Data blanks by design: Intellectual property and restrictions on genetic diversity assessments of the maize standing crop in the USA Upper Midwest

Abstract

All US commercial maize (Zea mays) is a single race, “Corn Belt Dent,” and its genetic base has been in decline for at least 40 years. Independent genotyping can only be conducted after patent and licensing restrictions have expired, a period of 20 years. These restrictions also impede a molecular based assessment of the standing crop by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) as recommended by experts. Data blanks about landscape vulnerability put farmers at risk of crop failure and the public at risk of food insecurity. Understanding maize diversity experts' perspectives and analysis helps describe the contours of these data blanks and inform policy recommendations. Recommendations by the Maize Crop Germplasm Committee to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for a molecular based vulnerability assessment on the US standing maize (Zea mays) crop have not been acted on because of intellectual property and licensing restrictions. This research explores maize diversity experts' access to data and perceptions and analysis of the standing crop. The data come from semi‐structured interviews conducted with 44 maize diversity experts in the public and private sectors. Experts explain that genetic data blanks restrict non‐industry research, describe public sector concerns that standing diversity is narrow(ing), and find historic sources of pedigree data in Plant Variety Protection and patent records are no longer reliable. Some interviewees perceive that industry monitoring of standing diversity is in their best financial interest. Industry participants describe concentration in US maize allows them to control diversity over time, while public researchers discuss efficiency of scale narrowing genetic diversity and global concentration spreading this trend. Knowledge gaps about genetic diversity in US commercial maize are designed through patents, contracts, non‐disclosure agreements, and confidentiality agreements by patent holders who do not want their inbred lines genotyped by competitors. This restricts research and knowledge flow about genetic information into public networks. The Maize Crop Germplasm Committee is a node for knowledge flow; however, the lack of mechanisms for action suggests it is performative. We recommend all protections used on seed include exemptions for research, breeding, and seed saving; an independent assessment of how industry monitors standing diversity; and a molecular analysis of the standing crop conducted by the USDA.