1. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Experiences, perspectives and outcomes of transnational research: Funders and Researchers A Researcher’s Perspective: Detection and epidemiology of pospoviroids (DEP) in support of policy – a virtual common pot project Steen Lykke Nielsen Aarhus University

2. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Outline of presentation Short introduction to DEP Experiences from being a coordinator: The call text Building a Consortium Competition Forms provided by the Call Secretariat Peer review Funding mechanism Project period Key outputs and disseminations Benefits from transnational collaboration

3. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Potato spindle tuber viroid - a harmful (quarantine) organism not know to occur in any part of the Community Viroid diseases

4. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Solanum jasminoides infected with potato spindle tuber viroid detected in many EU member states

5. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y -and in Petunia, Brugmansia and other solanaceous plants

6. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Feared scenario

7. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Experiences from being a coordinator

8. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Call text Research need The project application should address two main aspects. Epidemiology: host range of PSTVd and five other pospiviroids. different transmission pathways: –mechanical transmission during cultural practices –aphid transmission –transmission with other insects (e.g. during pollination) –the role of environmental conditions the role of viroid-host interactions in the epidemiology of the pospiviroids

9. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Call text Diagnosis: Approved protocols for the detection in host plants and seeds for all six pospiviroids. Validation of methods by a ring-testing including at least the diagnostic laboratories in the Consortium. However, a larger number of laboratories would be desirable. Finally, there is a need for reliable detection and identification of pospiviroids in ungerminated tomato seeds.

10. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Building a consortium – the process EUPHRESCO partners contributing to financing the topic: AT, DE, DK, FR, NL, SI, UK

11. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Building a consortium – the process Contact by personal network Nominate the coordinator Coordinator works out a draft of the application Partners asked to offer their contributions (in relation to their expertises and the size of their national grant) Nominating WP-leaders

12. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Competition? Only one consortium applied! Competitive elements: Strategy: include the best scientists in the consortium – competitors give up in advance Restriction of number of partners – gives competition between national scientists/institutes Elements discouraging competition: The very detailed call text Very limited expertise in viroids available in EU The limited grant and the restricted project period Possibility to apply restricted to the 7 donor countries

13. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y General experiences Application form and applicants guide: ok Peer review of the proposal – evaluators demand of response unreasonable Funding mechanism: virtual common pot: easy for the coordinator to cope with

14. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y General experiences Project period Only 1 year. Extremely short for a scientific project ½ - 2/3 of the period used to propagate material No time included for publishing

15. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y General experiences Research Consortium Agreement. A EUPHRESCO form would be preferable Final reporting form: fine! Demand for a short version for the EUPH home page: OK

16. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y General experiences Peer review (scientific) of the final report: unnecessary for a 1-year project Reviewer too pedant

17. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y General experiences Administrative burden from EUPHRESCO in general: LOW! A pleasure compared to FP7 projects

18. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Key outputs and disseminations The final scientific report including validated diagnostic protocols delivered to EUPHRESCO to be published later A short version of the final scientific report will very soon be laid on the web home page of EUPHRESCO including a validated diagnostic protocol The final full report provided to SANCO and will be offered to the SCPH/COPHS

19. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Key outputs and disseminations The results presented at an EPPO ad-hoc meeting on tomato viroids in Ljubljana, October 2009 A protocol for diagnosis of the 6 viroids were ring-tested among 15 participants from 12 countries – providing the labs with a protocol, isolates of viroids and a proficiency test

20. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Benefits from transnational collaboration Specific for DEP: Some partners ran other projects on viroids parallel. DEP profited by the synergy Partners possessed different expertises – synergy again One partner had a big collection of viroids

21. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Benefits from transnational collaboration In general: Learning new colleagues to know – extending personal network Learning from each others expertises Exchanging experiences and materials

22. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y The DEP Consortium Steen Lykke Nielsen, Aarhus University, DK Wendy Monger, Food and Environmental Res. Agency, UK J. Th. J. Verhoeven, Plant Protection Service, NL Mojca Virscek Marn, Agricultural Institute of Slovenia, SI Thierry Candresse, IBVM-INRA, F Richard Gottsberger, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety (AGES), A Stephan Winter, Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen und Zellkulturen, DSMZ, D Valérie Molinéro-Demilly & Xavier Tassus, Laboratoire National de la Protection des Végétaux, F

23. A A R H U S U N I V E R S I T Y Thank you for your attention!