The CaMV 35S serves here as a promoter, (col 49, lines 6-7).
All of the elements of claim 7 are taught by the Jefferson article.
With regard to element 7.1, the Jefferson article describes an experiment wherein non-transformed cells and transformed cells are supplied with tryptophyl-A-glucuronide. (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). In the same experiment the Jefferson article discloses that tryptophyl-A-glucuronide "shows no auxin activity ... when assayed using untransformed cells," and indicates that the transformed cells "remained green and healthy," thus indicating that the transformed cells used the tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). Since the transformed cells can use at least one more compound as an auxin source as compared to the non-transformed cells, the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over the non-transformed cells (p. 396. 1st full paragraph). The discussion of the experimental results concludes with the statement "other compounds are now being synthesized to achieve both negative and positive effects" (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). Taken in the context of the discussion of "Fusion Genetics - Positive and Negative Selection for Gene Fusion Action" on p. 394, the term "negative and positive effects" on p. 396 clearly refers to negative and positive selection.
With regard to elements 7.2 and 7.3, the Jefferson article discloses tobacco plants transformed with a CaMV 35S - GUS fusion (p.396, 1st full paragraph, lines 10-12). The Jefferson article further describes a gene fusion as "DNA constructions in which DNA sequences from two (or more) genes are combined" (p. 369, 2nd full paragraph, lines 1-4).
With regard to element 7.4, the Jefferson article discloses that the GUS gene "catalyzes hydrolysis of a very wide variety of glucuronides" (p. 371, 1st full paragraph, lines 5-6). The Jefferson article further discloses that "gene fusions are DNA constructions in which DNA sequences from two (or more) genes are combined such that the coding sequences of one gene (the responder)," i.e. here the GUS gene, "are transcribed and/or translated under the direction of another gene(s) (the controller)," e. g. here the CaMV 358 gene. Thus, neither the GUS gene nor the CaMV 35S gene code for a "toxin, antibiotic or herbicide resistance gene."
With regard to element 7.5, the Jefferson article discloses genetically transformed plant cells, specifically transformed tobacco plants (p. 396, 1st full paragraph, lines 10-12).
With regard to element 7.6, the Jefferson article describes an experiment wherein non-transformed cells and transformed cells are supplied with tryptophyl-A-glucuronide (p. 396, 1st full paragraph),
With regard to element 7.7, the Jefferson article, in the same experiment, states that tryptophyl-A-glucuronide "shows no auxin activity...when assayed using untransformed cells," and indicates that the transformed cells "remained green and healthy," thus indicating that the transformed cells used the tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source (p. 396, 1st full paragraph).
With regard to element 7.8, the Jefferson article discloses an experiment wherein the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over non-transformed cells. Specifically, the transformed cells which incorporate the GUS fusion can use tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source, and the non-transformed cells cannot. Since the transformed cells can use at least one more compound as an auxin source as compared to the non-transformed cells, the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over the non-transformed cells (p. 396, 1st full paragraph).
With regard to element 7.9, the Jefferson article describes an experiment wherein non-transformed cells and transformed cells are supplied with tryptophyl-A-glucuronide (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). In the same experiment the Jefferson article discloses that tryptophyl-A-glucuronide "shows no auxin activity ... when assayed using untransformed cells," and indicates that the transformed cells "remained green and healthy," thus indicating that the transformed cells used the tryptophyl-A-glucuronide as an auxin source (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). Since the transformed cells can use at least one more compound as an auxin source as compared to the non-transformed cells, the transformed cells have a competitive advantage over the non-transformed cells (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). The discussion of the experimental results concludes with the statement "other compounds are now being synthesized to achieve both negative and positive effects" (p. 396, 1st full paragraph). Taken in the context of the discussion of "Fusion Genetics - Positive and Negative Selection for Gene Fusion Action" on p. 394, the term "negative and positive effects" on p. 396 clearly refers to negative and positive selection.
All of the elements of claim 7 are taught by the Budar et al. article.
With regard to element 7.1, the Budar et al. article discloses that "genes 1 and 2 together or gene 2 associated with α-naphthalene acetamide can be used for positive and negative selections. One can select for the expression of gene 2 in plant cells if α-naphthalene acetamide is provided in the medium instead of an active auxin." (p. 205, 1st col., 4th full paragraph, lines 1-7).
With regard to elements 7.2 and 7.3, the Budar et al. article discloses that "genes 1, 2, and 4 ... were cloned and introduced into tobacco cells by ... leaf disk transformation. " (Abstract).
With regard to element 7.4, the Budar et al. article discloses that "the protein encoded by gene 1 catalyzes the formation of indole-3-acetamide which is converted to IAA by the product of gene 2." IAA, indole acetic acid, is an auxin. "The product of gene 2 also catalyzes the formation of naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) when α-naphthalene acetamide is provided" (p. 195, 2nd col, 1st full paragraph, lines 6-14).
With regard to element 7.5, the Budar et al. article discloses the introduction of genes into tobacco cells by transformation and "normal transformed plants." (Abstract).
With regard to elements 7.6 and 7.7, the Budar et al. article discloses that "our data show that genes 1 and 2 together... can be used for positive and negative selections. One can select for the expression of gene 2 in plant cells if α-naphthalene acetamide is provided in the medium instead of an active auxin" (p. 205, 1st column, 4th full paragraph, lines 1-7). Unless a cell population contained both transformed cells and non-transformed cells, there would be no need for selection. Further, if the non-transformed cells were able to use the α-naphthalene acetamide, there would be no way to select the transformed cells which, as noted, are able to use the α-naphthalene acetamide. Therefore, the disclosure of the Budar et al. article sets forth providing a population of transformed and non-transformed cells with a compound that only the transformed cells are able to utilize.
With regard to element 7.8, the Budar et al. article discloses that the "product of genes 1 and 2 are involved in the production of the auxin ..." (p. 195, 2nd col, 1st full paragraph, lines 6-14).
With regard to element 7.9, the Budar et al. article discloses that "genes 1 and 2 together or gene 2 associated with α-naphthalene acetamide can be used for positive and negative selections. One can select for the expression of gene 2 in plant cells if α-naphthalene acetamide is provided in the medium instead of an active auxin" (p. 205, 1st col., 4th full paragraph, lines 1-7).
All of the elements of claim 7 are taught by U.S. Patent 5268463.
With regard to element 7.1, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses an experiment wherein "on media in which tryptophyl glucuronide was the sole auxin source, only those leaves which expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 20-26). U.S. Patent 5268463 further discloses that "to identify plants which express Y, one may identify plants that express GUS, as the expression of both genes is under the control of the same promoter" (col. 20, lines 44-50). Additionally U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses that "GUS gene fusions could be used to report on the expression of a second gene of interest" (col. 20, lines 16-19).
With regard to elements 7.2 and 7.3, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses a gene fusion comprising a GUS encoding nucleic acid under the control of a promoter/enhancer element X, could be used to generate a transgenic plant. Tissue-specific activity of promoter X would be detectable by the observation that GUS activity was expressed in some plant tissue, but not others" (col. 20, lines 4-10). Specifically U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses a CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion, i.e. a desired nucleotide sequence and a co-introduced nucleotide sequence.
With regard to element 7.4, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses "a gene fusion comprising a GUS encoding nucleic acid under the control of a promoter/enhancer element X, could be used to generate a transgenic plant. Tissue-specific activity of promoter X would be detectable by the observation that GUS activity was expressed in some plant tissue, but not others" (col. 20, lines 4-10). Specifically U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses a CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion, e.g. a desired nucleotide sequence and a co-introduced nucleotide sequence (coI. 56, lines 1-4). The CaMV 35S sequence serves here as a promoter (col. 49, lines 6-7).
With regard to element 7.5, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses "plants transformed with a highly expressed CaMV 35S/GUS gene fusion" (col. 56, lines 2-3).
With regard to element 7.6, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses that "leaf discs from nontransformed and CaMV 35S/GUS transformed plants were exposed to media containing cytokinin and (i) no auxin, (ii) 1 μM tryptophyl-glucuronide, or (iv) 10 μM tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 1-7). Thus, transformed and non-transformed cells were supplied with a compound.
With regard to element 7.7, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses, in describing the outcome of the above mentioned experiment (iv) that "only those leaves that expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 22-25).
With regard to element 7.8, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses an experiment in which "in the absence of auxin, leaf discs from control plants and CaMV 35S/GUS-transformed 'GUS plants' became chlorotic and died over a 7 week period (Fig. 18)...on media in which tryptophyl glucuronide was the sole auxin source, only those leaves which expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 15-25).
With regard to element 7.9, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses an experiment wherein "on media in which tryptophyl glucuronide was the sale auxin source, only those leaves which expressed GUS remained green and healthy, presumably because they were able to cleave active auxin from tryptophyl glucuronide" (col. 56, lines 20-26). U.S. Patent 5268463 further discloses that "to identify plants which express Y, one may identify plants that express GUS, as the expression of both genes is under the control of the same promoter" (col. 20, lines 44-50). Additionally, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses that "GUS gene fusions could be used to report on the expression of a second gene of interest" (col. 20, lines 16-19).
The validity of dependent claims 12, 21 and 22 of the US 5994629 patent is also analyzed here. Each of these claims depends either directly or indirectly from claim 7 analysed above.
All of the elements of claims 12 and 22 are taught by the Jefferson article.
With regard to dependent claim 12, the Jefferson article discloses that "the gus operon consists of the glucuronidase gene itself, encoding GUS (gusA - formerly uidA) ... ". (p. 391, 1st full paragraph, lines 1-2). The Jefferson article further discloses "Table 1. GUS β-Glucuronidase ... Encoded by E. coli gusA (formerly uidA)" (p. 373, lines 1-2).
With regard to dependent claim 22, the Jefferson article discloses that "many other compounds are now being synthesized to achieve both positive and negative effects, for instance cyclohexamide-glucuronide, cytokinin glucuronide, etc." (p. 396, 1st full paragraph, lines 17-20).
All of the elements of claims 12,21 and 22 are taught by U.S. Patent 5268463.
With regard to dependent claim 12, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses transgenic plants expressing a β-glucuronidase gene fusion (col. 55, lines 60-63). U.S. Patent 5268463 further discloses that "the present invention relates to the β-glucuronidase (GUS) gene fusion...it is based on the surprising discovery that gene fusions comprising β-glucuronidase gene may be effectively expressed in a wide variety of organisms to produce active β-glucuronidase enzyme." (Abstract).
With regard to dependent claim 21, the Jefferson Patent discloses that "an additional and sometimes very useful technique is to use the specific β-glucuronidase inhibitor saccharolactone (Levvy, G. A., 1952, Biochem. J. 52:464) (Sigma S-0375, saccharic acid 1-4 latone, glucaric acid 1-4 lactone; glucarolactone) to corroborate the GUS-dependence of the fluorescence increase. This inhibitor will eliminate glucuronidase activity at concentrations less than one millimolar, but the compound is unstable at neutral pH, so that care should be exercised during prolonged assays. Because of this instability, it is preferable to use saccharolactone at up to 5 mM for assays up to half an hour. Alternatively, the reaction and the inhibited reaction may preferably be performed at pH 6.0 or below. GUS activity should not be affected by these conditions and saccharolactone is more stable at acid pH" (col. 31, lines 19-34).
With regard to dependent claim 22, U.S. Patent 5268463 discloses"...glucuronides comprising bioactive molecules can also be used as GUS substrates according to the invention; useful bioactive compounds include, but are not limited to steroid hormones non-steroid hormones and factors, lymphokines, auxins, cytokinins..." (col. 26, lines 40-47).
Based on the validity analysis, the folowing conclusion can be made:
A well-informed court should conclude that claims 1 and 7 of the US 5994629 patent are invalid because they fail to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 102 in view of the disclosures of any one of the Jefferson article (Doc1), the Budar et al. article (Doc2), and U.S. Patent 5268463 (Doc3).
Furthermore, claims 12 and 22, which depend from to claim 7, are invalid as anticipated by either the Jefferson article or U.S. Patent 5268463. Claim 21 is invalid as anticipated by U.S. Patent 5268463.
Further, without going into detail here, a well-informed court should hold that claims 1 and 7 are invalid because they fail to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 103, based upon the disclosures of either the Sreekrishna et al. patent (Doc4) or the Liijestroem et al. European patent (Doc5) in combination with the von Schaewen et al. article (Doc6).
G. Detailed patent information
|
Patent/application number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary of Claims |
Assignee |
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Positive selection
This patent is a Continuation in part of US 5767378. |
Originally assigned to Novartis AG, and then reassigned to Syngenta Participations AG |
|||||||||
|
EP 530129 A1
|
Title - Method for the selection of genetically transformed cells and compounds for use in the method
|
Applicant was Danisco A/S and then reassigned to Sandoz Ltd. and then to Novartis AG |
|||||||||
|
Title - Method for the selection of genetically transformed cells and compounds for use in the method
The granted European patent (EP 601092 B1) has significantly reduced number of claims after examination as compared to the original application (EP 601092 A1, which was also published as EP 530129 A1, see above). Opposition from CAMBIA, BASF AG and Unilever PLC was then lodged that led to the further amendment of the claims but the new specification is not available yet. The dates relevant to the opposition are as follows:
|
Applicant was Novartis AG and then reassigned to Syngenta Participations AG |
|||||||||
|
EP 896063 A2
|
Title - Method for the selection of genetically transformed cells and compounds for use in the method
This is a divisional application of EP 601092 B1. |
Syngenta Participations AG |
|||||||||
AU 664200 B2
|
Title - Method for the selection of genetically transformed cells and compounds for use in the method There is no specification available online for this patent. Claim information will be supplied when possible. |
Originally assigned to Sandoz Ltd, and then reassigned to Syngenta Participations AG |
|||||||||
|
Remarks |
A PCT application (WO 9305163) was also filed. Related patents were granted in Canada (CA 2110401), New Zealand (NZ 244135) and Russia (RU 2126834). Application was also filed in Japan (JP 6511146 T2). |
This Syngenta patent family includes patents granted in United states, Europe, Canada and Australia on positive selection system based on mannose or xylose. The invention of this patent family is directed to a method for selecting genetically transformed plant cells comprising the seteps of providing plant cells with a gene coding for an enzyme involved in mannose or xylose metabolism and selecting the transformed cells with mannose or its derivative or precursor. The transformed plant cells are also claimed.
Mannose is a hexose sugar that can strongly inhibite seed germination, root growth and respiration of plants. The sugar can be taken up by roots and converted to mannose-6-phosphate by the action of hexokinase but can not be further utilized. The accumulation of mannose-6-phosphate inhibits phosphoglucose isomerase, causing a block in glycolysis. The production of mannose-6-phosphate also depletes the cell of inorganic phosphate (orthophosphate) that is required for ATP production. While mannose has no direct adverse effect on plants, as the toxicity is not mediated by the compound itself, growth inhibition is the consequence of its phosphorylation to mannose-6-phosphate by hexokinase.
![]() |
| Mannose |
Phosphomannose isomerase (PMI, EC 5.3.1.8) is an enzyme that converts mannose-6-phosphate to fructose-6-phosphate, an intermediate of glycolysis that positively supports the growth of plant cell. In 1984, a gene coding for phosphomannose isomerase (manA or pmi) was first isolated from Escherichia coli by Miles and Guest. However, its first application in plants as a selectable marker gene was reported in 1998 by Joersbo et al. The idea was that plant cells lacking PMI are incapable of surviving on synthetic medium containing mannose as a carbon source. Introduction of the manA (pmi) gene into plant cells enables those transformed cells to utilize mannose as a carbon source, improve the energy status and avoid accumulation of the derivatized mannose-6-phosphate, and thus gives the transformed cell the growth advantage over the non-transformed cells.
![]() |
| Fructose |
To date, no endogenous PMI activity has been detected in plant cells, indicating that PMI selection may be useful in the transformation of many plant species.
Another selection system is based on xylose. Some plants such as potato, tobacco and tomato can not use D-xylose but can utilize D-xylulose as the sole carbon source. However, a problem initially encountered when xylose was used in the selection medium was the induction of callus. This proble was solved by addition of auxin inhibitor into the selection medium.
Xylose isomerase (D-xylose ketol-isomerase, EC 5.3.1.5) catalyzes the isomerization of D-xylose to D-xylulose and the isomerization of glucose to fructose and is also termed as glucose isomerase. A gene (xylA) encoding xylose isomerase was reported to be isolated from Thermoanaerobacterium thermosulfurogenes or Streptomyces rubiginosus.
This system enables the effective selection of transgenic potato, tobacco and tomato cells using D-xylose as the selective agent. Transgenic cells expressing the xylose isomerase gene can utilize xylose as a carbohydrate source and proliferate, whereas non-transgenic cells starve.
|
Patent number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Mannose or xylose based positive selection
|
Originally assigned to Novartis AG, and then reassigned to Syngenta Participations AG |
|||
|
Title - Mannose or xylose based positive selection
|
Syngenta Participations AG |
|||
|
AU 682495 B2
|
Title - Mannose or xylose based positive selection There is no specification available online for this patent, Should we get the PDF from IPaustralia? |
Originally assigned to Sandoz Ltd, and then reassigned to Syngenta Participations AG |
|||
|
Remarks |
Related patent application was filed in Canada (CA 2157470). Patents were also granted in Japan (JP 3698722 B2) ans Russia (RU 2126834). A PCT application (WO 94/20627) was also filed. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
25/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Novartis" in applicant "mannose" in abstract |
|
Results |
3 hits |
|
Comments |
Only US 5767378 is the relevant patent on positive selection |
CAMBIA holds patents in the United States and Australia that have claims on, among others, methods for selecting transformed cells based on the metabolism of various glucuronides that, when cleaved, could result in promotion of the growth of transformed cells.
GUS gene has been widely used as reporter gene for plant transformation since 1987. The enzyme coded by the GUS gene is β-glucuronidase, which hydrolyzes a wide variety of glucuronides. Therefore, the application of GUS gene can be extended to be used as a positively selectable marker. The utility of β-glucuronidase as selective marker relies on the fact that cells cannot grow on a β-glucuronide carbon source such as a glucuronide disaccharide unless β-glucuronidase is provided to cleave the β-glucuronide bond. The most useful example of such a disaccharide is cellobiuronic acid, which comprises β-glucuronic acid in [1-4] linkage to glucose. Only cells expressing β-glucuronidase can grow on a carbon source consisting only of cellobiuronic acid.
The positive selection system based on glucuronide metabolism is not limited to plant cells and can be applied to any host cells that do not have endogenous β-glucuronidase activity.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Microbial β-glucuronidase genes, gene products and uses thereof
|
CAMBIA |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Title - Microbial β-glucuronidase genes, gene products and uses thereof
This application is a Continuation of US 6641996 and the patent will soon be granted. The claim of interest is claim 40. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Title - Microbial β-glucuronidase genes, gene products and uses thereof
Another related patent with claims to use of a β-glucuronidase in positive selection has issued in Australia (760275). |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Remarks |
Related patent applications were also filed in Europe (EP 1175495 A1), New Zealand (NZ 503020), Japan (JP 2001515724) and Canada (CA 2303423). A related patent (application published as WO 2000/055333) has been issued in New Zealand as Patent Number 1485. A related patent (application published as WO 1999/13085) has been issued in the US (7087420) and is pending in Australia, Canada, Europe and further applications are pending in the United States as application numbers 10/120, 145 and 10/364, 649 (both recently allowed and soon to issue) in Brazil, Canada, Europe and Israel. A patent on producing a substrate for glucuronidase positive selection issued in the United States as Patent Number 6268493 is shown in the table below. |
Patent information for cellobiuronic acid preparation
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Preparation of cellobiuronic acid from polysaccharide
|
CAMBIA |
|||
|
Title - Preparation of cellobiuronic acid from polysaccharide
|
||||
|
Remarks |
The related PCT application was filed as WO 2000/08039. |
The goal of CAMBIA's work in this area, not yet fully realised, has been to develop a positive-selection system based on a glucose-releasing procompound that circumvents these limitations. In plants, the disaccharide sucrose releases glucose when hydrolyzed by the enzyme invertase. The glucose released can then act an energy substrate to drive plant growth. In an attempt to "mimic" this principle, we chose the disaccharide cellobiouronic acid (CbA) as the substrate for our selection system. CbA is composed of glucuronic acid linked ß(1-4) to glucose. As CbA was not commercially available when this work began, CAMBIA had to develop a new method to prepare the sugar. US Patent US 6,268,493 describes this work and can be licensed royalty-free under open source principles for both research and commercial uses; potential commercial suppliers are of interest. Because of its structure, we expect CbA to be hydrolyzed by any of a variety of different ß-glucuronidase (GUS) enzymes. Plant cells lacking GUS activity are unable to grow on CbA as the sole carbon source. Transformation with a gene encoding GUS, however, would allow them to access the glucose "immobilized" within CbA and use it as an energy source for growth.

Additional advantages of the CbA/GUS selection system being developed are that CbA can be produced from gellan gum, a commonly used food additive in ice creams and other products, and that GUS has already been comprehensively tested for safety in products approved by many national regulatory agencies for human consumption.
The ß-glucuronidase (GUS) enzyme that currently works best for this application was isolated from Thermotoga and together with the gene that encodes it is described in published patent applications WO 00/055333 and US 2003/229921, and in U.S. Patent No. 7087420. The license CAMBIA offers covers the gene and others similar to it, the protein, and a variety of uses of the protein, which may have industrial applications beyond positive selection.
This enzyme is of interest for other applications because it is highly thermostable, and it can be licensed royalty-free under open source principles. We expect that continuing work by anyone who wishes to collaborate within the open source licensee community will optimize the enzyme characteristics for cleavage of CbA in the spaces around the growing cells. CAMBIA has done some codon manipulation toward getting it to work in plants, still not entirely successful.
For positive selection, due to dominating patents (see www.patentlens.net) there may not be freedom to operate in all jurisdictions even with the workable substrate and gene variants, but in many countries you would be free to research and even commercialise this concept, and we definitely welcome collaboration. We have been developing a technology landscape around positive selection, on which we also welcome collaboration.
Historically CAMBIA is strongly associated with the ß-glucuronidase gene (gusA) from E.coli. There are thousands of publications documenting its extensive use and versatility as a marker gene for plant genetic transformation and molecular physiology studies.
More recently the hydrolytic capabilities of the gusA gene have been exploited to release aglycones from glucuronides. This principle can be exploited widely either to increase phloem transportability of hydrophobic substances and/or to reactivate inert, biochemical activity compounds to development of novel, second-generation hydrolytic enzymes with improved characteristics (e.g. secretability into the apoplast of plant tissues, improved higher thermal and chemical stability to expand on existing histochemical assay conditions, variants in substrate specificity and processability).
A different approach consists in the development of transport mechanisms based on substrate-specific permeases, to trap the substrates in the cell. Phloem-translocatable, bioactive pro-compounds are being developed as target substrates for the activating enzymes.
Glucuronidation is one of the main detoxification pathways of xenobiotics but also self-metabolites in vertebrates. Microbial intestinal flora and other microorganisms have developed hydrolytic capabilities to obtain the glucuronate moiety as a carbon source.
In E. coli, an operon constituted of four genes, encoding a repressor, a glucuronidase, a permease, and a porin-like protein, is responsible for import and hydrolysis of glucuronide. Free glucuronate is then funnelled into metabolic pathways.
The development of novel substrates for tissue-specific hydrolases, substrates having specific chemical, biochemical and physiological aspects, can contribute to selection and synthesis of agrichemical glucuronides, development of derivatives for positive selection, gametocidic or toxic chemicals.
Candidates have been selected based on their chemical suitability to provide derivatives. Another criterion is inactivity as a glucuronide and also non-toxicity to humans and non-target organisms. This also reduces the exposure of non-target pests to pesticides, reducing resistance buildup.
Another advantage of the approach is that the attachment of glucuronic acid makes many substances phloem translocatable, widening the scope of applicability for many agrichemicals whose use, although ecologically compatible, has been restricted by the lack of phloem mobility.
University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc. has a granted patent in the United States on methods and materials for selecting transgenic cells based on arabitol or ribitol as positive selectable markers. Patent application was also filed in Australia.[add a comment]
The invention relates to isolated polynucleotide molecules coding for a protein possessing arabitol/ribitol dehydrogenase enzymatic activity and a protein possessing arabitol/ribitol kinase enzymatic activity. It also relates to a positive selection system that involves conferring to transformed cells (includes protoplasts, as well as cells of plants, animals and microorganisms) the ability to metabolize arabitol, ribitol and/or mannitol and selecting the transformed cells.[add a comment]
D-arabitol and ribitol are two of the four possible pentitols (five-carbon sugar alcohol, C5H12O5) formed by the reduction of ribose. In 2001, LaFayette and Parrott reported that E. coli strains B and K-12 cannot metabolize these pentitols. However, E. coli strain C originally isolated in the Lister Institute, London, in 1920 (NCTC 1983) can metabolize both D-arabitol and ribitol and thus grow on these pentitols when they are the sole carbon source. This ability is due to the presence of two genes coding for arabitol deydrogenase and ribitol dehydrogenase that convert arabitol and ribitol into xylulose and ribulose, respectively.
![]() |
| The structure of a pentitol |
Plants are not able to metabolize arabitol and ribitol. The positive selection strategy in this aspect is to engineer plant cells by introducing an arabitol or ribitol dehydrogenase gene so that the transformed cells can utilise arabitol or ribitol as carbon source. For example, when a gene coding for a bacterial arabitol dehydrogenase is transferred into and expressed in a plant cell, the cell will be able to grow in a medium containing D-arabitol by converting arabitol into the plant-metabolizable xylulose, whereas an untransformed plant cell will not proliferate.
| Patent/Application Number | Title, Independent Claims and Summary | Assignee | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Arabitol or ribitol as positive selectable markers
|
University of Georgia Research Foundation |
|||||||
|
Remarks |
The related patent application in Australia (AU 200140117) has lapsed. A PCT application was also filed (WO 2001/66779). |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
31/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Positive AND selection AND transformation AND cell" in abstract |
|
Results |
117 hits |
|
Comments |
This search results in patents from several patent families that related to the positive selection topic: 1. the Syngenta family represented by WO 1993/05163 2. the "University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc." family represented by US 7005561 titled "Arabitol or ribitol as positive selectable markers". |
A wholly owned subsidiary of Monsanto Company, Seminis Vegetable Seeds is the largest developer, grower, and marketer of fruit and vegetable seeds in the world. It has granted patents in the United States and Europe that claim processes for positive selection of transformed plant cells based on encrypted carbon sources (mannose, mannitol, sorbitol, lactose, trehalose and salicin).
The scientific aspects of this patent family is related to methods for positively selecting transformed plant cells. Plants in their adult forms are autotrophic organisms. Thus, mature plants use carbon dioxide for most or all of their carbon requirements. However, when grown in a culture medium, as cell suspensions, microspores, protoplasts or as explants, the cultured plant cells are heterotrophic and require the provision of an external source of carbon as well as other nutrients. Typically, the carbon source is sucrose, glucose or another carbohydrate that can be readily metabolized by the growing cells so that they can grow, proliferate and differentiate.
The present invention utilizes the fact that plant cells cannot grow and proliferate using many small, carbon-containing compounds as a source of carbon during heterotrophic culture as a means of selectively growing genetically engineered plant cells. This is accomplished by using a selectable marker gene for cell transformation that converts a non-useful source of carbon that does not support cell growth and proliferation into a useful carbon source that supports cell growth and proliferation.
|
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Process for selection of transgenic plant cells
|
Seminis Vegetable Seeds, Inc. |
||||||
|
Title - Carbon-based process for selection of transgenic plant cells
|
|||||||
|
Title - Process for selection of transgenic plant cells
|
|||||||
|
Remarks |
Related patent was also granted in China (CN 96194540). The PCT application is WO 9631612 A2. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
8/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"selecting transformed cell" in abstract |
|
Results |
1486 hits |
|
Comments |
The following patents/applications worth further looking into: |
Expressive Rsearch B.V. obtained an European patent claiming a method for the selection of transformed plant cells using trehalose. Related patent applications were also filed in the United States, Canada and some other jurisdictions such as Japan and China.
Trehalose is a nonreducing disaccharide of glucose that functions as a compatible solute in the stabilization of biological structures under abiotic stress in bacteria, fungi, and invertebrates. As a fact, trehalose does not accumulate to detectable levels in most plants. Cells, in particular plant cells, can not normally develop in a medium in which an increased concentration of trehalose is present without another metabolizable carbon source being present.
Positive selection methods were developed by transforming target plant cells with genes coding for trehalase, which is able to hydrolyze intracellular trehalose and/or its derivative to glucose for plant use, and selecting transformed cells on a medium containing trehalose as the sole carbon source. The genes coding for intracellular trehalases can be of bacterial origin (e.g. the TreF gene from E. coli) or of plant origin (e.g. the AtTRE1 gene from Arabidopsis).
The gene coding for an endogenous trehalase exists in the genomes of higher plants such as soybeen and Arabidopsis thaliana. However, these endogenous trehalase genes generally code for an extracellular trehalase, which is not active in the cell. Such endogenous genes can be modified by a number of ways such as deactivating the protein-secretion signal via deletion or mutagenesis, changing the protein targeting sequences, or the pH sensitivity of the enzymatically active site to make the modified trehalases intracellularly active.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Method for selecting genetically transformed cells
|
Original applicant: Stichting Voor De Technische Wetenschappen Reassigned to: Expressive Research B.V. (NL) |
||
|
Title - Method for selecting genetically transformed cells
|
|||
|
Remarks |
Related patent application were also filed in Canada (CA 2466088 AA), China (CN 1622999 A), Japan (JP 2005508190 T2), Isreal (IL 161773 A0) and South Africa (ZA 200403307 A). The PCT application is WO 2003/040377 A1. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
7/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"selecting transformed cells" in title |
|
Results |
30 hits |
|
Comments |
Relevant patents/applications: |
BASF Plant Science GmbH and SweTree Technologies AB jointly own an European patent on methods for selecting transformed plants with D-amino acids.
Among the amino acids used as building blocks for proteins, all but one (glycine) can be found in two isomeric forms which are distinguished by their ability to rotate polarised light. The form found in largest quantities in nature rotates light to the left and is termed L- or levorotatory, while the less common form is termed D- or dextrorotatory.
Whilst D-amino acids are found in nature, they are present only at very low concentrations and only in specific compounds as cell wall proteins in bacteria. Although plant amino acid transporters mediate transport of both D- and L-forms of amino acids, plants lack the necessary enzymes to convert D-amino acids into nitrogen forms that can be used in synthetic reactions inside the plant. Normal plants cannot therefore use D-amino acids as a source of nitrogen.
Generally, only a single D-amino acid metabolising enzyme is needed to convert the D-amino acid into compounds that can participate in the usual plant pathways of nitrogen metabolism. Therefore, by introducing a bacterial gene, such as the gene coding for the enzyme D-serine dehydratase or the gene coding for D-amino acid oxidases, into plant cells, nitrogen that is otherwise inaccessibly bound in D-amino acids can thus be converted enzymatically into forms that can be readily utilised by the transgenic plant.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Selective plant growth using d-amino acids
|
BASF Plant Science GmbH & SweTree Technologies AB |
|||||
|
Title - Selective plant growth using d-amino acids
|
||||||
|
Remarks |
Patent applications were also filed in Australia (AU 2003235629), Canada (CA 2471517 AA), New Zealand (NZ 534469), China (CN 1620506 A), Japan (JP 2005514069) and Israel (IL 162644 A0). The PCT application is WO 2003/060133. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
09/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
(growth near/5 support) AND (plant near/5 growth) AND ((transformed near/2 cell) in claims) |
|
Results |
56 hits |
|
Comments |
The following new doc is relevant to positive selection: US 2005/76409: Selective plant growth using d-amino acids; by BASF |
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Argriculture holds a United States patent on methods for selection of transgenic cells by temperature sensitive marker proteins. The related patent application was also filed in Australia but has lapsed.
Temperature sensitive marker proteins, including heat shock proteins (HSP), heat shock transcription factors (HSTF, also referred to as heat shock factors, HSF), cold regulated proteins (COR, also referred to as cold shock proteins), and cold regulated protein transcription factors, and their corresponding nucleic acid coding sequences have been identified from many different orgnisms in the past decade. This invention uses genes coding for these temperature sensitive proteins as selectable markers for selecting the transformed cells under extreme temperature condition.
Suitable heat shock proteins which may be used as temperature-sensitive markers include those in the families of HSP 100 or HSP110 (those HSPs having a molecular weight range between approximately 100 and 110 kDa), HSP 90 (HSPs ranging in size between approximately 80 to 94 kDa), HSP 70, HSP 60, and low molecular weight (LMW) HSPs (those having a molecular weight between 15 and 30 kDa).
A variety of heat shock transcription factors, cold regulated proteins, or cold regulated protein transcription factors may also be used as potential temperature sensitive markers for selection purpose. These may include heat shock transcription factor or heat shock factor (HSF) proteins derived from humans and Drosophila (see US 5756343), the cold regulation protein COR15 from Arabidopsis (see US 5296462 and US 5356816) and cold regulation protein transcription factor CBF1 from Arabidopsis (see US 5891859 and US 5929305).
By transforming target cells with a gene coding for a temperature sensitive protein as a selectable marker, selection of truly transformed cells can be carried out through the treatment of cells under conditions of extreme temperature. In practice, however, most host cells of interest in fact possess native temperature stress response systems which are functional and could allow even the non-transformed cells to grow at the set extreme temperature and confuse the selection process. To minimize the induction of any of these native proteins that could protect the non-transformed cells and enable their growth at the temperature extremes used, an initial culture on a growth medium under relatively normal conditions, that is, at a temperature suitable to promote the growth of all of the cells but which will not induce the expression of the host cell's native protective heat shock proteins or cold regulation proteins may be a necessory step prior to the treatment under extreme temperature condition that only the transformed cells are supported.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Selection procedure for identifying transgenic cells, embryos, and plants without the use of antibiotics
|
The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture |
|||
|
Remarks |
The related patent application in Australia (AU 2003300183) lapsed. A PCT application (WO 2004/061128 A1) was also filed. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
31/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Positive selection transformation cell" in abstract |
|
Results |
117 hits |
|
Comments |
The "The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Argriculture" family represented by WO 2004/61128 titled " Selection procedure for identifying transgenic cells, embryos, and plants without the use of antibiotics". This patent family claims methods for selection of transgenc cells using temperature sensitive marker proteins. |
Danisco A/S holds granted patents in the United States, Australia and New Zealand regarding the method for the positive selection of genetically transformed plant cells by glucosamine 6-phosphate.
To normal plant cells, glucosamine or its derivatives such as glucosamine 6-phosphate, is a nutrient when present in a low concentration, However, they become toxic when their concentration exceeds certain level.
Glucosamine 6-phosphate deaminase from Escherichia coli is an allosteric hexameric enzyme which catalyzes the reversible conversion of D-glucosamine-6-phosphate into D-fructose 6-phosphate and ammonium ion and is activated by N-acetyl-D-glucosamine 6-phosphate. By transforming a gene coding for the glucosamine 6-phosphate deaminase into plant cells, the transformed cells will acquire the capability of converting glucosamine-6-phosphate to fructose-6-phosphate and ammonium. In this way, the transformed plant cells can use glucosamine-6-phosphate at a high concentration as a source of both carbohydrate and nitrogen for their growth over the non-transformed cells.
|
Patent number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Method of plant selection using glucosamine-6-phosphate deaminase
|
Danisco A/S |
|||||
|
Title - Selection method for transgenic plant
|
||||||
|
Remarks |
Related patent was also granted in New Zealand (NZ 336925). The European application (EP 970221 A1) was deemed to be withdrawn on 30 Dec 2005. Patent applications were also filed in Canada (CA 2280236), China (CN 1252097) and Japan (JP 2002514915). |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
30/05/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Simple, stemming on |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
"Danisco" in applicant "cell selection" in abstract |
|
Results |
12 hits |
|
Comments |
Both US 6444878 and AU 739067 B2 were listed |
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (Paris Cedex, FR) holds a patent in the United States that is related to the use of a DNA sequence coding for a polyol carrier for screening genetically modified plants. Related patent applications are also pending in Europe, Australia, Canada and Japan.
The plants are capable of synthesizing, via photosynthesis, primary compounds such as glucides by using light energy. Only certain organs of the plant, mainly the adult leaves, are capable of manufacturing and exporting the glucides towards the storage organs, such as the tubers, the seeds and the fruits. In the majority of plants, the main glucide transported is saccharose. However in a large number of plants, other compounds, such as polyols, are also transported. Polyols (or sugar alcohols) are, like saccharose, primary products of photosynthesis which include mannitol, sorbitol, dulcitol, galactitol, inositol, myo-inositol, ribitol, xylitol and more.
As an example, mannitol is present in more than 100 species of higher plants. It is produced in the mesophyll cells (cells containing chlorophyll). To circulate, it must re-enter the sieve tubes (veins). However, there is no continuity between the mesophyll cells and the sieve tubes, and a mannitol carrier is therefore needed. In this way, the mannitol leaves the mesophyll cells and uses the carrier to enter the sieve tubes.
By transforming plant cells with a DNA sequence coding for a polyol carrier, the transformed cells willl have an advantage in growth over their non-transformed cells when selection is carried out on a medium containing the polyol.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Applicant | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - DNA sequences coding for a polyol carrier and use thereof, in particular for preparing transgenic plants
|
Centre National De La Recherche Scientifique |
|||
|
Title - DNA sequences coding for a polyol carrier and their use, in particular for the preparation of transgenic plants
This is the granted patent of the US application US 2005/015832 A1. The total claims were reduced from sixteen to two. |
||||
EP 1299554 A1
|
Title - DNA sequences coding for a polyol carrier and use thereof, in particular for preparing transgenic plants The claims of this European application are the same as the United States application |
||||
|
Remarks |
A patent was already granted in France (FR 2811679 B1). Related patent applications were also filed in Australia (AU 200169241 A1), Canada (CA 2416203) and Japan (JP 2004502461). The PCT application is WO 2002/04647 A1. |
|
Search details |
|
|---|---|
|
Date of search |
09/06/2006 |
|
Database searched |
Patent Lens |
|
Type of search |
Expert, stemming off |
|
Collections searched |
AU-B, US-A, US-B, EP-B, WO |
|
Search terms |
(growth near/5 advantage) AND (plant near/5 growth) AND ((transformed near/2 cell) in claims) |
|
Results |
38 hits |
|
Comments |
The following new docs are relevant to positive selection: : Compositions and methods for identifying transformed cells; by PIONEER
HI-BRED |
Nippon Paper Industries Co. Ltd holds patents regarding vectors and methods of plant transformation using an auxin biosynthesis gene and/or cytokinin biosynthesis gene as positive selectable markers.
The patent family represented by US 6767735 and EP 1033409 discloses the use of plant hormone signal transduction genes as positive selection markers in a plant transformation vector, which can be excised after selection in order to generate selection marker-free transgenic plants. This method eliminates selection of false-positive plants that have not acquired the gene but show a morphological abnormality phenotype due to the influence of hormone produced by the true transformants close by.
The Japanese patent application JP 2001275667 claims the invention of use of a cytokinin-related gene in plant transformation. Addition of the cytokinin-related gene enhances transformation efficiency, as well as being useful as a positive selection marker gene (that can later be excised using transposons or a site-specific recombination system, or controlled by use of an inducible promoter upstream of the cytokinin-related gene). The application states that the reason for enhanced transformation efficiency is unknown, but relates the effect to cytokinins causing enhanced cell division of the plant.
Another patent family, represented by the United States patent application US 2004/163143, discloses a method of plant transformation using a vector that contains a gene coding for an enzyme that synthesises auxin from an auxin precursor (auxin synthesis gene). By adding the auxin precursor to the selection medium, transformants will synthesise auxin and produce adventitious shoots. The auxin synthesis gene can later be excised using a transposon or site-specific recombination system after selection to regenerate physiologically normal transformants with only the desired gene. Although not claimed in this published application, the applicant suggests the parallel introduction of a cytokinin synthesis gene to control the auxin/cytokinin ratio in the plant. The applicant states that the ‘appropriate’ auxin/cytokinin ratio in transformants (as opposed to non-transformants) will promote shoot generation.
| Patent/Application Number |
Title, Independent Claims and Summary |
Assignee | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Title - Vector for introducing a gene into a plant using a selectable marker
|
Nippon Paper Industries Co. Ltd. |
|
|
EP 1033409
|
Title - Vector for introducing a gene into a plant using a selectable marker
The claim is drawn to a vector comprises a desired gene and a plant hormone signal transduction gene for selection. A method for producing a transgenic plant cell is also claimed in the independent claim 10, which comprises the transformation of plant cells with the vector and the selection of transformed cells in the presence of plant hormones. |
||
|
Remarks |
Related patent applications were also filed in Canada (CA 2292798) and Japan (JP 2001218583). |
||
|
JP 2001275667
|
Title - Method of enhancing gene-transferring efficiency for monocotyledon
|
||
|
Remarks |
There is no family information for this Japanese patent application according to INPADOC. |
||
|
Title - Method for efficiently producing transgenic plant using auxin precursor
Definitions from the specification: "Auxin" is a plant hormone and is known to accelerate elongation, proliferation and division of cells. "Auxin precursor and/or an analogue" is a substance which is converted into auxin or a substance having a physiological activity similar to that of auxin (hereinafter also referred to as "auxin-like substance" as a whole) by the expression of the auxin precursor-auxin synthesis gene introduced as a selectable marker gene. |
||
|
Remarks |
Related patent applications were also filed in Japan (JP 2004057066), Australia (AU 2003221268 A1), Europe (EP 1384785 A1), Canada (CA 2436046 A1 ) and China (CN 1473936 A). |
This PDF copy is dated April 11, 2007. Changes may have been made to this
Technology Landscape after this date.
Download
PDF (info)
The information contained in this page was believed to be correct at the time it was collated. New patents and patent applications, altered status of patents, and case law may have resulted in changes in the landscape. CAMBIA makes no warranty that it is correct or up to date at this time and accepts no liability for any use that might be made of it. Corrections or updates to the information are welcome. Please send an email to info@bios.net.
The information contained in this page was believed to be correct at the time it was collated. New patents and patent applications, altered status of patents, and case law may have resulted in changes in the landscape. CAMBIA makes no warranty that it is correct or up to date at this time and accepts no liability for any use that might be made of it. Corrections or updates to the information are welcome, please send an email to info@bios.net.