Generation Challenge Programme
GCP website		Integrated Breeding
IBP website		Sunset Blog
Sunset blog		   Connect with us GCP on Facebook GCP on Twitter GCP on LinkedIn Subscribe to GCP Newsletter Subscribe to GCP RSS feeds

Rooting for the key to more phosphorus for rice

 Comparative genomics in cereals, Crop breeding, Genetics, Genomics, Rice  3 Responses »
Sep 072012
 

Preparing rice root samples (Photo: IRRI)ALL IN THE ROOTS: A plant’s roots are a marvellously multitalented organ. They act as fingers and mouths helping plants forage and absorb water and nutrients. They act like arms and legs offering a sturdy base of support so a plant doesn’t keel over. They help store food and water, like our stomach and fat cells. And in some plants, can spawn new life – we leave that to your imagination!

That is why it is of little surprise that this multitalented organ was the key to discovering why some rice lines yield better in phosphorus-poor soils, a puzzle whose answer has eluded farmers and researchers… until now.  And even better, the findings hold promise for sorghum, maize and wheat too. Please read on!

 In search of the key – The Gene Trackers
In 1999, Dr Matthias Wissuwa, now with the Japan International Research Centre for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS), deduced that Kasalath, a northern Indian rice variety, contained one or more genes that allowed it to grow successfully in low-phosphorus conditions.

For years, Matthias made it his mission to find these genes, only to find it was as easy as finding a needle in a genetic haystack. He teamed up with the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), and with GCP’s support, the gene trackers were able to narrow the search down to five genes of interest.

“We had started with 68 genes and within three years, we had narrowed in on these five candidate genes. And then, one-by-one, we checked whether they were related to phosphorous uptake,” recollects Dr Sigrid Heuer, senior scientist at IRRI and leader of the team that published the discovery in Nature in August 2012.

Sigrid Heuer at a rice phosphorus uptake demonstration field in The Philippines.

“In the end we found that if a certain protein kinase gene was turned on in tolerant plants like Kasalath, then those plants would perform better in phosphorus-deficient soils.”

They named this protein kinase gene PSTOL1, which stands for Phosphorus Starvation Tolerance. “When we put this gene into intolerant rice varieties that did not have this gene, they performed better in phosphorus-deficient soils.”

The importance of phosphorus
Rice, like all plants, needs phosphorus to survive and thrive. It’s a key element in plant metabolism, root growth, maturity and yield. Plants deficient in phosphorus are often stunted.

Sigrid explains that whereas phosphorus is abundant in most soils, it is however not always easily accessible by plants. “Many soil types bond tightly to phosphorus, surrendering only a tiny amount to plant roots. This is why more than half of the world’s rice lands are phosphorus-deficient.”

Farmers can get around this by applying phosphate fertilisers. However this is a very expensive exercise and is not an option for the majority of the world’s rice growers, especially the poorer ones –the price of rock phosphate has more than doubled since 2007. The practice is also not sustainable since it is a finite resource.

By selecting for rice varieties with PSTOL1, growers will be less reliant on phosphate fertilisers.

How it works: unravelling PSTOL1 mechanics
In phosphorus-poor soils, PSTOL1 switches on during the early stage of root development. The gene tells the plant to grow larger longer roots, which are able to forage through more soil to absorb and store more nutrients.

“By having a larger root surface area, plants can explore a greater area in the soil and find more phosphorus than usual,” says Sigrid. “It’s like having a larger sponge to absorb more water.”

A rice variety — IR-74 — with Pup1 (left) and without Pup1 (right).

Although the researchers focussed on this one key nutrient, they found the extra root growth helped with other vital elements like nitrogen and potassium.

Another by-chance discovery was that phosphorus uptake 1 (Pup1), the collection of genes (locus) where PSTOL1 is found, is present within a large group of rice varieties.

“We found that in upland rice varieties – those bred for drought-prone environments – most have Pup1,” says Sigrid. “So the breeders in these regions have, without knowing it, been selecting for phosphorus tolerance.”

“When thinking about it, it makes sense as phosphorus is very immobile in dry soils, therefore these plants would have had to adapt to grow longer roots to reach water deeper in the soil and this, at the same time, helps to access more reservoirs of phosphorous .”

Breeding for phosphorus tolerance, and going beyond rice
Using conventional breeding methods, Sigrid says that her team introduced PSTOL1 into two irrigated rice varieties and three Indonesian upland varieties, and found that this increased yields by up to 20 percent.

“In our pot experiments,” she added, “when we use soil that is really low in phosphorus, we see yield increases of 60 percent and more. This will mean growers of upland rice varieties will probably benefit the most from these new lines, which is pleasing given they are among the poorest rice growers in the world.”

Read how Indonesian researchers are developing their own breeds of upland rice with the PSTOL1 gene

Sigrid also sheds light on broadening the research to other crop varieties: “The project team is currently looking at Pup1 in sorghum and maize and we are just about to start on wheat.”

Building capacity and ensuring impact
Like all GCP projects, this one invests as much time in building capacity for country breeding programmes as on research.

Sigrid and her team are currently conducting the first Pup1 workshop to train researchers from Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. They will share molecular markers that indicate the presence of PSTOL1, techniques to select for the gene, as well as for new phosphorus-efficient varieties.

Breeding for phosphorus-efficient rice in the Philippines.

“The aim of these workshops is to take these important tools to where they are most needed and allow them to evolve according to the needs and requirements of each country,” says Dr Rajeev Varshney, GCP’s Comparative and Applied Genomics Leader. “Breeders will be able to breed new rice varieties faster and more easily, and with 100 percent certainty that their rice plants will have the gene. Within three to five years, each country will be able to breed varieties identical to those that growers know and trust except that they will now have the Pup1 gene and an improved ability to unlock and take up soil phosphorus.”

Joining hands in collaboration
This IRRI-led project was conducted in collaboration with JIRCAS and the Indonesian Center for Agricultural Biotechnology and Genetic Resources Research and Development (ICABIOGRAD) working with the Indonesian Centre for Rice Research. Other partners included: Italy’s University of Milano, Germany’s Max Planck Institute in Golm, the University of The Philippines at Los Baños, USA’s Cornell University and University of California (Davis and Riverside), Brazil’s EMBRAPA, Africa Rice Center, Iran’s Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute, Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and University of Dhaka in Bangladesh.

Links

Sigrid’s presentation at the GCP General Research Meeting 2011

Bird’s eye view from the Board

 Closing GCP, GCP, History  No Responses »
Jul 042012
 

The GCP community, its labours and joys

If tools and resources are not put to use, then we labour in vain...GCP contributes to food security by providing breeders with integrated tools, techniques and services to speed up the selection cycle, be this by conventional or molecular breeding. GCP focuses on developing new materials and new techniques and delivering these, and the appropriate breeding tools, technologies and services, to breeders. I think GCP has been one of the most successful builders of research and development partnerships.

The Board’s focus is now on auditing the Programme, and mapping a strategy to sustain its successful partnerships and systems, so that these can continue to deliver products and capacity to the developing world.”

Seatbelts on please! Time to take a tour with Andrew, for an ‘aerial’ view of GCP from the very  ‘top’.

Please meet Andrew Bennett (pictured), the Chair of GCP’s Executive Board. Among other responsibilities, he is also President of the Tropical Agricultural Association, UK, chairs the SciDev.Net Board, and previously chaired the CIFOR Board. He was formerly Executive Director of the Syngenta Foundation and Director of Rural Livelihoods and Environment at the Department for International Development (DFID, UK) where he was responsible for professional advice on policy and programmes on livelihoods, natural resources, environment, sustainable development and research. Andrew has worked on development programmes in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Pacific and the Caribbean.

Today, Andrew shares his perspectives on GCP’s work, its impact, the challenges, the community GCP has built, and the role of the Board. Please read on…

When was the GCP Board established, and what is its profile and role?
The Board was set up in mid-2008 towards the end of the first phase of the Programme. A review recommended that there be a fully independent Board, comprising people who had no conflict of interest with the Programme to facilitate decision-making.

Board members have between them a wide variety of skills and backgrounds, ranging from expertise in molecular biology to development assistance, socioeconomics, academia, finance, governance and change management.

We are committed to the role that can be played by science in development, and to the Programme. We have offered advice and helped the Programme’s Consortium Committee and management refocus the Programme. By all accounts, they seem happy with how things have evolved.

Because GCP is hosted by CIMMYT, the Board does not have to deal with any policy issues. That is the responsibility of the Consortium Committee. Our role is more to provide advice and to help with decision-making and implementation, which is great as we’ve been able to focus on the Programme’s science and people.

How long have you been involved with GCP?
Since the Board was established in 2008.

What does the GCP tagline – ‘Partnerships in modern crop breeding for food security’ – mean for you?
It means that all our undertakings are geared towards producing crop varieties that are tolerant to a range of environments, as well as being socially acceptable and appealing to farmers and markets.

How do you upgrade the planting material farmers have by fortifying it to combat the biotic and abiotic stresses? Half the challenge is breeding and selecting good material, and the other half is ensuring delivery of tools to breeders and new planting materials to farmers.

So GCP focuses on developing new materials and new techniques and delivering these, and the appropriate breeding tools, technologies and services, to breeders.

Why is GCP’s work important, and what does it mean for food security?
People who are food-secure have access to adequate food at all times to maintain healthy active lives. There are two sides to making this happen – access and availability.

GCP is increasing the number of varieties and lines tolerant to the conditions farmers are facing. What we cannot do is put money in the hands of poor people. If we supply people with the means to produce sustainable and healthy crops, they will have the means to produce food for themselves, and a means of making an income.

GCP contributes to food security by providing breeders with integrated tools, techniques and services to speed up the selection cycle, be this by conventional or molecular breeding.

For you, what have been the major outcomes of GCP so far?
GCP has shown that it is possible to form very productive partnerships across CGIAR institutes and advanced research establishments and those countries that have less scientific capacity. I think it has been one of the most successful builders of research and development partnerships. GCP has also shown public researchers can work very well with the private sector. The public sector has the means to build a lot of capacity.

I think GCP has demonstrated that it is possible to establish molecular breeding programmes in those parts of the world that do not have well-developed scientific infrastructure.

Just a little bit of money – relatively speaking of course – clear vision, and good leadership, can go very far, and produce tremendous benefits and progress.

GCP has also identified the constraints that we have to work within – the challenge of phenotyping and restrictions on the movement of genetic material to other parts of the world. GCP has paid particular attention to intellectual property [IP] because the information and materials GCP produces must remain in the public domain. IP in the international arena within which the Programme operates must span potentially conflicting national legislation regimes. It is a very complex area.

‘Challenge’ is in GCP’s name. What are the major challenges that the Programme has so far overcome?
Quite a number and more could be on the horizon. GCP has overcome some of these challenges. They include the problem of poor-quality phenotyping. This has been addressed through a comprehensive capacity-building programme, including laboratory and field infrastructure, and the training of research support staff in the developing-country field sites where GCP projects are being implemented.

Another challenge was focusing the Programme. At the start, the Programme was spread too thin, spanning too many crops and partners, but these have been progressively narrowed down in Phase II.

This narrowing is no mean feat in the public sector. In the private sector, you start with, say, a hundred projects, then after six months you halve them. After a year, you are down to 10 projects and you put all your resources into making those 10 ‘winners’ work. In the public sector, you keep the entire hundred going for three years, then you look for funding to keep them all running for another cycle. It’s a different culture: the private sector is product-oriented, while some aspects of the public sector emphasise contributing to the growth of knowledge and information, and to building or maintaining relationships, without necessarily asking about their usefulness and benefits to society.

The Board’s focus is now on auditing the Programme and mapping a strategy to sustain its successful partnerships and systems, so that these can continue to deliver products and capacity to the developing world.”

What are the future challenges that the Programme must overcome to remain sustainable?
There are many GCP activities that can be integrated into the new CGIAR Research Programmes. However, there may be other activities such as capacity building and IP management which – at this point in time – appear somewhat less easy to integrate into the new CGIAR Research Programmes.

There is also a danger – not unique to GCP but with all aid-assisted programmes – that when the money ends, everything will disappear into the archives. We have to make sure that doesn’t happen in this instance.

The Board’s focus is now on auditing the Programme and mapping a strategy to sustain its successful partnerships and systems, so that these can continue to deliver products and capacity to the developing world.

What are some of the lessons learnt so far?
GCP was born at a time when we thought molecular biology could solve all our problems quickly and efficiently. What I think we are finding is that molecular tools –while extremely useful – cannot entirely replace understanding the agronomy and phenotypic activities. Molecular biology alone is not a panacea or silver bullet for crop breeding; but it is a valuable tool.

Then there is capacity building: molecular breeding is a tool that you can only use if you have the capacity. Many parts of the world will require a lot of capacity building and support to be able to use the tools. GCP and its Integrated Breeding Platform can make a modest contribution to meeting this need through the proof-of-concept GCP Research Initiatives for selected crops and countries and establishing communities of practice.

If tools and resources are not put to use, then we labour in vain.

What has been the most enjoyable aspect of your position with GCP?
Without a doubt, attending the General Research Meetings has been the most enjoyable, meeting scientists from a wide range of institutes, backgrounds and countries.

These scientists come together because they share the same interests and a common goal. There’s a lively buzz of conversation. It is good to hear about what they are doing, what their aspirations are, and to learn from the knowledge and posters they bring to the meeting.

You don’t have to be a cutting-edge scientist to listen to these people whose enthusiasm is palpable. They are passionate, have a strong sense of community, enjoy what they are doing, and are just as keen to share this knowledge and enthusiasm. It’s all highly infectious!

Relevant links

Chickpea research in Ethiopia – A major boost for food security

 Africa, Chickpeas, Crop breeding  No Responses »
Jun 302012
 

Fikre Asnake (pictured)  is a researcher and breeder in both Tropical Legumes I and II projects (TLI and TLII), working at the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR).

He has been leading the project activities since 2008. Through the project, EIAR has obtained diverse chickpea germplasm from ICRISAT. This germplasm is undergoing different breeding schemes using marker-assisted recurrent selection (MARS) and marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC) for evaluation.

The germplasm is now in the pre-release testing phase. Some of the work is being done by postgraduate students trained by TLI (two PhDs and 1 MSc). The project is using MABC to introduce drought-resistant traits into proven superior cultivars. “We expect good gains in productivity for drought-prone environments, which will make a huge difference. The varieties we hope to release will increase not only quantity, but also quality,” says Fikre. “We anticipate some of these improved chickpea varieties will be released in the course of Phase II of the TLI project, based on work that began in Phase I.”

Building capacity
Capacity-building is a crucial cornerstone. “In addition to our three postgraduate students, about five or six of our researchers and technicians have been trained in molecular breeding and related areas, mostly at ICRISAT in India ,” reports Fikre. And that is not all: “We have also benefited from infrastructure improvements, including construction of a rainout shelter for our drought trials and coldrooms for seed preservation. A glasshouse will also be built for trials under controlled conditions.”

Fikre further notes, “These facilities and staff development will make us more effective in achieving the objectives we have set in the project. In addition, because the infrastructure is shared with other colleagues not directly involved in the TLI project, it is also an indirect conduit for further cementing synergies and collaboration, even as we already have good synergies with the national programme’s breeding scheme.”

Fikre is keen to see the capacity building translate into a larger critical mass of breeders conversant with molecular breeding, as well as an increase in the information on chickpeas, an area in which students have been extremely instrumental in eriching. “We are all learning a lot from molecular technologies through TLI, and beyond that, how to actually apply these technologies in a breeding programme.”

VIDEO: Fikre discusses capacity-building with other TLI colleagues

What next?
Looking into the future, what are Fikre’s projections and aspirations regarding TLI Phase II? “It is now time to test the drought-tolerant breeding lines already processed and tested through MARS. We will be undertaking this testing over the next two to three years or so, to see what gains have been made towards improving chickpeas.”

This testing will be done through multilocation trials both in research stations as well as on farmers’ fields, and will include a parallel evaluation and validation by colleagues outside the project.

“By the end of TLI Phase II, our goal is to have varieties that will go to farmers’ fields that will make a clearly discernible difference,” concludes Fikre.

VIDEO: Involving farmers in selecting varieties – Fikre and other TLI colleagues

Related links

 

Chickpea research in Kenya – A boon for the fallow period

 Africa, Chickpeas, Crop breeding, Legumes  No Responses »
Jun 302012
 

“When we first started working on this project in mid-2007, our breeding programme was very weak,” says Paul Kimurto (pictured), Lead Scientist for chickpea research in the Tropical Legumes I (TLI) project, Kenya, and a lecturer in Crop Science at Egerton University.

“We have since accumulated a lot of germplasm, a chickpea reference set, and a mapping population, all of which have greatly boosted our breeding programme. From these, we have been able to select appropriate genotypes, and we obtained 400 breeding lines. None of this would have been directly possible without GCP’s support,” adds Paul. [Editor’s note: A ‘reference set’ is a sub-sample of existing germplasm collections that facilitates and enables access to existing crop diversity for desired traits, such as drought tolerance or resistance to disease or pests]

Due to their hardiness against drought, chickpeas have been steadily gaining popularity in Kenyan drylands – including the dry highlands – where they are grown as a ‘relay’ crop after wheat and maize harvests during the short rains, when the land would otherwise lie fallow. “Chickpeas have therefore increased food security and nutritional status of more than 27,000 households living in Baringo, Koibatek, Kerio Valley and Bomet Districts in Kenya, who frequently face hunger due to frequent crop failure of main staples such as maize and beans owing to climate change,” says Paul.

Chickpea adoption in these areas has increased due to close collaboration between GCP, ICRISAT and Egerton University through funding, training, resources and germplasm facilitated by GCP.

Exposure and capacity building
Through the project, various members of the Egerton research team have benefited from training in Europe, Africa and Asia on wide-ranging aspects of modern breeding, including data management. The learning resources that the team accesses through GCP are also shared widely and used as teaching materials and resources for faculty staff and postgraduate students not directly involved in the project.

“We have also benefitted from physical infrastructure such as a rain-shelter, irrigation system, laboratory equipment and a greenhouse. We didn’t have these, and probably couldn’t have had them, because all these are costly investments. This has greatly improved the efficiency of not only our research, but also our teaching,” says Paul. In addition, three postgraduate students are supported by GCP – two are pursuing PhDs and one a Masters, all using modern molecular breeding methods in their studies.

VIDEO: Paul discusses capacity building in Kenya, alongside other TLI colleagues


Community gains

Besides the university, capacity building has benefited the broader community: agricultural extension staff from the Ministry of Agriculture and from Koibatek Farmers Training Centre (one of the project’s research site), have been trained in various fields. The Centre manager attended a GCP course in Ghana tailored for research station staff (link below), as did an Egerton University technician.

In addition to aiding research trials, the irrigation system and weather station installed at Koibatek help with teaching and producing crop seed and planting materials as well as pasture for the community, since the Centre has a mandate to provide high-quality seed and livestock breeds to the community.

According to Beatrice Komen, a farmer in Koibatek, the irrigation system “has enabled the Agricultural Training Centre supply us with high-quality pasture and crop seeds for planting during the right time because Egerton University uses it to produce sufficient seed without having to rely on seasonal conditions.”

Paul adds, “The automated weather station is a first in the region.” The weather station also feeds regional data into the national meteorological database and is used for teaching by secondary schools in the community.

Going further, faster
Paul observes “With the direct funding we obtain through the project, we are able to expand into other areas of dryland research such as soil science and nitrogen fixation for chickpeas. Our efficiency has also increased: with the greenhouse and rainout shelter, we can now rapidly obtain generation crosses. And the irrigation system means we can now do off-season trials without having to wait for seasonal changes.”

“We have learnt a lot through our involvement with the Programme, including outsourcing of genotyping services which GCP fully supports, the advanced tools and wide range of services offered by the Integrated Breeding Platform for both breeding and data management,” says Paul. “We have also received digital tablet for electronic field data collection in a more efficient and accurate manner compared to the traditional pen and paper.”

The goal
“Our goal is to apply the modern breeding methods we have learnt to release new improved drought- and disease-resistant varieties before the project closes in mid-2014.” Some of these new methods include using quantitative trait loci (QTLs) through marker-assisted selection (MAS) and marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC).

“The results we obtain will provide foundation seed that can then be used for mass production through the Tropical Legumes II project,” says Paul.

“Our task is not complete until we have improved varieties in the hands of farmers,” he concludes.

VIDEO on farmer participation, and the relevance of genomics – Paul and TLI colleagues

Related links

Chickpea research in India – Getting to the root of the matter to enhance drought tolerance

 Asia, Chickpeas, Crop breeding, Legumes  No Responses »
Jun 272012
 

India is the world’s largest producer and consumer of chickpea, accounting for more than a third (66 percent) of world production.

The Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) and the Indian Institute of Pulses Research (IIPR) are collaborating with the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) on marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC), to improve chickpeas for drought tolerance.

This complementary activity in the Tropical Legumes I project (TLI) Phase II is being funded by the Department of Biotechnology, Government of India.

Dr N Nadrajan (pictured left), IIPR Director, adds “We have been trained on the breeding tools offered by the Integrated Breeding Platform, including data management, and on electronic data collection using a handheld device.”

Shailesh Tripathi (pictured right) is a Senior Scientist working on chickpea breeding at IARI. “During Phase I of TLI, ICRISAT and its partners identified a root-trait QTL region which confers drought tolerance in chickpeas, and the markers by which to transfer this QTL region. By evaluating the chickpea reference set, ICRISAT and its partners in Africa identified about 40 lines for drought tolerance, and these lines are being used in Phase II of the project,” says Shailesh. [Editor’s note: A ‘reference set’ is a sub-sample of existing germplasm collections that facilitates and enables access to existing crop diversity for desired traits, such as drought tolerance or resistance to disease or pests]

“Through GCP, we have benefitted from training in molecular breeding. The benefits of this go beyond this project,” he adds.

The Indian scientists are using MABC as well as marker-assisted recurrent selection (MARS) in Phase II, applying genomic resources that came from Phase I of the project.

“Our goal is to obtain lines with good root traits for drought tolerance,” says Shailesh, realistically adding that “Variety release will take time, but the good news is that we already have the pre-release materials to identify donors for specific traits, like root biomass.”

Progress in chickpea research in Africa and Asia

Related links

Chickpeas: Toughening a tough crop for tougher times by healing its Achilles’ heel

 Africa, Chickpeas, Crop breeding, Legumes  No Responses »
Jun 262012
 

It’s all about water and weakness – or strength. The Greek legend has it that Achilles was dipped into River Styx by his mother, Thetis, in order to make him invulnerable. His heel wasn’t covered by the water and he later died of the wound from an arrow that struck his heel.

In our times, this analogy can be applied to chickpeas, where this streetwise tough customer in the crop kingdom that thrives on the most rugged terrains is hamstrung if there is no rain at the critical grain-filling period – its sole Achilles’ heel, when it cannot take the searing heat in the drylands it otherwise thrives in.

But before you read on about the latter-day borrowing of this ancient legend, and science’s quest to heal the hit from heat and to cure the crop’s fatal flaw on water, first, an important aside…

Who’s now calling the shots in chickpea research?

Molecular breeding in Phase I was led by ICRISAT, with country partners in a supporting role. In Phase II, activities are being led by country partners, which also assures sustainability and continuity of the work. ICRISAT is now in a facilitating role, providing training and data, while the research work is now in the hands of country partners.” – Pooran Gaur, Principal Scientist: Chickpea Breeding,  ICRISAT.

The facts
Chickpeas are an ancient crop that was first domesticated in central and western Asia. Today, this crop is cultivated in 40 countries and is second only to common beans as the food legume most widely grown by smallholders. The two main types of chickpeas – desi and kabuli – are valuable for both subsistence and cash.

Even for the hardy, times are tough
“Chickpeas are well-known to be drought-tolerant,” says Rajeev K Varshney, Principal Investigator of the project to improve chickpeas work in the Tropical Legumes I Project (TLI). He explains, “The plants are very efficient in using water and possess roots that seek out residual moisture in deeper soil layers.” However, he points out that, with changing climatic conditions, especially in drier areas, terminal drought – when rain does not fall during grain-filling – is the crop’s Achilles’ heel, and principal production constraint.

“Chickpeas are such tough plants that, even for conditions of terminal drought, yields can be increased by improving root characteristics and water-use efficiency,” says Rajeev. The research team has identified several lines with superior traits such as drought tolerance, after screening a set of 300 diverse lines selected based on molecular diversity of large germplasm collections.

VIDEO CLIP: Recipe for chickpea success

Enhancing the genetic makeup to beat the heat
The team went on to develop genomic resources such as molecular markers. With these markers, the team developed a high-density genetic map, and identified a genomic region containing several quantitative trait loci (QTLs), conferring drought tolerance. “QTLs help pinpoint, more specifically, the location of genes that govern particular traits like root length” explains Rajeev.

Longer roots will naturally give the plants a deeper reach into the water table. Root length is the difference between survival and perishing, which is why trees will be left standing on a landscape otherwise laid bare by prolonged drought.

Q for ‘quick’: QTLs speed things along from lab to field, and running with the winners
The discovery of QTLs makes identifying tolerant plants not only easier, but also cheaper and faster. “This means that better-adapted varieties will reach farmers faster, improving food security,” says Rajeev.

Pooran Gaur, GCP’s Product Delivery Coordinator for chickpeas, Principal Scientist for Chickpea Breeding at ICRISAT, and an important collaborator on the TLI project, adds, “We began marker-assisted selection backcrossing (MABC) in Phase I. By 2011, lines were already being evaluated in Ethiopia, India and Kenya. We are now at the stage of singling out the most promising lines.”

Putting chickpeas to the test: Rajeev Varshney (left) and Pooran Gaur (right) inspecting a chickpea field trial.

What was achieved in Phase I, and what outcomes are expected?
Phase I run from mid-2007 to mid-2010, during which time 10 superior lines for improved drought tolerance and insect resistance were identified for Ethiopia, Kenya and India. As well, a total of 1,600 SSR markers and 768 SNPs on GoldenGate assays were developed, along with an expanded DArT array with more than 15,000 features. A high-density reference genetic map and two intraspecific genetic maps were developed.

“We now have materials from marker-assisted backcrossing by using the genomic resources we produced in Phase I. These materials were sent to partners last year [2011]. And because in most cases we have the same people working in TLI as in TLII, this material is being simultaneously evaluated across six to seven locations by all TLI and TLII partners,” says Pooran.

“Preliminary analysis of data is quite encouraging and it seems that we will have drought-tolerant lines soon,” adds Rajeev.

Future work, and who’s now calling the shots in the field
In Phase II, 1,500 SNPs on cost-effective KASPar assays have been developed that have been useful to develop a denser genetic map. In collaboration with University of California–Davis (USA) and the National Institute of Plant Genome Research (India), a physical map has been developed that will help to isolate the genes underlying the QTL region for drought tolerance. A novel molecular breeding approach called marker-assisted recurrent selection (MARS) has been adopted. Over the remaining two years of Phase II, the chickpea work will focus on developing chickpea populations with superior genotypes for drought tolerance through MABC and MARS.

Pooran adds, “Molecular breeding in Phase I was led by ICRISAT, with country partners in a supporting role. In Phase II, activities are being led by country partners, which also assures sustainability and continuity of the work. ICRISAT is now in a facilitating role, providing training and data, while the MABC and MARS aspects are both in the hands of country partners.”

“Another important activity in Phase II is development of multi-parents advanced generation intercross (MAGIC) population that will help generation of genetic populations with enhanced genetic diversity,” says Rajeev.

Partnerships
The chickpea work is led by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), working with partners at the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Egerton University in Kenya, and the Indian Agricultural Research Institute. Additional collaborators in Phase I included the University of California–Davis (USA), the National Center for Genome Resources (USA) and DArT P/L (Australia).

For more information on the overall work in chickpeas, please contact Rajeev K Varshney, Principal Investigator of the chickpea work.

Video: Featuring Rajeev and partners Fikre Asnake (Ethiopia) and Paul Kimurto (Kenya)

Related links

 

 

Hitting the nail on the head: A nuts-and-bolts approach to local capacity empowerment (extended version)

 Capacity building, Closing GCP  No Responses »
Jun 202012
 

Breathing life into support services

By addressing the needs at the heart of quality agricultural research, right there on the station, GCP was the first to cotton on to a crucial missing link between researcher, research station, and support services.” – Hannibal Muhtar

Want to cut to the chase and only need the bare bones of this story? Skip over to the short version

“One thing that really energises me,” enthuses GCP Consultant Hannibal Muhtar, “is seeing people understand why they need to do the work, and being given the chance to do the how.” And so was born another wonderfully fruitful GCP collaboration. Hannibal, who describes the assignment as “a breath of fresh air,” was asked to identify, together with GCP project Principal Investigators, African research sites of ongoing or potential GCP Research Initiative projects where effective scientific research might be hampered by significant gaps in one fundamental area: infrastructure, equipment and support services.

Meet Hannibal Muhtar (Audio clip)

As at June 2012, the 19 sites selected were:

Burkina Faso – L’Institut de l’environnement et de recherches agricoles sites at :
1.  Banfora
2.  Farako-Bâ Regional Centre
Ethiopia
3.  Hawassa Agricultural Research Station
4.  The Southern Agricultural Research Institute
Ghana – Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Crops Research Institute sites at:
5.  Kumasi
6.  Tamale
Kenya
7.    Moi University (site 1)
8.    Moi University (site 2)
9.    Egerton University (Njoro site)
10.    Egerton University (Koibatek Farmers Training Centre)
Mali – L’Institut d’Économie Rurale sites at:
11.    Sotuba
12.    Cinzana
13.    Longrola
Niger – ICRISAT site
14.    Sadore
Nigeria
15.    National Cereals Research Institute
National Root Crops Research Institute sites at:
16.    Umudike
17.    Kano
Tanzania – Agricultural Research Institute at:
18.    Naliendele
19.    Mtwara

Flashback to 2010. Picture on the left: Hannibal at a planning session at Sega, Western Kenya, with Samuel Gudu and  Onkware Augustino. Picture on the right: Similarly, at Naliendele, in Tanzania with Omari Mponda.

Flashback to 2010. Picture on the left: Hannibal at a planning session at Sega, Western Kenya, with Samuel Gudu and  Onkware Augustino. Picture on the right: Similarly, at Naliendele, in Tanzania with Omari Mponda.

Embarking on the voyage to change, storms ‘n’ all
Hannibal, armed with years of practical experience in the application of engineering sciences in agriculture and developing countries, as well as an attentive ear to the real needs of researchers, embarked on a series of visits to these research stations in 2010 and 2011, meeting with staff of all levels, departments and functions, carrying out in-depth analyses and draw up concrete recommendations for infrastructure and support service investments for each of the sites so that good-quality field evaluations (‘phenotyping’ in ‘breeder-speak) of GCP-funded projects could be conducted. Thanks to funding from GCP’s Integrated Breeding Platform (IBP), and to the openness, commitment and energy of research staff on the ground to implement these recommendations, the efforts of multiple cross-cutting partnerships across Sub-Saharan Africa are, in 2012, starting to bear fruit. But it has not all been smooth sailing, and the storms encountered along the way to reach this end goal should not be underestimated.

Weeds, wear and tear, and a walk on the wild side
The obstacles, says GCP’s Director of Research, Xavier Delannay (pictured, can often be mundane in nature – a  lack of or faulty weather stations or irrigation systems, or fields ravaged by weeds or drainage problems and in dire need of rehabilitation, for example. Yet such factors compromise brilliant research. A simple lack of fencing, Xavier and Hannibal expound, commonly results not only in equipment being stolen, but also in roaming cattle and wild animals – boars, monkeys, hippopotamus and hyena, to name but a few – stomping over precious experiment sites and posing serious threats to field staff safety. “The real challenge lies not in the science, but rather in the real nuts-and-bolts of getting the work done in local field conditions,” he explains.’’

Hannibal concurs: “If GCP had not invested in these research support infrastructure and services, then their investment in research would have been in vain. Tools and services must be in place as and when needed, and in good working order. Tractors must be able to plough when they should plough.’’

But a critical change is also needed in mindset and budgeting. ‘’The word ‘maintenance,’’’ a Senegalese partner commented to Hannibal, describing his institute, “does not exist in our vocabulary and is not a line-item on our budget.”

The problem then is not always about limited funds but rather much more on how the funds available are budgeted, excluding the all-essential support services.

Getting down to the brass tacks of local empowerment, and aiming higher
Multi-lingual and fluent in English, Arabic and French, Hannibal employed a multi-faceted customised approach, based on the needs of each site, be it sharing his tricks-of-the-trade and improvising local solutions, or guiding researchers in identifying their specific needs, as well as on where and how to request equipment, just to mention a few examples. In other cases he would teach local station managers to build and apply simple yet revolutionary tools such as land-levellers (referred to as ‘floats’ in industrial-speak), as well as row-markers for more uniform spacing between rows and plants in the field.

In addition, he would organise a training workshops in either English or French, with different content for technicians, machine operators and station managers. The dedication demonstrated by this latter group to both learn and continue these efforts after the training was particularly pertinent for ensuring the long-term sustainability of the investments.

A colourful menu of options, then, for achieving one common overarching objective, which, as summarised neatly by Xavier, is: “The effective running of local experiment stations, for facilitating local research, improving local crops, and ultimately leading to empowerment and self-reliance of local farming communities.”

“At the end of the day, it’s about achieving food security and improving livelihoods,” Hannibal emphasises. Looking back at some of the research stations that are now well-equipped and are being managed well, and the improved crop varieties being produced and projected, Hannibal highlights the “harmonious chain” triggered as a result: “Food security and better livelihoods pave way for healthy, well-fed families, and agriculture growing beyond subsistence into an economic activity,” Hannibal concludes.

Lights, curtain… ACTION!
Much like in theatre, with all the ‘props’ in place, Hannibal reports that field trials are now performing well, thanks to the all-important ‘backstage’ support service elements being in good shape. Hannibal likens the positive feedback from the partners he has worked with to “A glass of cold water, after a long day in the sun!”

And there’s a beautiful simplicity to the impacts described: “With proper infrastructure in place, and with research station staff duly equipped with the hands-on expertise and practical know-how to utilise and apply this infrastructure and training, we’re now seeing field experiments being conducted as they should be, and getting good-quality phenotyping data as a result,” says Xavier. “Moreover,” he continues, “by providing glass-houses or the capacity to irrigate in the dry season, we are enabling breeders to accelerate their breeding cycles, so that they can work all year round, rather than having to wait until the rain comes.” Sites hosting GCP projects on rice in Nigeria, as well as on sorghum and rice in Mali, are just a few examples of those enjoying off-season work thanks to new irrigation systems.

Similar good news is expected soon for cassava in Ghana and in northern Nigeria. And yet more good news: in some cases, the impacts have not been limited to the trials, or even to the research trials and stations alone, as Xavier highlights with an example from Kenya: “The establishment of an irrigation system on a plot at Koibatek Farmer Training Centre – a partner of Egerton University – yielded excellent results for chickpea experiments. We emphasised that we did not want the equipment to be ‘bracketed’ exclusively for science and experiments. So, it was also used to train staff and farmers from the local community as well. This was greatly appreciated.”

Seeing the nuts-and-bolts now firmly in place for the majority of the sites visited, Hannibal believes GCP has facilitated a pioneering approach to local capacity building: “By addressing the needs at the heart of quality agricultural research, right there on the station, GCP was the first to cotton on to a crucial missing link between researcher, research station, and support services,” he reveals.

…Another missing link…
But the job is not quite done. One crucial gap is the sensitisation of upper management – those at the helm of national research institutes and research station Directors – to support and sustain infrastructure, training and related services. In some cases, costs could be easily met by utilising a priceless asset that most institutes already have, and which they could put to greater us – land and a controlled environment.

Upper management needs to be actively on board. “A research institute should work like a good sewing machine,” says Hannibal. “All well-oiled, all parts working well, and everybody knowing what they need to do.”

In the meantime, however, results from the field suggest that researchers in GCP projects are already reaping the benefits from improved infrastructure and support services, and are already off to a good start.

The stage is therefore set: backstage and props are well primed, performance trials are acting like they should, and the ‘theatre directors’ have an eye on sustainability after GCP’s final curtain call in 2014.

So, long may the show go on, with a cautionary word, however, to continually seek ways to not only maintain but also enhance performance!

Relevant links

  • PODCASTS: You can also listen to Hannibal, by tuning into Episode 2 for the entire interview, or zooming in on your particular area of interest in the mini-podcasts labelled Episodes 2.1 to 2.7 c here.
  • Capacity building
  • Research Initiatives
  • Integrated Breeding Platform website

 

 Newer Entries
cheap ghd australia