- Indigenous knowledge of agrobiodiversity makes the news in Indonesia.
- Reconstructing the strawberry.
- And reconstructing the history of cultivated citrus fruits.
- ICRISAT millet breeders get an a new toy.
- Plenty of diversity in the cultivated grape still. And it’s going to need it.
- Biodiversity (and agrobiodiversity?) needed for farm productivity. Well I never! But more mixed results available too. What’s a poor boy to think?
- SPOT 5 imagery can be used to identify crops. In Texas. But in Tanzania?
- Agricultural biodiversity and subsistence traditions, Part 2. In the Ozarks. But in Omo? (And here’s Part 1.)
Of cattle and people. And barley
Dienekes, a blogger who specializes in molecular anthropology, has a quick note today on a paper on the molecular genetics of cattle in Europe. The main story is one of distinction between North and South.
Apparently, the expansion of the dairy breeds have created, or largely maintained, a sharp genetic contrast of northern and southern Europe, which divides both France and Germany. It may be hypothesised that the northern landscapes, with large flat meadows, are suitable for large-scale farming with specialised dairy cattle (Niederungsvieh, lowland cattle), whilst the mixed-purpose or beef cattle (Höhenvieh, highland cattle) are better suited to the smaller farms and hilly regions of the south. However, it is also remarkable that in both France and Germany the bovine genetic boundary coincides with historic linguistic and cultural boundaries. In France, the Frankish invasion in the north created the difference between the northern langue d’oïl and the southern langue d’oc. The German language is still divided into the southern Hochdeutsch and northern Niederdeutsch dialects, which also correlates with the distribution of the Catholic and Protestant religions. On a larger scale, it is tempting to speculate that the difference between two types of European cattle reflects, and has even reinforced, the traditional and still visible contrast of Roman and Germanic Europe.
It doesn’t seem that the strong latitudinal genetic differentiation in cattle is matched by one in human populations. Here the pattern is much more gradual and clinal. ((Maybe there’s more interbreeding among human populations than between cattle breeds?)) However, there may be a similar “sharp genetic contrast of northern and southern Europe” (or at least between the Mediterranean and the rest of Europe) for barley. ((Yeah, I know it’s an old paper, but it’s the only map of barley genetic diversity in Europe I could find online at short notice. No doubt our readers will send in better examples.))
I’d dearly love to have the time to find out whether other livestock and crops show a similar pattern.
Nibbles: Squash etc, Potatoes, Economics, Pharaonic palm, goats, Chickpea
- Native American eating “best museum cafeteria in town”. “Makes up for the museum,” sniffs Jeremy
- Catalog of advanced clones and improved varieties going like hot potatoes.
- The Economic Impact of Bioversity is apparently “a seriously problem-rich, solution-craving topic”. Innovation Investment Journal says so.
- Pharaonic palm not immortal. Medemia argun “critically endangered”.
- Goat lineage diversity delineated. Paywalled.
- Chickpea diversity includes variability in resistance to salinity. Paywalled.
Nibbles: Cholera, School Gardens, Diets, Genetic pollution
- Vegetable seeds to combat cholera. Really.
- “[O]ne person’s tomato is another one’s maintenance nightmare.” School garden backlash shock.
- On the other hand “we have to imbue our children with the love of — and consumption of -— … fresh vegetables and fruits”. Lose some, win some.
- Malicious pollen? Anastasia turns the tables on the contamination nuts.
Different approaches to breeding and drought-resistant maize
Bestriding the world on the shoulders of giants, as we do, can cause dizzying glimpses of the obvious. Allowing farmers to participate in studies to improve their farming, for example, is a central tenet of research in poorer countries. Elsewhere, it seems to be less common and less visible, which may be why we sit up and take notice when we do see it, for example among Europe’s brassica growers.
Now, from the US, come similar stories. First off, there’s Syngenta’s drought-resistant maize which — get this! — is not genetically engineered. ((Well, not entirely; the drought-resistance was selected, not engineered, but these Agrisure Artesian varieties do contain engineered pest resistance and herbicide tolerance.)) Syngenta says these varieties suffer no production penalty when there is no drought. That’s really important to farmers who might not suffer a drought, but want to be prepared just in case, and whose preparation consists of one or a few highly-tailored varieties rather than a diversity of varieties. And it is really hard to achieve.
What does drought-resistant corn have to do with participatory research? (Leaving aside the question whether Syngenta’s approach might be a better idea than a pure GM approach for poorer countries.) Just that Mat Kinase recently drew attention to something called the US Testing Network (USTN), launched in Iowa in 2009 to “develop and introduce new non-GMO corn hybrids in the market, while improving the quality and quantity of non-GMO corn hybrids available”. As Mat notes:
I couldn’t care less about avoiding transgenes, but I love the idea of small companies, public sector scientists and enthusiastic individuals working together to improve germplasm for niche markets too small for the big seed companies to serve.
That is indeed a good idea. I wonder, would Syngenta be willing to offer USTN some drought-resistant lines without engineered pest resistance and herbicide tolerance, for use in further breeding efforts to serve niche markets? I doubt that there would be any risk of those markets cannibalizing sales of Syngenta’s products.
And there’s a tantalizing tidbit in the full report on USTN that Mat linked to:
Walter Goldstein of the Michael Fields Institute, Margaret Smith at Cornell University, and Major Goodman at North Carolina State have conducted research on a trait from popcorn, GaS, which blocks incoming pollen. This trait holds promise to block cross pollination from GM corn.
Even from these lofty heights, I had not been aware of this approach, the reverse of Terminator technology, to protect plants from inadvertent cross pollination. Early reports suggest it may not be plain sailing; even so, the fact that farmers and researchers are working together to solve a problem specific to those farmers is surely welcome.