Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34440301›Full record

ReviewGenes2021

Plant Variety Protection: Current Practices and Insights.

Ju-Kyung Yu, Yong-Suk Chung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Polyploidy: A macromutational force pushing bioeconomic developments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Harnessing Genomics for BreedingInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ju-Kyung YuSyngenta Crop Protection LLC, Seeds Research, Triangle Research Park, NC 27709, USA.
Yong-Suk ChungDepartment of Plant Resources and Environment, Jeju National University, Jeju 63243, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3121-7600

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breeders persistently supply farmers with the best varieties in order to exceed consumer demand through plant-breeding processes that are resource-intensive. In order to motivate continuous innovation in variety development, a system needs to provide incentives for plant breeders to develop superior varieties, for example, exclusive ownership to produce and market those varieties. The most common system is the acquisition of intellectual property protection through plant variety protection, also known as the breeder's right. Most countries have adopted the system established by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). To be granted plant variety protection, the variety should prove to be unique by meeting three requirements: distinctness, uniformity, and stability. This review summarizes (1) the plant variety protection via UPOV convention, (2) technical methods for distinctness, uniformity, and stability testing via phenotype, molecular markers, and sequencing as well as their challenges and potentiality, and (3) additional discussions in essentially derived variety, value for cultivation and use testing, and open source seed initiative.

Indexed as

Plant BreedingGenes, PlantPlantsbreeder’s rightbreedingDUS test (distinctness, uniformity, and stability)essentially derived variety (EDV)international union for the protection of new varieties of plants (UPOV)plant variety protection (PVP)

Identifiers

PMID34440301
PMCPMC8392850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.