ChronicaHORTICULTURAE

A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE

Volume 45 - Number 2 - 2005

ISHS

Symposia and Workshops

Horticultural HighlightsIntellectual Property Rights for Plants • Macadamia • European AppleBreeding Programs Turn to Biotechnology • Early Evidence for theCulinary Use of Squash Flowers in Italy • Small Urban Gardens •Horticulture in Iran

Walnut • Flower Bulbs • Orchard Systems • Peach • Tomato Diseases •Micropropagated Plants • Sustainable Greenhouse Systems • SoillessCulture and Hydroponics

CONTENTS

ISHS

ChronicaHORTICULTURAE

Chronica Horticulturae© ISBN: 90 6605 628 2 (Volume 45 - Number 2; June2005); ISSN: 0578-039X.

Published quarterly by the International Society for Horticultural Science,Leuven, Belgium. Lay-out and printing by Drukkerij Geers, Gent, Belgium.ISHS© 2005. All rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproducedand/or published in any form, photocopy, microfilm or any other means wit-hout written permission from the publisher. All previous issues are also availa-ble online at www.ishs.org/chronica. Contact the ISHS Secretariat fordetails on full colour advertisements (1/1, 1/2, 1/4 page) and/or mailing listsoptions.

Editorial Office and Contact Address:ISHS Secretariat, PO Box 500, B-3001 Leuven 1, Belgium. Phone:(+32)16229427, fax: (+32)16229450, e-mail: info@ishs.org, web:www.ishs.org or www.actahort.org.

Editorial StaffJules Janick, Science Editor, janick@purdue.eduJozef Van Assche, Managing Editor, jozef@ishs.orgKelly Van Dijck, Assistant Editor, kelly.vandijck@ishs.orgPeter Vanderborght, Associate Editor - Production & Circulation,

peter.vanderborght@ishs.org

Editorial Advisory CommitteeJules Janick, Purdue University, USA, Chair of the Editorial Advisory Committee

Tony Biggs, Australian Society of Horticultural Science, Australia

Byung-Dong Kim, Department of Plant Sciences and Center for PlantMolecular Genetics and Breeding Research, Seoul National University, Korea

António A. Monteiro, College of Agriculture and Forestry, Technical Universityof Lisbon, Portugal

Robert K. Prange, Atlantic Food and Horticulture Resarch Centre, Agricultureand Agri-Food Canada

Manfred Schenk, Institute of Plant Nutrition, University of Hannover, Germany

Membership and Orders of Chronica HorticulturaeChronica Horticulturae is provided to the Membership for free: IndividualMembership 45 EUR annually (special rate for Individual Members from selec-ted developing countries: 45 EUR for 2 years), Student Membership 15 EURper year. For all details on ISHS membership categories and membershipadvantages, including a membership application form, refer to the ISHS mem-bership pages at www.ishs.org/members.

PaymentsAll major Credit Cards accepted. Always quote your name and invoice ormembership number. Make checks payable to ISHS Secretariat. Money trans-fers: ISHS main bank account number is 230-0019444-64. Bank details: FortisBank, Branch “Heverlee Arenberg”, Naamsesteenweg 173/175, B-3001Leuven 1, Belgium. BIC (SWIFT code): GEBABEBB08A, IBAN:BE29230001944464. Please arrange for all bank costs to be taken from youraccount assuring that ISHS receives the net amount. Prices listed are in euro(EUR) but ISHS accepts payments in USD as well.

Acta HorticulturaeActa Horticulturae is the series of proceedings of ISHS Scientific Meetings,Symposia or Congresses. (ISSN: 0567-7572). ISHS Members are entitled to asubstantial discount on the price of Acta Horticulturae. For an updated list ofavailable titles go to www.ishs.org/acta. A complete and accurate record ofthe entire Acta Horticulturae collection, including all abstracts and full textarticles is available online at www.actahort.org. ISHS Individual membershipincludes credits to download 10 full text Acta Horticulturae articles. All ActaHorticulturae titles-including those no longer available in print format-are avai-lable in the ActaHort CD-ROM format.

Scripta HorticulturaeScripta Horticulturae is a new series from ISHS devoted to specific horticultu-ral issues such as position papers, crop or technology monographs andspecial workshops or conferences.

Cover photograph: Aerial view of kleingärten site (small community gardens)in Rottweil, Germany. Picture by courtesy of Rudolf Trepte, see p. 22

A publication of the International Society for HorticulturalScience, a society of individuals, organizations, and govern-mental agencies devoted to horticultural research, educa-tion, industry, and human well-being.

ISHS • 2

� News from the Board3 Building Partnerships, U. Aksoy4 Task Force for the Promotion of the European Horticultural Sector4 ISHS Launches Scripta Horticulturae5 Letter to the Editor - Review of Book on Olive Growing in Marginal Dry

Environments

� Issues5 Intellectual Property Rights for Plants. The Case for a New Law, E.J. Ryder

� Horticultural Science Focus11 Macadamia: Domestication and Commercialisation, R. Stephenson

� Horticultural Science News16 European Apple Breeding Programs Turn to Biotechnology,

S. Sansavini, E. Belfanti, F. Costa and F. Donati20 Early Evidence for the Culinary Use of Squash Flowers in Italy,

H.S. Paris and J. Janick

� The World of Horticulture22 The World of Small Urban Gardens, G. Groening26 Horticulture in Iran, E. Fallahi, A. Boland Nazar, M.R. Naeini and R. Salehi29 New Books, Websites30 Courses and Meetings30 Opportunities

� Symposia and Workshops31 Vth Int’l Walnut Symposium33 IXth Int’l Symposium on Flower Bulbs35 XIIIth Int’l Symposium on Integrating Canopy, Rootstock and Environmental

Physiology in Orchard Systems37 VIth Int’l Peach Symposium38 Ist Int’l Symposium on Tomato Diseases39 IInd Int’l Symposium on Acclimatization and Establishment of Micropropagated

Plants41 Sustainable Greenhouse Systems: Co-operation of Engineering and Crop Science

(Greensys2004)43 Int’l Symposium on Soilless Culture and Hydroponics

� News from the ISHS Secretariat44 New ISHS Members45 In Memoriam45 Calendar of ISHS Events47 Available Issues of Acta Horticulturae

team is an importantasset for employment.You can set up a high-tech laboratory but youneed staff to make itfunction. Thus, perso-nal improvement and vocational training are ofutmost importance in the postmodern world.ISHS contributes to this need with its meetingsand publications. Through partnerships withorganizations like the Commonwealth ofLearning and the Forum for Agriculture Researchin Africa (FARA) we can move to add trainingcomponents to our symposia in developingcountries.

Scientific communities involved in research anddevelopment, whether in the public or privatesector, are the major generators of new know-ledge. If knowledge is for the well-being ofhumankind, then it must be disseminated rapid-ly and widely. There is a vital need to build part-nerships to generate and to share knowledge.This partnership can involve many partners: thepublic and private institutes, the corporate sec-tor, non-governmental organizations (NGOs),and growers and grower organizations. Theexperiences brought up by each partner will addto the total font of knowledge. The partnershipmust be inter-geographic: north to south andeast to west. Each partner has a role. Bottom-upand top-down approaches need to be integratedto develop strategies and to decide on an actionplan to find appropriate solutions. Partnershipmust be established between both developedand developing countries. Globalization is a rea-lity, and due to high competition, the productionchain is getting longer and ever more sophistica-ted. The distance between the producer and theconsumer is forcing the adoption of strict stan-dards and tolerance limits. In order to have awin-win case there is a need to develop partner-ship throughout the chain. The world today isgetting smaller and the analogy of the globalvillage is apt. We know that in order to livehappily in a village, there needs to be supportwithin and between communities to providefood and shelter for everyone.

The International Society for HorticulturalScience has 6000 members with different back-grounds and representing more than 125 coun-tries. We believe our Society is in a unique posi-tion to extend horticultural knowledge and servehorticultural science and industry in every coun-try and region but in order to be successful wemust establish and carefully serve successfulpartnerships. Each of us has a responsibility tocontribute in some way to the success of thisglobal network.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 3

Building Partnerships

NEWS FROM THE BOARD

Uygun Aksoy, Secretary of the ISHS Board Uygun Aksoy

The International Society for HorticulturalScience (ISHS) believes that building partnershipsis the best way to more fully achieve world-widerepresentation of horticulture. Various initiativesare being implemented to accomplish this goal.Our objectives in strengthening links in horticul-ture are to: a) increase our membership andorganize more symposia in developing countries;b) seek closer collaboration with internationalresearch, educational, policy setting, and fundinginstitutions; c) cooperate with major nationalinstitutions; d) take part in research and trainingnetworks; and e) find partners in the corporateworld. Furthermore, we aim to embrace all of thescientific fields that are related to horticulture.

The Committee for Research Cooperation (CRC)is helping the Society to further these objectives.The Committee was established with a mandateto establish direct links with organizations invol-ved in international and national policy setting,funding, or research that involves horticulture,especially in developing countries. ISHS togetherwith the American Society for HorticulturalScience (ASHS) have initiated a discussion plat-form and a taskforce to emphasize the role andimportance of horticulture. Similar initiatives arebeing initiated in Europe as well as with otherinternational organizations. For example ourSociety is cooperating with the US Agency forInternational Development (USAID) to assess theneed for more horticultural research in supportof international development. New programssuch as those initiated by the Food andAgricultural Organization of the United Nationsand the World Health Organization (FAO/WHO)are promoting the health aspects of horticulturalproducts. Since horticultural production is nowrecognized as a significant tool to increase small-holder farmers’ income and food security, pro-jects on urban or peri-urban horticulture havebeen developed for poverty alleviation in south-east Asia, Africa, and Latin America.Horticultural crops are now incorporated intorotation programs with major field crops thatwere once grown exclusively as monocultures.

ISHS seeks involvement with those institutionsand initiatives that are on the cutting edge ofhorticulture. In some countries, where represen-tation within the Society is weak, horticulturalresearch institutions are being invited to becomeOrganizational Members to better organize anddisseminate information. In this way we hope toinitiate horticultural networks at a national andinternational level. ISHS is promoting individual

membership in developing countries by makingthe membership fee valid for two years. In addi-tion, we have initiated a “twinning” programwhere willing members can support other mem-bers directly or by donations to a fund for thispurpose.

Organization of more symposia in developingcountries is a key objective of ISHS for many rea-sons. In general, the highest number of partici-pants to any ISHS symposium comes from thehost country. Symposia thus promote nationaldevelopment in horticulture as well as enablingthe host country to display their horticulturalindustries to an international audience.Symposia help a wide variety of participants tobuild strong links with the host institution andhelp the institution locate research partners fromother parts of the world.

ISHS is working to increase representation of thedeveloping world on Council. Toward that endwe have greatly lowered country dues anddecreed that the poorest countries can participa-te in a first Council meeting without any pay-ment of Country Membership dues. This is ourattempt to encourage more global members tojoin the ISHS family.

The 19th and 20th century will be rememberedas the period when almost every decade saw theinvention of a new communication tool: the tele-graph, telephone, Xerox and fax machine, cellu-lar phone, world-wide web, satellites, and GPRS.They have created a world where informationand knowledge are transmitted at an everincreasing pace. As a consequence our worldfinds itself a knowledge-based society not only inthe industrial nations but also in the undevelo-ped and developing countries. Wireless techno-logies have helped the developing world skipsome steps while climbing the ladder of develop-ment. Instead of having to install above-groundor underground cables and infrastructure, theynow have access to the whole world of informa-tion through satellites and wireless instruments.Farmers in sub-Saharan Africa expect to get mar-ket information through their mobile phoneseven if they do not have access to the internet.Scientific and technological developments aremoving so fast, that to keep pace, an educatedworkforce is a must. Labor trained on one nar-row topic is no longer adequate. To solve pro-blems or to develop a hypothesis teams ofexperts and scientists are required from variousdisciplines. The ability to work with a team or tocontribute to the collective performance of a

ISHS • 4

Task Force for the Promotion ofthe European Horticultural Sector

Horticulture is an important sector of our civilsociety, yet it is not fully recognized as such. Inaddition to its great economic importance(employment, exports) it provides us with pro-ducts that have a high value for human healthand nutrition (fruits, vegetables, medicinalplants) and for embellishment of our living envi-ronment (flowers, plants, woody ornamentals).Moreover, it gives us possibilities for recreation,social contacts and personal well-being (gar-dens, parks, horticultural therapy).

Horticulture consists of many activities thatform a global chain: plant breeding and pro-duction, greenhouse construction, irrigation,climate control, information processing, pro-duct processing, packaging, transport, retail,etc. All these activities are based on knowledgeand expertise of various disciplines in scienceand technology. Horticulture is a truly multidis-ciplinary sector, and people working in horticul-ture have very different backgrounds (plant sci-ences, physics, engineering, information tech-nology, economics, etc.).

The increasing trade in products from develo-ping countries, while offering these countriesopportunities for development, requires know-ledge of food-safety aspects (contamination,traceability) and understanding of the impactthis international trade has both on the localinfrastructure and economy and on the welfareof farmers and their families. Here, too,research and education on issues of humanhealth, sustainability and environmental protec-tion are of vital importance.

The number of students in horticulture in mostWestern countries (Western Europe, NorthAmerica, Australia, New Zealand) has fallendramatically over the past few years, and weexpect the sector to call for more graduatesthan will be delivered in the near future. Forthis reason, universities and technical collegesshould increase their attention and funding forhorticultural research and education in itswidest sense. However, the responsibility tomaintain the necessary knowledge base restsnot only with scientists and educators. Otherparts of our society have a role to play as well.

To increase the awareness of horticulture and itsvarious components, the set-up of a Task Forcefor the Promotion of European Horticulture isbeing considered. This Task Force should consistof partners from science, education, industry,media, politics, etc. Its aim would be to discussthe various constraints of the sector and to for-mulate proposals to improve the image andincrease the public awareness of all stakehol-ders concerned.

CONTACT

Robert J. Bogers, Director Frontis, InternationalNucleus for Strategic Expertise, P.O. Box 88,6700 AB Wageningen, the Netherlands, email:rob.bogers@wur.nl

IISSHHSS LLaauunncchheessScripta Horticulturae

As the ISHS symposium series has developedand matured, Acta Horticulturae has beenselected as the vehicle of information transferboth in print and electronic format. As a resultspecific policies have been developed such asreview procedures, format, and size limitations.This has been important for inclusion of ActaHorticulturae both in libraries and in some ofthe Thomson ISI products.

To protect both quality and format, ISHS nowrestricts Acta Horticulturae to ISHS-sanctionedsymposia. This has created a need for anotherISHS archival series. As a result, ISHS has laun-ched a new series entitled Scripta Horticulturae(literally Writings in Horticulture), ISSN 1813-9205. We foresee that this series will be parti-cularly suitable for the following:

• Monographs on specific horticultural issues

• Training manuals

• Position papers

• Proceedings of workshops and conferenceswhere the program is not exclusively basedon contributed papers.

The series was initiated in 2005 with the title,The Horticultural Sector in Uganda, ISBN 906605 4 409. A second title (The HorticulturalSector in Vietnam) is forthcoming.

A cover and size format has been selected(Fig. 1) to prevent confusion of ScriptaHorticulturae with Acta Horticulturae. We fore-see that the internal format will vary dependingon the particular product. The series will beavailable in print and in electronic format on-line. Of course, development of ScriptaHorticulturae does not preclude further ISHSseries titles in the future.

The ISHS Board has deemed that this publica-tion be self-supporting and should complementrather than compete with other ISHS publica-tions. Our experience is that ISHS publicationsare produced and distributed in a cost competi-tive manner as compared to commercial publis-hers. Persons interested in contributing toScripta Horticulturae should contact ISHS:

Jozef Van Assche, Executive Director ISHS,jozef@ishs.org

Jules Janick, Publications Director ISHS,janick@purdue edu

Figure 1. Scripta Horticulturae n° 1:The Horticultural Sector in Uganda.

R.J. Bogers, P.A.Th.J. Werrij, J. Ganry, J. Lipecki,A.A. Monteiro, W. Müller, J.-C. Mauget, P. Ruhnke,

G.R. Dixon, U. Aksoy, G. Noga, J. Van Assche

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 5

REVIEW OF BOOK ON OLIVEGROWING IN MARGINALDRY ENVIRONMENTS

I was pleased to see the very nice review ofour book by Hava Rapoport published in

Letter to the Editor

Chronica Horticulturae 45(1):20. Although Dr.Rapoport reported that the Olive ProductionManual (Ferguson et al., University ofCalifornia, 1994) was not cited, this publica-tion was referred to and referenced.Information on cultivars was based on synthe-sis of available literature, including amongothers the FAO olive cultivar data base (cited)

and the World Catalogue of Olive Varieties(cited), as mentioned in the text.

Dr. Ashraf Tubeileh, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria

Discussions about intellectual property rights(IPR) are rich with contention and sometimestinged with rancor. They reflect the changingattitudes over time towards protection of theseproperty rights. They are rooted deeply in basicideas about money, ownership, human valuesand natural rights; the ideas that make peopleand societies alike or different. The historicalinterplay of these ideas has led to changes inattitudes, which in turn have led to changes ingovernment regulation of these ideas in theform of laws, and changes in the way the lawshave been written, interpreted and modified.

This generalization applies to the laws regula-ting IPR protection for plants. In this paper, Ipropose to examine the history of IPR for plantsin the context of overall patenting history, toidentify the virtues and drawbacks of plant IPRand finally, to propose the rationale and frame-work for a new IPR law for plants. The discus-sion will be based primarily on laws of theUnited States, reflecting my own familiaritywith those laws. However, most of the informa-tion will also apply to laws in many other coun-tries and the principles upon which I base myconclusions can be extrapolated to the interna-tional scene.

The first American Patent Act, enacted in 1790,shortly after the birth of the country, and basedupon a clause in Article I of the Constitution,stated that patents could be granted for up to14 years for useful and important inventions.The Act was rewritten in 1793, primarily byThomas Jefferson, defining a patentable item

as: “any new and useful art, machine, manufac-ture, or composition of matter and any newand useful improvement thereof...” This defini-tion prevails, although many minor changeshave been made over the years.

How did IPR become applicable to plants? Thefirst granting of a patent on a living organismoccurred in 1873, when Louis Pasteur wasgranted a patent on a yeast “free from organicgerms of disease, as an article of manufacture.”However, the first law dealing specifically withplants was the Plant Patent Act (PPA) of 1930,which allowed for patenting of asexually repro-duced plants. Subsequently the Plant VarietyProtection Act (PVPA) of 1970 provided for pro-tection, but not actual patenting, of sexuallyreproduced and tuber propagated plant varie-ties.

In 1972, A. Chakrabarty filed a patent applica-tion in the name of the General ElectricCompany for a patent on a genetically modifiedbacterium, a species of Pseudomonas. Thegenetic materials (plasmids) that were insertedenabled the bacterium to degrade several com-ponents of crude oil and would therefore be asignificant tool in treatment of an oil spill. ThePatent Office granted coverage for the methodof creating the modified bacterium and for themethod of deploying it, but excluded the bac-terium itself. After appeal and review, the casewent to the Supreme Court. In 1980, the Courtreversed the last part of the ruling and includedthe organism itself under the coverage (Burger,1980). In one stroke, the protection of a trans-

Intellectual Property Rights for Plants.The Case for a New Law

Edward J. Ryder

genic micro-organism was affirmed, statingclearly for the first time that a living organismcould be considered a “manufacture and acomposition of matter .”

Finally, in 1985, a Patent Office decision knownas Ex parte Hibberd allowed the granting of uti-lity patents for plant varieties (= cultivars). Thiswas eventually confirmed by the SupremeCourt in 2001.

PLANT IPR LAWS

Plant Patent Act (PPA) of 1930

The PPA permitted the patenting of asexuallypropagated plants (Table 1). One purpose ofthe act was to honor Luther Burbank, whoapparently lost many of his unprotected varie-ties to rival nursery companies. The law, asamended in 1954, reads:

“Whoever invents or discovers and asexuallyreproduces any distinct and new variety ofplant, including cultivated sports, mutants,hybrids, and newly found seedlings, other thana tuber propagated plant or plant found in anuncultivated state, may obtain a patent...”

The inventor has exclusive rights to propagateand sell the variety for 20 years and can licensethese rights in return for royalty payments. Theplant must remain stable through repeatedasexual propagation. However, it is protectedonly from asexual propagation by others, and

ISSUES

ISHS • 6

may be used by other breeders to develop newvarieties through seed reproduction.

The PPA requires that an invention or discoverybe novel and distinct. Unfortunately, the use ofthe word discovery attenuates the generalpatenting criterion requiring ‘the hand of man’.It actually rewards the eye of man, since a dis-covered mutant form is a product of the handof nature and the hand of man only applies toits propagation. A truly invented variant wouldbe one resulting from a process such as somaticcell culture or mutagenesis. PPA protection iseasily obtained; there is no requirement forsuperiority to others of the same type, or fornon-obviousness. Consequently, the number ofplant patents granted is enormous, averaging500 per year, and totaling over 12,500 since1931 (Regelbrugge, 2002). Most of these havebeen for roses, other ornamentals and fruittrees.

Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) of 1970

Seed companies campaigned for protection forsexually derived varieties as well, and theirefforts culminated with the PVPA. It grantedpseudo-patents called PVP certificates (Table 1).This act restricted protection to the immediatevariety only. A PVP certificate was granted origi-nally for 17 years, and is now granted for 20years.

A seed-reproduced variety or tuber must benew, distinct, stable and uniform. To be new, avariety must not have been previously commer-cialized for more than one year in the U.S.; itdoes not have to be new in the sense of actualexistence. Distinctiveness may be claimed onthe basis of a single trait, which may or may notbe meaningful. Some differences are obviouslymeaningful, such as a substantial difference indisease or insect resistance, flower color in rosesand fruit color in apples. However, a varietydoes not have to be an improvement over pre-vious varieties. For example, in 1999, an alfalfavariety received a certificate although it was lessresistant to a root-rotting organism than an ear-lier variety to which it was compared. Other dif-ferences, such as seed color in lettuce, anthercolor in corn, beak type in wheat, and tiller leafwidth in tall fescue, are likely trivial, unless lin-ked with genes of economic importance.Stability implies that the variety will remain thesame after being sexually reproduced. A uni-form variety is one in which observed variants(fewer than 5% of the sample) can be describedand predicted and are commercially acceptable.

The original 1970 Act specified two importantexceptions. One was called the farmer’s exemp-tion and permitted farmers to save seed fortheir own use and also to sell saved seed toneighbors. This exemption was modified in1994, allowing farmers to save seed only fortheir own use, not for sale to others. This cameabout because the exemption was abused. Forexample, a farming corporation in Iowa planted265 acres of soybean varieties developed by

Asgrow Seed. Co. that were protected underPVPA, then sold the entire crop to other far-mers for seed, sufficient to plant 10,000 acres(Scalia, 1995).

The other exception is known as the plant bree-der’s exemption. It means that the protectedvariety can be used by others in further bree-ding to create new varieties. This was alsomodified in 1994 to prevent rival breeders fromdeveloping so-called essentially derived varie-

ties, i.e. those that were very similar to the pro-tected variety. Unfortunately, it is not clear howsmall a difference justifies calling a derivedvariety essentially derived. For example, if thedifference agreed upon is (hypothetically) 15%,how is that measured? Does it mean 15% ofreadily discernible traits or 15% of the entiregenotype? How is either one measured?Suppose the difference between a protectedvariety and a derived one is less than 15%,

Table 1. A comparison of several existing laws regulating intellectual propertyrights (IPR) protection and a proposed new law.

Plant Patent Act (USA) Enacted 1930. Revised 1954.

Purpose: IPR protection for asexually reproduced plants.Scope: Primarily for ornamental species (roses), woody ornamentals, tree fruits. In 1954,

specified cultivated sports, hybrids, mutants, newly found seedlings.Requirements: Distinctiveness, newness.Duration: 20 years from filing date.Exceptions: Tuber propagated plants. Plants found in an uncultivated state. Varieties sexually bred and

reproduced from patented asexually reproduced varieties. Bacteria.

International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)Enacted 1961. Revised 1972, 1978, 1991.

Purpose: Legal protection of plant varieties through defined plant breeders’ rights.Scope: Production and reproduction of invented or discovered plant varieties in all plant genera and

species. Includes sexually and asexually reproduced varieties. Essentially derived varieties are also covered (1991).

Requirements: Novelty, stability, uniformity, distinctiveness.Duration: 20 years from date of certificate issue. 25 years for trees and vinesExceptions: It is optional to permit farmers to save seed for their own use in planting. Research using

the protected variety including the breeding of new varieties which can themselves be protected (excepting essentially derived varieties).

Plant Variety Protection Act (USA) Enacted 1970. Revised 1994.

Purpose: IPR protection for sexually reproduced varieties.Scope: Self pollinated and cross pollinated varieties. Inbreds and cultivars. Potato tubers.

Essentially derived varieties are also covered (1994).Requirements: Newness, distinctiveness, uniformity, stability.Duration: 20 years from date of certificate issue.Exceptions: Farmers may save seed for their own use but not for sale (as of 1994). Use of protected

varieties for research and further breeding (excepting essentially derived varieties).

Utility Patent (USA) (Ex parte Hibberd 1985) Supreme Court affirmation 2001.

Purpose: Extend utility patent protection to plants.Scope: Seeds, plants, plant parts, genes, traits, inbreds, F1 hybrids, cultivars. Methods of developing

inbreds, hybrids, and cultivars. DNA mechanisms and constructs.Requirements: Novelty, non-obviousness, utility.Duration: 20 years from filing date.Exceptions: Basic research, not including development of new varieties, except when licensed by the

patent owner.

Proposed IPR law for plants

Purpose: IPR protection for plant inventions, mechanisms, DNA units. Scope: Plant varieties developed sexually or asexually. DNA mechanisms and units. Modified

micro-organisms. Created mutants.Requirements: Varieties - newness, stability, uniformity, distinctiveness. For all other plant inventions, above

requirements plus non-obviousness.Duration: Sexual varieties: Seven years, renewable at 7 and 14 years, from issuance of certificate.

Asexual varieties, 10-12 years. Woody ornamentals and trees, 20-25 years. Mechanisms, micro-organisms, 10-12 years.

Exceptions: Limited, subsistence farmer’s seed saving. Use of protected varieties for further breeding. Use of protected mutant genes in other species. Discoveries (natural mutants, imported or native plants).

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 7

however it may be estimated. If that differenceincludes a single disease resistance gene confer-ring significant field resistance in the derivedvariety, does that still place the variety in theessentially derived class? The answer is that it ispossible because the definition of an essentiallyderived variety is dependent on the overalldegree of similarity and on the methods of deri-vation of the new variety. Among thesemethods are backcrossing and transformation.These methods are employed to transfer a spe-cific gene, leaving intact the rest of the genoty-pe. By definition, the result of the transfer is anessentially derived variety, but with a clear majordifference enabling it to be identified and to beused where the original cannot be used. Is it anew variety or is it essentially derived?

Theoretically, the stricture against essentiallyderived varieties will only permit the pedigreemethod, with single plant or mass selection, asan acceptable breeding procedure. Selectionalone, backcrossing and transformation will notbe acceptable. And if pedigree breeding, withstrong selection in one direction, restores the“essential characters” of the protected variety,that may not be acceptable either. So the termessentially derived can be interpreted in such away as to severely restrict the plant breeder’sexemption.

At present, the practical applicability of theterm essentially derived is uncertain, becausethe sum of the differences between two varie-ties can be objectively and adequately measu-red in very few crop plant species. Additionally,all varieties within a species will have a substan-tial base of genes common to all of them. Thisbase must be known to establish a startingpoint to measure the difference between anytwo. Various groups in the U.S. and Europe areattempting to define workable criteria for defi-nition and implementation of the essentiallyderived concept. In recent papers, Bernardo andKahler (2001) calculated essential derivationexpectations for inbred families of maize, whileVan Eeuwijk and Law (2004) proposed meansof calculating threshold values, using lettuceand barley as examples. Lesser and Mutschler(2004) have assessed the applicability of plantvariety protection and patent law in the contextof essential derivation estimation and proposeda dual protective system.

The PVPA was modeled after The InternationalConvention for the Protection of New Varietiesof Plants (UPOV). UPOV was first enacted in1961 for countries of the European Union(Cullet, 2003). It was revised in 1972, 1978, and1991. Membership was expanded, first to otherdeveloped countries and later to 16 developingcountries. By 2004, a total of 54 countries sub-scribed to UPOV. The United States joined in1978; revisions of PVPA in 1980 and 1994 werein response to the UPOV revisions of 1978 and1991. Protection is granted for those who deve-lop or discover varieties that are new, distinct,uniform, and stable. Coverage is for 20 yearsfor herbaceous species and 25 years for trees

and vines. Varieties may be either sexually orasexually propagated. Protective ownership wasextended in 1991 to include essentially derivedvarieties. At the same time, the farmer’s exemp-tion was restricted, giving member states theoption to allow farmer’s to save seed.

The PVPA and UPOV have been the mostenlightened of the instruments for IPR of plants.The spirit of the original attempts to protectplant breeders’ rights was that the granting of acertificate of protection should not inhibit theflow of information and products through con-tinued research by the entire plant breedingcommunity. Unfortunately, the collective revi-sions detract from that spirit.

Utility Patents

No new law was written to allow the grantingof a utility patent for a plant (Table 1). Thisdevelopment resulted from a suit by Pioneer Hi-Bred International against JEM Ag Supply, inwhich Pioneer claimed that the defendant hadillegally sold patented corn seed (Stoll, 2001).The defendant claimed that plants could not bepatented and that protection should be claimedonly under PPA or PVPA. Pioneer’s case wasupheld by the Supreme Court in 2001 (From aPatent Office ruling in 1985, Ex parte Hibberd),thus allowing the use of the general patent lawto grant true patents for plants, plant materialsand methodologies. The decision stated thatthere was no conflict involved in obtaining pro-tection under two different laws.

The utility patent is considered the ultimate pro-tective device, allowing neither a farmer’sexemption nor a breeder’s exemption. A patentwould protect the variety itself, all parts of thevariety (pollen, seeds), the progeny of the varie-ty, the genes or genetic sequences involved,and the method by which the variety was deve-loped. Protection is for 20 years. The seed canbe used only for research that does notinclude development of a commercial producti.e, another variety, unless licensed by thepatent holder.

In the classic sense, the patent is a defensivetool to prevent competitors from reaping someof the benefits rightfully belonging to the inven-tor. In the modern context, it is an offensiveweapon, to stifle competition, prevent furtherinnovation by others and maximize income. Themodern company looks upon the patent as abusiness asset, far beyond the classic definitionas an agreement between the state and theinventor granting the latter a temporary mono-poly in return for a social benefit.

The overemphasis on business benefits at theexpense of societal benefits is partially due toweaknesses of the present laws as applied toplants. The PPA and PVPA have a few weaknes-ses but they were written specifically for plants,and thereby implicitly recognize the differencesbetween plants and inanimate objects. This is asaving grace. Much more egregious is the appli-cation to plants of the utility patent law, which

does not recognize these differences and there-fore creates serious problems.

The utility patent law was written and amendedover the years to protect “a process, machine,manufacture, or composition of matter,” butnot living things. Therefore, with the Ex parteHibberd decision, it became necessary to applythe criteria of the utility patent law to livingentities, for which they were not intended. Thishas had some interesting consequences.

Consider the bases for granting a patent. Underthe utility patent law, an invention must benovel, non-obvious, and useful. The use of theterm novel in IPR laws may be confusing. Forplant breeder’s rights protection, it means newin a commercially available sense. Under patentlaw, it means: ‘of a remarkably new and diffe-rent kind’, as defined in the Random HouseDictionary (Stein and Su, 1980).

Non-obvious means that a competent practitio-ner in the particular art would not have beenlikely to have thought of the invention. This cri-terion is badly abused in plant utility patents. Asa retired lettuce breeder, I have been especiallyinterested in patents involving lettuce. Of 12patents found in an internet search, eight arefor new varieties. All are unequivocally obvious.Hundreds of lettuce varieties have been develo-ped and released over the years; these eight arenot remarkable in any way. The concept, bree-ding methods, and characteristics claimed areall ordinary. Most plant varieties are developedby shuffling known genes in various combina-tions; the genes code for obvious, known traits.

The other four patents were for characteristicsor procedures. One was for aphid resistancetransferred by traditional breeding crosses froma related wild species. The resistance was close-ly linked with a deleterious character; they wereseparated through crossing-over, and therecombinants were identified by molecularmethods. The overall process was clever butobvious: breeders often find it necessary tobreak undesirable linkages. The second patentwas for a trait called ‘multileaf characteristic’and refers to lettuce plants subject to fasciation,a flattening of the stem due to a wide meriste-matic apex. The trait was selected to occur veryearly in the life of the plant and resulted in theproduction of many leaves within a relativelynarrow size range. This trait would be advanta-geous in producing cut leaves for packaging.This innovation may be considered non-ob-vious.

The third trait is an elongated iceberg type let-tuce produced by crossing iceberg x romaine.Iceberg lettuce is normally spherical. The headleaves are closely appressed and cup-shapedand are therefore hard to separate. Romainehas elongated leaves that remain separated.The claimed trait specifies iceberg type leaves(characteristic texture and taste) in an elonga-ted head where the leaves also separate easily.This combination of traits is non-obvious. Thefourth patent is for a chemical treatment that

ISHS • 8

inhibits head formation of iceberg or butter-head lettuce, so that the leaves remain uprightand open. Interior leaves are exposed to lightand therefore are green instead of white. Thispresumably increases the content of certainnutrients, for example, beta-carotene, of theseleaves. This may qualify as a non-obvious inven-tion, although the idea of producing all greenhead leaves has been proposed before.

The last criterion for protection is utility. Themeaning of this is straightforward: the inven-tion is marketable and therefore has potentialeconomical use. This criterion is particularlyimportant to the inventor, because the drivingpurpose of the invention is to sell it and makemoney.

The difficulties noted above stem from a failureto properly apply two of the three basic require-ments that qualify an invention as patentableunder the utility patent law. What are the faultsof the law itself?

1. Broad Coverage of the Utility Patent. Theutility patent for plant varieties is considered theultimate protector of breeder’s rights, affordingthe opportunity to control as many aspects ofthe invention as possible, thereby strangling theinnovative capacity of the competition. The uti-lity patent is a means to slow the flow of pro-gress of plant breeding research, except withinthe company holding the patent. While ob-viously benefiting that company, it is a big stepbackwards for the plant breeding communityand by extension, for agriculture itself.Theoretically, if each seed company couldobtain a patent on a new variety with certainfavorable traits, each would do further breedingonly with its own protected variety. So therewould be parallel lines of research without theenrichment to each program that comes fromcrossing those lines with varieties in other pro-grams.

The owner of a patented variety can share it bylicensing its use in breeding to other companies.The cost of the license, in outright payment orin royalty fees, may be quite steep. This wouldcertainly limit the interest in using that variety,since the cost may negate any profit from a newvariety.

2. Invention Different from Discovery. Thewords “invention” and “discovery” are used inthe plant protection laws and literature as ifthey were interchangeable terms. However, theterm “to invent” is defined as “to originate as aproduct of one’s own device.” “To discover” is“to gain sight or knowledge of for the firsttime.” Webster’s Dictionary (Neilson et al.,1942) has a paragraph specifically distinguis-hing between invention and discovery:

“One discovers what existed before, but hadremained unknown. One invents by formingcombinations which are either entirely new or

which attain their end by means unknownbefore. Columbus discovered America.....Edisoninvented the phonograph...”

In patent law, the difference is made obscure bydifferences in the laws themselves, by differen-ces in application of the laws, and by poorlanguage usage. The PPA specifies that disco-vered mutants may be patented. The PVPA doesnot use either term, but refers only to sexuallypropagated crop varieties, which are by defini-tion invented. However, a breeder is defined asone who “directs the final breeding creating avariety or who discovers and develops a varie-ty.” It does not describe how it is possible to dis-cover a variety, but one interpretation, from aperhaps cynical view, is that one discoverssomeone else’s variety that has not been pro-tected and proceeds to become the “breeder”by applying for protection.

The plant patent law allows patenting of disco-veries as long as they are in a cultivated state. Itis not possible to obtain a patent on somethingthat is found, or discovered in an uncultivatedstate, if it is found in the United States. Such aplant is nature’s gift and is considered priorknowledge. However, anything found in ano-ther (usually developing) country is not conside-red prior knowledge, unless information aboutit has been published. In the absence of suchprotection, the plant can be brought into theU.S. and patented. In other words, domestical-ly we require invention by an inventor, butthings found in other countries can be “inven-ted” here by the “discoverer” there. A discove-rer becomes an inventor by crossing a border.The number of crops and products obtainedand monopolized in this manner has been esti-mated to be in the hundreds. Some of the bet-ter known examples include the nuña, or pop-ping bean, from Peru, a yellow bean fromMexico, a type of quinoa from Bolivia, and theneem tree of India. In some cases patents havebeen granted, and later revoked after protestby indigenous peoples. Many others continue inforce.

Discovered plants may be varieties or plant spe-cies growing wild or in semi-cultivation in deve-loping countries. These are plants that appearto have potential commercial value in the disco-verer’s home country. The taking of these plantshas economic, moral, ethical, and politicalimplications.

Economically, discovered plants have use orpotential use, and value, for medicines, pestici-des, foods, nutritional supplements, lotions,and other types of substances. Plants used formedicinal purposes in their native habitats areoften in an unrefined state. When collected andbrought to a developed country, active ingre-dients are extracted and therefore can beemployed in a more concentrated and presu-mably more effective form, which can be soldat higher prices.

The moral aspect is that some plant species are

used for religious purposes, and their use byoutsiders for “practical” purposes, without thesacred aspect, may be considered an affront tothe indigenous users. A famous example is theayahuasca vine (Banisteriopsis caapi), which isused by tribes in the Amazon basin for medici-nal purposes and religious ceremonies (Fecteau,2003). An American scientist visited theAmazon area, discussed the usefulness of thevine with the indigenous peoples, took someplants back to the U.S., did some selection workand applied for and received a PPA patent in1986. Upon protest by an organization repre-senting the tribes, the patent was revoked. Butthe basis for revocation was that informationabout the vine had been previously published.The religious or moral aspect of the issue wasunresolved in the decision, although the tribesconsidered the result a triumph on that basis.

The ethics of plant collection in one country foruse in another have been debated for a longtime. The debate reached a climax recently withthe accusation by various individuals andgroups that the practice amounted to economicimperialism and it was dubbed biopiracy. Theincreasing expropriation of native plants forpatenting in other countries has led to an inevi-table reaction. Some countries have enactedlaws severely restricting, or banning, the remo-val of any native plants from within the coun-try’s borders.

Plant collecting by one country in another’s ter-ritory originated at least as early as 1500 BCE,when Queen Hatshepsut of Egypt sent ships toa place called Punt to collect incense trees forthe royal palace gardens (Fig. 1). Plant collectingbecame an important national activity in theU.S. and European countries in the 18th centu-ry. Collected materials found their way intocommerce, into museums and botanical gar-dens and onto private estates. As governmentsbecame more aware of the usefulness of plantcollecting, publicly funded exploration trips ascooperative ventures of the host and guestcountries became more frequent. The materialscollected went into public collections, availableto anyone at essentially no cost.

In recent years, private plant breeding programshave increased in size and number. Financialinvestment also increased, as well as interest inintellectual property protection. At the sametime, as interest in pharmaceutically useful plantcompounds grew, so also did investment in andthe protection of discoveries made in develo-ping countries. The difference is that these lat-

Figure 1. Loading incense trees for ship-ment to Queen Hatshepsut’s court inAncient Egypt, circa 1500 BCE.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 9

ter actions may be considered as economicimperialism. Imperialistic ambitions may beimplemented in various ways. The most obviousand usually the most violent way is conquestthrough invasion. Numerous examples easilycome to mind: the Roman conquest of Europe,the Mongol sweep across Asia and EasternEurope, Hitler’s invasion of neighboringEuropean countries. Another means is byoverwhelming infiltration of under-populatedlands, such as the American penetration of theWest to California. A third is economic invasionby commercial interests, supported by militaryforces. This occurred in India, South Africa, andthe East Indies, and was implemented primarilyby the East India companies of Britain, Holland,and France. Finally, there is the discovery of‘unknown’ lands. Imperialism by discovery is aninteresting phenomenon. Picture a Spanish shiparriving at a shore of “The New World’” and asea captain taking possession of “this unknownland” by planting the flag of the King of Spain.The approach of a tall ship must have attractedmembers of the indigenous population to thelanding spot, and they were probably standingnearby during the flag ceremony. But they obvi-ously didn’t count as people to the arrivingship’s crew, who were discovering a land thathad already been discovered.

The rights of native populations are still at risktoday. Within the borders of the U.S., undocu-mented plants and plant materials are in thepublic domain and cannot be patented by a dis-coverer. In developing countries especially, onlypatented items or materials published in thatcountry are protected from being patented inthis country. Prior knowledge and use in an indi-genous culture are not recognized. It is this dis-tinction that is deplored by proponents of theBiodiversity Convention. More formally knownas The United Nations Framework Conventionon Biological Diversity, it was completed in 1992in Rio de Janeiro, with the goal to conserve theworld’s biological resources and promote sustai-nable development.

3. Plants Different from Objects. Another dis-tinction that must be made is that between livingplants and inanimate manufactured objects(Table 2). Some of those differences mean thatthe Ex parte Hibberd application of the U.S.Patent Law is not appropriate for providing intel-lectual rights protection for plants. Following areseveral differences that are important:

Materials and Structures. All plants are made ofthe same basic materials. These are variouscombinations of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygenthat play parts in structure and function, andwhich are supplemented with other elementssuch as nitrogen, calcium, iron, phosphorus,potassium and many minor elements. In addi-tion, the basic structure of a plant cannot bealtered. All flowering plants, for example, haveroots, stems, leaves, flowering parts and certaininternal systems that enable growth, reproduc-tion, gas exchange, nutrient absorption, sub-stance transport and other functions. The struc-ture and function remain the same over gene-rations. Therefore, a new variety is only slightlydifferent from all other varieties of the samespecies, the consequence of altering or exchan-ging a few genes among the many that controlthe growth, development and health of theplant. Plant breeders constantly shuffle thesegenes, swelling a stream of new varieties, inwhich the criterion of non-obviousness is rarelymet.

Objects, in contrast, are made of specific com-binations of different constituents: metals, plas-tics, ceramic materials, fabrics, rubber, gases,etc. Most chemical elements can be used in dif-ferent combinations to construct inanimateobjects. The basic structure of an object caneasily be altered, often substantially. Considerthe changes that have been made in sound sto-rage and reproduction: cylinder to wax disk tovinyl disk to tape to compact disk; from steelneedle to ceramic needle to light beam. Newbasic systems are constantly being created outof ideas and materials. Objects that did notexist suddenly come into existence. The tele-phone, the television set, the mouse trap, plas-tic, and steel were all basic new creations. Suchcreations are far more likely than plants to benon-obvious.

Description. It is impossible to describe a plantcompletely. One can take several pictures of anintact plant from various angles, and the imagewill be a faithful reproduction of what it lookslike from the outside at the time the pictureswere taken. It is possible to section a plant andget a gross image of its interior, but not of itsminute structure. This is destructive observationand the plant cannot be put back together. Andone cannot see or describe each of the genesand name its function.

An object can be completely described, insideand out. Each piece, no matter how small, canbe described, measured exactly, and its functionidentified. The object can almost always betaken apart for observation and be put backtogether exactly as it was before.

Change over Time. The description of a plant,even its overall gross image, changes with thepassage of time. From the beginning of its exis-tence as a plant to its end, it is never the same.A plant grows, and its size, dimensions, func-tion, texture, color, and the relative size of eachof its parts all change constantly and substan-tially.

An object cannot grow. The only way an objectcan change over time is by deterioration ordeformation induced by outside forces: heat,abrasion, blows, twisting, etc. Otherwise, it willremain exactly the same, sometimes for extre-mely long periods of time, as it was at its crea-tion. Unlike a plant, a patented object neverchanges.

Reproduction. Plants can rebuild themselves,beginning with a male and female cell,nutrients, and an appropriate environment.This can be done over and over again, genera-tion after generation. Changes are broughtabout by mutation and recombination. Thesechanges are relentless and divergent, and thismeans that when reproduced, again and again,a protected entity becomes phenotypically dif-ferent and eventually loses its original identity.Patenting a plant is like patenting the wind. Thechanges do not require the human hand.Moreover, the human hand cannot fabricate aplant by putting together the plant’s constitu-ents. Asexually reproduced varieties, are uniqueamong plants in that they usually remain essen-tially true to type and can be copied exactly.

Objects cannot reproduce themselves and theydo not mutate. They can, however, be fabrica-ted, with the help of the human hand, fromvarious parts. One object can even fabricateanother, as long as the human hand providesthe parts.

Much of the above discussion leads to the ine-vitable conclusion that present IPR law is inade-quate for plants and should be replaced.Intellectual property rights protection for plantsmust be framed in different terms than for ina-nimate objects.

The application of the utility patent law,through Ex parte Hibberd, is an especiallyunhappy one, forcing the squarest of pegs intothe roundest of holes. The application of thislaw is wrong on several levels. The novelty andnon-obvious criteria are often ignored. It allowselevation of the profit motive far above thegood-of-society requirement. And it ignores orrationalizes the real and irreconcilable differen-ces between plants and inanimate objects.

Plants Objects

All plants made of same materials Made of many different materialsAll have same basic structure Great variety of structuresCannot be fully described Can be completely describedGrowth and development over time Cannot grow or change shapeCan reproduce themselves Cannot reproduceChange each generation Do not changeCannot be manufactured Can be repeatedly fabricated

Table 2. A comparison of characteristics for higher plants and inanimate objects.

ISHS • 10

A NEW LAW PROPOSED

An intellectual property protection law forplants should address several concerns: (1) Itmust recognize the difference between livingand non-living things, (2) It must recognize thedifference between invention and discovery, (3)It must encourage research and the free flow ofinformation and (4) It must give approximatelyequal weight to the benefit for the inventor andthe benefit for society. In the U.S., it shouldsupersede the Plant Patent Act, the Plant VarietyProtection Act, and application of the UtilityPatent Law to plants. Internationally, UPOVshould be modified in the same manner.

Plant Varieties

Protection should be given to plant varietiesdeveloped by traditional plant breeding proce-dures, or by transformation or other parasexualmeans; and varieties reproduced by asexualmeans. The duration of protection for each typeof variety may have to be different to accountfor biological differences.

The criteria for protection should includenewness, uniformity, stability, and distinctive-ness. The claim of non-obviousness in the pro-tection of varieties can rarely be anything butludicrous, considering the constant stream ofvarieties that are essentially recycled old varie-ties. Utility is assumed as both a criterion andgoal.

Protection should be for the variety only. Thereshould be no constraint against other breedersusing that variety in further research, includingfurther breeding. Another breeder should befree to use the protected variety in a cross, fol-lowed by further development through pedi-gree breeding. Another breeder should also befree to transfer genes controlling economictraits into the protected variety by the backcrossmethod or by genetic transformation procedu-res. The question of “essentially derived” shouldbe irrelevant when a significant improvement ismade. However, a variety that differs from theprotected variety only by an apparently trivialcharacteristic, such as seed color, ought to beconsidered essentially derived and unacceptablefor protection as a new variety. However, appa-rently trivial traits have often been associated,physiologically or through linkage, with econo-mic traits. This connection should be demon-strated.

A variety from a plant in a population of a pro-tected variety, selected for an apparent pheno-typic difference that does not breed true, isessentially derived. But another breeder shouldbe free to select an obvious demonstrable off-type from a protected variety, when there is ameasurable difference in performance or inmarket appeal, as with an ornamental species.A significant genetic difference justifies identify-ing a variety as new. However, as a discoveredvariant, it should not be eligible for protection.

The present laws protect a variety for 20 years.

This is too long. A sexually derived varietychanges each time it is reproduced. Also, veryfew varieties remain viable, meaning marketa-ble in significant amounts, for that length oftime. A more realistic term is seven years, rene-wable at that time and again at 14 years. Thecompany can assess the value of the variety atthose times and decide whether to requestrenewal or to allow it into the public domain. Ifrenewed twice, the total length of protectiontime will be similar to the present 20 years. Alonger first term for cloned varieties, perhaps10-12 years, and up to 25 years for trees, wouldbe acceptable.

The amended version of PVPA permits saving ofseed only for on-farm use, not for sale. In deve-loped countries, the cost of the seed as a pro-portion of the total cost of growing a crop ran-ges from moderate to trivial. This is not true forsubsistence farmers in under-developed coun-tries. Therefore, seed saving of protected varie-ties should be permitted only for small subsis-tence farmers in developing countries and notfor farms on a true business basis.

Discovery as a Basis for Protection

A patent is at the same time a means of protec-tion and a reward for an intellectual innovationthat no one has ever created before. Discoveryis the exposure of a phenomenon previouslyunknown. Much of what we call discovery is theacquisition of knowledge by someone who didnot have that knowledge, but which wasknown to others. The ‘New World’ wasunknown to Columbus, but very well known tothe people living there. A child in school makes‘discoveries’ every day of knowledge that mayhave been known for centuries. A plant used byan indigenous people for medicinal or spiritualpurposes, or for making clothing or shelter, can-not be “discovered” by a newcomer. It hasalready been discovered. Furthermore, a disco-very is not an invention; it is not the creation ofsomething that did not previously exist. So, aplant existing in the wild, which turns out tohave useful properties, may be considered a dis-covery of the person who found it, but it is notthat person’s invention. It is Mother Nature’sinvention. We recognize this in present patentlaw as long as the plant is discovered withinU.S. borders, even in the absence of publishedknowledge. Outside our borders we do notrecognize this simple fact. This is inconsistent. Adiscovered plant should not be eligible for pro-tection.

Is there an inventive possibility with discoveredplants? Yes. The development of a process topurify a useful plant substance or to convert theraw plant into a useful article is an inventionand should be eligible for protection.

Genetic Material

There are several types of genetic material forwhich IPR protection is an issue. Again, one has

to make the distinction between invention anddiscovery. A newly found naturally occurringmutant is not an invention. It has been identi-fied, i.e. discovered, but it is in the publicdomain and should not be protected. If the pro-cedure used to discover the gene is new, thenthat procedure may be eligible for protection.Created mutants and modified genetic materi-als, such as promoters and anti-sense con-structs, have been modified by human hands,and should therefore be considered for protec-tion. Another type of genetic material is themodified organism, as exemplified by thePseudomonas species transformed byChakrabarty with the capacity to degrade spil-led oil. A transgenic micro-organism is equiva-lent to a new crop variety and would appear tobe eligible for protection. Non-obviousnessshould be an additional criterion for this type ofinvention. The single useful function of suchmaterials is unlikely to be altered during repro-duction, and the first term of protection couldbe longer than seven years.

The proposals made here for a new intellectualproperty rights law for plants are largely basedupon the concepts of the original Plant VarietyProtection Act and of UPOV. They rely upon twobroad arguments. One defines an invention ascompared to a discovery. The other compares abiological entity to an inanimate object.

Finally, the success of any law regulating thegranting of rights or licenses is heavily depen-dent upon an adequate examination system.Above all, the examiners must be knowledge-able. IPR protection for plants requires knowled-ge of genetics, breeding, and related sciences.

Intellectual property rights protection is areward. A reward is given for performing agood deed. So, in return for providing societywith a new and useful entity, a grateful govern-ment grants the inventor of the entity a shortperiod of time to make and sell it without fearof having it stolen and sold by someone else.This is the basic defensive nature of an intellec-tual property right and is a laudable accom-plishment in a just society. Unfortunately, theplant protection laws have not been appliedwell. In particular, the utility patent law forplants has been exploited to protect that whichhas not been invented. The utility patent pro-tects the variety, which has been invented, andall derivatives from that variety, which have notyet been invented. This exploits a unique cha-racteristic of plants: that the invented plant canbe used to invent other plants, by further bree-ding. Intellectual property is the immediate pro-duct of the intellect; the proposed, or hopedfor, secondary products, are not. Besides thoseproducts may not even be worth protecting. Anew law, as described, is needed to narrow theambition of inventors, allowing them to protectonly the products of their intellects.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 11

REFERENCES

Bernardo, R. and Kahler, A.L. 2001. North American study on essential derivation in maize: inbreds develo-ped without and with selection from F2 populations. Theor. Appl. Genet. 102:986-992.

Burger, C.J. 1980. Diamond, Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks v. Chakrabarty. 79-136, 447 U.S. 303.Cullet, P. 2003. The International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). Briefing Paper

2003-3. International Environmental Law Research Centre, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.ielrc.org/Content/BP03031P.pdf

Fecteau, L.M. 2003. The Ayahuasca patent revocation: Raising questions about current U.S. patent policy.http://www.infoeagle.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/lwsch/journals/bctwj/21_1/03_TXT.htm.

Lesser, W. and Mutschler, M.A. 2004. Balancing investment incentives and social benefits when protectingplant varieties: implementing initial variety systems. Crop Sci. 44:1113-1120.

Neilson, W.A., Knott, T.A. and Carhart, P.W. (eds.). 1942. Webster’s New International Dictionary. 2nd ed.,G. and C. Merriam and Co., Springfield, Mass., USA.

Regelbrugge, C.J. 2002. Statement on H.R.5119, the Plant Breeders’ Equity Act of 2002 to JudiciarySubcommittee on Courts, Internet, Intellectual Property, U.S. House of Representatives.http://www.house.gov/judiciary/regelbrugge091902.htm.

Scalia, J. 1995. Majority opinion in the case of Asgrow v. Winterboer. 92-2038, 513 U. S.179. http://case-law.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=us513/179.html

Stein, J. and Su, P.Y. (eds.). 1980. The Random House Dictionary, Concise Edition. Random House, NewYork.

Stoll, R.L. 2001. J.E.M. Ag Supply v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. - A commentary. UPOV Gazette 92.Van Eeuwijk, F.A. and Law, J.R. 2004. Statistical aspects of essential derivation, with illustrations based on

lettuce and barley. Euphytica 137:129-137.

Edward J. Ryder

Edward J. Ryder, a long time lettuce breeder andgeneticist with the Agricultural Research Service,U.S. Department of Agriculture in Salinas,California, retired in 2003 after 46 years of ser-vice. He has released 17 crisphead lettuce culti-vars and 45 advanced breeding lines and is theauthor of the monograph, Lettuce, Endive andChicory. Email: ejryder@sbcglobal.net

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Macadamia: Domestication andCommercialisation

Russ Stephenson

HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE FOCUS

The macadamia is considered one of theworld’s finest gourmet nuts because of its uni-que, delicate flavour, its fine crunchy texture,and rich creamy colour. Nuts from wild macada-mia trees provided a source of food for the abo-riginals in the Australian subcontinent, butAustralian farmers were slow to appreciate thecommercial potential of this fine nut.

Origin

The macadamia nut is the only commercialfood crop indigenous to Australia, originatingalong the fringes of rainforests in coastalsoutheast Queensland and northeast NewSouth Wales (25 to 32°S latitude). The tree hasseveral features suggesting adaptation to harshenvironments, including sclerophyllous leavesand dense clusters of fine, proteoid roots thatdevelop to enhance nutrient uptake from poorsoils, particularly those low in phosphorus.

Of the four southern species of macadamia,only two are edible, the smooth-shelled

Macadamia integrifolia and the rough-shelledM. tetraphylla. Only the former has been deve-loped commercially. The latter, grown on amoderate scale in California and New Zealand,produces a raw kernel of excellent eating qua-lity but contains a higher percentage of sugarsthat may caramelise on roasting, thus detrac-ting from its appearance and reducing its effec-tive shelf life. The wild M. ternifolia produces a

small, unpalatable, bitter kernel. M. janseniiwas first discovered in 1982 and there are lessthan 100 known individuals surviving in thewild. It has small inedible fruit.

Botany

The evergreen macadamia tree is medium tolarge, attaining a height of up to 20 m and aspread of up to 15 m. In M. integrifolia, the lea-ves are arranged in whorls of three and oftenhave spiny, dentate margins, and short (5-15mm) petioles. Multiple branches (or inflorescen-ces) may be produced from each node. Thependulous racemes, up to 15 cm long andbearing approximately 200 creamy, white flo-wers, are borne on hardened wood. Less than5% of flowers set fruit and the nuts take 6months to mature, after which they abscisenaturally.

The fruit is a globose follicle in which only oneof two ovules develops. As the husk dries, itsplits along a single suture to release the nut,

Small nuts of Macadamia ternifolia compared with the larger commercial nutsof M. integrifolia.

ISHS • 12

consisting of a hard, thick, stony, light-tan shell(the seed coat) that encloses the kernel.

The leaves of M. tetraphylla are sessile and arearranged in whorls of four. The margins aremore serrated, with up to 40 spines on eachside and, whereas new leaf growth of M. inte-grifolia is pale green in color, young M. tetra-phylla leaves are an attractive pink to red color.Racemes are longer (up to 30 cm) and bear upto 500 reddish-pink flowers.

History

A German explorer, Ludwig Leichhardt was thefirst person to collect macadamia. Some timelater, in 1857, Ferdinand von Mueller, theDirector of the Royal Botanical Gardens inMelbourne, and Walter Hill, the superintendentof the Brisbane Botanical Gardens, discovered amacadamia tree on the banks of the Pine River,30 km north of Brisbane. Von Mueller describedthe specimen and named it after his goodfriend, Dr. John Macadam.

One of the earliest macadamia orchards inAustralia was established at Rous Mill, nearLismore in the early 1880s and it is still produ-cing nuts today. Other small blocks were plan-ted throughout New South Wales andSoutheast Queensland but the total area priorto 1960 was less than 100 ha with annual pro-duction of less than 50 tonnes (t) of nut-in-shell. Although the macadamia is native toAustralia, large-scale commercial developmentfirst occurred in Hawaii after trees were impor-ted by William Purvis, also in the early 1880s. Itwas not, however, until the early 1920s that thefirst developmental macadamia orchards wereestablished in Hawaii. A major breakthrough tocommercialisation was the development of effi-cient cracking machines. The first truly com-mercial orchards were established by Castle andCooke at Keauhou on the island of Hawaii in1948.

Research in Hawaii

The development of the macadamia industrywas supported by research at the HawaiiAgricultural Experiment Station at theUniversity of Hawaii. An early achievement wasthe discovery of the importance of starch accu-mulation above girdled branches for successfulgrafting, resulting in true-to-type trees that

commenced bearing earlier, and producedmuch higher yields than seedling trees. J.H.Beaumont and R.H. Moltzau initiated a cultivarselection program in 1936 and William Storeyreleased the first 5 cultivars from 20,000bearing trees in 1948, two of which(‘Keauhou’, HAES 246 and ‘Kakea’, HAES 508)were the basis for early commercial orchards inHawaii, and later in Australia and other parts ofthe world. Cultivar trials using grafted treeswere established on all the major islands ofHawaii. Other important cultivars released were‘Ilaika’ (HAES 333) , ‘Kau’ (HAES 344), ‘Keaau’(HAES 660), ‘Mauka’ (HAES 741) and ‘Makai’(HAES 800). In 1960, Storey visited Australiaand collected additional new germplasm forevaluation in Hawaii. Richard Hamilton enthusi-astically promoted the development of themacadamia industry and continued the varietyselection work, as did his student, Phil Ito.

The importance of maintaining high qualitystandards in the developing Hawaiian industrywas acknowledged by J.C. Ripperton, R.H.Maltzau and D.W. Edwards who developedeffective quality assessment procedures for fac-tories. Their simple and convenient flotationtest for maturity was widely adopted. Kernelsthat float on tap water have at least 72% oiland are considered mature. They also develo-ped the concept of kernel recovery (the percen-tage of kernel within the nut), an importantquality feature, particularly in those early dayswhen many orchards were based on variableseedling trees that produced nuts with thickshells. More recently, Cathy Cavaletto’s post-harvest research at the University of Hawaii hasunderpinned the high quality of macadamias inthe marketplace.

From the early 1950s to the 1970s, researchwas carried out by B.J. Cooil, G.T. Shigueura,R.M. Warner, R.L. Fox and coworkers to overco-me nutritional constraints to productivity inHawaiian macadamia orchards and to developleaf analysis standards for optimum productionand quality. Yields were enhanced by applyingphosphorus fertilizer to lava and phosphorus-fixing soils. Excess phosphorus (leaf P greaterthan 0.1%), however, resulted in the formationof insoluble iron phosphates in the soil and,consequently, leaf chlorosis. This work providedthe basis for the development of macadamiaorchards not only in Hawaii, but also inAustralia and other parts of the world.

Macadamias in Australia

It was not until the early 1960s, when theHawaiian macadamia industry was already wellestablished, that efforts were made to developthe indigenous macadamia as a commercialcrop in Australia. Colonial Sugar Refiners (CSR)imported superior selections and technicalexpertise from Hawaii. Other large commercialoperations were soon established, with incometax incentives for investment in the industry.Although CSR imported the best varieties from

Flowers of Macadamia integrifolia (left) and M. tetraphylla (right).

An Australian macadamia orchard innorthern New South Wales bounded bytall windbreak trees.

Bunches ofmacadamia nuts.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 13

Hawaii, it became obvious their performancewas often disappointing and they were notnecessarily well adapted to Australian condi-tions. It was widely acknowledged that localresearch was needed to select varieties betteradapted to Australian conditions, and to simi-larly modify the Hawaiian cultural technology.

As in Hawaii, the Australian macadamia indus-try was fortunate in having a large number ofenthusiasts and innovators who contributed tothe improvement of the industry. The most pro-minent of these was Norm Greber, widely regar-ded as the founding father of the Australianmacadamia industry. He was the first Australianto successfully graft macadamia and was enga-ged by CSR to help develop their macadamianursery. Norm also propagated many trees in hisback yard and selected superior cultivars, inclu-ding ‘Own Choice’, ‘Own Venture’, ‘Renoun’,‘Ebony’ and ‘Greber Hybrid’. He received lifemembership by both the Australian and theCalifornian Macadamia Societies for his contri-bution to the development of the macadamiaindustry and became patron of the AustralianMacadamia Society.

Stan Henry, the CSR nursery manager, subse-quently developed a novel punch budding tech-nique using a modified, spent 0.303 brass bul-

let shell to remove an oval patch of bark fromthe rootstock that was replaced with a patchcontaining a single bud from the commercialscion. This rapid, effective technique gave CSRa considerable advantage over nurseriesemploying conventional grafting techniques.The success of punch budding was largely dueto careful selection of budwood with bark thatlifted readily. The CSR nursery supplied all thetrees for the first large-scale commercialorchards at Baffle Creek, north of Bundaberg,Maleny, Peachester, Mt Bauple andRockhampton, totalling over 1,000 ha.

In the 1970s, the first commercial processingplant was established by CSR. Soon after, otherfactories were established by Suncoast GoldMacadamias and by the Macadamia ProcessingCo and Macadamia Plantations of Australia.Today, there are about 10 factories operating inAustralia.

The Australian Macadamia Society

The macadamia industry in Australia is particu-larly fortunate in having forged a strong andeffective organisation, the AustralianMacadamia Society Limited (AMS). It was esta-blished in 1974 by a small group of enthusiastseager to share the benefits of their experienceand their innovative ideas. Ever since, it has res-ponded to needs and opportunities across thewhole industry. It fosters the dissemination ofinformation through its bimonthly NewsBulletin, website, MacGroup meetings, fielddays and annual conferences. These very effec-tive and powerful extension functions comple-ment services provided by State Departments ofAgriculture. Perhaps the most significant initia-tive of AMS was the active encouragement ofresearch into production, processing and pro-motion of the crop. Initially, research was fun-ded from a voluntary levy. In 1993, a productionlevy, attracting a subsidy from theCommonwealth Government, was introduced.This intensified research activity and flow-on

benefits to the industry. The industry levy is cur-rently 25.21 cents/kg total kernel of which 17.4c/kg is for product promotion and marketing,amounting to an annual budget of about A$2million. A further A$2 million is invested inresearch each year, half of which comes fromthe Commonwealth Government as a matchingdollar for dollar subsidy. Part of the levy is alsoused for regular chemical residue testing tomaintain Australia’s reputation for producinghigh quality, quality-assured kernel.

Research in Australia

One of the great challenges was the selection ofgenetic material better adapted to Australianenvironments. In Hawaii, over 100,000 treeswere screened to select the commercial cultivarsthat are widely used today, whereas inAustralia, fewer than 20,000 seedlings havebeen screened. Two of Henry Bell’s HiddenValley cultivars (A4 and A16) are registeredunder Plant Breeders Rights legislation and arewidely grown commercially, together with sub-sequent releases. The AMS currently funds amajor plant breeding program to develop supe-rior cultivars for Australia. To assist in the searchfor, and development of, better adapted culti-vars, the AMS has also provided funds to con-serve a wide range of germplasm from nativerainforests before they are lost forever by landclearing.

Early macadamia yields in Australia were gene-rally quite low compared with those reportedfrom Hawaii, although some trees approachedthe Hawaiian yield standard of 45 kg nut-in-shell. Yields of 30 kg are more common andproductivity continues to improve steadily withbetter technology. It seems that one of the fac-tors contributing to lower yields in Australia,and many other countries, is harsher environ-ments with larger diurnal and seasonal varia-tions in temperature than the mild, equable cli-mate of Hawaii.

Understanding the influence of environment on

Premium macadamia kernels.

Mechanical pruning of a high density macadamia orchard.A macadamia fingerwheel harvester significantly reduces harvesting costs.

ISHS • 14

macadamia growth and production was anessential objective of early macadamia research(and management). The mature macadamia iscapable of withstanding mild frosts to as low as-6°C for short periods, but extended periods orlower temperatures may severely damage or killmature trees. Even where trees survive, frostsmay burn off inflorescences and thus seriouslyreduce cropping. Optimum temperature for treegrowth and photosynthesis is about 26°C.Temperature is a major factor influencing vege-tative flushing, which, in turn, influences floralinitiation, nut growth, yield and quality.

Most genera of Proteaceae grow only in clima-tes where there is a long dry season. Drought,however, limits yield and results in small nutswith undeveloped kernels. Research at theMaroochy Research Station in a through-drai-ning lysimeter showed that even mild stressduring nut development, particularly the oilaccumulation stage, adversely affected bothyield and quality.

Fortunately, the macadamia has few seriousdisease problems and when these occur theytend to be localised. An example is a husk spotfungus (Pseudocercospora), which induces nutsto drop early in the harvest season before theyare fully mature.

In Australia, its place of origin, the macadamiais attacked by more than 150 pest species, al-though parasites and predators usually provideconsiderable control. Insects that commonlyreduce yields include macadamia flower cater-pillar (Homoeosoma vagella), fruit spotting bug(Amblypelta nitida), banana spotting bug(Amblypelta lutescens), macadamia nutborer(Crytophlebia ombrodelta) and macadamia fel-ted coccid (Eriococcus ironsidei). Any of thesehas the capacity, during severe infestations, todestroy the crop. An integrated pest manage-ment system for insect pest control has beenadopted. Pest population levels are monitoredin the orchard by pest scouts and chemicalsprays are only applied when threshold pestpopulation levels are reached. This approachmaximizes the contribution of natural enemiesin suppressing pest populations below econo-mic threshold levels. IPM has contributed to theprofitability of macadamia growing.

Early nutrition work in Australia refined theHawaiian standards to suit Australian condi-tions. It was found that small, frequent applica-tions of nitrogen, for example, effectively res-tricted tree growth but actually increased yieldand quality of nuts. Many of the soils on whichmacadamias are grown in Australia are low inboron and foliar boron sprays improve bothyield and quality (kernel recovery). As in Hawaii,phosphorus deficiency limited yields on phos-phorus-fixing ferrosol soils.

Because of the long break-even period (10-12years) for a net return on money invested inmacadamias, the Australian industry movedtowards high-density plantings to increase earlycash flow. Mechanical pruning is used to main-

tain hedgerows and allow normal orchard ope-rations such as spraying and harvesting.

The AMS responded to indifferent quality byadopting stringent quality standards and finan-cial incentives to encourage growers to sortpoor quality nuts from their consignments. Thissignificant step has enhanced Australia’s reputa-tion on world markets as a supplier of consis-tently high quality kernel. The industry places alot of importance on maintaining this reputa-tion. It has developed a ‘Code of SoundOrchard Practices’ to help achieve this.

Commercialisation

World consumption of macadamias accountsfor only about 2-3% of all tree nuts. For exam-ple, only 25,000 t of macadamia kernels is con-sumed compared with 650,000 t of almonds,

370,000 t of walnuts, 330,000 t of hazelnuts,250,000 t of cashews, 200,000 t of pistachiosand 110,000 t of pecans. There is, therefore,considerable scope for expanding world mar-kets. The USA is still the largest market formacadamias, which are particularly popular incookies (Fig. 1). Bakery products account forabout 40% of world production. Another 35%is used as snacks, 22% is coated in chocolate,mainly for the Japanese market, and about 3%is used in ice cream. The Australian industry isactively investing in promotion of macadamiasto diversify its markets, particularly into Japan,Europe and Asia.

Although Australia’s production of macadamiaswas only about 25% of that of Hawaii’s in1987, Table 1 shows that it is now greater, par-

Figure 1. World macadamia consumption (t) (2003). Source: Australian Macadamia Society(www.macadamias.org), US Embassy, Canberra, Hargreaves (2004).

Health Benefits

Macadamias, like other nut crops, have a high oil content (>72%) and for a long time were con-sidered by nutritionists to be less desirable in healthy diets. Research, dietary trials and popula-tion studies, however, demonstrate that macadamias contain a range of nutritious and healthpromoting constituents. These include monounsaturated fats, proteins, dietary fibre, minerals,vitamins, and phytochemicals.

The composition of both raw, dried and roasted macadamias typically contain:� Natural oils: 75%

� Moisture: 1.5%

� Protein: 9.4%

� Dietary fibre: 7.7%

� Carbohydrates: 4.7%

� Mineral matter: 1.6% including Potassium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Calcium, Selenium,Zinc, Copper and Iron

� Vitamins: Vit. B1, B2, B5, B6, Vit. E, plus niacin and folate

� Phytochemicals: Antioxidants including polyphenols, amino acids, selenium and flavanolsplus plant sterols

� Energy value: 3000 kilojoules per 100 g (727 calories)

Macadamias contain no cholesterol or trans-fatty acids. They do contain a higher percentage ofmonounsaturated oils than any other natural product. Macadamia oil is similar to olive oil incomposition and use. Macadamias are low in damaging saturated fats and in polyunsaturatedfats that oxidize readily. Diets containing moderate fat levels promote satiety and have beenshown to be sustainable and enjoyable in the long term. The desirable Mediterranean HealthPyramid diet has 40% of the food energy from fat.

Separate dietary trials with macadamias in Australia and Hawaii have demonstrated a signifi-cant reduction in total cholesterol, total triglycerides and the undesirable low-density choleste-rol, but little or no effect on the desirable high-density cholesterol. They, like many tree nuts,have been shown to lower blood pressure in hypertensive people and reduce the risk of heartdisease. Current research includes a full biochemical analysis and nutritional profiling of maca-damias and, in the USA, a phytochemical analysis is close to completion.

ticularly the production of kernel. Australia hasa considerable advantage due to a higher kernelrecovery. Nearly half the world’s macadamiaexports come from Australia. Massive expansionof plantings continues, particularly in Australiaand South Africa. There are now over 5 milliontrees planted on 15,000 ha in Australia, withproduction valued at around A$150 M, at thefarm gate.

The Future

Macadamia plantations require a large capitalinvestment and take several years to commencebearing. There is also the risk of declining priceswith increasing world production, although thishas not occurred yet. The industry’s investmentin promotion and marketing will secure a soundfuture, despite competition from countries likeBrazil with low production costs. The Australianindustry has developed advantages in culturaltechnology through its investment in research.This investment will continue to help overcomeremaining constraints to productivity and profi-tability. The future success of the Australianmacadamia industry is assured by the enthu-siasm, cohesion and innovative spirit of all

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 15

FURTHER READING

Gallagher, E.C., O’Hare, P.J., Stephenson, R.A.,Waite, G. and Vock, N. 2003. Macadamia pro-blem solver and bug identifier. Field Guide,Queensland Department of Primary Industries,Brisbane.

Hargreaves, G. 2004. Growth of the macadamiaindustry: From bush tucker to the king of nuts.Australian Nutgrower 18:26-29.

Ironside, D.A. 1981. Insect pests of macadamiain Queensland, Queensland Department ofPrimary Industries, Brisbane.

Nagao, M.A. and Hirae, H.H. 1992. Macadamia:Cultivation and Physiology. Critical Reviews inPlant Sciences 10:441-470.

O’Hare, P.J., Quinlan, K., Stephenson, R.A., Vock,N. et al. 2004. Macadamia grower’s handbook.Growing Guide, Queensland Department ofPrimary Industries and Fisheries, Brisbane,214p.

Power, J. 1982. Macadamia power. Tudor Press,Brisbane. p.6-44.

Shigeura, G.T. and Ooka, H. 1984. Macadamianuts in Hawaii: History and production. Univ.Hawaii, College of Tropical Agr. & HumanResources, Res. Ext. Ser. 039.

Stephenson, R.A. 1990. The macadamia : Fromnovelty crop to new industry. Agri. Sci. NS3:38-43.

Russ Stephenson

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

CONTACT

Dr. Russ Stephenson, Maroochy Research Station,Mayers Road, PO Box 5083, Sunshine Coast MailCentre, Nambour Queensland 4560, Australia,email: russ.stephenson@dpi.qld.gov.au

Table 1. World macadamia production and exports. Sources: Australian MacadamiaSociety (www.macadamias.org); Australian Bureau of Statistics; US Embassy,Canberra, Hawaii Agricultural Statistics Service, July 12 2004; World round-upreports (Proceedings of the Second International Macadamia Symposium, TweedHeads, Australia, 2003).

Country or Area Trees 2003 production (t) Kernel Kernel region (ha) (000) Nut-in-shell Kernel recovery (%) exports1(t)

Australia 15,000 5,000 30,000 9,100 32 7,460 2

Central America 8,700 - 17,000 3,100 18 3,100USA (Hawaii) 7,284 1,350 27,240 4,500 25 200South Africa 7,000 3,073 12,500 3,400 28 2,975Kenya 6,500 1,000 1 8,800 1,000 16 1,000Brazil 6,000 - 3,000 600 17 ca 540Malawi 5,112 1,022 4,000 1,000 25 1,000Zimbabwe - - 900 120 - 120

1 Estimate2 6,400 t of Australia’s production was exported as nut-in-shell in 2002-2003.

www.actahort.org33,000 articles on-line

Dr. Russ Stephenson is a Senior PrincipalHorticulturist with the Queensland Departmentof Primary Industries and Fisheries at theMaroochy Research Station where he has carriedout research on macadamia, horticultural agro-nomy and physiology over the past 24 years. Russis Secretary of the Australian Society ofHorticultural Science and a member of the ISHSCouncil.

those who are involved in this young, dynamicindustry.

ISHS • 16

European Apple Breeding ProgramsTurn to Biotechnology

S. Sansavini, E. Belfanti, F. Costa and F. Donati

HORTICULTURAL SCIENCE NEWS

Apple breeding programs, both public andprivate, have been expanding in Europe in thelast few decades. Almost all Western andEastern Europe countries have activated or ini-tiated at least one or two programs and Italynow has seven current programs. At present,there are more than 40 apple breeding pro-grams in the 25 countries of Europe. Efforts andresources have been designed to free Europefrom dependence on foreign genetic material,especially North American cultivars, that havepersisted over 50 years. At present only 10 to15% of the European apple industry’s currentcultivars are originated in this continent.

There is great diversity of European consumertastes and color preferences, varying from eastto west and north to south. Desirable tastesinclude a combination of sweet, tart and aro-matic (southern Europe), tart and firm (north-central Europe), with an increasing trend fortart-sweet and crisp-juicy. There is now accep-tance for diversity in appearance with market

acceptances of yellow, pink, green, or bi- to tri-colored skin types. The only common denomi-nator seems to be attractive appearance,lengthy storability, and enhanced shelf-life. Thismeans that existing germplasm and current cul-

tivar diversity are valuable assets and must beretained to achieve breeding excellence for eachapple type.

In the last decade (1991-2001), over 500 newapple cultivars have been released; Europe

Cultivar Scab1 Public or Private Institution Parents Maturity(days ± Golden Delicious)

Ariane R INRA (Angers) + Novadi Group (F) Complex hybrid (involving Florina, Prima, Golden D.) +5Ariwa R FAW Wadenswil (CH) Golden Delicious x Sel. A849-5 -3/+3Autento® Delcoros S Delbard nursery (F) Delgollune x Cox O.P. -15Brina R ISF-Trento (I) Sel. PRI 2059-101 O.P. +7Choupette R INRA + Ligonniere nursery (F) Sel. X4598 x Sel. X3174 +22Corail® Pinova S Instutut für Obst. Pillnitz-Dresda (D) Clivia x Golden Delicious -1Dalinco R INRA + Ligonniere nursery (F) Elstar x Sel. X3191 +12Delikates S Res. Inst. Pomol. - (PL) Jamies Grieve x Cortland -40/-30Diwa® FAW 5878 S FAW Wadenswil (CH) (Idared x Maigold) x Elstar -7Gold Chief® Gold Pink S DCA-Bologna (I) Starkrimson x Golden D. +12/+15Golden Orange R ISF-Trento (I) Ed Gould Golden x Sel. PRI 1956 +7Green Star® Nicogreen S B3F + KULeuven + Nicolaï nursery (B) Delcorf x Granny Smith 0Harmonie® Delorina R Delbard nursery (F) Grifer x Florina +7/+10Initial R INRA, Angers (F) Gala x Redfree -37/-34Kanzi® Nicoter S B3F + KULeuven + Nicolaï nursery (B) Gala x Braeburn 0Ligol S Res. Inst. Pomol. - Skierniewice (PL) Linda x Golden Delicious -16/-6Ligolina S Res. Inst. Pomol. - Skierniewice (PL) Linda x Golden Delicious -16/-9Mairac® La Flamboyante S RAC Changins (CH) Gala x Maigold +7/+10Prime Red R DCA Bologna (I) Prima x Summerred -35Rubens® Civni S C.I.V. Ferrara (I) Gala x Elstar -18Rubinola R Inst. Exper. Botany - Strizovice (CZ) Prima x Rubin -16Sampion Red S Res & Breed. Inst Pom. - Holovousy (CZ) Mutation of Sampion -6Tentation® Delblush S Delbard nursery (F) Golden Delicious x Grifer +7Topaz R Inst. Exper. Botany - Strizovice (CZ) Rubin x Vanda +8Wellant® CRPO 47 S PRI Wageningen (NL) Sel. CPRO x Elise -15/-10

Table 1. Promising new European apple cultivars.

Figure 1. World apple cultivars released from 1991 to 2001(total 586). Source: Della Strada and Fideghelli, 2002.

Figure 2. 'Gold Chief®' -'Gold Pink' is one of thenew Italian bred cultivars.

1 R = resistant; S = susceptible

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 17

ranks first, followed by North America, Asia,and Oceania (Fig. 1 and 2). Most Europeancountries have taken into account the increaseddemand that new cultivars engender, especiallyif they have improved quality, are adapted to anecologically sustainable fruit industry, and ensu-re enhanced food safety for consumers.However, while many of these new apple culti-vars are scab-resistant and endowed with vari-ous forms of tolerance to other pathogens, con-sumers, even those who opt for organic produ-ce, continue to prefer the better known suscep-tible cultivars. The most promising new applecultivars, propagated by the nursery industry,are shown in Table 1.

In Europe, the nursery industry has licenses topropagate many new cultivars and sports inclu-ding a number of foreign ones, which featureimproved fruit quality over more traditional cul-tivars (‘Braeburn’, ‘Delicious’, ‘Fuji’, ‘Gala’,‘Golden Delicious’). Many have changed namessuch as ‘Superchief®’ for a spur type of‘Delicious’; ‘Nagafu 12’ and ‘Kiku® 8’ for ‘Fuji’,

and ‘Galaxy®’ , ‘Brookfield®’ and ‘Schnitzer®’,for ‘Gala’ (Table 2). These dozens of mutationsconstitute more than 60-70% of new appleplantations.

As a consequence of consumer demand,orchard renewal is still based on traditional cul-tivars (Fig. 3 and 4). As a result, very limitedspace is gained by new cultivars. For example,up to the present time, the more than 30 scab-resistant cultivars commercially propagatedaccount for only 1-4% of the total number ofnew plantings in Europe, with the highest fre-quency in Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, andthe Netherlands. On the other hand several newcultivars such as ‘Pink Lady®’ (Australia),‘Tentation®’ (France), ‘Rubens®’ (Italy), ‘Jazz®’(New Zealand), ‘Ambrosia’ (Canada), ‘Cameo®’and ‘Honeycrunch®’ (USA), have been releasedwith the “club formula,” in which a limitednumber of producers control the productionand distribution pipeline in order to realize abetter price but also with higher cost of produc-tion (Sansavini et al., 2004).

The main objectives of apple breeding are beingpursued in a number of breeding stations bygenetic modification (GM) approaches. Theseobjectives include, in order of importance, fruitquality, resistance to biotic stresses, environ-mental adaptability, enhanced bearing throughchanges in tree habit, fruiting characteristics,and yield efficiency, and constancy of produc-tion. Studies of parental lines conducted viamolecular genotyping, are designed to identifythe genetic sources of qualitative and quantita-tive traits. These efforts have been boosted bywork on polymorphic DNA markers, especiallyamplified fragment length polymorphisms(AFLP) and simple sequence repeats (SSR) (Fig.5), aimed at identifying and highlighting profi-les characterizing individual genotypes. Thesemarkers, uniformly distributed throughout thegenome, have made it possible to identify 17linkage groups (representing the apple’s haploidchromosome number) and to explore quantita-tive traits. The markers thus form a genetic roadmap portraying the order and arrangement ofloci on the chromosome (Tartarini andSansavini, 2002).

The search for functional markers of candidategenes is the focus of studies ranging from stressresistance to quality traits. Initial efforts to drawup molecular maps relied on AFLPs (high inpolymorphism, low in repeatability) and SSRs(low in polymorphism, high in repeatability).Indeed, today there are a number of bacterialartificial chromosome (BAC) libraries and databanks for express sequence tags (ESTs), one of

Original Cultivar Name of mutation Public or Private Institution

Braeburn Eve® Mariri Red D. Easton, Nelson (New Zealand)Hillwell® Hidala J. Hillwell, Hastings (New Zealand)

Delicious (Early Red One®) Jeromine Valois nursery (France)Delicious (Red Chief® Campbell) Superchief® Sandidge Ray Sandidge, Entiat, Washington (USA)Fuji Kiku® 8 Japan, license Braun (Italy)

Naga Fu 12 Exper. Stat. - Nagano (Japan)Raku Raku Japanese cloneZhen® Aztec Austin orchards, Nelson (New Zealand)

Golden Delicious Pink Gold® Leratess Lerat Elaris (France)Pink Lady® Rosy Glow Bowden, N.S. Wales (Australia)Royal Gala Brookfield® Baigent Brookfield, Hawkes Bay (New Zealand)

Schnitzer® Schniga Schnitzer (Italy)

Table 2. Main mutants of several apple varieties, propagated in Europe. Figure 3. 'Ariane' is a new scab resistantcultivar bred and released by INRA(Angers) together with a private indus-try.

Figure 4. ‘Ariwa' (CH) has multiple resi-stance (scab, mildew and partially fireblight).

Transgenes Transgene expected effects Author

HcrVf2 (Vf) Resistance to Venturia inaequalis Belfanti E. et al.Endochitinase Resistance to Venturia inaequalis Chevreau E. et al.Puroindolinethaumatin II Improvement of the sweetness and fungal resistance Dolgov S.V. et al.pmi + gfp Alternative method for selectionpmi Alternative method for selection Flachowsky et al.attE Resistance to Erwinia amylovora Reim S. and Hanke V.AMVattE + AMVdpoAMV + ech42AMV + nag70AMV + ech42 + nag70ACO (antisense) Improvement of fruit storability James D.ACS (sense)Ga20 oxidase (sense) Plant height reductionHordothionin Resistance to Venturia inaequalis Krens F.A. et al.bar Herbicide resistance Dolgov S.V. and Skryabin K.G.Stilbene synthase Fungal resistance Szankowski I. et al.PGIPRolB Improvement of rooting and plant development Welander M. et al.pmi + gus + gai Alternative method for selection. Plant height reduction Zhu L.H. et al.

Table 3. Apple transformations in Europe shown at Eucarpia, 2003, Angers, France1.

1 EUFRIN network, working group in Biotechnology and Fruit Breeding (Chairman S. Sansavini).

ISHS • 18

which has more than 130,000 sequences, orover half the genome. Genetic characterizationhas in turn led to work on the transcription fac-tors with mRNA differential display as well asmore complex microarray techniques for abroad genome-based functional study. Theseapproaches have enabled the study and charac-terization of the gene pool involved in many ofthe plant’s physiological processes, from fruitripening to biotic and abiotic stress responses,and form the basis for molecular assays aimedat introducing desired traits in future breedingefforts.

Of great interest here are functional homolo-gies, i.e. heterologous sequences found even indistantly related species that involve the same

functions. Increasingly frequent syntenies havebeen observed within pome-fruit species (appleand pear). Especially noteworthy is the findingthat conserved regions and homologoussequences characterize both the resistance toCladosporium fulvum in tomato and to Venturiainaequalis in apple. Important too are the genefamilies, i.e. clusters of interdependent genes,including resistant gene analogues (RGA) thatalso play a role against Erwinia amylovora.Indeed, some RGAs have already been mappedidentifying quantitative trait loci (QTL) for fireblight resistance in pear (Dondini et al., 2004).

Research on scab resistance in Europe has pri-marily been conducted through the multi-part-ner DARE project. The signal findings of thiseffort include the resistance properties of theVf, Va, Vb, Vm and Vr genes and their respon-ses to the various races of the pathogen.Biotechnology tools have thus opened the doorfor breeding programs to develop resistant cul-tivars via the pyramiding of several genes formultiple resistance in individual genotypes so asto prevent the break-down of vertical resistance(as has already happened in apple with race 6 ofVenturia). An important part in this connectionis being played by local European cultivars suchas ‘Discovery’ (English) and ‘Durello di Forlì’(Italian), which have horizontal forms of scabresistance and tolerance, although the genesinvolved have yet to be identified. Several QTLshave been discovered.

The most recent European project, High QualityDisease Resistant Apple for a SustainableAgriculture (HIDRAS) includes Western andEastern Groups, and is attempting to determinethe molecular basis of key fruit quality traits suchas sugars, acids and flesh firmness. The primarygoal here is to develop new molecular assaytools for early selection using newly bred seed-

lings. Marker-assisted selection (MAS) involvingthese traits, could make breeding programs sig-nificantly more efficient (Fig. 6). This techniquedoesn’t substitute for traditional breeding butintegrates and accelerates the selection process,reducing costs and time (Fig. 7).

Of particular interest is a comparative testing ofthe European cultivars released in the last fewyears, an effort that will require significant par-ticipation of private breeders along with thehelp of several working groups for joint assess-ment of these new accessions. One of theseworking groups has been set up through theEuropean Fruit Research Institutes Network(EUFRIN), which suggests that Europe may soonplay an international role more on a par with itscapabilities and know-how than in the past -both at the scientific and production level.

Genetic engineering through transgenesis,represents an alternative to introgressing resi-stance genes or acquiring traits that are difficultto secure or transfer via traditional hybridization(Fig. 8). At the Eucarpia Symposium in Angers(September 2003) the EUFRIN network showedthe enormous methodological potential oftransgenic apples by presenting some 20 appli-cations for GM plants. The most frequent fieldregards resistance, especially as to the Vf gene(scab), to fire-blight and to other pathogens(Table 3). Four field trials of transformed appleare being conducted in the European Union totest the effects of transgenes towards severalbiotic stresses and their involvement in rootingand self-incompatibility. This technology couldmake it possible to by-pass the various genera-tions of crossing and backcrossing in traditionalbreeding practices. This technique can be pur-sued via two approaches: (1) introgressinggenes homologous to the apple species thathave been isolated from wild species such asMalus floribunda 821 (e.g. Vf), thereby practi-cing a sort of “gene therapy” on susceptiblecultivars such as ‘Gala’. This technology is beingpursued at the University of Bologna (Belfanti etal., 2004), as well as Cornell University and theUniversity of Illinois University (USA); or (2)inserting heterologous genes (e.g. endochitina-se, attacin, stilbene synthase), as is being doneat INRA (France) and at the University ofDresden and Hannover (Germany) (Szankowskiet al., 2003; Chevreau et al., 2004). There aremany protein molecules, synthesized in natureby bacteria, viruses and plants, having antibioticproperties, with a broad range of action andwhose gene encoding sequences have beenpatented (and hence are in the hands of thelarge international biotech companies).Environmental concerns could apply strongpressure to have such genes introgressed intoapple and other fruit species in the belief thatthe result will lead to a reduced risk that resi-stance will be lost or overcome. However, onthe other hand there is concern that these“alien” genes might carry other forms of risk(instability, allergenic, or environmental geneflow as has been found for the Bt gene used in

Figure 5. Examples of polymorphismavailable for marker assisted selection(MAS) for early detection of scab resi-stance: AFLP (left) and SSR (right).

Figure 6. PCR profile of specific amplifica-tion of HcrVf2 (sequence involved in Vfapple scab resistance). Several markersscreen resistant (R) from susceptible (S)plants. (L= ladder).

Figure 7. Test of scab resistance of apple seedlings after greenhouse inoculation with conidiaof Venturia inaequalis.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 19

SilvieroSansavini

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

All authors are member of the Department ofFruit Tree and Woody Plant Science (DCA),University of Bologna, Italy.

Silviero Sansavini is pomologist and head of DCA.Fabrizio Costa is a post-doctoral researcher,

whose major field is apple fruit ripening andquality, using a molecular approach.

Enrico Belfanti is a PhD student, whose major fieldis apple transformation.

Franco Donati is the apple breeder of DCA.

FabrizioCosta

EnricoBelfanti

FrancoDonati

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors thank J. Janick for his criticism andrevision of the paper.

CONTACT

Department of Fruit Tree and Woody PlantScience, University of Bologna, Viale Fanin 46,40127 Bologna, Italy, Fax: 0039.051.2096401,email: fruitseg@agrsci.unibo.it

REFERENCES

Belfanti, E., Silfverberg-Dilworth, E., Tartarini, S., Patocchi, A., Barbieri, M., Zhu, J., Vinatzer, B.A.,Gianfranceschi, L., Gessler, C. and Sansavini, S. 2004. The HcrVf2 gene from a wild apple confers scabresistance to a transgenic cultivated variety. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA) 101:886-890.

Bradford, K.J. and Alston, J.M. 2004. Horticultural biotechnology: Challenges for commercial development.Chronica Hort. 44(4):4-8.

Chevreau, E., Faize, M., Dupuis, F., Sourice, S. and Parisi, L. 2004. Combination of a transgene-mediateddefense mechanism with a natural resistance gene increases apple scab resistance. Acta Hort. 663:447-452.

Dondini, L., Pierantoni, L., Gaiotti, F., Chiodini, R., Tartarini, S., Bazzi, C. and Sansavini, S. 2004. IdentifyingQTLs for fire-blight resistance via a European pear (Pyrus communis L.) genetic linkage map. MolecularBreed. 14:407-418.

Della Strada, G. and Fideghelli, C. 2002. Le cultivar di pomacee introdotte dal 1991 al 2001. L’InformatoreAgrario 41:65-70.

Dolgov, S.V., Mikhailov, R.V. and Taran, S.A. 2003. Transgenic apple with improved fruit taste and phytopa-thogene resistance. Paper presented at the Eleventh Eucarpia Symposium on Fruit Breeding and Genetics,September 1-5, 2003, Angers, France.

Dolgov, S.V. and Skryabin, K.G. 2004. Transgenic Apple Clonal Rootstock Resistant to Basta Herbicide. ActaHort. 663:499-502.

Flachowsky, H., Birk, T. and Hanke, V. 2004. Preliminary results to establish an alternative selection systemfor apple transformation. Acta Hort. 663:425-430.

James, D. 2003. A short review of the progress and probles of fruit tree transformation. Paper presented atthe Eleventh Eucarpia Symposium on Fruit Breeding and Genetics, September 1-5, 2003, Angers, France.

Krens, F.A., Pelgrom, K.T.B., Schaart, J.G., Rouwendal, G.J.A. and den Nijs, A.P.M. 2004. Clean Vector tech-nology for marker-free transgenic fruit crops. Acta Hort. 663:431-435.

Reim, S. and Hanke, V. 2004. Investigation on stability of transgenes and their expression in transgenic appleplants (Malus x domestica Borkh.). Acta Hort. 663:419-423.

Sansavini, S., Donati, F., Costa, F. and Tartarini, S. 2004. Advances in apple breeding for enhanced fruit qua-lity and resistance to biotic stresses: new varieties for the European market. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. (inpress).

Szankowski, I., Briviba, K., Fleschhut, J., Schönherr, J., Jacobsen, H.J. and Kiesecker, H. 2003. Transformationof apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) with the stilbene synthase gene from grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) and aPGIP-gene from kiwi (Actinidia deliciosa). Plant Cell Rep. 22:141-149.

Tartarini, S. and Sansavini, S. 2002. The use of molecular markers in pome fruit breeding. Acta Hort.622:129-140.

Welander, M., Zhu, L.H. and Li, X.Y. 2004. Transformation of dwarfing apple and pear rootstocks with therolB gene and its influence on rooting and growth. Acta Hort. 663:437-442.

Zhu, L.H., Li, X.Y., Ahlman, A., Xue, Z.T. and Welander, M. 2004. The use of mannose as a selection agentin transformation of the apple rootstock M26 via Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Acta Hort. 663:503-506.

EUFRIN is a voluntary network of European fruitscientists operating through specific workinggroups, one of which is devoted to Biotechnologyand Genetic Improvement of Fruit Trees. The aimis to aid breeding programs by highlighting andpromoting biotechnology procedures, many ofwhich are already adopted in several research sta-tions. EUCARPIA and EUFRIN members can gene-rate benefits for both groups through direct con-tacts based on their knowledge of the real issuesat stake in the European fruit industry.

maize and cotton, and for herbicide resistanceused in soybean and maize).

A number of transgenic apples have been deve-loped in various European countries to date,despite the hostility of governments and the

paucity of research funding. The approachesused so far, involve Agrobacterium tumefaciensand plasmid vectors, viral promoters, and genesfor positive selection (such as nptII). Theseapproaches employ different strategies (e.g. co-integrated plasmids, transient systems of self-recombination, sense-antisense systems, co-suppression, and gene silencing). Clearly thetechnologies will still require many years of in-depth and coordinated research, and not just interms of methodology. However, many of thesetechniques have already proven viable offeringnew advances for so-called GM plants, i.e.plants genetically modified using biotechnology,with more benefits for consumers than for gro-wers. These techniques are encouraging a newgeneration of breeders despite the lack ofbacking of multinational firms or other com-mercial interests.

Bradford and Alston (2004) have stressed thatan intelligent application of biotechnology, iforiented by the market acceptance and consu-mers choices, is compatible with environmentalsustainability giving value to producers, distribu-tors and consumers. We concur. These are exci-ting times.

Figure 8. Main steps of the in vitro rege-neration from leaf and internodeexplants to obtain Vf transgenic appleplants. The introgression of the specificconstruct was carried on by a specific pla-smid of Agrobacterium tumefaciens.

ISHS • 20

Early Evidence for the Culinary Use ofSquash Flowers in Italy

Harry S. Paris and Jules Janick

A famous painting entitled The Fruit Seller(Fruittivendola) painted in 1580 by VincenzoCampi located in the Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan,depicts an elegant lady vender with a lapful ofpeaches holding a bunch of black grapes presi-ding over more than a dozen different fruits andvegetables for sale (Fig. 1), including severalcucurbits. A large yellow, oblate, ribbed pump-kin (Cucurbita pepo L. subsp. pepo PumpkinGroup) supports a plate of apricots. A basketwith a handle, filled to overflowing, contains anumber of black-green, warted, spherical tooblate, deeply furrowed, orange-fleshed canta-loupes (Cucumis melo L. subsp. meloCantalupensis Group). On the far right at theedge of the painting is a box shared by small redpears (‘Moscatelle’) and flower buds of C. pepo.Except for the pink roses clearly distributed fordecorative purposes, among fava beans in alarge woven basket in the right foreground,there is no doubt that all of the items on displaywere intended for culinary purposes. Thesquash flower buds are clustered and stackedtogether and to the right appears to be someyoung, tender foliage, suggesting that thesetoo must have been intended as kitchen items.

The culinary use of the fruits is, of course, by farthe most common and economically importantuse of the highly polymorphic C. pepo, whichincludes a number of diverse forms known asacorn, cocozelle, crookneck, scallop, straight-neck, vegetable marrow and zucchini squash, aswell as various pumpkins (Paris, 2001). The culi-

nary use of flowers, staminate as well as pistil-late, on the day of, or day after anthesis is fair-ly widespread today in Italy and other countriesand may have been practiced by NativeAmericans before the European encounter.

Young, tender cucurbit foliage is also consumedin some regions.

Both staminate and pistillate flower buds areincluded in Campi’s painting. The largest ones,towards the left of the box, appear to havebeen harvested on the day prior to anthesis (Fig.2). Depicted also, at the near edge of the box,are what appear to be several younger pistillateflowers, what would be referred to today as“baby” or “mini-vegetables.” This use of pre-anthesis flowers differs from the more familiaruse of C. pepo flowers on the day of anthesis orone day post-anthesis (Fig. 3).

The pistillate flowers in Campi’s painting are ofinterest in the context of the history of C. pepocultivar-groups. The largest of the flowers, har-vested on the day before anthesis, has a curvedovary that is prominently ribbed and approxima-

Figure 1. The Fruit Seller of Vincenzo Campi, 1580; note the box near the upper right edge ofthe painting containing pears and flower buds of Cucurbita pepo.

Figure 2. Close-up of the box containing pears and flowers buds of Cucurbita pepo.

Figure 3. Zucchini female flowers, one day post anthesis, for sale at a market in 2004 inKhania (Chania), Crete, Greece.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 21

tely one-fourth longer than the corolla. Theovary is cylindrical but not uniformly so, and itsgreatest diameter appears to be fairly close toits broad attachment to the calyx. The diameterof the ovary at that point is less than one-thirdthe length of the ovary, allowing for the curva-ture and 2-dimensional representation. Thesmaller ovaries, at the front of the box, have asimilar overall profile, though proportionallyeven narrower and longer. Apparently, theseflowers were taken from a form similar to theextant cultivar ‘Romanesco’, also known as‘Costata Romanesca’, of the Cocozelle Group.‘Romanesco’ is strongly ribbed and grown tothis day in Italy for the consumption of its flo-wers. Its pistillate flowers are especially adaptedfor this purpose; the calyx has a broad, strongattachment to the ovary and, therefore, doesnot easily slough off.

Fruit shape is quite variable in C. pepo and, as acharacteristic under polygenic control, shouldbe a good indicator of genetic relationshipsamong cultivars (Paris, 1986). This reasoninghas been confirmed by evidence obtained fromDNA sequence polymorphisms showing that C.pepo cultivars group largely according to fruitshape (Ferriol et al., 2003; Paris et al., 2003).Accordingly, the common name “zucchini,”often applied in the U.S. to all young, greensquash of Cucurbita regardless of shape, is bestapplied only to those having the shape of thefirst-described cultivars bearing the name‘Zucchini’, which is uniformly cylindrical.Collectively, then, the cultivars bearing fruits ofuniformly cylindrical shape comprise theZucchini Group, the origin of which can be tra-ced to the turn of the 20th century in northernItaly (Paris, 2001). Two other groups havingmore-or-less cylindrical fruits are the VegetableMarrow Group (short, dumpy fruits) and theCocozelle Group (long, bulbous fruits), both ofwhich are considerably older than the ZucchiniGroup, as indicated by historical records (Paris,2001) and confirmed by DNA polymorphisms(Ferriol et al., 2003; Paris et al., 2003). Althoughboth cocozelles and zucchinis are long fruits

with a length-to-width ratio of at least 3.5 (Fig.4), the two groups are not intimately related;instead, cocozelles are more closely allied to thepumpkins, which have round fruits. In manycountries, zucchini cultivars with bush typevines have replaced the previously grown vege-table marrows and cocozelles by being longerthan the former with less tendency to curvethan the latter (notice the curvature of the ovaryof the large pistillate flower in Fig. 1 and 2); theregular fruit shape of the zucchini, togetherwith its typically overall rich, dark green color,resulted in its replacing the older groups inmany markets (Paris, 1989).

The previously earliest known description anddepiction of the cocozelles were the account byJean Bauhin, published in 1651, and severalillustrations by A.N. Duchesne in 1770 (Paris,2001). If our interpretation is correct, this pain-ting by Campi is the first evidence of the exis-tence of cocozelles in the 16th century.

The C. pepo cultivar-groups Pumpkin [first illus-trated 1542], Scallop [1554], Acorn [1562],Vegetable Marrow [1566], Crookneck [1586],and now Cocozelle [1580] are found in botani-cal tomes and/or in paintings before the close ofthe 16th century (Paris, 2001; Fig. 1 and 2). Ithas been generally accepted that the pumpkins,scallops, acorns, and crooknecks had all origina-ted and diversified in North America. By far thegreatest diversity of cocozelles occurs in Europeand it had been suggested that the origin of thiscultivar-group (and that of the vegetable mar-rows) was probably European (Paris, 1989).However, the discovery of a cocozelle image inEurope as early as 1580 calls into question whe-ther this group was an Italian invention or aMexican one. Perhaps seeds of a primitive rib-bed Mexican landrace pumpkin variable for fruitshape, such as PI 442294, had been brought toItaly shortly after the initial European contactwith the Americas, and the Italians, during the16th century, selected for longer fruits, to bet-ter suit the culinary preparation of the pistillateflowers and young fruits (Paris, 1989). Campi’spainting and other still-lifes by Italian artists also

lead us to ponder whether there would be abetter chance of finding greater diversity ofcucurbits in Italian paintings than has beenfound in Dutch ones (Zeven and Brandenburg,1986), due to the milder climate of Italy that ismore suitable for growing cucurbits.

Figure 4. Young fruits of five cocozelle (left) and three zucchini (right) cultivars (after Paris,2001).

REFERENCES

Ferriol, M., Pico, B. and Nuez, F. 2003. Geneticdiversity of a germplasm collection ofCucurbita pepo using SRAP and AFLP markers.Theor. Appl. Genet. 107:271-282.

Paris, H.S. 1986. A proposed subspecific classifi-cation for Cucurbita pepo. Phytologia 61:133-138.

Paris, H.S. 1989. Historical records, origins, anddevelopment of the edible cultivar groups ofCucurbita pepo. Econ. Bot. 43:423-443.

Paris, H.S. 2001. History of the cultivar-groups ofCucurbita pepo. Hort. Rev. 25:71-170, 4 pl.

Paris, H.S., Yonash, N., Portnoy, V., Mozes-Daube, N., Tzuri, G. and Katzir, N. 2003.Assessment of genetic relationships inCucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae) using DNAmarkers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 106:971-978.

Zeven, A.C. and Brandenburg, W.A. 1986. Useof paintings from the 16th to 19th centuries tostudy the history of domesticated plants. Econ.Bot. 40:397-408.

Harry Paris

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Dr. Harry Paris is a Senior Research Scientist inthe Department of Vegetable Crops andPlant Genetics of the Agricultural ResearchOrganization, Newe Ya’ar Research Center,Ramat Yishay, Israel. His research is devotedto the genetics, breeding, crop history, anddevelopment of cucurbits.Email: hsparis@volcani.agri.gov.il

Dr. Jules Janick is the James Troop DistinguishedProfessor in Horticulture and is a member of theISHS Board where he serves as Director ofPublications. Email: janick@purdue.edu

Jules Janick

ISHS • 22

The World of Small Urban Gardens

THE WORLD OF HORTICULTURE

Gert Groening

The horticultural world of small gardens ishuge! They include small gardens of antiquitysuch as those planted by Greek women to vene-rate the god Adonis (Detienne, 1972); the bal-cony and windowsill gardens common in many

cities of Europe; the universe of miniature Asiangardens such as the Chinese p’en ching or theJapanese sakai and bonzai planting (Stein,1987); and finally, the small allotment or com-munity gardens found mostly in urban areas,

the subject of the present paper. These smallcommunity gardens are found in many placesaround the world, where they serve a widerange of purposes, including a source of foodand ornamentals as well as recreation. Thosewho operate these gardens have formed local,regional, and even national organisations andsome countries have issued laws for their regu-lation.

These small gardens have various names. Theyare called kleingärten in Austria, Switzerland,and Germany (Fig. 1), allotment gardens in theUnited Kingdom, ogródek dzialkowy in Poland,rodinná zahrádka in the Czech Republic, kisker-tek in Hungary, volkstuin in the Netherlands andin Belgium, jardins ouvriers and jardins familiauxin France and Belgium, kolonihave in Denmark,kolonihage in Norway, kolonitraedgard inSweden (Fig. 2), siirtolapuutarhat in Finland,shimin-noen in Japan, community gardens inthe USA (during World War II they were oftenreferred to as victory gardens in the US,Canada, and Australia), and probably manymore names in other countries around theworld. These gardens underscore the importan-ce of horticulture and specifically expresshuman interest in the growth of plants both forfood and for aesthetic reasons. With ongoingworld-wide urbanization these small gardenshave become part of the culture of many socie-ties.

Although I have seen those gardens and talkedto many of those who tend them in quite a fewparts of the world, I am most familiar with thesituation in Germany (Groening, 1974, 1996;Groening and Wolschke-Bulmahn, 1995;Bertram and Groening, 1996) and I will refer tothese community gardens specifically. AlthoughGermany’s kleingärten occur in rural areas, thevast majority is located in cities (Fig. 3). Most ofthese gardeners are urbanites whose familieshave settled in cities a long time ago. Most areworking class people including those whomigrated to the city, leading to the notion of“migrant gardens,” but these gardens alsoinvolve the middle class including tradesmenand professionals (Fig. 4). Many of the familieshave practised gardening in these little plots,which in most cases are associated in groups.The city of Berlin, Germany, with a populationof some 3.5 million hosts about 80,000 klein-gärten. The number of gardens assembled in

Figure 1. Kleingärten site at the International Garden Show in Rostock, Germany, 2003. Thesite which existed before the show was opened became an integral part of the show.

Figure 2. Allotment gardens in Skåne, Sweden.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 23

specific locations in the inner city as well as onthe periphery ranges from very few to severalhundred (Fig. 5). Different from home gardens,these types community gardens are not atta-ched to the urban home or apartment. There isalways some distance to be covered betweenthe home and the site where the little gardensstretch.

Usually the gardens are rented on a contractbasis for one or more years. Few are privatelyowned. Contrary to the temporary status ofmany of the early versions of these gardens,those with a longer history tend to turn perma-nent. In Germany there are about 1 million

kleingärten, the earliest of which date back toearly 19th century. Some of them can still befound on the very first location where they havebeen established. Poland also has a comparablylarge number of these community gardens(ogródek dzialkowy) (Bellows, 2004). In Englandmany of the some 300,000 allotment gardensare organized in the National Society ofAllotment and Leisure Gardeners (Crouch andWard, 2003). In the USA many of the commu-nity gardeners have formed associations (Fig. 6)and have joined the American CommunityGardening Association, which celebrated its25th anniversary in 2004 in Toronto, Canada. In

Figure 3. Kleingarten in Göppingen, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany.

Figure 4. Allotment garden of master butcher Ernst Schäfer, Germany. Painting by LiselotteSchramm-Heckmann, 1980.

Figure 5. Kleingarten site ‘Grübser Weg’in Magdeburg, Germany, implemented plan for kleingärten.Source: Landeshauptstadt Magdeburg,Stadtplanungsamt Magdeburg 1994.Kleingartenwesen der Stadt Magdeburg,Magdeburg, from the title cover.

Figure 6. Entrance to a Chinese-Americancommunity garden in South End, Boston,Massachusetts, USA.

Japan, the Association for Japan AllotmentGarden has been formed in the late 20th cen-tury (Fig. 7).

ISHS • 24

Museum in Leipzig, Saxony. This is an activeinstitution that has established a permanentexposition about kleingärten. It issues annualtransactions of the association of which 12 haveappeared to date. Since 1999 the museum haspublished ten scholarly studies, which relate tothe history of kleingärten in Germany (the mostrecent is: Förderverein des DeutschenKleingärtnermuseums in Leipzig e.V., 2004).

The history of many of these small gardens in

Germany and elsewhere is full of unpleasantexperiences because the land that was used forgardening had often been diverted for otheruses which were considered more profitable. Inthe USA some of the more spectacular actionswith respect to this issue have taken place in thelate 20th century in New York City (Stone,2002). Germany as well, has been the site ofmany political demonstrations against thedestruction of kleingärten for other land uses.In order to reduce speculation with the land onwhich these gardens are operated and in orderto avoid arbitrary cancellation of contracts,allotment holders have organized themselveson local, provincial and state levels and sendtheir representatives to the respective boards,commissions, and councils who decide thesematters. Since 1983 in Germany, the federal lawfor kleingärten governs the establishment ofspecial commissions who assess the value of thegardens, and suggest an annual rental fee pre-sented to the city council.

As land use planning has become a major issuein the course of the 20th century in Germany,those operating small gardens had to learn howto become involved in the political strugglesinvolving urban land use. In the early 20th cen-tury the inclusion of kleingärten into zoningplans was requested. In spite of the fact that the

Figure 7. Botsuyama kleingärten near Nagano, Japan.

Figure 8. Location map for kleingärten in Vienna, Austria. Allotment garden sites are markeddark green.

Figure 9. Suggestion for the design of a250 square meter kleingarten for a familywith children. Source: Mahler, 1972.

In 1921, after more than one decade of prepa-ratory discussions, the small gardeners inGermany organized a Union of AllotmentHolders Associations. At present, the FederalUnion of Garden Friends unites some 15,000associations. In Berlin, for example, close to 900associations have formed for the some 80,000kleingärten. In 1992 the “garden friends,” asthe allotment holders present themselves to thepublic, established a German Allotment Holders

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 25

REFERENCES

Bellows, A.C. 2004. One Hundred Years ofAllotment Gardens in Poland. Food & Foodways12:247-276.

Bertram, C. and Groening, G. 1996. LeipzigerSchrebervereine und ihre gesellschaftspolitischeOrientierung zwischen 1864 und 1919.(Schreber associations and their socio-politicalorientation between 1864 and 1919). VerlagWaldemar Kramer, Frankfurt am Main.

Crouch, D. and Ward, C. 1997, reprint 2003. TheAllotment: its landscape and culture. Five LeavesPublications, Nottingham, UK.

Detienne, M. 1972. Les Jardins d’Adonis. Lamythologie des aromates en Grèce, Bibliothèquedes Histoires, Éditions Gallimard, Paris.

Förderverein des Deutsches Kleingärtnermuseumin Leipzig e.V. (ed.). 2004. Reichsverband derKleingartenvereine in Deutschland 1921-1933.(Reichs union of Kleingarten associations inGermany 1921-1933). Mitteilungen, vol. 10,Leipzig.

Groening, G. 1974. Tendenzen imKleingartenwesen, dargestellt am Beispiel einerGrossstadt. (Tendencies in allotment gardeningas exemplied at a large city). Landschaft undStadt, Beiheft 10, Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart.

Groening, G. 1996. Aspects of community garde-ning in Germany, City Farmer, Canada’s Office ofUrban Agriculture, City Farmer’s UrbanAgriculture Notes, Internet Publication,Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Groening, G. and Wolschke-Bulmahn, J. 1995.Von Ackermann bis Ziegelhütte, Ein JahrhundertKleingartenkultur in Frankfurt am Main. (FromAckermann to Ziegelhütte, A Century ofAllotment Garden Culture in Frankfurt on Main).Studien zur Frankfurter Geschichte, vol. 36,Verlag Waldemar Kramer, Frankfurt am Main.

Mahler, E. 1972. Kleingärten. p.240. In: Berlin undseine Bauten, vol. XI, Gartenwesen, Berlin,Verlag von Wilhelm Ernst & Sohn.

Stein, R.A. 1987. Le Monde en petit: jardins enminiature et habitations dans la pensée religieu-se d’Extreme-Orient, Paris; English translation:Stein, R.A. 1990. The World in Miniature:Container Gardens and Dwellings in Far EasternReligious Thought. Stanford University Press,Stanford, CA.

Stone, E. 2002. Community Gardening in NewYork City wird zur politischen Bewegung.(Community gardening in New York City turnsinto a political movement). p.159-177. In: E.Meyer-Renschhausen, R. Müller and P. Becker(eds.), Die Gärten der Frauen, Zur sozialenBedeutung von Kleinstlandwirtschaft in Stadtund Land weltweit, (Women’s gardens, Aboutthe social meaning of smallest scale agriculturein urban and rural areas worldwide), CentaurusVerlag, Herbolzheim.

Gert Groening

Gert Groening is Professor of LandscapeArchitecture at the Berlin University of the Arts inGermany and is interested in the relation oflandscape architecture to horticulture. He is pre-sently Vice Chair of the ISHS CommissionLandscape and Urban Horticulture, email: groe-ning@udk-berlin.de

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Figure 10. Allotment gardener on his plot in Berlin-Weissensee, Germany.

as a gradually vanishing land use for manydecades. However, the opposite seems closer toreality (Fig. 10). They will be around for manymore years, although the reasons for these gar-dens have varied and will vary in the future.However, these community gardens have timeand again proven that there is a very basic needfor horticulture and gardening in an urban envi-ronment. Politicians, professionals and othersengaged in urban land use planning world wideneed to consider such gardens seriously.

first laws concerning kleingärten were issued in1919, it took the allotment holders some 50years of serious political engagement beforethey succeeded in their quest that these smallgarden became included in zoning plans (Fig.8). The representatives of kleingärten associa-tions continue to be actively engaged in urbanland use planning. In larger cities in Germanythe special interest in kleingärten is handled viaa special land use developmental plan, which isconsulted in urban land use planning issues.Landscape architects are involved in the deve-lopment of such plans as well as the design ofgarden sites (Fig. 9).

Kleingärten can be found on land whichbelongs to cities, states, churches, railroads,industrial and commercial corporations, andprivate landowners. In a few countries, such asGermany and Austria, there are special laws,which among many other issues rule land pro-vision and inclusion in land use planning pro-cesses for these little gardens. The size of thegardens varies widely from several squaremeters to almost 1,000 square meters.Frequently these community gardens inGermany, the United Kingdom, and otherEuropean countries, measure about 300 to 400square meters. Most community gardens in theUSA and Japan range from a few square metersto about 100 square meters. A toolshed, anarbor or a little hut can be found in most ofthese small gardens and some have a commu-nity house and playground.

Kleingärten, which have existed in Germany formore than 150 years, have been seen by some

ISHS • 26

Horticulture in Iran

Iran consists of a major portion of what wasonce the Persian Empire. Geographically, Iran islocated in south-western Asia between 25-40°North latitude and 45-63° East longitude. It bor-ders three CIS states (the Republics of Armenia,Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan), as well as theCaspian Sea to the north, Turkey and Iraq to thewest, the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman tothe south and Pakistan and Afghanistan to theeast. Due to its vast land area and variation inrainfall, Iran’s climate ranges from arid in thesouth to the rain forests in the north. Variationsin climate and presence of numerous moun-tains, lakes, rivers, and natural springs have cre-ated a unique country capable of producing alltypes of fruits, vegetables, flowers, and agrono-mic crops. The Caspian Sea area in the north of

Iran is one of the most unique regions in theworld, where a mild Mediterranean climatemeshes with the adjacent Alborz mountain ran-ges, creating a home to numerous species ofedible plants, including wild and domesticapples, medlars, cherries, pomegranates, citrus,quinces, olives, tea, rice, and melons. In addi-tion to apples and grapes, quinces and pome-granates are produced in Isfahan and other cen-tral provinces. Pistachio, olive, citrus, banana,and date are produced in many of the southernprovinces such as Kerman, Fars, and Khuzestan.Pistachio and many of the deciduous fruits spe-cies are native to Iran, and are believed to havebeen distributed to China and Europe, and fromthere to the rest of the world through the SilkRoad established by Darius the Great of the

Achemenian Dynasty. Apples and other decidu-ous fruits are commercially produced in moun-tain ranges of Alborz and Zagrous and in manyareas of Iran, including regions near Tehran(particularly Damavand, Taleghan, Karaj, andQazvin), Azarbaeijan, Khorasan, Kordestan, andIsfahan. Horticulture and horticultural crops arean integral part of Iranian’s rich and ancient cul-ture. This fact is well documented in PersianCuneiform, heliography, art, poetry, and histori-cal documents. For example, the word“Paradise,” which refers to a group of dwarfrootstocks including M.9, is a Persian word.Dwarf trees as well as dwarf horses were verypopular in ancient Persia, and Paradise wasused for dwarfing apple trees.

The long history of horticulture in Iran has madeIranian growers creative in the efficient use oflimited resources and in controlling pest anddiseases under adverse conditions. For example,there is evidence that drip irrigation was used inthe desert region of “Yazd” in central Iran, tosave precious water. Organic production of hor-ticultural crops has been the traditional methodof production, and this method is still practicedin spite of the wide use of modern cultural prac-tices. Iran is the native land to many flowerssuch as tulip, poppy, narcissus, and hyacinth,and many of the mountain ranges and plains ofIran are often covered with these wild flowers inthe spring. The commercial flower industry hassignificantly advanced in the last 25 years andflowers are used for all occasions, domesticallyas well as for export market. Based on FAO sta-tistics, Iran ranks first in fruit and second invegetable production in the Middle East.Consumption of fruit, flowers, and vegetablesin Iran is high. In addition to the domestic mar-ket, Iran has a major share of export for manyof the major fruits and vegetables in the globalmarket.

HORTICULTURAL STATISTICS

Based on the Iranian Ministry of Agriculture sta-tistics for 2002, 14.46 million hectares wereunder agricultural production. Iran’s vegetablesaccounted for 4.84% of total agricultural land(0.7 million ha with 17.1 million tonnes (t) ofproduction), vineyards 2% (0.29 million ha),deciduous fruit, citrus, and dates 13.6% (1.97million ha), and olive trees 0.5% (0.07 millionha). Values of annual export for vegetable andfruit are about $21.2 million, for nuts are$152.3 million, and for medicinal and industrialcrops are $36.9 million.

Fruit crops, with 13.57 million t, play an impor-tant role in the national economy in Iran. Iranranked first in production of pistachio (53% ofthe world pistachio with 249,000 t) and dates(879,000 t), second in apricots, third in walnuts

Esmaeil Fallahi, Ahmad Boland Nazar, Mohammad Reza Naeini and Reza Salehi

Horticulture is considered as one of the main components in the Iranian economy.Horticultural crops have the potential to replace oil income after reserves disappear. Yet,many challenges, including the global and regional political issues, face the Iranian horti-cultural industry. The future of horticulture in Iran seems to be bright, particularly if morepeace and calm can prevail in the region.

Map of Iran. Source: persia.org/imagemap/imagemap.html

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 27

and raisins, fourth in figs and almonds, andsixth in apple (2.3 million t) in the world (basedon FAO and Iranian Ministry of Agriculture sta-tistics). Iran also ranks high in export of thesefruits. Many of the traditional methods of pro-duction are still practiced in pistachio culture.Regions of Kerman, Mahan, Rafsanjan, andDamghan are major areas for pistachio produc-tion. Warm summer days and cool nights inthese desert areas induce excellent conditionsfor high quality pistachio production. Thefamous cultivar ‘Kerman’ in California was ori-ginally brought to the USA from the Kermanregion of Iran.

Of the total vegetable crops produced, 31.1%were fruit bearing such as tomato, melon,watermelon, and cucumber. Leafy or stemvegetables plus root, bulb and tuberous vegeta-bles accounted for 69% of total production.The leading crop in vegetables was tomato with4.1 million t followed by potato (3.7 million t),watermelon (2.1 million t), and onion (1.5 mil-lion t). Due to the wide range of climatic condi-tions in Iran, vegetables are produced in one ormore regions throughout the year.

Iran has diverse climactic areas for horti-culture: (A) citrus is a major crop in theCaspian Sea and Fars regions; (B) Highquality apples are produced in the moun-tainous region of Taleghan; and (C)Alborz Mountain Range, north of Iran, isrich in apples, pears, and plums.

POTENTIAL ANDCHALLENGES

Iran has a unique potential for production ofhorticultural crops, due to its rich and diverseclimatic conditions and creative and talentedgrowers. Iranian horticulturists are educatedeither in Iran, Europe, USA, New Zealand,Australia, or other countries. This diversity ofhorticultural education has given strength toIranian horticulture. Numerous universities andresearch institutions in Iran are actively seekingto improve the quality and quantity of food pro-

duced and to increase growers’ income. Theinternet has been a tremendous source of infor-mation for Iranian horticulturists. The ingenuityof some horticulturists in Iran is impressive asthey mesh the traditional and modern technolo-gy and science of horticulture to become moreefficient in production systems. A typical exam-ple of this ingenuity can be seen at Fadak Farmnear Qum, Iran. In this 100-ha olive orchard, auniquely-structured chimney is built to convertthe hot wind in the desert to a cooling systemby going through a water misting spray for sto-ring olives, without any electricity or other sour-

Fruits of Iran: (A) ‘Golden Delicious’, an important export apple; (B) pomegranate is a nativefruit to Iran and is exported to Europe; (C) quince is favorite fruit in Isfahan; and (D) kiwifruitproduced in the Caspian Sea region is increasingly popular.

Iran’s modern fruit industry: (A) entrance Fadak Farm, Qum; (B) propagation of fruit trees ingreenhouse; (C) a modern high density apple orchard in Damavand; and (D) a well-trained‘Red Delicious’ orchard in Azarbaijan.

ISHS • 28

ces of power. At this farm as well as many otherorchards, the magnificent architecture at theentrance to the orchard highlights the ever-las-ting passion of Iranian growers with horticultu-re. Efficient use of water by the use of drip irri-gation, storing rain water in reservoirs, andstructuring berms and hills to avoid salt injuryduring irrigation are examples of growers’ inge-nuity. Modern techniques for fruit productioncan be seen at the Sorkhdasht Fruit Orchards inDamavand, Iran and near Shandiz in Khorasan.Large domestic consumption and proximity tothe Persian Gulf and European markets areamong the positive factors for the Iranian horti-cultural industry.

EsmaeilFallahi

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Esmaeil “Essie” Fallahi is a Professor and ProgramDirector of Pomology at the University ofIdaho, Parma, Idaho 83660, USA, email: efalla-hi@uidaho.edu

Ahmad Boland Nazar is a horticulturist at FadakAgricultural Complex, Qum, Iran, email: fadako-live@hotmail.com

Mohammad Reza Naeini is a member of theScientific Board of the Agricultural and NaturalResources Research Center, Qum, Iran, email:mohammadreza_naeini@yahoo.com

Reza Salehi is a Ph.D. student in the Departmentof Horticulture, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran,email: salehir@ut.ac.ir

Ahmad BolandNazar

MohammadReza Naeini

Reza Salehi

However, Iranian horticulture faces major chal-lenges and requires substantial improvements.For example there are hundreds of native appleand pear cultivars that have been growing inIran for many centuries. Although someattempt has been made to preserve invaluablegermplasm, a large number of native varietiesof fruits such as walnuts, apples, plums, andpears are becoming extinct. A substantial num-ber of valuable date palms were destroyedduring the 8-year Iran-Iraq war. In addition tothe native germplasm, numerous new cultivarsof apples, pears, plums, cherries, grapes, citrus,olive, kiwifruit, and other fruits are grown inIran. Postharvest transportation and storage of

The olive industry of Iran: (A) modern olive orchard; (B) chimney to convert hot wind to coolair; (C) olives stored in cooled air storage in Qum; and (D) processed olives for export market.

horticultural crops is one of the most importantissues facing Iranian horticulture. Iranians preferto consume their fruits when they are almostripe. Thus, harvesting at an earlier stage ofmaturity is not very popular in Iran. This issue,combined with lack of sufficient storage facili-ties, leads to a very high percentage of culls infruits, vegetables, and flowers. Packing facilitiesand containers are poor. Fruits and vegetablesare often packed in small and fragile woodenboxes and wrapped in shredded paper and aretransported in non-refrigerated units. Althoughsome modern packing houses are built in vari-ous regions, they are insufficient. Although thecut flower industry is thriving in all regions, par-ticularly close to large cities, storage and trans-portation of flowers is a major issue and requi-res new technology. Extension horticultural ser-vices in Iran also need major improvement, par-ticularly for remote areas.

Postharvest technology in Iran: (A) package of apples for Mecca pilgrims; (B) Sorkhdasht mod-ern fruit packing house in Damavand; (C) apples in cold storage, Karaj; and (D) transportationof fruit.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 29

New Books, Websites

BOOK REVIEWS

Genetically Modified Crops: TheirDevelopment, Uses, and Risks. G.H. Liangand D.Z. Skinner (eds.). 2004. Food ProductsPress, The Haworth Press, Inc., New York.394p. ISBN 1-56022-280-8 (hardback).$69.95. ISBN 1-56022-281-6 (paperback).$49.95. www.haworthpress.com

This multi-authored work is touted as usable forthe classroom, scientists and the general public.However, it is much too complex and technicalfor the general public, and its use as a textbookis doubtful. There are fourteen chapters in the

book, coveringtopics from trans-formation, transge-ne locus formation,and gene stacking,to genetic enginee-ring in specificcrops. The last chap-ter addresses risksassociated withgenetically engi-neered crops.Referrals to reviewsfound elsewheremake the book diffi-cult to follow. Infor-mation in manycases is general and

serves more as a literature review than a text-book. It has a decent bibliography and index,but the organization of topics did not generallyflow well. There are several chapters that detailtransformation in specific crops, such as wheat,rice, cotton, sorghum, medicago, corn, soy-bean, vegetable crops, and turfgrass. Somewere well done with rather extensive literaturecitations. Many authors in these chapters arenot well known, but have experience transfor-ming the crops they write about. GeneticallyModified Crops would be useful as an overviewand could serve as a resource for those wishingto learn more about crop transformation.

Reviewed by Dr. Kathryn Orvis, Purdue University,West Lafayette, IN, USA

Postharvest Physiology and HypobaricStorage of Fresh Produce. S.P. Burg. 2004.CABI Publishing. 672p. ISBN 0 85199 801 1(hardback). £120.00 (US$199.00).www.cabi-publishing.org

There are several things that one notices imme-diately about this book, even before opening it.

The first is its size. Its weight is 1,574 g makingit the largest single volume on postharvest phy-siology, at least that I know of. Nowadays,almost all texts or comprehensive review booksare composed of chapters by different authorsand are into 2nd or later editions. Not so withthis book. There is only one author and it is inits first edition. The author’s name - Dr. StanleyP. Burg - is important to note. Dr. Burg receivedhis Ph.D. (Harvard University) in 1958 onBiogenesis of Ethylene. He proceeded to publisha number of original research articles on ethyle-ne physiology through the 1960s and early1970s that made him an icon in plant physiolo-gy and postharvest biology and technology. His1967 paper, Molecular requirements for thebiological activity of ethylene in ‘PlantPhysiology’ is listed in Classic Papers inHorticultural Science (J. Janick, editor)(http://www.ashs.org/ashspress/classic.html).Thereafter, he turned his attention to the com-mercialization of hypobaric (low-pressure) pre-servation of fresh foods and the vacuum gaugeon the cover of the book clearly signals the aut-hor’s intent to highlight the potential of hypo-baric storage. As many postharvest expertsknow, hypobaric storage has not been verypopular. Dr. Burg’s book may singlehandedlyrevive it.

Dr. Burg’s 47 years of knowledge is clearly evi-dent in the book’s content. The 88 pages ofreferences in the Bibliography, including cita-tions into 2003, are a testament to his thoroughknowledge of the literature. The main chapterheadings are: Introduction; Origins of the lowpressure concept; Gas and vapour mass trans-port; Oxygen, carbon dioxide, ammonia, andcyanide; Ethylene; Heat transfer and water loss;Postharvest diseases and physiological disor-

ders; Insect quarantine; Technical difficultiesassociated with laboratory hypobaric research;Horticultural commodity requirements; Meatstorage; Warehouse design; Intermodal contai-ner design; and Conclusions. The chapter hea-dings are quite appropriate. Each one has twoelements. The first element is an authoritativereview of the topic and the second element isa discourse on its relationship to hypobaricconditions and storage. Thus the reader is real-ly getting 2 books for the price of one. The textis virtually error-free with numerous informati-ve tables and figures. The only possible wea-kness is the under-representation of the latestknowledge on ethylene effects in postharvestbiology, resulting from recent research using 1-MCP, the new anti-ethylene compound.

This book is a unique personal perspectivefrom one of the brightest and most passionateminds in postharvest biology and technology.Both seasoned researchers and studentsshould acquire and use this book as an autho-ritative reference on both postharvest phyiolo-gy and hypobaric storage. It should be notedthat Dr. Burg is an invited speaker at the ISHSCA2005 conference in July, 2005 in Michigan,USA (http://hrt.msu.edu/ca2005/) and it will bea rare opportunity to meet him and maybeeven have him autograph a copy of his bookfor you.

Reviewed by Robert Prange, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Kentville, Nova Scotia, Canada

NEW TITLES

Benton Jones Jr., J. 2004. Hydroponics: APractical Guide for the Soilless Grower. 2nd ed.CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. 308p. ISBN:0849331676. $89.95.

Bhattacharjee, S.K. 2004. LandscapeGardening and Design with Plants. AkhilBooks, New Delhi, India. xxvi + 512p. ISBN8179100855 (hardback). $80. www.akhil-books.com

FAO, FLD, IPGRI. 2004. Forest genetic resourcesconservation and management. Vol. 1:Overview, concepts and some systematicapproaches. International Plant GeneticResources Institute, Rome, Italy. 106p. ISBN 92-9043-648-4.

IPGRI and COMAV. 2004. Descriptors forPepino (Solanum muricatum). InternationalPlant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy,and Centro de Conservación y Mejora de laAgrodiversidad, Valencia, Spain. 48p. ISBN 92-9043-616-6. $10.00.

The books listed here are non-ISHS-publications. For ISHS publications covering these or

other subjects, visit the ISHS website www.ishs.org or the Acta Horticulturae website

www.actahort.org

ISHS • 30

McLoughlin, Catherine and Taji, Acram (eds.).2005. Teaching in the Sciences: Learner-Centered Approaches. Food Products Press, The Haworth Press, Inc., New York. 228p. ISBN 1-56022-263-8 (hardback). $39.95. ISBN1-56022-264-6 (paperback). $29.95.www.haworthpress.com

Narayanasamy, P. 2005. Immunology in PlantHealth and Its Impact on Food Safety. FoodProducts Press, The Haworth Press, Inc., NewYork. xviii + 412p. ISBN 1-56022-286-7 (hard-back). $79.95. ISBN 1-56022-287-5 (paper-back). $49.95. www.haworthpress.com

Reed, B.M., Engelmann, F., Dulloo, M.E. andEngels, J.M.M. 2004. Technical guidelines forthe management of field and in vitro germ-plasm collections. IPGRI Handbooks for

Genebanks No. 7. International Plant GeneticResources Institute, Rome, Italy. 106p. ISBN 92-9043-640-9.

Sacandé, M., Jøker, D., Dulloo, M.E. andThomsen, K.A. (eds.). 2004. Comparative stora-ge biology of tropical tree seeds. InternationalPlant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.363p. ISBN 92-9043-641-7.

Tromp, J., Webster, A.D. and Wertheim, S.J.(eds.). 2005. Fundamentals of Temperate ZoneTree Fruit Production. Backhuys Publishers. xvi +400p. ISBN 90-5782-152-4 (hardback). € 160.www.backhuys.com

WEBSITES

http://information.cabi.org/t/479/5870/587/0/:

CAB Abstracts Archive, covering the literaturefrom 1910 to 1972 with over 1,8 millionrecords on every aspect of agricultural science,veterinary medicine, nutrition and naturalresources, available electronically for the veryfirst time.

http://www.geneconserve.pro.br: Gene Conserve: An electronic journal devotedto conservation of crop genetic resources withemphasis on cassava. Edited by Nagib M.A.Nassar.

http://www.stewartpostharvest.com/: StewartPostharvest Review: A new electronic journal,combining a summary of advances in eachtopic with expert commentary from internatio-nal authors on new research articles.

Courses and MeetingsThe following are non-ISHS events. Make sure to check out the

Calendar of ISHS Events for an extensive listing of all ISHS mee-

tings. For updated information log on to www.ishs.org/calendar

Special Session “Landscape Design and Nature in Urban Environmentwithin the 2005 IASME/ WSEAS International Conference on Energy,Environment, Ecosystems and Sustainable Development, 12-14 July 2005,Vouliagmeni, Athens, Greece. Info: Dr Julia N. Georgi, P.O. Box 13680,10310 Athens, Greece, Phone: (30)2106914064, (30)210 604 6954, mol.(30)6944373022, web: http://www.worldses. org/conferences/2005/greece/energy/index.html

Learning from EU: Reducing Impact of Mycotoxins in Tropical Agriculturewith emphasis on Health and Trade in Africa, 13-16 September 2005,Accra, Ghana. Info: Dr. Ranajit Bandyopadhyay (IITA), r.bandyopadhyay@cgiar. org; Dr. Angelo Visconti (ISPA), angelo.visconti @ispa.cnr.it; Dr.Joseph Cobbina (CSIR), j_cobbina@hotmail.com; web: www.iita.org/myco-toxinconf (under construction)

EUCARPIA Tomato 2005 - XV Meeting of the EUCARPIA Tomato WorkingGroup, 20-23 September 2005, Bari, Italy. Info: Prof. M. Amenduni, Dr. G.Bubici or Dr. C. Colella, Department of Biology and Plant Pathology, viaAmendola 165/A, 70126 Bari, Italy, Phone: (39)080 5442926, Fax:(39)080 5442906, email: amenduni@agr.uniba.it, giovabubi@email.it orc.colella@agr.uniba.it

2nd Solanaceae Genome Workshop, 25-29 September 2005, Ischia, Italy.Info: Prof. L. Frusciante, 2nd Solanaceae Genome Workshop Committee,Dept. of Soil, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Naples, ViaUniversità 100, 80055 Portici (NA), Italy, Phone: (39)081 2539024, Fax: (39)

081 7753579, email: committee@solanaceae2005.org, web: www.solana-ceae2005.org

Agricultural Training Programmes: Crop Production and WaterManagement; Agro Business Management; Horticulture and FloricultureManagement, September 2005, Galillee College, Israel. Info: Ms. RuthFishman, Director, Agriculturl Training Department, Galillee College,Israel, Phone: (972)4 9837444, Mobile: (972)52 5321218, Fax: (972)49830227, email: rfishman@galilcol.ac.il, web: www.galilcol.ac.il

International Training Workshop on Protected Agriculture, 21 November -4 December 2005, Yangling, China. Info: Mr. Wang Jucang, InternationalExchange Center, Yangling Demonstration Zone of Agricultural Hi-techIndustries, 1 Xinqiao North Road, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China, Phone:(86)29-87036980, Fax: (86)29-87036061, email: wjc@ylagri.gov.cn

Third International Conference on Plants & Environmental Pollution(ICPEP-3), 29 November - 2 December 2005, Lucknow, India. Info:Secretary, International Society of Environmental Botanists, NationalBotanical Research Institute, Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow - 226001, India,Phone: (91)522-2205831 to 35 ext 223, Fax: (91)522-2205836 /2205839, email: isebnbrilko@satyam.net.in / kjahmad@sancharnet.in,web: http://www.geocities.com/isebindia/index.html

6th International Cool Climate Symposium for Viticulture & Oenology(ICCS 2006), 6-10 February 2006, Christchurch, New Zealand. Info:Professional Development Group, PO Box 84, Lincoln University,Canterbury, New Zealand, Phone: (64)3 325 2811 ext 8955, Fax: (64)3325 3685, email: iccs2006@lincoln.ac.nz, web: www.iccs2006.org.nz

OpportunitiesPostharvest Scientist (Consultant), AVRDC

regional office in Bangkok, ThailandPostdoctoral Fellow - Plant Molecular Virology

and Genetics, AVRDC headquarters, Taiwan

Lab Director/Lead Research Scientist, GoldenState Bulb Growers, Inc., USA

Molecular Plant Breeder, AVRDC headquarters,Taiwan

Assistant Professor Enology, Oregon StateUniversity, USA

For more information visitwww.ishs.org/general/index.htm

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 31

SYMPOSIA AND WORKSHOPS

Section Nuts and MediterraneanClimate Fruits

Fifth Int’l Walnut Symposium

INTRODUCTION

Held in Sorrento from the 5th to the 9th ofNovember 2004, the 5th International WalnutSymposium presented the current status of theJuglans regia species in all its different aspects(fruit production, timber production, liquor andrelative derivatives). This approach stems fromthe indiscriminate nature of the various biologi-cal research aspects, regardless of the final pro-duct. Organised by two conveners with diffe-rent backgrounds, the conference aimed to pre-sent an integrated view through scientific ses-sions as well as technical visits. The conferencewas preceded by a technical tour in Veneto.Held in Sorrento, the town that gave its nameto one of the oldest Italian varieties, the sympo-sium was attended by participants coming from28 countries, among them numerous develo-ping countries.

SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS

Economical Aspects

Several researchers demonstrated the growingeconomic and commercial interest for walnutcultivation. A representative of the InternationalNut Council detailed the worldwide situation ofwalnut production and consumption. Attentionwas specifically drawn to the USA, China andthe Middle-East domination of the market, evenin Europe. The European countries, with Franceas leader, are at the moment developing amodern walnut production system, as shown byNogalba, a production conglomerate and inRomagna where organic farming methods areapplied. Another fact brought to our attentionby the Spanish presentation is the demand fromconsumers for specific quality standards. Theperspectives offered by the walnut market havestimulated interest from Northern Europeancountries like the UK and the Netherlands aswell as South American and non-traditionalAsian countries.

Genetics and Breeding

An overview of the different kinds of researchcarried out, ranging from taxonomical classifica-tion of Juglandaceae to breeding programmes,were presented. An interesting contributionwas a study carried out by cpDNA intergeneticspacer markers, which demonstrated that theorigin of the section Juglans is ancient in con-

trast to the fossil evidence, and that the evolu-tion of Persian walnuts and butternuts happe-ned at a different rate than black walnuts. Inthe UK, renewed interest for walnut led to theestablishment of research activities devoted toearly growth of walnut in the UK and the beha-viour of progenies/provenances fromKyrgyzstan, as well as programmes aimed atgenetic improvement. The University ofCalifornia, famous for its breeding programmessince 1948, is developing controlled pollinationcrosses in young orchards, for increasing thebreeding efficiency, by traditional and advancedtechniques. Backcross breeding aims at introdu-cing the gene for resistance to cherry roll virus.The genetic variation among and within popu-lations is undertaken to verify the interaction ofgenetic and environmental characteristics. Thepreliminary analysis of leaf images by an opticalscanner provides a new method for the charac-terisation and assessment of genetic variability.Developing countries are carrying out a traditio-nal broad spectrum of research activities on J.regia, where trees still contain a wide geneticand morphologic variability interesting for bree-ders and scientists alike. Appropriate programshave been started to validate the selection andtesting of local varieties and increase the gro-wing efficiency and production quality. Severalpresentations showed worldwide efforts for col-

lection, evaluation and characterisation ofmaterial of interest for different production pur-poses. Discussion on genetic resources conser-vation was carried out, concluding that germ-plasm should be protected on a global level asrichness for humanity.

Biotechnology

Great attention in this session was given tointer-specific hybrids due to the possibility ofconcentrating more advantageous characteris-tics of parents, such as timber and nuts quality,fast growth, upright stem and disease resistan-ce. Presented were the application of molecularmarkers as well as advanced biotechnologies,both used for improving selected plants, witheconomical and natural values. At the momentthe most useful markers seem to be microsatel-lites (Simple Sequence Repeat, SSR). Walnutnuclear SSR has been developed in the USA byWoeste and applied in Italy to discriminate J.regia and J. nigra genotypes and their hybrids,and to characterise cultivars. Modification ofnative germplasm for commercial reasons isnecessary when certain desired traits are mis-sing. A genetic improvement program on J.nigra tested the effect of genotype and kana-mycin selection on agrobacterium mediatedtransformation efficiency, yielding stable trans-

Participants of the Symposium.

ISHS • 32

genic lines. It needs to be reminded thatAgrobacterium tumefaciens is, however, thecause of crown gall disease. This infection,widespread in California orchards and quantifi-able by the pathogen presence in the soil, wasstudied by soil DNA extraction, PCR amplifica-tion and electrophoresis. There was a positivecorrelation between the observed disease inci-dence in the field and the presence of A. tume-faciens obtained, yielding a valid examinationtool. Finally, due to the importance of plant aga-mic regeneration, which in walnut doesn’t seemto be very common, embryogenesis of differenttissues was examined. In the absence of normalroot and shoot production from walnut somaticembryos, the effect of abscissic acid on embryomaturation was also investigated, with earlystage development as best suited to ABA treat-ment.

Biology and Physiology

Mechanisms controlling plant growth and pro-duction in different conditions were discussed.One important aspect taken into considerationwas adaptation to low temperatures. To under-stand the processes involved, attention wasfocused on two proteins involved in sugar trans-port. For walnut starch degradation and thesubsequent release of sucrose is of major impor-tance to repair metabolism. The importance ofwinter biology as preparation for the next vege-tative season was demonstrated. The utilisationof walnut in mixed plantations was studiedusing oxygen stable isotopes as tracers for thewater usage by the different species. It showedthe potential benefit from association withsome woody species or shrubs. Tight relation-ships exist between photosynthetic efficiency ofintercropped plants. Thus, it can be assumedthat a relationship exists between leaflet areaand photosynthetic efficiency. Also demonstra-

ted was the interaction between phenolic com-pounds and different cultivar stage develop-ments. Moreover some phenolic compoundsseem to be involved in the defence mechanismsof the walnut plant.

Propagation and Rootstocks

The difficulty of rooting and grafting of walnutspecies means that propagation remains underinvestigation. Focus lies on seed treatment forseedling production before the grafting stepand the influence of genetic provenance onquality. Problems of poor plant growth due torestriction of root apparatus were encountered,but overcome by hormone treatment of theroots. Still under investigation are the propaga-tion of rootstocks and hybrid resistance todisease and nematodes as well as the concernover the production of cloned own-rootedvarieties. Also under research are some physio-logical aspects to clarify mechanisms of in vitrorooting or embryo regeneration. Due to theirpractical importance for plant nurseries, data onwalnut grafting were reported using both tradi-tional and new methods, like hypocotyl graftingand hot callusing.

Diseases and Plant Protection

Selection of disease resistant varieties is of inte-rest to both scientist and producers alike, redu-cing the amount of chemical compoundsneeded and so saving the environment. VariousPhytophthora species were isolated from diffe-rent plant parts and from soil under decliningtrees, and classified on the basis of morphologi-cal characters and molecular markers.Phytophthora spp. cause similar symptoms todrought or nutritional deficiency. The declineand death can be due to a combination ofPhytophthora spp. Clones of different walnut

hybrids were evaluated for resistance to P. citri-cola, and the tolerant ones can be used forimproving rootstocks. Phytophthora spp. andBrenaria nigrifluence cause serious damage inIran. Pathogens were isolated to study the reac-tion of different cultivars and “false wood”plants. Anthracnose is one of the most impor-tant diseases and Italian provenances identifiedas resistant can be used as the basis for theorganisation of breeding resources and produc-tion of improved material. In NorthernCalifornia, walnut blight was controlled usingcupper compounds augmented with Manex. Anearly season bactericide spray program seems tobe promising.

Orchard and Forestry Management

Problems concerning the hedging training sys-tem and their suitable cultivation methods werediscussed. Results suggest that less frequentpruning is likely to increase productivity andthat irrigation and nutrient management in theyear after the hedging have the highest poten-tial impact on canopy development. Also somehedging strategies are more advantageous thanothers and more advantageous than non-pru-ned treatment by taking care of the solar lightmanagement. Another aspect related to theorchard management is the water manage-ment. Research carried out by Bongi et al.showed that J. regia seems to be a rootstockadapted to slower and wider water suppliesthan riparian rootstocks in Argentina. For inten-sive cultivation the necessity for systematicmanurings and irrigation as well as soil structu-re adaptation in poor areas clearly emerged.

Nut and Wood Processing

Research aimed at the improvement of moistu-re content after nut drying, a factor that cancompromise shelf-life. The interest in shelf-lifehas stimulated research into the role of lipoxy-genases (LOX) on walnut quality and the pre-sence in purified lipid bodies can indicate a roleof this enzyme in nut quality. The nutritionalvalue of the nut was also investigated andemphasis was placed on the content of taurine,uncommon in plants, but frequently present inanimal tissues as a metabolite of sulphuredamino acids, in the nut. The chemical composi-tion and health property of walnut brandy wasalso studied. The presence of phenolic com-pounds, deemed to have anti-carcinogenic pro-perties, was discussed. An exposition of diffe-rent walnut products, coming from all regionsof the globe, was held.

Workshop

A special half-day workshop was held on wal-nut cultivation in China. The recent reorganisa-tion of Chinese agriculture meant that walnutbecame also important for its timber producti-on, and not only for its traditional fruit produc-tion. The Italian National Research Council

A view of walnut products from the table exhibition held by the participants.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 33

CONTACT

Damiano Avanzato, CRA-Istituto Sperimentaleper la Frutticoltura di Roma, Via di Fioranello52, 00134 Roma, Italy, Phone: +39 0679348186, Fax: +39 06 79340158, email:davanzato@mclink.it

Maria Emilia Malvolti, CNR-Istituto di BiologiaAgro-ambientale e Forestale, V.le Marconi 2,05010 Porano (TR), Italy, Phone: +39 0763374913, Fax: +39 0763 374980, email:mimi@ibaf.cnr.it

(CNR) has been particularly active in this area,with complementary Chinese partners (theChinese Academy for Agricultural Sciences,CAAS, and the Chinese Academy of Forestry,CAF) for the promotion and introduction ofinnovative agricultural models aimed at impro-ving agricultural production, and the creation ofnew products responding to the recent evolu-tion of Chinese production systems to industria-lisation. Some results of the project have beenpresented together with those obtained byChinese researchers. Factors affecting in vitromicro-shoot rooting of precious Chinese culti-vars were detailed as well as the application ofparthenocarpy in genetic purification of walnutvariety.

TECHNICAL TOURS

The symposium included a pre-symposium tourin Veneto, where a modern orchard farm coo-perative (Nogalba) was visited. The technical

tour included the visit of the Petillegno enterpri-se in order to visit a wood processing industry,which uses wood coming from Italy and the restof the world. The second part was a visit of the“Besana” enterprise, specialised in processing,packaging and marketing of Italian and world-wide nuts and other dry fruits.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the expression of interest, the acti-ve participation, and the discussions obtained, itcan be concluded that the 5th InternationalWalnut Symposium achieved a remarkable suc-cess. The participation of farmers, scientists andstakeholders and the participation of peoplefrom all over the world offered a concreteopportunity to develop active and fruitful colla-boration between people working on J. regiaspecies.

Note: At the end of the symposium DamianoAvanzato was elected Chair of the ISHS

Working Group on Walnuts and Australia waschosen as the site of the next WalnutSymposium.

Damiano Avanzato and Maria Emilia Malvolti

Section Ornamental PlantsNinth Int’l Symposium on Flower Bulbs

The IXth International Symposium on FlowerBulbs was held in Niigata, Japan on 19-22 April,2004. A total of 148 delegates from 17 coun-tries attended the well-organized and thought-provoking symposium that featured three daysof oral scientific presentations, posters and a fullday professional tour. The symposium was hos-ted by the ISHS and the Japanese Society ofHorticulture Science (JSHS).

This was the first Flower Bulb Symposium inEast Asia, giving the non-Asian participants anexcellent opportunity to gain a higher under-standing of the organization and conduct ofhorticultural research and information dissemi-nation in the region.The program covered several aspects of flowerbulb horticulture, including bulb production

and storage, genetic resources of “new” and“old” genera, breeding, propagation, physiolo-gy, flowering and crop protection. While thesethemes have been typical in recent Flower BulbSymposia, they in fact represent the major areasof importance for both industry and science.One possible exception might be the area ofcrop protection, which was substantially lessrepresented than in many past symposia. One

Participants of the Symposium.

ISHS • 34

can speculate that a combination of reducedtravel funds, a plethora of competing meetingsand a worldwide reduction in scientists activelyworking on flower bulb crop protection mightexplain the reduced presence in this highly criti-cal area.

Even so, the environmental impact of flowerbulb production was considered, with reportsdescribing the development of lower-impactfarming systems. Unfortunately, Dutch expe-rience has been that there is a reluctance on thepart of farmers to fully embrace more ecologi-cally sound techniques in bulb production. Itwas suggested this might be due to the entiresocial context of flower bulb production, withmyriad voices competing for the farmer’s atten-tion. Thus, pilot programs are being developedto collect and synthesize diverse inputs to help“drive” the final desired result. Work continueson defining appropriate conditions for zero-

runoff (hydroponic) forcing systems for tulip,iris, and lily.

As in past Flower Bulb Symposia, there continu-es to be a deep interest in the discovery, deve-lopment, and appropriate exploitation of newspecies. Asian species such as Cucurma wereprominent, as were less commonly studiedgenera such as Lycoris, Hymenocallis,Rhodophiala, Leucocoryne, Tricyrtis, Littonia,Gloriosa, and Polygonatum. We were treated toan impressive body of work on flower bulbbreeding and genetics and biotechnology. Thereis active interest worldwide in defining and refi-ning protocols for in vitro propagation of newand existing crops. While the vast majority ofthe worldwide industry is built on just five gene-ra (Tulipa, Narcissus, Hyacinthus, Lilium andGladiolus), the interest in developing new scien-tific insight leading to economically viable con-sumer products is high. As pointed out in the2000 South African symposium, however, manyspecies (indeed, genera), have fundamentalflaws that will severely limit their utility as floralproducts, and major breakthroughs, especiallyin the area of postharvest life, will be requiredfor a commercially viable product.

Due to their relative “dormancy” (I use this termin quotes, as we clearly understand that mostflower bulbs are never truly dormant), flowerbulbs are relatively easily transported longdistances from their point of production to theiruse destination. Transportation problemsremain in the industry, and one of the largest isthe ethylene/Fusarium syndrome. We presentedresearch showing that tulip cultivars vary dra-matically in their ability to support ethylene pro-duction when infected by Fusarium. Dutchresearch was presented showing the efficacy of1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP) for reducing

ethylene problems in tulip. Other studies on theeffects of temperature extremes, and of internalmechanisms to resist Fusarium rounded outconsideration of flower bulb biology as relatedto transportation.

The control of flowering and bulbing continuesto be a major research area, with both molecu-lar and traditional approaches being presentedin Japan. Work is progressing in Japan on theidentification of genes that might be involved inbulbing, or at the very least, that respond tocold. Storage and programming protocols toretard or accelerate flowering were presentedfor a variety of crops, including some that areclassically considered herbaceous perennials,and not flower bulbs per se. A number of dis-cussions were held around a proposal to deve-lop one or more model bulbous systems toattempt to coordinate specific research ques-tions internationally.

In the business meeting of the ISHS WorkingGroup on Flower Bulbs, attendees discussedways to improve communication in the periodbetween symposia. To this end, the incomingChairman, Prof. William Miller, agreed to initia-te a listserve to promote discussion and interac-tion among bulb scientists. Discussants urgedgreater inclusion of herbaceous perennials withthis symposium, as many issues with perennialsare common to Flowerbulbs (“dormancy”, flo-wering control, transportation requirements,etc.). Finally, The Netherlands was selected asthe location of the Xth International Symposiumon Flower Bulbs, to be held April/May of 2008.

William B. Miller

CONTACT

Dr. William B. Miller, Chair of the ISHS WorkingGroup on Flower Bulbs, 2004-2008, Dept.Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca NY14853, USA, email: wbm8@cornell.edu

Participants observing growth and flowering of many tulip cultivars at the experimental fieldof the Niigata Agricultural Research Institute, Horticultural Research Center.

Gladiolus corms at the Tonami TulipFestival, individually labeled for retailsales.

Sales display of intact, flowering tulipplants for immediate planting in the gar-den, Tonami Tulip Festival.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 35

From 13-18 June 2004, scientists in Hungaryled by Dr. Károly Hrotkó hosted the 8thInternational Symposium on IntegratingCanopy, Rootstock and EnvironmentalPhysiology in Orchard Systems, under the auspi-ces of the ISHS. In what has become a long tra-dition, the participants of three working groupsof the ISHS Section Pome and Stone Fruits (theWorking Group on Rootstock Breeding andEvaluation, the Working Group on Orchard andPlantation Systems and the Working Group onEnvironmental Physiology of Fruit Crops) gatherto a common symposium, which focuses on thecomplex interaction of rootstock, canopy archi-tecture, training and pruning, and environmen-tal physiology, integrated into a great puzzlethat is called the orchard system.

This is the first time that this symposium hasbeen held in Central Europe. The selection ofHungary as the site for the 8th symposium pro-ved to be a good choice, since the meetingattracted a large group of participants (142 par-ticipants from 35 countries from 5 continents).During the symposium 154 papers, 64 oral and90 posters, were presented. The symposiumvenue was in Budapest on the highest point ofthe hilly district of Buda away from the noisydowntown, which offered a calm place sur-rounded by green for the symposium sessionsand discussions.

The sponsoring organization was the HungarianSociety for Horticultural Science, which is a rela-tively new member of the ISHS, founded in1993. Since then the number of Hungarian ISHSmembers has increased rapidly. Today there arearound 140 members, who actively participate

in different working groups and symposia. TheHungarian Society collaborated with theHorticultural Board of the Hungarian Academyof Science and the Faculty of HorticulturalScience, Corvinus University of Budapest toorganize the symposium. This event was finan-cially supported by the Hungarian Ministry ofEducation, the Hungarian Ministry ofAgriculture and Rural Development, theHungarian Collective Agricultural MarketingCentre and local agricultural organizations andcompanies.

Several dignitaries were represented in the ope-ning ceremony, Dr. Béla Mang, State Secretaryof the Ministry of Education, Bertalan Székely,General Director of the Agricultural Departmentof the Ministry of Agriculture and RuralDevelopment, Dr. Tamás Mészáros, Rector,Corvinus University of Budapest, Dr. MagdolnaTóth, Dean of the Faculty of HorticulturalSciences and János Papp, Chair of theHorticultural Board of the Hungarian Academyof Sciences. After the welcome address of Prof.Dr. Károly Hrotkó, Chair of the HungarianSociety for Horticultural Science, Dr. A.D.Webster, Chair of the ISHS Section Pome andStone Fruits gave the opening address. Thepapers and posters were presented in three suc-cessive sessions, focused on Rootstocks,Environmental Physiology, and OrchardSystems.

Section Pome and Stone FruitsEighth Int’l Symposium on IntegratingCanopy, Rootstock and EnvironmentalPhysiology in Orchard Systems

Opening session: Dr. A.D. Webster’s opening address.

Participants of the Symposium.

ISHS • 36

The keynote lecture for the rootstock session,which was given by Dr. Károly Hrotkó, gave anoverview on the progress and challenges inrootstock research. Due to the considerableincreased breeding activity, a large number ofnew rootstocks is available to fruit growers in awide range of vigour for each species, not onlyfor apple, but also for pear, cherry, plum, peachand apricot. However in most species, the gene-tic diversity and inheritability of rootstock cha-racters is not well understood and the gene-pool utilized for rootstock breeding is narrow.More rapid progress could be achieved with thedevelopment of marker-assisted breeding ofrootstocks, which would suppose greater gene-tic work with each species. The development ininnovative orchard systems also may alter thetargets of rootstock breeders, thus a continuousconversation is needed between orchard systemand rootstock research. The global warmingprocess might also bring challenges for tempe-rate zone fruit growing. In some regions increa-sed cold tolerance and winter hardiness will beneeded while in other regions increaseddrought tolerance and efficient water utilizationwill have increased importance. The speakeremphasized the importance of cooperativeresearch projects carried out or planned in theUSA and Europe. In the rootstock session 24other oral papers and 52 posters were presen-ted on recent results with pome and stone fruitrootstock breeding and evaluation in orchardconditions.

The keynote lecture for the environmental phy-siology session was given by Dr. Luca Corelli-Grappadelli. He emphasized that in the modernfruit growing the orchard is considered as a bio-factory where engines are driven by interceptedlight. Yet he asked the question: “Is maximizingorchard light interception always the best choi-ce?” In addition to intercepted light, the distri-bution of the light throughout the canopy isanother pillar of fruit tree productivity, as is therole of different leaf types in supporting fruitgrowth. Linear relationships between spur leafarea and spur light interception have beenreported for apple, which underlines the role ofprimary spur leaves in supporting early fruitletgrowth. The light response of leaf photosynthe-sis is saturated around or under 50% of full sunfor most species; however, the whole canopylight response curves are more gradual and maynot saturate. These plants may have adaptivemechanisms to high light intensities. The keyno-te lecture aimed to foster discussion on optimi-sing light management. A further 19 oral pre-sentations and 21 posters gave an excellentinsight into the recent research activities in thisfield.

The keynote speaker of the session on orchardand plantation systems was Dr. TerenceRobinson who gave an historical overview onthe recent advances in orchard systems. Overthe last 50 years, planting densities for bothpome and stone fruits have increased dramati-cally. The introduction of dwarfing rootstocks

has been the key element in the developmentof high density systems. However, several otheradvances such as the planting of featheredtrees, minimal pruning strategies and studies onlimb angle have also contributed to this deve-lopment. Economic studies with apple and pearhave shown that the optimum density is lessthan the maximum that can be successfullymanaged. The march toward higher densitieshas been limited by economic factors, especial-ly the price of the tree. Future improvements inhigh density orchard systems will require impro-ved rootstocks, which are better adapted to bio-tic and abiotic stress conditions, improved gene-tic control of vegetative growth, flowering andfruit growth as well as improved understandingof the physiology of pruning and thinning. Inthis session a further 18 oral and 17 poster pre-sentations reported on recent results of partici-pating researchers.

The technical tour on the third day visited theResearch Station of the Faculty of HorticulturalScience, Corvinus University of Budapest, theResearch Institute for Fruit Growing andOrnamentals Budapest-Érd and fruit farms inRáckeve and Agárd. The participants receivedan insight into the present situation of theHungarian fruit industry, which is now in a tran-sitional stage after the political and economicalchanges in the early 90’s in Central and EasternEurope. In the pre-symposium tour, participantsvisited apple and sour cherry fruit farms in theEastern Hungary fruit growing region of Nyírségand research stations in Újfehértó andDebrecen. The tour also included tourist high-lights in Hortobágy National Park (Puszta) andthe vineyards of Tokaj. After the symposium atwo-day post-symposium tour showcased stonefruit orchards around Lake Balaton in WesternHungary, and apple growers in Zala County.Vineyards around Lake Balaton and Tihanypeninsula were also visited.

In the business meeting the participants of thethree working groups accepted the proposal ofTerence Robinson to organize the next combi-ned meeting in Geneva, New York (USA) in June2008. During the symposium the WarsawGroup of East-European Apple RootstockResearchers also held their business meeting.They decided to continue their cooperation andorganize the next seminar in Babtai, Lithuania,in the Fall of 2005.

The symposium participants also enjoyed seve-ral special events on the culture and history ofHungary including a wonderful dinner cruise onthe Danube and a show of Hungarian horse-manship. The conference was concluded with awonderful banquet at the military castle ofBudapest where the three working groupsawarded a lifetime achievement award to Dr.A.D. Webster for his outstanding contributionto developments in the field of orchard systemsand rootstock research. In the same ceremonythe ISHS medal was awarded to Dr. KárolyHrotkó in recognition of his meritorious serviceto the society as convener of the 8th

International Symposium on IntegratingCanopy, Rootstock and EnvironmentalPhysiology in Orchard Systems.

Károly Hrotkó and Terence Robinson

CONTACT

Prof. Károly Hrotkó, Department of Fruit Science,Corvinus University of Budapest, 1518Budapest, Pf. 53, Hungary, email: karoly.hrot-ko@uni-corvinus.hu

Prof. Terence Robinson, Department ofHorticultural Sciences, Cornell University, 630W. North Street, 14456 Geneva NY, USA, email:tlr1@cornell.edu

Dr. Terence Robinson presenting a life-time achievement award to Dr. Anthony D. Webster.

Dr. Anthony D. Webster, Chair ISHSSection Pome and Stone Fruits, handing out the ISHS Medal Award tothe convener Dr. Károly Hrotkó.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 37

Section Pome and Stone FruitsSixth Int’l Peach Symposium

The 6th International Peach Symposium washeld in Santiago, Chile, on January 9-14, 2005.The meeting was organized by the Facultad deCiencias Agronómicas of the University of Chilein collaboration with the International Societyfor Horticultural Science (ISHS). This event wasfinancially supported by several institutions: FDI-CORFO, FIA, IICA and private sponsors: DowAgroscience, Bayer CropScience, Unitec,Anasac, Estudio Federico Villaseca, AndesNursery Association, Viveros Requinoa, ChiquitaChile, Consorcio de Viveros de Chile, ASOEXand Fedefruta.

The symposium began on Sunday with tworound tables: “Peach Quality” carried out by Dr.

S. Predieri (Bologna, Italy) and “Genomics andTransformation” organized by Dr. R. Scorza(Kearneysville, West Virginia, USA) and Dr. P.Tonutti (Padova, Italy) and followed by 45researchers. The necessity of organizing net-works for promoting information exchange andgenerate collaborative research proposals in thenear future was concluded in both round tables.

In the opening session, the authorities wererepresented by the Dean of the Facultad deCiencias Agronómicas (Prof. M. Silva), the ViceChairman of the ISHS Section Pome and StoneFruits (Prof. T. DeJong), and the Chairman of theISHS Working Group on Peach Culture (Dr. R.Infante).

Seven 40-minute lectures that opened each ses-sion were presented. Ted DeJong presented“Physiological and Developmental Principles ofPeach Tree and Fruit Growth Related toManagement Practices”; Filiberto Loreti “Stateof Arts on Peach Rootstocks and OrchardSystems”; Amos Naor “Irrigation Scheduling ofPeach - Deficit Irrigation at DifferentPhenological Stages and Water StressAssessment”; Silverio Sansavini “State of Artson Breeding Varieties: Biotechnology andGenetics”; Pietro Tonutti “Development ofGenomics Tools for Peach: the Italian ESTreeConsortium”; Carlos Crisosto “Peach Quality &Postharvest Biology and Technology” and L.Miguel Albisu “Peach Market and MarketingTrends”. The topics of this Congress were rela-ted to the following issues: 1) General &Economic Overview, 2) Breeding, Genetics andBiotechnology, 3) Genomics, 4) Rootstocks andOrchard Systems, 5) Fruit and TreeDevelopment, 6) Irrigation Management, 7)Pest Management, 8) Fruit Quality and 9) PostHarvest Biology and Technology. Twenty-fiveoral presentations and 70 posters were presen-ted. The Congress was attended by 110 partici-pants from 13 countries: Italy, USA, Spain,France, Romania, Australia, China, South Africa,Brazil, Argentina, Israel, Canada and Chile.

The meeting was opened with a word of welco-me by the convener, R. Infante, who referred tothe importance of organizing the symposium inChile and, for the first time, in the SouthHemisphere. Chile is the most important peachproducer of the South Hemisphere, followed byArgentina and South Africa. The peach industryis quite important for the local economy, with18,000 ha and an average production of350,000 tons of fruit per year. Peach orchards

Symposium participants visiting Valparaiso city, in the back is the old La Matriz church.

Peach harvest period at Los Andes, 5th region, Chile. Participantshad the opportunity to taste juicy and aromatic fruits.

A partial view of the Aconcagua valley, a nice early peach producing area.

ISHS • 38

are mainly located in the central area, nearSantiago, Maipo valley, and harvest runs fromNovember to March. The Chilean peach indus-try is focused mainly on the global market, USAbeing the most important destination. Thesefruits should travel by ship 20 to 30 days to arri-ve to the final consumer.

During the post symposium tour, we had theopportunity to learn about the Chilean peachindustry, visiting Chiquita’s fruit packing facili-ties and Mr. Chimenti’s orchard, an example ofa well managed farm, where we saw the gro-wer’s own innovations on plum and peach trai-ning systems. The visited area is 60-80 km awayfrom San Antonio and Valparaiso, place ofdeparture of the fruit to the final destination.Valparaiso was visited on Tuesday afternoon,after enjoying a trip and a typical lunch on LosAndes. On the Valparaiso hills we had theopportunity to walk some old streets and enjoya beautiful view of the harbor and the pierswhere the fruit is loaded on the ships.

The most important Chilean nursery(Univiveros), where we could see the simultane-ous propagation of temperate and subtropicalspecies, was visited too. Also we could learnabout the collaborative work on peach breedingfollowed by a group of private nurseries (ANA)associated with a public institution (Universityof Chile). This program is mainly focused toobtain new varieties that could be stored forlong periods without chilling injury symptoms.

On Monday it was voted to determine wherethe 7th International Peach Symposium will becarried out. Dr. Joan Girona got this excellentnomination, so the next symposium will be heldin Spain, probably in the summer of 2009.

On Friday, researchers had the opportunity toparticipate at the Peach Breeders Meeting.More than thirty researchers followed the 9 pre-sentations that showed the last innovations onbreeding programs from Italy, USA, Brasil,Australia and Chile. Also it was a good oppor-tunity to discuss about property rights and the

existing obstacles for a free exchange of germ-plasm among programs. The eating quality ofnew varieties was underlined as a basic goal tobe reached.

The symposium gave us the opportunity to par-ticipate in excellent scientific presentations anddiscussions, in a very friendly environment.Moreover, we could learn little more about thisbeatiful country and its fruit industry. Papers willbe published as a volume of Acta Horticulturaein the near future.

Rodrigo Infante

CONTACT

Dr. Rodrigo Infante, Facultad de CienciasAgronómicas, University of Chile, Casilla 1004,Santiago, Chile, email: rinfante@uchile.cl

Section Vegetables - CommissionPlant Protection

First Int’l Symposium on Tomato Diseases

The First International Symposium on TomatoDiseases (1st ISTD) was held at GrosvenorResort in the Walt Disney World, Orlando,Florida, USA, June 21-24, 2004. TheSymposium was organized under the auspicesof the ISHS, in cooperation with the Universityof Florida, IFAS. Tim Momol and Jeff Jones,plant pathologists at the University of Floridaacted as co-conveners, with the assistance of

Steve Olson, vegetable specialist at the sameUniversity.Over 190 delegates representing academic,industry, and government organizations of over28 countries registered for the Symposium. Allparticipants received the Program and AbstractBook during registration. There were three pre-sentations in the opening session on globallyimportant tomato diseases: Tomato yellow leaf

curl virus (TYLCV), bacterial spot and bacterialwilt. The symposium was divided into 12 scien-tific sessions: Emerging Diseases and Detection,Plant Pathology Extension in 2004 and Beyond,Organic Tomatoes, Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus,Products from IPM Providers and Ag IndustryUpdates, Bacterial Diseases, Bacterial Wilt,Disease Management, Tomato Seed Health,Disease Resistance, Begomoviruses and TheirWhitefly Vectors, and Posters.Emerging Diseases and Detection and PlantPathology Extension in 2004 and BeyondSessions included topics such as diagnostics oftomato diseases, occurrence of new diseases,new technologies and biosecurity.Sessions on Management, Resistance, BacterialDiseases, Tomato Seed Health, OrganicTomatoes and Products from AgriculturalIndustry covered the latest disease managementtactics, resistant cultivars, developments anddisease management products. Biology, epidemiology, and management ofspecific diseases such as Tomato Spotted WiltVirus (TSWV), Bacterial Wilt caused by Ralstoniasolanacearum, Begomoviruses and TheirWhitefly Vectors were presented with experien-ces of presenting scientists worldwide.In addition to the scientific program there weremany opportunities to network and meet withcolleagues around the world during the dailyreceptions and at the Symposium dinner onWednesday.In a special session the participants attendedthe ISHS Business Meeting and Award

Participants of the Symposium. Photo by courtesy of Yasmin Wallas, University of Florida.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 39

Ceremony. Four pioneer scientists, S. Cohen, J.P.Jones, H. Laterrot, and R.E. Stall received the 1stISTD Award as a recognition of their contribu-tions to the field of tomato pathology.

The delegates decided to establish a newWorking Group on Tomato Diseases under theauspices of the ISHS. The 2nd ISTD will be heldin 2007 Fall at Kusadasi, Turkey and will beorganized by Hikmet Saygili, Plant ProtectionDepartment, Faculty of Agriculture, EgeUniversity, Bornova, Izmir, Turkey. H. Saygili hasbeen nominated as the new secretary of the

Working Group. The present acting co-secreta-ries, Tim Momol and Jeff Jones have been nomi-nated as the co-chairmen of the group and willserve for the three-year period to the next mee-ting.This meeting received good media coveragebefore and after the meeting. Some examplescould be viewed at these links: http://southeastfarmpress.com/news/61704Tomato-diseases/ andhttp://southeastfarmpress.com/news/81304Tomato-symposium/

The Symposium papers will be published in aspecial volume of Acta Horticulturae.

Tim Momol

CONTACT

Tim Momol, University of Florida, IFAS, NFREC,Quincy, FL, USA, email: tmomol@ufl.edu

Commission Biotechnology andMolecular Biology

Second Int’l Symposium onAcclimatization and Establishment ofMicropropagated Plants

The Second International Symposium onAcclimatization and Establishment ofMicropropagated Plants was held on the MayanRiviera, Cancun, Mexico from the 22nd to the24th of November 2004. The symposium wasorganized by CICY (Centro de InvestigaciónCientífica de Yucatán) and convened by bothDr. Jorge Santamaría from CICY and Dr. YvesDesjardins from the Horticultural ResearchCenter at Laval University, Canada. The confe-rence was held under the auspices of the ISHSCommission Biotechnology and MolecularBiology and was also sponsored by SEC,COQCYT, Agro-Bio Mexico and theGovernment of Yucatán. Despite the relativelylow attendance, the symposium was a successfrom all points of view. Seventy-nine partici-pants, representing 18 countries, presented atotal of 63 papers of which 28 were orals. Theconference was organized in 9 sessions dealingwith the establishment limitations caused bythe shoot physiology and by poor rooting,genetic stability, acclimatization problems intransformed plants, biotic and abiotic priming,scaling up and field performance problems andtheir impact on the micropropagation industry.A round table also took place to wrap up theevent, present conclusions and future prospectsfor research in this field. Overall, the symposiumwas a great opportunity to meet great people,exchange knowledge and to reiterate theimportance of the acclimatization problems tothe micropropagation industry.

Dr. Santamaría and his team made an outstan-ding job of selecting great on site facility for theconference and organizing a beautiful mid-con-ference tour. The facility for the conference wasthe wonderful all-included Barcelo Resort onthe Riviera Maya. The venue was superb andconducive to fruitful contacts and scientific

exchanges. Within arm’s reach from the beauti-ful Caribbean sea, the conference rooms andtechnical support were excellent. Dr. Santamaríaalso organized a fantastic tour to Tulum, one ofthe nicest archeological sites of the Mayanpeninsula where the participants got anacquaintance with the life style of the pre-Colombian culture and heritage. The day endedby a tour to the Xcaret park and a live perfor-mance depicting the history of the Mayan andMexican people. The Organizing Committeewould like to thank all the participants for theircontribution, and especially the administrative

staff who ran the event very smoothly.Moreover, the conveners would like to acknow-ledge the support of their sponsors withoutwhom this Symposium would not have beenpossible.

Lets Move Micropropagation in the 21stCentury

In a very inspiring keynote lecture entitled‘Micropropagation: the past, present and futu-re’ Dr. Paul Read made a comprehensive returnon the evolution of micropropagation and came

Opening ceremony with the presence ofa representative of the Governor ofQuintana Roo. To the right: Dr. Jorge M.Santamaría, convener of the symposium.

Dr. Yves Desjardins, co-convener of thesymposium, giving one of the openingtalks entitled ‘How “micropropagation-omics” can contribute to a better under-standing of phenomenon taking place inplant tissue culture.’

ISHS • 40

to some insightful forecast of where micropro-pagation might be going in the future.According to him, the advent of new methodo-logies like bioreactors and microenvironmentcontrol (light, CO2, nutrients) will reduce costsof production and allow for the mass propaga-tion of an increasing number of new species,varieties and will open the field to new derivedproducts like pharmaceutical and health-benefi-cial plant products. In a follow up paper Dr. YvesDesjardins presented some contradictory datafrom the literature on the effect of medium’ssugar content and its impact on development ofauto- or mixotrophy depending on the physio-logical status of the plantlets. According to him,if we are to understand the physiology of tissuecultured plants and move this science awayfrom a certain empiricism to a more fact drivenscience, it is of paramount importance to startusing the tools offered by the new science of“omics”, that is, genomic, proteomic and meta-bolomic. He went on to show how these newmethodologies could be useful to understand,in a holistic manner, the impact of specific cul-ture conditions at the level of the genome, thetranscriptome, the proteome and finally themetabolome. These techniques being applied toArabidopsis are now revolutionizing the way weunderstand plant physiology and development.In a provocative affirmation Dr. Desjardins sug-gested that we are intoxicating plantlets withthe high concentration of nitrogen found in theMS medium and our reliance on exogenoussucrose. Yet, he emphasized that we did nothave the tools until the advent of the “omics”to have a global picture of the real metabolicimpact of the tissue culture process on plants.

Biotic Priming

The essence of tissue culture is to grow plants inan axenic environment. However, this way ofdoing is most likely responsible for the difficultestablishment of plantlets in the field and their

poor acclimatization. Dr. Jerzy Nowak gave athoughtful presentation on the importance ofco-culturing in vitro plantlets with both endo-mycorrhizal fungi and bacteria. He providedsome vivid examples of the effects of certainstrains of bacteria on in vitro growth and impro-ved survival and growth of plantlets in the field.He made clear these bacteria have a profoundimpact on the physiology of plantlets and inparticular on stomatal functioning, probablymediated by the production of ABA and inreturn on the plantlet’s capacity to supporttransfer to the field. Other talks were also pre-sented on mycorrhizal inoculation of the choiceof acclimatization substrate.

Abiotic Priming

Plantlets growing in vitro present both a modi-fied anatomy and physiology due to the fact thatthey are cultured under low light, high sucrose,high nitrogen and submitted to poor gasexchange. These conditions can cause uncon-trolled water loss, and low photosynthetic activi-ty in vitro, all of which can contribute to poorrecovery in acclimatization. Dr. Jana Pospisilovapresented a thorough overview of the impact ofthe microenvironment in the tissue culture ves-sels on the aberrant physiology of plantlets. Shenicely demonstrated that high humidity, lowlight and CO2, have a negative impact on thenormal functions of plantlets. She also presentedsome practical methods to alleviate the poorestablishment problems by ventilating the ves-sels, adding ABA to the medium, and modifyingthe light environment to make it more condu-cive to the development of photosynthesis. Inthis context Dr. Jorge Santamaría presented anice talk on approaches to improve acclimatiza-tion of plants. These reaffirmed the importanceof adding ABA to the medium, providing venti-lation in the vessels, increasing the light levelsduring a pre-acclimatization stage, but also ofmodulating the concentration of sugar and thetypes of sugar provided during micropropaga-tion on development of photosynthesis. Manyinteresting papers were also presented on thephysiology of plantlets in temporary bioreactors,on the importance of optimal rooting for esta-blishment of plantlets.

Are the Clones all Different ???

It is well known that tissue culture can causemutations and produce off-type plants.

Dr. Carmine Damiano, Chairman of theISHS Commission Biotechnology andMolecular Biology, handing the ISHSmedal to Dr. Jorge M. Santamaria, con-vener of the symposium.

Opening talk given by Paul Read,Chairman of the ISHS Working Group onQuality Management inMicropropagation.

Participants of the symposium at the entrance of the symposium venue, located at the beauti-ful resort of the Riviera Maya, Mexico.

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 41

CONTACT

Professor Yves Desjardins, Centre de recherche enhorticulture, Université Laval, Québec, Canada,G1K 7P4, email: yves.desjardins@plg.ulaval.ca

Dr. Jorge Santamaría, CICY, Merida, Yucatan,Mexico, email: Jorgesm@cicy.mx

However, we often do not know the prevalen-ce of this phenomenon nor its molecular basis.Dr. Andrew James from CICY gave an outstan-ding presentation on this topic showing thatmutations were a common phenomenon in tis-sue-cultured bananas (up to 14%) mainly attri-butable to the methylation of DNA. It is thusimportant to measure the true-to-typeness ofplantlets originating from tissue culture even ifaxillary branching is used as a method of pro-pagation. Caution will also be needed to res-pect the true-to-typeness of plants originatingfrom genetic transformation. In this context, Dr.Gomez-Lim from Cinvestav in Irapuato, Mexico,gave an excellent talk on the successes and pro-blems of transformation protocols on the qua-lity and survival of plantlets. At this stage of theresearch advancement, it is not yet known towhat extent the genetic transformation affectsthe physiology of in vitro plantlets and how itmay impair acclimatization successes.

Acclimatization Problems in the Real World

A number of presentations revealed the realimportance of acclimatization and esta-blishment problems to the micropropagationindustry. Dr. Jitendra Prakash from In VitroInternational LTD in his talk on acclimatizationof calla lily, presented a recent survey of theworld’s micropropagation industry. According tohim, the number of plants propagated in theworld is now close to 900 million annually andis constantly increasing since the mid 70’s.Despite this increasing plantlet production, los-ses are still important in reducing the profitabi-lity of many laboratories around the world. Dr.Prakash gave an excellent illustration of this pro-blem with calla lily, a crop that is multiplied toimpressive levels (25 million) from which only 8million reach market. He showed that increa-sing HID illumination and especially modulatingthe red light spectrum was instrumental inimproving acclimatization and survival ofZantedeschia and in providing the production ofa higher percentage of the tuberous rhizomesreaching flowering stage. New approaches forimproving efficiency of micropropagation usingtemporary immersion bioreactors were also pre-sented by Dr. Carmine Damiano (Chair of theISHS Commission Biotechnology and MolecularBiology) and Dr. Justo Gonzales (Bioplanta,Cuba). Finally, Dr. Cuauhtémoc Navarro, presen-ted an excellent talk on how he implemented astrict selection protocol, keeping only the stron-gest, most developed plantlets in culture andtransferring them to acclimatization with muchsuccess and improved survival upon acclimatiza-tion. He commented that even if this procedurereduces the propagation efficiency, overall, itimproved the performance of his plants, whichare now demanded by its clients who apprecia-

te the quality of the plants produced byAgromod, a micropropagation laboratory inChiapas, Mexico. The industry is still in greatdemand for new optimized protocols to reducelosses during acclimatization.

Business Meeting

The participants of the meeting praised the orga-nization of Dr. Santamaría and also suggestedstrongly that a 3rd meeting should be organizedin 2007. Already two candidatures have reachedthe Chair of the ISHS Commission Biotechnologyand Molecular Biology. One is coming from Dr.Prakash from In Vitro International to hold thenext meeting in Bangalore, India. Another candi-dature came from Dr. Anabela Romano from theUniversidade do Algarve to hold the next confe-rence in Faro, Portugal. Both candidatures havemerits and the choice for the next venue forthe meeting will be made by the Commissionshortly.

Yves Desjardins

Cultural trip to the fantastic Mayan ruinsat Tulum.

Commission Horticultural Engineering- Commission Protected Cultivation

Sustainable Greenhouse Systems: Co-operation of Engineering and CropScience (Greensys2004)

Greensys2004, a symposium on sustainablegreenhouse systems, was organised byWageningen UR, The Netherlands, from 12 till16 September 2004 under the auspices of theISHS Commission on Horticultural Engineeringand that on Protected Cultivation. It was meantto survey the state of the art in the develop-ment of sustainable greenhouse systems and toencourage the disciplinary and interdisciplinaryexchange of ideas amongst engineers and cropscientists. Taking into account the number ofparticipants (about 190) and papers (about

130), this approach has proven to be succes-sful. This is also illustrated by the initiativestaken during the meeting, to organise a similarsymposium in 2007.The conference was held in Leuven, Belgium,because Greensys was organised in concurren-ce with the general conference of the EuropeanSociety for Agricultural Engineers (AgEng2004).This enabled joint activities and the possibilityfor all participants to join sessions in either con-ference. Greensys2004 combined the topics ofGreenhouse Design, Energy Saving Strategies,

Crop Tolerance, Greenhouse Climate Control,Sensors in Horticulture, Automation, Cultiva-tion and Environment (by Ace-Sys) and LifeSupport Systems in Space. Sustainability wasthe overall connecting theme for all topics.In the plenary session two keynote speakerstook the floor: Prof. Stefania de Pascale fromNaples University, Italy, discussed the perspecti-ves and challenges of sustainability forMediterranean climates and Mr. Jaap van derVeen, Chairman of the Board of HorticulturalProducts in The Netherlands discussed the same

ISHS • 42

subject for moderate climates. Besides, therewere 4 parallel oral sessions and each day a pos-ter session was held led off by a short 2-minuteoral presentation for each poster.

In the presentations some trends in the develop-ment of sustainable greenhouse systems wereevident: The wasteless delivery of water andnutrients to the crop is of general concernworldwide both from the engineering and fromthe cultural point of view. However, the rangeof presentations reflected that the solutionsdepend on the local stage of development ofthe greenhouse industry, the yield level and theaffordable cost. The methods applied to preventemission of nutrients to the environment aregreatly influenced by local regulations. In highdensity greenhouse regions regulations arestrict, leading to closed watering systems. Thisenhanced the development of sensors, imple-mentation of models in control and environ-mentally friendly disinfection systems. Lowwater consumption is getting more important,especially in southern regions with high croptranspiration and expensive water supply.Greenhouse systems aiming to recover transpi-red water were presented.

Another trend is the use of biological controlmethods and the prevention of immigration of

harmful insects. The application of insectscreens in the greenhouse ventilators and itseffect on ventilation and greenhouse climatewas reported extensively through experimentaldata as well as computer modelling of the flowby computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Thesame holds for the ventilation process itself as akey factor in climatisation.

For the northern countries with high-energyconsumption, efficient control of the greenhou-se climate based on models and plant sensorscan save substantial amounts of energy, whichis an important aspect of sustainability. Covermaterials combining high light transmissionwith a high insulation value are developed.Nowadays, double covers with a light transmis-sion value comparable to single-layered glassare on the market enabling energy savings ofabout 25%. Another method is subtracting sur-plus summer heat from the greenhouse by anair to water heat exchanger and its seasonalstorage in an aquifer below the greenhouse forwinter use. While the heat is stored at low tem-perature (about 18°C) a heat pump is needed inwinter to upgrade the heat to a level suitablefor greenhouse heating. The exploitation ofsummer heat in winter results in energy savingsof about 30%. If all surplus heat can be subtrac-ted, the greenhouse can be closed in summer.Then CO2 can be added also at high irradiationlevels resulting in higher crop production.Moreover immigration of pests and diseases willbe reduced. Therefore the closed greenhouse isa hot topic in research in The Netherlands com-bining about 20% production increase with 25-30% reduction of energy consumption.

Another concept is to lower heat demand as faras possible and to combine this with seasonalheat storage. Then energy consumption can be

reduced nowadays up till 50% and even more,if improved cover materials are developed.Thus, sustainable energy supply will be possiblein the future.

Much more detailed information on thesetopics will be published in the proceedings ofthis symposium

During the conference two technical tours wereorganised on Thursday September 17 tomodern greenhouses demonstrating the imple-mentation of modern technology with the levelof sustainability in the northwestern Europeangreenhouse industry. These tours were conclu-ded with a short visit of the beautiful Belgiantowns Gent (for tour 1) and Mechelen (for tour2) and an informal farewell dinner

Gerard Bot

CONTACT

Prof. Dr. Gerard Bot and Dr. Leo Marcelis,Wageningen-UR, The Netherlands, email:gerard.bot@wur.nl and leo.marcelis@wur.nl

Prof. Gerard Bot (convener) and Prof.Gerrit van Straten (Chairman IPC) duringthe Greensys2004 opening session.

Listening to a tomato grower (technical tour 1).

Dr. LeoMarcelis (convener).

A fully automated lettuce production system (technical tour 2).

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 43

Commission Plant SubstratesInt’l Symposium on Soilless Culture andHydroponics

The International Symposium on SoillessCulture and Hydroponics was held at theUniversity of Almería (Spain) from 14-20November 2004. Almería city is just outside oneof the most important regions of protected cul-tivation in the world with more than 30000 haof plastic-houses. Almería is situated in thesoutheastern extreme of the Iberian peninsula,open to the Mediterranean Sea, with 219 km ofcoast, of which particular places stand outbecause of their singularity and crystallinewaters. For the last decades of the 20th centu-ry, thanks to the new techniques of greenhouseintensive cultivation, Almería turned into thevegetable supply centre of Europe.

This was the first time a meeting of the ISHSWorking Group on Hydroponics was held inSpain. Over 120 participants from 30 countriesfrom all continents attended and presentedover 100 papers. Symposium participants weretreated upon arrival by the OrganizingCommittee to a Book of Abstracts that includedall summaries of papers and a new Spanishbook edition of Soilless Culture.

After the opening welcome by the Chairman ofthe ISHS Commission Plant Substrates, Dr. OmerVerdonck, the Symposium passed on to the invi-ted speakers, Dr. Wilfredo H. Schnitzler, Dr.Cees Sonneveld, Dr. Xavier Martinez, Dra. SilviaBures, Dr. Juan Jesús Berenguer, Dr. FernandoDianez, Dr. Ber Van Tol and Dr. Meier Schwarz.The first speaker, Dr. Wilfredo H. Schnitzler,

gave an overview on biotic stress relief on plantsin hydroponic systems. The second one, Dr.Cees Sonneveld, examined the cation concen-tration in plant tissues of crops as affected byseveral conditions. Dr. Xavier Martinez and Dra.Silvia Bures gave a brief session about growingmedia standardization in the European Union.Dr. Juan Jesús gave a presentation about culti-vation of cherry tomato in soilless culture, whichseems to be an interesting option. Anotherspeaker, Dr. Fernando Dianez, spoke about sup-pression of soilborne diseases. From Grodan, Dr.Ber Van Tol, gave an introduction to nutrientmanagement. The last invited speaker, Dr. MeierSchwarz, gave a short review about 50 years ofInternational Soilless Culture Society.

Thirty five oral presentations and over 85 posterpresentations covered six topics according tothe following sessions: Hydroponics, Alternativeand Organic Substrate, Irrigation andFertigation, Inorganic Media and PlantNutrition, Crop Protection and Special Topics.On the third day, in the sessions related toHydroponics, Alternative and Organic

Substrate, and Irrigation and Fertigation, vari-ous papers discussed new substrates to improvethe efficiency of soilless systems under protec-ted culture. In a session related to InorganicMedia and Plant Nutrition various new ideaswere introduced, such as biostimulators in ahydroponical system. Another session focusedon Crop Protection related especially to the useof suppressant compost. In our final sessionrelated to Special Topics, several papers discus-sed about some peculiar issues.

One of the highlights of the symposium was thetours taken in the middle and at the end. Atwo-day technical tour took place in an impor-tant piece of land close to Almería in the sur-roundings of the El Ejido village. Participantsvisited some farms that had several vegetablesoilless crops, a nursery, the research center “LaNacla” and the De Ruiter Seeds Center.

On the last day, participants were able to enrollin a trip to Granada and to visit Alhambra. Thiscomplex of monuments also has an indepen-dent palace opposite, surrounded by orchardsand gardens: the Generalife.

Participants of the Symposium.

Openning session. Left: Dr. Juan JesusBerenguer, invited speaker. Right: Dr. Miguel Urrestarazu, convener of thesymposium.

Technical visit at a nursery of horticulturalplants.

Technical visit at De Ruiter SeedsExperimental Research Center.

ISHS • 44

The Symposium Organization wishes to thankall participants for their contributions to thescientific success and to the friendly atmosphe-re of meeting. Reviewed oral and poster presen-tations will be published in Acta Horticulturae.

Miguel Urrestarazu Gavilán

CONTACT

Prof. Dr. Miguel Urrestarazu Gavilán, convener,email: mgavilan@ual.es and Prof. Dra. Maria delCarmen Salas, secretariat, email: csalas@ual.es

Overview of greenhouse near the coast line (Granada, South of Spain).

FROM THE SECRETARIAT

New ISHS Members

ISHS is pleased to welcome the followingnew members:

NEW ORGANISATIONMEMBERS:

Canada: Canadian Forrest Service - Atlantic,Fredericton, NB

Czech Republic:

Res.Inst.Landscape&Ornamental Gardening,Pruhonice near Praha

Spain: Chemtrade s.l., Barcelona

United Kingdom: Duchy College, Camborne,Cornwall and Sparsholt College Hampshire,Winchester

USA: Brugmansia Growers International,Newnan, GA.

NEW INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS:

Argentina: Eduardo Cittadini, Dr. ValeriaRudoy, Liliana San Martino, Prof. Héctor Svartz;Australia: Mr. Simon Agius, Dr. ChrysantusAkem, Patricia Conwell, Ms. Alison Curl,Shannon Ms. Dillon, Dr. David Doyle, Ms. JessicaErhart, Mr. Murray Fraser, Dr. Alonso Gonzales-Mejia, Chris Hamilton, Kim Nicole Ms.Hamilton, Mr. Nelson Heywood, Mr. Colin Jack,Skye Jacometti, Dr. Jenny Jobling, Mr. AdamKaity, Dr. Tahir Khurshid, Mr. Brett Lovell, Dr.Cameron Alex McConchie, SharmaneMercorella, Mr. Narendra Nand, Ann Ms. Parisi,Mr. Stuart pickworth, Ms. Cameron Playsted,Mr. Glenn Riseborough, Ms. Ruth Teunissen,

Assistant Prof. Kerry Walsh, Mr. David Willyams,Bec Wilson, Mr. Ross Mackenzie Wright, Mr.David Peter Young, Dr. Isa Yunusa; Austria:Prof. Dr. Astrid Forneck, Carina Kornfeind, Mr.Karl Schebesta; Belgium: Dr. Jan De Riek, Mr.Davy Ottevaere, Nico Scheerlinck, Ms. EliseVanaudenhove; Brazil: Tedson Azevedo, Prof.Dr. Altair Bertonha, Prof. Dr. Patrícia Duarte deOliveira Paiva, Eugenia Hidalgo; Bulgaria: Dr.Argir Zhivondov; Cambodia: Siek Kimsath;Canada: Mr. Khalid Ahmad, Mr. Ken Clancy,Mr. Robert Davis, Dr. Kyu heon Lee, Dr. ClaudineMénard; Chile: Ricardo Andrade, CeciliaMujica, Mr. Pablo Rubio, Mr. Carlos Vial, Mr.Claudio Vial; China: Prof. Zhaohe Yuan;Colombia: Mauricio Gleiser; Congo: Mr.Nicolas Descampe; Croatia: Ms. KlaudijaCarovic, Mr. Vjekoslav Martinko, Bruno Novak,Ms. Goran Radocaj, Ms. Snjezana Tolic; Cyprus:Mr. Damianos Neocleoys; Denmark: GabrielaMaletti, Dorte Nissen, Birgitte A. Pedersen,Dvoralai Wulfsohn; Dominican Republic:Elijorson Ferreira; Ecuador: Mr. Miguel ChávezA; Egypt: Mosaad Kotb Hassanien; Estonia:Liidia Klaas; France: Darnaud Alexandre, Mr.Akaabooune Charaf, Dr. Jovan Djordjevic,Bernard Guillien, Eddie Keturakis, Mr. FabienRouer; Germany: Amy Brenner, Mr. PeterDiessenbacher, Dietmar Hellebrandt, SusanneKrause, Ms. Tanja Mucha; Greece: Mr. GeorgeAgathos, Prof. Demetra Prophetou-Athanasiadou, Ms. Eleftheria Spantidaki, Mr.Tasos Temirtzoglou, Mr. Dimitrios Tsioutsios,Dimitris Vakamis; Guatemala: Felix Medrano;Hungary: Ms. Maria Dani, Viktor Páthi; India:Mr. Vishnu Barhate, Mr. Chetan Dedhia, Ms.

Latha Mohandoss; Indonesia: Mr. RonaldManegeng, Dr. Chikaya Sakai; Iran: MoharramAinollahi, Javad Lameii, Prof. Dr. AbdolhosseinRustaiyan; Ireland: Mr. Brian Morahan; Israel:Andrew Blake, Dr. Yuval Eshdat; Italy: Dr. BorisBasile, Dr. Salvatore Camposeo, Dr. ChiaraCirillo, Dr. Giuseppe Ferrara, Dr. AnnalisaGiordano, Dr. Stefano Macolino, Prof. OrianaSilvestroni, Massimo Stano; Japan: HitoshiHonjo, Takayuki Kobayashi, Mr. Sakurai Shigeo,Toshihiko Sugiura; Jordan: Dr. Ahmad Ateyyeh;Kenya: Dr. Tony Simons, Mr. Peter Zwager;Korea (Republic of): Mr. Sunghwa Choe, Mr.Kwangho Kim, Dr. Jun Gu Lee, Ms. Sunae Lee,Mr. Jin Seong Moon, Ms. Eunhui Park, Mr. Il-RaeRho, Ms. Yujeong Seol, Prof. Dr. Tae-MyungYoon; Lebanon: Dr. Najat Saliba; Lithuania: Dr.Zita Duchovskiene; Macedonia: Rukie Agic;Malaysia: Dr. Sayed Hasan; Malta: JaimeContesse; Mexico: Mr. Joel Cantu, Mr. Sergio L.Urgellés, Mr. Juan Lopez, Dr. Daniel LeobardoOchoa-Martinez; Moldova: Aurielia Bondari;Netherlands: Dr. Dik de Vries, Ms. NourHabjoka, Dr. Wessel Holtman, Mr. Qi Jiang,Anton Kloosterboer, Ms. Diana Martinez, Mr.Hans Opdam, Mr. Gerben Ravensbergen, JoseRuijter, Rene van Rensen, Ms. Sharifa Zaidi;New Zealand: Mr. James Simpson; Norway:Mr. Oddmund Frynes, Sigrid Mogan; Oman: Dr.Mike Deadman; Pakistan: Mr. Raheel Anwar;Palestina: Dr. Jamil Harb; Panama: Mr.Ricaurte Arrocha; Poland: StanislawKarczmarczyk, Dr. Robert Kurlus, CezaryPodsiadlo, Mr. Radoslaw Roszczyk; Portugal:Prof. Maria de Lurdes Carvalho, Dr. Luis Cunha,Prof. Dr. Artur da Câmara Machado, Mr. João

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 45

Freitas, Dr. Mónica Moura, Artur Sousa; PuertoRico: Raul J. Abreu, Raul Mari, Dr. SalvadorSalas; Reunion: Dr. Michel Roux-Cuvelier;Romania: Prof. Dr. Nicolae Atanasiu, Prof. Dr.Gheorghe Campeanu, Prof. Dr. Ruxandra LauraCiofu, Prof. Dr. Liviu-Coriolan Dejeu, Dr. AureliaDobrescu, Prof. Dr. Elena Dobrin, Dr. ElenaMaria Draghici, Dr. Monica Dumitrascu, Prof. Dr.Dorel Hoza, Prof. Dr. Gheorghita Hoza, Prof. Dr.Viorica Luchian, Prof. Dr. Nicolae Munteanu,James Olunden, Prof. Dr. Florin Toma, DoruHarry Vasilescu; Russia: Roman Mikhailov, IgorSidorov; Samoa: Ms. Laisene Samueli; Serbiaand Montenegro: Janko Cervenski, DejanMarcic, Zivoslav Markovic; Singapore: Mr. SengPheow Teo; Slovenia: Dr. Denis Rusjan, MitjaSolar; South Africa: Dr. Isa Bertling, TrevorBoyce, Mr. Willie Duminy, Dr. Heidi Hawkins,Mr. Maasdorp Maree, Mr. Johannes W. Meiring,Mr. Gert Pienaar, Mr. Eugene Reeksting, Mr.Andrew Grant Sheard, Mr. Steve Terblanche,Mr. Alexander Tilanus; Spain: Francisca Alonso,Mr. Daniel Blanco, Dr. Rafaela Cáceres, JulioCalderon, Dr. Maria Luisa Cañete, OctaviDalmau, Mónica González, Juan José Hueso,

Sabino Miguez Devesa, Ms. Virginia Pinillos,Ana Roldán, Dr. Luis Gonzaga Santesteban, Ms.Laura Soler, Dr. Teresa Soriano-Vallejo, ElisaSuarez-Rey; Sweden: Mr. Stafpan Andersson,Mr. Karl-Erik Gustavsson, Mr. Micael Wendell;Switzerland: Mr. Leslie Blair, Ute Kührt, JörgSamietz; Tanzania: Dr. Adah Mdesa Mwasha;Thailand: Mr. Preecha Sananvatananont, Mr.Charoen Singlaw, Mr. Suttisak Wilanan; Tonga:Ms. Eleutide Leody Vainikolo; Tunisia: Mr.Habib Kraiem; Turkey: Dr. Muzaffer Adiyaman,Prof. Dr. Mustafa Büyükyilmaz, Dr. Hakki ZaferCan, Assistant Prof. Sadiye Gozlekci, Hülya Ilbi,Ms. Gamze Özer, Dr. Fatih Sen, Dr. Sedat Serçe,Rukiye Tipirdamaz, Dr. Nurhan Varol; UnitedKingdom: Mr. Richard Butchart, Mr. MikeCarling, John Carter, Harriet Duncalfe, Dr. RayFordham, Mr. Christopher Jones, E. Klein, Dr.Michael Milner, Ms. Janet Prescott, Dr. R.A.K.Szmidt, Pernille Thorbeck, Don Vaughan;United States of America: Mr. DonaldAckerman, Jon Anderson, Harry L. Andres, JeffAndresen, Ms. Sachiko Asada, Ms. SameeraBafeel, Howard Beck, Stephen Boone, ShawnCarney, Dwight Carter, Dr. Pedro Castellanos,

Dr. Chih Cheng T. Chao, Rodrigo Cifuentes,Ann Clements, Patrick J. Conner, Dr. FrederickCrowe, Mr. Trent Cunningham, David Davis,Ms. Vera Edwards, Amy L. Enfield, Dr. GlennFain, Laura Fick, Mr. Gary Fisher, Mr. Carl Frost,Dr. Kitren Glozer, Dr. Stephanie Greene, Prof. Dr.James Hancock, Mr. L. Patrick Hanemann, Ms.Kathie Hansen, Alice Harris, Wanda HeuserGale, Mr. John Hoogeboom, Robert Jennings,Mr. Avnish Kapoor, Ms. Andrea Kawabata,Michael P. Kenna, Mr. David Klimstra, Ms. ChitraKrishnaswamy, Dr. Garry Legnani, Mr. JoseLloreda, Margaret McGrath, Guy W. Metzler,Timothy Ness, Paul Otten, Danielle Poor, Dr.Edward Ryder, Casey Safreno, Mr. ShahirSalyani, Dr. Richard Schaefers, Mr. CharlieShultz, Ms. Leslie Sisneros, Dr. John StephenSmith, Dr. Kristi Snell, Melanie St.James, Mr.Brian Stanek, Paul Suriano, Mr. Seth Swanson,Julie M. Tatata, Mr. Robert Thompson, KristiThornburgh, Mr. Charles Tubesing, J. TimVanini, Stephen Wood, W. Brooke Yeager;Uzbekistan: Dr. Dmitrij Savostin; Zimbabwe:Louis Jacobus Du Plessis, Sebinasi Dzikiti

For updates and more logon to www.ishs.org/calendar. Doalways mention your ISHS membership number or attach copyof your ISHS membership card when registering. A reduced ISHSmembers registration fee applies.

YEAR 2005

� June 13-17, 2005, Murcia (Spain): XIII International Symposiumon Apricot Breeding and Culture. Info: Dr. Felix Romojaro and Dr.Federico Dicenta, CEBAS-CSIC, PO Box 164, 30100 Espinardo(Murcia), Spain. Phone: (34)968396328 or (34)968396309, Fax:(34)968396213, email: apricot@cebas.csic.es Symposium Secretariat:Viajes CajaMurcia, Gran Via Escultor Salzillo 5. Entlo. Dcha., 30004Murcia, Spain. Phone: (34)968225476, Fax: (34)968223101, email:congresos@viajescajamurcia.com web: apricot.viajescajamurcia.com

� June 14-17, 2005, Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia): II InternationalSymposium on Sweetpotato and Cassava - 2ISSC. Info: Dr. TanSwee Lian, MARDI, Rice & Industrial Crops Research Centre, PO Box12301, 50774 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Phone: (60)389437516, Fax:(60)389425786, email: sltan@mardi.my web: http://www.mardi.my

� June 16-19, 2005, Horst/Venlo (Netherlands): XI InternationalAsparagus Symposium. Info: Ir. Pierre Lavrijsen, Asparagus bv, PO

Box 6219, 5960 AE Horst, Netherlands. Phone: (31)773979900, Fax:(31)773979909, email: plavrijsen@asparagus.nl orinfo@ias2005.com, web: www.ias2005.com

� June 21-24, 2005, Aas (Norway): V International Symposium onArtificial Lighting. Info: Prof. Dr. Hans R. Gislerod, Dept. of Plantand Environmental Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway, POBox 5022, 1432 Aas, Norway. Phone: (47)64947800 or(47)64947824, Fax: (47)64947802, email: hans.gislerod@ipf.nlh.noor lightsym2005@nlh.no web: www.lightsym2005.no

� June 26-30, 2005, Saltillo Coahuila (Mexico): X InternationalSymposium on Plant Bioregulators in Fruit Production. Info: Dr.Homero Ramirez, Salazar 1081, Zona Centro, Saltillo Coahuila25000, Mexico. Phone: (52)84174167, email:homeror@terra.com.mx web: www.saltillo2005.org

� July 5-10, 2005, East Lansing, MI (USA): IX InternationalControlled Atmosphere Research Conference. Info: Dr. RandolphM. Beaudry, Michigan State University, Department of Horticulture,A22 Plant& Soil Sci. Building, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325, USA.Phone: (1)517 355 5191 x303 or x339, Fax: (1)517 353 0890, email:beaudry@msu.edu or allens@msu.edu web:www.hrt.msu.edu/CA2005

Calendar of ISHS Events

PASSED AWAY

Mr. Philip Costa (84) passed away in his home-town, Paarl, South Africa, on 1 May 2005. Mr.Costa had been an ISHS member until 2003.

Philip devoted his entire working life to theSouth African olive and olive oil industry.

NEW

In Memoriam

ISHS • 46

NEW

� July 19-23, 2005, Chiang Mai (Thailand): International Symposiumon Improving the Performance of Supply Chains in theTransitional Economies. Info: Dr. Peter J. Batt, ISHS Supply ChainManagement Symposium, Horticulture, Curtin University ofTechnology, GPO Box U1987, Perth 6845, WA, Australia. Phone:(61)892667596, Fax: (61)892663063, email: p.batt@curtin.edu.auweb: muresk.curtin.edu.au/conference/ishscm

� August 15-18, 2005, Oxford, MS (USA): International Symposiumon Quality and Safety Issues Related to Botanicals. Info: Dr.Ikhlas Khan, National Center for Natural Products Research, Schoolof Pharmacy, University of Mississippi, PO Box 1848, University, MS38677, USA. Phone: (1)6629157821, Fax: (1)6629151006, email:ikhan@olemiss.edu

� August 18-21, 2005, Québec (Canada): International Conferenceon Human Health Effects of Fruits and Vegetables. Info: Dr.Yves Desjardins, Academic Director, Institute of Nutraceutical andFunctional Foods, Horticultural Research Center, Laval University,Quebec, QC G1K 7P4, Canada. Phone: (1)4186562131x2359, Fax:(1)4186567856, email: yves.desjardins@plg.ulaval.ca web:www.favhealth2005.org

� September 4-10, 2005, Angers (France): International Symposiumon Growing Media. Info: Dr. Jean-Charles Michel, National Instituteof Horticulture, INH, Research Unit A-462, SAGAH, 2 rue Le Notre,49045 Angers Cedex 01, France. Phone: (33)241225422, Fax:(33)241225553, email: jean-charles.michel@inh.fr or ishs-angers2005@inh.fr web: ishs-angers.agrena.org

� September 5-8, 2005, Singapore (Singapore): InternationalConference & Exhibition on Soilless Culture - Singapore 2005(ICESC-2005). Info: Dr. Mallick F. Rahman M., Chairman ConferenceOrganizing Committee, Block 461 #13-75 Crawford Lane, Singapore190461. Phone: (65)62918153, Fax: (65)62987978, email:ICESC2005@singaporehydroponics.com web: www.icesc-2005.com

� September 12-16, 2005, Townsville, North QLD (Australia): IIIInternational Symposium on Cucurbits. Info: Dr. Gordon Rogers,Horticultural Research and Development, PO Box 552 SutherlandNSW 2232, Australia. Phone: (61)295270826, Fax: (61)295443782,email: gordon@ahr.com.au or III Cucurbitsymposium, Joanna Embry,Growcom, PO Box Bundaberg QLD 4670, Australia. Phone:(61)741532555, Fax: (61)741531322, email:jembry@growcom.com.au web: www.cucurbitsymposium.org.au

� September 15-17, 2005, Venosa (Italy): International Symposiumon Advances in Grapevine and Wine Research. Info: Dr. VitaleNuzzo, Dipartimento di Scienze dei Sistemi Colturali, Forestali edell’Ambiente, Viale dell’Ateneo Lucano, 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy.Phone: (39)0971205263 or (39)3293606254, Fax: (39)0971205378,email: nuzzo@unibas.it

� September 18-22, 2005, California (USA): IV InternationalSymposium on Rose Research and Cultivation. Info: Dr. H. BrentPemberton, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&MUniversity Agricultural Research and Extension Center, PO Box 200,1710 N. Highway 3053, Overton, TX 75684-0200, USA. Phone:(1)9038346191, Fax: (1)9038347140, email: b-pemberton@tamu.edu web: flowers.tamu.edu/symposium/

� October 5-7, 2005, Freemantle, WA (Australia): III InternationalPhylloxera Symposium. Info: Dr. Kevin Powell, Department ofPrimary Industries, Rutherglen Centre, RMB 1145, Rutherglen, VIC3685, Australia. Phone: (61)260304500, Fax: (61)260304600, email:kevin.powell@dpi.vic.gov.au

� October 10-14, 2005, Daytona Beach (USA): InternationalSymposium on Biotechnology of Temperate Fruit Crops andTropical Species. Info: Dr. Ralph Scorza, USDA-ARS AppalachianFruit Research Station, 2217 Wiltshire Rd., Kearneysville, WV 25430,USA. Phone: (1)3047253451, Fax: (1)3047282340, email:rscorza@afrs.ars.usda.gov or Dr. Richard Litz, University ofFlorida/IFAS, Horticultural Sciences Department, 18905 SW 280 St.,

Homestead, FL 33031-3314, USA. Phone: (1)3052467001ext310,Fax: (1)3052467003, email: rel@ifas.ufl.edu web:conference.ifas.ufl.edu/ishscrops

� November 22-24 2005, Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia): I InternationalSymposium on Papaya. Info: Dr. Abd. Shukor Abd. Rahman,Horticulture Research Centre, MARDI, GPO Box 12301, 50774 KualaLumpur, Malaysia. Phone: (603)89437263, Fax: (603)89487590,email: arshukor@mardi.my web: www.mardi.my/papaya/

� December 1-7, 2005, Santiago (Chile): IX International Rubus andRibes Symposium. Info: Dr. Maria Pilar Banados, Universita Catolicade Chile, Departamento de Fruticultura y Enologia, Casilla 306-22,Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile. Phone: (56)26864305, Fax:(56)25534130. email: pbanados@puc.cl web: www.rubusribes.cl

� December 5-8 2005, Lucknow - Uttar Pradesh (India): IInternational Guava Symposium. Info: Prof. Dr. R.K. Pathak,Central Institute of Subtropical Horticulture, Rehmankhera, POKalkori, Lucknow 227 107, India. Phone: (91)5222841022, Fax:(91)5222841025, email: cish2001in@yahoo.co.in web: www.int-guavasymp.net

YEAR 2006

� February 5-10, 2006, Sandton, Johannesburg (South Africa): VIIIInternational Mango Symposium. Info: Dr. Richard Elphick, 48,Malelane 1320, South Africa. Phone: (27)137260089, Fax:(27)137260113, email: elphickr@iafrica.com

� February 19-24, 2006, Agadir (Morocco): InternationalSymposium on Advances in Soil and Soilless Cultivation underProtected Environment. Info: Conveners Dr. A Hanafi and Dr. W.H.Schnitzler, Institut Agronomique et Véterinaire Hassan II, ComplexeHorticole, PO BOX 12042, Cité Balnéaire, Agadir 80.000, Morocco.Phone: (212)48248152 or 61177968, Fax: (212)48248152, email:hanafi@iavcha.ac.ma web: www.iavcha.ac.ma/ishs-morocco2006

� February 21-24, 2006, Rotorua (New Zealand): VI InternationalKiwifruit Symposium. Info: Dr. Bob Martin, Market Access andTechnical Manager, Zespri International Ltd., 400 Maunganuit Rd.,Mount Maunganui (PO Box 4043, Manganui South), New Zealand.Phone: (64)75751591 or 21595128, Fax: (64)75751340, email:bob.martin@zespri.com web: www.kiwi2006.com

� February 22-25, 2006, San Remo (Italy): The Labiatae: Advances inProduction, Biotechnology and Utilization. Info: Dr. BarbaraRuffoni, CRA Experimental Institute of Floriculture, Corso Inglesi 508,18038 San Remo, Italy. Phone: (39)0184667251, Fax:(39)0184695072, email: b.ruffoni@istflori.it web: www.istflori.it

� March 28-31, 2006, Lorca - Murcia (Spain): VI InternationalSymposium on Artichoke, Cardoon and their Wild Relatives.Info: Ir. Regino Aragón Pallarés, Dpto. Horticultura, IMIDA, C/ Mayor,S/N, 30150 La Alberca (Murcia), Spain. Phone: (34)968366773, Fax:(34)968366792, email: regino.aragon@carm.es or Dr. Juan A.Fernández, Departamento Producción Vegetal, UniversidadPolitécnica de Cartagena, Paseo Alfonso XIII, 52, 30203 Cartagena,Spain. Phone: (34)968325446, Fax: (34)968325435, email: juan.fer-nandez@upct.es Symposium Secretariat: Viajes CajaMurcia, Gran ViaEscultor Salzillo 5. Entlo. Drcha., 30004 Murcia, Spain. Phone:(34)968225476, Fax: (34)968223101, email: congresos@viajescaja-murcia.com web: www.viajescajamurcia.com/artichoke

� March 30 - April 5, 2006, San Diego, California (USA): VIIInternational Protea Research Symposium. Info: Dennis Perry,Perry’s Panorama, PO Box 540, Somis, CA 93066-0540, USA. Phone:(1)8056423267, Fax: (1)8056425967, email: perrypan@adelphia.net

� April 1-5, 2006, Guangzhou (China): II International Symposiumon Loquat. Info: Dr. Shunquan Lin, College of Horticulture, SouthChina Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, Wushan, China.Phone: (86)2085288262, Fax: (86)2085282107, email:cmliu@scau.edu.cn

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

CHRONICA HORTICULTURAE •VOL 45 • NUMBER 2 •2005 • 47

ACTA HORTICULTURAE

Available Issues of Acta HorticulturaeAvailable numbers of Acta Horticulturae (in print for-mat). These as well as all other titles are also availablein ActaHort CD-rom format. For detailed informationon price and availability, including tables of content, orto download an Acta Horticulturae order form, pleasecheck out the ‘publications’ page at www.ishs.org orgo to www.ishs.org/acta

Acta Acta Title ActaNumber Price (EUR)

680 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 6: Traditional Medicine and Nutraceuticals 56

679 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 5: Quality, Efficacy, Safety, Processing and Trade in Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 56

678 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 4: Targeted Screening of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Economics and Law 56

677 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 3: Perspectives in Natural Product Chemistry 49

676 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 2: Conservation, Cultivation and Sustainable Use of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 56

675 III WOCMAP Congress on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants - Volume 1: Bioprospecting and Ethnopharmacology 58

674 III International Symposium on Applications of Modelling as anInnovative Technology in the Agri-Food-Chain - Model-IT 121

673 IX International Symposium on Flower Bulbs 150

672 IV International Symposium on Horticultural Education, Extensionand Training 83

671 IX International Pear Symposium 124

� April 24-27, 2006, Almería (Spain): Symposium on GreenhouseCooling: Methods, Technologies and Plant Response. Info: Dr.Jerónimo Pérez Parra, Estación Experimental de Cajamar, Autovía delMediterráneo Km. 416,7, 04710 El Ejido, Almería, Spain. Phone:(34)950580569, Fax: (34)950580450, email: jpparra@cajamar.es

� May 22-26, 2006, Antalya (Turkey): XX International Symposiumon Virus and Virus-like Diseases of Temperate Fruit Crops andXI International Simposium of Small Fruit Virus Diseases. Info:Prof. Dr. Kadriye Çaglayan, Mustafa Kemal University, AgricultureFaculty, Plant Protection Department, 31034 Antakya-Hatay, Turkey.Phone: (90)3262455836 Ext.1347, Fax: (90)3262455832, email:caglayan@mku.edu.tr and Prof. Dr. Filiz Ertunc, Ankara University,Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Plant Protection, 06110Ankara, Turkey. Phone: (90)3123170550 ext.1120, Fax:(90)3123187029, email: ertunc@agri.ankara.edu.tr web:www.fv2006.gen.tr

� June 6-8, 2006, Hammamet (Tunisia): X International Symposiumon the Processing Tomato. Info: Abdellatif B’Chir, GICA, 77avenue Taïeb M’Hiri, 1002 Tunis, Tunisia. Phone: (216)71783559,Fax: (216)71783206, email: gica@planet.tn or Sophie Colvine, AMIT-OM, 54 avenue de Bonaventure, 8400 Avignon, France. Phone:(33)490861695, Fax: (33)490854147, email: colvine@tomate.org

� June 7-10, 2006, Presov (Slovak Republic): I InternationalSymposium on Chamomile Research, Development andProduction. Info: Dr. Ivan Salamon, Department of Ecology, FHPVPresov University, 17th November Street #1, 071 16 Presov, Slovakia.Phone: (421)517725361 or (421)907186500, Fax: (421)517725547or (421)517710803, email: salamon@fhpv.unipo.sk web:www.chamomile.szm.sk

� July 2-6, 2006, Udine (Italy): IX International Conference onGrape Genetics and Breeding. Info: Prof. Enrico Peterlunger,Università di Udine, Dip. di Scienze Agrarie e Ambientale, Via delleScienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy. Phone: (39)0432558629, Fax:(39)0432558603, email: peterlunger@uniud.it

� August 13-19, 2006, Seoul (Korea): XXVII InternationalHorticultural Congress. web: www.ihc2006.org

� August 28 - September 2, 2006, Mildura, VIC (Australia): VInternational Symposium on Irrigation of Horticultural Crops.Info: Dr. Ian Goodwin, Senior Irrigation Scientist, HorticulturePhysiology Section, Department of Primary Industries, Private Bag #1,Tatura 3616 VIC, Australia. Phone: (61)358335240 or(61)409351962, Fax: (61)358335299, email:ian.goodwin@dpi.vic.gov.au

� September 11-15, 2006, San Remo (Italy): XXII InternationalEUCARPIA Symposium - Section Ornamentals: Breeding forBeauty. Info: Dr. Tito Shiva or Dr. Antonio Mercuri, CRA IstitutoSperimentale per la Floricoltura, Corso degli Inglesi 508, 18038 SanRemo (IM), Italy. Phone: (39)0184694846, Fax: (39)0184694856,email: a.mercuri@istflori.it web: www.istflori.it

� October 3-7, 2006, N’Zérékoré (Guinea): I InternationalSymposium Contribution of African Botanica to Humanity.Info: Dr. Nianga Nicephore Malo, Director UDECOM, 69 Chablis,Sector Aylmer, Gatineau, QC J9H 5P9, Canada. Phone:(1)8196849029, Fax: (1)8192462945, email: malo@ccophymed.com

� October 16-17, 2006, Adana (Turkey): I International Symposiumon Pomegranate and Minor Mediterranean Fruits. Info: Prof. Dr.Ahsen Isik Özgüven, Cukurova University Agricultural Faculty,Horticultural Department, Ziraat Fakültesi Bahçe Bitkileri Bölümü01330, Adana, Turkey. . Phone: (90)3223386564, Fax:(90)3223386388, email: ahsen@cu.edu.tr

� October 28-30, 2006, Mashhad (Iran): II International Symposiumon Saffron Biology and Technology - ISSBT. Info: Prof. Dr. A.Koocheki, CESC, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University ofMashhad, PO Box 91775-1163, Mashhad, Iran. Phone:(98)5117610760 or (98)5118788494, Fax: (98)5118787430, email:akooch@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir or saffron-ir@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir web:saffron-ir.um.ac.ir

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

NEW

ISHS • 48

670 I International Symposium on Root and Tuber Crops: Food Down Under 57

669 VIII International Symposium on Postharvest Physiology of Ornamental Plants 90

668 I International Humulus Symposium 65

667 IV International Cherry Symposium 110

666 IV International Pineapple Symposium 79

665 II International Symposium on Lychee, Longan, Rambutan and other Sapindaceae Plants 89

664 IV International Symposium on Irrigation of Horticultural Crops 132

663 XI Eucarpia Symposium on Fruit Breeding and Genetics 186

662 VII International Symposium on Temperate Zone Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics 99

661 I International Conference on Turfgrass Management and Science for Sports Fields 115

660 V International Congress on Artichoke 119

659 VII International Symposium on Protected Cultivation in Mild Winter Climates: Production, Pest Management and Global Competition 159

658 I International Symposium on Rootstocks for Deciduous Fruit Tree Species 137

657 XIX International Symposium on Virus and Virus-like Diseases of Temperate Fruit Crops - Fruit Tree Diseases 117

656 X International Symposium on Small Fruit Virus Diseases 57

655 XV International Symposium on Horticultural Economics and Management 106

654 International Workshop on Models for Plant Growth and Control of Product Quality in Horticultural Production 77

653 IX International Symposium on Plant Bioregulators in Fruit Production 61

652 I International Symposium on Grapevine Growing, Commerce and Research 108

651 XXI International Eucarpia Symposium on Classical versus Molecular Breeding of Ornamentals - Part II 54

649 Euro Berry Symposium - Cost 836 Final Workshop 77

648 South Pacific Soilless Culture Conference - SPSCC 60

647 International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants 55

646 International Symposium on Irrigation and Water Relations in Grapevine and Fruit Trees 54

645 VII International Mango Symposium 136

644 International Symposium on Growing Media and Hydroponics 117

642 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Horticulture, Art and Science for Life - The Colloquia Presentations 60

641 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: The Knowledge Business: Horticulture Education and Knowledge Transfer 51

640 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Viticulture - Living with Limitations 86

639 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Expanding Roles for Horticulture in Improving Human Well-Being and Life Quality 84

638 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Sustainability of Horticultural Systems in the 21st Century 105

637 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Advances in Vegetable Breeding 84

636 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Key Processes in the Growth and Cropping of Deciduous Fruit and Nut Trees 140

635 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Managing Soil-BornePathogens: A Sound Rhizosphere to Improve Productivity in Intensive Horticultural Systems 57

634 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: IV International Symposium on Taxonomy of Cultivated Plants 68

633 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Protected Cultivation 2002: In Search of Structures, Systems and Plant Materials for Sustainable Greenhouse Production 109

632 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Citrus and Other Subtropical and Tropical Fruit Crops: Issues, Advances and Opportunities 81

631 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Issues and Advances in Transplant Production and Stand Establishment Research 70

630 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Nursery Crops; Development, Evaluation, Production and Use 78

629 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: The Future for Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 107

628 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Issues and Advances in Postharvest Horticulture 168

627 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Toward Ecologically Sound Fertilization Strategies for Field Vegetable Production 71

626 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Berry Crop Breeding, Production and Utilization for a New Century 96

625 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Biotechnology in Horticultural Crop Improvement: Achievements, Opportunities and Limitations 98

624 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Elegant Science in Floriculture 110

623 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Plant Genetic Resources, The Fabric of Horticulture’s Future 80

621 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Horticultural Science in Emerging Economies, Issues and Constraints 46

620 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Asian Plants with Unique Horticultural Potential: Genetic Resources, Cultural Practices, and Utilization 99

619 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Potatoes, Healthy Food for Humanity: International Developments in Breeding, Production, Protection and Utilization 99

618 XXVI International Horticultural Congress: Environmental Stress and Horticulture Crops 107

617 Workshop on Rootstocks’ Performance in Phylloxera Infested Vineyards 51

616 I International Symposium on Acclimatization and Establishment of Micropropagated Plants 104

615 IV International Conifer Conference 97

613 VIII International Symposium on the Processing Tomato 96

611 International Congress on Greenhouse Vegetables. The Production Chain of Fresh Tomatoes, Peppers and Cucumbers 43

610 V International Symposium on Kiwifruit 109

609 International Symposium on Managing Greenhouse Crops in Saline Environment 102

608 International Symposium on The Horizons of Using Organic Matter and Substrates in Horticulture 70

607 IX International Symposium on Timing of Field Production in Vegetable Crops 61

601 II International Persimmon Symposium 62

600 VIII International Controlled Atmosphere Research Conference 160

599 International Conference: Postharvest Unlimited 146

598 International Symposium on Sustainable Use of Plant Biodiversity to Promote New Opportunities for Horticultural Production Development 71

596 VIII International Symposium on Pear 154

595 International Symposium on Apple Breeding for Scab Resistance 52

593 IV International Symposium on Models for Plant Growth and Control in Greenhouses: Modeling for the 21st Century -Agronomic and Greenhouse Crop Models 60

592 V International Peach Symposium 130

591 III International Symposium on Pistachios and Almonds 107

590 IX International Workshop on Fire Blight 95

589 X International Asparagus Symposium 79

For an updated list of all titles (in print or ActaHort CD-rom format)logon to www.actahort.org