Category: Genebanks

Posted on

Mapping wheat diversity in Turkey

ResearchBlogging.orgNo sooner did I blog about a paper which mapped diversity in a crop in Mexico across time, that I came across one mapping diversity in another crop in Turkey. ((Morgounov, A., Keser, M., Kan, M., Küçükçongar, M., Özdemir, F., Gummadov, N., Muminjanov, H., Zuev, E., & Qualset, C. (2016). Wheat Landraces Currently Grown in Turkey: Distribution, Diversity, and Use Crop Science, 56 (6) DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2016.03.0192))

The authors — a truly international bunch from the Bahri Dagdas International Agricultural Research Institute, the Vavilov Institute, CIMMYT, ICARDA, FAO, and UC Davis — describe a huge effort to collect and describe wheat from all over the country during 2009-2014. They then compare the resulting socioeconomic and geographic patterns of diversity with a previous survey done by the Vavilov Institute in the 1920s, the results of which were published in 1935-9 by Mirza Gökgöl, a Turkish scientist who accompanied that expedition. ((Gökgöl, M. 1935. Turkish wheats, Vol. I. Ministry of Agriculture, Yesilkoy Seed Breeding Institute Publications No. 7, Devlet Press, Istanbul, Turkey (In Turkish).
Gökgöl, M. 1939. Turkish wheats, Vol. II. Ministry of Agriculture, Yesilkoy Seed Breeding Institute Publications No. 14, Tan Press, Istanbul, Turkey (In Turkish).))

As in the Mexican maize study, diversity in the crop was measured in terms of distinct morphological types, and was unevenly distributed around the country, but unlike in that work, diversity was calculated for each administrative province, rather than in each square in a grid. As provinces vary widely in size, and in the extent to which wheat is grown in them, this approach is not ideal.

Nevertheless, it was possible to make direct comparisons between the two study periods for about 17 provinces. Discounting some very rare and very minor morphological variants, it seems fairly safe to say that for these provinces, the number of distinct wheat types went down about 59% overall, though with large differences among provinces. There is no map showing this in the paper, but, thanks to my colleague Nora Castañeda, I can help you with that. Red is down, green is up.

Data from Morgounov et al. (2016) Table 4. Wheat landrace diversity for selected provinces in Turkey found in the 1920s compared with the current results (2000s).

What explains wheat landraces still thriving in some places, and not in others?

Socioeconomic data indicated that landrace farmers are found mostly in remote mountainous subsistence communities with very little grain trade, small areas planted to wheat, and relatively simple production technologies. The key reasons famers continue to grow landraces are their grain qualities and adaptation to abiotic stresses.

Posted on

Brainfood: Slow Food, Runner bean diversity, Bamboo diversity, Istrian grapes, Smelly cheeses, Wild pseudocereals, Diversity & phenology, VAM diversity, Oases apocalypse, Wild wheat physiology, PepperHub, Bactrian camel diversity, Swiss livestock, CWR conservation, Tree database

Posted on

Nibbles: Viking dope, Garden survey, Ancient olive press, Proposal writing, Nice figures, Old garden books, Chestnuts, Cannibalism, Saving coffee, Vanilla history, Seed book, Spanish brassica

Posted on

A focus on farmers

A whole bunch of interesting reports for your delectation today. From our friends Ola Westengen ((Who I believe has contributed here, in the interest of full disclosure.)), Teshome Hunduma and Kristine Skarbø at NORAGRIC comes “From Genebanks to Farmers. A study of approaches to introduce genebank material to farmers’ seed systems.”

This report reviews strategies, methodologies and projects that exist to facilitate direct access to genebank material for farmers. Based on a literature review, a survey as well as interviews and data collection from key actors in conservation and development oriented seed system work, we trace trends in the field and develop a typology of approaches.

It’s not long, so read the whole thing. But a couple of things to whet your appetite. First, the categorization of approaches:

  • Reintroduction
  • Community Seed Banks (CSB)
  • Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB)
  • Emergency Seed Interventions
  • Variety Introduction
  • Integrated Seed System Approaches

You can argue with it, but I do like a taxonomy to start things off. Second, the data.

…farmers, farmer organizations and NGOs indeed comprise a substantial user group of the CGIAR genebanks, receiving some 7% of the samples, on par with the distribution to commercial sector requestors.

Always good to have the data. And finally, the challenges: (1) reaching scale, (2) achieving long term sustainability, and (3) legal aspects. In particular scaling up, always a bugbear.

The scale challenge is both a question of seed availability and the number of beneficiaries involved. Genebanks are only able to distribute small quantities of seeds and in all approaches described here the seed multiplication step is to a lesser (e.g. PPB) or larger extent (e.g. emergency seed interventions) critical. There is furthermore a need for exploring ways to scale up in terms of numbers of farmers reached. Some of these approaches, in particular PPB and CSBs, are so resource intensive that the number of farmers directly involved in each project is likely to remain limited. On the other hand, the crowdsourcing approach to varietal evaluation promoted in the Seeds4Needs initiative coordinated by Bioversity International represents a promising strategy for large scale on farm evaluation of diverse portfolio of crops.

Susan Bragdon’s work is quoted in the report, and concidentally she has three (count them) things out this month, published by the Quaker United Nations Office (QUNO).

  • Are Small-scale Farmers at the Table? Reflections on Small-scale Farmers’ Participation in Global and National Decision-Making: “…six recommendations for how multilateral institutions that host negotiations or dialogues can encourage and facilitate the participation of small-scale farmers.”
  • The Foundations of Food Security – Ensuring Support to Small-scale Farmers Managing Agricultural Biodiversity: “…a rights-based approach supported by governments nationally and internationally [e.g., the Plant Treaty] open broader possibilities of predictable, stable support.”
  • The Evolution of Rights and Responsibilities over Agricultural Biodiversity: “…suggestions on how to create a system that supports the critical role that agricultural biodiversity plays in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.”

The culmination of this flurry of activity from Susan and QUNO is a call to action paper, The Time is Ripe for Governments to Strengthen Sustainable and Food-Secure Farming, in which….

…the Small-Scale Farmers and Agrobiodiversity Dialogue to Action Group (DtA) calls upon the international community to mobilize resources for a more proactive role of the public sector in supporting small-scale farmers, their seed systems and the protection of agricultural biodiversity. Furthermore, the group calls upon national governments to engage in consultation with small-scale farmers to identify what they require in order to effectively engage in activities to support the conversation and sustainable use of biodiversity and to achieve secure livelihoods.

Ok, so there’s a lot to take in here, but if I were to try to encapsulate the take-home message for you, it would be this phrase from the description of the second of Susan’s papers listed above:

…increased private sector interest in agriculture and food systems is reason for equally vibrant governments acting in the public interest.

And international genebanks too, I suppose.