What’s the Greek bank worth?

Among 18 new projects funded by the John S. Latsis Public Benefit Foundation is Valuation of the Greek Gene Bank. The project summary makes fascinating reading. Here’s a snip:

[R]esources of the Greek Gene Bank are under imminent threat, linked to financial pressures, with risk of loss affecting as much as 50% of the Collections …

Do you suppose that 50% might be an under- or over-estimate? Either way, the announcement creates all sorts of temptations to speculate on links between the health of genebanks and that of central banks. Just a thought, but wouldn’t it be a great idea to have a European Central Genebank to, like, remove the temptation for countries to neglect their national genebanks and fib about accessions, viability levels, distribution and so on?

Still, the project report should make interesting reading for genebank managers and their friends everywhere.

4 Replies to “What’s the Greek bank worth?”

  1. Not enough promoting the safety duplication at Svalbard? The multiplication of structures will only thin the already scarce human and financial resources.

    1. Yes, duplicating at Svalbard would certainly seem an important thing to try to do before it’s too late. But I also wonder what such a threat would mean in the context of the Aegis initiative. But enough of looking on the dark side. At least someone’s doing a cost-benefit of a genebank. Not nearly enough of those…

  2. The better integration and sharing of responsibilities in Europe for the long-term conservation of genetically unique and important accessions would be attained if all material is safely duplicated in Svalbard. The European collection is a decentralised concept, so the threat posed on individual collections (genebanks) would be minimised with the duplication.

  3. Svalbard should not be considered “safety duplication”. The viability of the accessions is not monitored at Svalbard and no fresh seed is grown. Original donors must “remember” decades after their original donation to provide fresh seed. Svalbard is fine for last resort storage but in my view the priority is real safety duplication (not “black box”) for each accession in two institutions that are committed to manage it, monitor viability and generate fresh seed, as a minimum. Once this is done, then provide a triplicate sample to last-resort Svalbard.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *