Theme: Environmental health and biodiversity

The world needs better management of water, soil, nutrients, and biodiversity in crop, livestock, and fisheries systems, coupled with higher-order landscape considerations as well as circular economy and agroecological approaches.

CIMMYT and CGIAR use modern digital tools to bring together state-of-the-art Earth system observation and big data analysis to inform co-design of global solutions and national policies.

Our maize and wheat genebanks preserve the legacy of biodiversity, while breeders and researchers look at ways to reduce the environmental footprint of agriculture.

Ultimately, our work helps stay within planetary boundaries and limit water use, nutrient use, pollution, undesirable land use change, and biodiversity loss.

All farmers are susceptible to extreme weather events, and many are already feeling the effects of climate change. (Photo: N. Palmer/CIAT)

CGIAR webinar unleashes multidisciplinary approach to climate change and plant health

Written by Steven M on February 8, 2021. Posted in Features.

Evidence of enormity and immediacy of the challenges climate change poses for life on earth seems to pour in daily. But important gaps in our knowledge of all the downstream effects of this complex process remain. And the global response to these challenges is still far from adequate to the job ahead. Bold, multi-stakeholder, multidisciplinary action is urgent.

Mindful of this, the first event in Unleashing the Potential of Plant Health, a CGIAR webinar series in celebration of the UN-designated International Year of Plant Health, tackled the complicated nexus between climate change and plant health. The webinar, titled “Climate change and plant health: impact, implications and the role of research for adaptation and mitigation,” convened a diverse panel of researchers from across the CGIAR system and over 900 audience members and participants.

In addition to exploring the important challenges climate changes poses for plant health, the event explored the implications for the wellbeing and livelihoods of smallholder farming communities in low- and middle- income countries, paying special attention to the gender dimension of both the challenges and proposed solutions.

The event was co-organized by researchers at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe).

The overall webinar series is hosted by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), the International Potato Center (CIP), the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). It is sponsored by the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition (A4NH), the CGIAR Gender Platform and the CGIAR Research Program on Roots, Tubers and Bananas (RTB).

This is important

The stakes for the conversation were forcefully articulated by Shenggen Fan, chair professor and dean of the Academy of Global Food Economics and Policy at China Agricultural University and member of the CGIAR System Board. “Because of diseases and pests, we lose about 20-40% of our food crops. Can you imagine how much food we have lost? How many people we could feed with that lost food? Climate change will make this even worse,” Fan said.

Such impacts, of course, will not be evenly felt across geographic and social divides, notably gender. According to Jemimah Njuki, director for Africa at IFPRI, gender and household relationships shape how people respond to and are impacted by climate change. “One of the things we have evidence of is that in times of crises, women’s assets are often first to be sold and it takes even longer for them to be recovered,” Njuki said.

The desert locust has been around since biblical times. Climate change has contributed to its reemergence as a major pest. (Photo: David Nunn)

Shifting risks

When it comes to understanding the impact of climate change on plant health “one of our big challenges is to understand where risk will change,” said Karen Garrett, preeminent professor of plant pathology at the University of Florida,

This point was powerfully exemplified by Henri Tonnang, head of Data Management, Modelling and Geo-information Unit at icipe, who referred to the “unprecedented and massive outbreak” of desert locusts in 2020. The pest — known since biblical times — has reemerged as a major threat due to extreme weather events driven by sea level rise.

Researchers highlighted exciting advancements in mapping, modelling and big data techniques that can help us understand these evolving risks. At the same time, they stressed the need to strengthen cooperation not only among the research community, but among all the stakeholders for any given research agenda.

“The international research community needs to transform the way it does research,” said Ana María Loboguerrero, research director for Climate Action at the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT. “We’re working in a very fragmented way, sometime inefficiently and with duplications, sometimes acting under silos… It is difficult to deliver end-to-end sustainable and scalable solutions.”

Time for a new strategy

Such injunctions are timely and reaffirm CGIAR’s new strategic orientation. According to Sonja Vermeulen, the event moderator and the director of programs for the CGIAR System Management Organization, this strategy recognizes that stand-alone solutions — however brilliant — aren’t enough to make food systems resilient. We need whole system solutions that consider plants, animals, ecosystems and people together.

Echoing Fan’s earlier rallying cry, Vermeulen said, “This is important. Unless we do something fast and ambitious, we are not going to meet the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Register for the other webinars in the series

Cover photo: All farmers are susceptible to extreme weather events, and many are already feeling the effects of climate change. (Photo: N. Palmer/CIAT)

Zimbabwe: Centre Develops New Hybrid Maize Resistant to Armyworm

Written by Bea Ciordia on January 13, 2021. Posted in In the media.

The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT) has developed new maize hybrid varieties showing promising resistance to the destructive fall armyworm pest, which has been causing huge crop losses ever since the pest was first reported in Africa in 2016.

Unleashing the potential of plant health

Written by Rodrigo Ordóñez on January 8, 2021. Posted in News.

The UN has designated 2020 as the International Year of Plant Health. CGIAR Centers have significant scientific knowledge, extensive experience on the ground, and thought leadership that they can lend to the global discussion to advance awareness, collaboration, and scaling of needed interventions.

CGIAR’s International Year of Plant Health events will comprise a series of four webinars of global scope targeting scientists and researchers working in relevant fields. The webinars will take an in-depth look into current science in the area, identify areas for further research, and opportunities to take current scientific innovations to scale.

Each webinar will examine one aspect of the crop supply chain — from genebanks to farmers’ fields to consumers’ plates — to identify ways of promoting the adoption of tools and practices designed to boost the long-term health of plants and the environment in low- and middle-income countries. With the acceleration of the effects of climate change on the incidence and intensity of pests and diseases, identification of the right crop varieties, mix of crops, and tools and practices will be key to ensuring the availability of food to feed the planet.

Webinar series

Webinar 1: Climate change and plant health: impact, implications and the role of research for adaptation and mitigation

January 28, 2021 – 13:00 GMT

Webinar 1 will discuss the anticipated impacts of climate change on plant health in smallholder systems, tackling how the occurrence, intensity, and frequency of biotic and abiotic stresses will change as a function of climate change. It will provide participants with information on the negative effects on plant health, in relation to food security, nutrition, environment, gender, and livelihoods, as well as on the role of research in providing support to global efforts to mitigate or adapt to climate change challenges for plant health. Full details of webinar 1.

Webinar 2: Germplasm health in preventing transboundary spread of pests and pathogens

February 17, 2021 – 12:00 GMT

Webinar 2 will highlight the importance of germplasm (phytosanitary) health in the prevention of transboundary pest and disease spread, as well as the propagation of clean planting material to be used locally. Experts will discuss the implications of poor germplasm practices on agricultural and food system sustainability, farmer livelihoods, and food and nutrition security. They will also examine how opportunities for greater workplace diversity in germplasm health hubs and gender-responsive programming could drive more inclusive sustainable development. Full details of webinar 2.

Webinar 3: Integrated pest and disease management

March 10, 2021 – 12:30 GMT

Webinar 3 examines integrated approaches for sustainable management of transboundary diseases and crop pests and their implications for agri-food system sustainability, social inclusion and gender equity. Drawing on both successes and enduring challenges, experts will identify the potential benefits of more gender-responsive approaches to pest and disease control; more coordinated action by national, regional and global organizations; and lessons to be learned from successful animal health management. Full details of webinar 3.

Webinar 4: A One Health approach

March 31, 2021 – 14:00 GMT

Webinar 4 brings together scientists working at the intersection of environmental, human, and animal health. In this session, the experts will examine plant health and agriculture from a “One Health” approach — a collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary perspective that recognizes the health of people, animals, plants, and their environments as all closely connected. In this approach, agricultural practices and plant health outcomes both are determined by, and contribute to, ecological, animal, and human health. Full details of webinar 4.

CIMMYT announced fall armyworm-tolerant maize hybrids for Africa.

Announcing CIMMYT-derived fall armyworm tolerant elite maize hybrids for eastern and southern Africa

Written by Emma Orchardson on December 23, 2020. Posted in News.

A collage of maize images accompanies a CIMMYT announcement about fall armyworm-tolerant maize hybrids for Africa.

The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) is pleased to announce the successful development of three CIMMYT-derived fall armyworm-tolerant elite maize hybrids for eastern and southern Africa.

Fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) emerged as a serious threat to maize production in Africa in 2016 before spreading to Asia in 2018. Host plant resistance is an important component of integrated pest management (IPM). By leveraging tropical insect-resistant maize germplasm developed in Mexico, coupled with elite stress-resilient maize germplasm developed in sub-Saharan Africa, CIMMYT worked intensively over the past three years to identify and validate sources of native genetic resistance to fall armyworm in Africa. This included screening over 3,500 hybrids in 2018 and 2019.

Based on the results of on-station screenhouse trials for fall armyworm tolerance (under artificial infestation) conducted at Kiboko during 2017-2019, CIMMYT researchers evaluated in 2020 a set of eight test hybrids (four early-maturing and four intermediate-maturing) ) against four widely used commercial hybrids (two early- and two intermediate-maturing) as checks. The trials conducted were:

“No choice” trial under fall armyworm artificial infestation in screenhouses in Kiboko, Kenya: Each entry was planted in 40 rows in a separate screenhouse compartment (“no-choice”), and each plant infested with seven fall armyworm neonates 14 days after planting. Foliar damage was assessed 7, 14 and 21 days after infestation. Ear damage and percent ear damage were also recorded, in addition to grain yield and other agronomic parameters.
On-station trials in eastern Africa: The trials, including the eight test entries and four commercial checks, were conducted at six locations in Kenya during the maize cropping season in 2020. Entries were evaluated for their performance under managed drought stress, managed low nitrogen stress, and under artificial inoculation for Turcicum leaf blight (TLB) and Gray leaf spot (GLS) diseases. The three-way cross CIMMYT test hybrids and their parents were also characterized on-station for their seed producibility, including maximum flowering time difference between parents, and single-cross female parent seed yield.

The eight test entries with fall armyworm tolerance were also included in the regional on-station trials (comprising a total of 58 entries) evaluated at 28 locations in Kenya and Tanzania. The purpose of these regional trials was to collect data on agronomic performance.

On-farm trials in Kenya: The eight test hybrids and four commercial checks were evaluated under farmers’ management conditions (without any insecticide spray) at 16 on-farm sites in Kenya. Each entry was planted in 20-row plots, and data was recorded on natural fall armyworm infestation. Foliar damage was assessed 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35 days after germination together with insect incidence. Ear damage and percent ear damage were also recorded, besides grain yield and other agronomic parameters.

Figure 1. Responses of CIMMYT-derived fall armyworm tolerant hybrids versus susceptible commercial checks at the vegetative stage (A & B) and at reproductive stage (C & D), respectively, after fall armyworm artificial infestation under “no choice” trial in screenhouses at Kiboko, Kenya. Note the difference in the harvest of a FAWTH hybrid (E) versus one of the commercial susceptible hybrid checks (F), besides the extent of damage caused by fall armyworm to the ears of the susceptible check (visible as blackish spots with no grains in the ears). — **Figure 1.** Responses of CIMMYT-derived fall armyworm tolerant hybrids versus susceptible commercial checks at the vegetative stage (A & B) and at reproductive stage (C & D), respectively, after fall armyworm artificial infestation under “no choice” trial in screenhouses at Kiboko, Kenya. Note the difference in the harvest of a FAWTH hybrid (E) versus one of the commercial susceptible hybrid checks (F), besides the extent of damage caused by fall armyworm to the ears of the susceptible check (visible as blackish spots with no grains in the ears).

Summary of the data

“No-choice” trials in screenhouses at Kiboko: Significant differences were observed between the three selected fall armyworm tolerant hybrids (FAWTH2001-2003) and the commercial benchmark hybrid checks at the vegetative and grain filling stages and at harvest (Figure 1). In the fall armyworm artificial infestation trial, the three selected FAWTH hybrids yielded 7.05 to 8.59 t/ha while the commercial checks yielded 0.94-1.03 t/ha (Table 1).
On-station trials: No significant differences were observed between the three selected FAWTH hybrids and the commercial checks for grain yield and other important traits evaluated under optimum, managed drought stress, low nitrogen stress, TLB and GLS diseases (Table 1). The three FAWTH hybrids recorded excellent synchrony in terms of flowering between the female and male parents, and very good female parent seed yield (Table 1).
On-farm trials: There were significant differences in terms of foliar damage ratings between the FAWTH hybrids and the commercial checks. For ear damage, the differences were not statistically significant. The grain yields did not vary significantly under natural infestation in the on-farm trials because of the very low incidence of fall armyworm at most sites.

Native genetic resistance to fall armyworm in maize is partial, though quite significant in terms of yield protection under severe fall armyworm infestation, as compared to the susceptible commercial checks. Sustainable control of fall armyworm is best achieved when farmers use host plant resistance in combination with other components of integrated pest management, including good agronomic management, biological control and environmentally safer pesticides.

Next Steps

Together with national agricultural research system (NARS) partners, CIMMYT will nominate these FAWTH hybrids for varietal release in target countries in sub-Saharan Africa, especially in eastern and southern Africa. After national performance trials (NPTs) and varietal release and registration, the hybrids will be sublicensed to seed company partners on a non-exclusive, royalty-free basis for accelerated seed scaling and deployment for the benefit of farming communities.

Acknowledgements

This work was implemented with funding support from the CGIAR Research Program on Maize (MAIZE), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Feed the Future initiative, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. MAIZE receives Windows 1&2 funding support from the World Bank and the Governments of Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, France, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and USA. The support extended by the Kenya Agriculture & Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) for implementation of this work through the fall armyworm mass rearing facility at Katumani and the maize research facilities managed by CIMMYT at Kiboko is gratefully acknowledged.

For further information, please contact:

B.M. Prasanna, Director of the Global Maize Program, CIMMYT and the CGIAR Research Program on Maize. b.m.prasanna@cgiar.org

Direct sowing of wheat seed into a recently-harvested rice field using the “Happy Seeder” implement, a cost-effective and eco-friendly alternative to burning rice straw, in northern India. (Photo: BISA/Love Kumar Singh)

“Happy Seeder” saves farmers money over burning straw, new study in India shows

Written by Mike Listman on December 10, 2020. Posted in News.

Compared to conventional tillage practices, sowing wheat directly into just-harvested rice fields without burning or removing straw or other residues will not only reduce pollution in New Delhi and other parts of northern India, but will save over $130 per hectare in farmer expenses, lessen irrigation needs by as much as 25%, and allow early planting of wheat to avoid yield-reducing heat stress, according to a new study published in the International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability.

The practice requires use of a tractor-mounted implement that opens grooves in the soil, drops in wheat seed and fertilizer, and covers the seeded row, all in one pass. This contrasts with the typical method for planting wheat after rice, which involves first burning rice residues, followed by multiple tractor passes to plow, harrow, plank, and sow, according to Harminder S. Sidhu, principal research engineer at the Borlaug Institute for South Asia (BISA) and a co-author of the study.

“There are already some 11,000 of these specialized no-till implements, known as the Happy Seeder, in operation across northern India,” said Sidhu, who with other researchers helped develop, test and refine the implement over 15 years. “In addition to sowing, the Happy Seeder shreds and clears rice residues from the seeder path and deposits them back onto the seeded row as a protective mulch.”

Covering some 13.5 million hectares, the Indo-Gangetic Plain stretches across Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan and constitutes South Asia’s breadbasket. In India, the northwestern state of Punjab alone produces nearly a third of the country’s rice and wheat.

Some 2.5 million farmers in northern India practice rice-wheat cropping and most burn their rice straw — an estimated 23 million tons of it — after rice harvest, to clear fields for sowing wheat. Straw removal and burning degrades soil fertility and creates a noxious cloud that affects the livelihoods and health of millions in cities and villages downwind. Air pollution is the second leading contributor to disease in India, and studies attribute some 66,000 deaths yearly to breathing in airborne nano-particles produced by agricultural burning.

The central and state governments in northwestern India, as well as universities and think-tanks, have put forth strategies to curtail burning that include conservation tillage technologies such as use of the Happy Seeder. Subsidies for no-burn farming, as well as state directives and fines for straw burning, are in place and extension agencies are promoting no-burn alternatives.

A farmer in India uses a tractor fitted with a Happy Seeder. (Photo: Dakshinamurthy Vedachalam/CIMMYT)

As an aid for policy makers and development practitioners, the present study applied econometrics to compare conventional and zero-tillage in terms of yield, input levels and implications for rice residue burning. The study also compared use of the Happy Seeder versus a simple zero-tillage drill with no straw shredder. Participants included more than 1,000 farm households in 52 villages, encompassing 561 users of conventional tillage, 226 users of simple zero-tillage seeding implements, and 234 Happy Seeder users.

They found that only the Happy Seeder was able to sow wheat directly into large amounts of rice residues, with significant savings for farmers and equal or slightly better wheat yields, over conventional tillage. The Happy Seeder also saves time and water.

“Given the benefits of sowing wheat using the Happy Seeder against the tremendous health and environmental costs of residue burning, the reduction or elimination of straw burning should be pushed forward immediately,” said P.P. Krishnapriya, research scientist at the Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, and a co-author of the article. “Investments in social marketing and policies that foster the use of the Happy Seeders, including significant subsidies to purchase these machines, must be accompanied by stricter enforcement of the existing ban on residue burning.”

The study also found that the information sources most widely-available to farmers are currently geared towards conventional agricultural practices, but farmers who use the internet for agricultural information are more likely to be aware of the Happy Seeder.

“Awareness raising campaigns should use both conventional and novel channels,” said Priya Shyamsundar, lead economist at the Nature Conservancy (TNC) and co-author of the article. “As with any innovation that differs signiﬁcantly from current practices, social and behavioral levers such as frontline demonstrations, good champions, and peer-to-peer networking and training are critical.”

In addition, rather than having most individual farmers own a Happy Seeder — a highly-specialized implement whose cost of $1,900 may be prohibitive for many — researchers are instead promoting the idea of farmers hiring direct-sowing services from larger farmers or other people able to purchase a Happy Seeder and make a business of operating it, explained Alwin Keil, a senior agricultural economist with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and lead author of the new study.

“We are extremely grateful to the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), the Nature Conservancy, and the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat Agri-Food Systems (WHEAT), who supported our research,” said Keil.

Douglas Mungai holds up soil on his farm in Murang’a county, Kenya. (Photo: Robert Neptune/TNC)

Crop breeding and soil management must go hand in hand

Written by Emma Orchardson on December 8, 2020. Posted in Blogs.

There is a growing crisis beneath our feet. Scientists, soil specialists and policy-makers around the world are sounding the alarm about degrading soil conditions. And it is particularly stark in developing countries. In fact, about 40 per cent of soils in sub-Saharan Africa are already of poor quality.

Declining soil health causes poor crop yields, leading to further pressure on the soils as farmers struggle to meet food demands and eke out a living. Many farmers lack access to information or technologies to get out of this vicious cycle. If you are a farmer with the need to increase your yield in the face of these challenges, crop breeding and soil management offers a range of solutions as part of an Integrated Soil Fertility Management (ISFM) approach.

For instance, breeding programs which partner with CGIAR Excellence in Breeding (EiB) are working to deliver the best seed varieties for farmers to help them withstand harsh conditions and increase yields. Alongside this work, researchers are supporting farmers to adopt better agronomic practices, such as minimum tillage farming, crop rotation, proper spacing and planting date practices, the use of terracing or intercropping, or techniques to reduce water use.

Of course, breeding cannot happen in a vacuum. To protect soils and produce quality yields, these cropping measures should be closely matched to the best, context-appropriate soil management practices available to farmers, for instance around the type and timing of mineral fertilizer, along with organic sources like crop residues, compost or manure.

Indeed, a combination will bring the best results. But most of the time accessing either improved variety or best agronomic practice represent a challenge for farmers in low income countries.

Here are three ways crop breeders can ensure they deliver the best seeds and create the best conditions for long-term crop production.

Include farmers, agronomic experts and extension services when defining product requirements

Strong connections among public breeding programs and extension and agronomic groups are vital. There is growing discussion regarding how to broaden our work to better consider all the factors that contribute to a successful breeding scheme: genotyping, environment and management (GxExM). However, defining the management component is not easy. Do we breed for conditions that farmers are actually working with, or breed for conditions that they should adopt?

A key to answer this question is a strong breeding team defining the traits needed and wanted by farmers. To design the best product profile, it is imperative to involve extension teams and other groups that work on the development of sustainable agronomic practices.

A farmer inspects a drought-tolerant bean plant on a trial site in Malawi. (Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT) — A man inspects a drought-tolerant bean plant on a trial site in Malawi. (Photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT)

Properly manage research stations

Attention also needs to focus on the sustainability practices within research stations. It is all too easy to find degraded soil in public research stations. There are many reasons for this: inadequate long-term planning, lack of organized management structures, insufficient connections between breeding and agronomic teams, and lack of resources, to name a few.

Public research stations must serve as an example for the farmers in that specific region. Thus, it is not only what products we develop that matters, but also how we develop them. If we develop a good variety at the research station, but do so without adopting good agronomic practice, what example has been set for farmers and future generations? We need to ensure we invest in the best soil management practices along every step of the research phase.

Breed for specific soil characteristics

Once the breeding target is known, breeding for specific soil conditions is critical. This means developing varieties for soil conditions such as nutrient deficiencies or high salinity levels. CGIAR breeding programs have put in tremendous efforts with great impact here.

For example, AfricaRice and partners developed rice varieties branded ARICA (Advanced Rice Varieties for Africa) to be salt or iron toxicity tolerant, among other traits. This is helping farmers who farm under predominantly rainfed conditions, in which soils and yields are threatened by floods, droughts and toxicity.

Another standout product is Stress Tolerant Maize for Africa (STMA), led by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA). Breeders have developed varieties that can thrive in low soil fertility conditions, along with resistance to other stresses such as pests and drought. The project has seen the adoption of new maize varieties by more than six million households across 13 countries, with some farms increasing yields by over 150 per cent.

Our soils depend on breeding for the future. Breeding is showing real results for improving yields, delivering better food, and increasing smallholder incomes. But its impact on ecosystems could go either way. With the right investments in relationships, good research practices, and delivering varieties matched to particular soil conditions, we can breed for the present and for the future.

It is time to invest in both crop breeding and soil management — as one vital package of innovations.

A young man uses a precision spreader to distribute fertilizer in a field. (Photo: Mahesh Maske/CIMMYT)

Too much or never enough

Written by Emma Orchardson on December 4, 2020. Posted in Blogs.

Although nitrogen has helped in contributing to human dietary needs, there are still large areas of the world — namely sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia — that remain short of the amounts they need to achieve food and nutritional security.

Conversely, synthetic nitrogen has become increasingly crucial in today’s intensive agricultural systems, but nearly half of the fertilizer nitrogen applied on farms leaks into the surrounding environment. It is possible that we have now transgressed the sustainable planetary boundary for nitrogen, and this could have devasting consequences.

Given this conflicting dual role this compound plays in agricultural systems and the environment — both positive and negative — the nitrogen challenge is highly relevant across most of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) established by the United Nations.

Facing a global challenge

The challenge of nitrogen management globally is to provide enough nitrogen to meet global food security while minimizing the flow of unused nitrogen to the environment. One of the key approaches to addressing this is to improve nitrogen use efficiency – which not only enhances crop productivity but also minimizes environmental losses through careful agronomic management – and measures to improve soil quality over time.

Globally, average nitrogen use efficiency does not exceed 50%. Estimates show that a nitrogen use efficiency will need to reach 67% by 2050 if we are to meet global food demand while keeping surplus nitrogen within the limits for maintaining acceptable air and water qualities to meet the SDGs.

This target may seem ambitious — especially given the biological limits to achieving a very high nitrogen use efficiency — but it is achievable.

Earlier this year, J.K. Ladha and I co-authored a paper outlining the links between nitrogen fertilizer use in agricultural production systems and various SDGs. For instance, agricultural systems with suboptimal nitrogen application are characterized with low crop productivity, spiraling into the vicious cycle of poverty, malnutrition and poor economy, a case most common in the sub-Saharan Africa. These essentially relate to SDG 1 (no-poverty), 2 (zero-hunger), 3 (good health and well-being), 8 (decent work and economic growth) and 15 (life on land).

On the other hand, excess or imbalanced fertilizer nitrogen in parts of China and India have led to serious environmental hazards, degradation of land and economic loss. Balancing the amount of N input in these regions will contribute in achieving the SDG 13 (climate action). Equally, meeting some of the additional SDGs (5, gender equality; 6, clean water and sanitation; 10: reduced inequalities; etc.) requires optimum nitrogen application, which will also ensure “responsible consumption and production” (SDG 12).

A diagram shows the impact of fertilizer nitrogen use on the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. (Graphic: CIMMYT/Adapted from CCAFS)

So, how can we achieve this?

Increased research quantifying the linkages between nitrogen management and the SDGs will be important, but the key to success lies with raising awareness among policy makers, stakeholders and farmers.

Most agricultural soils have considerably depleted levels of soil organic matter. This is a central problem that results in agroecosystems losing their ability to retain and regulate the supply of nitrogen to crops. However, poor knowledge and heavy price subsidies are equally to blame for the excess or misuse of nitrogen.

While numerous technologies for efficient nitrogen management have been developed, delivery mechanisms need to be strengthened, as does encouragement for spontaneous adaptation and adoption by farmers. Equally — or perhaps more importantly — there is a need to create awareness and educate senior officials, policy makers, extension personnel and farmers on the impact of appropriate soil management and intelligent use of nitrogen fertilizer, in conjunction with biologically integrated strategies for soil fertility maintenance.

An effective and aggressive campaign against the misuse of nitrogen will be effective in areas where the compound is overused, while greater accessibility of nitrogen fertilizer and policies to move farmers towards soil quality improvement will be essential in regions where nitrogen use is currently sub-optimal.

It is only through this combination of approaches to improved system management, agricultural policies and awareness raising campaigns that we can sufficiently improve nitrogen use efficiency — and meet the SDGs before it’s too late.

Read the full study “Achieving the sustainable development goals in agriculture: the crucial role of nitrogen in cereal-based systems” in Advances in Agronomy.

A collage of shows images relating to different stages of the nitrogen cycle. (Graphic: Alfonso Cortés/CIMMYT)

Nitrogen in agriculture

Written by Emma Orchardson on December 4, 2020. Posted in Explainers.

Nitrogen is the most essential nutrient in crop production but also one of the most challenging to work with. The compound is central to global crop production — particularly for major cereals — but while many parts of the world do not have enough to achieve food and nutrition security, in others excess nitrogen from fertilizer leaks into the environment with damaging consequences.

What is nitrogen?

Around 78% of the Earth’s atmosphere is made up of nitrogen gas or N2 — a molecule made of two nitrogen atoms glued together by a stable, triple bond.

Though it makes up a large portion of the air we breathe, most living organisms can’t access it in this form. Atmospheric nitrogen must go through a natural process called nitrogen fixation to transform before it can be used for plant nutrition.

Why do plants need nitrogen?

In both plants and humans, nitrogen is used to make amino acids — which make the proteins that construct cells — and is one of the building blocks for DNA. It is also essential for plant growth because it is a major component of chlorophyll, the compound by which plants use sunlight energy to produce sugars from water and carbon dioxide (photosynthesis).

The nitrogen cycle

The nitrogen cycle is the process through which nitrogen moves from the atmosphere to earth, through soils and is released back into the atmosphere — converting in and out of its organic and inorganic forms.

It begins with biological nitrogen fixation, which occurs when nitrogen-fixing bacteria that live in the root nodules of legumes convert organic matter into ammonium and then nitrate. Plants are able to absorb nitrate from the soil and break it down into the nitrogen they need, while denitrifying bacteria convert excess nitrate back into inorganic nitrogen which is released back into the atmosphere.

The process can also begin with lightning, the heat from which ruptures the triple bonds of atmospheric nitrogen, freeing its atoms to combine with oxygen and create nitrous oxide gas, which dissolves in rain as nitric acid and is absorbed by the soil.

Excess nitrate or that lost through leaching — in which key nutrients are dissolved due to rain or irrigation — can seep into and pollute groundwater streams.

A diagram shows the process through which nitrogen moves from the atmosphere to earth, through soils and is released back into the atmosphere – converting in and out of its organic and inorganic forms. (Graphic: Nancy Valtierra/CIMMYT)

What about nitrogen fertilizer?

For thousands of years, humans didn’t need to worry about nitrogen, but by the turn of the Twentieth Century it was evident that intensive farming was depleting nitrate in the soil, which raised concerns about the world’s rising population and a possible food crisis.

In 1908, a German chemist named Fritz Haber devised a process for combining atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen under extreme heat and pressure to create liquid ammonia — a synthetic nitrogen fertilizer. He later worked with chemist and engineer Carl Bosch to industrialize this process and make it commercially available for farmers.

Once production was industrialized, synthetic nitrogen fertilizer — used in combination with new, high-yielding seed varieties — helped drive the Green Revolution and significantly boost global agricultural production from the late 1960s onwards. During this time Mexico became self-sufficient in wheat production, as did India and Pakistan, which were on the brink of famine.

In today’s intensive agricultural systems, synthetic nitrogen fertilizer has become increasingly crucial. Worldwide, companies currently produce over 100 million metric tons of this product every year, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations predicts that demand will continue to rise steadily, especially in Africa and South Asia.

Is it sustainable?

As demand continues to rise worldwide, the challenge of nitrogen management is to provide enough to meet global food security needs while minimizing the flow of unused nitrogen — which is 300 times more polluting than carbon dioxide — to the environment.

While many regions remain short of available nitrogen to achieve food and nutrition security, in others nearly half of the fertilizer nitrogen applied in agriculture is leaked into the environment, with negative consequences including increased environmental hazards, irreparable land degradation and the contamination of aquatic resources.

This challenge can be addressed by improving nitrogen use efficiency — a complex calculation which often involves a comparison between crop biomass (primarily economic yield) or nitrogen content/uptake (output) and the nitrogen applied (input) through any manure or synthetic fertilizer. Improving this ratio not only enhances crop productivity but also minimizes environmental losses through careful agronomic management and helps improve soil quality over time.

Currently, average global nitrogen use efficiency does not exceed 50%, which falls short of the estimated 67% needed to meet global food demand in 2050 while keeping surplus nitrogen within the limits for maintaining acceptable air and water qualities.

Cutting-edge technological options for nitrogen management are on the horizon, though in the short-term nitrogen use efficiency can best be improved at farmer-level, by targeting fertilizer application, use of slow-release nitrogen fertilizers, using precision nitrogen application tools (Green Seeker) or fertigation using micro irrigation.

A woman in India uses a precision spreader to apply fertilizer on her farm. (Photo: Wasim Iftikar)

Blue-sky technology

Much progress has been made in developing technologies for an efficient nitrogen management, which along with good agronomy are proven to enhance crop nitrogen harvest and nitrogen use efficiency with lower surplus nitrogen.

Scientists are investigating the merits of biological nitrification inhibition, a process through which a plant excretes material which influences the nitrogen cycle in the soil. Where this process occurs naturally — in some grasses and wheat wild relatives — it helps to significantly reduce nitrogen emissions.

In 2007, scientists discovered biological nitrification traits in a wheat relative and in 2018 they succeeded in transferring them into a Chinese spring wheat variety. The initial result showed low productivity and remains in the very early stages of development, but researchers are keen to assess whether this process could be applied to commercial wheat varieties in the future. If so, this technology could be a game changer for meeting global nitrogen use efficiency goals.

A farmer assesses soil on his plot in Ethiopia. (Photo: Simret Yasabu/CIMMYT)

Taking stock of the national toolbox

Written by Emma Orchardson on November 19, 2020. Posted in Features.

The Government of Ethiopia has consistently prioritized agriculture and sees it as a core component of the country’s growth. However, despite considerable efforts to improve productivity, poor management of soil health and fertility has been an ongoing constraint. This is mainly due to a lack of comprehensive site-and context-specific soil health and fertility management recommendations and dissemination approaches targeted to specific needs.

The government envisions a balanced soil health and fertility system that helps farmers cultivate and maintain high-quality and fertile soils through the promotion of appropriate soil-management techniques, provision of required inputs, and facilitation of appropriate enablers, including knowledge and finance.

So far, a plethora of different research-for-development activities have been carried out in support of this effort, including the introduction of tools which provide location-specific fertilizer recommendations. For example, researchers on the Taking Maize Agronomy to Scale in Africa (TAMASA) project, led by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), have created locally calibrated versions of Nutrient Expert® (NE) — a tool for generating fertilizer recommendations — for maize farmers in Ethiopia, Nigeria and Tanzania.

Nutrient Expert® is only one of the many fertilizer recommendation tools which have been developed in recent years covering different levels of applicability and accuracy across spatial scales and users, including smallholder farmers, extension agents and national researchers. However, in order to make efficient use of all the resources available in Ethiopia, there is a need to systematically evaluate the merits of each tool for different scales and use cases. To jump start this process, researchers from the TAMASA project commissioned an assessment of the tools and frameworks that have been developed, adapted and promoted in the country, and how they compare with one another for different use-cases. Seven tools were assessed, including Nutrient Expert®, the Ethiopian Soil Information System (EthioSIS) and RiceAdvice.

For each of these, the research team asked determined how the tool is currently being implemented — for example, as an app or as a generic set of steps for recommendation generation — and its data requirements, how robust the estimates are, how complicated the interface is, how easy it is to use, the conditions under which it performs well, and the spatial scale at which it works best.

Farmer Gudeye Leta harvests his local variety maize in Dalecho village, Gudeya Bila district, Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

Combining efforts and information

The results of this initial assessment indicate that the type of main user and the scale at which decisions are made varied from tool to tool. In addition, most of the tools considered have interactive interfaces and several — including Nutrient Expert® and RiceAdvice — have IT based platforms to automate the optimization of fertilizer recommendations and/or analyze profit. However, the source codes for all the IT based platforms and tools are inaccessible to end-users. This means that if further evaluation and improvements are to be made, there should be a means of collaborating with developers to share the back-end information, such as site-specific response curves and source codes.

Because most of the tools take different approaches to making fertilizer application site-specific, each of them renders unique strengths and trade-offs. For example, Nutrient Expert® may be considered strong in its approach of downscaling regionally calibrated responses to field level recommendations based on a few site-specific responses from farmers. By contrast, its calibration requires intensive data from nutrient omission trials and advice provision is time consuming.

Overall, the use of all the Site-Specific Decision-Support Tools (SSDST) has resulted in improved grain yields compared to when farmers use traditional practices, and this is consistent across all crops. On average, use of Nutrient Expert® improved maize, rice and wheat yields by 5.9%, 8.1% and 4.9%, respectively. Similarly, the use of RiceAdvice resulted in a 21.8% yield advantage.

The assessment shows that some of the tools are useful because of their applicability at local level by development agents, while others are good because of the data used to develop and validate them. However, in order to benefit the agricultural system in Ethiopia from the perspective of reliable fertilizer-use advisory, there is a need to develop a platform that combines the merits of all available tools. To achieve this, it has been suggested that the institutions who developed the individual tools join forces to combine efforts and information, including background data and source codes for IT based tools.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted efforts to convene discussions around this work, CIMMYT has and will continue to play an active advocacy role in supporting collaborative efforts to inform evidence-based reforms to fertilizer recommendations and other agronomic advice in Ethiopia and the wider region. CIMMYT is currently undertaking a more rigorous evaluation of these tools and frameworks as a follow up on the initial stocktaking activity.

Wheat disease common to South America jumps to Africa

Written by Mary Donovan on November 3, 2020. Posted in In the media.

Pawan Kumar Singh, head, wheat pathology, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) says that the fast-acting and devastating fungal disease known as wheat blast was first spotted in Africa in the Zambian rainfed wheat production system in the 2017-2018 crop cycle.

Latin America poised to lead the next 50 years in food systems and agrobiodiversity research

Written by Mary Donovan on October 16, 2020. Posted in News.

With global agriculture in stasis and under threat from climate change, Latin America’s role to address these challenges through innovation and partnerships is crucial. This was the main takeaway from a 2020 World Food Prize roundtable event, where representatives from four CGIAR centers discussed opportunities for increased investment in Latin America for developing innovations to improve global agriculture and agro-biodiversity.

The event was moderated by Natasha Santos, the Vice President of Global Stakeholders Strategy and Affairs for Bayer Crop Sciences. Speaking online from Brazil, Santos stressed the importance of private sector partnerships in Latin America for achieving sustainable growth and development.

Jesus Quintana, the Managing Director for the Americas, the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT opened the event with a short description of his organization’s work with development finance to promote sustainable development in the Amazon. “With USAID,” he said, “we are searching for business models that strengthen local innovations and social businesses to conserve biodiversity, including agri-food systems.”

Picking up on the idea of agri-food systems, Bram Govaerts, Interim Deputy Director General, Director of Integrated Development and Representative for the Americas, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), noted that the World Food Programme will receive the Nobel Peace Prize 50 years after Norman Borlaug – whose work was the inspiration for the CGIAR – became the first recipient of the prestigious award from the fields of food and agriculture. The span between awards, Govaerts said, serves as notice that much important work still remains in the fight against hunger and nutrition insecurity worldwide.

In this vein, Govaerts described CIMMYT’s work with a program called AgroTutor, which delivers site-specific data and recommendations tailored to farmers’ needs that help improve yields and facilitate more profitable market interactions.

The continuing mission to eradicate global hunger and promote development in the face of climate change can be uniquely addressed in the Andes, said Ginya Truitt Nakata, Regional Director for Latin America and the Caribbean, International Potato Center (CIP). Home to 85 of the world’s 110 biological life zones, Truitt Nakata said CIP’s Andean Initiative would use the mountains as a living laboratory for co-investigation of agricultural challenges with networks of smallholder farmers.

“The data and lessons we draw from these spaces will have application for farmers around the world,” she said.

As the event centered around recent CGIAR innovations in Latin American, Ruben G. Echeverría, Senior Research Fellow, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), said the greatest need, system-wide, is the bottleneck of ideas and innovations prior to implementation. For this reason, IFPRI is developing project incubation facilities to scale up innovations for stronger, further-reaching impact with farmers. “This work requires partnerships with public and private finance to help transform our knowledge into impact for food systems,” he said.

Following the short presentations, the roundtable opened a conversation that focused on the need for inclusiveness in research, private sector partnerships, and data collection supported by monitoring and learning.

“As the CG system, we are talking about participatory development with farmers – women, men and youth. It takes a little longer but the adoption rates [of innovation] are much higher,” Truitt Nakata said.

Agriculture in Latin America, like other regions of the world, also struggles with “brain drain,” losing talented young people to other sectors of the employment market. “So, when we talk about youth,” Echeverría responded, “We need more than participation. It’s about attracting young people to agricultural opportunities through IT and finance.”

Focusing on the technical side of innovation, Govaerts and Quintana cited the need for improved use of data.

“We need to multi-purpose data and use monitoring in real time to ensure better return on investment,” said Govaerts, “We need to know where we made progress and where we made mistakes.” Quintana endorsed that sentiment, “Careful monitoring of projects should be the heart of collaborative work, to generate baselines so we can accurately measure our impact and make more responsible use of resources.”

Given the wealth of ideas exchanged in the hour-long event, Marco Ferroni, the Chair of the CGIAR System Management Board, said the presentations showed the indispensable value of the region’s to food system and agrobiodiversity research.

“Latin America is the world’s largest food exporting region and important producer of ecosystem services that shape global weather patterns and climate… Motivated by the need to increase the scope of our impact, partnerships help us achieve critical mass in terms of data, analysis and delivery to stakeholders. For all these reasons, and others, Latin American food systems need and deserve policy attention and investment,” Ferroni said.

FOR MORE INFORMATION AND MEDIA CONTACTS:

Bioversity/CIAT: Adriana Varón a.p.varon@cgiar.org

CIMMYT: Ricardo Curiel: r.curiel@cgiar.org

CIP: Viviana Infantas: v.infantas@cgiar.org

IFPRI: Katarlah Taylor: k.taylor@cgiar.org

What is sustainable intensification?

Written by Mary Donovan on October 14, 2020. Posted in Explainers.

By 2050, the world’s population could grow to 9.7 billion, food demand is expected to increase by 50% and global demand for grains such as maize, rice and wheat could increase by 70%. How can we meet the food and nutrition demands of a rising population, without negative environmental and social consequences?

Sustainable intensification is an approach using innovations to increase productivity on existing agricultural land with positive environmental and social impacts. Both words, “sustainable” and “intensification,” carry equal weight.

CIMMYT conducts research on sustainable intensification to identify ways farmers can increase production of crops per unit of land, conserve or enhance important ecosystem services and improve resilience to shocks and stresses, especially those due to climate change and climate variability.

For example, CIMMYT’s research on sustainable intensification in India has helped shape policies that increase farmer income while reducing pollution and land degradation.

What is the scope of sustainable intensification?

Sustainable intensification takes into consideration impact on overall farm productivity, profitability, stability, production and market risks, resilience, as well as the interests and capacity of individual farmers to adopt innovations. It is not limited to environmental concerns, but also includes social and economic criteria such as improving livelihoods, equity and social capital.

Certain methods and principles are needed to achieve the goals of sustainable intensification. In collaboration with farmers and other change actors, CIMMYT carries out research-for-development projects to test and scale a range of technologies and approaches that contribute to these results. The research focuses on combined resource use efficiencies of crop production inputs: land, plant nutrients, labor and water.

One example is conservation agriculture, the combination of crop diversification, minimal soil movement and permanent soil cover. International scientific analysis has found that conservation agriculture can, in many places with different characteristics, play a crucial role towards achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Crop and system modeling, geographic information systems, remote sensing, scale-appropriate mechanization and socioeconomic modeling are some of the approaches that contribute to the design and evaluation of sustainable intensification alternatives in current farming systems.

Figure: Multi-criteria sustainability assessment of alternative (sustainable intensification) and reference systems in the Western Highlands of Guatemala.

What are some more examples?

Several interventions by CIMMYT aim at safeguarding biodiversity and protecting — in some cases increasing — ecosystem services crucial for small-scale farmers’ livelihoods and the health of all. Others have studied the impact of landscapes on dietary diversity and nutrition. Yet others have developed appropriate small-scale machines, allowing farmers to save time, costs and labor associated with agriculture to increase yields, halt the expansion of the agricultural frontier and invest in new opportunities.

How is sustainable intensification different from ecological intensification, agroecological intensification or climate-smart agriculture?

Sustainable intensification, ecological intensification and agroecological intensification strive for the same general goal to feed an increasing population without negative environmental and social consequences, but they place emphasis on different aspects.

Ecological intensification focuses on ecological processes in the agroecosystem. Agroecological intensification emphasizes a systems approach and strongly considers social and cultural perspectives.

Climate-smart agriculture and sustainable intensification are complementary, but climate-smart agriculture focuses on climate stress, adaptation and mitigation.

Sustainable intensification can be achieved with a range of methods, including these concepts. It is one strategy among many for global food system transformation.

What is the history of CIMMYT’s research on sustainable intensification?

In the 1960s, the Green Revolution brought high-yielding crops to some regions of Latin America and South Asia, allegedly saving millions from starvation. Yet the Green Revolution had unintended environmental and social consequences. Critics of the Green Revolution argued these cropping techniques were highly dependent on external inputs, fossil fuels and agrochemicals, causing environmental damage through overuse of fertilizers and water, and contributing to soil degradation.

In the 1980s, CIMMYT scientists began placing stronger emphasis on environmental and social aspects — such as conserving soil and water, and ensuring social inclusion of marginalized groups — recognizing their importance to sustain the intensification of crops in South Asia. It was understood that sustainability includes improving the livelihoods of rural people who depend on these natural resources, in addition to better resource management. CIMMYT began to take these considerations to the core of its work.

Farmers harvest maize cobs. — Farmers Maliamu Joni and Ruth Andrea harvest cobs of drought-tolerant maize in Mbeya, Tanzania. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)

Are these practices successful?

Sustainable intensification can boost yields, increase farmers’ profits and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions can be achieved by increasing nitrogen use efficiency, which also reduces groundwater pollution.

Research from CIMMYT’s SIMLESA project has shown that conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification practices led to a 60-90% increase in water infiltration and a 10-50% increase in maize yields in Malawi. In Ethiopia, crop incomes nearly doubled with crop diversification, reduced tillage and improved varieties, compared to using only one of these practices.

According to research from Stanford University, agricultural intensification has avoided emissions of up to 161 gigatons of carbon from 1961 to 2005. CIMMYT research shows that India could cut nearly 18% of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable intensification practices that reduce fertilizer consumption, improve water management and eliminate residue burning. Zero-tillage wheat can cut farm-related greenhouse gas emissions by more than 75% in India and is 10-20% more profitable on average than burning rice straw and sowing wheat using conventional tillage.

A CIMMYT study in Science shows that thousands of wheat farmers in northern India could increase their profits if they stop burning their rice straw residue and adopt no-till practices, which could also cut farm-related greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 78% and lower air pollution. This research and related work to promote no-till Happy Seeders led to a 2018 policy from the government of India to stop farmers from burning residue, including a $166 million subsidy to promote mechanization to manage crop residues within fields.

In light of this evidence, CIMMYT continues to work with stakeholders all along the value chain — from farmers to national agricultural research organizations and companies — to promote and scale the adoption of practices leading to sustainable intensification.

Cover photo: Irrigated fields under conservation agriculture at CIMMYT’s CENEB experiment station near Ciudad Obregón, Sonora, northern Mexico. (Photo: CIMMYT)

See our coverage of World Food Day 2020.

2020 World Food Prize recognizes career devoted to fight hunger and climate change through soil conservation

Written by Ricardo Curiel on October 14, 2020. Posted in News.

The World Food Prize Foundation is honoring the work of Rattan Lal, who dedicated his life to study the effect of soil health in food production and climate change mitigation. On October 15 he will receive the 2020 World Food Prize, considered the “Nobel Prize” of agriculture.

Lal, who serves as distinguished professor of Soil Science and founding director of the Carbon Management and Sequestration Center at Ohio State University, is a visionary who understood the intricate relationship between soil conservation, yield potential, nutrition and carbon sequestration.

“Dr. Lal’s innovative research demonstrated how healthy soils are a crucial component of sustainable agricultural intensification — enabling higher crop yields, while requiring less land, agrochemicals, tillage, water and energy”, announced the World Food Prize Foundation in a press release.

Lal becomes the 50^th person to receive the World Food Prize since the late Norman Borlaug — 1970 Nobel Peace Prize laureate — established the award in 1987. The award acknowledges outstanding contributions to human development by individuals who significantly improve the quality, quantity and availability of food on a global scale.

“CIMMYT actively researches and promotes the sustainable farming practices that Dr. Lal studied and advocated for since the late 1980s, such as no tillage, residue retention and crop rotation, which combined with new precision farming technologies help farmers increase yields, reduce food production costs and protect the environment”, said Bram Govaerts, Integrated Development director and representative for the Americas at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT).

The World Food Prize has a long association with CIMMYT. Sanjaya Rajaram was awarded the 2014 World Food Prize for his work that led to a prodigious increase in world wheat production. Evangelina Villegas and Surinder Vasal were awarded the 2000 World Food Prize for their work on productivity and nutritional content of maize. Bram Govaerts received the Norman Borlaug Field Award in 2014. As an institution, CIMMYT received the Norman Borlaug Field Medallion in 2014.

Wheat blast has made the intercontinental jump to Africa

Written by Mary Donovan on October 9, 2020. Posted in In the media.

For the first time, wheat blast, a fast-acting and devastating fungal disease, has been reported on the African continent, according to a new article published by scientists from the Zambian Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI), the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the US Department of Agriculture – Foreign Disease Weed Science Research Unit (USDA-ARS).

Wheat spikes damaged by wheat blast. (Photo: Xinyao He/CIMMYT)

Scientists find genomic regions associated with wheat blast resistance in CIMMYT nurseries

Written by Madeline Dahm on October 5, 2020. Posted in News.

Wheat spike damaged by wheat blast. — Wheat blast damages wheat spikes. (Photo: Xinyao He / CIMMYT)

In an article published in Nature Scientific Reports, a team of scientists led by wheat breeder Philomin Juliana from the International Wheat and Maize Improvement Center (CIMMYT) conducted a large genome-wide association study to look for genomic regions that could also be associated with resistance to wheat blast.

Juliana and fellow scientists found 36 significant markers on chromosome 2AS, 3BL, 4AL and 7BL that appeared to be consistently associated with blast resistance across different environments. Among these, 20 markers were found to be in the position of the 2NS translocation, a chromosomal segment transferred to wheat from a wild relative, Aegilops ventricosa, that has very strong and effective resistance to wheat blast.

The team also gained excellent insights into the blast resistance of the globally-distributed CIMMYT germplasm by genomic fingerprinting a panel over 4,000 wheat lines for the presence of the 2NS translocation, and found that it was present in 94.1% of lines from International Bread Wheat Screening Nurseries (IBWSNs) and 93.7% of lines from Semi-Arid Wheat Screening Nurseries (SAWSNs). Although it is reassuring that such a high percentage of CIMMYT wheat lines already have the 2NS translocation and implied blast resistance, finding other novel resistance genes will be instrumental in building widespread, global resilience to wheat blast outbreaks in the long-term.

The researchers used data collected over the last two years from CIMMYT’s IBWSNs and SAWSNs by collaborators at the Bangladesh Wheat and Maize Research Institute (BWMRI) and Bolivia’s Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agropecuaria y Forestal (INIAF).

Devastating fungal disease

Wheat blast, caused by the fungus Magnaporthe oryzae pathotype Triticum, was first identified in 1985 in South America, but has been seen in Bangladesh in recent years. The expansion of the disease is a great concern for regions of similar environmental conditions in South Asia, and other regions globally.

Although management of the disease using fungicide is possible, it is not completely effective for multiple reasons, including inefficiency during high disease pressure, resistance of the fungal populations to some classes of fungicides, and the affordability of fungicide to resource-poor farmers. Scientists see the development and deployment of wheat with genetic resistance to blast as the most sustainable and farmer-friendly approach to preventing devastating outbreaks around the world.

This work was made possible by the generous support of the Delivering Genetic Gains in Wheat (DGGW) project funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the U.K. Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) and managed by Cornell University, the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Feed the Future initiative, the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat (WHEAT), the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), The Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsråd), and the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR).

Read the full article:
Genome‑wide association mapping for wheat blast resistance in CIMMYT’s international screening nurseries evaluated in Bolivia and Bangladesh

This story was originally posted on the website of the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat (wheat.org).