Mongolians protect giant trout by not eating it. More for everybody else, I guess.
Planting a barrier to block UG99 wheat rust
An article in the November issue of Agricultural Research magazine, house organ of the US Department of Agriculture, warns: “World Wheat Supply Threatened!” complete with exclamation point. Well, yes, as we have indeed pointed out before. However, the article’s subtitle explains: “Luckily, research is under way to defend this grain of life.”
Phew! They had me worried.
Hidden in the write-up, which is to-the-point and interesting, is what struck me as a pretty off-the-wall suggestion. US scientists plan to focus resistant varieties (if and when they are developed) in southern states such as Texas, Georgia and Louisiana. The spores of UG99 can overwinter in the warm climates of the South, so the hope is that by preventing the disease getting a hold there, they can prevent it spreading to the rest of the country. Intriguing idea, but I wonder whether it really stands a chance.
There’s more in the article, on the resistance genes that might be inserted into US wheats and on the vital role of properly trained people in the field, who spotted UG99 early on and were able to sound the alarm.
Watermelon vine decline culprit identified
Watermelon vine decline: new virus to blame.
High Plains Drifting
Wheat being nudged and prodded into perenniality, and local perennials the other way ((That’s the Land Institute stuff we’ve blogged about before.)); cows managed like bison, and bison managed like cows (including by media moguls turned restauranteurs); reenactments of Custer’s Last Stand, and Indian retirees going home to the reservation; farmers paid to retire some of their acres so grasslands can make a comeback, and high-tech plants turning corn into diapers. There sure is some funny stuff going on in the Great Plains, that sixth of the continental US between the foothills of the Rockies and the 98th (or possibly the 100th) parallel. Read all about it in National Geographic’s Change of Heartland. The feature is from a couple of years ago, but still well worth checking out, if only for the photos. And thanks to Kem and her friend for pointing it out to me.
War bad for seeds, seeds good for peace
We asked Jacob van Etten to write about war and agricultural biodiversity after seeing his great website. It’s just coincidence that he sent the following piece in right after we blogged about flooding and genetic erosion. Sometimes things work out that way. Thanks, Jacob. We’re always open to guest contributions…
War can be disastrous for the environment. Think about forest destruction in Kurdistan or burning oil wells in Iraq. But we know very little about agrobiodiversity losses caused by armed conflict. Some time ago, a team of geographers wrote an alarming article about maize biodiversity in Guatemala, where a war raged in the 1980s. They claimed that war and modernization had caused a massive disappearance of indigenous maize varieties. This was based on a quick study of several townships.
However, in a recent restudy, which involved more intensive sampling in a single township, it became clear that several maize varieties were still hiding in the corners. Variety loss was in fact rather low and no varieties were reported to be lost due to the war. What seemed to have changed over the last decades was the social distribution of seeds and knowledge, suggestive of a disrupted social exchange network.
As other studies in Rwanda and West Africa have given similar results, a general picture seems to emerge. The problem is often not the physical survival of seeds and varieties during war. They may be conserved by those who stay in the village or recovered after the violence from fields and secret storages. The main problem is that war destroys the social and economic tissue that underpins agricultural diversity management. Mistrust and poverty will limit the circulation of seeds, leading to access problems and a fragmented local knowledge system. There may thus be a lot of sense in a project of CARE by Sierra Leone that turned the problem of seeds and war on its head. It used the distribution of seeds as a way to evoke discussion on the principles of social exclusion and the causes of the armed conflict.