- There are no origins in food.
- Haitians get seeds. But of what kind(s)? Why not give some of them Carossier palm seeds to plant?
- Afghans are incredible cannabis farmers.
- Animals need traditional remedies too.
Measuring diversity in Tibetan walnuts
You collect leaves from 220 walnut trees of two morphologically very distinct species (Juglans regia and J. sigillata) from two unrelated groups of families of villagers in each of six different villages in Tibet. You get the gene-jockeys to do their microsatellite stuff on the leaves. You calculate the contribution of species, of the kin relationship of the growers and of village to genetic diversity. You expect the biggest genetic differences to be between species.
You are wrong.
Yes, the “species,” which look totally different, are in fact indistinguishable genetically. But there were significant differences among villages, and smaller but still significant differences between unrelated families of farmers within villages. So, you might be particularly interested in certain traits, for improvement say (and so are the farmers: walnut landraces in this part of Tibet are often named after fruit phenotypes). But — in this case — morphology is not a great guide to the totality of the underlying genetic diversity. So you can’t use it alone for conservation.
Which is also the conclusion researchers in Benin arrived at in their study of another tree, akee (Blighia sapida), also just out. A conservation and use (domestication, in this case) strategy “should target not only the morphotypes recognized by local populations but should also integrate the population genetics information.”
Does this amount to a general rule?
Agricultural biodiversity conservation and use in the spotlight at IITA
The latest edition of IITA’s R4D Review has various articles on agrobiodiversity issues, including a roundup of the activities of the centre’s genebank and an interview with its manager, Dr Dominique Dumet.
Battling it out over drought-tolerant maize in Africa
Maize in Africa is becoming a bit of a battlefield in the agri-culture wars. The BBC has a radio programme on the Water Efficient Maize for Africa project, which is a partnership between national programmes, CIMMYT and Monsanto, with a lot of work being done in Kenya. Predictably, it is very biotechnology-oriented, with marker-assisted selection and genetic modification to the fore.
At the other end of the spectrum, Scientific American has an article on a GEF project (funding comes also from Norway and the Netherlands) at Sakai, Kenya which is very different.
Agricultural extension officers now offer seasonal and locally relevant climate predictions explained in simple terms in Kikamba, the regional tribal language. They are now producing a handbook to translate weather predictions into practical advice about what and when to plant.
The project has also helped farmers set up a seed bank. A group of about 40 men will collect, process and preserve the best local seeds and loan them out again during the next planting season, slowly selecting for the best climate-adapted varieties.
Sakai’s farmers are hedging their bets. Increasingly, they are diversifying their crops by planting more drought-tolerant grains, peas and beans.
One wonders whether the two projects are even aware of each other, let alone talking. Maybe someone will tell us.
Modifying left, right and center
Today’s Daily News section at National Geographic had pieces on a trout genetically modified to be more muscular and a pig genetically modified to be more environmentally friendly. Is there no tweak the boffins will not contemplate?