Mixed Crop of Potatoes, Rye and Cabbage on Inis Meáin, Aran Islands, Co. Galway

REPORT ON THE PRODUCTION OF A GENETIC CONSERVATION STRATEGY FOR PLANTS IN IRELAND: CROP WILD RELATIVES AND LANDRACES

Mixed crop of Potatoes, Rye and Cabbage on Inis Meáin, Aran Islands, Co. Galway

Report to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine: Conservation of Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme for Food and Agriculture

Dr Tom Curtis

October, 2014

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. A total of 94 projects on plants have been funded since 1996 with 24 of these covering Irish Heritage Apple identification, characterisation, propagation and cultivation.
2. The future maintenance of the collections is somewhat uncertain due to lack of characterisation of some material, orchards being situated in unsuitable locations for healthy growth and the lack of curation of collections arising from staff shortages.
3. There have been 8 projects on Brassicas funded but the real challenge here is in characterising what are truly Irish landraces and then breeding them true.
4. This is also the case for landraces of cereals and 11 projects have been funded.None of these have been characterised with any certainty and having them breed true is also fraught.
5. The listing and collection of CWR has been the subject of 4 projects and significant gaps are in the need for the correct curation, routine viability testing and duplication of collections.
6. If duplications are to be lodged with other institutes such as it is vital that adequate back-ups are in place.
7. An urgent requirement for all those curating collections of seeds and/or plants is the production of a Procedures Manual.
8. The three main institutes with genebanks should formalise co-operation between them with a Protocol and countenance their auditing by an independent body with expertise in genebanks.
9. The focus for funding should be restricted to species of direct relevance to specieson ITPGRFA or are Irish landraces of long standing.
10. In the past, a few projects have been awarded to studies of modern cultivars and trees which do not strictly come under the remit of GRGAS.
11. There is a need for greater co-ordination within the genetic resources area in Ireland and a sub-group on Plant Genetic Resources be set up under the Genetic Resources Advisory Committee.
12. It is proposed that all data collected for all plant projects funded by GRGAS, including Landraces should be centralised in NBRDC in Waterford.
13. A comprehensive inventory of Irish Landraces is a priority especially for Cereals.
14. There appears to be huge potential for LR of apples, barleys and flax as there is an increase in craft cider and beer production.
15. The funding available to GRGAS should be evenly divided between the Animal and Plant areas.
16. It may be appropriate to look to appropriate private sources for co-sponsorship of projects.

REPORT ON THE PRODUCTION OF A NATIONAL GENETIC CONSERVATION STRATEGY FOR PLANTS: CROP WILD RELATIVES AND LANDRACES

INTRODUCTION

The importance of conserving Plant Genetic Resource was established initially under the Convention of Biological Diversity (1992) and underpinned by several subsequent FAO Reports, especially the Global Plan of Action for Plant Genetic Resources, European Community Strategies and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (2001). A necessary pre-requisite to this requires the production of a Strategy Document for National States so that inventories of genetic resources are made, priorities established, in situ and ex situ conservation plans are made and documented and all data are properly recorded in a standard manner for a wide range of users and stake-holders. To a certain degree, these have been done for Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces under the Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme (GRGAS) operated by the Dept of Agriculture, Food and the Marine but to date there has been no formal Strategy Document for plants in Ireland even though an internal document on the area was prepared by DAFF in 2004. Consequently,the aim of this project is to review the projects on plants carried out to date under the Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme, assess their success or lack of and identify gaps but the major part of the work has been on the preparation of a Strategy for the conservation of plant genetic resources in Ireland over future years.A complementary National Genetic Conservation Strategy Document for animals was produced by Sinéad McParland in November 2013, and it was obvious that such a document for plants would extremely useful. That should aim to provide a clear indication of what priority work and research needs to be carried out to ensure the practical conservation of our resources, together with appropriate recording and documentation. A further aim is to provide the DAFM Committee on Genetic Resources with a document against which they can assess the appropriateness and relevance to the Strategy of future applications to it for funding. These aims coincide precisely with Condition 4 of the Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme (GRGAS) Project Conditions (2014)

The specific Objectives of Project are:-

1. The production of a National Genetic Conservation Strategy Document for Plants: Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. It does not deal with modern varieties of plants used for intensive agricultural and horticultural purposes.
2. A complete review of the 104 projects, covering 17 separate areas, funded by the Advisory Committee on genetic Resources from 1996 to 2013 with a view to establishing how successful they were and to identify gaps which can be accorded priority in the National Strategy Document.
3. In this regard, the viability testing of seeds collected in the past of landraces and CWRs must emerge as one of the priorities
4. Provide the DAFM Committee on Genetic Resources with a document against which they can assess the appropriateness and relevance to the Strategy of future applications to it for funding.

The study focused on the following core areas:-

Centralised data recording and databasing; Inventories of plant genetic resources which are taxonomically robust for both CWRs, landraces and cultivars; Gap analysis, Conservation in seed and gene banks (ex situ); Conservation in situ and 'Hotspots'; Uses of landraces;. An all-island strategy for apple varieties; the need for a strategy for aquatic plants of relevance to agriculture and biodiversity; Sustainable utilization; Funding.

A Review of Progress within the Plant genetic Resources area to 31stOctober, 2014 and proposals for future strategic organisation and projects

I have taken the lead on the production of this document but obviously it is necessary and highly desirable to have inputs from all the major stakeholders and the following individuals and their departments and agencies have been contacted, had agreed to co-operate.Since 12th June, 2014, I have visited and spoken to all those listed below who have shared willingly with their information and expertise:-

Cara Mac Aodháin, Dept of Agriculture, Forestry & Marine, Backweston; (Plants Co-ordinator Advisory Committee Genetic Resources)

Dr Una FitzPatrick, National Biodiversity Data Centre, Waterford; (Databases, inventories and recording)

Dr Steve Waldren, Trinity College Seed & Gene Bank; (Co-ordinator seed and gene bank wild plants & some landraces)

Prof. Charles Spillane; Dept of Botany & Plant Science, University College, Galway; (Genetic resources research)

Dr Peter McKeown, Senior Researcher, Genetic Resources, Dept of Botany & Plant Science, University College Galway

Dr Aoife O’Rourke, Genetic Heritage Ireland (N.A.T.I.V.E) (former Chairperson GHI)

Lisa Duncan, Manager, Matteo Petitti, Garden Co-ordinator, Pat O’Meara, Orchard Manager Irish Seed Savers, Capparoe, Scarriff, Co. Clare

John Joe Byrne, Damian Brown, Maury Conway and Gary Duffy, Seed Testing and Plant Health Laboratories at Backweston, Co. Kildare.

Seán Mac Antsaoir,Agro-Food Biosciences Institute, Dept Agriculture and Rural Development (Northern Ireland), Loughgall, Co. Armagh(Apple varieties Northern Ireland)

Dr Mary Forrest, Dept of Agriculture and Food Science, University College, Dublin

Seán Ó Gaoithín, Head Gardener, Glenveagh Castle, Co. Donegal

Dr Susanne Barth, Research Scientist, Teagasc Crops, Environment and Land Use Programme

Oak Park Research Centre, Co. Carlow

My own expertise is in the conservation of genetic resources for plants, wild and cultivated: CWRs & landraces and aquatic plants.

It did not prove possible to meet with Dr Michael Hennerty, formerly Faculty of Agriculture, University College Dublin,and an expert onApple varieties, due to his continuing ill-health.

Most visits to individuals and agencies have involved T & S costs. The costs incurred have been outlined in a summary of expenditure to DAFM at when this Report was submitted.

One field visit to the Aran Islands had already been undertaken in July, 2014 to establish the current status of landraces of cereals being grown there and a further visit took place in early September 2014.

Nomenclature follows Parnell and Curtis (2012) for vascular plants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This Strategy Document is loosely modelled on the template proposed by Maxted, Magos Brehm and Kell(2012) Conservation and Sustainable Use of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture: A Toolkit for National Strategy Development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, Rome, Italy. The Toolkit can act as a template for the production of a National Irish Strategy but where necessary it was modified to reflect conditions particular to Ireland.

Aim of the PGRFA Toolkit (after Maxted et alia 2012).

The Toolkit places particular emphasis on how National Strategies for CWR and LR conservation can be developed and implemented to help nations worldwide to systematically conserve their vital natural resources. Particular emphasis is placed on:-

Creation of inventories;

Prioritization for conservation action;

Collation of taxonomic and threat data;

Genetic data analysis;

Ecogeographic surveying;

Gap analysis;

Establishment and implementation of in situ and ex situ conservation goals;

Monitoring of diversity conserved;

Making the critical link between conservation and use to ensure the conserved resource is sustainably exploited;

Promoting the use of diversity;

Data management.

It is important to stress there is no single method for developing National Strategiesfor CWR and LR Conservation because of issues concerning resource and baseline biodiversitydata availability, the local community where the National Strategy is to be implemented, aswell as the focal area and remit of the agencies which are responsible for formulating andimplementing the strategy. Nevertheless, the process of developing National Strategies forCWR and LR Conservation can be viewed as a series of decisions and actions that follow thesame basic pattern in all countries. The Toolkit should thus be viewed as a framework andguide for developing National Strategies for CWR and LR Conservation within which thesuggested steps do not necessarily have to be followed in the same predefined order, but inorder to develop an effective and efficient long-term National Strategy, have to beimplemented within the confines of the available data and resources.

Maxted et alia (op.cit.) state the following:-

“National agrobiodiversity conservation

Several decisions have to be made before starting to develop National Strategies for CWR and LR Conservation, and these will be affected by the availability ofexisting data and resources. The first step is the creation of a CWR or LR inventory fromexisting botanical or crop data. Once the relevant taxa have been identified and collated, it islikely that a prioritization step will be undertaken because the number of taxa usually exceedsthose that can be realistically actively conserved using the available resources. Next, theavailable baseline taxonomic, ecogeographic, genetic and threat data are collated for thepriority taxa. Specifically regarding LR, maintainers’ knowledge about the LR they grow is alsorelevant and should be gathered. Subsequently, a threat assessment and gap analysis study iscarried out, culminating in the formulation of a National Strategy with clear conservation goalsand recommendations for in situ and ex situ actions. As a result, a network of nationalconservation areas (genetic reserves for CWR and on-farm locations for LR) will be established,as well as ex situ conservation actions to ensure a safety backup of the genetic diversity. the Toolkit. The National Strategies for CWR and LR Conservation developed for any individualcountry aims at the macro-conservation level to maximise conserved taxonomic,ecogeographic and genetic diversity of the country’s CWR or LR, while at the same timepromoting its use. While at the micro-conservation level, effective conservation will beimplemented at the individual conservation areas, gene bank managers and farmercommunities”

To some degree, some of the above, especially the earlier stages of the Strategy, have been carried out by projects funded by the Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme operated by the Dept of Agriculture since 1996. So, the first task undertaken in preparing this Strategy Document was a reviewof all of the projects with a view to identifying which areas had been covered, how relevant they were to the conservation of CWR and LR genetic resources, assessing the success of projects, seeing which areas had not yet been dealt with and so identifying gaps which can be addressed in the future. This section provides a generic overview of progress so far with the details of what work has and needs to be carried out and it is presented in detail under the main headings for CWRs and LRs suggested by Maxted et alia (op.cit.).

A total of 94 projects on plants have been funded since 1996 and a summary of the project areas, the main researchers and the number of projects funded for that area since 1996 are presented in Table 1.Further descriptive details of all projects are presented in Appendix I.

Project area / Researchers* / No. funded
and percentage
of total
Heritage apples / UCD, ISSA,
IGRCT / 24-25.5%
Beet evaluation
& germplasm / Irish Sugar Ltd
D. Grogan / 3-3%
Brassicas / ISSA;TCD:DIT / 8-8.5%
Cereal varieties / GHI;ISSA;
M.Miklas / 10-10.6%
Cereals general / GHI;DAFF / 3-3%
CWRs-listing &
collecting / GHI / 4-4.2%
CWRs-databases
& recording / NBDC / 4-4.2%
Education / UCG;Fingal CC / 3-3%
Equipment / DAFRD;ISSA / 2-2%
Flax / ISSA / 3-3%
Forage-clover and
Perennial rye grass / Teagasc;UCD;NUI
Maynooth / 12-12.7%
Genebanks / DAFRD;TCD;IGRCT / 3-3%
Peas / ISSA / 1-1%
Potatoes / Tops;UCD / 3-3%
Sitka spruce / Coillte Teoranta / 1-1%
Trees-Elm, Birch,
Alder, Willows,Cherry / Teagasc;TCD, Coillte;
NBG / 8-8.5%
Wheat protein evaluation / UCD / 1-1%
Native Irish vegetables / ISSA / 1-1%
Total / 94

Table 1: Summary of projects funded under the Genetic Resources Grant Scheme 1996-2013

*Acronyms: (UCD=National University of Ireland-University College Dublin:ISSA=Irish Seed Savers Association:IGRCT=Irish Genetic Resources Conservation Trust:GHI=Genetic Heritage Ireland:TCD=Botany Dept and Genebank:DIT= Dublin Institute of Technology: NBDC=National Biodiversity Data Centre:UCG=National University of Ireland University College Galway:DAFRD= Dept of Agriculture, Food & Rural Development:NUI Maynooth=National University of Ireland, Maynooth: Fingal CC= Fingal County Council: Tops=Tops Potato Centre, Raphoe:NBG=National Botanic Gardens: Teagasc= Teagasc Crops, Environment and Land Use Programme,Oak Park Research Centre, Co. Carlow.

It can be seen from Table 1that just over a quarter of the projects have dealt with Heritage Apples and their conservation, followed by Forage projects at 12% and cereals at 10%. Trees follow at 8% with a similar value for the combined CWR areas of listing, collecting and databases. On the surface it would seem that all of the project areas are suitable ones for funding but a critical examination of Appendix 1which gives full descriptions of all projects, suggests otherwise. A significant number of projects have covered areas which are not of direct relevance to genetic resources conservation of CWRs and LRs for food and agriculture and in this regard those Forage projects which have dealt only with modern cultivars and not nativevarieties of White clover and Perennial rye grass stand out and that of Wheat protein evaluation. In addition, all of the projects which have dealt with trees strictly speaking are not covered by the remit of the Genetic Resources Grant Aid Scheme, this being especially so for the project dealing with Sitka spruce. It is suggested that these latter group of projects might be best funded by COFORD as has been the case for recent proposals within the tree area. Similarly, those projects concentrating on contributing to the improvement of forage crops for intensive agriculture should be excluded.

Overall, the bulk of the funding has gone to the Landrace area, especially to Heritage Apples, though some species such as Peas have been the subject of little work. In contrast, the area of CWRs has been the subject of less than 10% of the projects and this imbalance between that area and LR might be adjusted in the future. As the Heritage Apple area has been the subject of over a quarter of the projects-and approximately a quarter of the funding-should future applications be accorded less priority than those from other areas? Within LR, with the exception of the Heritage apples and Potatoes, there has been little in the way of preparing inventories of Irish LRs, or their characterisation and this is a gap which needs to be addressed. All of these issues will be dealt with below under the appropriate area and headings but two other priorities are addressing the curation, duplication and viability testing of all germplasm stored in the genebanks at Backweston and TCD. The other priority is that of co-ordination between all players in a formal manner as a sub-group of the Advisory Committee. This should also have responsibility for dissemination of information on what is current in the genetic resources area and in education.