Abstract:
An inbred corn line, designated LH 163, is disclosed. The invention relates to the seeds of inbred corn line LH 163, to the plants of inbred corn line LH 163 and to methods for producing a corn plant produced by crossing the inbred line LH 163 with itself or another corn line. The invention further relates to hybrid corn seeds and plants produced by crossing the inbred line LH 163 with another corn line.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     The present invention relates to a new and distinctive corn inbred line, designated LH163. There are numerous steps in the development of any novel, desirable plant germplasm. Plant breeding begins with the analysis and definition of problems and weaknesses of the current germplasm, the establishment of program goals, and the definition of specific breeding objectives. The next step is selection of germplasm that possess the traits to meet the program goals. The goal is to combine in a single variety or hybrid an improved combination of desirable traits from the parental germplasm. These important traits may include higher yield, resistance to diseases and insects, better stalks and roots, tolerance to drought and heat, and better agronomic quality. 
     Choice of breeding or selection methods depends on the mode of plant reproduction, the heritability of the trait(s) being improved, and the type of cultivar used commercially (e.g., F 1  hybrid cultivar, pureline cultivar, etc.). For highly heritable traits, a choice of superior individual plants evaluated at a single location will be effective, whereas for traits with low heritability, selection should be based on mean values obtained from replicated evaluations of families of related plants. Popular selection methods commonly include pedigree selection, modified pedigree selection, mass selection, and recurrent selection. 
     The complexity of inheritance influences choice of the breeding method. Backcross breeding is used to transfer one or a few favorable genes for a highly heritable trait into a desirable cultivar. This approach has been used extensively for breeding disease-resistant cultivars. Various recurrent selection techniques are used to improve quantitatively inherited traits controlled by numerous genes. The use of recurrent selection in self-pollinating crops depends on the ease of pollination, the frequency of successful hybrids from each pollination, and the number of hybrid offspring from each successful cross. 
     Each breeding program should include a periodic, objective evaluation of the efficiency of the breeding procedure. Evaluation criteria vary depending on the goal and objectives, but should include gain from selection per year based on comparisons to an appropriate standard, overall value of the advanced breeding lines, and number of successful cultivars produced per unit of input (e.g., per year, per dollar expended, etc.) 
     Promising advanced breeding lines are thoroughly tested and compared to appropriate standards in environments representative of the commercial target area(s) for three years at least. The best lines are candidates for new commercial cultivars; those still deficient in a few traits are used as parents to produce new populations for further selection. 
     These processes, which lead to the final step of marketing and distribution, usually take from eight to 12 years from the time the first cross is made. Therefore, development of new cultivars is a time-consuming process that requires precise forward planning, efficient use of resources, and a minimum of changes in direction. 
     A most difficult task is the identification of individuals that are genetically superior, because for most traits the true genotypic value is masked by other confounding plant traits or environmental factors. One method of identifying a superior plant is to observe its performance relative to other experimental plants and to a widely grown standard cultivar. If a single observation is inconclusive, replicated observations provide a better estimate of its genetic worth. 
     The goal of plant breeding is to develop new, unique and superior corn inbred lines and hybrids. The breeder initially selects and crosses two or more parental lines, followed by repeated selfing and selection, producing many new genetic combinations. The breeder can theoretically generate billions of different genetic combinations via crossing, selfing and mutations. The breeder has no direct control at the cellular level. Therefore, two breeders will never develop the same line, or even very similar lines, having the same corn traits. 
     Each year, the plant breeder selects the germplasm to advance to the next generation. This germplasm is grown under unique and different geographical, climatic and soil conditions, and further selections are then made, during and at the end of the growing season. The inbred lines which are developed are unpredictable. This unpredictability is because the breeder&#39;s selection occurs in unique environments, with no control at the DNA level (using conventional breeding procedures), and with millions of different possible genetic combinations being generated. A breeder of ordinary skill in the art cannot predict the final resulting lines he develops, except possibly in a very gross and general fashion. The same breeder cannot produce the same line twice by using the exact same original parents and the same selection techniques. This unpredictability results in the expenditure of large research monies to develop a superior new corn inbred line. 
     The development of commercial corn hybrids requires the development of homozygous inbred lines, the crossing of these lines, and the evaluation of the crosses. Pedigree breeding and recurrent selection breeding methods are used to develop inbred lines from breeding populations. Breeding programs combine desirable traits from two or more inbred lines or various broad-based sources into breeding pools from which inbred lines are developed by selfing and selection of desired phenotypes. The new inbreds are crossed with other inbred lines and the hybrids from these crosses are evaluated to determine which have commercial potential. 
     Pedigree breeding is used commonly for the improvement of self-pollinating crops or inbred lines of cross-pollinating crops. Two parents which posess favorable, complementary traits are crossed to produce an F 1 . An F 2  population is produced by selfing one or several F 1  &#39;s or by intercrossing two F 1  &#39;s (sib mating). Selection of the best individuals is usually begun in the F 2  population; then, beginning in the F 3 , the best individuals in the best families are selected. Replicated testing of families, or hybrid combinations involving individuals of these families, often follows in the F 4  generation to improve the effectiveness of selection for traits with low heritability. At an advanced stage of inbreeding (i.e., F 6  and F 7 );, the best lines or mixtures of phenotypically similar lines are tested for potential release as new cultivars. 
     Mass and recurrent selections can be used to improve populations of either self- or cross-pollinating crops. A genetically variable population of heterozygous individuals is either identified or created by intercrossing several different parents. The best plants are selected based on individual superiority, outstanding progeny, or excellent combining ability. The selected plants are intercrossed to produce a new population in which further cycles of selection are continued. 
     Backcross breeding has been used to transfer genes for a simply inherited, highly heritable trait into a desirable homozygous cultivar or inbred line which is the recurrent parent. The source of the trait to be transferred is called the donor parent. The resulting plant is expected to have the attributes of the recurrent parent (e.g., cultivar) and the desirable trait transferred from the donor parent. After the initial cross, individuals possessing the phenotype of the donor parent are selected and repeatedly crossed (backcrossed) to the recurrent parent. The resulting plant is expected to have the attributes of the recurrent parent (e.g., cultivar) and the desirable trait transferred from the donor parent. 
     Descriptions of other breeding methods that are commonly used for different traits and crops can be found in one of several reference books (e.g., Allard, 1960; Simmonds, 1979; Sneep et al., 1979; Fehr, 1987). 
     Proper testing should detect any major faults and establish the level of superiority or improvement over current cultivars. In addition to showing superior performance, there must be a demand for a new cultivar that is compatible with industry standards or which creates a new market. The introduction of a new cultivar will incur additional costs to the seed producer, the grower, processor and consumer; for special advertising and marketing, altered seed and commercial production practices, and new product utilization. The testing preceding release of a new cultivar should take into consideration research and development costs as well as technical superiority of the final cultivar. For seed-propagated cultivars, it must be feasible to produce seed easily and economically. 
     Once the inbreds that give the best hybrid performance have been identified, the hybrid seed can be reproduced indefinitely as long as the homogeneity of the inbred parent is maintained. A single-cross hybrid is produced when two inbred lines are crossed to produce the F 1  progeny. A double-cross hybrid is produced from four inbred lines crossed in pairs (A×B and C×D) and then the two F 1  hybrids are crossed again (A×B)×(C×D). Much of the hybrid vigor exhibited by F 1  hybrids is lost in the next generation (F 2 ). Consequently, seed from hybrid varieties is not used for planting stock. 
     Corn is an important and valuable field crop. Thus, a continuing goal of plant breeders is to develop stable, high yielding corn hybrids that are agronomically sound. The reasons for this goal are obviously to maximize the amount of grain produced on the land used and to supply food for both animals and humans. To accomplish this goal, the corn breeder must select and develop corn plants that have the traits that result in superior parental lines for producing hybrids. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     According to the invention, there is provided a novel inbred corn line, designated LH163. This invention thus relates to the seeds of inbred corn line LH163, to the plants of inbred corn line LH163 and to methods for producing a corn plant produced by crossing the inbred line LH163 with itself or another corn line. This invention further relates to hybrid corn seeds and plants produced by crossing the inbred line LH163 with another corn line. 
     DEFINITIONS 
     In the description and examples which follow, a number of terms are used. In order to provide a clear and consistent understanding of the specification and claims, including the scope to be given such terms, the following definitions are provided: 
     Predicted RM. This trait for a hybrid, predicted relative maturity (RM), is based on the harvest moisture of the grain. The relative maturity rating is based on a known set of checks and utilizes conventional maturity systems such a the Minnesota Relative Maturity Rating System. 
     MN RM. This represents the Minnesota Relative Maturity Rating (MN RM) for the hybrid and is based on the harvest moisture of the grain relative to a standard set of checks of previously determined MN RM rating. Regression analysis is used to compute this rating. 
     Yield Bushels/Acre). The yield in bushels/acre is the actual yield of the grain at harvest adjusted to 15.5% moisture. 
     Moisture. The moisture is the actual percentage moisture of the grain at harvest. 
     GDU Silk. The GDU silk (=heat unit silk) is the number of growing degree units (GDU) or heat units required for an inbred line or hybrid to reach silk emergence from the time of planting. Growing degree units are calculated by the Barger Method, where the heat units for a 24-hour period are: ##EQU1## The highest maximum used is 86° F. and the lowest minimum used is 50° F. For each hybrid, it takes a certain number of GDUs to reach various stages of plant development. GDUs are a way of measuring plant maturity. 
     Stalk Lodging. This is the percentage of plants that stalk lodge, i.e., stalk breakage, as measured by either natural lodging or pushing the stalks determining the percentage of plants that break off below the ear. This is a relative rating of a hybrid to other hybrids for standability. 
     Root Lodging. The root lodging is the percentage of plants that root lodge; i.e., those that lean from the vertical axis at an approximate 30° angle or greater would be counted as root lodged. 
     Plant Height. This is a measure of the height of the hybrid from the ground to the tip of the tassel, and is measured in inches. 
     Ear Height. The ear height is a measure from the ground to the ear node attachment, and is measured in inches. 
     Dropped Ears. This is a measure of the number of dropped ears per plot, and represents the percentage of plants that dropped an ear prior to harvest. 
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
     Inbred corn line LH163 is a yellow dent corn with superior characteristics, and provides an excellent parental line in crosses for producing first generation (F 1 ) hybrid corn. 
     Inbred corn line LH163 was developed by selfing hybrid plants from a population of Pioneer 3720 and using the ear-row pedigree method of breeding. Selfing and selection were practiced within the above F 1  cross for seven generations in the development of LH163. During the development of the line, crosses were made to inbred testers for the purpose of estimating the line&#39;s general and specific combining ability, and evaluations were run by the Williamsburg, Iowa Research Station. The inbred was evaluated further as a line and in numerous crosses by the Williamsburg Research Station and other research stations across the Corn Belt. The inbred has proven to have a very good combining ability in hybrid combinations. 
     The inbred has shown uniformity and stability for all traits, as described in the following variety description information. It has been self-pollinated and ear-rowed a sufficient number of generations, with careful attention to uniformity of plant type to ensure homozygosity and phenotypic stability. The line has been increased both by hand and sibbed in isolated fields with continued observation for uniformity. No variant traits have been observed or are expected in LH163. 
     Inbred corn line LH163 has the following morphologic and other characteristics (based primarily on data collected at Williamsburg, Iowa): 
     
         ______________________________________VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION______________________________________A.   MaturityINBRED = LH163Best Adapted For: Most Regions of Corn BeltHeat Unit Silk: 1255 ##STR1##B.   Plant CharacteristicsPlant height (to tassel tip): 201 cm.Length of top ear internode: 12 cm.Number of ears per stalk: Slight two-ear tendencyEar height (to base of top ear): 88 cm.Number of tillers: NoneCytoplasm type: NormalC.   LeafColor: 5GY 3/4 Munsell Color Chart forPlant TissueAngle from stalk: 30-60°Marginal waves: NoneNumber of leaves (mature plants): 15Sheath pubescence: MediumLongitudinal creases: FewLength of ear node leaf: 69 cm.Width at widest point of ear node leaf): 9 cm.D.   TasselNumber of lateral branches: 6Branch angle from central spike: 30-40°Pollen shed: MediumPeduncle length (top leaf to basal branches): 2 cm.Anther color: YellowGlume color: Green with brown marginE.   Ear (Husked Ear Data Except When Stated Otherwise)Length: 19 cm.Weight: 107 gm.Midpoint diameter: 40 mm.Silk color: GreenHusk extension: Short to none, eartips can be exposedHusk leaf: &lt;8 cm.Taper of Ear: AveragePosition of shank (dry husk stage): UprightKernel rows: 14Husk color (fresh): Light greenHusk color (dry): BuffShank length: 9 cm.Shank (no. of internodes): 7F.   Kernel (Dried)Size (from ear midpoint)Length: 10 mm.Width: 8 mm.Thickness: 5 mm.Shape grade (% rounds): &gt;80%Pericarp color: Colorless at crown, then turnsmore bronze in color down to pedicelAleurone color: Homozygous WhiteEndosperm color: YellowEndosperm type: Normal starchGm Wt/100 seeds (unsized): 29 gm.G.   CobDiameter at midpoint: 32 mm.Strength: StrongColor: Red______________________________________ 
    
     This invention is also directed to methods for producing a corn plant by crossing a first parent corn plant with a second parent corn plant, wherein the first or second corn plant is the inbred corn plant from the line LH163. Further, both first and second parent corn plants may be from the inbred line LH163. Therefore, any methods using the inbred corn line LH163 are part of this invention: selfing, backcrosses, hybrid breeding, and crosses to population. Any plants produced using inbred corn line LH163 as a parent are within the scope of this invention. Advantageously, the inbred corn line is used in crosses with other corn varieties to produce first generation (F 1 ) corn hybrid seed and plants with superior characteristics. 
     As used herein, the term &#34;plant&#34; includes plant cells, plant protoplasts, plant cell of tissue culture from which corn plants can be regenerated, plant calli, plant clumps, and plant cells that are intact in plants or parts of plants, such as pollen, flowers, kernels, ears, cobs, leaves, husks, stalks, and the like. 
     Tissue culture of corn is described in European Patent Application, Publication No. 160,390, incorporated herein by reference. Corn tissue culture procedures are also described in Green and Rhodes, &#34;Plant Regeneration in Tissue Culture of Maize&#34;, Maize for Biological Research (Plant Molecular Biology Association, Charlottesville, Va. 1982), at 367-372. Thus, another aspect of this invention is to provide for cells which upon growth and differentiation produce the inbred line LH163. 
     In the tables that follow, the traits and characteristics of inbred corn line LH163 are given in hybrid combination. The data collected on inbred corn line LH163 is presented for the key characteristics and traits. The tables present yield test information about LH163. LH163 was tested in several hybrid combinations at four locations, with two or three replications per location. Information about these hybrids, as compared to several check hybrids, is presented. 
     The first two pedigrees listed in the comparisons are hybrids containing LH163. Information for the pedigrees includes: 
     1. Mean yield of the hybrid across all locations. 
     2. A mean for the percentage moisture (% M) for the hybrid across all locations. 
     3. A mean of the yield divided by the percentage moisture (Y/M) for the hybrid across all locations. 
     4. A mean of the percentage of plants with stalk lodging (% SL) across all locations. 
     5. A mean of the percentage of plants with root lodging (% RL) across all locations. 
     6. A mean of the percentage of plants with dropped ears (% DE). 
     The series of hybrids listed under the hybrid containing LH163 are considered check hybrids. The check hybrid is compared to hybrids containing the inbred LH163. 
     
                       TABLE 1______________________________________Overall Comparisons ofLH163 × LH82 Hybrids Vs. Check Hybrids       Mean                            %Hybrid      Yield   % M    Y/M  % SL  % RL  DE______________________________________LH163 × LH82Avg: Michigan   178     19.83                        8.97 0     0     0Iowa       181     16.73                        10.79                             10    0     0Wisconsin  161     17.30                        9.35 5     1     2Minnesota  177     13.43                        13.26                             0     2     04 State Avg:       174     16.82  10.59                           4     1     1LH74 × LH163Avg: Michigan   169     20.20                        8.38 3     3     0Iowa       178     15.45                        11.49                             8     0     1Wisconsin  166     16.25                        10.20                             4     0     2Minnesota  183     12.17                        15.14                             0     1     04 State Avg:       174     16.02  11.30                           4     1     1LH74 × LH82Avg: Michigan   201     21.30                        9.45 4     7     0Iowa       176     17.13                        10.25                             13    0     3Wisconsin  158     16.40                        9.64 7     0     0Minnesota  190     13.63                        14.04                             0     7     04 State Avg:       181     17.11  10.84                           6     4     1______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 2______________________________________Overall Comparisons ofLH163 × LH82 Hybrids Vs. Check Hybrids       Mean                            %Hybrid      Yield   % M    Y/M  % SL  % RL  DE______________________________________LH163 × LH82Avg: Ohio       178     15.63                        11.40                             1     0     0Indiana    188     15.97                        11.78                             2     0     0Michigan   178     19.83                        8.97 0     0     0Iowa       176     16.20                        10.89                             4     0     0Wisconsin  152     17.34                        8.78 2     0     1Minnesota  161     15.66                        10.94                             1     1     06 State Avg:       167     16.52  10.38                           2     0     0LH74 × LH82Avg: Ohio       170     16.43                        10.34                             13    0     0Indiana    210     16.77                        12.50                             1     0     0Michigan   201     21.30                        9.45 4     7     0Iowa       171     16.77                        10.23                             5     2     2Wisconsin  148     17.01                        8.74 4     0     0Minnesota  169     16.11                        11.08                             1     3     06 State Avg:       170     16.94  10.27                           4     2     0______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 3______________________________________Overall Comparisons ofLH163 × LH74 Hybrids Vs. Check Hybrids       Mean                            %Hybrid      Yield   % M    Y/M  % SL  % RL  DE______________________________________LH163 × LH74Avg: Michigan   169     20.20                        8.38 3     3     0Iowa       178     15.45                        11.49                             8     0     1Wisconsin  131     17.46                        7.76 2     0     1Minnesota  179     14.92                        12.51                             1     0     04 State Avg:       161     16.73  10.07                           3     1     1LH74 × LH85Avg: Michigan   156     18.97                        8.20 2     3     0Iowa       170     14.65                        11.60                             11    0     1Wisconsin  124     17.03                        7.53 3     0     0Minnesota  175     14.88                        12.13                             1     0     04 State Avg:       154     16.24  9.86 3     0     0LH146 × LH82Avg: Minnesota  165     18.75                        8.76 5     26    0Iowa       174     14.45                        12.01                             16    5     1Wisconsin  129     16.58                        7.99 4     0     1Minnesota  171     14.63                        12.01                             0     3     04 State Avg:       156     15.94  10.13                           5     6     0______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 4______________________________________Overall Comparisons ofLH163 × LH146 Hybrids Vs. Check Hybrids       Mean                            %Hybrid      Yield   % M    Y/M  % SL  % RL  DE______________________________________LH163 × LH146Avg: Iowa       167     13.93                        11.95                             20    1     0Wisconsin  127     15.53                        8.28 2     0     0Minnesota  171     14.25                        12.43                             2     0     03 State Avg:       156     14.63  10.97                           5     0     0LH146 × LH85Avg: Iowa       160     14.18                        11.25                             15    5     2Wisconsin  118     15.76                        7.55 4     0     2Minnesota  171     14.33                        12.33                             1     0     03 State Avg:       151     14.78  10.56                           5     1     1______________________________________ 
    
     DEPOSIT INFORMATION 
     Inbred seeds of LH163 have been placed on deposit with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), Rockville, Md. 20852, under Deposit Accession Number 40782 on Apr. 10, 1990. A Plant Variety Protection Certificate is being applied for with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 
     Although the foregoing invention has been described in some detail by way of illustration and example for purposes of clarity and understanding, it will be obvious that certain changes and modifications may be practiced within the scope of the invention, as limited only by the scope of the appended claims.