It’s E-Agriculture Week in Rome next week. Lots of people coming, lots of stuff going on. I’ll try to be very Web 2.0 about it and do some posting when cool agricultural biodiversity comes up, but also check out the blog of the centerpiece conference.
Bigger not necessarily better in agrobiodiversity
Jeremy says we sound like a broken record on the lack of agricultural thinking in biodiversity circles at times, and he’s right of course. More charitably, it could be thought of as judicious use of a leitmotif. In which case another one would certainly be the unfortunate dearth of information on nutritional composition at the variety or accession level, certainly as compared to morphological and agronomic information. The reason for that is that genetic resources scientists and breeders have been more interested in things like yield and disease resistance. That’s had consequences.
Continue reading “Bigger not necessarily better in agrobiodiversity”
Disappearing languages, disappearing agrobiodiversity
There are about 7,000 languages currently spoken around the world. By 2100, there will half that, if we’re lucky. That’s according to Harrison and Gregory Anderson of the Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages in Oregon, who “traveled the world to interview the last speakers of critically endangered languages as part of the National Geographic Society’s Enduring Voices Project.” Here’s a telling quote from Harrison Anderson:
Most of what we know about species and ecosystems is not written down anywhere, it’s only in people’s heads.
Just compare the map of hotspots of language loss with those of centres of crop origin and diversity. When the last native speakers of those 3,500 doomed languages go in the next century or so, they’ll be taking with them irreplaceable knowledge of agricultural biodiversity. Knowledge which we’ll need to make the most of that agrobiodiversity, and indeed to conserve it in situ (should we wish to) ((Or, indeed, should we be able to, given what climate change is going to do. Anyway, thanks to Ola for pointing out the article.)).
Ft Collins genebank in the news
There’s an article about USDA’s long-term genebank at Ft Collins, Colorado in the Denver Post:
Global warming is predicted by some seed-physiology scientists to wipe out as much as 40 percent of the world’s crops, according to Kathryn Kennedy, director of the St. Louis-based Center for Plant Conservation, a longtime user of the seed bank.
Plant breeders and researchers will turn here for the seeds to produce the crops adapted to new climatic conditions.
“We have always tried to stay three steps ahead, but with global warming, we’re concerned three steps may not be enough,” said Christine Walters, a plant physiologist and self-described seed nerd at the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Center for Genetic Resource Preservation.
Inevitably, Svalbard gets a name-check, though accompanied by a little bit of a sneer :), I thought:
Unlike the new, attention-getting “doomsday” seed bank dug into the permafrost of Svalbard, Norway, to be the ultimate seed backup, seeds go in and out of the Fort Collins site. About 150,000 seed samples were sent out last year.
It’s a long article, but well worth reading. And check out the slide-show too. The only blemish ((And thanks to Karen Williams for pointing it out.)) is that the genebank is referred to as the “CSU gene bank,” CSU being Colorado State University. Well, it’s undoubtedly on the campus of CSU, but the National Center for Genetic Resource Preservation is a federal facility under USDA.
Green Millennium Revolution Villages debated
I’ve blogged a few times before about the Millennium Villages. An initiative of the Earth Institute at Columbia University launched in 2004, the Millennium Villages project aims “to demonstrate how the eight Millennium Development Goals can be met in rural Africa within five years through community-led development.” ((“The Millennium Village effort is explicitly linked to achieving the Millennium Development Goals and addresses an integrated and scaled-up set of interventions covering food production, nutrition, education, health services, roads, energy, communications, water, sanitation, enterprise diversification and environmental management. This has never been done before.”))
Pedro Sanchez, director of the Millennium Villages Project, The Earth Institute at Columbia University debated the project, and also Africa’s proposed new Green Revolution (another frequent subject hereabouts), with the anthropologist Paul Richards of Wageningen University yesterday at the Development Studies Association Annual Conference. That’s going on at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex in the UK.
Would have been great to be there, and ask why it is that supporting the Millennium Villagers manage and enhance their agrobiodiversity doesn’t seem to be much on the agenda. But here’s the next best thing: a description of the encounter, one of a series of entries on the conference you’ll find at The Crossing, the blog of the STEPS Centre. ((“The Social, Technological and Environmental Pathways to Sustainability (STEPS) Centre is a major new interdisciplinary global research and policy engagement hub combining development with science and technology studies. The STEPS Centre addresses two global challenges: linking environmental sustainability with better livelihoods and health; and making science and technology work to reduce poverty and increase social justice.”))
Here’s an intriguing snippet from the blog:
Richards says the Green Revolution induces spread of innovation by showing the seed system the “correct” pattern. But an alternative can be based on unsupervised learning that already takes place, he adds, whizzing through some very big and interesting ideas very quickly.
Kinda makes you wish you’d been there in person, doesn’t it?