Which statement about patenting a plant is true?

• A. It's the only way to ensure a breeder gets financial reward from a hybrid, it's new, and the plant patent act of 1930 covered only asexually propagated plants.
• B. It guarantees that all plant varieties are free to be used by anyone.
• C. It has no relation to hybrid breeding or financial rewards.
• D. It applies equally to sexually and asexually propagated plants.

Answer: (A)

Patenting a plant centers on giving breeders a temporary, exclusive right to propagate and sell a new and distinct plant that is reproduced asexually. The Plant Patent Act of 1930 created this protection specifically for asexually propagated plants, like clones produced by cuttings or grafting. That’s why patenting is a primary way breeders can secure financial reward for a new variety, and why this act is described as covering only asexually propagated plants.

Other statements misstate the reality: patent rights do not make a plant free for anyone to use, because patents restrict what others can propagate or sell. The idea that patenting has no relation to hybrid breeding or financial rewards isn’t accurate, since breeders pursue patent protection precisely to monetize their new plant developments. And the notion that patent protection applies equally to sexually and asexually propagated plants isn’t correct; plant patents cover asexually reproduced plants, while sexually reproduced varieties may be protected under other laws (like plant variety protection) rather than plant patents.