1. Arusha 3-7 August 2015 McKnight CCRP – Breeding Pipelines BREEDING – Pipelines: Conceptualizing the principal steps and processes, and related issues, including farmer participation Eva Weltzien ICRISAT-Mali

2. Outline – Key Issues 1.What is ‘Plant Breeding’ ? 2.Comparing Crops and Breeding Programs 3.Farmer Participation 4.Goals of breeding programs with participation

3. What is ‘Plant Breeding’? Some definitions Different perspectives on the history of plant breeding Stages of a modern Plant Breeding Program Organizational Options

4. Breeding = Agronomy + Plant Selection +Seed Plant Breeding Agronomy Seed Science Genetics

5. History of discoveries in plant breedings 9000 BC First evidence of plant domestication in the hills above the Tigris river 1694Camerarius first to demonstrate sex in (monoecious) plants and suggested crossing as a method to obtain new plant types 1714Mather observed natural crossing in maize 1761-1766Kohlreuter demonstrated that hybrid offspring received traits from both parents and were intermediate in most traits, first scientific hybrid in tobacco 1866Mendel: Experiments in plant hybridization 1900Mendel’s laws of heredity rediscovered 1944Avery, MacLeod, McCarty discovered DNA is hereditary material 1953Watson, Crick, Wilkins proposed a model for DNA structure 1970Borlaug received Nobel Prize for the Green Revolution Berg, Cohen, and Boyer introduced the recombinant DNA technology 1994‘FlavrSavr’ tomato developed as first GMO 1995Bt-corn developed (after U. Achenbach, 2008) Selected milestones in plant breeding

6. History of the organization of plant breeding ActivitySorghum- Mali 1920s N Germany large farms 1920s S Germany small farms US-GMO aera Creating Diversity FarmersLarge Farmers/ state funded research State funded research Company/ state funded research Creating experimental varietes FarmersLarge Farmers Network of farmer cooperatives company Variety testingFarmersLarge Farmers Network of farmer cooperatives company with network of test farmers Seed dissemination Farmers according to local rules Large Farmers sell seed Farmer coops sell seed Network of seed retailers

7. Organization of plant breeding and its history Reading Resources: J.R. Kloppenburg. 2005. First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology (Science and Technology in Society), 2nd edition; U Wisconsin Press Jonathan Harwood.2011. Europe’s Green Revolution and Others Since: The rise and fall of peasant-friendly plant breeding, Routledge, London

8. Private and public plant breeding Source: Adapted from Louwaars and de Boef, 2012

9. After: Schnell FW (1982) A synoptic study of the methods and categories of plant breeding. Z Pflanzenzüchtg 89:1-18. Comparing breeding methods and programs StagesSelf-pollinated crops Cross-pollinated OPV’s Cross-pollinated crops - hybrids Generating new diversity Crossing, and advancing until F2 generation Randomating new population bulk and deriving new progenies deriving potential hybrid parents from both pools Creating new experimental varieties Selecting lines and increase seed so that METs can start Progeny testing and random- mating new varieties for MET’s (2-4 gen.s) Test-crossing for GCA, Evaluating new experimental varieties METs in TPE Identifying best combinations in MET’s

10. ‘Buzz’ around your table What is an experimental variety in your breeding programs?

11. Full plant breeding cycle Generate or assemble breeding parents containing relevant traits Select in segregating populations Test and evaluate experimental varieties Produce and distribute seed Set breeding objectives

12. ‘Buzz’ around your table Who decides and on what basis whether a new variety will be disseminated?

13. Basic ideas of participatory plant breeding Farmers and researchers have different and highly complementary skills. Through collaboration, they can obtain better results than any group alone. Jointly they can develop options for change that depart from a shared understanding of the existing situation, including goals pursued by the farmers, and important constraints. They can build on existing strengths, capacities, networks etc. – and develop practical solutions for identified weaknesses and limitations.  The overall aim is to increase the range of options or choices available to local farmers, e.g. for adapting their farming systems to new challenges.

14. Types of participation – how farmers can contribute to breeding programs Types of participationImplementation consultativeLocal opinions are asked; ‘outsiders’ analyze the data and decide on course of action, take decisions collaborativeLocal farmers work together wth outsiders to determine priorities; overall project responsibilities remain with outsiders co-learningLocal farmers and outsiders share their knoweldge to create ew understanding; they work together to form action plans; often with outsider facilitation

15. Task for 3(6) tables 1. Experiences with farmers contributing to creating new diversity 2. How are farmers contributing to the identification of new varietes in your programs? 3. Farmers and evaluating new experimental varieties - roles and contributions?

16. Phases of implementing PPB projects Initiating dialogueEntering into discussion with farmers, starting capacity building and training Initiating collaboration Sharing knowledge and identfying starting points for collaboration in practical breeding work Working togetherCarrying out practical breeding work together with clear roles and responsibilities Building NetworkFacilitate exchanges among farmers in an area, between farmers in similar areas, with other researchers

17. Tacit Knowledge Difficult to express and communicate with language – passed on through apprenticeship and practice Specific to a certain context, experience Linked to specific skills, activities Hidden in objects: tools, seeds, … Mental models to explain, classify, perceive Specifc communication tools are necessary to externalize this knowledge: Visualization, using objects, observing actions Outsider facilitation may be advantageous

18. Explicit, scientific knowledge Shared in written form Using a common language, standards, rules Formal training

19. Farmer Research Networks Linking many farmers for generating, adapting, sharing technology, knowledge Bringing farmers’ knowledge, experience into exchange with science Creating efficiencies from joining efforts of many

20. Range of Goals of PB and PPB projects + Nutrition Support for spec. groups Conserve biodiversity Farmer empower- ment Change policies ‘’’’’ Improved productivity and more efficient breeding process

21. Considerations for Nutrition oriented PPB Who is vulnerable? What are the main nutrition issues? Who is the main food provider? How is the food sourced? How is it prepared? What improvements are possible via plant breeding? Collaboration with nutritionist, food processing specialist, social science, and requires access to medical facilities

22. Specific needs of a specific group of farmers? Small-holder family farms concerned with food security Commercial farmers, supplying to a specific value chain Livestock keepers Women farmers, who only produce for home consumption

23. (P)PB and conserving biodiversity? Improving a threatened local variety Disseminating local varieties from one are in anotherone Building breeding populations with local germplasm Using a decentralized process for selection Diverse mixes of selection criteria

24. Building farmers’ capacity - empowering Joint priority setting and planning Training on principles of PB, seed production Collaboration as a group Developing business, communication, marketing capacity Exchanges with farmers from other areas Leadership of projects

25. Potentials of participatory and decentralized breeding from a breeder’s point of view ‘Conservation through use’: locally adapted varieties are used as breeding parents Selection in the target environments Rapid feedback and adoption by farmers Improved scientific understanding of adaptation to needs, conditions and constraints faced by different groups of farmers (e.g. women and men)

26. Potentials of participatory and decentralized breeding from a farmers‘ point of view ●Use of local varieties with preferred traits as breeding parents ●Conduct and evaluate trials under local conditions and gain new contextualized knowledge and skills ●Select cultivars for future breeding (= participation in decision-making) ●Co-produce new varieties that are adapted to local conditions and needs ●Produce and disseminate seed

27. Thank you for your attention…

28. Farm Productivity Increased Seed Inputs (Fertiliser, Crop protection Information, Knowhow FinanceMarkets Family Labour Mechanization, (Technical Services)

29. Practical example: ICRISAT‘s participatory sorghum breeding program in West Africa

30. Acknowledgements and works cited Acknowledgements All photos used in the presentation were kindly provided by Dr E Weltzien Rattunde, ICRISAT Bamako, Mali, and Dr Sonja Siart, Berlin, Germany. Data slides used in the presentation were kindly provided by Dr H.F.W. Rattunde and Dr E. Weltzien Rattunde, ICRISAT Bamako, Mali. Works cited Ceccarelli, S. (2012): Plant Breeding with Farmers – a Technical Manual, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria. Ceccarelli, S. (2015): Seeds of future. Paper published by the author on www.researchgate.net, 12 2015. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2346.0002. Christinck, A., Weltzien, E., Hoffmann, V. (2005). Introduction. Pp. 11–14. In: Christinck, A., Weltzien, E., Hoffmann, V. (eda.). Setting breeding objectives and developing seed systems with farmers. Margraf Publkishers, Weikersheim, Germany. Haussmann, B.I..G, Rattunde, H.F., Weltzien-Rattunde, E., Traoré, P.S.C., vom Brocke, K., Parzies, H. (2012): Breeding strategies for adaptation of pearl millet and sorghum to climate variability and change. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 198 (5): 327–339. Hoffmann, V., Probst, K., Christinck, A. (2007): Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development? Agriculture and Human Values 24: 355–368. Leiser, W.L., Rattunde, H.F.W., Piepho, H.P., Weltzien, E., Diallo, A., Melchinger, A.E., Parzies, H.K., Haussmann, B.I.G. (2012): Selection strategy for sorghum targeting phosphorus-limited environments in West Africa: analysis of multi-environment experiments. Crop Science 52 (6): 2517–2527. Leiser, W.L., Rattunde, H.F.W., Piepho, H.P., Weltzien, E., Diallo, A., Toure, A., Haussmann B.I.G. (2015): Phosphorous Efficiency and Tolerance Traits for Selection of Sorghum for Performance in Phosphorous-Limited Environments. Crop Science 55:1152–1162. Louwaars, N.P., De Boef, W.S. (2012): Integrated seed sector development in Africa: a conceptual framework for creating coherence between practices, programs, and policies. Journal of Crop Improvement, 26: 39–59. Rattunde, H.F.W., Weltzien, E., Diallo, B., Diallo, A.G., Sidibé, M., Touré, A.O., Rathore, A., Das, R.R., Leiser, W.L., Touré, A. (2013): Yield of Photoperiod-sensitive Sorghum Hybrids Based on Guinea-race Germplasm under Farmers’ Field Conditions in Mali. Crop Science 53: 2454–2461. Restrepo Rodriguez, M.J., Lelea, M.A., Christinck, A., Hülsebusch, C., Kaufmann, B.A. (2014): Collaborative learning for fostering change in complex social-ecological systems: A transdisciplinary perspective on food and farming systems. Knowledge Management for Development Journal 10 (3): 38-59.

31. ICRISAT‘s participatory sorghum breeding program in West Africa 15 years of collaboration: researchers from ICRISAT, national breeding programs, several farmer organizations, NGOs Includes pre-breeding, breeding and variety evaluation as well as seed production activities ●Joint “ownership” of varieties in national variety registers, no IPR ●Many open pollinating varieties developed (various plant types and for different purposes, including nutritionally improved varieties) ●Latest development: Landrace-based sorghum ‘hybrids’

32. What is special about sorghum hybrids? Sorghum is a predominantly self-pollinating crop – no need for producing „inbred lines“ The degree of cross-pollination can be increased by introducing male-sterile lines („mother lines“) on which the hybrid seed can be harvested Crossing genetically distant landraces results in a heterosis effect (yield increase) If the harvested grain is re-sown, this results in diverse (mixed) landrace populations

33. Advantages of landrace-based sorghum hybrids Yield gains of 30% (or more) – across productivity levels Local adaptation and farmer-preferred traits are maintained Farmers can produce the hybrid seed by themselves, even the parental lines Incentive to maintain landraces (needed as breeding parents/pollinators) Farmers can harvest food crops and „cash crops“ (seed) in one field New options for intensification (e.g. fertilizer application)

34. 2014 Side-by-Side on-farm comparisons of new Sorghum Hybrids and Local Varieties, each in ¼ ha plots conducted by CMDT in Koutiala, Mali >40% yield superiorities! 60 Farmer Fields58 Farmer Fields Technology Diffusion Sorghum&Millet (ARDT_SMS)

35. Mean cost and benefit of production obtained with local varieties, bred open pollinated varieties (OPV) and hybrid varieties of sorghum with and without fertilizer use over 81 farmer-managed on-farm trials in Mali

36. Conclusions Farmers and researchers can jointly arrive at innovative solutions that address typical constraints faced by the farmers (e.g. climate variability, low soil fertility). The new varieties provide additional options to farmers to improve productivity and economic outcomes of their farming activities. They provide advantages to farmers working under a range of production conditions, and with or without further investment (e.g. fertilizer). Through their participation in the breeding program, farmers can take better informed decisions on variety use and expand their capacities and skills (e.g. conducting trials, producing seed). The example further shows how concerns associated with agricultural intensification, e.g. regarding biodiversity loss or soil fertility decrease, can be addressed in a breeding program.