In T 1228/01 the appellant (applicant) inferred that the reference to a deposited phage in a claim, whose correct deposit was mentioned in the application as originally filed, was an implicit disclosure of a part of a nucleotide sequence contained in the phage, although the sequence was not disclosed per se. The board made reference to T 301/87 (OJ 1990, 335), in which it had been decided that if an entity itself was disclosed to the skilled person, this did not necessarily mean that a component part was also disclosed for the purpose of priority if this could not be envisaged directly and unambiguously as such and required considerable investigation to reveal its identity. The board in in T 1228/01 held that these findings were also applicable to amendments. It stated that the disclosure in the application as originally filed of the deposition of the recombinant bacteriophage Lgt11-P3 was not considered to be a basis within the requirements of Art. 123(2) EPC 1973 for the disclosure of a DNA sequence designated as "the P3 coding sequence" which was allegedly contained in that bacteriophage, but which as such was not disclosed in the application as originally filed. Thus, the requirements of Art. 123(2) EPC 1973 were not met.