Category: Breeding

Posted on

The Viking in the wheat field on the radio

Alerted by a colleague I listened to a little bit of a long radio programme featuring Susan Dworkin, author of The Viking in the Wheat Field, and assorted luminaries. The Viking in question was Sir Bent Skovmand, a plant breeder extraordinaire, and what I heard of the programme indicated that there is still profound ignorance out there about plant breeding, about agriculture, about genebanks, about GMOs, about the Global Crop Diversity Trust, about just about everything.

Of course, I have no idea what to do about any of that (other than to keep plugging away). I did like one metaphor that Per Pinstrup Anderson, former director general of IFPRI used when asked about the “problem of hunger”. Imagine yourself in a room of seventy people, he said. Ten of those won’t have enough to eat today. That’s pretty good. To which I’d add that another 10 are obese or overweight. And 20 suffer the hidden hunger of missing micronutrients.

Posted on

Seed systems and survival

Two recent documents address seed systems in sub-Saharan Africa. One, from the Drylands Coordination Group in Norway looks at the relevance of the informal seed sector to farmers in southern Tigray, Ethiopia, using the famine of 1984 as a boundary across which to compare results. It’s a complex story that would repay study by someone expert in the subject matter, but this is striking:

Five cultivars of sorghum, one cultivar of tef and four cultivars of maize have been lost and others are on the verge of being lost from the farming system of the area. Early maturing sorghum cultivars from the informal seed are gaining upper hand and have already replaced the old but late maturing types.

It is tempting to see those changes as a response to changing weather patterns, and the study recommends research to make older varieties “as productive as they used to be”.

In Zambia, Danielle Nierenberg reports on her blog, the aid charity CARE is fostering a business-like approach to increasing the production of staple crops.

One way they’re doing this is by creating a network of agro-dealers who can sell inputs to their neighbors as well as educate them about how to use hybrid seeds, fertilizers, and other inputs. At the same time, “we are mindful” of the benefits of local varieties of seeds, says Harry Ngoma, Agriculture Advisor for the Consortium for Food Security, Agriculture and Nutrition, AIDS, Resiliency and Markets (C-FAARM).

Right on, Harry! Sounds very like the approach being promoted by AGRA in its pursuit of an African green revolution. And CARE is also promoting indigenous crops such as sorghum to complement Zambia’s appetite for maize. But is there a danger that this network of agro-dealers will be promoting the inputs that make them the most profit? There must be a way of tying rewards for advice to the practical outcome of following that advice.

Posted on

Reviewing the use and usefulness of cereal landraces

From Eliseu Bettencourt, one of the authors of the paper concerned.

The paper “Cereal landraces for sustainable agriculture. A review” was recently made available on-line at Agronomy for Sustainable Development, though behind a paywall. The paper version will be published soon.

The paper is co-authored by eighteen authors pulling together diverse backgrounds and expertises.

The review addresses the current status and prospects for cereals landraces in the context of sustainable agriculture, discussing the place of landraces in the origin of modern cereal crops and breeding of elite cereal cultivars, the importance of on-farm and ex situ diversity conservation; how modern genotyping approaches can help both conservation and exploitation; the importance of different phenotyping approaches; and whether legal issues associated with landrace marketing and utilisation need addressing.

The paper also deals with the current status and potential for the improved deployment and exploitation of landraces, and incorporation of their positive qualities into new cultivars or populations for more sustainable agricultural production. In particular, their potential as sources of novel disease and abiotic stress resistance genes or combination of genes if deployed appropriately, of phytonutrients accompanied with optimal micronutrient concentrations which can help alleviate aging-related and chronic diseases, and of nutrient use efficiency traits.

The paper is structured in 12 chapters, namely: Introduction; History of cereal landraces; Diversity and germplasm collections; Genebanks and conservation of cereal landraces; Genotyping and phenotyping; Nutrient uptake and utilisation; Nutrition and quality; Biotic and abiotic stress resistance and tolerance; Breeding: conversion of landraces into modern cultivars; Participatory breeding; Legal issues; Conclusions. The paper also counts with an extensive list of bibliographic sources.

The main findings of the paper can be summarised as: A lot of recent research effort has gone into collecting, organising, studying and analysing cereal landraces with a primary goal being to incorporate their positive qualities in new cultivars or populations for a more sustainable agricultural production, particularly in response to recent climate changes.

A major part of this valuable landrace diversity is conserved in the world’s genebanks network and should be exploited systematically for traits such as quality and specific adaptations to stress environments. However, the available genetic variation in adaptive responses to soil and climatic conditions conserved in landraces is little understood, and even less used. More uniform and user-friendly documentation about collection and characterisation of landraces, either morphologically or with molecular tools, is needed to access this variation more effectively. Genebanks should aim at adopting a common concept of landraces and plan special inventories for them. The level of diversity should be monitored during their conservation so that the original level of variation is maintained. More studies are needed in order to investigate if their long-term maintenance by farmers resulted in increasing genetic variation.

New high-throughput genotyping platforms and phenotyping data in common databases will enable powerful association genetic approaches to be used for improvement and direct deployment of landrace resources.

The renewed focus on cereal landraces for breeding purposes is also a response to some negative consequences of modern agriculture and conventional breeding, such as the liberal use of high inputs, the loss of genetic diversity and the stagnation of yields in less favourable areas.

Further enhancement of productivity and stability is achieved through practicing “non-stop selection” within landraces across the marginal production environments, to exploit the constantly released by the genome useful adaptive variation.

The review highlights the value of landraces as resources for the future sustainability of cereal crop production, the methods to enhance their genetic makeup and avoid seed degradation and emphasises the level of co-ordination and resourcing needed to realise the great potential of cereal landraces.

Posted on

Hot potato in Europe

From André Heitz.

Approval of genetically modified varieties in Europe is governed by a strange rule: a qualified majority of member States in Council is required for either approving or rejecting a GMV, and if a qualified majority does not obtain, the decision is entrusted to the European Commission. For the last twelve years — a period of time in which GMVs rose from some 30 to some 134 million hectares worldwide — member States have always managed to create the stalemate that threw the hot potato onto a shy Commission preoccupied by its standing rather than effectiveness.

Things may have changed on 2 March 2010, when the Commission — ending a process that started in January 2003 — approved BASF’s Amflora potato for cultivation for industrial use (it is a starch potato composed almost exclusively of amylopectin) and authorised the use of its by-products as feed. At the same time, it authorised the placing on the market of three GM maize products (MON863xMON810, MON863xNK603, MON863xMON810xNK603) for food and feed uses, but not for cultivation.

Not unexpectedly, these decisions provoked the ire of “environmental groups” and some member States. In the Amflora case, the controversy centres on the presence of an antibiotic resistance marker gene.

Whether those decisions are a positive signal for GMVs in Europe is quite uncertain, however.

Firstly, the cultivation authorisation for Amflora is subject to restrictions to prevent the mixing of the GM potato with conventional or organic potatoes. Sounds reasonable, but the measures are nothing but good crop husbandry and industrial practices, moreover in the context of a crop that will be grown exclusively under contract with a limited number of processors. The upshot is that this potato is still treated like a delinquent requiring close scrutiny. Ironically, if we exclude the ARM nptII gene (now present elsewhere on millions of hectares) and the changed proportion of amylopectin and amylose, Amflora is no different from conventional starch potatoes.

Secondly, it is understood that member States will be free to refuse the cultivation of Amflora (at present, member States can only derogate to the principle of a single market under strict conditions). The Commission will also produce a “proposal by the summer setting out how a Community authorisation system, based on science, can be combined with freedom for Member States to decide whether or not they wish to cultivate GM crops on their territory”.

Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner, John Dalli stated: “Responsible innovation will be my guiding principle when dealing with innovative technologies. After an extensive and thorough review of the five pending GM files, it became clear to me that there were no new scientific issues that merited further assessment. All scientific issues, particularly those concerning safety, had been fully addressed. Any delay would have simply been unjustified. By taking these decisions, the European Commission fulfils its role in a responsible manner.” There is every reason to expect that national governments — and why not also regional and local authorities — will not decide on the same basis when confronted with irrational arguments and electoral pressure.

For more, both with further links:

Posted on

UG99 in the internet mainstream

It was Lord Beaverbrook, I think, who said that if something had not been reported in his once-mighty Daily Express, then it hadn’t happened. ((No, I’m not going to check.)) For netizens of the modern age, much the same could be said of MetaFilter; if it isn’t there, it’s nowhere. And so it came to pass that UG99, recently covered by Wired magazine and Nibbled here, is officially a threat; it says so on MetaFilter.

I’m not actually a member, nor do I care to be. ((Too much on my plate.)) But if I were, I’d be responding to some of those comments, oh yes. And thanks to those comments, I’ve learned that the Wired piece’s author keeps a blog, which contains stuff that had to be left out. Cool.