3.1 Genetic Resources Science and Technology
3.2 Documentation, Information and Training
3.3 Summary of Conclusions for GRST and DIT Programmes
3.1.1 Overview
3.1.2 Genetic Diversity
3.1.3 Germplasm Maintenance
3.1.4 Germplasm Health
3.1.5 Global Forest Genetic Resources
3.1.6 In situ Conservation
3.1.7 Assessment
The Genetic Resources Science and Technology (GRST) Group was formed in January, 1997 from the amalgamation of what were previously two separate thematic groups; the Genetic Diversity Group (GD) and the Germplasm Maintenance and Use Group (GMU). The rationale for this organizational change was to integrate more closely conservation with sampling of genetic diversity and to provide a closer link to utilization. In addition, the small size of the groups at headquarters suggested that there were opportunities for achieving economies of scale. The change seems to be accepted by the staff concerned, though some reservation was expressed about the justification. However, collegial relationships were evident and no tensions have developed - confirming staffs' dedication and willingness to cooperate. The Panel notes the added logic to this amalgamation that effectively brings the core of IPGRI's technical work into one group - the more so because of the addition of three new major programme areas in in situ conservation, forest genetic resources and socioeconomic and cultural aspects of conservation that all require incorporation of genetic diversity and maintenance aspects.
The Panel has received Centre-Commissioned external programme review reports (CCERs) for the Genetic Diversity Group and the Germplasm Maintenance and Use Group that provide a rationale for the present programme and offer suggestions for the future. The Panel believes that both reports give a good and realistic survey of the Groups' work and concurs with most recommendations contained therein. Indeed the Panel used the information contained in the CCERs together with the information provided by staff in support of these in-depth reviews as its point of departure for what follows.
IPGRI's thematic activities respond primarily to the third of its Objectives (see Box 1.2): namely to develop and promote improved strategies and technologies for PGR conservation. The Panel analyzed the present programme in terms of relevance to address problems, primarily in the context of promoting national programmes of genetic conservation and use.
Essentially, this thematic group has to provide advances in PGR conservation and the relevant methodologies and knowledge base to do so efficiently. As this is a very broad objective, the Panel focused on a more limited objective; the support required for the development of national programmes, albeit without losing sight of the broader objectives of the programme, since, in the 'post-Leipzig' period, special attention to national programmes is considered justified.
An idealized stepwise process in the development of such a PGR programme is outlined in Section 1.3 above. In reality, of course, PGR programme development does not follow such a systematic process. More normal is that all activities take place simultaneously. Genetic erosion is a stealthy process that may go unnoticed for a long time while important diversity is being lost. However, the "steps" suggested above do offer a logical framework for the analysis of the GRST activities, including its cooperation with the regional groups.
Steps 1 and 2 (Surveying and Monitoring) primarily deal with genetic diversity. Step 1 is essentially covered by some of the activities in project C09 (see Boxes 3.1 and 3.2), locating and monitoring genetic diversity. Different approaches are taken, including agro-ecological surveys, to estimate genetic erosion, search for specific characters and their distribution in relation to environmental conditions, ethnobotanical surveys, and Geographic Information Systems.
In S.E. Asia, a recurring theme with conservationists is that, except for rice, in most other crops (roots and tubers, vegetables, fruits, medicinal plants) there is hardly any knowledge on what genetic diversity exists and so the assessment of what is actually or potentially lost is not feasible. In the absence of such data, it is difficult to convince policy-makers of the need for conservation, nor can one set priorities and realistically plan conservation activities. In order to advance IPGRI's current 'case study' mentality (Box 3.2 refers) and provide hard data for future research efforts as required by Objective 1, the Panel recommends that GRST undertake a systematic programme of appropriate diversity surveys in crops or groups of crops by country and region as a base line activity.
In making this recommendation, the Panel is motivated by two important considerations:
· the collected data are important for priority-setting in genetic conservation, for clarifying the relative (by region) importance for conservation of crops and groups of crops, and providing factual evidence in support of funding requests for conservation; and· regional activities in related ecosystems across national borders in joint activities will stimulate regional cooperation and possibly lead to regional genebank programmes.
This may introduce a new strategy in dealing with national governments and policy-makers in the promotion of national programmes, which so far mainly takes place through contacts at the policy level. The contributions made by IPGRI in producing country reports on PGR conservation in the context of the FAO International Conference and Programme on PGR Conservation at Leipzig (1996) were a good step forward, but are in the latter category. They were clearly highly relevant and served to gain recognition at the level of policy-makers that PGR conservation needed attention.
|
Box 3.1: Activities within the Project on Locating and Monitoring Genetic Diversity Objectives: · To locate populations possessing maximum
diversity |
|||
|
Activity |
Group origin of task managers |
Work in progress or planned |
Partners |
|
A. Developing and applying genetic diversity location methods
|
WANA |
Agro-ecological surveying of vegetable species in WANA |
National programmes in Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey |
|
SSA |
Test GIS methods for ex situ collecting and in situ site location |
under discussion |
|
|
GRST |
Revision of IPGRI collecting forms to include ethnobotanic data |
IPGRI regional offices and national programmes involved in collecting |
|
|
Americas |
Locating genetic diversity of Sapotaceae in the Americas |
Univ. of San Carlos, Guatemala; CENTA, El Salvador |
|
|
GRST |
Parameters for random sampling strategies |
under discussion |
|
|
B. Testing methods of measuring and describing genetic diversity
|
GRST |
Using molecular methods to locate diversity in coconut |
IARC-LARS, UK; PCA, Philippines; COGENT partners |
|
APO |
Linking ethnobotanic and genetic analysis in taro |
Institute of Biotechnology/Kunming Institute, China |
|
|
GRST |
Distribution of seed protein and RAPD genetic diversity in wild wheats in Iran |
SPII, Karadj, Iran; University of Tuscia, Italy |
|
|
C. Determining the effect of factors important to the extent and distribution of genetic diversity
|
Americas |
Breeding system, ecological and demographic factors in Phaseolus lunatus and in situ conservation |
University Gembloux, Belgium; University Costa Rica |
|
SSA |
Spatial and temporal distribution of diversity in forage species under stress conditions in the Sahel |
Free University, Berlin/University of Giessen, Germany |
|
|
GRST |
Variation in host and pathogen disease control factors in Stylosanthes spp. And Colletotrichum |
Universities in Louvain/Leuven Belgium and UNAM, Mexico |
|
|
D. Locating useful adaptive traits |
SSA |
Agro-ecological and geographic data and data on head smudge and drought tolerance in teff, and drought tolerance in millets |
PGRC/E, Ethiopia; ARI, Ethiopia University Nairobi, Kenya; University, Harare, Zimbabwe |
|
E. Developing methods for monitoring genetic erosion
|
WANA |
Developing methods to assess genetic erosion in vegetables in WANA |
National programmes in Iran, Jordan, Morocco, Syria, Turkey |
|
SSA |
Genetic erosion in rice from Tana delta area and in finger millets |
KARI, TARDA, GBK, Kenya |
|
|
GRST |
Measuring genetic erosion in desert-prone areas in SSA |
IFAD, FAO and national programmes to be determined |
|
|
Box 3.2: Case Study: Agro-ecological surveying of vegetable species in WANA Project: Locating and monitoring genetic diversity Activity: A: Developing and applying genetic diversity location methods Programme: Agro-ecological survey procedures developed and tested in Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Syria and Turkey using vegetable crop landraces growing in diverse environments with training on use of procedures. Effectiveness of survey procedures for diversity collection and analysis tested. Partners: GRU, SARD, Damascus, Syria; IAV, Rabat, Morocco; INRA, Rabat, Morocco; PGRI, ARC, Islamabad, Pakistan; SPII, Karadj, Iran; University of Ain Shams, Cairo, Egypt; Ministry of Agriculture, Ruis, Oman; ARARI, Menemen, Izmir, Turkey; PGRU, NCARTT, Jordan Direct Outputs: · Over 1500 accessions collected and conserved of Mediterranean vegetables from Morocco, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan · Methodology developed for agro-ecological surveying of vegetable crops in the WANA region. · Trained personnel (20 - 25) from national programmes. · Data on the morpho-agronomic characterization and evaluation of the collected material analyzed. · Knowledge about the agro-ecological distribution of genetic diversity in the surveyed crops obtained. Wider results for IPGRI: · The development of an agro-ecological survey methodology as a tool to assist partners in locating populations with maximum genetic diversity. · Increased knowledge on the distribution of genetic diversity · Identification of correlations between genetic diversity and agro-ecological factors. · The conservation of significant collections of vegetable crop germplasm of economic value in ex situ genebanks. |
But the problems and discussions generated in Leipzig concentrated more on issues of ownership and access, and seldom were concerned with the real issue in agrobiodiversity - the threat of genetic erosion. The existence of important genetic diversity was assumed, but little attention was directed at the continued existence of such diversity and its importance to agriculture. A recurring observation at the level of conservationists is that little is known of the genetic diversity of crops present and therefore little is known of what is being lost as agricultural development proceeds.
Hence the Panel emphasizes that inventorying and surveying the presently available genetic diversity should get a high priority. Through surveys, which generally are not very expensive and can involve local institutions, universities and students, problems of genetic loss and opportunities for conservation are highlighted from below. This may well convince policy-makers and research managers that action is needed to conserve that resource. At the same time such projects will have a direct relationship to the issue of ex situ - in situ conservation/management of genetic diversity and could provide important economic data. Involving students is an investment in present and future awareness of genetic diversity.
The second set of issues relevant to genetic diversity is in Step 3 (Building a Conservation Strategy); to understand the nature and distribution of genetic diversity within and between populations, and between geographic localities. This kind of information is necessary to arrive at rational sampling strategies for the purpose of genetic conservation.
The main activities in this area are work on morphological and molecular markers to estimate the degree of genetic diversity and genetic distances between populations, spatial and temporal distribution of diversity and others. IPGRI is well informed about external developments in this area, such as on a European Union project on estimating genetic diversity using advanced biotechnological techniques.
There is a problem here: often, those responsible for the collecting and sampling of genetic diversity have little knowledge or competence in population genetics, nor can they realistically appraise various methods available in modem biotechnology. They are field collectors, but they may also have responsibility for the regeneration/rationalisation of genebank collections. IPGRI's role here could well be that of a 'clearinghouse', i.e. translating existing specialised knowledge in technical manuals for various purposes and crops. An example is provided by the manual on use of molecular markers in PGR conservation work, to be published soon. Case studies are needed for types of crops, such as presently formulated for sweet potato in the Philippines. It seems to the Panel that we deal here with a set of issues that warrant a longer-term programme with clearly identified objectives in time to ultimately add up to a focused and practical set of programme strategies.
There are other issues that are central to conservation and utilization of PGR where there is a serious lack of knowledge. These include genotype X environment interaction (especially of landraces), genetic control of adaptation and distribution and location of specific characters. IPGRI recognises this and is involved in research in many of these areas, such as adaptation to stress, locating desirable traits in ex situ collections, etc. IPGRI is encouraged to continue to promote such research on a longer-term basis - particularly as it would seem that the in situ programme offers good opportunities to link such research to actual farmer situations.
Utilization (Step 4) also involves issues of genetic diversity. Mention should be made of work on establishing "core" collections, aimed at improving access to and use of genetic collections. Examples are the barley core collection and present work on core collections in sesame in India and China which receive both technical and financial support from IPGRI.
A new programme area for IPGRI is the integration of ethnobotanical and socio-economic perspectives into the work on genetic diversity and maintenance. Farmers' knowledge is being used in locating and collecting crop plant diversity. Socioeconomic and ethnobotanical methods play a central role in the Group's work on in situ conservation, and several partners with expertise in this area have been mobilized globally and within partner countries. Economic valuation work has been started and has gained credibility within the economics field. This work has implications for national genetic resources policy formulation and work is just beginning on the practical valuation of genetic resources in the field.
Gender, farmers' rights, and traditional resource rights are prominent issues, particularly after the Leipzig conference. The group has recently given priority to building a network of expertise on gender-sensitive approaches, that are also relevant to the in situ conservation programme. Modest activities on IPR and traditional resource rights are being carried out in partnership with representatives of local communities and are designed to help guide more equitable partnerships in conservation and use through a better appreciation of local people's rights and need for access. Finally, the Group's work on legal and institutional frameworks in support of fair and equitable exchange of genetic resources and distribution of benefits is modest but focuses on the technical bases for policy decisions and thus contributes to the current round of deliberations in FAO, CBD and other fora.
The Panel considers these activities to be extremely important. However, in view of experiences with social science research in other IARCs, there is a constant need for close integration of such research in the other thematic activities and this has implications for where the staff member is located. The important role of social science is that it can link the various disciplinary approaches with the needs and practices of people. In addition it provides access to farmers' knowledge to supplement formal knowledge, which is especially relevant in plant genetic resources.
This area is essentially covered by Step 2 and entails decisions on the most appropriate forms of conservation; such as in situ versus ex situ, field genebanks, in vitro, as seed, and cryopreservation and others. Another major area of concern is the whole issue of germplasm management.
Ex situ conservation methodologies and strategies are addressed in project C10 (see Box 3.3). Past work (in cooperation with the University of Reading) on seed storage behaviour of "orthodox" seeds (seeds that respond well to drying and long-term storage under low temperature) will be published in a compendium which will be extremely helpful to genebank managers. Attention is also given to storage of pollen which seems to be generally possible. Another option is ultra-drying of seeds (below 3% moisture content) with research projects in China, India and the USA.
However, there are many species, especially those with large seeds and tropical species, that have "recalcitrant" seeds that rapidly lose viability under standard protocols of storage. These include important economic crops such as coconut, cacao, tea, and many tropical fruits. Furthermore, many, if not most, of the species important to forestry (a new programme area for IPGRI), also have recalcitrant seeds. The physiology of the storage behaviour of these seeds is not well understood and is under investigation. Typically, species producing recalcitrant seeds, or which are vegetatively propagated, are maintained in field genebanks. Since this conservation method alone cannot ensure safe and long-term conservation, it is necessary to develop alternative approaches such as cryopreservation.
IPGRI is investigating various options, including cryopreservation. This technology is already put to good use for a number of vegetatively propagated crops and may hold promise for many other species with recalcitrant seed. Cryopreservation is receiving considerable attention with projects in a number of countries; South Africa (Trichilia spp), Cuba and Spain (citrus), Cuba (pineapple), Western Samoa (taro) and India (various recalcitrant and vegetatively propagated crops).
|
Box 3.3: Activities within the Project on Ex situ Conservation Technologies and Strategies Project Objectives: · to develop and/or refine technologies for the conservation of orthodox seeds, pollen, in vitro cultures with focus on low-input methods · to develop germplasm health procedures to improve health status of collections and allow increased exchange of PGR · to develop cost-effective strategies and methods for the management of germplasm collections · to investigate new methodologies, enhance existing methodologies and develop applications to improve documentation on PGR and use of PGR information · to produce and disseminate scientific and technical information through publication of technical bulletins, guidelines, compendia, descriptor lists, scientific papers and conference proceedings | ||
|
Activity 1 - A. ex situ storage technologies | ||
|
Group origin of task members |
Work in progress or planned |
Partners |
|
GRST, SSA |
ultra-dry seed storage |
CAAS, China; NSSL, USA; ICRISAT |
|
SSA, GRST |
sun-drying of seeds |
ICRISAT, Niger; KGB, Kenya; RBG Kew, UK |
|
GRST, SSA |
screening of tropical seeds for sensitivity to desiccation and freezing |
University of Natal, South Africa |
|
GRST, SSA |
cryopreservation of Trichilia spp. germplasm |
University of Natal, South Africa |
|
GRST, Americas |
cryopreservation of Citrus germplasm |
CNIC, IIC, Cuba; INIA, Spain |
|
GRST, Americas |
cryopreservation of pineapple germplasm |
ISACA and CNIC, Cuba |
|
GRST, APO |
cryopreservation of taro germplasm |
PRAP, Western Samoa |
|
GRST, APO |
cryopreservation of recalcitrant and vegetatively propagated tropical species |
NBPGR, India |
|
GRST, Europe |
cryopreservation of Allium germplasm |
IPK, Germany; RICP, Poland; RIVC, Czech Republic |
|
GRST, Americas |
in vitro culture and conservation of Swietenia |
CATIE, Costa Rica |
|
GRST, APO, Americas |
in vitro slow growth storage of sweet potato |
14 institutes in APO and the Caribbean; CIP |
|
GRST, APO |
in vitro collecting techniques for Dipterocarp species |
FRIM, Malaysia |
|
GRST |
status report on the development and application of in vitro techniques for the conservation and use of PGR |
Griffith University, Australia |
|
GRST, SGRP |
Proc. Consultation meeting on management of field and in vitro genebanks |
|
|
GRST |
Proc. Intl. Workshop on desiccation tolerance and sensitivity of seeds and vegetative plant tissues |
CABI, UK; University of Natal, South Africa |
|
GRST |
compendium on seed germination |
University of Reading, UK |
1 Activities B (germplasm health), C (germplasm management) and D (germplasm documentation) are not included in this example.
IPGRI has appropriately directed its attention to tissue culture research for genetic conservation. This includes research on in vitro (tissue culture) techniques on slow-growth media for such crops as Musa, sweet potato, and high-value forest (Dipterocarp) tree species; research for in vitro multiplication, and cryopreservation.
Solving the problem of conserving genetic diversity ex situ in cases of species with recalcitrant seeds or that are reproduced vegetatively is, however, only part of the problem. Application of the various techniques (except ultra-drying), are often costly and labour intensive, are dictated by the actual threat of genetic erosion, the ease in which such collections can be made, and the sustainability of such programmes after initial financial support ceases. There are many opportunities for research and case studies in this area; however, the Panel recommends that projects directed at developing and testing methodologies in genetic resources should be more than case studies, and should be linked directly to priority problems of actual conservation management in national and/or international programmes.
A major area where IPGRI has an important role to play is in germplasm management. Many countries are in the process of establishing or strengthening national PGR programmes and there is a need for these programmes to maximize efficiency in view of generally constrained funding resources. At present IPGRI has no special staff member with practical experience in the management of a genebank programme. Also within the GRST group, an experienced genebank manager could play an important role in directing the programme towards practical and real problems in rationalizing genetic resources management in national genetic resource management programmes.
Safe movement of germplasm is of fundamental importance, is of global concern, and is a field in which IPGRI has an important role to play. IPGRI's role is to advise and provide services to national PGR programmes as well as to national authorities involved with germplasm health and quarantine. Crop-specific guidelines for safe movement of germplasm are published jointly with FAO, and consultancy services are provided. IPGRI also is publishing a series of technical bulletins on various issues relevant to germplasm health, such as seed treatment, virus indexing and therapy, and seed health testing of forest trees. Close contacts are maintained with the various crop institutes of the CGIAR. A joint inter-centre project is being carried out to study the effects of pathogens on the longevity of seeds. IPGRI does not offer specific training in seed health matters, but participates in on-the-job training at IARCs and the IPGRI staff member has a number of teaching assignments at general training courses including courses on seed pathology. The increase in germplasm exchange dictates effective germplasm health management.
Global forest genetic resources is a new addition to the mandate of IPGRI, an addition adopted by the CGIAR with some reservations and concerns as to whether IPGRI could make a meaningful contribution. However the relevant project (C07) which is now underway is well-designed; and is appropriately linked to address, the perceived problems (see Box 3.4). Working relations have been established with a number of international institutes and organizations (CIFOR, ICRAF, FAO) and national organizations. The research is aimed at better understanding the major causes of genetic erosion, such as (i) over-exploitation (natural stands of bamboo and rattan in S.E. Asia, noble hardwoods in Brazil, high-value African timber in Cameroon and fuel wood species from Sahelian woodlands), (ii) products harvested from the forest by tribal people, and (iii) fragmentation of natural forests. It is still too early to make a judgement on this project.
A start has been made with the development of a GIS for forest genetic resources for developing decision strategies for targeting species, populations, and genetic diversity in forest ecosystems; developing methods for in situ conservation of tropical forest species; and, as part of the ex situ programme already mentioned, adopting effective conservation of tropical trees with recalcitrant seeds. All these activities are carried out by national and international organizations active in the field. Perhaps the major contribution of IPGRI so far has been to identify causes of genetic erosion and direct the attention of cooperating institutions to the options available to counteract such processes.
|
Box 3.4: Activities within the Project on Global Forest Genetic Resources Strategies Objectives: to develop strategic and collaborative research on the conservation and use of intraspecific diversity of useful forest trees. This includes developing: · improved methods for targeting species, sites and populations; assessment of threats to forests, genetic erosion and a generalizable decision making support system to prioritize conservation efforts; · improved methods and strategies for in situ conservation in tropical forests; · effective methods for conservation of forests trees with recalcitrant seeds, and · global information system on forest genetic resources. |
|||
|
Activity |
Group |
Work in progress or planned |
Partners |
|
A. Developing a global information system on forest genetic resources
|
GRST |
Software developed |
CIFOR/ICRAF/FAO/Consultant |
|
SSA |
Data entry |
National Programmes in SSA (KEFRI, IRA, CNSF) and AU/NL |
|
|
B. Developing decision strategies for targeting species, populations and genetic diversity in forest ecosystems
|
GRST |
Developing generalizable decision support strategies |
UBC, USP, CENARGEN, CIFOR, FAO |
|
GRST |
Locating genetic diversity in marginal Sahelian dryland |
CILSS; CNSF, Univ. of Ouagadougou; IRA, Cameroon; FRD, Ghana; OFI, UK. |
|
|
GRST/APO |
Locating genetic diversity of high value timber species in mainland Southeast Asia |
FSI, Vietnam; FD, Laos; RFD, Thailand; Asean Forest Seed Centre, Thailand; FRI, Myanmar |
|
|
GRST |
Locating diversity in multi-species forest ecosystems |
CIFOR, FAO, DFSC, ATSC, USP, CENARGEN |
|
|
C. Developing methods and strategies for conservation and sustainable use of GR of bamboo and rattan |
APO |
Selecting priority species; assessing patterns of genetic variation; developing ex situ conservation methods; breeding systems; training on taxonomy |
National programmes in Asia, Asean Forest Seed Centre, FAO, ICIMOD (for details please see case study box on bamboo and rattan) |
|
D. Developing methods for in situ conservation of tropical forests
|
GRST/APO
|
Conservation and sustainable use of forest genetic resources in Western Ghats with Soliga communities |
UAS Bangalore, ICFRE, Dehra Dun, India; UMass Boston, USA; CIFOR, ATREE, FRIM, Malaysia; AFSC, Thailand |
|
Impact of forest disturbance on genetic diversity in forest ecosystems |
ASEAN FTSC, RFD, Dept of Social Sciences, Thailand; UAS, Bangalore, India; FRIM, Malaysia |
||
|
Impact of forest fragmentation on genetic diversity in tropical forests: dryland and riverine forests |
CATIE, OFI, CIFOR |
||
|
Impact of selective logging in tropical forests; Costa Rican lowlands and African forests |
UCR-CIEDES, Umass. CIFOR |
||
|
E. Effective conservation of tropical trees with recalcitrant seeds |
GRST/APO |
Selection of 25 priority species. Training and planning workshop, development of screening protocol, development of seed development protocol, screening activities in partnership in 25 countries publication of a bi-annual newsletter. |
APO: D. FRIM, Malaysia, FRIM, Myanmar; LIPI, Indonesia;, AFSC, Thailand; ICFRE, India. SSA: South Africa; S. Gamene, CNSF, Burkina Faso; NTSP. Tanzania: Kenya FRI: AMERICAS: CATIE. Costa Rica; CENARGEN, Brazil; FTSC, Nicaragua; CENARGEN, Brazil; Herbario National de Costa Rica; CONIF/INSE-FOR, Colombia; USDA-FS. EUROPE/, DFSC; AUC, Denmark, RBG, Kew. Univ Reading, UK; Univ Paris 6, France; HRI, Wellsbourne, UK; CPRO, NL; WAU, NL; UFP, Germany |
|
F. Networking on forest genetic resources |
EUROPE |
Transfer of the experience from EUFORGEN to other regions such as WANA and SSA |
EUFORGEN countries. SADC, CILSS, CNSF, Burkina Faso; KEFRI, Kenya; PNSF, Senegal; ICRAF; ICARDA; FAO/FORM; NPs in SSA and WANA |
Bamboo and rattan and some high-value timber species were selected for case studies to indicate what can be done in research on genetic diversity and active conservation. In a very short time, IPGRI has achieved credibility in an extremely complex field of conservation linked to utilization of forest genetic resources. These achievements - including the logic of the approach - are recognised by the Panel. The Panel does not claim expertise in this area. However, it is impressed by the logic of the approach, essentially following the stepwise process used in the present analyses.
The in situ conservation project builds on the realisation (newly focused as a result of the attention afforded it in the Global Plan of Action adopted at the Leipzig PGR Conference), that farmers continue to play a major role in the conservation of agrobiodiversity. Institutional plant breeding primarily deals with major food crops, and the adoption of improved varieties is often restricted to the more favourable environments. Thus, plant breeders often do not seem to produce varieties that are adapted to the more marginal, stress-prone, and diverse environments. This has led to the recognition of the value of locally adapted landraces and different on-farm decentralised forms of crop improvement.
IPGRI has decided to enter into this arena. It has correctly identified the lack of knowledge of on-farm management of genetic diversity as a major bottleneck to strengthening such practices as part of overall genetic conservation. A project was formulated that includes work in nine countries to address this lack of information. Financial support from a number of donors was received immediately for three countries (Nepal, Burkina Faso, and Vietnam), while a number of other proposals are under consideration in Morocco and Mexico. Working through national programmes, the project focuses on linking farmer decision-making to measurable indices of genetic diversity on the farm. The Panel generally concurs with the approach taken. It notes that through the project, working relationships have been established between IPGRI, national programmes and NGOs.
The Panel feels confident with the overall approach taken in the GRST group. Major problem areas have been identified and a variety of projects initiated. It has been successful in directing research into issues that are directly relevant to understanding genetic diversity for the purpose of conservation and use. Arguably the most important step in research is identifying the right questions that need to be addressed. Finding the right solutions follows from this, and IPGRI has done this with some success. The same applies to research on conservation methodology, directing research at seed physiology and various methods of conservation involving top institutes in the field. Directing research on understanding genetic diversity for conservation and on methods of conservation was one of the major recommendations in the previous review, and the Panel recognises the excellent manner in which IPGRI responded to that recommendation. It emphasizes the continuing importance of maintaining a programme that integrates the different elements in a coherent way - and for this to occur, care will be needed to ensure that individual pieces of work fit into the overall strategic framework that has been developed. Further, a continuing dialogue will be needed with staff in regional offices and national programmes. The main message the Panel wants to convey to IPGRI is twofold: first, that it sees a need for the programme to focus more strongly on solving actual problems relating to national genetic resource management programmes rather than increasing academic understanding per se; and second, that results obtained in the field need to be translated into a form that facilitates a rapid adoption in the practices of national programmes.
In carrying out its activities, GRST operates through contracted research projects that embrace a wide range of agricultural and natural ecosystems and species and generally appear to be relevant (Appendix VII). Of course, it should be realised that to get projects funded, IPGRI sometimes has to accept compromises. However, the Panel would like to caution that this can lead to fragmentation of effort.
The Panel, in general, supports IPGRI's policy of strengthening its activities in the regions. However, it cautions against relocating GRST technical specialists to regional offices, unless there is a clearly identified comparative advantage in doing so: the holistic nature of PGR conservation research requires close interactions between staff in different disciplines - interactions that typically are best realised in a headquarters setting.
While promoting conservation and use is IPGRI's main responsibility, a number of projects are starting to involve utilization, notably the in situ conservation programme, COGENT, and INIBAP. Also, many national programmes are becoming involved in activities aimed at promoting the use of genetic diversity. The decline in public-supported plant breeding, reductions in funding for biosystematic research, and rapid expansion of biotechnology have led to a serious reduction in population enhancement and the development of new breeding populations using wild or primitive materials at universities and institutes of plant breeding. The Panel believes that genebanks may have a role to play in this area. There certainly is a role for genebanks in the newly developing approach referred to as "farmer participatory breeding", which also underpins the in situ conservation project.
3.2.1 Overview
3.2.2 Library and Information Services
3.2.3 Publications
3.2.4 Public Awareness
3.2.5 Germplasm Documentation
3.2.6 Training
The Panel has received the CCER on the Documentation, Information, and Training (DIT) Group. The Panel believes that the report (updated with information through interaction with staff) gives a good and realistic survey of the Group's work and concurs with most of the recommendations of the CCER. In the interactions with Group staff, the Panel found them to be a very well-motivated team and obviously dedicated to achieving the mission of the Institute.
The DIT work addresses IPGRI's first Objective, to strengthen developing country national programmes, and its fourth Objective, to provide an international information service on PGR (see Box 3.5). The DIT programme has been developed through a strategic planning process and is further described in IPGRI's Information, and Training strategy documents.
|
Box 3.5: Documentation, Information and Training Group The Documentation, Information and Training Group (DIT) is one of two Thematic Groups based at IPGRI Headquarters in Rome. DIT is responsible for the oversight of a range of disciplines relating to information and communications: · Germplasm Documentation The Group has a complement of 6 internationally recruited staff (including one Associate Expert), 7 locally recruited professional staff (two of which are temporary) and 5 locally recruited support staff. The DIT Group includes the Editorial and Publications Unit. DIT staff coordinate three projects within the IPGRI project portfolio: · Project C06 - Global capacity building and institutional support DIT staff also make important contributions to projects coordinated by other groups, e.g. activities on documentation methodology and application (in Project C10), public awareness (in regional projects and Project C20). DIT staff collaborate closely with colleagues in Regional Groups and within INIBAP with a view to maximizing the effectiveness of IPGRI's collective resources for information-related activities. Training activities are similarly carried out in a highly collaborative way among different groups. The DIT Group has organized two institute-wide information meetings (1993 and 1996) towards this end, the latter meeting providing the opportunity for all relevant staff to participate in the development of IPGRI's Information Strategy. |
The Information Strategy explains how IPGRI intends to achieve the fourth objective: it seeks to clarify the purpose, objective, and thrust of the Institute's information activities. IPGRI's information activities encompass Library & Information Services and Publications, Genetic Resources Documentation, Training and Training Materials, and Public Awareness. DIT is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the work programme, although it does not necessarily carry out all the tasks of that programme. IPGRI's information activities have contributed significantly to improved access by scientists in developing countries to relevant sources of PGR information.
Advances in information and communications technology offer new opportunities to enhance access to, and usefulness of, information. New information technologies are being applied in all DIT areas in order to enhance the production, management and dissemination of information. DIT has played a leading role in the development of IPGRI's World-Wide-Web site and is starting to disseminate electronic forms of IPGRI's information products and training materials via this web site.
IPGRI's information strategy is oriented to assist in building the information capacity in national programmes, so that they can better meet their own information needs. DIT will focus on national programmes' needs for information technology, as this technology provides the means to accessing electronic PGR information (e.g. bibliographic resources, electronic publications, training materials and databases), and to manage and disseminate their own information such as germplasm information. IPGRI's information activities could be enhanced by increased cooperation with other CGIAR centres in all DIT areas and some opportunities are discussed below. The Integrated Voice and Data Network (IVDN) provides a convenient infrastructure for sharing information with, and communicating with other CGIAR centres.
IPGRI Library & Information Services (LIS) aims to provide IPGRI staff with scientific and technical information. This is primarily to support IPGRI's projects but also to provide an important resource for the professional development of staff including Associate Experts.
As well as providing literature and bibliographic support to projects, LIS staff are also involved in providing information services to the wider PGR community. LIS is involved in project activities to produce and disseminate specialist subject bibliographies. These types of bibliographies complement the sponsorship of Plant Genetic Resources Abstracts to libraries of national programmes, one of the recommendations of the previous EPMR.
Resources for this support are limited, and one way to enhance services and use resources effectively would be to investigate the possibility of CGIAR centres jointly purchasing electronic information resources such as bibliographic databases and electronic journals and providing access to these joint resources via the IVDN.
The IPGRI publications are of high standard and cover a wide range, from incidental workshop reports and conference proceedings to technical manuals, descriptor lists, bibliographies, scientific books and others. These activities have contributed significantly to improved access by scientists in developing countries to relevant sources of PGR information. The Panel is impressed by the quality of these activities that, within the CGIAR, are recognised to be of high standards. The Panel is somewhat surprised that apparently all IARCs have their own publishing units with only very loose relationships and little or no sharing of resources. This also applies to INIBAP. Closer and effective cooperation with some sharing of tasks may well lead to a better use of total available capacity and human resources. The Panel suggests that IPGRI continue to explore opportunities for closer cooperation in publishing activities between the centres: an example could be co-publishing the SGRP-sponsored book Biodiversity in Trust. There is also scope for sharing facilities, staff skills and other resources to enhance the cost-effectiveness of this area.
IPGRI has a prominent role within the CGIAR system in generating and monitoring public awareness (PA) activities. This role has been enhanced by the increased international visibility of biodiversity since UNCED and of agrobiodiversity during, and since, the Leipzig conference. However IPGRI's PA efforts have met these challenges and ably represented not just IPGRI but the CGIAR system as a whole. As with publishing, the PA output seems to exceed what might reasonably be expected from such a small unit. The Panel is aware that steps are being taken within the CGIAR to promote closer cooperation in PA activities and concurs. INIBAP's activities in this area should continue to be incorporated into those of IPGRI.
IPGRI maintains a number of databases that contain metadata on plant genetic resources. These include databases on the structure of national plant genetic resources programmes ("country profiles"), germplasm holdings worldwide, and collecting missions in which IBPGR/IPGRI has been involved. IPGRI uses these databases to provide a vital information service for IPGRI staff and its collaborators. Increasingly, these databases are accessed by outside users.
IPGRI has, perhaps curiously, only played a modest role in the application of information technology to germplasm collection management over the past decade. Management of IPGRI appears not to have fully appreciated the importance of these developments and has assigned limited staff who have been occupied mainly with the management of, and support to, internal systems of documentation. Within the CGIAR, IPGRI, for various reasons, has not been able to play a significant role in germplasm documentation. The Panel considers this to be a major weakness in IPGRI's overall programme.
Information technology, in the opinion of this Panel, is a major tool available to genebanks to manage and allow easy access to genetic resources. An organization like IPGRI would seem to have a comparative advantage in the international context to exploit such technology and take a leading role in promoting appropriate use in genebank programmes.
Most genebanks have computerized documentation systems today - due, in part, to improved access to more powerful computers at affordable prices; to the development and ready availability of commercial user-friendly software; and to a growing affinity of genebank staff for computers.
The various IARCs have developed individual genebank documentation systems in the past but with little attempt to integrate or link the various systems within the CGIAR. The Stripe Study of Genetic Resources in the CGIAR (1994) noted the variable quality and diversity of computer operating systems and database formats within the CG system. The idea of using a management consultant team to examine the then-current status of other databases in the centres and to propose improvements and closer integration was put forward. The Stripe Study led to the establishment of the System-wide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP). The "internally" (by the SGRP) Commissioned External Review of the CGIAR Genebank Operations (1996) noted "the importance of efficient, user-friendly databases at the Centres that can be integrated into a System-wide network that is easily accessible internationally". A response to this is the present SGRP activity managed by IPGRI on the implementation of a System-wide Information Network for Genetic Resources (SINGER).
The Panel considers these to be positive developments, but wishes to state that it is somewhat surprised that the various IARCs and TAC took so long to realise the importance of harmonised genebank documentation systems accessible to users worldwide and inter-centre cooperation in this area.
A major contribution of IPGRI has been crop descriptor lists for a large number of crops and the importance of these lists is generally recognised. The concept and format of these crop descriptor lists is under constant review with the aim to enhance their usefulness: one example is the improvements made to the lists by indicating minimum sets of highly discriminating data. Another contribution is the commissioned development and publication of a two-volume handbook as a guide for national scientists to become familiar with building genebank documentation systems. This includes the Genebank Management System User Guide and associated software. The software can be used as a training tool and serve as an entry-level documentation system for genebanks. This handbook has been widely distributed and is in great demand.
However, this is only part of what is needed. Developments in information technology will continue to improve PGR documentation systems including improved access through the Internet to different databases and documentation networks. Current documentation systems used by most genebanks are generally flexible and inter-compatible, hence there is no need for harmonising hardware or software. However a basic requirement for efficient data exchange is standardisation of codes, formats and data structures accepted by genebanks. IPGRI has, jointly with FAO, taken the initiative to develop multicrop passport descriptors to address these concerns. This is a global requirement and IPGRI would seem to be well placed to take responsibility for that task. However, to sustain effectively developments such as these requires strengthening of the staff of IPGRI in documentation with at least one person experienced in genebank documentation.
IPGRI can capitalise on progress made by a number of national and regional programmes, notably within the European Cooperative Programme for Crop Genetic Resources Networks (ECP/GR). The Panel recommends that IPGRI strengthens its documentation unit and establishes, with SGRP, a Documentation Advisory/Support Group comprised of documentation specialists from various advanced institutions. The terms of reference for this Group should be to: provide programmatic guidance to IPGRI; advise on standardisation of codes, formats and data sets; facilitate documentation in support of surveys, GIS and farmers' data; assist in facilitating training opportunities; and incorporate the latest developments in information technology in the advice given.
3.2.6.1 Background
3.2.6.2 Achievements and impact
3.2.6.3 Future strategy
3.2.6.4 Assessment and conclusion
Since UNCED 1992 and Leipzig 1996, PGR has received increasing public and professional attention. There is likely to be an increased demand for training as national programmes are expanding and the field is broadening to include not just agriculture, but also forestry, agroforestry, and fisheries. The role of farmers in managing local genetic diversity adds new perspectives and needs for training. At the same time, increasing interest in PGR is having an effect on the curricula of professional training in many universities. It is opportune for IPGRI to position itself in this rapidly changing environment and this is being addressed in the context of the changes being made to IPGRI's Training Strategy (1994, and now revised 1996).
While training is an integral part of all four of IPGRI's major Objectives, it is particularly important in Objective 1 - to assist national programmes. Central coordination of training is provided by the Documentation, Information and Training Group, but responsibility for organising training is shared with regional groups. At present, IPGRI does not have a full time staff member responsible for overall coordination of training within IPGRI at HQ. Instead the duties form part of the already heavy workload of the DIT Group Director.
The number of people trained over the period 1991 through 1996 has increased from 62, to 316 per year with the major part of the increase resulting from the introduction, in 1994, of occasional short courses on various subjects related to PGR. There is a continuing high demand for specialist practical training which IPGRI seeks to meet as efficiently as possible but IPGRI alone cannot do this; hence the strong partnership emphasis in the Training Strategy. Also the number of individuals attending on-the-job types of training for genebank personnel increased from less than 10 in the period 1992-1994 to more than 20 in 1996.
The training is mainly driven by demand from the region and covers a wide range of related topics. IPGRI is developing training modules and teaching materials for use in short courses and university degree courses. The actual courses are usually organised in a cooperative arrangement between national, regional and/or international centres and universities.
Building on the experience of the long-standing course at the University of Birmingham, UK, IPGRI has been stimulating regional universities to establish M.Sc. courses in PGR conservation and use. At present, such courses are being established at the University of Zambia in Lusaka and the University of the Philippines Los Banos.
The training materials produced take advantage of the wide range of thematic and regional in-house expertise. IPGRI will always have limited capacity to carry out hands-on training and therefore makes effective use of its resources through the production of training materials - materials that can potentially reach a very large audience. Advantage is being taken of new technologies by complementing traditionally produced, printed media with electronic media on diskette, CD-ROM or materials placed on the IPGRI web site.
The Revised Training Strategy document indicates that IPGRI will continue to facilitate and promote the various forms of training on all subjects relevant to its mandate and no major changes in its activities are anticipated. The actual size of the programme will be determined by demand on the one hand, and available funding on the other, suggesting a market-driven approach.
So far, the Panel considers the IPGRI programme in training to have contributed significantly to the availability of better trained staff in various national programmes. There will be a continuous demand for the short technical courses.
For training in the actual management of genebanks, collecting and collection management and documentation, the Panel suggests that IPGRI establish institutionalised arrangements with the other IARCs, agreeing on regional responsibility for on-the-job training. Similar arrangements could be made with some of the more advanced national genebanks, both in the region and elsewhere, including in developed countries. By coordinating such training, through occasional workshops at training institutions, IPGRI would likely achieve a degree of cooperation and harmonisation in training that gives due recognition to the local institution's roles in a global network and thereby increasing their commitment. This suggestion builds on an earlier suggestion for establishing a PGR Documentation Support Group.
There would seem to be an added advantage to an approach involving national and international PGR programmes in methodology development and training in all aspects of PGR. It promotes an international orientation of PGR conservation at a time when the CBD concept of national sovereignty and ownership seems to have promoted an attitude of isolationism that threatens access of world plant breeding to total genepools, essential to plant breeding worldwide and their contribution to food production.
The pros and cons of a specialised M.Sc. training in PGR have been debated in the previous EPMR. The advantage is that well-trained people are available to work in and manage national programmes. Notably, graduates from the Birmingham course are found throughout national and international PGR programmes. However, the job opportunities in genetic resources programmes are limited, and specialisation reduces opportunities for change to other fields of research and thus positioning in the job market. Increased emphasis on the utilization aspects of PGR may give an advantage to professionals with a background in plant breeding and the Panel cautions IPGRI on its promotion of university degree training in PGR and concurs with IPGRI's approach to promote a limited number of regionally based MSc courses and encourage the inclusion of PGR issues in the more traditional disciplines such as agronomy, plant breeding, botany, plant physiology, plant pathology, entomology, and nematology. It is noted that, typically, professionals with experience in related fields, particularly in plant breeding, easily make the transition to working in PGR programmes with the added advantage of hands-on experience in utilization.
The absence of a full-time training officer means that IPGRI has slowed the pace at which it could implement its training strategy, and the Panel recommends the appointment of a training specialist officer in DIT responsible for all aspects of PGR training.
The GRST and DIT programmes cover a wide range of activities, comprehensively covering the four "steps" in PGR conservation programme development as indicated in Chapter 1. IPGRI is indeed moving over a broad front. Generally, the Panel considers scope and balance of the various activities to be satisfactory. It recognises the problems IPGRI has in maintaining such a balance where it often is dependent on special or restricted core funding by donors which sometimes are somewhat inclined toward new trends at the expense of more traditional activities. IPGRI's organization structure should reflect the holistic nature of PGR conservation and maximize opportunities for staff in different disciplines to interact and cooperate on all aspects of their work. This is one of IPGRI's main strengths and should be exploited to the fullest.
IPGRI is urged to maintain a clear focus on its primary task, supporting genetic conservation worldwide. Research projects should clearly state, in their objectives and expected outputs, their practical value and how the project will contribute to improved conservation and/or use within the national or international programme. The early translation of research results into practical methodologies for genebank programmes should have high priority.
IPGRI is not lacking in communication with the PGR community at large. However, the Panel feels that there is room for closer cooperation in actual activities on a more permanent and institutional basis. This would mean a sharing of responsibilities with both national and international genebanks in such areas as documentation, training, advisory services, identification of research needs, and testing new methodologies. Such sharing could further strengthen the participatory nature of its programme activities.
