Are species like cans of soup?

A longish article in the latest Wired does what seems to this untutored eye a good job of describing the controversy about barcoding. Here’s the case against in a nutshell:

“We’re not accusing Hebert of being a creationist, just of acting like one,” says Brent Mishler.

and the case for:

The space ship lands. He steps out. He points it around. It says “friendly – unfriendly – edible – poisonous – dangerous – living – inanimate.”

There are a lot of pithy quotes like those and astute observations, such as the one that Charles Darwin was a parataxonomist. Well worth reading. We have, of course, blogged about barcoding before.

Nibbles: Worms, Cowpeas, Vavilov, Asian carp, Genebanks, Cassava

Wheat database heaven?

The USDA is promising people like Luigi ((Remember when he was Lost in Genebank database hell?)) a get out of hell free card. Shiaoman Chao, a molecular geneticist, sequences and fingerprints thousands of wheat and barley samples sent to her by breeders around the country. The results can help breeders to decide whether a particular seedling is worth persevering with.

But those data on their own become much more valuable when they can be married to other kinds of information from other kinds of laboratory. Enter GrainGenes, “a treasure trove of genetic information about wheat, barley and other ‘small grains’ like rye, oats and triticale”.

Personally, I don’t have the knowledge to make use of GrainGenes, or any of the other massive portals dedicated to just a few crops each: maize, strawberry, potato and others. But there is help out there.

The bigger question is the extent to which all those portals can be brought together and interlinked with other kinds of data: where selections grow, their visible characteristics, their utility, etc. etc. I know there are people coming at this from the non-molecular side of things, but I do sometimes wonder whether they really have the chops (and the resources) to pull it off. If some of the gene-jockeys decided they wanted to do it, and could throw some of their brains, brawn and bucks at the problem, I reckon Luigi would have his lifeline sooner. And it might be more reliable.

World Bank supports cacao diversity project

Good news from our friend Hannes Dempewolf, of the University of British Columbia. Congratulations to all involved!

Last Friday was the day of the big decision on whether we had made the cut and would be pronounced a winner at this year’s Development Marketplace competition of the World Bank. An event geared towards innovative approaches to agricultural development, the competition was very tough. Nevertheless, the jury seemed to like our idea of establishing a DNA-fingerprinting based system of traceability for ancient cacao varieties and declared this Bioversity International-led project a winner, together with 21 others, including another on cacao that dealt more specifically with organoleptic assessments of Ecuadorian cacao diversity. Generally, agricultural biodiversity featured big time at the competition, with several project proposals on neglected and underutilized species as well as diversity driven value chain development approaches for coffee, or in our case cocoa.

After the excitement of the award ceremony had settled, some World Bank staffers approached me and told me that one representative of our project, as well as of two other projects, had been selected to meet the president of the World Bank, Robert B. Zoellick, for lunch. ((Photo from the World Bank Development Marketplace Blog.)) This certainly came as a big surprise and all three of us were somewhat unsure what to expect, since the World Bank staffers had made clear to us that this would be a meeting of utmost rarity since the president usually never does lunchtime meetings and he only this morning had arrived from the UN’s annual general assembly meeting in New York City. After such a build-up, I was quite nervous and had eaten way too many cocoa nibs from my display stall before the president eventually arrived at my booth to learn from me about our proposal. He seemed very keen to hear about our project idea and to my surprise was particularly interested in the more technical details, which I had not expected from an economist of his stature. He asked me how we came up with our idea and what had lead us to submit the proposal, which I had no problem explaining with my enthusiasm on agricultural biodiversity and my belief in a “conservation through use” philosophy. We were then guided upstairs to his office facilities where we were offered lunch with the president as well as a few other World Bank staffers and past winners. He seemed very keen in the Development Marketplace competition per se, since it is one of the rare occasions that the World Bank offers direct assistance to more grassroots organizations rather than big government ones.

The table conversation was largely focussed on our proposed projects and he asked everyone in turn quite detailed questions on the wider framework and relevancy of the problem, which they were trying to solve with their proposals. At the end of the lunch he asked us whether anyone had any final remarks, at which point I mentioned that I was very impressed by the diversity and high quality of the project ideas that had been presented by the 100 finalists of the competition and whether there wouldn’t be a way to increase the funding pool in future years to give more finalists the chance to implement their great ideas. He seemed to think it might be possible with the help of additional donors, which everyone was happy to learn. We then all returned from the executive level high up in one of the wings of the World Bank building down to the inner courtyard of the bank and proceeded to join the other finalists at a special policy dialogue on “Cultivating Innovation: A Response to the Food Price Crisis” that had been offered as final event of these exciting four days.