That seems to be the plea Jelte Rozema and Timothy Flowers make in a Science paper that’s just out. ((It’s behind a paywall, but you can read other people’s take on it at Mongabay and Wired.)) But, frankly, I found the paper disappointing, not least because it is short on clear recommendations. For example, what is one to make of this?
Because salt resistance has already evolved in halophytes, domestication of these plants is an approach that should be considered. However, as occurred with traditional crops such as rice, wheat, corn, and potatoes, domestication of wild halophytic plant species is needed to convert them into viable crops with high yields. Such a process can begin by screening collections for the most productive genotypes.
Are they telling us that domestication of new species is a more profitable approach than trying to breed salinity-tolerance into existing crops? I think so, in which case it would be an interesting view, but I’m not altogether sure that’s in fact the point they’re making. It could have been better phrased. I mean those first two sentences could be summarized as
Domestication of halophytes should be considered. However, domestication of wild halophytes is needed.
Not sure how the editors at Science let that one by. There was also no explicit reference in the paper to the International Centre for Biosaline Agriculture and its genebank. Or to the possible role of crop wild relatives in breeding for salinity tolerance. All around, an opportunity missed.