This document discusses policies and options for maintaining and distributing germplasm derived from projects to ensure important materials are not lost. It suggests the best option is for CGIAR gene banks to accept breeding line submissions, but criteria for submission needs clarification. If gene banks do not accept lines, materials will need to be maintained in breeding programs and local banks. The document also addresses planning needed to inventory resources, assess value, and costs of long-term maintenance. Looking ahead, it recommends assessing post-project sustainability plans, continuing product verification, and updating the IBP business plan within the new CGIAR reform framework.

1. Theme 5 Closing Comments
Brainstorming, Future Activities

2. Theme 5 Brainstorming Session
Maintenance, distribution and
sustainability of germplasm products
produced in GCP Projects

3. Maintenance, distribution and
sustainability of germplasm products
 Long term maintenance and sustainability of
products
 Cataloguing indicates availability but does not
incorporate an explicit commitment to maintain a
product to the extent possible
 Tools, applications, markers, databases, etc can
reside on computers
 Responsibility for maintenance, updating and distribution
is still essential
 Germplasm particularly vulnerable to loss
 Recurrent costs for storage, maintenance and
distribution
 No explicit statement line in proposals or product
delivery plans to address the issue

4. Maintenance, distribution and
sustainability of germplasm products
 Post-delivery commitment or policies incorporating
mutually agreed upon principles and practices
needed
 Issues
 Contact continuity
 Maintenance continuity
 Sustainability
 Product potential
 Public interest
 Human and physical resources
 Infrastructure
 Cost and cost recovery

5. What kind of policies and assistance are needed to
ensure that – no matter how varied the origins –
important germplasm derived from projects will be
appropriately maintained and distributed?
 Options
 National gene banks
 Highly varied capability
 Will generally take breeding materials in variable
amounts
 Generally not suitable for storage of whole populations
or reliable distribution
 Resource limited
 Regional gene banks
 Capabilities varied but better resources
 Generally accept breeding materials
 Probably not suitable for population storage
 Should be assessed for distribution capabilities
 Will Diversity Trust provide more funding?

6. What kind of policies and assistance are needed to
ensure that – no matter how varied the origins –
important germplasm derived from projects will be
appropriately maintained and distributed?
 CG Center Banks
 Most capable of storing, maintaining, distributing important
breeding materials
 Highly varied policies for accepting breeding materials
 Need standard policy
 May have some clarification after CG reform completed
 Diversity Trust to provide funding for additional materials
 Undefined as to nature of these
 Will likely only admit the highest valued materials if
breeding materials accepted
 Some may require entrance through quarantine incurring
full cost recovery charge-back fees
 GCP “Finishing” funds could mitigate

7. What kind of policies and assistance are needed to ensure
that – no matter how varied the origins – important
germplasm derived from projects will be appropriately
maintained and distributed?
 Breeding programs
 Could maintain all materials
 Annual grow-outs
 Costs mount to carry along materials of limited value
to originating program
 Without proper storage facilities danger of loss
 Limited resources for long-term distribution
 Generally no resources for long-term storage backup
 Storage resources generally suitable only for short-
term storage
 Limited space for populations

8. What kind of policies and assistance are needed to
ensure that – no matter how varied the origins –
important germplasm derived from projects will be
appropriately maintained and distributed?
 All options have disadvantages as well as
advantages
 Overall best option is CG Centers Banks
 But how to submit breeding materials
 Criteria not established
 Volume
 Kinds
 Will need a plan for proposal
 Volume
 Value
 Without CG Center Bank option will need Plan B
 Maintenance in breeding programs, banks available

9. What kind of policies and assistance are needed to
ensure that – no matter how varied the origins –
important germplasm derived from projects will be
appropriately maintained and distributed?
 Best materials should be backed up as much as
possible
 Program
 National/regional bank
 CG Bank/program
 Question is distribution
 Storage of backup relatively easy
 Distribution remains question
 How much is enough?
 Others maintained by programs and to the extent
possible in local/regional banks
 Distribution contact critical
 Time period

10. Planning
 Preferred
 Center Gene Banks accept breeding line (including
high value populations) submissions
 Most populations maintained
 Conditions of entry defined
 Likely to vary considerable
 Not all would be admitted
 Plan B
 Rely on status quo
 Center Gene Banks do not accept breeding line
submissions
 Maintenance in breeding programs and local
arrangements
 Finishing funds
 Define need

11. Planning
 Inventory of resources that will be produced
 Assessing value of material
 Time required for maintenance to ensure that potential is not lost
 Background dataset
 Impact potential
 Years
 Traits
 Assessing requirement for maintenance, sustainability
 Resources
 Cost
 Proposal (white paper) to make case
 Center Gene Banks
 Regional networks
 Diversity Trust?

12. Are charge-back programs for germplasm
requests an appropriate means of cost-
recovery and sustainability assistance?
 Generally acceptable, but:
 Depends on source of request
 Developed vs developing countries
 From developing countries charge-back may go
to government rather than specific program
negating cost-recovery
 Two charge-back levels necessary; single
fee may be inhibitory to requests from
developing countries

13. Looking Ahead
 Assessment of sustainability needs of all
products: Post-GCP plans
 Continuity of maintenance still should be verified
 Publish on IBP portal
 Finish uploading RI project delivery plans
into web-based planner
 Open to view and comment by project partners
 Facilitate interaction, monitoring
 On-site visits to project locations as possible
 Entry of products to new catalogue
 Continue verification process

14. Looking Ahead
 Participation in extensive survey of a wide
audience to determine what people now
envision the IBP to become
 How will the IBP fit in view of the CGIAR reform
 Necessary to construct a realistic business plan

15. Looking Ahead
 Updating IBP Business Plan
 First presented at IBP launch Feb 2010
 Focus on services
 Must now find a niche within new framework of
CRPs or an alternative
 Focus on capacity building, CoP?
 Build a new community within the IBP
 Focus and strengthening partnerships to facilitate
capacity building activities and molecular
breeding tool use within the framework of IBP
 More attention to implementation and operations