Landraces : Infra-specific Diversity & Adaptive Divergence

1. Landraces: Infra-specific Diversity & Adaptive Divergence Of an Endangered Evolutionary Link [3]

2. [Q1]. What are wheat landraces, why they are important, what is their potential?

3. WLRs • Dynamic population(s), • Historical origin, • Distinct identity, • Genetically diverse, • Locally adapted, and • Associated with “traditional” farming systems • Lacks formal crop improvement,

4. Why WLRs are important? • Heterogeneity & Diversity • (Reduce risk of failure, increase food security, limited capacity to control the environment) • Support subsistence farming (LCDs) • Emergence of farmers’ seed system(s)

5. Why WLRs are important? • Evolutionary link (Wild – Modern Wheat cultivars) • Evolution of durum wheat (populations) vs. bread wheat (genotypes) • Evolution of meta-populations] e.g., Hourani Durum wheat LR, Tabasi Bread wheat LR • Dynamic evolution of diversity • Combined human and natural selection • Gene complexes, within & among genotypes

6. Why WLRs are important? • Future increases in productivity • …mostly will be needed/made under biotic & abiotic stresses. • Wide adaptation (How nice! ; How wide?) • Narrow / specific adaptation • Conservation of GD

7. What are the potentials of WLRs? • WLR shaped & molded to: • Meet diverse needs and end-uses • Meet diverse cultural practices • Respond to changing socio-economic, and growing conditions. • Have /Provide Private & Public value [Utilization/On-farm Conservation ?]

8. What are the potentials of WLRs? • Agronomic potential • Biomass [Early vigor, weed competition, straw, fit crop-livestock integrated system]. • Root systems [Seminal vs. adventitious roots, numbers/timing, ] • Nutrients (protein content, HMW glutenins, composition, bioavailability) • Organoleptic/nutritional characteristics/quality [Farekah, Bulgur, Semolina, Cuscus, Farro, wholemeal bread, etc.]

9. What are the potentials of WLRs? • Eco-physiological potential • Emergence/ coleoptiles • Facultative types • W & NUE (uptake) • Soil biota/ Mycorrhiza/root investment • Translocation of PS (stem reserves), Grain FP/Duration • Temp/ET [dT]

10. Future value of WLRs? • How strongly our food traditions can be linked to the conservation of wheat landraces, • How does increased knowledge of food traditions and improved culinary arts help create or expand market demand for wheat landrace products,

11. Future value of WLRs? • How environmental factors can impact quality and culinary attributes of wheat landrace products, • How does the accrued knowledge, along with on-farm conservation, improve livelihoods of individual farmers and rural communities? • Potential “Trans-domestication” of WLR!

12. Why WLRs are important? • Adaptation: • Local adaptation, low-input, drought, management practices, e.g., variable seeding rate/depth – emergence, compensation, facultative LRs • Yield stability / Responsiveness (?) • – Different genotypes, wide range of yield potential, GxE. • Disease buffering capability • Temporal & spatial

13. [Q2].Practical guidelines: How to Restore & Maintain (Advance) LRs on the Farm?

14. Queen Hatshepsut –Land of Punt

15. Vavilov

16. Svalbard

17. Germplasm Collection & Conservation • Genebanks – Freezing the genetic landscape • Queen Hatshepsut • Vavilov [VIR] • IBPGR 1970s-1990s • IPGRI 1993> Biodiversity > Bioversity International • NPGS-GRIN

18. Dynamic Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of WLRsOn-Farm Conservation of WLR: • Sustainable management of LR germplasm within traditional agricultural systems ……. “Because in situ (on-farm) conservation has continued into the present ……..does not ensure that this de facto strategy for conserving PGR will continue into the future”

19. On-Farm Research, Breeding, Selection, and Seed Exchange Programs of WLR [PPB] “to meet needs of low-input, small-scale farmers in marginal areas [LCDs]”

20. Wide range of stakeholders are involved (Expertise, interests, end-use value) • Identify farmers’ / stakeholders’ needs • Identify sources of variation/parents • Design crosses-selection-evaluation-testing-quality-product(s). • Seed multiplication – maintenance of GD – seed exchange • Can deliver more benefits to all stakeholders –

21. Approaches for breeding and selecting WLR for organic and low-input systems:

22. [1]. Selection is carried out under conventional farming conditions and organic farmers are expected to test released wheat varieties and select the ones that perform well under their particular organic conditions,

23. [2]. Initial crosses and early selections are focused on traits required in conventional systems, but advanced generations are evaluated and selected under organic conditions,

24. [3]. Crosses and selection strategies focus on traits demanded by the organic sector and selection is carried out under organic conditions throughout the breeding and selection program. ……....... [Temporal stability of quality traits, GxE]

25. On-Farm Participatory Research, Breeding and Selection of [W]LRs • Demand for different varietal traits is poorly understood • High variability of the agro-ecological setting • Adoption of modern varieties? • Emerging markets? • Participatory research (risk) vs. Participatory learning • Who leads, who follows? • When do farmers should get involved?

26. How to restore & maintain LRs on the farm? • On-Farm Conservation of WLR: • “Sustainable management of LR germplasm within traditional agricultural systems” • Natural laboratory – Evolution • Methodology: Little progress – • Practical difficulties • Changes in / loss of traditional farming systems • Land-use options • Loss of IK • Rural economy – demographics

27. On-Farm conservation strategies • …range from simple to complex activities, depending on: • The species and its characteristics (e.g., durum or bread wheat, hulled or free-threshing, etc.) • Spatial variation, habitats. • Level of GD • Economic value • Level of threat • Available financial and human resources

28. On-Farm Conservation: The focus is on GD conservation within a particular farming system On-farm Management: The focus is on conserving traditional farming systems, then [not] on GD of LRs.

29. Suggesting General guidelines “may” be “problematic” because: • Very few on-farm conservation “models” • Farmers’ variable attitudes, approaches and practices. • Emphasis on Economic & Food Security NOT Conservation

30. Suggesting General guidelines “may” be “problematic” ……… • Farmers de facto practiced on-farm conservation and on-farm management for thousands of years…. • Objective: Combine high yield and food security • Based on Within- and Among-species diversity • A major factor in On-Farm Conservation is: • “HOW Farmers Select and Retain Seed for next growing season?” • Selection is based on: • Yield • Quality • Resistance/tolerance to biotic/abiotic stresses

31. Guidelines ….. • Position “On-farm conservation” within PGR conservation context • Practice a “general” model for on-farm conservation • Develop /Advance the “science” of “on-farm conservation”

32. Empirical Model • To Improve targeting • Households likely to (continue) grow LRs, and • LRs most likely to be grown • Pr(LRj = 1) = f(b0+b1*SE+b2*PC+b3*MA+b4*VC+b5*AZ+e)

33. The probability of growing LR on plot (field) j is a function of: • SE: Socioeconomic factors • Years of farming experience of decision maker • Years of education of decision maker • Total farm area • Land ownership category • Ownership of livestock, etc.

34. The probability of growing LR on plot (field) j is a function of: • PC: Land (parcel, field) characteristics, • Irrigated/dry land • Land quality • MA: Market access, • Distance to market/processing facilities • Knowledge of market needs • Diversity of crops / LRs available in market, etc.

35. The probability of growing LR on plot (field) j is a function of: • VC: Crop Landrace (Variety) characteristics, • Yield potential • Biotic/abiotic tolerance • Suitability for soil type • Bread/secondary product quality • Wheat residue for animal feed • AZ: Agro-ecological Zone.

36. Phases of implementing On-farm Conservation:

37. 1.Project planning & establishment • 1.1.Select site, community & farmer(s) for effective on-farm conservation • 1.2.Ensure maximum possible GD of [W]LR (or any other crop) • 1.3.Info on amount/structure of GD [which traits?] • 1.4.Identify/understand farmer’s needs… impact on management of GD • 1.5.Identify sources of [W]LR germplasm:

38. 1.5.Identify sources of [W]LR germplasm: • Hi GD, Interest of local farmers/community in GD, Threats to GD, Knowledgeable/practicing farmers in managing/manipulating GD • The “Hu” factor: • Diversity of rural community, Age, Gender, Financial resources, Social status, Ethnicity. • Socio-economic survey.

39. 2.Project management & monitoring • Depends on: Location, target crop (Old variety, LR, open-pollinated, cross-pollinated, annual, perennial) • Local community, Who (stakeholder) is involved? Available resources.

40. 2.Project management & monitoringTasks: • 2.1.Identify the context of management/monitoring • (GD conservation, farming system conservation/management). • 2.2.Specify target crop(s) • 2.3.Description of LR(s) – phenotypic/genetic • 2.4.Findings of socio-economic survey – locations/farmers. • 2.5.Assessment of potential genetic erosion • (potential causes: socio-economic, biotic, etc.) • 2.6.Training and research needs • 2.7. Strategy to monitor: • Potential causes of genetic erosion, • Potential impact of interventions on GD • 2.8.Strategy ..how to use GD?

41. Practical Questions: • Frequency, size, nature, and coverage of (seed) sampling. • Timing of (seed) sampling. • Traits to be assessed / evaluated. • Data analysis / reporting, dissemination. • Documentation of management practices

42. 3.On-farm sustainable utilization of diversity • 3.1.Link genetic conservation-sustainability-utilization • 3.2.Should facilitate present/future PGR use • 3.3.Utilization: • Traditional, General, Professional. • 3.4.Farmers as direct users • 3.5.Ex situ conservation of PGR produced on farm: • Availability (other users) • Re-introduction (e.g., Ethiopian Durum WLR) • 3.6.Conservation – contribution to quality of life of local community.

43. Current/Future Needs for Sustainable On-Farm Conservation: • (1).Awareness – benefits of locally-grown adapted [W]LRs • (2).Access to PGR of adapted [W]LRs • (3).Improved traits: • Agronomic, • Phenotypic, • Quality • ……. of value to farmers/users/consumers • (4).Increased access to markets … competition with “others” • (5).Direct/indirect support for On-farm dynamic conservation & sustainable utilization of local [W]LR GR. • (6).Farmer Networks, Community Seed Exchange Systems, Community Seed Banks.

44. [3].Community Seed Banks [CSB]—their value, and how to restore them? • A community currency alternative • IK of biological resources --> derive a livelihood from nature • CSB allows farmers access to planting material they desire, • whilst maintaining (advancing) agro-biodiversity.

45. CSBs-How to implement? • In situ (On-farm) conservation…. • Farmers as stewards of crop diversity, growing out varieties as a method of varietal conservation • NGOs (and others) …developed CSBs to: • Facilitate these conservation activities, and • Allow farmers’ access to a wider range of material than is normally available. • How do they function? • Parallel with existing (traditional) “Genebanks” and seed exchange systems, • Build on traditional Genebanks

46. CSB Categories • De facto CSBs, • Community Seed Exchange, • Organized Seed Banks, and • Seed Savers’ Networks

47. Objectives: • Farmer seed security, and • Biodiversity conservation

48. Questions? • How best to work with existing seed banking practices? And • How to resolve the (seemingly) conflicting requirements of varietal conservation and the socio-economic needs of farmers?

49. [1]. De facto (individual household) Seed Banks: • 1-1.Most numerous informal seed multiplication, storage (exchange) system. • 1-2.Farmers prefer to obtain their seed locally • (adaptation, availability of information on quality) • 1-3. Gender relations & influence on type of seed • 1-4.Selection methods/timing • (pre- or post-harvest, individual/bulk, etc.)

50. [1]. De facto (individual household) Seed Banks: • 1-5.Stored seed quality • (physical/biological/viability/etc.) • 1-6.Equity/hierarchy of access? • (Timing and amount …) • 1-7.Advantages: • Seed of known quality • Small amounts / emergency seed timely available • Famers can pay for seed in a variety of ways.