Zoysia matrella plant named 'Fox'

Abstract

A new and distinct variety of Zoysia matrella plant named Fox, characterized by having less ear emergence, dark green leaf color, thick stolon, high tolerance to tread pressure, better summer survival, late fall discoloration, and high disease resistance, as compared to other Zoysia grass varieties.

Claims

1. A new and distinct variety of Zoysia matrella plant named Fox, as described and illustrated herein.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

[0006] The accompanying colored photographs (FIGS. 1-20) illustrate and compare the overall appearance of the new Zoysia matrella plant, showing the colors as true as it is reasonably possible to obtain in colored reproductions of this type. Colors in the photographs may differ slightly from the color values cited in the detailed botanical description which accurately describe the actual colors of the plant.

[0007] FIG. 1 shows a comparison of leaf colors of Fox, Emerald, and Meyer. Photographing date: Jul. 21, 2015. Photographing site: test field in Nasu research center of National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization: Senbonmatsu, Nasushiobara city, Tochigi prefecture, Japan.

[0008] FIG. 2 shows a comparison of stolon thicknesses and stolon lengths (in cm) of Fox, Emerald and Meyer.

[0009] FIG. 3 shows a panoramic view of the test field (in the white frame border), including the test plot of Fox. Photographing date: Jul. 18, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0010] FIG. 4 shows Fox in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 18, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0011] FIG. 5 shows Emerald in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 18, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0012] FIG. 6 shows Meyer in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 18, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0013] FIG. 7 shows a panoramic view of the test field (in the white frame border), including the test plot of Fox. Photographing date: Sep. 9, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0014] FIG. 8 shows Fox in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Sep. 9, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0015] FIG. 9 shows Emerald in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Sep. 9, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0016] FIG. 10 shows Meyer in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Sep. 9, 2013. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0017] FIG. 11 shows a panoramic view of the test field (in the white frame border), including the test plot of Fox. Photographing date: Jul. 30, 2014. Photographing site: same as FIG. 1.

[0018] FIG. 12 shows Fox in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 30, 2014. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0019] FIG. 13 shows Emerald in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 30, 2014. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0020] FIG. 14 shows Meyer in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 30, 2014. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0021] FIG. 15 shows a panoramic view of the test field (in the white frame border), including the test plot of Fox. Photographing date: Jul. 21, 2015. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0022] FIG. 16 shows Fox in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 21, 2015. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0023] FIG. 17 shows Emerald in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 21, 2015. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0024] FIG. 18 shows Meyer in the close planted plot. Photographing date: Jul. 21, 2015. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 1.

[0025] FIG. 19 shows an entire picture of the tread load machine. This picture was taken and provided by Tokyo Metropolitan Agriculture and Forestry Research Center. Photographing date: Nov. 19, 2008. Photographing site: test field in Tokyo Metropolitan Agriculture and Forestry Research Center: Fujimicho, Tachikawa city, Tokyo, Japan.

[0026] FIG. 20 shows an image of tread pressure damage on turf caused by a tread load machine. This picture was taken and provided by Tokyo Metropolitan Agriculture and Forestry Research Center. Oct. 10, 2008. Photographing site: same as in FIG. 19.

[0027] FIG. 21 shows the leaf blade tip shapes of Fox (upper), Emerald (middle) and Meyer (bottom). The dotted lines show 5 mm square, and the bold lines show 25 mm square.

[0028] FIG. 22 shows ear emergence of Fox (upper), Emerald (middle) and Meyer (bottom). The photographs in the left columns show the quadrats for counting ear emergence of each variety, and those in the right columns show the close-up of the ear emergence parts in the quadrats. The ear emergence parts of each variety are marked by red circles.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE VARIETY

[0029] The following is a detailed description of the new Zoysia matrella grass variety known as Fox, based upon observations of the plant grown in pots and close planted fields.

[0030] Fox is a perennial, vegetatively propagated Zoysia grass, and is believed to be a variety of Zoysia matrella due to its morphological properties. The seed parent of Fox was the ecotype 286 Togurazaki 6 (unpatented and unnamed), and the pollen parent was the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (unpatented and unnamed). The applicants had vegetatively propagated Fox by sod, and discovered that Fox is a new and distinct variety compared to Emerald and Meyer (both of which are the most morphologically and physiologically similar varieties to Fox). Fox is characterized by its less ear emergence, dark green leaf color, thick stolon, high tolerance to tread pressure, better summer survival, late fall discoloration, and high disease resistance, compared to other Zoysia grass varieties.

[0031] Fox has acute leaf blade tip (see FIG. 21), and Fox has less ear emergence than Meyer (see Tables 1 and 2 below, and FIG. 22). In addition, the comparison of leaf colors of Fox, Emerald and Meyer (FIG. 1) shows that the leaf color of Fox is darker than Emerald. Since Fox has less ear emergence than Meyer, and has darker leaf color than Emerald, Fox is more aesthetically appealing as a whole than Emerald and Meyer.

[0032] The comparison of stolon thicknesses of Fox, Emerald and Meyer (FIG. 2) shows that Fox has thicker stolon than those of Emerald and Meyer (see also Tables 1 and 2). Since Fox has thicker stolon than those of Emerald and Meyer, it has higher tolerance to wear than Emerald and Meyer. Furthermore, comparing Fox with El Toro (a variety of Zoysia japonica, having relatively high tolerance to tread pressure), Fox has higher tolerance to tread pressure (see Tables 7 and 8 below) and longer green period (see Table 9 below) than El Toro. Therefore, Fox is considered to be promising as Zoysia grass for school playground.

[0033] In addition, Fox has better summer survival and late fall discoloration than Emerald and Meyer (see Tables 3 and 4 below), and also has higher disease resistance to Rhizoctonia patch, rust, and stripe leaf roll than Emerald and Meyer (see Tables 5 and 6 below).

A. REPRODUCTION

[0034] After the crossbreeding between the ecotype 286 Togurazaki 6 (seed parent) and the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (pollen parent), and the subsequent selection for properties from the 10 F.sub.1 individuals derived from the above-mentioned crossbreeding, Fox was maintained by vegetative propagation. Subsequently, for further tests, several stolons of Fox were collected and grown in 7.5 cm diameter polypots (for tests in individually planted plots) and in 5 cm square peat moss pots (for tests in close planted plots). For the following respective tests, the pot seedlings of Fox were transplanted in 3 replications in test plots.

[0035] It is apparent from the Figures provided herein that Fox transplanted in the test plots grew at a more rapid rate than Emerald during the second comparison tests period (July 2013 to July 2015).

B. MORPHOLOGICAL AND GROWTH PROPERTIES

[0036] Fox was tested for its morphological and growth properties in the period of 2003 to 2006 (the first comparison tests) and in the period of 2013 to 2015 (the second comparison tests), comparing to those of Emerald and Meyer. Fox and Emerald both had no ear emergence in the test cultivations in Nasushiobara city. The stolon thickness of Fox was significantly thicker than those of Emerald and Meyer. The leaf length of Fox was equal to those of Emerald and Meyer. The leaf width of Fox was significantly wider than Emerald. The leaf color of Fox was significantly darker than the leaf color of Emerald (see Tables 1 and 2).

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Morphological Properties (2003 to 2006) Ear Emergence 1: no emergence Leaf Color 2: spring emergence Stolon Leaf Leaf 1: very pale 3: fall emergence Thickness Length Width to 4: spring and fall (mm) (cm) (mm) 9: very dark emergence Fox 1.94 1.99 2.74 6.5 1 Emerald 1.14 2.08 1.69 5.2 1 Meyer 1.65 2.20 3.13 6.4 2
The ages of the plants observed for Stolon thickness, Leaf length, Leaf width, and Leaf color were plant age 2, and the ages of the plants observed for Ear emergence were plant ages 1-4.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Morphological Properties (2013 to 2015) Ear Emergence 1:no ear emergence Leaf Color 2:spring emergence Stolon Leaf Leaf 1:very pale 3:fall emergence Thickness Length Width to 4:spring and fall (mm) (cm) (mm) 9:very dark emergence Fox 2.05 2.11 2.73 7.0 1 Emerald 1.27 2.02 2.02 5.0 1 Meyer 1.71 2.13 3.23 7.0 2
The ages of the plants observed for Stolon thickness, Leaf length, Leaf width, and Leaf color were plant age 2, and the ages of the plants observed for Ear emergence were plant ages 1-3.

[0037] The fall discoloration of Fox was significantly later than those of Emerald and Meyer in 2003 fall, and it was equal to that of Emerald and significantly later than that of Meyer, in 2004 fall, 2005 fall and 2013 fall. The fall discoloration of Fox in 2014 fall (in the test field of Chubu Green Institute of Chubu Co., Ltd.: Kotoura town, Tottori-prefecture, Japan) was more than one month later than those of Emerald and Meyer. The fall discoloration of Fox in 2015 fall was equal to that of Emerald and 21 days later than that of Meyer. The summer survival of Fox was significantly better than those of Emerald and Meyer, and the winter survival of Fox was equal to those of Emerald and Meyer (see Tables 3 and 4).

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Growth Properties (2003 to 2006) Fall Fall Fall Winter Summer Discolora- Discolora- Discolora- Survival Survival tion tion tion 1:very bad 1:very Date Date Date to bad to (Month/Day) (Month/Day) (Month/Day) 9:very 9:very in 2003 in 2004 in 2005 good good Fox Dec. 6 Dec. 4 Nov. 29 7.0 5.0 Emerald Dec. 1 Nov. 28 Nov. 28 7.0 3.9 Meyer Nov. 25 Nov 15 Nov. 23 6.3 3.1
The ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in 2003 were plant age 1, the ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in 2004 were plant age 2, and the ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in 2005 were plant age 3. The ages of the plants observed for Winter survival and Summer survival were plant age 2.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Growth Properties (2013 to 2015) Fall Discoloration Fall discoloration Fall Date date in Kotoura discoloration Winter survival (Month/Day) town date 1:very bad to in 2013 (Year/Month/Day) in 2015 9:very good Fox Dec. 4 2015 Jan. 13 Dec. 28 5.3 Emerald Dec. 4 2014 Dec. 5 Dev. 28 4.3 Meyer Nov. 29 2014 Dec. 5 Dec. 7 5.3
The ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in 2013 were plant age 1, the ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in Kotoura town were plant age 2, and the ages of the plants observed for Fall discoloration date in 2015 were plant age 3. The ages of the plants observed for Winter survival were plant age 2.

C. DISEASE RESISTANCE

[0038] Furthermore, Fox was also tested for its disease resistance in the period of 2003 to 2006 (the first comparison tests) and in the period of 2013 to 2015 (the second comparison tests), comparing to those of Emerald and Meyer.

[0039] In the first comparison tests (2003 to 2006), the disease resistance of Fox to Rhizoctonia patch was significantly higher than those of Emerald and Meyer, and the disease resistance of Fox to rust was equal to that of Emerald and significantly higher than that of Meyer, and finally, the disease resistance of Fox to stripe leaf roll was equal to that of Emerald and significantly higher than that of Meyer.

[0040] In the second comparison tests (2013 to 2015), the disease resistance of Fox to Rhizoctonia patch was equal to that of Emerald and significantly higher than that of Meyer, and the disease resistance of Fox to stripe leaf roll was equal to that of Emerald and significantly higher than that of Meyer (see Tables 5 and 6).

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Disease Resistance (2003 to 2006) Resistance to Resistance to Rhizoctonia Patch Resistance to Rust Stripe Leaf Roll 1: very low to 1: very low to 1: very low to 9: very high 9: very high 9: very high Fox 7.7 8.7 9.0 Emerald 4.3 9.0 9.0 Meyer 4.3 7.0 5.7
Scored from the degree of natural pathogenesis. Scores 1 and 9 are defined to be lethal pathogenesis and no pathogenesis, respectively. Scores 2 to 8 are allocated between 1 and 9. The ages of the plants observed for Resistance to Rhizoctonia patch were plant age 2, and the ages of the plants observed for Resistance to rust and Resistance to stripe leaf roll were plant age 1.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Disease Resistance (2013 to 2015) Resistance to Resistance to Rhizoctonia Patch Stripe Leaf Roll 1: very low to 1: very low to 9: very high 9: very high Fox 6.7 9.0 Emerald 5.3 9.0 Meyer 4.0 5.7
Scored from the degree of natural pathogenesis. Scores 1 and 9 are defined to be lethal pathogenesis and no pathogenesis, respectively. Scores 2 to 8 are allocated between 1 and 9. The ages of the plants observed for Resistance to Rhizoctonia patch and Resistance to stripe leaf roll were plant age 3.

D. TOLERANCE TO TREAD PRESSURE

[0041] The tolerance to tread pressure of Fox was tested in the test field in Tokyo Metropolitan Agriculture And Forestry Research Center in October 2013 and May 2014, by comparing to El Toro, which is a variety of Zoysia japonica, having relatively high tolerance to tread pressure. Fox and El Toro were transplanted in the planting bases (composed of 90% washed sand, 5% zeolite and 5% perlite), which were 3 m.sup.2 per plot. The tests were carried out in 3 replications. The tread pressure treatments were carried out by giving the tread pressure loads calculated from the research of the action of elementary school children (that is, 100% load (348 person.Math.second/m.sup.2) and 50% load (174 person.Math.second/m.sup.2) both at 29.3 kg weight (corresponding to the average weight of elementary school children), and no treatment) onto Fox and El Toro, using the tread load machine which was developed by Tokyo Metropolitan Agriculture And Forestry Research Center (Japanese Utility Model No. 3155709). The growth states of Fox and El Toro after the tread pressure treatment were evaluated by determining the number of shoots, the sum of stolon lengths, the dry weight of stolons of both varieties.

[0042] In both 2013 test and 2014 test, the number of shoots of Fox per square meter was higher than that of El Toro, the sum of stolon lengths of Fox per square meter was longer than that of El Toro, and the dry weight of stolons of Fox was higher than that of El Toro, in all tread pressure treatments (i.e., 100% load, 50% load, and no treatment) (see Tables 7 and 8 below).

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Growth Rate State After Tread Pressure Treatment in October 2013 Number of Shoots (number/m.sup.2) Stolon Length (m/m.sup.2) Dry Weight of Stolon (g) No No No Variety treatment 50% 100% treatment 50% 100% treatment 50% 100% Fox 11691 11040 7077 293 287 246 134 130 121 El Toro 5407 3057 3680 185 136 156 76 54 78
The ages of the plants observed for Number of shoots, Stolon length and Dry weight of stolon were plant age 1.

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Growth Rate State After Tread pressure Treatment in May 2014 Number of Shoots (number/m.sup.2) Stolon Length (m/m.sup.2) Dry Weight of Stolon (g) No No No Variety treatment 50% 100% treatment 50% 100% treatment 50% 100% Fox 13580 13580 10701 488 373 352 154 118 136 El Toro 11796 9936 10268 238 251 219 83 55 75
The ages of the plants observed for Number of shoots, Stolon length and Dry weight of stolon were plant age 2.

[0043] In addition, the greening period of Fox determined by observation was about one month longer than that of El Toro (see Table 9 below).

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Greening Period Determined by Observation Variety Greening time Discoloration time Fox Middle April Late November El Toro Late April Late October
The ages of the plants observed for Greening time and Discoloration time were plant age 1-2.

[0044] As a result, it was discovered that Fox had higher tolerance to tread pressure than El Toro, since Fox was less affected by the tread pressure treatment than El Toro, the dry weight of stolons of Fox after the tread pressure treatment was larger than that of El Toro, and the growth revival of Fox after the tread pressure treatment occurred more readily than in El Toro, and further, Fox had a longer green period (middle April to late November) than El Toro. Therefore, Fox is considered to be promising as Zoysia grass suitable for school playgrounds.

E. TEST FOR UNIFORMITY AND DISTINCTNESS OF FOX USING SSR MARKERS

[0045] In order to confirm the uniformity and distinctness of Fox clonal line at the DNA level, the tests for uniformity and distinctness were carried out by using the SSR markers (Tsuruta S., et al., Development and characterization of simple sequence repeat markers in Zoysia japonica, Steud. Grassland Science 51: 249-257 (2005)), which were developed by the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science (Tochigi-prefecture, Japan).

1. MATERIALS AND METHODS

[0046] With regard to Fox, 12 leaf samples were collected from the clone storage field, and 2 leaf samples were collected from the planters in the greenhouse, and subsequently, the DNAs were extracted from these 14 leaf samples. For each sample, a plurality of leaves (which were able to be confirmed as being derived from one clone) were collected. The DNAs extracted from Emerald and Meyer, as control varieties, were also tested. The SSR markers used, and the experimental conditions are shown as follows (see Tables 10 to 13 below).

TABLE-US-00010 TABLE10 6TypesofSSRMarkersUsedforTests(all derivedfromthegenomicDNAof ZoysiajaponicaAsagake) Primer Primer Amp- Se- Se- lified quence SEQ quence SEQ Chain Marker (5-3) ID (5-3) ID Length Name Motif Forward NO: Reverse NO: (bp) ZjAG115 (AG).sup.13 GAACAAGA 1 GCACGC 2 155 GTAGTG ATCGTT GCGTCA ZjAG120 (AG).sup.8 GCGGCTAC 3 TGTAGGTG 4 117 TCTACTCC AGGGACG ACTACAG GATAAAG ZjAG125 (AG).sup.17 TAACTACT 5 TACTTGTT 6 179 AGCCGAT CATTGCC CAAGA ATTATCC ZjAG133 (AG).sup.6 TGGGCTTA 7 AACCTGCC 8 136 AA GTGCTAC TATCTGT (AG).sup.28 GAATGTG GCGTATG ZjAG140 (TG).sup.10 CTTACAC 9 ACAGACAT 10 146 (AG).sup.10 CCCACAT AGGGCTCA CAACTG TTAGTG ZjAG143 (AG).sup.13 CGCAACT 11 AGAACTA 12 129 AA TCAAAT AGCAAAAT (GA).sup.4 CCTAC GGGTCCC
Amplified chain length indicates the chain length of the amplified fragment based on the base sequence.

TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Reaction Composition for PCR Amplification Composition Used amount 5 PrimeSTAR Buffer 2.0 l (TaKaRa) dNTP Mixture 0.8 l (2.5 mM each) Forward Primer 1.0 l (5 pmol/l) Reverse Primer 1.0 l (5 pmol/l) PrimeSTAR HS Taq 0.1 l (TaKaRa) SDW 4.1 l Template DNA 1.0 l (25 ng/l) Total 10.0 l

TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Reaction Conditions for PCR Amplification Temperatures Times Cycle 98 C. 3 minutes 1 cycle 98 C. 20 seconds 30 cycles 56 C. 20 seconds 72 C. 30 seconds 4 C. 1 cycle

TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 Electrophoresis Condition Using the Sequencer ABI3130x1 Composition Used amount Formamide 13.75 l ROX500 0.25 l PCR Product 1.00 l (150-fold diluted with sterile water) Total 15.00 l

2. RESULTS

[0047] Since there was no difference in the size of amplified DNA region among the 14 samples of Fox, these samples were identified as having the same genotype. In contrast, there was difference in the size of amplified DNA region among Fox, Emerald and Meyer, and thus it was determined that Fox has a genotype different from Emerald and Meyer (see Table 14 below).

TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 Typing Results Based On the Electrophoresis Data Obtained by the Sequencer ABI3130x1 Marker Sample ZjAG115 ZjAG120 ZjAG125 ZjAG133 ZjAG140 ZjAG143 Fox (planter 01) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (planter 02) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 01) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 02) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 03) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 04) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 05) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 06) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 07) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 08) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 09) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 10) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 88/95 131/146 Fox (field 11) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 131/146 114/124 Fox (field 12) 146/155/228/236 111/117 186/188 131/146 114/124 Emerald 144/236 121 177/186 93/130 131/146 110/126 Meyer 144/236 104/123 174/186 86/93 135 108/124 Numbers indicate the sizes of each allele (bp). indicates missing values.

[0048] The above results confirm the uniformity of the Fox clone and the distinctness of Fox from the other major varieties of Zoysia.

G. DIFFERENCE IN MORPHOLOGICAL AND GROWTH PROPERTIES FROM PARENTS

[0049] The stolon thickness of Fox was considerably wider than that of the ecotype 286 Togurazaki 6 (seed parent), and with respect to ear emergence, Fox had no ear emergence in 2003-2006 and 2013-2016, but the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (pollen parent) had relatively abundant ear emergence (see Table 15). The greening period of Fox was middle April to late November (see Table 9 and Table 16), but that of the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (pollen parent) was late April to late October (see Table 16). Therefore, the greening period of Fox was one month longer than the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (pollen parent).

TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 15 Comparison of Morphological Properties between Fox and the parents varieties (the ecotype 286 Togurazaki 6 (seed parent) and the ecotype 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 (pollen parent)). The research of the parents varieties was conducted in 1992 to 1999. Leaf length (cm) Leaf width Ear emergence 1: (mm) 1: no extremely 1: extremely 2: spring Stolon shot to 9: slender to 9: Leaf color 3: fall thickness extremely extremely (1: very pale to 4: spring and Cultivar (mm) long wide 9: very dark) fall Fox 1.94 1.99 (3) 2.74 (5) 6.5 1 (2003-2006) Fox 2.05 2.11 (3) 2.73 (5) 7.0 1 (2013-2016) Leaf length (cm) 1: Leaf width Heading extremely 1: extremely Leaf color 1: extremely Stolon shot to 9: slender to 9: 1: extremely little to 9: thickness extremely extremely light to 9: extremely Ecotypes (mm) long wide extremely dark abundant 286 Togurazaki 0.9 2 1 3 6 226 Nagasaki 1.6 5 5 5 7 Akase 6 The numerals 3 and 5 in the brackets after Leaf length (cm) and Leaf width (mm) of Fox indicate the scores for Leaf length and Leaf width. Score 3 indicates short, and Score 5 indicates middle.

TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 16 Comparison of Spring greening date and Fall discoloration date, and Summer survival between Fox and the parents varieties (the research of the parents varieties was conducted in 1992 to 1999) Spring greening date in Fall discoloration Summer survival Nasushiobara date in Nasushiobara (1: very bad to 9: Cultivar (Month/Day) (Month/Day) very good) Fox Apr. 19-Apr. 30 Nov. 29-Dec. 6 5.0 (2003-2006) Fox Apr. 14 Dec. 4-Dec. 28 (2013-2016) Summer survival 1: extremely poor Greening time Coloring time to 9: extremely Ecotypes (Year/Month/Day) (Year/Month/Day) excellent 286 Togurazaki 6 1992 Apr. 5 7 226 Nagasaki Akase 6 1992 Apr. 26 1993 Oct. 22 7

TABLE-US-00017 TABLE 17 Comparison of Resistance to rust between Fox and the parents variety (the research of the parents variety was conducted in 1992 to 1999) Resistance Cultivar 1: very low to 9: very high Fox 8.7 (2003-2006) Fox (2013-2016) Crown rust resistance Crown rust resistance in 1992 1: Extremely in 1999 1: Extremely low to 9: low to 9: Ecotypes Extremely high Extremely high 286 Togurazaki 6 7 1 226 Nagasaki 9 1 Akase 6