Featured: Genebank Data

Ruaraidh Sackville Hamilton, Curator of IRRI’s genebank, offers some insights into germplasm documentation and the necessary conversations, and brings up an important caution:

[I]t is a common mantra to call for recipients to return data “to add to the store of information the genebank has on its accessions”. Be careful you don’t encourage genebank curators to attach recipient’s data to their own accessions. That would be wrong. You have to keep the data associated with the recipient’s germplasm, and link their germplasm back to the genebank accession. You need also to know and record the nature of that link. For example, how did they choose the plant to genotype, and how likely is it to be typical of the original heterogeneous accession?

The ICIS mantra is that’s why we use ICIS, not a traditional genebank database. Traditional genebank databases don’t allow you to define links between the genebank’s accession and the recipient’s sample, so you can’t do what you want. If you seriously want to connect recipients’ info back to the accessions, you’d better think seriously about incorporating germplasm tracking into GRIN and Genesys.

ICIS, in case you were wondering, is the International Crop Information System. There are different implementations for different crops. I don’t know whether they talk to each other or to anything else.

Nibbles: Gardening, Seed Swap, Mapping, Animal Genebank, Rice, Seed Treay, Nanocellulose, Camels, Bread, food Security

Skin in the game: Africa must invest more

Promises made by African leaders to increase their investment in agriculture to ten per cent of their national budgets have been met by only eight out of 53 countries, the 7th Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Partnership Platform Meeting heard last week (23–25 March).

But annual international donations to agricultural research capacity in Africa have soared from US$25 million annually to US$120 million in the period 2005–2010.

It isn’t clear how the numbers SciDev.net reports have been calculated, and it doesn’t much matter. If better research really is the engine of economic growth that some people say it is, then one would expect countries that need it most to do their bit. What would happen, I wonder, if international donations were based on some sort of matching scheme?

Yo! Pavlovsk Politicos! Listen up!

Some of the accessions investigated by the project are nutritionally much more valuable than others. Thanks to the project, we know which berries they are. Thanks to Pavlovsk, we have the berries. On that basis alone, surely they’re more valuable than the land they occupy on the outskirts of St Petersburg. Let’s hope that the project team is successful in getting that policy message across tomorrow.

The Vaviblog reports on the first day of an important meeting, a round-up of the project on Conservation, characterization and evaluation for nutrition and health of vegetatively propagated crop collections at the Vavilov Institute.

Nibbles: Quinoa, Domestication, Wine, Ants & termites, Pavlovsk