Germany. 1. Introduction. Lothar Frese

Transcription

1 Germany Lothar Frese Julius Kühn-Institut, Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants (JKI), Institute for Breeding Research on Agricultural Crops, Quedlinburg, Germany ( 1. Introduction This introduction is based on the Second National Report on the state of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture in Germany published by BLE-IBV in 2008 and focuses on aspects that are of importance to the PGR Secure project. The Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) is located in middle Europe and covers an area of km 2. According to Meynen and Schmithüsen the landscape can be divided into 89 ecogeographic units ranging from low land coastal areas to high mountains in Alp regions. About 4200 crop and CWR species occur in German (Kell et al., 2008); of 3500 plant species distribution records and species descriptions are kept in the information system FloraWeb ( In ,704,000 ha were managed by farm enterprises of which 5.5% belong to the ecological farming sector. While the number of farm enterprises is steadily decreasing the average farm size is increasing. In % of the farmers owned up to 50 ha, 24.9% between 50 and 200 ha and 3.6% between 200 and more than 1000 ha. The major crop group are cereals (6.6 Mill. ha), row crops (0.62 Mill. ha), industrial crops (1.5 Mill. ha) and crops harvest green (2.6 Mill. ha; forage / bio energy) ( Breeders create a larger number of varieties of which the most successful ones dominate the production. In winter barley and winter wheat the five most successful varieties covered approximately 50% of winter barley and winter wheat production area between 1995 and Although vegetable, fruit crops, spices and pharmaceutical plants are grown on less than 1% of the agricultural land they contribute in terms of numbers with a total of 170 species the most to interspecific diversity in crop production. The (global and national) agricultural policy determines the species diversity in crop production as was shown by Piorr und Lehmann (2004). The Federal Government published the National Strategy on Biological Diversity in The German Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV) published the sectional Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery in the same year. The second expert program for plant genetic resources was published in June 2012 and is based on this BMELV strategy. The expert program can be considered as a rolling process. It identifies needs, actions and actors responsible for the implementation of measures required to improve the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources, including landrace and CWR, in Germany. In addition, the Federal Government, and the Länder encourage the farmers to protect plant genetic resources by means of special agri-environmental measures.

2 Wild plant species are protected through nature conservation laws and are managed in protected areas such as the Natura 2000 network. These areas fall into the responsibility of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU). Actions have been undertaken by the BMELV to specifically improve the in situ conservation of CWR and landrace conservation on-farm. However, compared to the ex situ conservation programs the development of in situ conservation approaches for landraces and CWR are still at an early stage. On this background the present survey focussed predominantly on the maintenance and use of landraces (LR) and crop wild relatives (CWR) in an ex situ context. To this end stakeholders of plant genetic resources (PGR) were interviewed using the guideline-based interview technique with a fixed set of questions to be asked. For each stakeholder group a separate set of questions was selected from a much larger set and allocated to the categories: C capacity, S state, A - access, Info information, Coop cooperation, Pol policy and T Trends. Stakeholders interviewed were genebanks Dr. U. Lohwasser, IPK on 02 February 2012, Dr. E.Maul, JKI, on 27 January 2012; public research organizations Dr. F. Marthe, JKI, on 16 February 2012, Dr. B. Horneburg, University of Göttingen, on 17 February 2012; NGOs Mr. C. Blank, VERN, on 17 February 2012, Dipl.-Biol. U. Reinhard, Dr. S. Gura, VEN, on 17 February 2012, and breeding companies Dr. R. von Broock, KWS Lochow GmbH, on 30 January 2012, Dr. E. Esch, Hild Samen GmbH, on 14 February Interviews lasted around 1-2 hours per interview. On the basis of the interviews a short report including a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity and threat) analysis was carried out and action points formulated concerning the use of crop wild relatives and landraces in Germany. 2. Stakeholder interviews 2.1 Genebanks Capacity and state The federal ex-situ collection of agricultural and horticultural plants is managed by the Department Genebank of the Institute for Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research (IPK). The department manages a large multi-crop collection. The work is performed by 65 persons and in addition seasonal workers. The genebank deploys about 50% of the staff capacity for routine genebank work and another 50% into research with seed physiology as a major research field. The genebank has an annual budget of about 11 Mill. (including personal costs). The Vitis genebank managed by the Julius Kühn-Institut, Institute of Grapevine Breeding Geilweilerhof is a component of the German Vitis Genebank Network and the network coordinating unit as well. This grapevine breeding institute deploys 6-7 persons for genebank work which accounts for most of the annual genebank budget of 0.34 Mill.. Additional genebanks for specific crops or plant groups such as hop, fruit crop, ornamental plants as well as wild plants for food and agriculture exist. These genebanks form national networks with a set of decentralized holdings and central coordination units. If the capacity would increase the IPK genebank will intensify screening and pre-breeding. The collection of landraces and CWR was also seen as a necessary task. IPK would in particular collect CWRs if additional funds will allow an increase of storage capacities. The Vitis genebank would increase collection related research. With decreasing funding IPK

3 would concentrate on the collection maintenance since this has absolute priority while the Vitis genebank would reduce the intensity of work in general (as field stands of a durable crop are not under immediate risk of getting lost). The top five crops of the IPK genebank in terms of number of accessions are wheat (28111), barley (23245), Phaseolus beans (9146), cultivated and wild forms of potato (6124) and peas (5295). Most of the wheat and barley collection is well characterised while there is still work to be done for the remaining species. Other crops are systematically characterized whenever they are reproduced in the field. The JKI Vitis collection amounts to 3789 accessions including landraces, wild species and crosses between the cultivated grapevine and wild species and is very well characterized. The characterization work is based on standard descriptor list and is performed systematically. The collection will never be completely evaluated as new aspects always accrue. Evaluation is a rolling process and the extent of evaluation largely depends on the amount of funding for this often costly work. The Institute of Grapevine breeding has always been quite successful in acquiring funds for characterization and evaluation. Both genebanks cooperate intensively within the framework of national and internationally funded projects. About one person months of permanent staff is invested by the IPK Genebank into national PGRFA board meetings and ECPGR meetings. The Institute for Grapevine Breeding invests about 80% of a technical staff member and 20% of a scientist in national and international cooperation, in particular in the development and operation of information systems with a European and international scope. In this respect the institute has a unique selling point which facilitates cooperation and acquisition of projects. The institute s contribution to the international cooperation benefits the user community and pays off for the institute as well. Access and information Users can search for germplasm held by the IPK genebank via the online Genebank Information System (GBIS) but can also start searching in EURISCO or many ECPGR crop specific databases. The passport data of the IPK genebank are offered in German and English language as well. The passport and characterization data of the JKI Vitis genebank can be searched online either via the European Vitis Data Base or EURISCO. The Vitis International Variety Catalogue (VIVC) is also an important information source. Evaluation data are offline but can be made available by the institute on request. In the latter case, the limiting factor is the work capacity available for compiling user specific sets of evaluation data. The samples can be ordered online via GBIS (click-wrap procedure for the smta) or via letter / . Then the smta is also sent via letter or . The smta is also used by the Vitis genebank although Vitis is not on the Annex I of the International Treaty. Request can be send by letter or . The Vitis genebank requests private, non-commercial users to sign a simplified MTA. The IPK genebank dispatched accessions of the top five crops in the period of July 2010 to June The information system was able to calculate for the top five crops the percentage of CWR and landrace accessions sent to users which ranged between 69% (top 1) to 17% (top 5). On average 125 Vitis accessions are distributed to users each year of which about 20% fall into the category of landraces and CWR. GBIS became operational in 2006/2007. The genebank works continuously on the improvement of the information system. It concerns the addition of components and the improvement of application software. This work can be performed by the in-house staff as part of their routine work. The digitisation of existing data was mentioned as a more important task for the time being.

4 The characterisation and evaluation (C&E) data are either recorded in an information system developed by the EVA II group (barley, wheat) and hosted and operated by the JKI. Data on potato are kept in an Access database which is not online but freely accessible on request. C&E data generated by the IPK on other species will be integrated in the information system step-wise. This is a long-lasting process. The Institute for Grapevine Breeding of the JKI records C&E data systematically in an information system. The information systems are further improved using the agile software development strategy. Obsolete modules of the information system are modernized step-wise with the help of the central information technology group of the JKI. Currently the establishment of high throughput phenotpying technologies is planned to facilitate the observation of traits in the grapevine genebank field stand. All passport data of accession belonging to the national inventory are uploaded to EURISCO. Cooperation The IPK genebank is embedded into a strong external and internal research environment which facilitates cooperation with various kinds of partners. CWR are used in research work on a limited scale, mainly in screening project. Concerning CWR and landraces the activities are rather limited with Hordeum as an outstanding exception. The Institute for Grapevine Breeding holds a genebank and is a variety breeder at the same time. The Vitis genebank cooperates with breeders as well as private persons selecting clones (selection of variants within clone varieties). The use of pest and disease resistant CWR originating from North America and Asian countries is high on top of the institute s work program. The wild species from Europe is a significant source of quality traits. Policy and constraints A national expert program for PGRFA, which specifically stresses the need to conserve landraces and CWR is existing and is being implemented. Currently a focus is set on the establishment of a genebank network for CWR and wild species for food and agriculture and on projects to conserve former breeder s varieties on-farm and wild species in situ. With respect to the ex situ management no basic changes were considered necessary by both interview partners as the work is well organised. Changes to the expert program are not necessary as the aims of the current program have not fully been achieved. Actions needed to conserve landrace and wild species are published on the website of the BLE and measures can be funded through on-farm and in situ management projects such as specific measurements for grapevine landraces on-farm conservation. Such programs and projects are of limited relevance to the IPK which only observes the development and provides material on request. At the EU level the GENRES projects have promoted the description of leafy vegetables, barley, Allium, Solanum, Brassica, Daucus, Vitis and Beta. With regard to CWR the impact of GENRES was appraised as rather limited while in the case of landraces projects may have let to the development of market niches. Concerning the collection maintenance, the GENRES program played almost no role for the IPK genebank. Whereas the impact of GENRES on the national work was assessed as rather limited the high importance of GENRES at the European level was stressed by the interviewed genebanks. The GENRES program contributed to a more efficient and effective European genetic resources conservation and utilization work. Trends The heterogeneity of landrace and CWR accession make a reliable characterisation of this material difficult. The user is therefore faced with heterogeneous material and data. The intensification of pre-breeding could solve this problem by producing introgression lines.

5 Such approach would also help raising the overall performance of landrace and CWR to the level of modern breeding lines. Such service would promote the use of genebank collections. The maintenance of the genebank collections was considered the most important task for today and tomorrow. In this context the improvement of the quality management system (the IPK genebank is certified according to ISO9001:2008) was mentioned as a challenge. The research on long-term storage effects on seeds and other storage materials and research on the adaptability of crops in the face of climate change was seen as an important trend. The development and improvement of a European-wide harmonised Vitis collection management was seen as a future challenge. AEGIS will play an important role in this process. The identification of unique accessions and the further development of a highly diverse core collection will be increasingly supported by knowledge and tools produced by genomic research. In the field of on farm management of Vitis landraces wine-growers shall assume a stronger role as the maintenance of genetic resources is not only a task of public institutions. Some wine-growers are actually prepared to assist the growing of landraces is perceived as a unique selling point and chance for the company. In grapevine breeding lack of access to CWR in Asia is the main obstacle towards the use of CWR. China blocks access to Vitis resources completely. This problem can only be solved through negotiations at the CBD level and within the framework of the International Treaty. 2.2 Public research institutes Capacity and state The Institute for Breeding Research on Horticultural and Fruit Crops of the JKI sets amongst other tasks a focus on plant genetics of vegetable crops and medicinal and aromatic plants (MAP). The staff capacity (scientist and technical staff) related to this task amounts to 12 persons. The interviewed University institute staff capacity amounts to 20 persons; the interviewee lead a research group of 3 (part time) employees. The Institute for Breeding Research on Horticultural and Fruit Crops of the JKI evaluates genetic resources, analysis the inheritance of traits relevant to plant breeding, develops selection methods for these traits, procedures for introgression of traits into cultivated germplasm and develops adapted genotypes with valuable genes. The main crop species are Daucus carota, Petroselinum crispum, Melissa officinalis, Apium graveolens, and Brassica oleracea. While breeding research on Daucus has become a unique selling point of the institute in Germany the intensity of Brassica breeding research is decreasing due to legal obligations of the JKI to reduce staff capacities. The reduction of staff capacity in the public breeding sector is a continuing process that started already before 1989 and affected governmental research institutes as well as plant breeding research institutes of Universities as well. According to the definition of the term landrace given above former landraces (now kept ex situ) played a significant role in Petrosilenum, Melissa, Daucus, Apium and Brassica. Petroselium ranks first while the use of Brassica landraces is already history. In a few cases CWR of these five crops were used in breeding research. The research work focuses on resistance, quality components, hybrid breeding systems, and characterisation and evaluation as a pre-condition for pre-breeding. The latter work is of particular importance as it allows the attraction of project funding and the employment of younger scientists which in turn is of

6 general importance to the institute with many permanent staff members older than 50 years. Landraces and CWR have been systematically characterized and evaluated in the framework of projects. The interviewee found it impossible to list all the target traits investigated so far. Recently in a few case also the metabolom was investigated. If one considers C&E data recorded in excel tables as a kind of database then one might argue that C&E data are documented systematically. The University working group Site Specific Adaptation and Organic Breeding focuses on breeding research for organic farming systems, tolerance to biotic and abiotic stress, as well as the genetic principles of site specific adaptation. Tomato, soy bean and leaf chicory are the main research objects. They were chosen partly because these objects facilitate the attraction of project funds. In the tomato project approximately 200 former landraces, in the soy bean project few landrace and in the leaf chicory project a few tens of landrace were used. The landrace material is systematically characterised and evaluated by the University working group but not used in omics projects. The data are stored in excel tables and after publication of the results in a journal the donor genebank(s) get(s) an extra copy. It was not known to the interview partner how the information is then handled by the genebank(s). Access and information The JKI institute had difficulties to find research material as most genebanks have no or difficult to use online catalogues. In the case of Melissa officinalis even large genebanks could not provide material simply because this widely spread plant species has never been systematically collected. It was difficult to contact genebanks in Spain, Portugal and in Turkey. In 2010 landrace and CWR accessions were provided by three genebanks. The University institute searched for information systems in the web and then contacted collection curators directly. This approach allowed tapping of information on specific accessions which is not stored in databases. The assessment of material by a human cannot be replaced by an information system, stressed the interview partner. In 2010 the partner requested and received germplasm from exactly two genebanks. The JKI publishes results of the characterisation and evaluation work in scientific journals. Data on IPK accessions are sent back to the genebank. It is not known how these data are then managed. The University institute reported the same and added that for the first time following obligations laid down in the smta a data set on Brassica evaluation data will be returned to the donor genebank as excel file. The JKI institute solely used the online information system GBIS of the IPK to search for material. The University institute used GBIS as well as the information system of the Centre for Genetic Resources, The Netherlands. Cooperation GENRES was appraised as a valuable program as it allowed the characterisation and evaluation of genetic resources of Daucus, Brassica, Allium and several more crop species. The vegetable group of the institute cooperates with breeding companies in Germany, only. There is some cooperation between JKI and growers, very little between JKI and NGOs, and an intensive cooperation with mostly the IPK genebank. The cooperation with breeding companies is restricted to projects co-financed by the commercial partner. Cooperation with growers is of interest as it allows the joint development of a product along the whole production chain. Without a functioning production chain the utilisation of landrace and

7 CWR accession would not be possible. The University institute cooperates within co-funded projects with companies in Germany and abroad, with growers, with NGOs and genebanks as well. Policy and constraints The national expert program on PGRFA which encourages inter alia the conservation and use of landraces and CWR was known to the interviewees. It was noted that the expert program lists actions and actors but is essentially based on input in kind from the actors. The funding mechanisms for PGR projects provided by the government via BLE were mentioned by both interview partners. In the case of MAP lack of appropriate germplasm in genebanks restricts the use of CWR in breeding research projects. The access to such germplasm growing in the natural habitat was seen as even less organised and thus more complicated. The interview partner from the University did not know the GENRES council regulation whereas the EU research framework program was known. The preparation of EU project proposal was considered complicated and time consuming. In addition, research subjects related to real problems of growers are not valued by the EU according to the experience of the interview partner. Everything must be innovative. In general, for small research groups EU programs are regarded as rather inaccessible and hard to manage. For that reason EU research programs have had very limited impact on the institutes work. The fact that biodiversity research ranks high on the EU research agenda was nevertheless acknowledged. The University interview partner suggested facilitating access to EU funding for small interest groups. It was said that the EU could do both: funding of large consortia as well as small groups with project ideas targeted at solving of problems of growers. Trends During the past 10 years the research program of the Institute for Breeding Research on Horticultural and Fruit Crops as well as of the University working group remained constant which is considered an important advantage in breeding research. The focus and intensity of the work is increasingly determined by project funding. The demand for more interspecific diversity in crop production systems was considered a trend by both interview partners. The JKI partner noted that the policy has trends too. In some political periods pre-breeding work is welcomed, in some years researchers have to conceal that they contined pre-breeding work. The adaptation of crops to changing production conditions, e.g. caused by climate warming, is only possible if breeding research is backstopped by a stable policy for breeding research. The provision of such conditions is the duty of policy. In the domain of vegetable breeding the consumers behaviour pans out as a problem. The knowledge on how to prepare fresh vegetables is diminishing with increasing market shares for convenience products. The society behaves like a schizophrenic. While the number of cooking shows in television increases the interests in fresh vegetables decreases. More interest in fresh products and perhaps even interest in the nutritional or taste quality differences between varieties within a crop could also promote the use of landraces in vegetable production and breeding. In a specific consumer sector the interest in product diversity is increasing. We can only hope that this development has an impact on the major part of the society. It would be a chance for underutilised crops or less used crop types.

8 The University interview partner considered legal uncertainty in the field of seed marketing of conservation varieties as an obstacle for landrace use. The costs for registration of conservation varieties was seen as still too high for organisations interested to registered large numbers of conservation varieties. The current revision of the seed marketing legislation was acknowledged; the complete deregulation seen as a means for promoting the use of landraces. A pre-condition for the use of landraces is the existence of production of systems which are suited for landraces. The current economic trend points to the further market concentration, harmonisation of production systems and as a consequence the creation of anonymous markets. The less transparent markets are the more growers focus on the maximizing yield at the disadvantage of diversity. Even organic farming is subjected to this process and the role of organic farming in conserving genetic resources should be critically assessed. 2.3 Non-governmental organizations The NGO in the sense of the definition given above were interviewed: the Verein zur Erhaltung und Rekultivierung von Nutzpflanzen (VERN) (Association for maintenance and recultivation of crops) and the Verein zur Erhaltung der Nutzpflanzenvielfalt (VEN) (Association for the maintenance of crop diversity). Capacity and state There are several large associations acting at the federal level and additional associations active at the Länder or even local level. Amongst the large associations Arche Noah with many German members plays a role in southern Germany, mainly. The VEN has members in almost all Länder of the FRG while the VERN is mainly active in Brandenburg and Saxony. The staff capacity ranges from one minijob (6 h a week) to 2.6 persons; the annual budget amounts up to 30,000 mainly generated by membership fees. Tomato, beans, peas, leafy vegetables, potato are the top five crops of the VEN while the VERN ranked crops as follows: tomato, potato, leafy vegetables, rye and wheat. Members of both NGOs did collect landraces but most of the germplasm held in the collections came from the IPK Genebank. Both organizations aim at the reintegration of landraces conserved ex situ into the agricultural / horticultural production. VEN members are encouraged to accept responsibility for foster varieties and these varieties are then described systematically. VEN members publish observations on foster varieties or any other germplasm kept by members in a booklet which can be ordered. The VEN focuses activities more on conservation while the VERN is more interested in the reintegration of adapted accessions into the production process. Therefore, the VERN is testing the adaptation of accessions and their market potential rather than describe the accessions systematically with the help of descriptor list. Both NGOs stimulate the interest of people by publishing historical reports on specific crop types or by informing people during fairs or similar events. The public relation work of both NGOs is very well developed. The NGOs are present in journals and broadcasting or television as well. The VEN is member of a German umbrella organization which in turn represents the interest of the NGO sector at e.g. meetings of the Advisory Board for Plant Genetic Resources of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV). Access and information Both NGOs record passport and descriptive data either in excel sheets or in a MySQL database. The public can access information on the associations and their collections via attractive websites. Information is also disseminated via printed seed catalogues or crop

9 specific booklets. The catalogues and booklet can be used to order material from the individual germplasm holder. Cooperation Both NGOs cooperate intensively with similar organisations in Germany and abroad. They maintain active working relationships with public research institutes and breeding companies (mainly from the organic farming sector). Since the controlled experimental release of GMO material by the IPK in the vicinity of the genebank the cooperation between NGOs and the IPK is rather restrained. Due to the different priorities the VERN succeeded to projects funds for research and development projects which resulted in the establishment of market niches for a remarkable number of obsolete varieties. The VEN with a stronger focus on agrobiodiversity policy also cooperates with other organisations of the civil society. Policy and constraints Both NGOs have been involved in the development of the national expert program for plant genetic resources. Programs that specifically support the reintegration of landraces and obsolete varieties into the agricultural production are known to both, have been used with varying success but were appraised with caution. The funding mechanisms, national as well as EU, focus too much on farmers (in the legal sense) or were seen not durable enough and therefore not suitable to produce long-term impact e.g. able to increase the genetic diversity in the production system. Both NGOs unanimously noted that the GENRES council regulation has not supported their work. Trends The management of a large number of different crop species and the whole range of distinct types of these crops by members of the NGOs and other people was seen as an integral part of the breeding for ecological farming. By regenerating and using this material it is continuously adapted to changing environmental conditions and can be a starting point for breeding of crops that fit into ecological farming systems. The decreasing number of crop specific genebank collection curators who know their material not only as an accession number was seen as a problem. Human knowledge and experience is steadily replaced by data and information. This knowledge can no longer be handed over from the today s generation to the next and this was seen as a factor limiting the use of landrace in future. Another trend is pointing to the opposite direction, though. People are getting more and more interested in crop diversity aspects. It was believed that the high attention agrobiodiversity matters received during the COP9 at Bonn would cease immediately after the end of the conference. Instead, people today wish to experience diversity and wish to contribute to the maintenance of diversity. The legal uncertainty with respect to seed trade legislation, variety protection, CBD and International Treaty, however, weakens this trend. An ordinary citizen just does not understand what he/she is allowed do to and what might be forbidden. 2.4 Breeding companies A company focussing on breeding of agricultural crops (KWS Lochow GmbH and a vegetable breeding company (Hild Samen GmbH) were interviewed. Capacity and state The staff capacity of KWS Lochow amounts to approximately 400 persons of which 180 persons work in Germany and 220 in the UK, Poland, France and Russia. 250 persons are

10 involved in breeding cereal varieties. The company is part of a larger enterprise breeding and marketing varieties in 14 different countries worldwide. The staff capacity of Hild Samen amounts to 75 persons of which 20 persons are engaged in research targeting at the development of new varieties. The company is part of an international vegetable breeding enterprise with breeding and marketing activities in many countries in Europe and worldwide. The German daughter company concentrates activities on the German market but also sells varieties in Europe and overseas. The most important crops (in terms of turn-over) of the KWS Lochow are rye, wheat and barley. In other crops the breeding intensity is less as the return is limited. In a few cases crops are only kept in the business to maintain the breeding pool and the expertise. Highest priority has breeding on agronomic traits and yield, second rank quality and third resistance. As resistance is an important component of yield stability the company selects material with resistance to the all important disease and pests but only to that extend appreciated by the market. KWS Lochow uses landraces and CWR in the breeding program and performs a few crosses between elite lines and exotic germplasm every year. The company invests a remarkable percentage of the annual breeding budget into the selection of lines derived from such crosses. Currently, the breeding progress is still undiminished. There is therefore sufficient genetic variation in the company s breeding pools. An agreement between competing companies allows them to exchange and use varieties as crossing partners even if these varieties are not yet protected. In addition, the company has started with in-house prebreeding programs with exotic germplasm. The company considers the introgression of specific traits from exotic germplasm into the elite breeding pool as the key to long-term economic success. Hild Samen develops varieties for many vegetable crops; the top five crops in decreasing order are parsley, chive, radish, basil, and dill. The breeding activities are intensive in parsley as compared to dill. The company produces (not only) seeds for the organic farming sector of many crop species (21 genera in total) and 18 different herbal species. The improvement of quality, yield and resistance are the main breeding aims of Hild Samen. In particular breeding for resistance to a total of 56 pest and diseases is quite a challenge. Landraces in the sense of the given definition are not used in the breeding program and CWR are not at all used. The genetic variation in the breeding pools is large enough and in addition the introgression of landraces or CWR germplasm would downgrade the performance of the breeding material which is very well adapted to the current production conditions. As the company is breeding many vegetable crops the breeding intensity is lower than in agricultural crops. Therefore vegetable breeders may face problems arising from genetically narrow breeding pool only 100 to 200 years in the future. However, the value of non-adapted germplasm for breeding is clearly understood and therefore the development in the research and development sector is attentively observed. Access and information KWS Lochow rarely orders material from genebanks but uses lines from pre-breeding projects and so does Hild Samen. For the time being it is more important from the companies perspective that cooperating breeding research institutes have easy access to data and material. Cooperation KWS Lochow cooperates with the IPK as such and not specifically with the genebank department. The company is partner in many joint research projects with a variety of public

11 research institutions as partner. There is no cooperation with NGOs. Hild Samen cooperates with genebanks, public research institutes and NGOs currently even in the framework of an EU project. There is no systematic cooperation between vegetable breeding companies such for cereals in the EVA II program. A close contact with the IPK Genbank is maintained. Policy and constraints The GENRES council regulation was only vaguely known to the KWS Lochow interview partner. The GENRES was not known to the vegetable breeder of Hild Samen. The leafy vegetables working group of the European Cooperation Program for Plant Genetic Resources and the oat working group was known to the respective interview partner. Hild Samen has little direct benefit from EU research programs. The company is too small and has no capacity left required for a continuous observation of the EU research policy and research program development. This is rather a task of the GFP which actively informs companies on research programs. The KWS Lochow commented EU research programs in a similar way. Trends In the past 25 years breeding projects in some crops species started but were closed after a while for economic reasons. Wheat, rye and barley continue to play the major role. The breeding aims have not been changed basically. KWS Lochow will employ pre-breeders in future. The high cost of pre-breeding is the factor limiting the use of landraces and CWR. The omics research will facilitate the use of genetic resources through pre-breeding. The omics research will start interest companies when the cost/benefit ratio is getting better. In future breeders will not domesticate species but traits derived from landraces and CWR. Genomic selection will play an increasing role in plant breeding, too. Hild Samen cannot employ persons exclusively engaged in pre-breeding. The small size of the company explains why this task is integrated in the variety breeding, instead. The breeders assess germplasm collections but so far no crosses between exotic material and breeding lines have been made. The spectrum of species bred by the German branch changed after the fusion with the larger enterprise. The German branch sets focus on the needs of the German market in particular on crops of regional relevance while the larger part of the company services the global market for major vegetable crops such as carrot, Brassica crops, tomato etc. The market demand for higher resistance is a clear trend as chemical plant protection products are step by step withdrawn from the market. Abiotic stress does not yet play a role in vegetable breeding. Vegetables can be grown in the greenhouse or under cover in the field or can be irrigated which mitigates negative weather effects on the crops. In the past CWR did not contribute to a stabilisation or improvement of the company s market position. The role of CWR as donors of resistance genes will increase in future. In particular in the field of bacterial diseases of vegetables, which cannot control chemically, the significance of resistance breeding will increase. Not until information on such traits is known an accession stored in a genebank gets valuable. C&E data were recorded in the past and are recorded today but at the end of many projects the data are not available online. This problem is addressed repeatedly since years, recently in the GFP annual report 2011, but there is no attempt to solve this problem systematically. The lack of good information systems for C&E data are a major obstacle towards the use of landraces and CWR in vegetable breeding. In addition, the legal uncertainty caused by the CBD has an equally negative impact on the utilisation of landraces and CWR in variety breeding. As long as companies cannot calculate the costs for using accessions, companies will prefer their own material. In particular access to non-annex-i species is very difficult and

12 if every germplasm acquisition triggers costs for a lawyer, the company will refrain from using such genetic resources. Today, both companies order germplasm from the IPK Genebank, mainly. In future the international exchange of genetic resources will gain in importance. The companies are not at all against significant contributions to the Multilateral System of the International Treaty and support the Access and Benefit Sharing process. However, the amounts of money which some countries expect the breeding companies to pay in the framework of the MLS or ABS are beyond reality and as long as problems related to the MLS and ABS are not settled the interest in using landraces and CWR will be rather restrained. By integrating genetic resources into the breeders product, the variety, genetic resources are maintained. In particular crops with a small market require more support by public plant breeding research. The current trend regrettably points towards the opposite direction as policy does not understand the correlation between breeding intensity and maintenance of genetic resources in production systems. With increasing knowledge on genetic resources collections their usefulness improves. Knowledge can also be generated by genetic markers which just show the genetic structures within a crop specific germplasm holding. Based on such information core collections can be created and the often frightening large size of evaluations sets reduced to a manageable (in terms of costs) size. Such development would promote the breeder s interest in germplasm evaluation and exploitation. 3. SWOT analysis and recommended actions 3.1 SWOT analysis Strengths Country with considerable biodiversity in situ (of CWR) and ex situ Clear governmental control on the PGR sector A national PGR expert program exists as rolling plan The national genebank system is well organised The access to germplasm is provided via the websites of the genebank(s) The cooperation between all stakeholder groups is well developed The cooperation with the ECPGR program and with EU project partners is established and benefits the national system Weaknesses The expert program is based on voluntary contributions of the actors Gaps in collections at the national and global level The collaboration between all stakeholder groups in the field of documentation and exchange of characterisation and evaluation data is not well organised Vegetable breeding research capacity is decreasing Scientist in the public breeding research and private breeding sector may be too focussed on the genetic resources stock held within the country EU research programs are perceived as unattractive NGOs can only marginally contribute to the reintegration of genetic diversity into production systems due to very limited financial means available to them

13 Although CWR and landraces are used in research and pre-breeding the great significance of theses genetic resources is not perceived by the public IPK experiments with GMO crops close to the IPK genebank disturbs the tradionally good cooperation between NGO (which are opinion makers) and the genebank Legal uncertainty with respect to seed trade legislation, CBD and the International Treaty Opportunities Enforcement of genebank networks at the national level and through the AEGIS process at the European level Encouragement of other crop groups to join the EVA II program Strengthening of pre-breeding programs Intensification of research cooperation at the European level Promotion of the cooperation in the field of information system development Creation of core collections using information from genetic molecular marker research Promotion and strengthening of the public interest in diversity products Improvement information of the public on legal aspects related to PGR work/ variety breeding Development of agrobiodiversity friendly farming systems Raising the cost for synthetic-chemical disease and pest control Threats Decreasing staff capacities in the public PGR research sector No or very difficult access to genetic resources collections outside of Germany Displacement of permanently employed collection curators by geneticists A too strong focus on breeding research, pre-breeding and breeding on major crops Lack of incentives to use LR and CWR in long-term base broadening programs of companies Increasing market shares of convenience products and anonymous markets 3.2 Recommended actions Government While project funding is an appropriate instrument for short to mid-term breeding research objectives it is inappropriate for long-term objectives such as the management of genebanks and genetic resources information systems, public-private-partnership (PPP) programs as an infrastructure for genetic resources evaluation project, pre-breeding and base broadening programs, in particular if these programs aim at performance of tasks which are considered

14 by the society as important but cannot be taken over by private companies due to economic reasons. The government should therefore consider shifting funds from the project budget lines to budget lines for funding of durable infrastructures. The lack of legal clarity and certainty concerning access, use and distribution of genetic resources appeared as a major constraint to the use of landraces and CWR in the private variety breeding sector. This limits opportunities for the public genetic and breeding research sector of using these resources in PPP projects. Unfortunately even in the general public the uncertainty is present. Instead of seeing genetic resources as a common heritage of mankind and a fascinating subject, genetic resources are perceived as a legal problem. The government should therefore create legal certainty and in parallel strengthen the already existing good public relation work. Genebanks Genebanks and other public research institutions engaged in PGR work should develop a joint strategy aiming at the improvement of information systems in close cooperation with partners at the national, EU and ECPGR level with a specific focus on characterisation and evaluation data. Lack of or difficult to access C&E data hampers the use of landraces and CWR significantly. It is a major short-coming of the German PGR program. Public research organizations The public discussion on agriculture is dominated by reports on plant protection affairs and similar negative issues. Although the private plant breeders state that particular traits found in genetic resources provided the basis of long-term economic success the public does not get such positive messages. The public breeding research sector has and is been using a wide asset of landraces and CWR. Therefore public research institutions should regularly provide the press with success stories on landrace and CWR use which in turn will also strengthen the position of geneticists and breeding researchers in the public sector and help maintaining infrastructure required to screen, evaluate, document, investigate genetic resources. NGOs This stakeholder group is quite well-organised in Germany and plays an important role in the public awareness building. As opinion makers with close contacts to consumers at the local and Länder level, NGOs can pave the way for products based on landraces and stimulate the public interest in the development of environmental friendly agricultural production systems. The NGO work is still suboptimal as indicated by the very low number of persons employed by German associations as compared to those active in Austria or the Switzerland. As the genebanks in Germany function very well, there is no immediate risk of losing landraces. Hence, NGOs can and should set a work focus on the reintegration of landraces into the agricultural production systems by developing market niches. Breeding companies The public-private-partnership programs should be strengthened to facilitate the systematic characterization and evaluation of additional crops (not only cereals) and pre-breeding. Companies should use their political influence with the aim of raising the quality and functionality of genetic resources information systems in Germany to the level of the Genetic Resources Information Network operated by the USDA/ARS.

15 4. References Meynen, E. and Schmithüsen J., 1960: Handbuch der naturräumlichen Gliederung Deutschlands. Bundesanstalt für Landeskunde, Remagen/Bad Godesberg (9 Lieferungen in 8 Büchern, aktualisierte Karte 1: mit Haupteinheiten). Piorr, H-P and Lehmann, K., 2004: Vielfalt im Wandel der Zeit - Historischer Überblick und Status Quo. In: Begemann, F. und Schröder, S. (Hrsg.), Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen, Schriftenreihe der Zentralstelle für Agrardokumentation und information. Informationszentrum Biologische Vielfalt (IBV), BAND 23, Produktvielfalt durch Ressourcenvielfalt, - Potenziale genetischer Ressourcen - Tagungsband eines Symposiums vom September 2003 im Gustav- Stresemann-Institut in Bonn. Warlich Druck Ahrweiler GmbH, Bad Neuenahr- Ahrweiler.