47. Volume 14- Number 2 - IP Australia

all varieties where there is no possibility of distinguishing
from the candidate variety through descriptions, photos, etc.
If the candidate variety has not been distinguished from its
parents/source material elsewhere in the application, it is a
requirement that the parents/source material be included in
the comparative trial. However, this requirement can be
waived if the parents/source material can be distinguished
from the candidate variety by the use of the grouping
characteristics mentioned above.
Example 5
Choice of Comparators Grouping characteristics used
in identifying the most similar varieties of common
knowledge were – Stem: anthocyanin colouration absent,
Leaf: variegation present, Flower: colour yellow. On the
basis of these grouping characteristics following
comparator varieties were included in the trial:
‘Comparator 1’, ‘Comparator 2’, ‘Comparator 3’ etc.
Example 6
Choice of Comparators Grouping characteristics used
in identifying the most similar varieties of common
knowledge were – Seed: colour. On the basis of this
grouping characteristic following comparator varieties
were included in the trial: ‘Comparator 1’, ‘Comparator
2’ etc. The original source material from which the
variety was selected was also included for the purpose of
providing evidence of breeding.
Example 7
Choice of Comparators ‘Comparator 1’ is the only
other variety of common knowledge in existence at the
time of lodgment of this application. No other varieties
of common knowledge have been identified.
Comparative Trial
State the location and date of the trial. Give relevant details
on propagation, pot/plot size and type, growing medium,
chemical treatments, lighting, irrigation, or management
which may be necessary to repeat the trials. State the type
of trial design used, the total number of specimens in the
trial and how they were arranged. State the number of
specimens from which measurements/observations were
taken. Also indicate how the specimen was selected and the
sampling regime.
Example 8
Comparative Trial Location: Carrum Downs, VIC
(Latitude 38(06( South, elevation 35m), summer-autumn
1996/97. Conditions: trial conducted in a polyhouse,
plants propagated from cutting, rooted cuttings planted
into 210mm pots filed with soilless potting mix (pine
bark base), nutrition maintained with slow release
fertilisers, pest and disease treatments applied as
required. Trial design: fifteen pots of each variety
arranged in a completely randomised design.
Measurements: from ten plants at random. One sample
per plant.
Prior Applications and Sales
Indicate the prior overseas applications with Country, Year
of lodgement, Current status and Name applied in the
following format.
Example 9
Country
Applied
Year Current Status Name
Germany 1994 Granted ‘Variety’
Denmark 1994 Granted ‘Variety’
Also indicate date and country of first sale and date of first
sale in Australia.
Example 10
First sold in Germany in 1994. First Australian sale Nil.
Name of the person who prepared the description
Name and address of the person who prepared the
description. It is preferable that the description be prepared
by the Qualified Person or at the very least the draft has
been seen and approved by the QP before final submission.
Please note that it is a responsibility of the QP under the
PBR Act to verify the particulars of the detailed description
are accurate.
Example 11
PLANT VARIETIES JOURNAL 2001 VOL 14 NO. 2
Description: Name, Company (optional), Town/suburb, State
(abbreviated)
Comparative Table
While preparing the table NEVER use the “table creating
features” of word processing packages as they insert hidden
formatting blocks that are difficult to remove before
publication. Instead, use a single tab mark to align columns.
NEVER use drawing objects to create lines, boxes or
shading. Instead use the underscore character ( _ ) to create
lines for tables. Tables should normally be either 8.5cm
wide (half page) or 17.5cm wide (full page). If necessary a
very wide table can be presented in landscape orientation.
Please note the following points when preparing the
comparative table:
• The candidate variety is always on the left of the table.
If the same table is used for two or more candidate
varieties, the candidate varieties are arranged in order of
application numbers, higher application number to the
left of the table. Comparators are always to the right of
the candidate(s).
• Arrange the characteristics in order – this should be the
same as the order in the UPOV technical guidelines for
the species. Please ensure that each characteristics
marked with an asterisk is included.
• If a UPOV technical guideline is not available use the
order same as in the text part: Plant, Stem, Leaf,
Inflorescence, Flower, Flower parts, Fruit, Fruit parts,
Seed, special characters etc.
5