Cwr at eucarpia


Published on

Published in: Technology

Cwr at eucarpia

  1. 1. Neil Palmer/CIATWild relatives in prebreeding: Fishing thegenepool with dynamiteHannes DempewolfGlobal Crop Diversity Trust
  2. 2. Human population growth2.5 4.1 6.1 8.0 9.21950 1975 2000 2025 2050Source: United Nations. 2007. World Population Prospects: The 2006 Revision.
  3. 3. Impact of humans on the planetCrop and forage species now cover roughly half of the Earths land surface (Kareiva et al. 2010)
  4. 4. Impact of humans on the planetCrop and forage species now cover roughly half of the Earths land surface (Kareiva et al. 2010)
  5. 5. Likelihood (in percent) that the summer average temperature in 2050 willexceed the highest summer temperature ever observed (1900-2006).Source: Battisti, D.S., and R.L. Naylor. 2009. Historical warnings of future food insecurity with unprecedented seasonal heat.Science, 323, 240-244.Impact of climate change on food security
  6. 6. Likelihood (in percent) that the summer average temperature in 2090 willexceed the highest summer temperature ever observed (1900-2006).Source: Battisti, D.S., and R.L. Naylor. 2009. Historical warnings of future food insecurity with unprecedented seasonal heat.Science, 323, 240-244.Impact of climate change on food security
  7. 7. Climate change and crop yieldsSource: Schlenker W and Lobell D. B. 2010. Robust negative impacts of climate change on African agriculture. Environmental Research Letters 5, no. 1: 014010.Predicted changes in total production (per cent) in SSA from climate change in 2046–2065relative to 1961–2000. The median predicted impact is shown as solid line, while the boxshows the 25–75 percentile range. Whiskers extend to the 5 and 95 percentile
  8. 8. Climate change is threating CWRpopulations in the wildJarvis et al 2008
  9. 9. The Trust’s CWR initiative
  10. 10. But why CWR?“When the crop you live by isthreatened you will turn to anysource of relief you can find. Inmost cases, it is the wildrelatives that salvage thesituation, and we can point veryspecifically to several examplesin which genes from wildrelatives stand between manand starvation or economicruin.”- Jack Harlan
  11. 11. But why CWR?Hoisington et al 1998Folke 2001
  12. 12. Need to show impactsDisease Resistance from CWR• Rice Grassy Stunt Virus (RGSV) was a major disease problem inSoutheast Asia (especially in Indonesia) in the 1970s• Resistance was found in India in several populations of a wildrelative of rice, O. nivarra.• Resistance gene was bred in the 1980s into major varietiesreleased by IRRI, resulting in hundreds of released varieties acrossmany rice growing areas.• Resistance is used in millions of hectares in South and SoutheastAsia and has reduced the occurrence of RGSV to minimal levels. We need sound studies to measure the precise economic impact.
  13. 13.  Numbers will likely increase with time, as value of cropsincreases and technological advances allow us to use CWRsmore effectively.Economic valuation of PGRStudy Parameters Figure(US$)Witt 1985 Annual benefits from diseaseresistance introgressed fromwild wheat species$50 millionPrescott-Allenand Prescott-Allen 1986Annual contributions of CWRto US economy fromdomestic and importedsources$340 millionIltis 1988 Annual contribution of genesfrom Lycopersiconchmielewskii$8 millionPimentel 1997 Annual contributions of CWRto US economy$20 billionAnnual contributions of CWRto world economy$115 billionHein andGatzweiler 2006Net present value of wildcoffee genetic resources$1.458billion
  14. 14. Fishing with dynamiteDynamite fishingPros:• Large catch possibleCons:• Extremely destructive• By-catchPre-breeding using CWRsPros:• Major trait alterations possibleCons:• Can severely alter phenotype• Linkage-dragOr perhaps a better analogy:“Its a bit like crossing a house cat with awildcat. You dont automatically get a big docilepussycat. What you get is a lot of wildness thatyou probably dont want lying on your sofa.”
  15. 15. CWR initiative• Identify, collect, conserve, document and use key crop wildrelative diversity for climate change adaptation (in developingcountries)• $50 million over 10 years pledged by Norwegian government,starting 2011Species Common nameAvena sativa OatCajanus cajan PigeonpeaCicer arietinum ChickpeaDaucus carota CarrotEleusine coracana Finger milletHelianthus annuus SunflowerHordeum vulgare BarleyIpomoea batatas Sweet potatoLathyrus sativus Grass pea/Common chicklingLens culinaris LentilMalus domestica AppleMedicago sativa Alfalfa/LucerneMusa acuminata Cavendish bananaMusa balbisiana Guangdong plantainSpecies Common nameOryza glaberrima African riceOryza sativa RicePennisetum glaucum Pearl milletPhaseolus lunatus Butter bean/Lima beanPhaseolus vulgaris Garden beanPisum sativum Garden peaSecale cereale RyeSolanum melongena Eggplant/AubergineSolanum tuberosum PotatoSorghum bicolor SorghumTriticum aestivum Bread wheatVicia faba Faba beanVicia sativa Common vetchVigna subterranea Bambara groundnutVigna unguiculata Cowpea
  16. 16. CWR initiative
  17. 17. CWR
  18. 18. Gap analysisDetermine gapsin collectionsModeldistributionsGathertaxonomic dataGatheroccurrencedataMake collectingrecommendationsGeoreferencingSource: concept and images from Jarvis et al. 2009. Value of a Coordinate: geographic analysis of agricultural biodiversity. Presentation for BiodiversityInformation Standards (TDWG), November 2009.
  19. 19. Collecting
  20. 20. Expert consultations
  21. 21. Expert consultations• There is generally a lot of interest and excitement about the use ofwild relatives amongst many breeders• There is a concern that in current funding schemes pre-breedingfalls through the cracks• Each crop requires a specific approach, considering:• Specific life-history traits of the crop• Crop-specific breeding goals• Capacity and „level of advancement‟ of community of breeders• Often little knowledge about trait characteristics of CWRs(challenge of phenotyping wild relatives (need to develop effectivescreening methods))• Interest of private sector in some crops
  22. 22. Pre-breeding options• First evaluate CWRs, then pick most promising genotypes and use inpre-breeding with cultivated lines, evaluate again• Assess genetic diversity of accessions, pick set of diverse CWRgenotypes and cross with cultivars, create BCs and RILs andevaluate• QTL (and MAS) approaches• Candidate gene approaches and allele mining in CWRs
  23. 23. Image by:Neil Palmer/CIATMeeting Participants/Signatories: Susan McCouch, Loren H. Rieseberg, Scott Jackson, Edward Buckler, Hannes Dempewolf,Luigi Guarino, Gregory J. Baute, James Bradeen, Paula Bramel, Peter K. Bretting, John Burke, David Charest, Sylvie Cloutier,Glenn Cole, Michael Dingkuhn, Catherine Feuillet, Paul Gepts, Dario Grattapaglia, Sandra Knapp, Peter Langridge, AmyLawton-Rauh, Qui Lijua, Charlotte Lusty, Jonathan P. Lynch, Todd Michael, Sean Myles, Ken Naito, Randall L. Nelson, RenoPontaroll, Christopher M. Richards, Jeffrey Ross-Ibarra, Steve Rounsley, Ruaraidh Sackville Hamilton, Ulrich Schurr, RuthShaw, Nils Stein, Norihiko Tomooka, Esther van der Knaap, David van Tassel, Jane Toll, Jose Valls, Rajeev Varshney, JudsonWard, Robbie Waugh, Peter Wenzl and Daniel ZamirOutcomes of meeting on the use of ‘omics’ to unlockthe potential of plant biodiversity11th to 13th of December 2012 at Asilomar, California
  24. 24. CWR genomics• characterization of diversity andstructure of wild relative accessions(population genomics)• better understanding of the geneticbasis and genomic architecture ofselection and adaptation• discovery of useful cryptic variationhidden in wild ancestors bydeveloping and genotypinginterspecific backcross populationswith elite materials• Showing the historic significance ofpast wild relative introgression forcurrent cultivars
  25. 25. CWR genomicsSome core questions that genomics can help us answer:Is it possible to discover useful cryptic variation hidden in wildancestors by developing interspecific backcross populationswith elite materials?Does the breeding value of a given wild relative accessiondepend on the genetic architecture of the trait(s) of interest?Is it possible to pinpoint specific regions of the CWR genomesthat harbor valuable, cryptic variation when crossed withcultivated lines and is it possible to predict these regions apriori?To what extent can „genomic selection‟ methods be applied tobreeding with crop wild relatives?
  26. 26. Big data and CWR„Big data‟ has significant potentialfor the exploration of geneticdiversity contained in CWR andfor more efficiently moving traits(genes) into elite germplasm foruse by breeders.A key challenge is to link uppassport, genomic andphenotypic information ongenebank accessions, which aretypically recorded and managedindependently.Image by:Neil
  27. 27. Advancing the use of CWRs• Need for long-term fundingschemes• Public/private partnerships• Information sharing is key• Programs that encourage thesystematic exploration of CWRdiversity are needed• Policies that facilitate access tocrop wild relatives are important
  28. 28. Thanks to ourpartners!