# Patent

## Title
Romaine lettuce variety 163502

## Abstract

A novel romaine lettuce cultivar, designated 163502, is disclosed. The invention relates to the seeds of lettuce cultivar 163502, to the plants of lettuce line 163502 and to methods for producing a lettuce plant by crossing the cultivar 163502 with itself or another lettuce (Lactuca sp.) line. The invention further relates to methods for producing a lettuce plant containing in its genetic material one or more transgenes and to the transgenic plants produced by that method and to methods for producing other lettuce lines derived from the cultivar 163502.

## Background
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a Lactuca sativa cultivar exhibiting resistance to 17 known strains of Downy Mildew (Bremia lactucae), Corky Root (Rhizomonas suberifaciens) and Lettuce Mosaic Virus (LMV), partial resistance to Fusarium Wilt (Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lactucae), combined with a fast growth and fast heartfilling.
2. Background of the Invention
Vegetables and especially lettuce have growing importance in the human diet. There are unique qualities to these foodstuffs that make them critically important to good health and longevity of life. Such vegetables are nearly exclusive eaten in their natural state as a fresh, raw product. As such the appearance of such vegetables is critical to their sale. Americans especially demand a perfect or near perfect appearance of their raw products. Whereas, in some countries, foodstuffs can have blemishes and imperfections and be fit for the market, the US consumer demands a perfect near unblemished product.
It will be appreciated that all growers are faced with a limited amount of space in which to grow their vegetables and food products. It is more than desirable to maximise the yield of a particular parcel and especially so for the small to moderate sized grower. For example, if a grower can break even by selling about 500 cartons of lettuce per acre and he can switch to a different variety of the same lettuce and grow about 900 cartons of lettuce per acre, the product of the different variety would be much more valuable. This very well could be the difference between a grower able to survive bad economic conditions one year and continue his operation or going under and being forced to sell out or turn his land into residential property.
The export of vegetables across the international and state lines is vital to the grower and shippers of fresh produce. In fact, California and Arizona grow about 90% of the total United States lettuce production and It is estimated that about 75% or more of all lettuce grown in California is so exported (Subbaroa 1998) for sale in states such as New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and the like.
For a further understanding of lettuce, its uses and history Waycoft et al, U.S. Pat. No. 5,973,232 and Subbaroa 1998 is incorporated herein by references. There are six morphological types of lettuce: crisphead (iceberg), butterhead, Cos (Romaine), leaf, stem and Latin. The crisphead is the most common in the United States,just as Romaine types, while butterhead, iceberg and Romaine types are popular in northern and southern Europe. Cultivated lettuce originated from the ancestral wild species L. sativa. Today there are hundreds of cultivars, which are divided into four large groups based on morphological characteristics of the gross leaf morphology and leaf arrangement (Subbaroa 1998). These basic lettuce types frequently form the basis for grouping lettuces as is commonly seen in supermarkets, grocery and produce stores. Each of these basic groups is comprised of numerous cultivars; each characterised by its own particular morphology, disease resistance, and cultural adaptations.
Lettuce cultivars are susceptible to a number of diseases such as downy mildew (Bremia lactucae), lettuce drop (Sclerotinia minor and S. sclerotiorum), corky root (Rhizomonas suberifaciens), Fusarium Wilt, lettuce mosaic virus, big vein and aster yellows, just to list a few. These diseases result in millions of dollars of lost lettuce crop through the world every year.
The United States have a strict control on the presence of LMV on the seed of lettuce. The Salinas Valley Authority has designated a period in December that no lettuce plants may grow in the field. This will break the cycle of LMV in the field. Seed companies go through strict precocious measures to avoid that contaminated seed is planted in the United States. Varieties that have a genetic resistance against Lettuce Mosaic virus are not able to spread the disease. This reduces the cost of production for the seed company and reduces the risk of the unwanted importation of LMV to the United States.
Growers want to have a quick and reliable return on their investment in a lettuce crop. They want a variety that produces a good sized marketable head with an early filling of the heart, that reaches the minimum weight earlier. Not only to be able to sell their product earlier, but also to spend less on irrigation and pest- and disease-control during the time the crop is in the field.


DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Definitions
In the description and tables 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:
Allele. The allele is any of one or more alternative form of a gene, all of which alleles relates to one trait or characteristic. In a diploid cell or organism, the two alleles of a given gene occupy corresponding loci on a pair of homologous chromosomes.
Backcrossing. Backcrossing is a process in which a breeder repeatedly crosses hybrid progeny back to one of the parents, for example, a first generation hybrid F1 with one of the parental genotype of the F1 hybrid.
Essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics. A plant having essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics means a plant having the physiological and morphological characteristics, except for the characteristics derived from the converted gene.
Regeneration. Regeneration refers to the development of a plant from tissue culture.
Single gene converted. Single gene converted or conversion plant refers to plants which are developed by a plant breeding technique called backcrossing wherein essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological characteristics of a line are recovered in addition to the single gene transferred into the line via the backcrossing technique or via genetic engineering.
Maturity Date. Maturity refers to the stage when the plants are of full size or optimum weight, in marketable form or shape to be of commercial or economic value. In romaine types they range from 50-75 days from time of seeding, depending upon the season of the year.
RHS. RHS refers to the Royal Horticultural Society of England which publishes an official botanical color chart quantitatively identifying colors according to a defined numbering system, The chart may be purchased from Royal Hort Society Enterprise Ltd RHS Garden; Wisley, Woking; Surrey GU236QB, UK.
Cotyledon. In the case of lettuce, one pair of leaves formed on an embryo within the seed, which upon germination are the first leaves to emerge.
Fourth leaf. The fourth leaf formed on the lettuce plantlet subsequent to the emergence of the cotyledons.
Frame leaf. The first set of freely recurring leaves which are external to the head.
Market stage. The developmental stage reached by a crop plant at which the plant is ready for harvest. In the Romaine Group of cultivars of lettuce, it is that stage at which the head has reached maximum size and just before the tops of the leaves completely enclose the cavity created inside the head.
Butt. The bottom portion of the lettuce which includes the stem and adjacent leaf bases of the outermost head leaf of the harvested head.
Core. The stem of the lettuce head on which the leaves are borne.
Bolting. The process during which the stem within the lettuce head greatly elongates, causing the head to lose its shape and resulting ultimately in the producing of a flower stalk.
163502 was developed from a cross between the variety Tall Guzmaine and a proprietary breeding line from the romaine program of Enza-zaden. This breeding line was selected from a cross between a blond romaine variety called Fame and a dark green butterhead variety called Ballora (both Enza-zaden varieties).
The selected F4 line was used as the pollinator in the cross with Tall Guzmaine. After 7 generations of self-pollination and plant selection, the line 163502 was selected, multiplied and tested in Europe for 2 years and in the US for 2 years.
During the generations of selecting, selection criteria in the field were fast heart filling, dark green color, thick leaf, resistant to bolting and resistant to tipburn.
Seed from the selected plants were tested in the greenhouse for resistance to Bremia Lactucae, Corky Root and Lettuce Mosaic Virus for the successive generations until uniform resistance was reached.
Based on trials in Arizona and Spain in the winter of 2002/2003 the present invention was faster growing with a better heart filling when compared to standard varieties Darkland Cos and Hearts Delight.
Based on artificial tests and confirmed by field observations, 163502 is resistant to strains 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 21 and 23 of Bremia lactucae. Furthermore, based on artificial tests and confirmed by field observations, 163502 is resistant to Corky Root and to Lettuce Mosaic Virus. The present invention also has some resistance to Fusarium Wilt.
VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION
Plant Type
Romaine (Cos)
Seed
Color: black
Cotyledon to Fourth Leaf Stage
Shape of cotyledons: broad
Undulation: flat
Anthocyanin distribution: absent
Rolling: absent
Cupping: slight
Reflexing: none
Color: dark green
Mature Leaves
Margin—Incision depth: absent
Margin—Undulation of the apical margin: absent
Green color: dark green, RHS 7.5 GY 3/4
Anthocyanin—Distribution: absent
Size: large
Glossiness: glossy
Blistering: moderate
Trichomes: absent
Leaf thickness: thick
Plant (at Market Stage)
Frame leaves: 29 cm spread
Head size class: large
Head weight: 650 g—24-head count per carton
Head firmness: loose
Butt
Shape: Tapered and flattened
Core
Diameter at base of head: 38 mm
Core height from base of head to apex: 86 mm
Maturity
Summer: 103 days, 5 days earlier than Green Towers
Winter: 91 days, 5 days earlier than Green Towers
Bolting
Approximate days for germination: 81
Mature seed stalk: 80 cm length
Total spread: 31 cm
Color: dark green
Shape: straight
Margins: without dentate
Terminal inflorescence: present
Lateral and basal shoots: absent
Adaptation
Primary Regions of Adaptation (tested and proven adapted)
Southwest (California, Arizona desert): adapted
Soil Type: clay-loam
Disease and Stress Reactions
Downy Mildew (Bremia lactucae)—Resistant to 17 races
Lettuce Mosaic (LMV): Resistant
Corky Root Rot (Rhizomonas suberifaciens): Resistant
Fusarium Wilt (Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lactucae) Moderate resistance
FURTHER EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
This invention also is directed to methods for producing a lettuce cultivar plant by crossing a first parent lettuce plant with a second parent lettuce plant wherein either the first or second parent lettuce plant is a lettuce plant of the line 163502. Further, both first and second parent lettuce plants can come from the cultivar 163502. Still further, this invention also is directed to methods for producing a cultivar 163502-derived lettuce plant by crossing cultivar 163502 with a second lettuce plant and growing the progeny seed, and repeating the crossing and growing steps with the cultivar 163502-derived plant from 0 to 7 times. Thus, any such methods using the cultivar 163502 are part of this invention: selfing, backcrosses, hybrid production, crosses to populations, and the like. All plants produced using cultivar 163502 as a parent are within the scope of this invention, including plants derived from cultivar 163502. Advantageously, the cultivar is used in crosses with other, different, cultivars to produce first generation (F1) lettuce seeds and plants with superior characteristics.
As used herein, the term plant includes plant cells, plant protoplasts, plant cell tissue cultures from which lettuce plants can be regenerated, plant calli, plant clumps and plant cells that are intact in plants or parts of plants, such as embryos, pollen, ovules, flowers, seeds, roots, anthers, and the like.
As is well known in the art, tissue culture of lettuce can be used for the in vitro regeneration of a lettuce plant. Tissue culture of various tissues of lettuces and regeneration of plants therefrom is well known and widely published. For example, reference may be had to Teng et al., HortScience. 1992, 27: 9, 1030-1032 Teng et al., HortScience. 1993, 28: 6, 669-1671, Zhang et al., Journal of Genetics and Breeding. 1992, 46: 3, 287-290, Webb et al., Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture. 1994, 38: 1, 77-79, Curtis et al., Journal of Experimental Botany. 1994, 45: 279,1441-1449, Nagata et al., Journal for the American Society for Horticultural Science. 2000,125: 6, 669-672. It is clear from the literature that the state of the art is such that these methods of obtaining plants are, and were, “conventional” in the sense that they are routinely used and have a very high rate of success. Thus, another aspect of this invention is to provide cells which upon growth and differentiation produce lettuce plants having the physiological and morphological characteristics of variety 163502.
With the advent of molecular biological techniques that have allowed the isolation and characterization of genes that encode specific protein products, scientists in the field of plant biology developed a strong interest in engineering the genome of plants to contain and express foreign genes, or additional, or modified versions of native, or endogenous, genes (perhaps driven by different promoters) in order to alter the traits of a plant in a specific manner. Such foreign additional and/or modified genes are referred to herein collectively as transgenes. Over the last fifteen to twenty years several methods for producing transgenic plants have been developed, and the present invention, in particular embodiments, also relates to transformed versions of the claimed line.
Plant transformation involves the construction of an expression vector that will function in plant cells. Such a vector comprises DNA comprising a gene under control of or operatively linked to a regulatory element (for example, a promoter). The expression vector may contain one or more such operably linked gene/regulatory element combinations. The vector(s) may be in the form of a plasmid, and can be used alone or in combination with other plasmids, to provide transformed lettuce plants, using transformation methods as described below to incorporate transgenes into the genetic material of the lettuce plant(s).
Expression Vectors for Lettuce Transformation
Marker Genes—Expression vectors include at least one genetic marker, operably linked to a regulatory element (a promoter, for example) that allows transformed cells containing the marker to be either recovered by negative selection, i.e., inhibiting growth of cells that do not contain the selectable marker gene, or by positive selection, i.e., screening for the product encoded by the genetic marker. Many commonly used selectable marker genes for plant transformation are well known in the transformation arts, and include, for example, genes that code for enzymes that metabolically detoxify a selective chemical agent which may be an antibiotic or a herbicide, or genes that encode an altered target which is insensitive to the inhibitor. A few positive selection methods are also known in the art.
One commonly used selectable marker gene for plant transformation is the neomycin phosphotransferase II (nptII) gene, isolated from transposon Tn5, which when placed under the control of plant regulatory signals confers resistance to kanamycin. Fraley et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 80:4803 (1983). Another commonly used selectable marker gene is the hygromycin phosphotransferase gene which confers resistance to the antibiotic hygromycin. Vanden Elzen et al., Plant Mol. Biol., 5:299 (1985).
Additional selectable marker genes of bacterial origin that confer resistance to antibiotics include gentamycin acetyl transferase, streptomycin phosphotransferase, aminoglycoside-3′-adenyl transferase, the bleomycin resistance determinant. Hayford et al., Plant Physiol. 86:1216 (1988), Jones et al., Mol. Gen. Genet., 210:86 (1987), Svab et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 14:197 (1990< Hille et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 7:171 (1986). Other selectable marker genes confer resistance to herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate or broxynil. Comai et al., Nature 317:741-744 (1985), Gordon-Kamm et al., Plant Cell 2:603-618 (1990) and Stalker et al., Science 242:419-423 (1988).
Other selectable marker genes for plant transformation are not of bacterial origin. These genes include, for example, mouse dihydrofolate reductase, plant 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase and plant acetolactate synthase. Eichholtz et al., Somatic Cell Mol. Genet. 13:67 (1987), Shah et al., Science 233:478 (1986), Charest et al., Plant Cell Rep. 8:643 (1990).
Another class of marker genes for plant transformation require screening of presumptively transformed plant cells rather than direct genetic selection of transformed cells for resistance to a toxic substance such as an antibiotic. These genes are particularly useful to quantify or visualize the spatial pattern of expression of a gene in specific tissues and are frequently referred to as reporter genes because they can be fused to a gene or gene regulatory sequence for the investigation of gene expression. Commonly used genes for screening presumptively transformed cells include α-glucuronidase (GUS, α-galactosidase, luciferase and chloramphenicol, acetyltransferase. Jefferson, R. A., Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 5:387 (1987), Teeri et al., EMBO J. 8:343 (1989), Koncz et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci U.S.A. 84:131 (1987), DeBlock et al., EMBO J. 3:1681 (1984).
Recently, in vivo methods for visualizing GUS activity that do not require destruction of plant tissue have been made available. Molecular Probes publication 2908, Imagene Green, p. 1-4 (1993) and Naleway et al., J. Cell Biol. 115:151a (1991). However, these in vivo methods for visualizing GUS activity have not proven useful for recovery of transformed cells because of low sensitivity, high fluorescent backgrounds and limitations associated with the use of luciferase genes as selectable markers.
More recently, a gene encoding Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) has been utilized as a marker for gene expression in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. Chalfie et al., Science 263:802 (1994). GFP and mutants of GFP may be used as screenable markers.
Promoters—Genes included in expression vectors must be driven by nucleotide sequence comprising a regulatory element, for example, a promoter. Several types of promoters are now well known in the transformation arts, as are other regulatory elements that can be used alone or in combination with promoters.
As used herein, promoter includes reference to a region of DNA upstream from the start of transcription and involved in recognition and binding of RNA polymerase and other proteins to initiate transcription. A “plant promoter” is a promoter capable of initiating transcription in plant cells. Examples of promoters under developmental control include promoters that preferentially initiate transcription in certain tissues, such as leaves, roots, seeds, fibers, xylem vessels, tracheids, or sclerenchyma. Such promoters are referred to as “tissue-preferred”. Promoters which initiate transcription only in certain tissue are referred to as “tissue-specific”. A “cell type” specific promoter primarily drives expression in certain cell types in one or more organs, for example, vascular cells in roots or leaves. An “inducible” promoter is a promoter which is under environmental control. Examples of environmental conditions that may effect transcription by inducible promoters include anaerobic conditions or the presence of light. Tissue-specific, tissue-preferred, cell type specific, and inducible promoters constitute the class of “non-constitutive” promoters. A “constitutive promoter” is a promoter which is active under most environmental conditions.
A. Inducible Promoters
An inducible promoter is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce. Optionally, the inducible promoter is operably linked to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence which is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce. With an inducible promoter the rate of transcription increases in response to an inducing agent.
Any inducible promoter can be used in the instant invention. See Ward et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 22:361-366 (1993). Exemplary inducible promoters include, but are not limited to, that from the ACEI system which responds to copper (Meft et al., PNAS 90:4567-4571 (1993)); In2 gene from maize which responds to benzenesulfonamide herbicide safeners (Hershey et al., Mol. Gen Genetics 227:229-237 (1991) and Gatz et al., Mol. Gen. Genetics 243:32-38 (1994)) or Tet repressor from Tn10 (Gatz et al., Mol. Gen. Genetics 227:229-237 (1991). A particularly preferred inducible promoter is a promoter that responds to an inducing agent to which plants do not normally respond. An exemplary inducible promoter is the inducible promoter from a steroid hormone gene, the transcriptional activity of which is induced by a glucocorticosteroid hormone. Schena et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 88:0421 (1991).
B. Constitutive Promoters
A constitutive promoter is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce or the constitutive promoter is operably linked to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence which is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce.
Many different constitutive promoters can be utilized in the instant invention. Exemplary constitutive promoters include, but are not limited to, the promoters from plant viruses such as the 35S promoter from CaMV (Odell et al., Nature 313:810-812 (1985) and the promoters from such genes as rice actin (McElroy et al., Plant Cell 2:163-171 (1990)); ubiquitin (Christensen et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 12:619-632 (1989) and Christensen et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 18:675-689 (1992)); pEMU (Last et al., Theor. Appl. Genet. 81:581-588 (1991)); MAS (Velten et al., EMBO J. 3:2723-2730 (1984)) and maize H3 histone (Lepetit et al., Mol. Gen. Genetics 231:276-285 (1992) and Atanassova et al., Plant Journal 2 (3): 291-300 (1992)).
The ALS promoter, Xba1/NcoI fragment 5′ to the Brassica napus ALS3 structural gene (or a nucleotide sequence similarity to said Xba1/NcoI fragment), represents a particularly useful constitutive promoter. See PCT application WO96/30530.
C. Tissue-specific or Tissue-preferred Promoters
A tissue-specific promoter is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce. Optionally, the tissue-specific promoter is operably linked to a nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence which is operably linked to a gene for expression in lettuce. Plants transformed with a gene of interest operably linked to a tissue-specific promoter produce the protein product of the transgene exclusively, or preferentially, in a specific tissue.
Any tissue-specific or tissue-preferred promoter can be utilized in the instant invention. Exemplary tissue-specific or tissue-preferred promoters include, but are not limited to, a root-preferred promoter, such as that from the phaseolin gene (Murai et al., Science 23:476-482 (1983) and Sengupta-Gopalan et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 82:3320-3324 (1985)); a leaf-specific and light-induced promoter such as that from cab or rubisco (Simpson et al., EMBO J. 4(11):2723-2729 (1985) and Timko et al., Nature 318:579-582 (1985)); an anther-specific promoter such as that from LAT52 (Twell et al., Mol. Gen. Genetics 217:240-245 (1989)); a pollen-specific promoter such as that from Zm13 (Guerrero et al., Mol. Gen. Genetics 244:161-168 (1993)) or a microspore-preferred promoter such as that from apg (Twell et al., Sex. Plant Reprod. 6:217-224 (1993).
Signal Sequences for Targeting Proteins to Subcellular Compartments
Transport of protein produced by transgenes to a subcellular compartment such as the chloroplast, vacuole, peroxisome, glyoxysome, cell wall or mitochondroin or for secretion into the apoplast, is accomplished by means of operably linking the nucleotide sequence encoding a signal sequence to the 5′ and/or 3′ region of a gene encoding the protein of interest. Targeting sequences at the 5′ and/or 3′ end of the structural gene may determine, during protein synthesis and processing, where the encoded protein is ultimately compartmentalized.
The presence of a signal sequence directs a polypeptide to either an intracellular organelle or subcellular compartment or for secretion to the apoplast. Many signal sequences are known in the art. See, for example Becker et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 20:49 (1992), Close, P. S., Master's Thesis, Iowa State University (1993), Knox, C., et al., Structure and Organization of Two Divergent Alpha-Amylase Genes from Barley, Plant Mol. Biol. 9:3-17 (1987), Lerner et al., Plant Physiol. 91:124-129 (1989), Fontes et al., Plant Cell 3:483-496 (1991), Matsuoka et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 88:834 (1991), Gould et al., J. Cell. Biol. 108:1657 (1989), Creissen et al., Plant J. 2:129 (1991), Kalderon, et al., A short amino acid sequence able to specify nuclear location, Cell 39:499-509 (1984), Steifel, et al., Expression of a maize cell wall hydroxyproline-rich glycoprotein gene in early leaf and root vascular differentiation, Plant Cell 2:785-793 (1990).
Foreign Protein Genes and Agronomic Genes
With transgenic plants according to the present invention, a foreign protein can be produced in commercial quantities. Thus, techniques for the selection and propagation of transformed plants, which are well understood in the art, yield a plurality of transgenic plants that are harvested in a conventional manner, and a foreign protein then can be extracted from a tissue of interest or from total biomass. Protein extraction from plant biomass can be accomplished by known methods which are discussed, for example, by Heney and Orr, Anal. Biochem. 114:92-6 (1981).
According to a preferred embodiment, the transgenic plant provided for commercial production of foreign protein is lettuce. In another preferred embodiment, the biomass of interest is seed. For the relatively small number of transgenic plants that show higher levels of expression, a genetic map can be generated, primarily via conventional RFLP, AFLP, PCR and SSR analysis, which identifies the approximate chromosomal location of the integrated DNA molecule. For exemplary methodologies in this regard, see Glick and Thompson, Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology CRC Press, Boca Raton 269:284 (1993). Map information concerning chromosomal location is useful for proprietary protection of a subject transgenic plant. If unauthorized propagation is undertaken and crosses made with other germplasm, the map of the integration region can be compared to similar maps for suspect plants, to determine if the latter have a common parentage with the subject plant. Map comparisons would involve hybridizations, RFLP, AFLP, PCR, SSR and sequencing, all of which are conventional techniques.
Likewise, by means of the present invention, agronomic genes can be expressed in transformed plants. More particularly, plants can be genetically engineered to express various phenotypes of agronomic interest. Exemplary genes implicated in this regard include, but are not limited to, those categorized below:
1. Genes that Confer Resistance to Pests or Disease and that Encode:
A. Plant disease resistance genes. Plant defenses are often activated by specific interaction between the product of a disease resistance gene (R) in the plant and the product of a corresponding avirulence (Avr) gene in the pathogen. A plant line can be transformed with cloned resistance gene to engineer plants that are resistant to specific pathogen strains. See, for example Jones et al., Science 266:789 (1994) (cloning of the tomato Cf-9 gene for resistance to Cladosporium fulvum); Martin et al., Science 262:1432 (1993) (tomato Pto gene for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv. Tomato encodes a protein kinase); Mindrinos et al., Cell 78:1089 (1994) (Arabidopsis RSP2 gene for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae).
B. A Bacillus thuringiensis protein, a derivative thereof or a synthetic polypeptide modeled thereon. See, for example, Geiser et al., Gene 48:109 (1986), who disclose the cloning and nucleotide sequence of a Bt ä-endotoxin gene. Moreover, DNA molecules encoding α-endotoxin genes can be purchased from American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Va., for example, under ATCC Accession Nos. 40098, 67136, 31995 and 31998.
C. A lectin. See, for example, the disclose by Van Damme et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 24:25 (1994), who disclose the nucleotide sequences of several Clivia miniata mannose-binding lectin genes.
D. A vitamin-binding protein such as avidin. See PCT application US93/06487, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. The application teaches the use of avidin and avidin homologues as larvicides against insect pests.
E. An enzyme inhibitor, for example, a protease or proteinase inhibitor or an amylase inhibitor. See, for example, Abe et al., J. Biol. Chem. 262:16793 (1987) (nucleotide sequence of rice cysteine proteinase inhibitor), Huub et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 21:985 (1993) (nucleotide sequence of cDNA encoding tobacco proteinase inhibitor I), Sumitani et al., Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 57:1243 (1993) (nucleotide sequence of Streptomyces nitrosporeus á-amylase inhibitor).
F. An insect-specific hormone or pheromone such as an ecdysteroid and juvenile hormone, a variant thereof, a mimetic based thereon, or an antagonist or agonist thereof. See, for example, the disclosure by Hammock et al., Nature 344:458 (1990), of baculovirus expression of cloned juvenile hormone esterase, an inactivator of juvenile hormone.
G. An insect-specific peptide or neuropeptide which, upon expression, disrupts the physiology of the affected pest. For example, see the disclosures of Regan, J. Biol. Chem. 269:9 (1994) (expression cloning yields DNA coding for insect diuretic hormone receptor), and Pratt et al., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm. 163:1243 (1989) (an allostatin is identified in Diploptera puntata). See also U.S. Pat. No. 5,266,317 to Tomalski et al., who disclose genes encoding insect-specific, paralytic neurotoxins.
H. An insect-specific venom produced in nature by a snake, a wasp, etc. For example, see Pang et al., Gene 116:165 (1992), for disclosure of heterologous expression in plants of a gene coding for a scorpion insectotoxic peptide.
I. An enzyme responsible for a hyper accumulation of a monterpene, a sesquiterpene, a steroid, hydroxamic acid, a phenylpropanoid derivative or another non-protein molecule with insecticidal activity.
J. An enzyme involved in the modification, including the post-translational modification, of a biologically active molecule; for example, a glycolytic enzyme, a proteolytic enzyme, a lipolytic enzyme, a nuclease, a cyclase, a transaminase, an esterase, a hydrolase, a phosphatase, a kinase, a phosphorylase, a polymerase, an elastase, a chitinase and a glucanase, whether natural or synthetic. See PCT application WO 93/02197 in the name of Scott et al., which discloses the nucleotide sequence of a callase gene. DNA molecules which contain chitinase-encoding sequences can be obtained, for example, from the ATCC under Accession Nos. 39637 and 67152. See also Kramer et al., Insect Biochem. Molec. Biol. 23:691 (1993), who teach the nucleotide sequence of a cDNA encoding tobacco hookworm chitinase, and Kawalleck et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 21:673 (1993), who provide the nucleotide sequence of the parsley ubi4-2 polyubiquitin gene.
K. A molecule that stimulates signal transduction. For example, see the disclosure by Botella et al., Plant Molec. Biol. 24:757 (1994), of nucleotide sequences for mung lettuce calmodulin cDNA clones, and Griess et al., Plant Physiol. 104:1467 (1994), who provide the nucleotide sequence of a maize calmodulin cDNA clone.
L. A hydrophobic moment peptide. See PCT application WO95/16776 (disclosure of peptide derivatives of Tachyplesin which inhibit fungal plant pathogens) and PCT application WO95/18855 (teaches synthetic antimicrobial peptides that confer disease resistance), the respective contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
M. A membrane permease, a channel former or a channel blocker. For example, see the disclosure of Jaynes et al., Plant Sci 89:43 (1993), of heterologous expression of a cecropin-α, lytic peptide analog to render transgenic tobacco plants resistant to Pseudomonas solanacearum. 
N. A viral-invasive protein or a complex toxin derived therefrom. For example, the accumulation of viral coat proteins in transformed plant cells imparts resistance to viral infection and/or disease development effected by the virus from which the coat protein gene is derived, as well as by related viruses. See Beachy et al., Ann. rev. Phytopathol. 28:451 (1990). Coat protein-mediated resistance has been conferred upon transformed plants against alfalfa mosaic virus, cucumber mosaic virus, tobacco streak virus, potato virus X, potato virus Y, tobacco etch virus, tobacco rattle virus and tobacco mosaic virus. Id.
O. An insect-specific antibody or an immunotoxin derived therefrom. Thus, an antibody targeted to a critical metabolic function in the insect gut would inactivate an affected enzyme, killing the insect. Cf. Taylor et al., Abstract #497, Seventh Int'l Symposium on Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions (Edinburgh, Scotland) (1994) (enzymatic inactivation in transgenic tobacco via production of single-chain antibody fragments).
P. A virus-specific antibody. See, for example, Tavladoraki et al., Nature 366:469 (1993), who show that transgenic plants expressing recombinant antibody genes are protected from virus attack.
Q. A developmental-arrestive protein produced in nature by a pathogen or a parasite. Thus, fungal endo α-1,4-D-polygalacturonases facilitate fungal colonization and plant nutrient release by solubilizing plant cell wall homo-α-1,4-D-galacturonase. See Lamb et al., Bio/Technology 10:1436 (1992). The cloning and characterization of a gene which encodes a lettuce endopolygalacturonase-inhibiting protein is described by Toubart et al., Plant J. 2:367 (1992).
R. A development-arrestive protein produced in nature by a plant. For example, Logemann et al., Bioi/Technology 10:305 (1992), have shown that transgenic plants expressing the barley ribosome-inactivating gene have an increased resistance to fungal disease.
R. A lettuce mosaic potyvirus (LMV) coat protein gene introduced into Lactuca Sativa in order to increase its resistance to LMV infection. See Dinant et al., Molecular Breeding. 1997, 3: 1, 75-86.
2. Genes that Confer Resistance to a Herbicide, for Example:
A. A herbicide that inhibits the growing point or meristem, such as an imidazalinone or a sulfonylurea. Exemplary genes in this category code for mutant ALS and AHAS enzyme as described, for example, by Lee et al., EMBO J. 7:1241 (1988), and Miki et al., Theor. Appl. Genet. 80:449 (1990), respectively.
B. Glyphosate (resistance impaired by mutant 5-enolpyruvl-3-phosphikimate synthase (EPSP) and aroA genes, respectively) and other phosphono compounds such as glufosinate (phosphinothricin acetyl transferase, PAT and Streptomyces hygroscopicus phosphinothricin-acetyl transferase, bar, genes), and pyridinoxy or phenoxy propionic acids and cycloshexones (ACCase inhibitor-encoding genes). See, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,940,835 to Shah, et al., which discloses the nucleotide sequence of a form of EPSP which can confer glyphosate resistance. A DNA molecule encoding a mutant aroA gene can be obtained under ATCC accession number 39256, and the nucleotide sequence of the mutant gene is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,769,061 to Comai. See also Umaballava-Mobapathie in Transgenic Research. 1999, 8: 1, 33-44 that discloses lactuca sativa resistant to glufosinate. European patent application No. 0 333 033 to Kumada et al., and U.S. Pat. No. 4,975,374 to Goodman et al., disclose nucleotide sequences of glutamine synthetase genes which confer resistance to herbicides such as L-phosphinothricin. The nucleotide sequence of a phosphinothricin-acetyl-transferase gene is provided in European application No. 0 242 246 to Leemans et al., DeGreef et al., Bio/Technology 7:61 (1989), describe the production of transgenic plants that express chimeric bar genes coding for phosphinothricin acetyl transferase activity. Exemplary of genes conferring resistance to phenoxy propionic acids and cycloshexones, such as sethoxydim and haloxyfop are the Acc1-S1, Acc1-S2 and Acc1-S3 genes described by Marshall et al., Theor. Appl. Genet. 83:435 (1992).
C. A herbicide that inhibits photosynthesis, such as a triazine (psbA and gs+ genes) and a benzonitrile (nitrilase gene). Przibilla et al., Plant Cell 3:169 (1991), describe the transformation of Chlamydomonas with plasmids encoding mutant psbA genes. Nucleotide sequences for nitrilase genes are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,810,648 to Stalker, and DNA molecules containing these genes are available under ATCC Accession Nos. 53435, 67441, and 67442. Cloning and expression of DNA coding for a glutathione S-transferase is described by Hayes et al., Biochem. J. 285:173 (1992).
3. Genes that Confer or Contribute to a Value-added Trait, such as:
A. Increased iron content of the lettuce, for example by transforming a plant with a soybean ferritin gene as described in Goto et al., Acta Horticulturae. 2000, 521, 101-109. Parallel to the improved iron content enhanced growth of transgenic lettuces was also observed in early development stages.
B. Decreased nitrate content of leaves, for example by transforming a lettuce with a gene coding for a nitrate reductase. See for example Curtis et al., Plant Cell Report. 1999, 18: 11, 889-896.
Numerous methods for plant transformation have been developed, including biological and physical, plant transformation protocols. See, for example, Miki et al., “Procedures for Introducing Foreign DNA into Plants” in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Glick B. R. and Thompson, J. E. Eds. (CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, 1993) pages 67-88. In addition, expression vectors and in vitro culture methods for plant cell or tissue transformation and regeneration of plants are available. See, for example, Gruber et al., “Vectors for Plant Transformation” in Methods in Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Glick B. R. and Thompson, J. E. Eds. (CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, 1993) pages 89-119.
A. Agrobacterium-mediated Transformation
One method for introducing an expression vector into plants is based on the natural transformation system of Agrobacterium. See, for example, Horsch et al., Science 227:1229 (1985). Curtis et al., Journal of Experimental Botany. 1994, 45: 279, 1441-1449, Torres et al., Plant cell Tissue and Organic Culture. 1993, 34: 3, 279-285, Dinant et al., Molecular Breeding. 1997, 3: 1, 75-86. A. tumefaciens and A. rhizogenes are plant pathogenic soil bacteria which genetically transform plant cells. The Ti and Ri plasmids of A. tumefaciens and A. rhizogenes, respectively, carry genes responsible for genetic transformation of the plant. See, for example, Kado, C. I., Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 10:1 (1991). Descriptions of Agrobacterium vector systems and methods for Agrobacterium-mediated gene transfer are provided by Gruber et al., supra, Miki et al., supra, and Moloney et al., Plant Cell Reports 8:238 (1989). See also, U.S. Pat. No. 5,591,616 issued Jan. 7, 1997.
B. Direct Gene Transfer
Despite the fact the host range for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation is broad, some major cereal or vegetable crop species and gymnosperms have generally been recalcitrant to this mode of gene transfer, even though some success has recently been achieved in rice and corn. Hiei et al., The Plant Journal 6:271-282 (1994) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,591,616 issued Jan. 7, 1997. Several methods of plant transformation, collectively referred to as direct gene transfer, have been developed as an alternative to Agrobacterium-mediated transformation.
A generally applicable method of plant transformation is microprojectile-mediated transformation wherein DNA is carried on the surface of microprojectiles measuring 1 to 4 ìm. The expression vector is introduced into plant tissues with a biolistic device that accelerates the microprojectiles to speeds of 300 to 600 m/s which is sufficient to penetrate plant cell walls and membranes. Russell, D. R., et al. Pl. Cell. Rep. 12(3, January), 165-169 (1993), Aragao, F. J. L., et al. Plant Mol. Biol. 20(2, October), 357-359 (1992), Aragao, F. J. L., et al. Pl. Cell. Rep. 12(9, July), 483-490 (1993). Aragao Theor. Appl. Genet. 93: 142-150 (1996), Kim, J.; Minamikawa, T. Plant Science 117: 131-138 (1996), Sanford et al., Part. Sci. Technol. 5:27 (1987), Sanford, J. C., Trends Biotech. 6:299 (1988), Klein et al., Bio/Technology 6:559-563 (1988), Sanford, J. C., Physiol Plant 7:206 (1990), Klein et al., Biotechnology 10:268 (1992)
Another method for physical delivery of DNA to plants is sonication of target cells. Zhang et al., Bio/Technology 9:996 (1991). Alternatively, liposome or spheroplast fusion have been used to introduce expression vectors into plants. Deshayes et al., EMBO J., 4:2731 (1985), Christou et al., Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 84:3962 (1987). Direct uptake of DNA into protoplasts using CaCl2 precipitation, polyvinyl alcohol or poly-L-omithine have also been reported. Hain et al., Mol. Gen. Genet. 199:161 (1985) and Draper et al., Plant Cell Physiol. 23:451 (1982). Electroporation of protoplasts and whole cells and tissues have also been described. Saker, M.; Kuhne, T. Biologia Plantarum 40(4): 507-514 (1997/98), Donn et al., In Abstracts of VIIth International Congress on Plant Cell and Tissue Culture IAPTC, A2-38, p 53 (1990); D'Halluin et al., Plant Cell 4:1495-1505 (1992) and Spencer et al., Plant Mol. Biol. 24:51-61 (1994). See also Chupean et al., Biotechnology. 1989, 7: 5, 503-508.
Following transformation of lettuce target tissues, expression of the above-described selectable marker genes allows for preferential selection of transformed cells, tissues and/or plants, using regeneration and selection methods now well known in the art.
The foregoing methods for transformation would typically be used for producing a transgenic line. The transgenic line could then be crossed, with another (non-transformed or transformed) line, in order to produce a new transgenic lettuce line. Alternatively, a genetic trait that has been engineered into a particular lettuce cultivar using the foregoing transformation techniques could be moved into another line using traditional backcrossing techniques that are well known in the plant breeding arts. For example, a backcrossing approach could be used to move an engineered trait from a public, non-elite inbred line into an elite inbred line, or from an inbred line containing a foreign gene in its genome into an inbred line or lines which do not contain that gene. As used herein, “crossing” can refer to a simple X by Y cross, or the process of backcrossing, depending on the context.
When the term lettuce plant, cultivar or lettuce line is used in the context of the present invention, this also includes any single gene conversions of that line. The term single gene converted plant as used herein refers to those lettuce plants which are developed by a plant breeding technique called backcrossing wherein essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological characteristics of a cultivar are recovered in addition to the single gene transferred into the line via the backcrossing technique. Backcrossing methods can be used with the present invention to improve or introduce a characteristic into the line. The term backcrossing as used herein refers to the repeated crossing of a hybrid progeny back to one of the parental lettuce plants for that line. The parental lettuce plant that contributes the gene for the desired characteristic is termed the nonrecurrent or donor parent. This terminology refers to the fact that the nonrecurrent parent is used one time in the backcross protocol and therefore does not recur. The parental cantaloupe plant to which the gene or genes from the nonrecurrent parent are transferred is known as the recurrent parent as it is used for several rounds in the backcrossing protocol (Poehlman & Sleper, 1994; Fehr, 1987). In a typical backcross protocol, the original cultivar of interest (recurrent parent) is crossed to a second line (nonrecurrent parent) that carries the single gene of interest to be transferred. The resulting progeny from this cross are then crossed again to the recurrent parent and the process is repeated until a lettuce plant is obtained wherein essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological characteristics of the recurrent parent are recovered in the converted plant, in addition to the single transferred gene from the nonrecurrent parent.
The selection of a suitable recurrent parent is an important step for a successful backcrossing procedure. The goal of a backcross protocol is to alter or substitute a single trait or characteristic in the original line. To accomplish this, a single gene of the recurrent cultivar is modified or substituted with the desired gene from the nonrecurrent parent, while retaining essentially all of the rest of the desired genetic, and therefore the desired physiological and morphological, constitution of the original line. The choice of the particular nonrecurrent parent will depend on the purpose of the backcross, one of the major purposes is to add some commercially desirable, agronomically important trait to the plant. The exact backcrossing protocol will depend on the characteristic or trait being altered to determine an appropriate testing protocol. Although backcrossing methods are simplified when the characteristic being transferred is a dominant allele, a recessive allele may also be transferred. In this instance it may be necessary to introduce a test of the progeny to determine if the desired characteristic has been successfully transferred.
Many single gene traits have been identified that are not regularly selected for in the development of a new line but that can be improved by backcrossing techniques. Single gene traits may or may not be transgenic, examples of these traits include but are not limited to, herbicide resistance, resistance for bacterial, fungal, or viral disease, insect resistance, enhanced nutritional quality, industrial usage, yield stability and yield enhancement. These genes are generally inherited through the nucleus. Several of these single gene traits are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,777,196; 5,948,957 and 5,969,212, the disclosures of which are specifically hereby incorporated by reference.
DEPOSIT INFORMATION
A deposit of the Enza Zaden North America, Inc. proprietary romaine lettuce variety 163502 disclosed above and recited in the appended claims has been made with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), 10801 University Boulevard, Manassas, Va 20110. The date of deposit was Jun. 17, 2005. The deposit of 2,500 seeds was taken from the same deposit maintained by Enza Zaden North America, Inc. since prior to the filing date of this application. All restrictions upon the deposit have been removed, and the deposit its intended to meet all of the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §1.801-1.809. The ATCC accession number is PTA-6794. The deposit will be maintained in the depository for a period of 30 years, or 5 years after the last request, or for the effective life of the patent, whichever is longer, and will be replaced as necessary during that period.
Although the foregoing invention has been described in some detail by way of illustration and example for purposes of clarity and understanding. However, it will be obvious that certain changes and modifications such as single gene modifications and mutations, somaclonal variants, variant individuals selected from large populations of the plants of the instant line and the like may be practiced within the scope of the invention, as limited only by the scope of the appended claims.

## Claims

1. A seed of a lettuce variety designated 163502, wherein a representative sample of seed was deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6794.

2. A lettuce plant, or a part thereof, produced by growing the seed of claim 1.

3. Pollen of the plant of claim 2.

4. An ovule of the plant of claim 2.

5. A tissue culture of regenerable cells produced from the plant of claim 2.

6. The tissue culture according to claim 5, wherein said regenerable cells of the tissue culture are derived from a plant part selected from the group consisting of leaves, pollen, embryos, cotyledons, hypocotyls, meristematic cells, roots, root tips, anthers, flowers, seeds, stems and pods.

7. A lettuce plant regenerated from the tissue culture of claim 5, wherein the regenerated plant has all of the morphological and physiological characteristics of lettuce variety 163502, wherein a representative sample of seed of said lettuce variety 163502 was deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6794.

8. A method for producing a hybrid lettuce seed wherein the method comprises crossing a first parent lettuce plant with a second parent lettuce plant and harvesting the resultant hybrid lettuce seed, wherein said first parent lettuce plant or said second parent lettuce plant is the lettuce plant of claim 2.

9. A method for producing a lettuce plant that contains in its genetic material a transgene, comprising crossing the lettuce plant of claim 2 with either a second plant of another lettuce variety comprising a transgene, or a non-transformed lettuce plant of the lettuce variety 163502, so that the genetic material of the progeny that result from the cross contains a transgene operably linked to a regulatory element, wherein said transgene confers a trait selected from the group consisting of herbicide resistance, insect resistance and disease resistance.

10. A method of producing an herbicide resistant lettuce plant wherein the method comprises transforming the lettuce plant of claim 2 with a transgene that confers herbicide resistance.

11. An herbicide resistant lettuce plant produced by the method of claim 10.

12. The lettuce plant of claim 11, wherein the transgene confers resistance to an herbicide selected from the group consisting of imidazolinone, sulfonylurea, glyphosate, glufosinate, L-phosphinothricin, triazine and benzonitrile.

13. A method of producing an insect resistant lettuce plant wherein the method comprises transforming the lettuce plant of claim 2 with a transgene that confers insect resistance.

14. An insect resistant lettuce plant produced by the method of claim 13.

15. The lettuce plant of claim 14, wherein the transgene encodes a Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxin.

16. A method of producing a disease resistant lettuce plant wherein the method comprises transforming the lettuce plant of claim 2 with a transgene that confers disease resistance.

17. A disease resistant lettuce plant produced by the method of claim 16.

18. A method of producing a lettuce plant with modified fatty acid metabolism or modified carbohydrate metabolism wherein the method comprises transforming the lettuce plant of claim 2 with a transgene encoding a protein selected from the group consisting of stearyl-ACP desaturase, fructosyltransferase, levansucrase, alpha-amylase, invertase and starch branching enzyme.

19. A lettuce plant produced by the method of claim 18.

20. A lettuce plant, or a part thereof, having all the physiological and morphological characteristics of lettuce variety 163502, wherein a representative sample of seed of said variety was deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6794.

21. A method of introducing a desired trait into lettuce variety 163502 wherein the method comprises:
(a) crossing lettuce variety 163502 plants grown from lettuce variety 163502 seed, representative seed of which has been deposited under ATCC Accession No. PTA-6794, with plants of another lettuce variety that comprise a desired trait to produce F1 progeny plants, wherein the desired trait is selected from the group consisting of male sterility, herbicide resistance, Insect resistance and disease resistance; 
(b) selecting F1 progeny plants that have the desired trait to produce selected F1 progeny plants; 
(c) crossing the selected progeny plants with the lettuce variety 163502 plants to produce backcross progeny plants; 
(d) selecting for backcross progeny plants that have the desired trait and physiological and morphological characteristics of lettuce variety 163502 listed in the VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION to produce selected backcross progeny plants; and 
(e) repeating steps (c) and (d) three or more times in succession to produce selected fourth or higher backcross progeny plants that comprise the desired trait and all of the physiological and morphological characteristics of lettuce variety 163502 listed in the VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION as determined at the 5% significance level when grown in the same environmental conditions.

22. A plant produced by the method of claim 21, wherein the plant has the desired trait and all of the physiological and morphological characteristics of lettuce variety 163502 listed in the VARIETY DESCRIPTION INFORMATION as determined at the 5% significance level when grown in the same environmental conditions.

23. The plant of claim 22 wherein the desired trait is herbicide resistance and the resistance is conferred to an herbicide selected from the group consisting of imidazolinone, sulfonylurea, glyphosate, glufosinate, L-phosphinothricin, triazine and benzonitrile.

24. The plant of claim 22 wherein the desired trait is insect resistance and the insect resistance is conferred by a transgene encoding a Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxin.