Home is where conservation begins

Thanks to Jade Philips (see her on fieldwork below) and Åsmund Asdal, two of the authors, for contributing this post on their recent paper on the conservation of crop wild relatives in Norway.

ResearchBlogging.orgNorway may be an unlikely spot in which to look for agrobiodiversity, but seek and ye shall find. A recent paper discusses the development and implementation of an in situ and ex situ conservation strategy for priority crop wild relatives (CWR) in the country. ((Phillips, J., Asdal, A., Magos Brehm, J., Rasmussen, M., & Maxted, N. (2016). In situ and ex situ diversity analysis of priority crop wild relatives in Norway. Diversity and Distributions DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12470)) Some 204 taxa were prioritized, which included forage species, berries, vegetables and herbs. Distribution data collected from GBIF and species distribution modelling software including MaxEnt and the CAPFITOGEN tools were used to identify conservation priorities.

Screen Shot 2016-09-05 at 11.47.38 AMA proposal was made for a network of in situ genetic reserves throughout Norway to help capture the genetic diversity of priority CWR and allow them to evolve along with environmental changes. Some 10% of priority species do not seem to be found in existing protected areas.

Complementary ex situ priorities were also set out in the paper to ensure the full range of ecogeographic diversity across Norway, and hence genetic diversity, was captured within genebanks and therefore easily available for plant pre-breeders and breeders to utilise. Some 177 species have no ex situ collections at all. The priority CWR identified and the methodology used within Norway are applicable both in other countries and internationally. We hope that now the scientific basis for the conservation of these vital resources within Norway has been identified, integration of these recommendations into current conservation plans will begin. This will take us one step closer to the systematic global protection and use of our wild agrobiodiversity, a need which is growing increasingly urgent each day.

IMG_2669 small

Brainfood: Lentil diversity, Cacao diversity, Larch distribution, Tea diversity, Salmon breeding, Ethiopian sorghum, Brassica differentiation, Biodiversity info, Human footprint

Brainfood: Ryegrass genome, Pest distributions, German oregano, Pápalos distribution, Chinese pea, Dutch cattle, Animal biobanking, Legumes everywhere, Crop diversification in China, Asian fermentation

Agroforestry around the world

I’ve been looking for an excuse to play around with the Database of Places, Language, Culture and Environment (D-PLACE), which “contains cultural, linguistic, environmental and geographic information for over 1400 human ‘societies’”. It finally arrived today, in the form of a monumental study of carbon sequestration on farmland in Nature. The authors used remote sensing and fancy spatial modelling to work out the amount of tree cover, and hence the levels of biomass carbon, on agricultural land around the world. This is the global map they got for % tree cover in 2000 and 2010.

global tree cover

I was curious to see whether one could predict the areas of highest tree cover (or highest biomass C) from the much coarser data on agriculture that D-PLACE brings together from ethnographic studies. This is what the distribution of “major crop type” looks like, from D-PLACE.

agriculture-major-crop-type-map_1_

So the answer is no, I guess. It’s difficult to see any association between the amount of trees on farms and the main types of crops grown there, at least just by eyeballing the maps. There may be a hint of a preference for roots and tubers, but nothing really jumps out. I’ll keep playing though, there’s a whole range of cultural and ecological variables you can tweak.

Brainfood: China cereal yield, US soybean breeding, Breadfruit genomics, Field app, Urban ag, Rose breeding, Strawberry cryo, Global biodiversity loss, Oceania bananas, Vegetable breeding, Badass Chinese sheep