Skip to main content

Location: United States of America

Of wheat, weight, gluten and food intolerances

Written by on . Posted in Blogs.

Julie Miller Jones is a professor emerita of nutrition in the Department of Nutrition and Exercise Science at St Catherine University in St Paul, Minnesota. Any opinions expressed are her own.

A popular dietary trend involves the elimination of wheat- and gluten-containing foods inspired in part by the book “Wheat Belly” written by cardiologist William Davis.

“I’d like to make the case that foods made with wheat make you fat,” Davis wrote. “I’d go as far as saying that overly enthusiastic wheat consumption is the main cause of the obesity and diabetes crisis in the United States.”
Davis claims that wheat is addictive and suggests that a diet eliminating the grain and its relatives, rye and barley is the key to weight loss and a reduction in diabetes.

Davis states that the increase in obesity and diabetes in the United States directly correlates with the increase in the sales of wheat-based products.

There are several flaws in such an interpretation

First, it is an association – the increase in the rate of obesity also directly correlates with the sales of running shoes. Correlations simply show how things vary together. Attributing the increase in obesity to wheat prevents people from addressing the real culprit – caloric imbalance. Calories have increased and physical activity has decreased. The increase in calories does not come from a single food or food group.

“Food available for consumption increased in all major food categories from 1970 to 2008. The number of average daily calories per person in the marketplace increased approximately 600 calories,” according to the President’s Council on Fitness, Sports and Nutrition and statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau.
The general rise in calorie intake reflects increases in the overall consumption of fats and oils, sugars, cereals, meats, poultry and dairy.

At the same time, physical activity has dwindled to far below recommended levels. Thus, to suggest that wheat is the cause of obesity and that its elimination is the solution fails to address overconsumption of most food types and the under-consumption of fruits and vegetables and inadequate activity.

If wheat consumption were the culprit, Americans would have been fattest in 1880 when consumption was 250 pounds (113 kilograms) per capita. We would have weighed the least in 1960 (110 pounds of wheat per capita) and continued to gain weight up until 2000 when wheat consumption climbed to 145 pounds per capita. Since 2000, we should have been losing weight as per capita wheat consumption has dropped steadily to 133 pounds.

These data show that there is no correlation between wheat consumption trends and obesity trends.
Weight-loss diets that advocate the elimination of an entire food group such as wheat may cause initial weight loss, but – like many fad diets – rarely show long-term maintenance of weight loss.

In fact, studies confirm that the easiest diets to maintain are those that deviate least from normal eating patterns. They are also much more likely to be associated with long-term weight loss and maintenance of the loss.
Further, diets that include a balance of foods and do not have “forbidden” or excluded foods are associated with the greatest success in sustaining the weight loss.

Elimination of wheat and gluten can result in problems because wheat is a major contributor to dietary fiber, B vitamins and other nutrients.

Wheat and gluten in food products is unique among proteins. It performs its “magic” by adding elasticity and structure that holds gas to make delicious bread and baked products.

Allergies, Celiac and Gluten Sensitivity

Davis posits that the gluten in grain is toxic and not fit for human consumption.  While this is true for those with an allergy to wheat and celiac disease, it is not true for the population as a whole.

Medical studies show that while 35 percent of people believe they have a food allergy, only about 3 percent actually have true food allergies. For a true allergy the offending food protein (allergen) and an antigen in the body cause an immunoglobulin E reaction.

Of the 3 percent with allergies, only 0.5 percent of children and adults have been diagnosed with an allergy to one of 27 wheat proteins.

Celiac disease, an inherited autoimmune disease, was shown in 2008 to occur in one of every 133 individuals in the United States and is higher in some other countries. This level is much higher than was previously thought. This is partly due to better diagnostic methods, recognition of many symptoms that may affect systems besides the gut, and a documented increase in incidence. Nonetheless, many of those with the disease are not diagnosed and many who do not have the disease are self-diagnosing.

Non-celiac gluten sensitivity, a situation where a group of symptoms of discomfort occur with the ingestion of gluten, has been added as a potential syndrome. However, there is much disagreement about whether or not it exists, its potential causes and incidence. If it exists, incidence has been thought to be as low as 1 percent and as high as 30 percent with a recent study suggesting it may be 3 percent of the population.

Interested in this subject? Find out more information here:

Dieting and restrained eating as prospective predictors of weight gain. Link

The prevalence of celiac disease in the United States. Link

The incidence and risk of celiac disease in a healthy US adult population. Link
(Green PH, Jabri B. Celiac disease.  Annu Rev Med. 2006;57:207-21;  Rubio-Tapia A, Ludvigsson JF, Brantner TL, Murray JA, Everhart JE. The prevalence of celiac disease in the United States.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Oct;107(10):1538-44; Riddle MS, Murray JA, Porter CK. The incidence and risk of celiac disease in a healthy US adult population. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Aug;107(8):1248-55.  Kassem Barada, Abbas Bitar, Mohamad Abdul-Razak Mokadem, Jana Ghazi Hashash, and Peter Green. Worldwide Incidence of Celiac Disease.  World J Gastroenterol. 2010 March 28; 16(12): 1449–1457.)

Worries Over Wheat

The arguments presented by Davis in “Wheat Belly” and in another book titled “Grain Brain” by neurologist David Perlmutter, which states that carbohydrates destroy the human brain, have fuelled a negative view of wheat products.

Both authors claim that the wheat we are eating has been changed by biotechnology or contains genetically modified organisms (GMO).

They also claim that wheat is different from 100 years ago and contains more gluten and that it is more toxic. The statement about GMO content is false as there is no GMO wheat commercially sold anywhere on the planet.

In terms of gluten content, similar studies comparing old and new lines of grain conducted by the United States Department of Agriculture and at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada show that the gluten amount in wheat varieties more than 150 years old and current varieties varies slightly by year but the amount remains well within biological variability.  This shows that the level of gluten has not changes appreciably over time.
Wheat grain provides types of dietary fiber not widely distributed in other foods. For example, the soluble fiber found in oats and barley that has been shown to lower serum cholesterol and attenuate blood glucose is not found in fruits and vegetables to any great extent.

The recommended amount of dietary fiber is 38 grams per day for adult males and 25 grams for adult females. Getting that level of fiber only from fruits and vegetables (which have an average of 2 to 4 grams of fiber per serving), would require consumption of approximately 12 to 13 servings for adult males. That is at least three times more than the amount currently eaten.

Therefore, exclusion of cereal grains – particularly bran-rich cereals – is not only problematic to getting enough of certain fiber types, it also makes it more likely that an individual will fall far below recommended fiber intakes.

From a nutritional standpoint, this is a big concern at a time when only 4 percent of the U.S. population eats the recommended level of dietary fiber given that it is listed as a nutrient of concern by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010 issued by the U.S. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

Wheat area expansion faces a headwind requiring increased spending on R&D to raise yields

Written by on . Posted in Blogs.

 

Photo credit: Madan Raj Bhatta

 

Derek Byerlee is a visiting scholar at Stanford University.
Any views expressed are his own.

Over the last 50 years or so, the big increases in agricultural production have come through improved yields largely as a result of the Green Revolution.

From 1961 to 2011, per capita cereal production increased by 40 percent, while the amount of cropland per capita fell by half. In most regions, the total area of cropland has either reached a peak or declined. However, in three tropical regions, land expansion has been and still is a significant source of agricultural growth: Southeast Asia, tropical South America and sub-Saharan Africa.

Since 1990, wheat is the only major crop to experience an overall decline in area.

Looking to the future, how much land can be expected to come into production for cropping?

Currently, about 1,500 million hectares (Mha) of land is used for crops.

I project that additional demand for land will be 6 to 12 Mha each year for a total of 120 to 240 Mha increase from 2010 to 2030.

The higher projection allows a greater role for trade and thereby production by the lowest-cost producers who are often located in land-abundant countries.

These estimates are broadly in line with a synthesis by Erik Lambin & Patrick Meyfroidt who also include projections of the loss of land due to expansion of urban settlements and infrastructure as well as losses due to land degradation. Taking these losses into account, Tony Fischer provides an estimate of total additional gross cropland demand from 2010 to 2030 of 160 Mha to 340 Mha. Global models also suggest expansion of cropland to 2050 of about 300 Mha, given projected yield growth.

Is there enough land to satisfy demand? The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’s World Agriculture Towards 2030/2050 report estimates that some 1.4 billion hectares of currently uncultivated land that is not forested or in protected areas is suited to crop agriculture although they note that this is an optimistic estimate. A more conservative estimate of available land with at least moderate suitability for rainfed cultivation in low population-density areas – that is, non-forested, non-protected and with a population density of less than 25 people per square kilometer – is approximately 450 Mha.

At first glance, it would thus seem that projected demand for land (even under the scenarios of the higher demand estimates) over the next two decades can be accommodated by available uncultivated land.

However, most of this uncultivated land is concentrated in a few countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Central Asia and is often far from ports and roads.

A global analysis may also miss key constraints at the local level such as human diseases and unrecorded current land use that reduce effective land supply.

In addition, an expansion of land area of the order of 160 Mha (the lower-bound estimate of the estimated future land needs) could have significant biodiversity costs from conversion of natural ecosystems, even in the non-forested areas considered above.

Indeed, one of the sustainable development goals currently under discussion in international fora is to reduce deforestation to zero by 2030 – implying a closing of the land frontier. Finally with the exception of some areas in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, most of the available land is in the tropics and is unsuitable for wheat production.

Overall then, projections of future land availability for agriculture suggest a growing land scarcity, particularly for wheat, especially when taking into account that demand for food and feed will continue to rise with growing affluence in rapidly industrializing countries, as well as the use of land for biofuel feedstocks.

Growing scarcity together with high commodity prices have combined to stimulate global investor interest in farmland that underlies much of the recent discussion on intensification as a strategy to save land and concerns about a global ‘land grab’ by investors from land-scarce countries.

Wheat area is also being pushed out by other crops in many countries. Over the period 1993 to 2013, wheat area has fallen by 4.5 Mha, exceeded only by other winter cereals (barley, rye, and oats) that have collectively lost over 40 Mha.

During the same period, the area of oil crops (mostly soybeans, rapeseed and oil palm) has increased by an astonishing 100 Mha, maize by a hefty 53 Mha and rice by 20 Mha.

This year for example, North Dakota, a quintessential wheat-producing state in the United States, for the first time planted more soybeans than wheat.

In Argentina, soybeans rotated with maize have also displaced a significant wheat area, while in northern China, increasing maize area appears to be at the expense of spring wheat. Wheat area in the United States and China has fallen by 7 Mha and 6 Mha respectively since 1993. The major exceptions to these trends are India and Australia, where wheat area is up sharply.

All of this, of course, implies that increasing wheat yields will be especially critical to maintain its competitiveness and to save further land expansion into forests.

Norman Borlaug, the pioneer of the Green Revolution, long recognized that increased yields were not only essential to increasing global food security but also to saving forests.

This has now been enshrined in the environmental literature as the Borlaug Hypothesis. The real world is not so simple since there are situations where increasing yields may enhance crop profitability and encourage its expansion at the expense of forests. However, we found that just the CGIAR investment in germplasm is likely to have saved from 18-27 Mha of land from 1965-2000.

The bottom line is that increased spending on research and development (R&D) by national programs and CGIAR is a priority to achieving not only food security but confronting land scarcity.

None of the above considers the negative impacts of climate change, but a recent thoughtful analysis by David Lobell of Stanford University has shown that investing in R&D to adapt to climate change and maintain yields in the face of rising temperatures and increased drought is one of the most cost-effective ways to save forests and therefore mitigate climate change.

Surprisingly, wheat is the crop that faces the strongest headwind from both land scarcity and climate change. Wheat also appears to be grossly underfunded at the international level as measured by the budget provided to the WHEAT CRP – one of the lowest among the 15 CRPs. Tony Fischer, Honorary Research Fellow, at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), in a companion piece has shown that there are many promising avenues to higher R&D spending, both to raise yield potential and close large yield gaps.

 

Interested in this subject? Find out more information here:

Alexandratos, N., & Bruinsma, J. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision (No. 12-03, p. 4). Rome, FAO: ESA Working paper.

Borlaug, N. 2007. “Feeding a Hungry World.” Science 318(5849):359–359.

Deininger, K.W., and D. Byerlee. 2011. Rising Global Interest in Farmland: Can it Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits? Washington D.C.: World Bank Publications.

Fischer RA, Byerlee D, Edmeades GL. 2014. Crop Yields and Food Security: Will Yield Increase Continue to Feed the World? Canberra: Aust. Cent. Int. Agric. Res.

Lambin, E. F. 2012. Global land availability: Malthus versus Ricardo. Global Food Security. 1; 83-87.

Lobell, D.B., U.L.C. Baldos, and T.W. Hertel. 2013. “Climate Adaptation as Mitigation: the Case of Agricultural Investments.” Environmental Research Letters 8(1):015012.

Stevenson, J.R., N. Villoria, D. Byerlee, T. Kelley, and M. Maredia.  2013. “Green Revolution Research Saved an Estimated 18 to 27 Million Hectares from Being Brought into Agricultural Production.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Available at: 10.1073/pnas.1208065110 [Accessed May 13, 2013].

 

 Go back to: Wheat Matters

 

Overview of CGIAR Development Dialogues

Written by on . Posted in News.

Overview of CGIAR Development Dialogues

The inaugural CGIAR Development Dialogues will focus attention on the vital role of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, landscapes and food systems in achieving sustainable development. The one-day event will be held at the Faculty House of Columbia University in New York City on 25 September. A by-invitation-only audience of some 300 will attend. Thousands more will be included online through live webcasting and social media channels.

Background

2014 marks an historic opportunity to communicate the importance of research on sustainable agriculture to stakeholders involved in the climate change and development policy processes. In Paris in December 2015, the 21st Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP 21) will seek to agree on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. In September of the same year, the UN hopes to forge a consensus and agreement on the creation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and accompanying targets, in what UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has termed the post-2015 development framework and agenda. These two processes will help define the global development path of donors, civil society and policymakers in coming decades. Shaping, delivering and monitoring the targets set by these agreements will require not only new funding commitments but also the latest knowledge and innovations from the global research and academic community, in partnership with governments, civil society and the private sector.

Why CGIAR Development Dialogues?

The Dialogues present an opportunity to shape research and development for tomorrow’s food systems, landscapes and rural economy. The Dialogues are designed to influence policy and leverage the attention of world leaders, scientists, donors, media, civil society, the private sector, community groups and SDG negotiators on the vital role that agriculture, forestry, fisheries, landscapes and food systems play in sustainable development. The event offers an opportunity to forge a link between the experience of CGIAR, the Centers and CRPs and the implementation and achievement of the emerging SDGs. The event will take place in conjunction with the most important conversations on global development in recent years and will leverage the presence of key players at concurrent events.

Dialogue objectives:

  • Demonstrate the fundamental role of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, landscapes and food systems for achieving each of the emerging SDGs.
  • Highlight key areas of opportunities, including: improving livelihood opportunities for poor rural people; reducing risks in long-term food supply; improving nutrition; enhancing efficiency in food systems and renewable products’ value chains; investing in sustainable landscapes; conserving and wisely using biodiversity; and meeting the challenges of climate change.
  • Point to important gaps in knowledge and the need for public and private investments in research, outreach and capacity development.

Intended outcomes

  • Improved clarity for key decision makers on the importance of agriculture, forestry and fisheries landscapes and food systems in achieving the SDGs and climate agenda.
  • Raised profile for food systems and landscapes as cross-cutting issues.
  • Identification of research gaps to achieve the SDGs and targets under the climate agreement.
  • Commitments to investments in research and capacity development.
  • Strengthened partnerships with CGIAR.
  • Identification of key recommendations for further discussion and debate, to be delivered to the UNGA. 

Panel

CIMMYT and the WHEAT and MAIZE CRPs were asked to develop one of the eight panels that will take place at the Development Dialogues. Other Centers and CRPs (IRRI, ILRI, ICRISAT, the Roots, Tubers and Bananas CRP) were also invited to help develop the panel. The topic that we are developing for the event is “Global food security for 9.6 billion people in 2050: What does agricultural research (including breeding for major crops) have to do with it?”

Panel summary

After identifying key by-2050 food security and rural development challenges related to major crop farming systems, the panelists will discuss how crop production and agricultural productivity can address those challenges and translate them into agricultural research priorities. Panelists will outline the role of publicly funded international agricultural research and that of the private sector research and development in addressing those priorities. Finally, the panelists will discuss where the funding should, or could come from.

Among the key points that will be made during the panel discussion:

  • Crop productivity increases (breeding and agronomy) currently do not keep pace with demand. This will lead to further food price increases.
  • Food price increases will delay efforts to reduce poverty, perpetuate malnutrition and be an incentive for further deforestation.
  • Demand for food will increase fastest in low- and middle-income countries.
  • Most production increases will need to come from the developing world where climate change impacts will also be the greatest.
  • Today’s investment in international agricultural research will determine technologies and know-how available to farmers in coming decades.

Panelists/Key Areas of Discussion

Raj Kumar, the president and editor-in-chief of Devex, will serve as the panel’s moderator. Dave Watson, manager of the MAIZE CRP, will lead the panel. Other panelists include: Timothy D. Searchinger, research scholar at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University and senior fellow at the World Resources Institute; Rhoda Peace Tumusiime, African Union commissioner of Agriculture & Rural Development; and Natalie Rosenbloom, vice president of Sustainability & Signature Partnerships at Monsanto Corporation. Ashok Gulati, chair/professor of agriculture at the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations was also scheduled to be a panelist, but was just asked to serve on an Indian national commission that will be meeting at the same time. A substitute panelist may be added in the near-term.

New Scientist examines the gluten-free trend

Written by on . Posted in News.

It is estimated that nearly one in three people in the United States are living a “gluten-free” lifestyle (New Scientist, July 2014). This diet trend has been supported and encouraged by celebrities, athletes and influential people around the world. In the past five years there has been an epidemic of self-diagnosed gluten intolerance. Many are claiming gluten is a toxic addictive that causes bloating, various mental disorders, stomach pains, headaches and lethargy.

Gluten intolerance can be the result of a multitude of disorders, including coeliac disease. According to Coeliac.org , “Coeliac disease is caused by a reaction of the immune system to gluten – a protein found in wheat, barley and rye. When someone with coeliac disease eats gluten, their immune system reacts by damaging the lining of the small intestine.” Cutting out gluten means cutting out one of the primary food groups. Many gluten-free foods sold in stores are short on fiber and have higher sugar content, often making these products less healthy for non-gluten-intolerant consumers.
Only about one percent of the United States population suffers from coeliac disease, so why is one-third of the population going gluten-free and swearing off wheat even after the health risks? Non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) may be the cause. Many are claiming NCGS as a result of having no immune reaction to gluten but still experiencing bloating and stomach pain that went away after adopting a gluten-free diet.  Small studies have been conducted, and it appeared that NCGS is legitimate. Peter Gibson of the Alfred Hospital and Monash in Melbourne, Australia, was one of the first to study the effects of gluten with randomized tests. Even after his first test came back positive, showing that the participants who ate gluten were experiencing abdominal pains and lethargy, Gibson was not convinced (New Scientist, 2014.)

“The trouble is that wheat has more than just gluten in it,” said Gibson (New Scientist, 2014). What Gibson discovered was gluten in wheat was not causing the illnesses. Results pointed to the fermentable oligo-di-monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) found in wheat, which are also present in many fruits, vegetables and dairy products (The Guardian, 2014).

CIMMYT is running an online campaign to dispel myths about wheat, as well as raise awareness about the importance of wheat in the world. For more information visit the Wheat Matters website, and join in on the #WheatMatters conversation on Facebook and Twitter.

University of Wisconsin students experience Mexico’s maize and culture

Written by on . Posted in News.

The University of Wisconsin students met smallholder farmers in Toluca to view their practices first-hand. Photos: Luis Castilla Zetina/CIMMYT

On 9 August CIMMYT-El BatĂĄn welcomed a group of 22 students and three teachers from the University of Wisconsin for a week-long stay. The students are enrolled in the university’s course for a Global Health Certificate, which introduces students to a preventive, population-level, interdisciplinary approach to health promotion. According to organizers, the trip to CIMMYT served to “open the eyes of the students to the importance of agriculture and nutrition.”

During the last six years, Dr. Sherry A. Tanumihardjo has visited CIMMYT with students to expose them to the realities of Mexican maize and wheat production systems, as well as how the Center’s research is helping smallholder farmers increase their productivity and improve their livelihoods. During the program’s first day, CIMMYT specialists presented the work being done at the Wellhausen-Anderson Plant Genetic Resources Center and the Seeds of Discovery initiative, as well as the objectives and strategies being pursued by the Maize, Wheat and Conservation Agriculture programs.

Genetic Resources Director Dr. Kevin Pixley led a discussion to help the students make sense of the different areas seen during the day and how they all work together to fulfill CIMMYT’s mission. On their second day, the group traveled to the TlaltizapĂĄn experiment station, where Dr. Oscar Bañuelos explained the work being done in the Tripsacum ex situ conservation garden, while Thanda Dhliwayo described in detail the work that is being conducted with biofortified maize.

Later, the group travelled to Cuernavaca to learn about the work being done to reduce Mexico’s obesity and malnutrition problems by Dr. Salvador Villalpando, director of the National Institute of Public Health. On Wednesday, the group continued their cultural tour, visiting the National Museum of Anthropology and the Mexico City Historic Center. Previously, MarĂ­a Elena Campos had taken them to the pyramids in TeotihuacĂĄn so the visitors could get a better sense of Mexico, its origins and its rich history. The day ended at the Palace of Fine Arts (Palacio de Bellas Artes), where everyone had a chance to relax and enjoy a production of the Ballet FolklĂłrico de MĂ©xico.

Óscar Bañuelos demonstrates maize pollination.

On Thursday, the students visited the Toluca experiment station and were welcomed by Fernando Delgado, senior station superintendent. After briefly explaining what CIMMYT does in Toluca, Delgado took them to meet local farmers, where the students had the opportunity to watch, listen and talk to some of the people that CIMMYT serves, and to gain a better understanding of their problems and needs.

On their last day, the group visited the Santa Catarina field with Arturo Reyes Ramírez and learned about the nixtamalization process from Estela Flores. The experience had a strong impact on the students, who learned first-hand about Mexican maize production and consumption processes, from the fields to the dining table. They left with a greater understanding of how important maize is, not only as food, but also as a cultural phenomenon. Visits like this raise awareness about the importance of the research and work being done at CIMMYT. The students from the University of Wisconsin take home a powerful memory of the work that CIMMYT does to help the world’s poor farmers.

Study shows climate change could negatively Impact maize and wheat yields by 2030

Written by on . Posted in Features.

Global demand for food is expected to grow rapidly leading up to 2050, and the ability to meet such demand is of the utmost importance in order to maintain food security. However, a recent study shows projected climate change threatens to compromise the world’s ability to meet this demand – especially in global cereal yields – as soon as the next 10 years, given that the bulk of the demand will occur in the next two decades.

The authors emphasize the importance of this information for organizations that deal in international food prices, stability and peace. The study “Getting caught with our plants down: the risks of a global crop yield slowdown from climate trends in the next two decades,” published in Environmental Research Letters by David Lobell, an associate director at Stanford University’s Center on Food Security and the Environment, and Claudia Tebaldi, a research scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, used computer models to examine the potential impact of climate change on food yields in the next 20 years, particularly of wheat and maize.

Photo: A. Yaqub/CIMMYT

The models combined global climate trends with data on weather patterns and crops in order to estimate the likelihood that global agriculture would be able to keep up with increased demand under a changing climate. According to the study, under natural climate shifts the likelihood that agricultural production will take a downturn in the next 20 years is very low, but when projected climate change is factored into the equation the results are quite different. “Climate change has substantially increased the prospect that crop production will fail to keep up with rising demand in the next 20 years,” stated Tebaldi. The study found that “because of global warming, the chance of climate trends over a 20-year period causing a 10 percent yield loss has increased from a less than 1 in 200 chance arising from internal climate variability alone, to a 1 in 10 chance for maize and 1 in 20 chance for wheat.” Maize faces a greater threat from climate change than wheat due to the fact that its main production areas are more geographically concentrated, meaning that “large regional trends can have more influence on global maize than wheat.” It is important to remember that one of the major assumptions of the study is that methods to adapt to climate change are not implemented on a large scale in the next 20 years, i.e. “the locations and seasons of maize and wheat production do not change.”

The study suggests that shifting production to cooler regions could help to offset the impacts of climate change on yield, but implies that at the present moment these shifts “are not occurring fast enough to significantly alter the global pattern of maize or wheat production.” While the likelihood of climate change having a devastating impact on wheat and maize yields is not very high, at one in 10 and one in 20 respectively, it is a concern that the odds are considerably higher under “human-induced global warming” than under “natural climate shifts.” It is for this reason that the authors recommend that anyone concerned with food security or international stability be aware of the potential risk climate change poses to global food production. The full article is available at IOPscience.

CIMMYT, Oak Ridge scientists collaborate on food security challenges

Written by on . Posted in News.

Carissa Wodehouse/CIMMYT

On 20-22 May, CIMMYT hosted a summit with researchers from Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), a U.S. Department of Energy facility that is the largest multipurpose science laboratory in the U.S. and a committed member of the Knowledge Systems for Sustainability community of practice.

CIMMYT and ORNL began interacting in 2011, with CIMMYT leadership visiting ORNL in 2013. This summit was the formal realization of the commitment between the two groups. Bram Govaerts, associate director of CIMMYT’S Global Conservation Agriculture Program, gave an overview of the necessity for collaboration by referring to a recent National Geographic article, “Feeding 9 Billion,” that offered a five-step plan to sustainably increase the global food supply:

1. Freeze agriculture’s footprint

2. Grow more on the farms we already have

3. Use resources more efficiently

4. Shift diets

5. Reduce waste

Photos: AC Staff

The first four suggestions, Govaerts pointed out, were being directly addressed at the summit. Technology developed at ORNL will play a major role, through the improved use of big data, assessment tools, sensors and controls. One example described by Jay Gulledge, director of ORNL’s Environmental Services Division, is a laser-based infrared computed tomography spectroscopy tool that can read the greenhouse gas emissions of an area.

Virginia Dale, ORNL Corporate Fellow in the Environmental Services Division, addressed how farmers, data specialists and others are having different conversations around the same topics. “When people talk about food security, they mean different things; there’s no agreement in the world.” To create a common starting point, Dale described ORNL’s efforts to determine specific environmental and socioeconomic sustainability indicators that add value to the entire community.

Photos: AC Staff

On the second day, the morning was dedicated to creative, collaborative brainstorming to specify work for each of the five task areas. Stan Wood, senior program officer in the Agricultural Policy and Global Development Program at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, noted a recurring tension among all task groups between focusing on external audiences versus serving internal scientists’ needs. He described how the science community tends to ask for a model, while visitors to the Gates Foundation will ask “so what difference does it make?” Wood suggested focusing both on the practitioners (will it actually be helpful in the field?) and the beneficiaries (are they front and center?) to create a strong human narrative.

Molly Jahn, professor in the Laboratory of Genetics and Department of Agronomy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, reviewed the partnership potential including commercial and media groups, common resources and a focus on near-term rather than hypothetical goals. “We’re on the edge, and not everything we commit to or try works,” she said. “Challenges happen, and that is part of the experiment. Those challenges themselves are deeply informative.”

CIMMYT Director General Tom Lumpkin closed the summit, describing Jahn as “a living matrix maker 
 she gets us out of our silos.” He continued, “so much could be done if we had all of the data, all of the research projects that have disappeared into paper recycling and digital trash cans.” Acknowledging the senior CIMMYT staff present, Lumpkin emphasized that they are people who have spent time “on the ground, in the villages, who have looked farmers in the face. They can bring a lot to the discussion.”

President Obama honors Norman Borlaug’s work and vision

Written by on . Posted in News.

Julie Borlaug, associate director for external relations for the Norman Borlaug Institute for International Agriculture, and granddaughter of the late Dr. Borlaug, has shared with CIMMYT this letter from U.S. President Barack Obama honoring Borlaug’s life and work and endorsing the pursuit of training and advanced technology to help farmers face critical challenges such as climate change. Read more about the letter in this article from Agri-Pulse.

 

The Borlaug Summit on Wheat for Food Security: speaker spotlight

Written by on . Posted in Features.

By Brenna Goth/CIMMYT

Rachel Laudan learns how to use a grindstone (a Mexican metate). Photo courtesy of Rachel Laudan.

Food historian Rachel Laudan will explain wheat’s impact on world history at the Borlaug Summit on Wheat for Food Security. The Summit, which will be held in Ciudad Obregón, Sonora, Mexico, in March, will feature Laudan’s lecture “Wheat: The Grain at the Center of Civilization.”

Wheat, used in many of the most popular dishes across the globe, has changed the world, according to Laudan.

“No one would have predicted this of the hard-to-process seeds of this finicky, low- yielding grass,” she writes in a preview to her talk. “Nor would they have predicted that processing wheat would have encouraged new forms of economic organization, expressed political and social status and symbolized moral and religious beliefs.”

She recently released the book Cuisine and Empire: Cooking in World History, a story of how food is interconnected with economies, beliefs, social structures and politics throughout time and across the world. The book is a finalist for the International Association of Culinary Professionals 2014 Food Writing Awards.  Laudan describes her inspiration on her blog.

Here, Laudan has provided us with an excerpt of the book focused on the difficulties of grinding wheat:

When I was a little girl, my father decided to make some flour from the wheat we had grown on the farm. He tried pounding it with a pestle and mortar but all he got was broken grains, not flour. He put it through the hand mincer screwed to the edge of the table with the same result. Finally, he attacked it with a hammer on the flagstone floor. After he gave up, defeated, my mother cleared up the mess. It was sobering to realize that if the commercial millers vanished, we could have starved even with barns full of sacks of wheat.

To turn wheat into flour, you have to shear, not pound, the hard grains, which requires a grindstone, as the people of Lake Kinneret had discovered. A friend in Mexico, where hand grinding still goes on, showed me how it worked. She knelt at the upper end of a grindstone, called a metate – a saddle-shaped platform on three inverted pyramidal legs, hewn from a single piece of volcanic rock. She mounded a handful of barley, took the mano, a stone shaped like a squared-off rolling pin, in both hands with her thumbs facing back to nudge the grain into place, and, using the whole weight of her upper body, sheared the mano over the grain. After half a dozen passes, she had broken the grains, which now clustered at the bottom end of the metate. Carefully scraping them up with her fingertips, she moved them back to the top, and started shearing again, this time producing white streaks of flour. By the time she had sheared the grain from top to bottom five or six times, she had produced a handful of flour.

Grinding may look easy, and it is, for the first ten minutes. To grind a quantity of grain, though, as I found out when I tried, takes skill, control, physical strength, and time. I was quickly panting, sweaty, and dizzy, my hair in my eyes, and the mano slipping at awkward angles. Grinding is hard on the knees, hips, back, shoulders, and elbows, causing arthritis and bone damage. Grinding is lonely, too exhausting to allow for chatter. Kneeling to grind with the breasts swinging can be seen as submissive, demeaning, and sexually provocative, as lascivious eighteenth- and nineteenth-century illustrations of Mexican women grinding make clear. The heavy labor was relegated to women, convicts, and slaves, called “grinding slaves” in the technical language of seventh-century English court documents. Even today Mexican women in remote villages grind five hours daily to prepare enough maize for a family of five or six. For generation upon generation of grinders in the bread-eating parts of the world, the author of Genesis (3:19) had it nailed. “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”

You can purchase the book through the University of California Press or Amazon. For more thoughts from Rachel Laudan, check out her website and read her blog.

See all of the Summit speakers here.

Mathematical models could further CIMMYT’s reach

Written by on . Posted in Features.

Mathematical models could boost CIMMYT’s impact on Mexico, a leading scientist in the United States said last month. Carlos Castillo-Chavez, a Mexican-born scientist and professor at Arizona State University, visited El Batán from 21 to 23 August to meet with the staff of the MasAgro program and the Biometrics and Statistics Unit. His trip focused on learning about and giving input on CIMMYT programs as well as seeking opportunities for collaboration with ASU.

Castillo-Chavez is part of U.S. President Barack Obama’s Committee on the National Medal of Science, whose members help select medal candidates from among top U.S. scientists. Castillo-Chavez grew up in Mexico City with interests in theater and literature but thought he would be more successful pursuing math. He moved to the United States in 1974 and worked odd jobs before starting college in Wisconsin and later earning a PhD in mathematics from the University of Wisconsin- Madison. He first visited CIMMYT about two decades ago and was the PhD adviser at Cornell University for Carlos Hernández, the head of CIMMYT’s Biometrics and Statistics Unit. Castillo-Chavez’s research focuses on the intersection between math, natural sciences, and social sciences. He studies disease evolution and social landscapes, including tuberculosis and SARS, the role of mass transit systems in the spread of influenza in Mexico, and “social diseases” such as drinking and drug use. Castillo- Chavez founded the Mathematical, Computational and Modeling Sciences Center at ASU and has received various awards at the national level for his research, teaching, and mentorship of minority students.

Bringing research to the people it could benefit is often a complicated and political process, Castillo- Chavez said. Scientists have the responsibility to communicate their research to the public, but policymakers set the course for “trendy” research topics. It’s an issue that needs to change, he said. And it could change with more interdisciplinary programs that have direct ties to and benefits for society. “Most problems of interest to Mexico don’t always apply to what’s current or hot in international academia,” Castillo- Chavez said. “There is no reason why Mexico should not have its own research agenda that may or may not intersect with the U.S.” He said during the visit that his research on contagion and how information spreads applies to the work CIMMYT is doing. Mathematical models can be used to study and increase the impact CIMMYT’s research has on Mexico by assessing the culture and identifying obstacles, he said. By communicating the research to enough people, “a culture change takes place where farmers and politicians are in constant communication to implement CIMMYT research,” Castillo- Chavez said. ASU and CIMMYT’s Biometrics and Statistics Unit could collaborate on this research by mentoring and training young people who would work closely with both institutions, he said, adding that he’s interested in exploring those possibilities.

During his visit, Castillo-Chavez learned MasAgro is an example of a project that targets a local population, he said. But the challenge with all advancements is finding the right leaders to put them into place. “It’s clear the research could generate dramatic improvements if implemented,” he said. “Nationally, we would see incredible advances in sustainable agriculture.”

“You go to the field.” U.S. Borlaug Fellows in Global Food Security

Written by on . Posted in News.

When asked how you become a successful wheat breeder, Dr. Norman E. Borlaug replied, “Well, you go to the field. You go to the field again, and then you go to the field. When the wheat plants start to talk to you, you know you have made it.” The Nobel Peace Prize, the Congressional Gold Medal, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom were awarded to Dr. Borlaug for saving the lives of over one billion through his efforts. Borlaug’s legacy continues today through the U.S. Borlaug Fellows in Global Food Security Program at the Center for Global Food Security, Purdue University, providing graduate students the opportunity to “go to the field” and become successful scientists in their own right.

Funded by USAID, the Borlaug Fellowship provides graduate students the opportunity to collaborate with agricultural scientists in developing nations. The program fosters connections between scientists internationally, while furthering research and developing community around important agricultural themes, such as production, natural resource conservation, and development. With a focus on interdisciplinary and cross-cultural experiences, students benefit from the ability to practice their science on the ground in an international setting, preparing them to become important members of the global scientific community. Doctoral candidates Ariel N. Rivers of Pennsylvania State University and Sean M. Thompson of Texas A&M University were given the opportunity to “go to the field” during the 2013 field season in partnership with CIMMYT.

Of the dual-title program, Entomology and International Agriculture and Development at Pennsylvania State University, Rivers (pictured above) is mid-way through her six-month tenure at CIMMYT’s El Batán station. By studying the three practices of conservation agriculture —crop rotation, minimal soil disturbance, and retention of crop residues on the soil surface— Rivers hopes to better understand which of these practices augment beneficial insect communities and how. In high enough numbers, beneficial insects can contribute to pest control, nutrient cycling, and soil aeration, all of which are essential to agricultural production in low-input developing country agriculture.

Thompson (pictured right), of the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences at Texas A&M University, is working with Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) to non-destructively assess wheat root biomass. This technology could allow for rapid, non-destructive assessment of populations and selection for traits undetectable by traditional methods. The primary objective of this research is to define the capability of GPR to phenotype below ground crop biomass, in the context of higher yield and quality stability in wheat during drought stress. GPR is one of the many field-based high-throughput phenotyping technologies being tested in CIMMYT’s Wheat Physiology program.

Both Rivers and Thompson plan to collaborate internationally after they complete their doctoral studies. “We have benefitted from the opportunity to practice that skill at CIMMYT,” they both agree. “Thanks to the example set by Borlaug, we are better prepared to take our science ‘to the field’.” Further information about the research or the U.S. Borlaug Fellowship in Global Food Security can be obtained by contacting the Purdue Center for Global Food Security.

Nebraska Declaration on Conservation Agriculture signed

Written by on . Posted in News.

8623227856_28319de0bf_zAfter months of discussions and debates on the scientific evidence regarding conservation agriculture for small-scale, resource-poor farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, a group of 40 scientists reached a consensus on the goals of conservation agriculture and the research necessary to reach these goals. The discussions leading to the signing of the Nebraska Declaration on Conservation Agriculture on 5 June 2013 began during a scientific workshop on “Conservation agriculture: What role in meeting CGIAR system-level outcomes?” organized by the CGIAR Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, USA, during 15-18 October 2012. Several CIMMYT scientists contributed to the Lincoln workshop and the subsequent draft of the convention. “Not every participant agreed to sign. It went too far for some conservation agriculture purists and not far enough for others. This is usually the case when a consensus between 50 scientists and experts is sought,” said Bruno Gerard, director of CIMMYT’s Global Conservation Agriculture Program (GCAP), pointing to an interesting read in that respect, ‘Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: The heretics’ view’ by Giller et al. (2009).

According to the Declaration, most efforts to date in developing countries have promoted conservation agriculture as a package of three practices: minimum disturbance of soil, retention of sufficient crop residue, and diversified cropping patterns. However, the situation on the ground shows limits of this strict definition, as there is little evidence of conservation agriculture wide adoption in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, but there is some evidence of adoption of one or two of the components. To play a significant role in low-productivity, resource-poor agricultural systems, broader efforts going beyond a focus on the package of the three main practices are necessary. Emphasis needs to be placed on diagnostic agronomy and participatory on-farm research to identify the constraints faced by farmers and to guide farmers in finding solutions to them. As there is a range of sound agronomic, economic, and/or social reasons for choosing not to adopt the three-component conservation agriculture package, it is necessary to systematically assess the suitability and viability of management options and practices while considering farmers’ objectives and constraints, the Declaration stresses.

Rigorous and coordinated research is needed to assess and better understand the process of adoption of conservation agriculture. Unless the farmers’ reasons for choosing to adopt or not to adopt a certain practice are known, a wider adoption of conservation agriculture practices is unlikely.

“I think the declaration is useful as conservation agriculture principles should be seen as a way to sustainable intensification and not an end by itself,” commented Gerard. “The declaration fits well with the present efforts of GCAP and the Socioeconomics Program to put conservation agriculture in a broader context, and to better understand adoptability and constraints to adoption, which are agroecology-, site-, and farm-specific. Furthermore, it stretches the importance of systems research to integrate field level agronomy work within a multi-scale and multi-disciplinary framework.”

Maize lethal necrosis: Scientists and key stakeholders discuss strategies as the battle continues

Written by on . Posted in News.

29A recently-emerged disease in Eastern Africa, maize lethal necrosis (MLN), remains a serious concern. A regional workshop on the disease and its management strategies was held during 12-14 February 2013 in Nairobi, Kenya. Organized by CIMMYT and the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), the workshop brought together nearly 70 scientists, seed company breeders and managers, and representatives of ministries of agriculture and regulatory authorities in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, as well as experts from the U.S.A.

The key objective of the meeting was to “establish a strong interface between research and regulatory institutions in Eastern Africa to effectively tackle the MLN challenge, including the ongoing efforts and further steps to identify and deploy disease-resistant germplasm, and to create a system that can ensure a constant flow of varieties,” explained B.M. Prasanna, CIMMYT Global Maize Program director. Prasanna highlighted the difficulties faced by the maize farming community from the disease, and emphasized the need to accelerate deployment of MLN resistant maize varieties and to generate necessary awareness among the relevant stakeholders on management strategies. “It is necessary to break the MLN disease cycle and tackle the problem from multiple perspectives,” added KARI director Ephraim Mukisira. He mentioned that besides partnering with CIMMYT on breeding for MLN resistant varieties, KARI will also be distributing seed of alternative crops to farmers in affected areas. “As a dairy farmer, I will be planting napier grass instead of maize this season,” noted Mukisira.

The first signs of a new disease appeared in 2011 and 2012 in the Rift Valley Province, Kenya. A team of CIMMYT and KARI scientists identified it as MLN, a disease caused by a double infection of the maize chlorotic mottle virus (MCMV) and the sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) and transmitted by insects. According to Godfrey Asea, plant breeder and head of the Cereals Program at the National Crops Resources Research Institute (NaCRRI), Kampala, MLN was also identified in Uganda. Furthermore, symptoms of MLN have been cited in Tanzania, said Kheri Kitenge, maize breeder at the Selian Agricultural Research Institute (SARI), Arusha.

Scientists, particularly breeders, have made significant progress in tackling the disease. Studies are already underway at two field sites (Naivasha and Narok) where responses of a wide array of inbred lines and pre-commercial hybrids are being evaluated under high natural disease pressure and artificial inoculation. Participants visited the Sunripe Farm in Naivasha, where they observed KARI-CIMMYT MLN trials under natural disease pressure. A trial under artificial inoculation in Naivasha featuring nearly 175 commercial maize varieties is showing high levels of susceptibility to MLN. Researchers remain hopeful as some of the elite inbred lines and pre-commercial hybrids developed under projects such as the Drought Tolerant Maize for Africa (DTMA) or Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) are showing resistance to the disease.

During the farm visit, KARI pathologist Anne Wangai and her team showed how to generate artificial inoculum for MCMV and SCMV, as well as the enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) based technique for pathogen diagnosis at the national agricultural research laboratories at the KARI campus. The participants observed an artificial inoculation of maize seedlings in the field, followed by a discussion on some of the major changes in maize seed demand resulting from MLN incidence. “The maize seed industry is under stress in Kenya due to the need to replace some popular but MLN-vulnerable varieties as soon as possible,” explained Evans Sikinyi, Seed Trade Association of Kenya (STAK) executive officer. All stakeholders agreed that the foremost priority is to identify and speed deployment of MLN resistant maize varieties. “We also have to enhance the diagnostic capacity in the labs and ensure there is a rapid response and surveillance on MLN,” added Esther Kimani, general manager of phytosanitary services at the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS).

In the concluding session of the workshop, stakeholders identified key research areas and discussed partnership opportunities.

Climate Change and Agriculture: Building Resilience

Written by on . Posted in Features.

This article is cross-posted from the Feed the Future blog. Feed the Future is the United States Government’s global hunger and food security initiative. It supports country-driven approaches to address the root causes of hunger and poverty and forge long-term solutions to chronic food insecurity and undernutrition. Drawing upon resources and expertise of agencies across the U.S. Government, this Presidential Initiative is helping countries transform their own agriculture sectors to sustainably grow enough food to feed their people.

Feed the Future strategies for food security are designed not only to accelerate agriculture-led growth and reduce undernutrition, but also to encourage sustainable and equitable management of land, water, fisheries, and other resources. Feed the Future Intern Christopher Chapman asked CIMMYT’s conservation agriculture expert Bruno Gerard (pictured left) how climate change relates to agricultural development.

Continue reading

Ravi Singh receives Crop Science Research Award

Written by on . Posted in News.

Ravi P. Singh, distinguished scientist and head of Bread Wheat Improvement, was awarded the 2012 Crop Science Research Award by the Crop Science Society of America (CSSA). Singh is the first CIMMYT scientist to receive this award.

The award was presented at the CSSA annual meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio, on 24 October 2012, and recognized Singh’s achievements in fighting wheat diseases, rusts in particular. “Wheat rusts are among the world’s most important diseases,” said Singh. “A century of research and breeding has helped to reduce the losses caused by rusts, but new biotypes continue to emerge.”

A fellow of numerous scientific associations, Singh has contributed to the development of over 200 wheat cultivars; 20 of which are resistant to Ug99 and have been released and taken up by farmers in developing countries. His approaches for generating high-yielding and disease-resistant wheat lines have changed wheat breeding at CIMMYT and at breeding programs worldwide. Though an eminent scientist himself, Singh recognizes that science alone cannot solve the critical problems facing agriculture: “Policies to ensure efficient use of water, nutrients, and prices will be important to enhance productivity and profitability.”