Maize in Asia Maize area (South and South-East Asia) expanding by 2.2%annually. 16.5 m ha (2001) to 18.0 m ha (2006) Over 80% of the maize is rain fed where productivity ishalf that of irrigated maize Erratic rainfall6007008009001000110012001979 1980 198 1 1 982 1983 19 84 1985 1986 1 987 1988 1989 1990YearRainfall(mm)1.01.21.41.61.82.0Maizeyield(t/ha)Rain fallM aize yield
Grim Reality……of geographical climate Climatic change effect decliningground water table => watershortage => drought India would have a water deficitof 50 per cent by 2030 whileChina would have a shortage of25 per cent.„ – ADB Addressing the problem ofdrought should provide thehighest technical returns torain-fed maize
Grim Reality……of geographical climate Each degree day spent above30 C reduced the final yieldof maize by 1% under optimalrain-fed conditions, and by1.7% under droughtconditions … data generated byinternational networks ofcrop experimentersrepresent a potential boon toresearch aimed atquantifying climate impacts …
Yield Gaps (t/ha) in Maize(Source : Edmeades et al., 2003)Attainable YieldActual Yield
Principle Outputs Yellow drought tolerant inbred lines Knowledge on drought tolerant donor lines andMARS technology Scientists trained in molecular breeding
We thrive on collaboration ……… Dr. B. S. Vivek, CIMMYT-India Dr. P. H. Zaidi, CIMMYT-India Dr. Fan Xingming, YAAS, Kunming,China Dr. Pichet Grudloyma, NSFCRC,Tak Fa, Thailand Dr. M. Azrai, ICERI, Maros,Indonesia Dr. Le Quy Kha, NMRI, Vietnam Dr. Eureka Ocampo, Institute ofPlant Breeding, UPLB, Philippines Dr. I.S. Singh, Krishidhan Seeds,India Dr. R.P. Singh, Syngenta, India
Project Details Grant Period:(Start: Nov 08) (End: Oct 2013)
Managed Drought StressIrrigation for germination Last irrigationSlide Courtesy: P. H. ZaidiGenotypic variability
Not a shot in the dark ......We have a history of breeding progressunder drought in CIMMYTWhat has acceleratedbreeding progress for DTin CIMMYT?● Managed drought screeningsites● Collaboration throughregional trialsAverage breeding progress (Banziger et al, 2006)Percentage yield increase of experimentalhybrids (n=42) over checks (n=41)0%5%10%15%20%25%0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 >9Average trial yield (t/ha)Yieldincreaseoverchecks++* * ****** ************Trial #: 18 41 38 48 31 27 21 22 20 7Low yielding environments High yielding environments
Inbred Line DevelopmentS1F2F1P1 P2xS6Genotype S1 familiesForm S1 x testerEvaluate test crossesForm C1 using genotype & phenotype dataGenotype C1 plantsForm C2 using genotype data onlyMarker Assisted Recurrent Selection (MARS)Genome Wide Selection (GWS)Pedigree BreedingC2AMDROUT
Why is MARS successful? Objective: maximize the frequencyof favorable alleles in the resultingpopulation, from which inbreds areextracted. “By changing the favorable allelefrequency from 0.5 to 0.96, theprobability of recovering the idealgenotype for 20 independentregions increases from one pertrillion to one in five.” (Eathingtonet al. 2007) Advantage of MARS is greatest fortraits controlled by many genes.MeanLines developed by pedigreeselectionLines selected for recombinationfrom C0 phenotypingCycle 3 MARS linesPopulation of random linesextracted from a crossMARS moves the mean ofthe selected population inadvanced cycles beyondthe original distribution bygreatly increasing thefrequency of favorablealleles
Not a shot in the dark ......Evidence for MARS Moreau et al. 2004. Experimental evaluation of several cycles ofmarker-assisted recurrent selection in maize. Euphytica 137:111 Podlich et al. 2004. Mapping as you go: an effective approach tomarker-assisted selection for quantitative traits. Crop Sci.44:1560 Bernardo and Charcosset. 2006. Usefulness of gene informationin marker-assisted recurrent selection: a simulation appraisal.Crop Sci. 46:614 Bernardo and Yu. 2007. Prospects for genome-wide selection forquantitative traits in maize. Crop Sci. 47:1082 Eathington et. al. 2007. Molecular markers in a commercialbreeding program. Crop Sci 47:S-154-S-163 (2007) Bernardo, R. 2008. Molecular markers and selection for complextraits in plants: learning from the last 20 years. Crop Sci.48:1649–1664.
Use of MARS MARS is being implemented by several multinationalbreeding companies to accelerate breeding progress inmaize An increasing number of maize hybrids in Europe andthe US originate from MARS approaches MARS is currently not being implemented in the publicsector, partly due to lack of access to high-throughput genotyping and data processing facilities In collaboration with the GCP, IITA, Cornell Universityand Monsanto, CIMMYT has initiated the world-widelargest public sector MARS breeding approach
Suite of Supplementary project/s Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa (DTMA) Project Mega pan-African project Biggest public sector MARS effort MARS know-how trickling in Affordable, Accessible, Asian (AAA) Drought TolerantMaize Project Asian Project Association mapping, MARS Bigger in scopeWe are not alone…………..
AMDROUT: Current Status Test cross phenotypic data from one seasonavailable for 2 populationsHeritability over 0.6 for grain yield attainable Genotypic data available Analysis is in progressDebate on QTL vs. GWS approaches
AMDROUT: Challenges PhenotypingLow heritabilities for many trials Germplasm ExchangeObtaining permits
Projects AMDROUT, B Vivek Maize in Indonesia M Azrai, ICeRI, Indonesia Maize reference set composition and evaluation, J Gethi Maize acid soil tolerance, C Guimaraes & D. Ligeyo MSV resistance in maize, J Derera Outline of the maize programme at IITA, M Gedil Outline of the Maize programme at Seed Co, E Tembo Outline of the Maize programme at Krishidhan, IS Singh Outline of the Maize programme at Syngenta, RP Singh Introducing the Syngenta Foundation AAA project, B Vivek
Group Members Jean-Marcel Ribaut, GCP Bindiganavile Vivek, CIMMYT Azrai, Muhammad, ICERI, Indonesia Bennet, Andrew, GCP Executive Board Danquah, Eric, WACCI –Ghana Danson, Jedidah Wamuyu, ACCI, South Africa Derera, John, ACCI, South Africa Gedil, Melaku, IITA Gethi, James, KARI – Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Guimaraes, Claudia Teixeira, EMBRAPA, Brazil Krishna, Girish Kumar, CIMMYT Robinson, Mike, Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture Singh, I.S, Krishidhan Seeds, India Singh, RP, Syngenta, India Tembo, Elliot, Seed Co, Zimbabwe Vengadessan, V, CIMMYT
Data Sharing All participants agreed to test the phenotypic database.(IMIS) GCP will help in putting existing files in database ifnecessary, either through visits by informatics groups or byemail Participants agreed to fill data file requests and share itwith GCP. All were enthusiastic about Samsung Galaxy tablets GCP will collect requests and distribute tablets (reasonablenumber) Tools will be provided through IBP on the condition thatparticipants will use it. Most people were willing to share data amongst themselves. GCP will take care of the implementation especially foraccessing database tools of the platform.
Breeding activities Fingerprinting exercise was presented. All participants were invited to submit their linesfor fingerprinting. It was recommended to targetelite and popular lines; about 30 lines per program.
Ontology After presentation of the maize crop dictionary andontology, Rosemary committed to indicate to participants theinformation that she would need, mainly to see if any majortraits are missing and to see if the definitions for existingtraits made sense. Group agreed that the trait list available on central databaseshould focus on those that are used routinely by breeders.Since this is based on Maize Finder and Fieldbook there areample number of traits which need to be properlycategorized. Need to make sure that DUS traits areincluded. Trait definitions are well defined in maize and thisshould be built upon. Groups were expecting some simple protocols to use the cropontology finder and curator system for eg. How do yousearch if your trait is already in the database?
Capacity building Eric and Jedidah presented about WACCI andACCI. Jean Marcel presented the 3 year capacitybuilding proposal. Participants were asked to think about nominationsin their programs and neighbouring programs onwho would contribute to this training. Whether one week would be sufficient for suchtraining should be considered. Also, more thoughtneeds to be put on grouping by country or teams.
Communities of Practice (COP) Why would one want to be in a COP? Crop was primary motivation. Inability to do certain tasks, need for mentorship,socializing, expertise. Components: confidence, trust, mobilize, support, openness,sharing, clear added value, good use of time, knowledge. Mike Robinson made the comment that delivery chain couldbe important in a COP implying that farmers should be a part. If crop COP is the entry point then people agreed that therewas a need for a regional component. If delivery chain is the key driver of a COP then it wouldhave to be region specific. COP based on language was suggested to be an important. The group present was not representative of the maizecommunity; therefore that linkages to DTMA and WEMA arerequired to ensure that more people are brought on board.