Advertisement

Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 59, Issue 5, pp 635–644 | Cite as

Digitization and online availability of original collecting mission data to improve data quality and enhance the conservation and use of plant genetic resources

  • Imke ThormannEmail author
  • Hannes Gaisberger
  • Federico Mattei
  • Laura Snook
  • Elizabeth Arnaud
Review

Abstract

Ex situ conservation in genebanks is the most important way of conserving plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA) (FAO 2010). The use of germplasm conserved in genebanks depends to a large extent on the quality and quantity of data available about each accession. Initial selection of accessions for use in research or breeding is often made based on the available passport information, which describes the source of the material. Availability of collecting site description or geographic coordinates is considered a quality indicator in particular for accessions of wild species and landraces (Van Hintum et al. in Plant Genet Resour Charact Util 9(3):478–485, 2011). However lack or unavailability of accession specific data, including passport and location data, continues to represent a constraint to enhanced utilization of accessions (FAO 2010; Khoury et al. in Genet Resour Crop Evol 57(4):625–639, 2010). Collecting mission reports and collecting forms provide original data, including location data, about materials collected and distributed to genebanks. The International Board for Plant Genetic Resources and its successor, the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (now Bioversity International) have supported the collection of over 225,000 samples of PGRFA during the last quarter of the past century. The documentation gathered at the time of their collection has recently been digitized, passport data extracted, and made available through the web (http://www.central-repository.cgiar.org/; http://singer.cgiar.org/index.jsp?page=biomissions), where it can be consulted to integrate and improve the quality of passport data. Collected samples can be linked to accessions in genebanks. The original collecting mission reports often include eco-geographic, environmental, biotic and climate data that can be used to improve knowledge about the accessions and facilitate their utilization.

Keywords

Collecting missions Data quality Digitization Ex situ conservation Germplasm utilization Passport data 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The recently concluded World Bank-funded project, entitled “Collective Action for the Rehabilitation of Global Public Goods in the CGIAR Genetic Resources System: Phase 2” (GPG2), implemented under the aegis of the System-wide Genetic Resources Program of the CGIAR (SGRP), provided the context and financial resources for achieving work described in this article (SGRP 2010), which was undertaken within the GPG2 activity 4.1 on completion of passport data entry to assess knowledge and gaps in the diversity and genetic quality of the collections.

References

  1. Barry MB, Pham JL, Béavogui S, Ghesquière A, Ahmadi N (2008) Diachronic (1979–2003) analysis of rice genetic diversity in Guinea did not reveal genetic erosion. Genet Resour Crop Evol 55:723–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bezançon G, Pham J-L, Deu M, Vigouroux Y, Sagnard F, Mariac C, Kapran I, Mamadou A, Gérard B, Ndjeunga J, Chantereau J (2009) Changes in the diversity and geographic distribution of cultivated millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) varieties in Niger between 1976 and 2003. Genet Resour Crop Evol 56:223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. FAO (1993) International code of conduct for plant germplasm collecting and transfer, adopted by the FAO conference at its 27th session, 6–24 November 1993Google Scholar
  4. FAO (1996) Global plan of action for the conservation and sustainable utilization of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  5. FAO (1998) The state of the world’s plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  6. FAO (2010) Second report on the state of the world’s plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  7. Gotor E, Alercia A, Ramanatha Rao V, Watts J, Caracciolo F (2008) The scientific information activity of Bioversity International: the descriptor lists. Genet Resour Crop Evol 55:757–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Greene SL (2001) Improving the quality of passport data to enhance germplasm use and management. Plant Genet Resour Newslett 125:1–8. http://www2.bioversityinternational.org/publications/pgrnewsletter/article.asp?id_article=1&id_issue=125
  9. Guarino L (1985) IBPGR wheat collecting mission to Morocco—1985 (n.p.). Report no. FAO-AGPG:IBPGR/85/151. IPBGR/IPGRI collecting no. CN371Google Scholar
  10. Guarino L, Ramanatha Rao V, Reid R (eds) (1995) Collecting plant genetic diversity. Technical guidelines. CAB International, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Hazekamp T (2002) The potential role of passport data in the conservation and use of plant genetic resources. In: Engels JMM, Ramanatha Rao V, Brown AHD, Jackson MT (eds) Managing plant genetic diversity. IPGRI, Rome, pp 185–194Google Scholar
  12. Khoury C, Laliberte B, Guarino L (2010) Trends in ex situ conservation of plant genetic resources: a review of global crop and regional conservation strategies. Genet Resour Crop Evol 57(4):625–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moss H, Guarino L (1995) Gathering data in the field. In: Guarino L, Ramanatha Rao V, Reid R (eds) Collecting plant genetic diversity. Technical guidelines. CAB International, New York, pp 367–417Google Scholar
  14. Richards CM, Volk GM (2010) New challenges for data management in genebanks. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on molecular markers in horticulture. Acta Horticulturae 859. International Society of Horticultural Science (ISHS), pp 333–336. ISBN 978-90-66052-28-4Google Scholar
  15. Rubenstein KD, Smale M, Widrlechner MP (2006) Demand for genetic resources and the US National Plant Germplasm System. Crop Sci 46:1021–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. SGRP (2010) Global public goods project phase 2—final report. System-wide genetic resources programme (SGRP). Bioversity International, RomeGoogle Scholar
  17. Thormann I, Engels JMM (2001) IBPGR/IPGRI register of base collections. Annex VII In: Development of a scientifically sound and financially sustainable global genebank system. Final report on the technical research phase (n.p.). System-wide Genetic Resources Program, RomeGoogle Scholar
  18. Van Dooijeweert W, Menting F (2008) Improving the quality of passport data of a genebank collection: approaches at CGN. Plant Genet Resour Newslett 153:20–27. http://www2.bioversityinternational.org/publications/pgrnewsletter/article.asp?id_article=4&id_issue=153
  19. Van Hintum T, Menting F, van Strien E (2011) Quality indicators for passport data in ex situ genebanks. Plant Genet Resour Charact Util 9(3):478–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Imke Thormann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hannes Gaisberger
    • 1
  • Federico Mattei
    • 1
  • Laura Snook
    • 1
  • Elizabeth Arnaud
    • 1
  1. 1.Bioversity InternationalRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations