In crop research fields, drones and other high-tech sensing tools are now a common sight. They collect high-resolution data on a wide range of traits — from simple measurement of canopy temperature to complex 3D reconstruction of photosynthetic canopies.
This technological approach to collecting precise plant trait information, known as phenotyping, is becoming ubiquitous. According to experts at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and other research institutions, breeders can profit much more from these tools, when used judiciously.
Examples of different classes and applications of breeder friendly phenotyping. (Image: M. Reynolds et al.)
In a new article in the journal Plant Science, CIMMYT Wheat Physiologist Matthew Reynolds and colleagues explain the different ways that phenotyping can assist breeding — from simple to use, “handy” approaches for large scale screening, to detailed physiological characterization of key traits to identify new parental sources — and why this methodology is crucial for crop improvement. The authors make the case for breeders to invest in phenotyping, particularly in light of the imperative to breed crops for warmer and harsher climates.
Andrea Gardeazábal works on the use of data-driven agronomy, knowledge management and ICT for innovation within agri-food systems. She holds an MSc in Information and Communication Technologies for Development from the University of Manchester, UK, and an MSc in Political Science from Los Andes University, Colombia. She has over a decade of experience designing and deploying large ICT for agriculture and education projects in Mexico, Guatemala, and Colombia.
Gardeazabal currently coordinates the Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning Unit for CIMMYT’s Integrated Development Program, which involves the design and operation of robust information systems for data collection, analysis and dissemination.
Global schemes to fight climate change may miss their mark by ignoring the “fundamental connections” in how food is produced, supplied and consumed, say scientists in a new paper published in the journal Nature Food. Global bodies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), handle the different components of the food system separately. This includes crop and livestock production; food processing, storage and transport; and food consumption. Scientists argue this disjointed approach may harm strategies to reduce food emissions and safeguard food from climate impacts, and that a “comprehensive” and “unified” approach is needed.
Food and climate change are deeply interlinked, but food emissions need to be tracked beyond the “farm gate,” that is, beyond the emissions arising from growing crops or raising livestock. Researchers are uncovering new insights on how the different subcomponents of the food system contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation. They argue that we must understand how these components work together — or clash in some cases — in order to effectively address agriculture in a changing climate.
Global schemes to fight climate change may miss their mark by ignoring the fundamental connections in how food is produced, supplied and consumed, scientists say in a new paper published in the journal Nature Food.
Plant breeding, genetics, math and software development are all stereotypically male fields. For too long, women have been excluded from these fields for social, religious, cultural and “Oh, it’s a boys’ club, I don’t feel welcome” reasons, thus depriving scientific progress of great female minds and ideas.
In light of the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, we stopped to ask four scientists and leaders at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) why they chose science. Here are some inspiring highlights.
What made you want to become a scientist?
Margaret Bath, Member of the CIMMYT Board of Trustees: “I love food and I love science and math, so I had the opportunity to combine […] three things that I love very much and make a great career out of it. I’m a firm believer in math and science as an enabler for solving complex problems that face our society today.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/B8SFzWyg86c/
Cynthia Ortiz, researcher in CIMMYT’s Genetic Resources Program: “I remember one time when I was watching fireflies. My grandfather approached me and asked me if I understood why they shine and I said ‘no.’ I remember well what he said to me: ‘The world is much more than what we see, hear and feel.’ In that moment, I knew that I wanted to understand more about the things that surround us.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/B8T52Y7nt_r/
What’s the best thing about being a scientist?
Aparna Das, Technical Program Manager in the Global Maize Program, CIMMYT: “The whole idea where I use information, knowledge and technology to generate biological products was very exciting for me. The biggest learning I have had in the 25 years of my career as a plant-breeding scientist […] has been how I can use the vast information, combine it with the present day technological advances and deliver something for the future, which can address the global food crisis problem, which is looming […] in the near future.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/B8Zeau5neHq/
Philomin Juliana, wheat scientist in CIMMYT’s Global Wheat Program: “How you can use scientific research to answer lots of different questions and how you can solve […] different problems using math, data analysis. All these are key questions that affect humankind today and how we can design future systems based on our current understanding of systems and also how all these together can help us make a difference in the lives of farmers and the poor.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/B8Z2WTfH-sh/
Are you passionate about science and want more women to get involved? join CIMMYT’s #WhyIChoseScience campaign. Take out your phone, click ‘record’ and share what made you want to become a scientist!
Mechanization is a process of introducing technology or farm equipment to increase field efficiency. CIMMYT’s mechanization work is context-specific, to help farmers have access to the appropriate tools that are new, smart and ideal for their unique farming conditions.
Jelle Van Loon, CIMMYT mechanization specialist, explains how his team prototypes innovations that allow precision farming and supports different actors in the value chain from importers to policy-makers to create broader availability of farm equipment.
If not practiced sustainably, agriculture can have a toll on the environment, produce greenhouse gases and contribute to climate change. However, sustainable farming methods can do the opposite — increase resilience to climate change, protect biodiversity and sustainably use natural resources.
One of these methods is conservation agriculture.
Conservation agriculture conserves natural resources, biodiversity and labor. It increases available soil water, reduces heat and drought stress, and builds up soil health in the longer term.
What are the principles of conservation agriculture?
Conservation agriculture is based on the interrelated principles of minimal mechanical soil disturbance, permanent soil cover with living or dead plant material, and crop diversification through rotation or intercropping. It helps farmers to maintain and boost yields and increase profits, while reversing land degradation, protecting the environment and responding to growing challenges of climate change.
To reduce soil disturbance, farmers practice zero-tillage farming, which allows direct planting without plowing or preparing the soil. The farmer seeds directly through surface residues of the previous crop.
Zero tillage is combined with intercropping and crop rotation, which means either growing two or more crops at the same time on the same piece of land, or growing two different crops on the same land in a sequential manner. These are also core principles of sustainable intensification.
How is conservation agriculture different from sustainable intensification?
Sustainable intensification is a process to increase agriculture yields without adverse impacts on the environment, taking the whole ecosystem into consideration. It aims for the same goals as conservation agriculture.
Conservation agriculture practices lead to or enable sustainable intensification.
What are the benefits and challenges of conservation agriculture?
Zero-tillage farming with residue cover saves irrigation water, gradually increases soil organic matter and suppresses weeds, as well as reduces costs of machinery, fuel and time associated with tilling. Leaving the soil undisturbed increases water infiltration, holds soil moisture and helps to prevent topsoil erosion. Conservation agriculture enhances water intake that allows for more stable yields in the midst of weather extremes exacerbated by climate change.
While conservation agriculture provides many benefits for farmers and the environment, farmers can face constraints to adopt these practices. Wetlands or soils with poor drainage can make adoption challenging. When crop residues are limited, farmers tend to use them for fodder first, so there might not be enough residues for the soil cover. To initiate conservation agriculture, appropriate seeders are necessary, and these may not be available or affordable to all farmers. Conservation agriculture is also knowledge intensive and not all farmers may have access to the knowledge and training required on how to practice conservation agriculture. Finally, conservation agriculture increases yields over time but farmers may not see yield benefits immediately.
However, innovations, adapted research and new technologies are helping farmers to overcome these challenges and facilitate the adoption of conservation agriculture.
How did conservation agriculture originate?
Belita Maleko, a farmer in Nkhotakota, central Malawi, sowed cowpea as an intercrop in one of her maize plots, grown under conservation agriculture principles. (Photo: T. Samson/CIMMYT)
The term “conservation agriculture” was coined in the 1990s, but the idea to minimize soil disturbance has its origins in the 1930s, during the Dust Bowl in the United States of America.
CIMMYT pioneered no-till training programs and trials in the 1970s, in maize and wheat systems in Latin America. In the 1980s this technique was also used in agronomy projects in South Asia.
CIMMYT began work with conservation agriculture in Latin America and South Asia in the 1990s and in Africa in the early 2000s. Today, these efforts have been scaled up and conservation agriculture principles have been incorporated into projects such as CSISA, FACASI, MasAgro, SIMLESA, and SRFSI.
Farmers worldwide are increasingly adopting conservation agriculture. In the 2015/16 season, conservation agriculture was practiced on about 180 mega hectares of cropland globally, about 12.5% of the total global cropland — 69% more than in the 2008/2009 season.
Is conservation agriculture organic?
Conservation agriculture and organic farming both maintain a balance between agriculture and resources, use crop rotation, and protect the soil’s organic matter. However, the main difference between these two types of farming is that organic farmers use a plow or soil tillage, while farmers who practice conservation agriculture use natural principles and do not till the soil. Organic farmers apply tillage to remove weeds without using inorganic fertilizers.
Conservation agriculture farmers, on the other hand, use a permanent soil cover and plant seeds through this layer. They may initially use inorganic fertilizers to manage weeds, especially in soils with low fertility. Over time, the use of agrichemicals may be reduced or slowly phased out.
How does conservation agriculture differ from climate-smart agriculture?
While conservation agriculture and climate-smart agriculture are similar, their purposes are different. Conservation agriculture aims to sustainably intensify smallholder farming systems and have a positive effect on the environment using natural processes. It helps farmers to adapt to and increase profits in spite of climate risks.
Climate-smart agriculture aims to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change by sequestering soil carbon and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and finally increase productivity and profitability of farming systems to ensure farmers’ livelihoods and food security in a changing climate. Conservation agriculture systems can be considered climate-smart as they deliver on the objectives of climate-smart agriculture.
Cover photo: Field worker Lain Ochoa Hernandez harvests a plot of maize grown with conservation agriculture techniques in Nuevo México, Chiapas, Mexico. (Photo: P. Lowe/CIMMYT)
“This event is a first of its kind. Here you have the fertilizer industry, which is relatively conservative, and yet there are speakers such as Mostafa Terrab of the OCP Group or Svein Tore Holsether of Yara who are pushing this future agenda,” said Bruce Campbell, Director of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS).
“If I was from the fertilizer industry, I would really wake up, as perhaps is happening with some companies. If you look at the airlines industry, you see some super visionary players and others who are not. I feel that there could be players in this group who could be as visionary: looking at cutting down the energy inputs into fertilizer production, working together with governments to reform subsidies that promote over-fertilization, working towards precision fertilizer application. If the fertilizer industry wants to gain the trust of a more and more discerning public, then they need to show climate leadership,” Campbell remarked.
Early plant vigor can be improved through the use of direct seeders, which place fertilizer close to the seed. (Photo: Wasim Iftikar / CIMMYT)
The right time and place
Although fertilizer use revolutionized agriculture and allowed farmers to grow better crops on less land, plant nutrients are often vilified because of the negative environmental impact caused by their improper use.
For this reason, experts often speak of the 4R stewardship principles of fertilizer: right fertilizer source, at the right rate, at the right time, and in the right place.
“The industry needs solid science to back up agricultural technology solutions in the realms of both nutrient and water management. Regarding the right placement, right time and the right quantity of fertilizer, mechanization solutions — such as direct seeders, which place fertilizer close to the seed — can really increase nutrient use efficiency and improve plant early vigor. Together with a wide range of partners, CIMMYT has been using these across smallholder systems of Asia, Africa and Latin America,” highlighted Martin Kropff, Director General of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), during one of the panel discussions.
In order to scale up the most relevant scientific findings and extension efforts, the focus should be on using available fertilizers better. This goes hand in hand with better management of organic matter and soils. There is a human element too: farmers’ efficiency could be improved with better advice especially targeted at extension offices or service providers.
At the event, David Nabarro challenged the fertilizer industry to take the lead in reforming the broken food system. (Photo: Marta Millere/CIMMYT)
S for sustainability
In order to identify the missing link of sustainability, just a day before the launch of the forum, the International Fertilizer Association (IFA) created a new Scientific Panel on Responsible Plant Nutrition. This group of international experts will provide objective knowledge and assessments for the fertilizer industry and other stakeholders to develop a more responsible plant nutrition system.
Bruno Gérard, Director of CIMMYT’s Sustainable Intensification research program and a member of the panel, spoke about CIMMYT’s unique selling proposition. “CIMMYT has a significant research agenda and experience in better nutrient management in wheat- and maize-based systems. In regions such as South Asia, the challenge is to produce more or the same with less and better fertilizers through improved management practices. Instead in Sub-Saharan Africa, the focus is on giving better access and knowledge so that farmers can produce more with adequate fertilizer inputs.”
Being part of the panel will give CIMMYT the opportunity to better link up with the fertilizer industry and contribute to improved fertilizer use in term of profitability, yield stability and risk, accessibility but also — from an environmental perspective — minimize the footprint of fertilizer through better agronomic practices and management.
The High Level Forum on Plant Nutrition took place on November 18-20, 2019, in Versailles, France.
Wheat provides, on average, 20% of the calories and protein for more than 4.5 billion people in 94 developing countries. To feed a growing population, we need both better agronomic practices and to grow wheat varieties that can withstand the effects of climate change and resist various pests and diseases.
Watch CIMMYT Wheat Physiologist Carolina Rivera discuss — in just one minute — choosing and breeding desirable wheat traits with higher tolerance to stresses.
Scientists from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) presented last week at the International Plant and Animal Genome Conference (PAG) in San Diego, USA.
PAG is the largest agricultural genomics meeting in the world, bringing together over 3,000 leading genetic scientists and researchers from around the world to present their research and share the latest developments in plant and animal genome projects. It provides an important opportunity for CIMMYT scientists to highlight their work translating the latest molecular research developments into wheat and maize breeding solutions for better varieties.
To meet global food demand by 2050, agricultural production must increase by 60% — while at the same time minimizing harm to the environment. This is the process of sustainable intensification, recommended by organizations like the United Nations and the EAT Lancet Commission as a key strategy for transforming our struggling global food systems.
Genomics is crucial to sustainable intensification. By studying a plant or animal’s genetic architecture, researchers can better understand what drives crop or livestock productivity, quality, climate resilience, and resistance to pests and diseases. With this information scientists can speed up efforts to develop better varieties and stay ahead of climate- and disease-related threats.
Philomin Juliana stands next to the logo of the PAG conference. (Photo: CIMMYT)
At the conference, wheat scientist Philomin Juliana shared her findings on successfully identifying significant new chromosomal regions for wheat yield and disease resistance using the full wheat genome map. Juliana and her colleagues have created a freely-available collection of genetic information and markers for more than 40,000 wheat lines which will accelerate efforts to breed superior wheat varieties. She also discussed the value of genomic and high-throughput phenotyping tools for current breeding strategies adopted by CIMMYT to develop climate-resilient wheat.
Principal scientist Sarah Hearne discussed the smarter use of genebank exploration for breeding. Germplasm banks are reserves of native plant variation representing the evolutionary history of the crops we eat. They are a vital source of genetic information, which can accelerate the development of better, more resilient crops. However, it is not easy for breeders and scientists to identify or access the genetic information they need. Using the whole genebank genotypic data, long-term climate data from the origins of the genebank seeds and novel analysis methods, Hearne and her colleagues were able to identify elite genetic breeding material for improved, climate resilient maize varieties. They are now extending this approach to test the value of these data to improve breeding programs and accelerate the development of improved crops.
Distinguished scientist Jose Crossa discussed the latest models and methods for combining phenomic and genomic information to accelerate the development of climate-resilient crop varieties. He highlighted the use of the Artificial Neural Network — a model inspired by the human brain — to model the relationship between input signals and output signals in crops. He also discussed a phenotypic and genomic selection index which can improve response to selection and expected genetic gains for all of an individual plant’s genetic traits simultaneously.
Sarah Hearne presents on the smart use of germplasm banks to accelerate the development of better wheat and maize varieties. (Photo: Francisco Gomez)
Principal scientist Kanwarpal Dhugga gave a presentation on approaches to improve resistance against maize lethal necrosis (MLN) in Africa. MLN is an aggressive disease that first appeared in Kenya in 2011, devastating maize production. It has since spread to neighboring countries. Under a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Dhugga and his colleagues at CIMMYT and Corteva Agriscience have identified a small genomic region explaining more than 50% of variation in MLN resistance. They are currently validating a few candidate genes in this region. Once done, they will use gene editing directly in elite lines from eastern Africa to accelerate the development of improved, disease resistant maize hybrids.
Genomic breeder Umesh Rosyara demonstrated the genomic selection pipeline and other tools at a workshop using the online Galaxy software. Galaxy is an open-source software that allows users to access powerful computational analysis tools. The CGIAR Excellence in Breeding Platform (EiB) has set up an instance of Galaxy that contains a suite of bioinformatics analysis tools, R-packages — a free software environment for statistical computing and graphics — and visualization tools to manage routine genomic selection (GS) and genome wide association studies (GWAS) analysis. This allows crop breeders and genomic scientists without a programming background to conduct these analyses and create crop-specific workflows.
“PAG is currently the main international meeting touching both crop and livestock genomics, so it’s an invaluable chance to connect and share insights with research and breeding colleagues around the world,” said Hearne. “It’s also an important forum to highlight how we are linking upstream and field, and help others do the same.”
Kanwarpal Dhugga (left) takes a selfie with his colleagues in the background during the PAG conference. (Photo: Kanwarpal Dhugga/CIMMYT)
Lara Roeven completed her undergraduate degree in social sciences at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, where she focused primarily on political science in a program that combined this with the study of psychology, law and economics. “I liked it a lot because it gave me an interdisciplinary look at how social injustice manifests itself.”
Having worked on gender and social inclusion issues in the past, she had already heard of CGIAR and its research portfolio, but it was the interdisciplinarity of CIMMYT’s approach that prompted her to apply to the organization at the end of a study abroad program in Mexico. “I had a strong interest in agriculture and I’d always wanted to look at how gender and social inclusion issues affect women and marginalized groups within the context of rural, environmental or climate change, so this role seemed like a good fit.”
Since joining CIMMYT’s Gender and Social Inclusion research unit in January 2019, Roeven has been part of a team of researchers analyzing the ways in which gender norms and agency influence the ability of men, women and young people to learn about, access and adopt innovations in agriculture and natural resource management.
So far, Roeven has mainly been supporting data analysis and helping to produce literature reviews. She has contributed to a number of studies simultaneously over the past year, from the feminization of agriculture in India to changing gender norms in Tanzania. “It’s very interesting because you learn the particularities of many different countries, and the extent to which gender norms can differ and really influence people’s opportunities.”
Searching for nuance
A lot of research follows a similar pattern in highlighting the relationship between women’s work and empowerment, but realities on the ground are often more nuanced. In India, for example, well-established social structures add another layer of complexity to gender dynamics. “What I found interesting when we started looking into the ways in which gender and caste interrelate was that nothing is straightforward.”
Women from higher castes can actually be more isolated than women from lower ones, she explains, for whom it can be more accepted to pursue paid work outside of the home. However, lower-caste women also frequently experience high levels of poverty and vulnerability and face social exclusion in other realms of life.
“These dynamics are actually a lot more complicated than we usually think. And that’s why it’s so interesting to do this kind of comparative research where you can see how these issues manifest themselves in different areas, and what researchers or development practitioners working at ground level have to take into account in order to address the issues these women face.”
Eventually, Roeven hopes to pursue a PhD and a career in academia, but for the time being she’s enjoying working on research that has so much potential for impact. “There are many studies showing that gender gaps need to be closed in order to increase food security and eliminate hunger,” she says. “I feel like many interventions, extension services or trainings don’t always have the desired effect because they do not effectively reach women farmers or young people. Certain people are continuously left out.”
Conducting this kind of research is a crucial step in working towards empowering women across the world, and Roeven would like to see more researchers incorporating this into their work, and really taking on gender as a relational concept. “We can keep on conducting research within the Gender and Social Inclusion research unit, but it would be interesting if our approaches could be mainstreamed in other disciplinary areas as well.”
Though it might not be easy, Roeven emphasizes that it is necessary in order to have an impact and prevent innovations from exacerbating gender and social inequality. “Besides,” she adds, “I think it’s great when research has a social relevance.”
CIMMYT’s multi-crop, multi-use zero-tillage seeder at work on a long-term conservation agriculture trial plot at the center’s global headquarters in Mexico. Maize crop residues are visible in the foreground. (Photo: CIMMYT)
New research published in Field Crops Research by scientists at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) responds to the question of whether wheat varieties need to be adapted to zero tillage conditions.
With 33% of global soils already degraded, agricultural techniques like zero tillage — growing crops without disturbing the soil with activities like plowing — in combination with crop residue retention, are being considered to help protect soils and prevent further degradation. Research has shown that zero tillage with crop residue retention can reduce soil erosion and improve soil structure and water retention, leading to increased water use efficiency of the system. Zero tillage has also been shown to be the most environmentally friendly among different tillage techniques.
While CIMMYT promotes conservation agriculture, of which zero tillage is a component, many farmers who use CIMMYT wheat varieties still use some form of tillage. As farmers adopt conservation agriculture principles in their production systems, we need to be sure that the improved varieties breeders develop and release to farmers can perform equally well in zero tillage as in conventional tillage environments.
The aim of the study was to find out whether breeding wheat lines in a conservation agriculture environment had an effect on their adaptability to one tillage system or another, and whether separate breading streams would be required for each tillage system.
The scientists conducted parallel early generation selection in sixteen populations from the breeding program. The best plants were selected in parallel under conventional and zero-till conditions, until 234 and 250 fixed lines were obtained. They then grew all 484 wheat lines over the course of three seasons near Ciudad Obregon, Sonora, Mexico, under three different environments — zero tillage, conventional tillage, and conventional tillage with reduced irrigation — and tested them for yield and growth traits.
The authors found that yields were better under zero tillage than conventional tillage for all wheat lines, regardless of how they had been bred and selected, as this condition provided longer water availability between irrigations and mitigated inter-irrigation water stress.
The main result was that selection environment, zero-till versus conventional till, did not produce lines with specific adaptation to either conditions, nor did it negatively impact the results of the breeding program for traits such as plant height, tolerance to lodging and earliness.
One trait which was slightly affected by selection under zero-till was early vigor — the speed at which crops grow during the earliest stage of growth. Early vigor is a useful adaptive trait in conservation agriculture because it allows the crop to cope with high crop residue loads — materials left on the ground such as leaves, stems and seed pods — and can improve yield through rapid development of maximum leaf area in dry environments. Results showed that varieties selected under zero tillage showed slightly increased early vigor which means that selection under zero tillage may drive a breeding program towards the generalization of this useful attribute.
The findings demonstrate that CIMMYT’s durum wheat lines, traditionally bred for wide adaptation, can be grown, bred, and selected under either tillage conditions without negatively affecting yield performance. This is yet another clear demonstration that breeding for wide adaptation, a decades-long tradition within CIMMYT’s wheat improvement effort, is a suitable strategy to produce varieties that are competitive in a wide range of production systems. The findings represent a major result for wheat breeders at CIMMYT and beyond, with the authors concluding that it is not necessary to have separate breeding programs to address the varietal needs of either tillage systems.
This work was implemented by CIMMYT as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat (WHEAT).
Whenever seed is transferred between countries, continents or regions there is an inherent risk that new plant pathogens could spread to previously non-infested areas — with potentially devastating consequences. FAO estimates that these pathogens are responsible for the loss of up to 40% of global food crops, and for trade losses in agricultural products exceeding $220 billion each year.
With old and new pests and diseases causing devastation across the world, it is becoming increasingly important to consider plant health. This is especially true at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), an organization which processes and distributes enormous quantities of seed each year and in 2019 alone sent over 10,000 tons to more than 100 partners in Africa, the Americas, Asia and Europe.
Amos Alakonya joined CIMMYT in July 2019, and as head of the organization’s Seed Health Unit he is acutely aware of the need to mitigate risk throughout the seed production value chain.
In the lead up to this year’s International Phytosanitary Awareness Week, the plant pathologist sits down to discuss pests, screening procedures, and explain why everyone should be talking about seed health.
Amos Alakonya, head of CIMMYT’s Seed Health unit. (Photo: Eleusis Llanderal/CIMMYT)
Can you start by telling us about the CGIAR Germplasm Health Unit consortium and what it does?
Within CGIAR we have a cluster called Genebank Platform whose main function is to support CGIAR efforts in conservation and distribution of germplasm. Ten CGIAR Centers have germplasm banks that work closely with germplasm health units to ensure that they only distribute plant materials free from pests and diseases.
What is the procedure for introducing seed at CIMMYT?
At CIMMYT, researchers must follow the correct procedure when bringing in seed. Once someone has identified the need to bring in seed, contacted a supplier and agreed on the genotypes and amount required, the responsibility is transferred to the Seed Health Unit. We take care of communication with the seed supplier and provide support in acquisition of the necessary phytosanitary documentation that will ensure compliance with host country rules.
For instance, we will process and provide a plant import permit allowing us to bring in the seed while also stipulating the conditions it must meet before entry into Mexico. This document is used as the standard guide by the authorities in the supplier country, commonly referred to us National Plant Protection Organization (NPPO). The NPPO will then perform a pre-shipment verification and issue a phytosanitary certificate if the seed meets the standards stated in the import permit.
Because we distribute our materials as public goods, we ensure that all seed sent out or received can be used and distributed without restrictions from the supplier or the recipient. This is achieved by the signing of a standard material transfer agreement that complies with International treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. This is done through CIMMYT’s legal unit.
Petri dishes and a microscope in Amos Alakonya’s lab. (Photo: Eleusis Llanderal/CIMMYT)
Once we have received all the necessary documents, materials are cleared through customs and delivered to the lab, where we begin our analysis. The first thing we do is assess the material visually and confirm there is no discoloration and no foreign material like soil or seeds from other species. At the next stage, we set up several assays to detect fungi, bacteria and viruses. We only release seed to scientists or allow distribution after we’ve confirmed they are free from injurious pathogens. Overall, this process takes between 25 and 40 days, so scientists must plan ahead to avoid any inconvenience.
That sounds like a complex process. Do you face any challenges along the way?
There are several challenges but we work around them. One of the biggest ones is meeting up with time expectations. For example, every scientist wants to make sure that they’re on track, but sometimes the seed takes longer than expected to arrive or the documentation gets misplaced which means the seed cannot be released from customs in time.
Even after a delay, the seed has to still pass through the standard health testing procedure. Sometimes we find that the supplier’s NPPO hasn’t carried out the right tests, so we bring in seed that turns out to be non-compliant and may end up being destroyed as a result. However, we only recommend seed destruction in cases where we can’t mitigate.
That’s why it’s crucial that everyone — at all stages of the seed production value chain — is aware of the risks and appropriate mitigation processes. These include checking seed before planting, regular field inspections, and observing field hygiene and spraying regimes.
The theme for this year’s event focuses on transboundary threats to plant health. Are there any emerging ones that you’re concerned about?
Currently there are three main concerns. The first is Maize Lethal Necrosis. The disease was initially reported in the USA and Peru in 1977, but since 2011 the disease has been invading farms in east and central Africa. Because of this, maize breeders in the region cannot send seed directly to their partners in other regions of the world without going through a quarantine field station in Zimbabwe. This comes with additional costs and time burden to the program.
We’re also very concerned about wheat blast, which is now present in Bangladesh where we have trials and share seed in both directions. We have therefore already put in place screening tools against wheat blast to ensure we do not introduce it into experimental fields in Mexico.
And finally, we have the fall armyworm. This pest is indigenous to South America where it is less ferocious, but ever since it reached Africa around 2016 it has been causing destruction to maize and costing farmers lots of money to control through application of chemicals. This emerging disease really undermines food security efforts.
This is obviously an important topic to raise global awareness about. Why do you think it is so crucial to discuss seed health within CIMMYT internally as well?
Amos Alakonya, head of CIMMYT’s Seed Health unit. (Photo: Eleusis Llanderal/CIMMYT)
It’s very important that everyone working at CIMMYT, and especially those working with seed, is aware of the potential risks because about 30% of maize and 50% of wheat grown worldwide can be traced to CIMMYT germplasm. And it’s even more important for Mexico because most of our wheat breeding program is based here and it is also the center of origin for maize. With partners in more than 100 countries we have to be extremely vigilant. If anything goes wrong here, many countries will be at risk.
Ultimately, we want people to be aware of the important role they play in ensuring phytosanitary compliance because prevention is better than cure. We would like to envisage a situation where everybody in CIMMYT is aware of the mitigation processes that have been put in place to ensure safe seed exchanges.
Will you continue working to raise awareness beyond this year’s event?
Yes. In December 2018, the United Nations declared 2020 the International Year of Plant Health. Everybody will be encouraged to take this opportunity to inform people about the importance of seed health, especially as it relates to food security, environmental conservation and economic empowerment.
It’s exciting because this event only happens every 30 to 50 years, so this is really a once in a lifetime opportunity to showcase the work we do every day, both as a unit and in collaboration with our global partners.
Cover photo:
A mixture of maize seeds seen in close-up. (Photo: Xochiquetzal Fonseca/CIMMYT)
Wheat blast is a fast-acting and devastating fungal disease that threatens food safety and security in tropical areas in South America and South Asia. Directly striking the wheat ear, wheat blast can shrivel and deform the grain in less than a week from the first symptoms, leaving farmers no time to act.
The disease, caused by the fungus Magnaporthe oryzae pathotype triticum (MoT), can spread through infected seeds and survives on crop residues, as well as by spores that can travel long distances in the air.
Magnaporthe oryzae can infect many grasses, including barley, lolium, rice, and wheat, but specific isolates of this pathogen generally infect limited species; that is, wheat isolates infect preferably wheat plants but can use several more cereal and grass species as alternate hosts. The Bangladesh wheat blast isolate is being studied to determine its host range. The Magnaporthe oryzae genome is well-studied but major gaps remain in knowledge about its epidemiology.
The pathogen can infect all aerial wheat plant parts, but maximum damage is done when it infects the wheat ear. It can shrivel and deform the grain in less than a week from first symptoms, leaving farmers no time to act.
Where is wheat blast found?
First officially identified in Brazil in 1985, the disease is widespread in South American wheat fields, affecting as much as 3 million hectares in the early 1990s. It continues to seriously threaten the potential for wheat cropping in the region.
In 2016, wheat blast spread to Bangladesh, which suffered a severe outbreak. It has impacted around 15,000 hectares of land in eight districts, reducing yield on average by as much as 51% in the affected fields.
Wheat-producing countries and presence of wheat blast.
How does blast infect a wheat crop?
Wheat blast spreads through infected seeds, crop residues as well as by spores that can travel long distances in the air.
Blast appears sporadically on wheat and grows well on numerous other plants and crops, so rotations do not control it. The irregular frequency of outbreaks also makes it hard to understand or predict the precise conditions for disease development, or to methodically select resistant wheat lines.
At present blast requires concurrent heat and humidity to develop and is confined to areas with those conditions. However, crop fungi are known to mutate and adapt to new conditions, which should be considered in management efforts.
How can farmers prevent and manage wheat blast?
There are no widely available resistant varieties, and fungicides are expensive and provide only a partial defense. They are also often hard to obtain or use in the regions where blast occurs, and must be applied well before any symptoms appear — a prohibitive expense for many farmers.
The Magnaporthe oryzae fungus is physiologically and genetically complex, so even after more than three decades, scientists do not fully understand how it interacts with wheat or which genes in wheat confer durable resistance.
Researchers from the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) are partnering with national researchers and meteorological agencies on ways to work towards solutions to mitigate the threat of wheat blast and increase the resilience of smallholder farmers in the region. Through the USAID-supported Cereal Systems Initiative for South Asia (CSISA) and Climate Services for Resilient Development (CSRD) projects, CIMMYT and its partners are developing agronomic methods and early warning systems so farmers can prepare for and reduce the impact of wheat blast.
CIMMYT works in a global collaboration to mitigate the threat of wheat blast, funded by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat (WHEAT), the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet). Some of the partners who collaborate include the Bangladesh Wheat and Maize Research Institute (BWMRI), Bolivia’s Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agropecuaria y Forestal (INIAF), Kansas State University and the Agricultural Research Service of the US (USDA-ARS).
