Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Traditional breeding: limitations Bert Visser Copenhagen, 13 december 2005

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Scope of this presentation technological limitations “species” barriers timelines breeding of clonally propagated and perennial crops specific traits institutional limitations seed regulatory systems infrastructure costs of technologies market demands access to technologies concentration in breeding sector

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Technological limitations

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Species barriers no denial of species barriers, but modern technologies allow wider, interspecies crosses and bridge crossings soften consequences of introgression of unadapted germplasm/wild relatives most of useful traits to be found in (wild) relatives more than in unrelated species potential usefulness not well exhausted and not always predictable traditional breeding logical choice (serendipity!)

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Timelines traditional breeding time consuming many new varieties 10 years in pipeline, but: two-hemisphere programmes decrease breeding periods marker-assisted breeding/selection decreases breeding periods however, wide crosses add to lead time the GMO practice may show shorter breeding but long approval trajectories less experience with risks risks real (peanut gene in soy bean)

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Clonally propagated crops breeding clonally propagated crops often complex banana, potato, cassava (near-sterility) fruit trees extension of breeding period breeding often involves ploidy reduction however, tissue culture contributes to rapid multiplication of final breeding materials still, GM technology needs products of traditional breeding to build on and add individual traits to

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Specific traits too few within-species resistances against viruses and insects few GM-successes largely in this terrain (Bt and virus resistance genes) most relevant potential contribution of GM technology (if widely licensed! no signs now!) for other traits traditional breeding out-competes GM technology rin mutation to delay tomato fruit ripening banana mutants not initiating ethylene synthesis

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Institutional limitations

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Seed regulatory systems professional sector varieties promoted prohibition of marketing farmers’ seeds limitations in obtaining micro credits farmers’ varieties disregarded combining professional and local germplasm (Salazar et al., 2006) adapting to local circumstances GM varieties further threat to farmers’ contributions use of protected varieties prohibited

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Infrastructure costs of technologies modern technologies costly require specialist human expertise and facilities without reach of many LDCs North-South collaboration or PPPs required CBD not very conducive, International Treaty PGRFA not yet operational, framework for effective international collaboration not in place infrastructure costs and international legal framework even larger barrier for GM technology many LDCs lack regulatory frameworks

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Market demands markets demand uniformity and continuous supply of products globalization results in 30 global super crops other crops increasingly marginalized thus, breeding for uniformity in limited set of crops available diversity increasingly underexploited GM technology enforces this trend ten years resulted in varieties for only four crops and two traits by 5-6 companies

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Technology access many modern technologies protected process patents, e.g. AFLP™, statistics software increasing number of crop varieties is hybrids hybrids boost R&D but also reduce number of breeding companies hybrids not attractive as parental germplasm in targeted breeding programmes (still used in farmer- breeding) GM technology even more protected marketing and growing of seeds only under license of developer trait patents more damaging than process patents

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Private sector concentration technology demands enhanced concentration in breeding sector technology development and concentration in sector may result in less breeders and decreased pool of elite germplasm no evidence yet more diversity created in smaller number of crops economics govern exploitation of genetic diversity insufficient complementarity offered by public sector

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Conclusions (1) technological limitations are specific for traditional breeding, but are increasingly compensated by modern (non-GM) technology some limitations are difficult to address effectively, but concern limited number of crops and traits clonally propagated crops and single resistance genes

Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands Conclusions (2) institutional limitations hamper exploitation of genetic diversity at inter- and intra-specific levels, but have an even increased impact on use of GM technology current trends enforce socio-economic inequalities GM technology can not survive without traditional breeding to build on, traditional breeding will survive without GM technology GM debate of limited practical relevance