Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources and crop wild relatives of the United States

Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources
and
Crop wild relatives of the United States
Colin K. Khoury
National Genetic Resources Advisory Council (NGRAC) Meeting
April 21 2016
University of Georgia
Griffin, Georgia

Some early genetic resource introducers to the U.S.
“The greatest service which can be rendered to any country is to add a useful plant to its culture;
especially a bread grain. next in value to bread is oil” Thomas Jefferson, 1800

U.S. seed distributions 1862-1897
Period Number of seed
packages
Average number of
seed packages per
year
1862-1869 6,597,979 824,747
1870-1879 12,894,336 1,289,434
1880-1889 34,951,232 3,495,123
1890-1897 81,561,998 10,195,250
Seed package distributions by the U.S. Government to farmers
Fowler (1994) Unnatural Selection. Gordon and Breach, Amsterdam.
1897 – the biggest year in U.S. plant germplasm distribution history:
20,368,724 packages mailed
Examples of farmer driven crop development in the U.S.:
7000 varieties of apples developed the 1800s
135 significant wheat varieties grown in Ohio in 1859
1362 varieties of strawberry in New York by 1925

http://www.bioenergyconsult.com/introduction-to-pome/
Increasing challenges to food production
Neil Palmer/CIAT
Energy Bulletin 2007http://www.greenberg-art.com/

1961
Diets are changing
Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006
1985
Diets are changing

2009
Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006
Diets are changing

Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006
Diets worldwide are becoming more similar*
*for crops measured in FAO food supply data

• Major cereals, tubers and
sugar- centerpiece and still
growing in importance
• Oil crops, especially
soybean and palm oil-
major increases
• Regional cereals, tubers,
and oils- marginalizing
• Local crops also declining
Changing relative contribution of crops to diets
Khoury and Jarvis (2014) CIAT Policy Brief 18.

U.S. dietary change 1961 to 2009
Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006
Calories Fat

• Calories:
+ soybean (134%), other sweeteners (271%), maize (51%), barley
(5%), rice (152%), peanut (22%), alcoholic beverages (27%), rape
and mustard (1815%)
- wheat (-6%), sugar (-43%), other vegetables (-25%), beans (-29%)
• Protein:
+ peanut (+38%), maize (+30%), rice (+169%)
- other vegetables (-23%), beans (-20%)
• Fat:
+ soybean (+111%), maize (+102%), rape and mustard (+3708%),
peanut (10%), olives (+267%), cocoa beans (112%), sunflower
(+535%)
- cottonseed oil (-80%), coconut (-68%)
U.S. dietary change 1961 to 2009
Khoury et al. (2014) PNAS 111(11): 4001-4006

David Cavagnaro
Conservation and access are critically important
Castañeda-Álvarez et al. (2016) Nature Plants 2(4): 16022
http://www.fao.org/wiews-archive/img/gbanks130.jpg

David Cavagnaro
• Direct measures of exchange of plant genetic resources
among countries are not comprehensively available
• Plant Treaty MLS should help fill this data gap in coming years
• Use of germplasm is often proprietary information,
especially in the private sector
• The economic, social, and food and nutrition security
benefits derived from production of crop varieties have not
been well documented
Challenges in quantifying interdependence among
countries in plant genetic resources
(i.e., our excuses)

David Cavagnaro
• CGIAR and USDA NPGS distributions show increasing
international transfers over time
• Increasing use of breeding materials from diverse geographic
backgrounds in the development of modern cultivars of major
cereal and grain legumes
• Most of the biggest producers of major crops are not in the
centers of diversity of the crops, e.g.:
• Wheat: China, India, USA, Russian Federation, France and Canada
• Maize: USA, China, Germany, France, Brazil, and Argentina
• Soybean: USA, Brazil, Argentina and India
• Potato: China, India, Russian Federation, Ukraine, USA (FAOSTAT 2015)
Evidence for increasing use of exotic genetic
resources
(i.e., what we do know)
Khoury et al. (2015) ITPGRFA Research Study 8 (Rome: FAO).

Interdependence is central to the Plant Treaty
• “Alarmed by the continuing erosion of
these resources”
• “Cognizant that plant genetic resources for
food and agriculture are a common
concern of all countries, in that all
countries depend very largely on plant
genetic resources for food and agriculture
that originated elsewhere”
• “Recognizing that, in the exercise of their
sovereign rights over their plant genetic
resources for food and agriculture, states
may mutually benefit from the creation
of an effective multilateral system for
facilitated access to a negotiated
selection of these resources and for the
fair and equitable sharing of the benefits
arising from their use”
http://www.planttreaty.org/

Flores-Palacios X. (1998) Background Study Paper No. 7, Rev. 1. (Rome: FAO).
Estimating interdependence in plant genetic resources

“Primary regions of diversity” of crops
International Potato Center (CIP)

High diversity in primary regions
David Cavagnaro

Primary regions of diversity of major crops

Primary regions of diversity of crops produced and/or consumed by the U.S.
Primary region of diversity
of crops
Production
quantity
(tonnes)
Production
quantity (%)
Harvested
area (ha)
Harvested
area (%)
Production
value
(current
million USD)
Production
value (%)
Calories
(kcal/
capita/
day)
Calories
(%)
Protein
(g/
capita/
day)
Protein
(%)
Fat (g/
capita/
day) Fat (%)
Food
weight
(g/
capita/
day)
Food
weight
(%)
North America 10,906,985 0.7% 1,210,253 0.6% 8,645.9 2.6% 40.7 0.6% 0.4 0.4% 1.6 1.2% 42.7 1.2%
Central America and
Mexico 440,916,585 27.3%40,191,879 20.4% 70,298.0 21.0% 226.0 3.3% 4.3 4.5% 10.7 8.1% 69.3 1.9%
Caribbean 13,744,297 0.8% 3,766,020 1.9% 1,820.1 0.5% 24.0 0.4% 0.1 0.1% 2.5 1.9% 5.3 0.1%
Andes 34,470,536 2.1% 1,312,551 0.7% 17,980.4 5.4% 135.0 2.0% 5.1 5.3% 0.5 0.4% 268.3 7.2%
Tropical South America 17,528,874 1.1% 4,316,086 2.2% 3,920.8 1.2% 111.7 1.7% 3.3 3.5% 9.0 6.8% 48.7 1.3%
Temperate South America 1,292,593 0.1% 23,273 0.0% 2,260.0 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.0%
West Africa 21,890,391 1.4% 3,466,355 1.8% 4,910.2 1.5% 90.3 1.3% 2.5 2.7% 0.3 0.2% 33.7 0.9%
Central Africa 20,637,054 1.3% 3,300,015 1.7% 4,465.4 1.3% 90.3 1.3% 2.5 2.7% 0.3 0.2% 33.7 0.9%
East Africa 25,852,211 1.6% 6,284,486 3.2% 3,262.5 1.0% 64.7 1.0% 1.5 1.6% 5.2 3.9% 21.7 0.6%
Southern Africa 27,431,824 1.7% 6,027,565 3.1% 3,950.4 1.2% 30.0 0.4% 0.5 0.5% 2.4 1.8% 5.3 0.1%
Northwest Europe 37,186,740 2.3% 1,368,202 0.7% 12,113.8 3.6% 338.7 5.0% 0.9 0.9% 0.4 0.3% 152.0 4.1%
Southwest Europe 40,642,785 2.5% 1,768,832 0.9% 14,285.9 4.3% 390.7 5.8% 0.4 0.4% 7.7 5.8% 151.0 4.1%
Northeast Europe 37,186,740 2.3% 1,368,202 0.7% 12,113.8 3.6% 338.7 5.0% 0.9 0.9% 0.4 0.3% 152.0 4.1%
Southeast Europe 42,769,582 2.6% 2,031,089 1.0% 16,692.7 5.0% 390.7 5.8% 0.4 0.4% 7.7 5.8% 151.0 4.1%
South and East
Mediterranean 106,135,285 6.6%22,627,839 11.5% 29,342.1 8.8% 1096.7 16.2% 20.8 21.9% 10.4 7.8% 577.7 15.6%
West Asia 267,977,643 16.6%30,723,523 15.6% 31,153.8 9.3% 767.0 11.3% 21.3 22.4% 5.7 4.3% 520.7 14.0%
Central Asia 261,673,534 16.2%29,701,364 15.1% 28,450.9 8.5% 726.3 10.7% 20.5 21.6% 3.0 2.3% 533.3 14.4%
South Asia 40,038,995 2.5% 2,208,900 1.1% 8,708.2 2.6% 410.3 6.1% 2.2 2.3% 1.2 0.9% 158.0 4.3%
East Asia 126,519,118 7.8%33,192,758 16.9% 51,406.4 15.3% 662.0 9.8% 2.4 2.5% 58.5 43.9% 283.7 7.7%
Southeast Asia 40,702,420 2.5% 1,927,681 1.0% 7,909.2 2.4% 401.7 5.9% 1.7 1.8% 1.1 0.8% 142.7 3.8%
Tropical Pacific Region 1,031,687 0.1% 36,220 0.0% 406.5 0.1% 9.0 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.9 0.7% 5.3 0.1%
Not Specified 1,103,124 0.1% 91,050 0.0% 1,064.1 0.3% 419.7 6.2% 3.3 3.5% 3.5 2.6% 349.0 9.4%

Primary regions of diversity of crops produced by the U.S.

Primary regions of diversity of crops consumed by the U.S.

Calories
Australia and New Zealand
Indian Ocean Islands

The primary regions of diversity of major crops

Calories

Calories
Global interconnectedness
with regard to primary
regions of diversity of crops
important in food supplies

U.S. national agricultural production:
98.7% ± 1.1 of production quantity is foreign crops
98.8% ± 1.1 of harvested area
94.9% ± 1.1 of production value
Production
quantity
Degree of production per country of “foreign” crops
Global average of national agricultural production:
71.0% ± 1.8 of production quantity is foreign crops
64.0% ± 2.2 of harvested area
72.9% ± 1.9 of production value

Calories
Degree of consumption per country of “foreign” crops
U.S. national food supply:
89.9% ± 4.1 of calories are from foreign crops
94.7% ± 2.1 of protein
96.4% ± 0.9 of fat
84.2% ± 5.5 of food weight
Global average of national food supplies:
65.8% ± 1.8 of calories are from foreign crops
66.6% ± 2.1 of protein
73.7% ± 1.6 of fat
68.7% ± 1.4 of food weight

Use of “foreign” crops has increased over time
Production systemsFood supplies

Use of “foreign” crops is associated with diverse diets and
agricultural production systems

Use of “foreign” crops is associated with GDP

David Cavagnaro
• Formal seed system development varies among countries
• Breeding capacity varies among countries
• Decreasing national public sector and increasing international
private sector
• Crop genetic diversity is also distributed outside of primary
regions:
• Secondary regions and beyond
• Genebanks
• *but note, the increasing use of crop wild relatives and their relatively
low representation in genebanks still connect us to primary regions for
wild genetic resources
Limitations and caveats to our estimates

Distributions of crop wild relatives that are highly
under-represented in the world’s genebanks

Origins of accessions and recipients of samples distributed by NPGS
Regional origins and recipients of 3 million accessions distributed by the USDA NPGS, 2005-2015

Plant genetic resource distributions by
major germplasm distributors
Genebank
Average number of
samples distributed per
year
USDA NPGS, USA 304,249
CGIAR* (International) 44,669
IPK, Germany 28,529
AGG, Australia 8,911
CGN, Netherlands 6,512
AAFC, Canada 3,452
JIC, UK 797
*no CIMMYT data, and doesn’t include distributions to CG breeding programs
Distributions (backups) in Svalbard Global Seed Vault not included for any genebank

Regional origins and recipients of the 400,000 accessions distributed on average per year by the USDA NPGS, CGIAR, IPK, AGG, CGN, AAFC, and JIC
Origins of accessions and recipients of samples distributed by major
germplasm distributors worldwide

David Cavagnaro
• The world is interconnected with regard to primary regions of
diversity of crops important in national production and national food
supplies, and is becoming more so over time
• Primary regions are still directly relevant at least for crop wild relatives
• Broad use of “foreign” crops and extensive interconnectedness
among countries worldwide bolsters the arguments:
• For considering the genetic resources of important food crops as public goods
which should be openly available to all
• Exchange should be as politically straightforward and financially low cost as possible
• Native traits, at the least, should not be privatized
• For recognizing historical contributions to the diversity in our food systems by
protecting farmers’ rights to choose what varieties they maintain and exchange
• For international collaboration on conservation, availability and access to
genetic diversity of important food crops
• The U.S. is a major provider and U.S. users are major beneficiaries of
plant genetic resources distributed by genebanks
Interdependence: key messages

Importance of crops and their coverage in the Plant Treaty MLS
• Total global production
of crops not in Annex 1:
• 41.0% of production
quantity
• 27.0% of harvested area
• 41.2% of production
value
• Global aggregate food
supplies not in Annex 1:
• 28.7% of calories
• 19.0% of protein
• 61.0% of fat
• 43.4% of food weight
Blue: covered in Annex 1
Red: not covered in Annex 1

Crop wild relatives
of the United StatesGreg Baute

Crop wild relatives in the news

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300
CWR in global development targets
“By 2020 maintain genetic
diversity of seeds, cultivated plants,
farmed and domesticated animals and
their related wild species,
including through soundly managed
and diversified seed and plant banks
at national, regional and international
levels, and ensure access to and fair
and equitable sharing of benefits
arising from the utilization of genetic
resources and associated traditional
knowledge as internationally agreed”
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
Target 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved
nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture

https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/
CWR in global conservation targets
“By 2020, the genetic diversity of
cultivated plants and farmed and
domesticated animals and of wild
relatives, including other socio-
economically as well as culturally
valuable species, is maintained, and
strategies have been developed and
implemented for minimizing genetic
erosion and safeguarding their genetic
diversity.”
Convention on Biological Diversity
Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020
Aichi Biodiversity Targets

Crop wild relatives are valuable
Western corn rootworm resistance
from Tripsacum dactyloides
Salinity tolerance from
Helianthus paradoxus
Uses worldwide:
• pest and disease resistance 56%
• abiotic stress tolerance 13%
• quality improvement 11%
• yield increase 10%
• husbandry improvement 6%
cytoplasmic male sterility and
fertility restorers 4% (Maxted & Kell 2009)

Taxon Trait Taxon Trait
Corylus americana
Eastern filbert blight resistance and
other traits
Juglans major Rootstock for high pH soil
Helianthus anomalus Fertility restoration genes Juglans microcarpa Rootstock for high pH soil
Helianthus argophyllus Downy mildew resistance Juglans nigra Anthracnose resistance
Helianthus bolanderi Genetic stock Malus fusca Graftstock
Helianthus debilis Powdery mildew resistance Prunus andersonii Graftstock
Helianthus deserticola Downy mildew resistance Prunus pumila Graftstock
Helianthus divaricatus Broomrape resistance Prunus rivularis Graftstock
Helianthus giganteus Fertility restoration genes Ribes nigrum
Pest and disease resistance. Other
useful agronomic traits.
Helianthus grosseserratus Broomrape resistance Ribes uva-crispa Gall mite resistance
Helianthus hirsutus Fertility restoration genes Solanum stoloniferum Late blight resistance
Helianthus maximilianii Broomrape resistance Tripsacum dactyloides Corn leaf blight resistance
Helianthus neglectus Fertility restoration genes Vitis acerifolia Graftstock
Helianthus paradoxus Salt tolerance Vitis aestivalis Graftstock
Helianthus pauciflorus Cytoplasmic male sterility Vitis cinerea Graftstock
Helianthus petiolaris Verticillium resistance Vitis cinerea var. helleri Graftstock
Helianthus praecox
Downy mildew, rust, verticillium
wilt and broomrape resistance
Vitis labrusca Cold tolerance
Helianthus resinosus Fertility restoration genes Vitis monticola Graftstock
Helianthus strumosus Fertility restoration genes Vitis mustangensis Graftstock
Helianthus tuberosus Broomrape resistance Vitis riparia Phylloxera vitifoliae resistance
Hordeum bulbosum Powdery mildew resistance Vitis rupestris Phylloxera vitifoliae resistance
Juglans californica Graftstock Vitis vulpina Graftstock
Juglans hindsii Vigorous rootstock
Agronomic traits in U.S. CWR
Khoury et al. (2013) Crop Science 53(4): 1496.

2055
CWR are threatened
Jarvis et al. 2008
Agric. Ecosys. Environ.
126: 13-23.
1950-2000

58
Wild Pecos sunflower
Helianthus paradoxusWild squash Cucurbita okeechobeensis subsp.
okeechobeensis
Scrub plum Prunus geniculataTexas wild rice Zizania texana
Including at home

Gather
occurrence data
Make collecting
recommendations
Model
distributions
Process data
Determine gaps
in collections
Taxonomic
Geographic
Ecological
Choose species
or area
CWR gap analysis method
Crop genepool
(bean, potato, etc.)
National
Global

Inventory of CWR of the U.S.
• Inventory includes a wide range of
utilized and potentially useful taxa,
including both native and naturalized
species occurring in the U.S.
• List peer reviewed by U.S.
researchers, curators, breeders
• Inventory contains over 4,600 taxa
• CWR related to major crops
prioritized, along with U.S. iconic
wild crops (e.g. sugar maple, wild
rice, pecan)
• 250 closely related, native taxa
related to 38 crops = highest priority

raspberry 8
ribes 27
squash pepo 3
star anise 1
strawberry 8
sugar maple 3
sunflower 35
sweet potato 9
tepary bean 2
vanilla 2
walnut 5
wild rice 5
Associated
crop
Number
of CWR
apricot 2
beet 3
blackberry 36
blueberry 17
cherry 2
chestnut 3
chives 1
cotton 3
cranberry 2
fig 1
garlic 1
grape 28
guava 1
hazelnut 3
lettuce 9
lingonberry 3
maize 3
mate 5
peach 10
pecan 9
pepper 1
persimmon 2
pistachio 1
plum 17
potato 1
ramp 1
Highest priority U.S. CWR
(native close relatives of important food crops)

Distributions of priority CWR in the U.S.

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Further collecting priorities for priority CWR in the U.S.

• 219 species related to 36 crops are high priority for
collecting
• Collecting gaps in all 50 states + D.C.
State
# of HPS
with gaps
New York 87
Virginia 85
Tennessee 82
Texas 82
North Carolina 80
West Virginia 80
Pennsylvania 78
Ohio 77
Illinois 75
Georgia 74
New Jersey 74
Indiana 73
Arkansas 72
Kentucky 72
Maryland 72
Massachusetts 72
Missouri 72
South Carolina 72
Florida 69
Alabama 68
Number of high priority species for collecting, per state

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Number of high priority species (HPS) needing collecting per country
The U.S. is a global hotspot for under-
represented CWR of major food crops

Ongoing CWR-related plant explorations
in the U.S.
USDA-ARS Plant Exploration Program
• fills gaps in the NPGS
• recent explorations for CWR of potato,
quinoa, sunflower, bean, sweet potato,
and squash
BLM Seeds of Success
• collection of US native plant
materials for restoration
• seeds incorporated into the NPGS
for conservation and distribution
Wild potato, Arizona
Wild sunflower, Louisiana
Photo: J. Bamberg
Photo: K.A. Williams

Monongahela
National Forest, WV
George Washington National Forest, VA
http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/news/cranberry/index.shtml
Wild cranberry
Vaccinium
macrocarpon
USDA CWR collaborative conservation projects

• The U.S. has a lot of CWR, and large gaps in conservation
• To do:
• Comprehensive gap analysis ex situ and in situ
• Establish partnerships across and beyond agencies
• Conserve and make available CWR of important crops
• Our goal is comprehensive conservation nationally, and to
provide an example for other countries to meet their goals:
• Comprehensive and easily accessed information on CWR species, their
distributions, occurrences, and conservation status
• Broad diversity of CWR secured in situ and ex situ
• Germplasm of CWR readily available to global community of plant
breeders and scientists
• National strategy for long-term conservation of U.S. CWR established
and activated, involving broad partnerships across federal and state
agencies, tribal nations, NGOs, and beyond
Crop wild relatives: our goals and steps forward
Greg Baute

Dietary diversity:
Khoury et al. (2014) Increasing homogeneity in global food supplies and the implications for food security. PNAS 111(11):
4001-4006.
Khoury & Jarvis (2014) The Changing Composition of the Global Diet: Implications for CGIAR Research. CIAT Policy Brief No. 18.
Interdependence:
Khoury et al. (2015) Estimation of Countries’ Interdependence in Plant Genetic Resources Provisioning National Food Supplies and Production
Systems. International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Research Study 8 (Rome: FAO).
Khoury et al. (2015) Where our Food Crops Come from: A new estimation of countries’ interdependence in plant genetic resources. CIAT Policy
Brief No. 25.
Crop wild relatives:
Castañeda-Álvarez et al. (2016) Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. Nature Plants 2(4): 16022.
Khoury et al.(2013) An inventory of crop wild relatives of the United States. Crop Science 53(4): 1496.
Thank you!
c.khoury@cgiar.org | colin.khoury@usda.ars.gov

Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources and crop wild relatives of the United States

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

En vedette

En vedette (17)

Similaire à Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources and crop wild relatives of the United States

Similaire à Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources and crop wild relatives of the United States (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Interdependence among countries in plant genetic resources and crop wild relatives of the United States

Notes de l'éditeur