[For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and
Agriculture see Forum website.
Note, participants are
assumed to be speaking on their own behalf, unless they
state otherwise.]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 10:42
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 115: Preservation of livestock genetic resources
Again, I am Dr. Masroor Ellahi Babar.
I would like to express my regret for making a comment that I made in my previous message (nr. 107, July 1) “There are many countries like Canada which have not their own genetic resources”. I am aware of the fact that Canada has its genetic resources and is committed to the preservation of livestock genetic resources, and has devoted a considerable amount of funding to this initiative. What I wanted to say was that many breeds of livestock originated from Europe, Africa and Asia and these areas have wild type breeds. Most of the livestock species are kept in these areas for more than 5000 years. There are a few references to sheep rearing in Bible. Similarly, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) used to take sheep for grazing. So these areas have original genetic resources. Other areas have some modified or migrated breeds as many areas are discovered much later than these three areas.
The conservation of farm animal genetic resources and biodiversity are growing concerns in all countries. The preservation of agro-biodiversity is important for sustainable agriculture and food security globally. The problem that I see is that most of the funds dedicated to genetic preservation are committed by the developed countries. A considerable number of livestock breeds that are considered rare and are thus preserved in these countries originated from Europe, Asia and Africa, many of them may not be rare in the country of origin. Second, a very large number of local breeds in developing countries are disappearing and are being replaced by more productive imported breeds. Many of these breeds may have valuable genetic characteristics that will become useful in the future. Very little or no attempt is being made to preserve these breeds.
My suggestion was for each institution in the developed countries to make a sistership relation with an institution in the developing countries, and develop joint genetic evaluation and conservation programs. The long-term outcome of such activities with respect of understanding the genetic merit of various breeds and preservation of genetic resources will be, in my opinion, immense.
Dr. Masroor Ellahi Babar,
Nova Scotia Agricultural College,
PO Box 550
Truro, Nova Scotia
Canada B2N 5E3
MBABAR (at) nsac.ns.ca
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 10:44
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 116: End of e-mail conference - India
I am Janaki Krishna from India again.
Though these conferences are a bit informal, I would like to thank FAO formally for organising this conference. I always enjoy the FAO conferences as they inspire and give lot of insights. I would also like to thank the Moderator for the nice moderation throughout the conference. The conference has generated very useful leads for further follow up and necessary actions. Looking forward to more such conferences in the area of biotechnology.
P S Janaki Krishna
Consultant
Andhra Pradesh Netherlands Biotechnology Programme
Institute of Public Enterprise
Hyderabad - 500 007,
India
Phone 91 - 40 - 27097018/27098148
Email: jankrisp (at) yahoo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 11:15
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 117: Using biotechnology to conserve and characterise life support species
I am Promila Kapoor-Vijay, an ecologist with special interest in population biology. My research work covers biodiversity and genetic resources of underutilized species. My recent work has been to provide concept and framework for developing a web-based Biodiversity Thematic window for the South, in which biotechnology has a sub theme.
I wish to reaffirm my support to the voices of all those who supported various contributions emphasizing use of biotechnology tools for conservation of plant and animal genetic resources in terrestrial and aquatic environments. I am very pleased to see emphasis being placed on the need to use of appropriate tools, techniques and practices for developing both conventional and advanced methods of cataloguing genetic diversity and variability of annual, perennial plant (trees) and animal genetic resources. There is no way one can put value on genetic resources as their importance transcends economic, social and ecological values. Ecological services rendered by biodiversity; economic value generated by biomaterials embedded in bio-wealth cannot be calculated and the few estimates that are available only give a clue as to future worth of naturally available biological resources.
It is well known that all developed countries invest heavily in biotechnology and it is becoming one of the key economic growth areas of the world and will have the next wave of major environmental impacts.
The knowledge and expertise related to biotechnology for the use of local and indigenous plant, animal and microbial resources is missing in the countries of the South where millions suffer from poverty, hunger and disease. Where and when people do not have resources to meet even their basic needs, the world does not focus on building their scientific and technological capacities as priority is to save lives at the given moment. However, the missing links of knowledge, building of competence and capacities, when not attended to at the right time, become the source of more of future problems and disasters.
The natural disasters (Tsunamis, land based earthquakes, volcanoes), whether caused by natural factors or driven by human actions, affect the poor most, as they do not have access to economic resources for coping with emergencies. The richer community, somehow, suffers lesser damage as they have easy access to social and economic instruments that can spread the impact of disasters. The poor, especially those living in the marginal environments, rely most on unique life support species for their food, nutrition security and survival of their communities in emergencies. These species have ability to grow in extreme environments and habitats such as saline, water logged lands (both coastal and non coastal) after disasters such as Tsunami, floods, land slides, drought. For example, some populations of Chenopodium album are used in emergencies by mountain people. Studies on genetic relationships among cultivated and wild populations of Chenopodium species using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) profiles has given new direction in characterization and conservation of this important pseudocereal. [Chenopodium album, also known as lambsquarter, is in the same genus as quinoa. Pseudocereals are plants, such as quinoa, that do not belong to the cereal grains grasses but produce fruits and seeds that can used as flour for bread and other staples...Moderator].
The genes which are unique to such life support species could be useful in developing future varieties of plants, animals and microbes in building food, nutrition, health, and ecological security for the people of the South. The use of biotechnology to catalogue and conserve diversity of life support species will safeguard humanity from poverty and hunger and impending threatening global climate change, increasing soil stresses such as from chemicals, salinity and desertification.
My considered view is that information, knowledge, and expertise associated with biotechnology which is relevant and needed to conserve unique plant, animal and microbial species thriving in diverse and especially extreme environments should be strengthened.
Developing countries of the South need to become part of this revolution. If they cannot, then they will become technologically excluded and lose out on the economic growth that is within their reach as the critical ingredient needed for using biotechnology, the vast pool of genetic material, is owned by them. If they do not take part, the benefits, so greatly needed by them, will be missed.
Dr Promila Kapoor-Vijay
Affiliated Scientist,
Institue of Environmental Sciences,
Zurich University,
Zurich
Switzerland
pkv (at) bluewin.ch
Professor (Hon.) in Environmental Sciences,
GB Pant University of Agriculture and Tchnology,
Pant Nagar-263145
Uttaranchal,
India
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 11:22
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 118: Re: DNA barcoding // Inadequacy of using a single molecular marker system
This is Kioumars Ghamkhar, again.
Regarding the 2 issues reiterated in P.K. Gupta's message (nr. 87, 27 June):
1. For the for first issue, I was hoping someone would address his comment on DNA barcoding before the e-conference ends but no one did. So, I do it:
There is no doubt that DNA barcoding can help taxonomists to classify, re-classify, or even identify taxa or new species within the current known taxa as well as the unknown taxa, which will be discovered in future (only 15% of all species have been identified so far). However, it does not mean that it is, or must be, an alternative to the traditional taxonomy based on morphological data/information. There is already an agreement among many taxonomists in the world to harmonise the DNA barcoding activities and because of a need for consistency, the gene that must be, or is, used should be a gene that exists in all taxa and while it is variable among taxa, it should not be too variable among (evolutionarily) very close taxa (sister groups). That is exactly why the genes responsible for coding the cytochromes have been mostly selected for this purpose. So, if anyone has got the facilities and the material (plant specimens), it is recommended to start doing barcoding sooner rather than later.
2. Regarding the second issue in his message (also mentioned by E.M. Muralidharan, Message 109, July 1):
Sure. No single molecular method has been ever claimed to be solving the world's problems. Basically, more molecular techniques/data, more resolution or better results. Also, using molecular data does not mean that morphology must be ignored or forgotten. The best approach (as I have mentioned in my previous email) is to analyse your single (each molecular and morphological) data, obtain the results, compare the results of separate datasets in pairs with the single results and, finally, the combined whole (single molecular plus morphological data) data with each separate and paired results using statistical analyses. If you have enough time and funding and you looking for the best outcome, you must do all this because there is (most of the time) inconsistency between different data sets.
Dr Kioumars Ghamkhar
Research Associate
Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture (CLIMA)
University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley WA 6009
Australia
Voice: 61 8 6488 7120
Fax: 61 8 6488 1140
E-mail: kioumars (at) cyllene.uwa.edu.au
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 11:33
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 119: Re: Not depending heavily on a single type of marker
This is Kioumars Ghamkhar, again.
Concerning E.M. Muralidharan's message 109 (July 1) about amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLPs):
Although I am doing (fluorescent) AFLPs myself, and I am pretty much convinced it is a great method, he is right about the fact that the results of AFLP (or any other whole genome fingerprinting technique) must be checked before jumping to any conclusion. This can be done either by using other more consistent techniques (such as sequencing of, for example, internal transcribed spacer (ITS) or a coding region of the genome) or by testing the results using different analytical methods. To get more information on this issue please read this article:
Phylogenetic signal in AFLP data sets, W.J.M. Koopman (2005), Systematic Biology, 54:2, p.197-217.
Dr Kioumars Ghamkhar
Research Associate
Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture (CLIMA)
University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley WA 6009
Australia
Voice: 61 8 6488 7120
Fax: 61 8 6488 1140
E-mail: kioumars (at) cyllene.uwa.edu.au
[The abstract to this article reads "AFLP markers provide a potential source of phylogenetic information for molecular systematic studies. However, there are properties of restriction fragment data that limit phylogenetic interpretation of AFLPs. These are (a) possible nonindependence of fragments, (b) problems of homology assignment of fragments, (c) asymmetry in the probability of losing and gaining fragments, and (d) problems in distinguishing heterozygote from homozygote bands. In the present study, AFLP data sets of Lactuca s.l. were examined for the presence of phylogenetic signal. An indication of this signal was provided by carrying out tree length distribution skewness (g1) tests, permutation tail probability (PTP) tests, and relative apparent synapomorphy analysis (RASA). A measure of the support for internal branches in the optimal parsimony tree (MPT) was made using bootstrap, jackknife, and decay analysis. Finally, the extent of congruence in MPTs for AFLP and internal transcribed spacer (ITS)-1 data sets for the same taxa was made using the partition homogeneity test (PHT) and the Templeton test. These analytical studies suggested the presence of phylogenetic signal in the AFLP data sets, although some incongruence was found between AFLP and ITS MPTs. An extensive literature survey undertaken indicated that authors report a general congruence of AFLP and ITS tree topologies across a wide range of taxonomic groups, suggesting that the present results and conclusions have a general bearing. In these earlier studies and those for Lactuca s.l., AFLP markers have been found to be informative at somewhat lower taxonomic levels than ITS sequences. Tentative estimates are suggested for the levels of ITS sequence divergence over which AFLP profiles are likely to be phylogenetically informative"...Moderator].
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 11:40
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 120: Use of DNA microarrays for study of genetic diversity
I am PK Gupta again from Meerut University in India;
I would like to point out that one aspect, which still remains uncovered in this conference is the use of DNA microarrays for the study of genetic diversity. This subject is covered in detail in the recent Special Issue of "Chromosome Research" Volume 13, # 3, which is exclusively devoted to DNA microarrays. The DNA oligonucleotide arrays, already available in some plant systems, would allow the study of genetic diversity at the whole genome level utilizing information on diversity at the nucleotide level. Since these microarrays are being procured in several labs in the developing countries also, the participants in this conference should be aware of this powerful tool for the study of the germplasm, at least in some crop plants (e.g. rice, brassicas, etc.). Interested participants may consult the above Special Issue of Chromosome Research and the literature cited therein.
P.K. Gupta
Honorary Emeritus Professor and INSA Senior Scientist
Molecular Biology Laboratory
Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding
Ch. Charan Singh University
MEERUT-250 004
India
Tel (Lab): 91-121-2768195
(Resi): 91-121-2762505
TeleFax : 91-121-2768195
e-mail : pkgupta36 (at) yahoo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: 03 July 2005 11:54
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: 121: Re: Preservation of livestock genetic resources
It is D. Vijay from India again.
I truly agree with Masroor Ellahi Babar (message 115, July 3) with regard to cooperation between developed and developing countries. What he said is true not only for Livestock but also for other resources like plants and fisheries. It's the right time to have a global understanding of the problem of loss of biodiversity and its conservation. Keeping the borders aside and united, the individuals can do a lot towards achieving this target. With the advancement of technology (like use of molecular markers for conservation) there should be a proper collaboration between these two parts of the world.
Being a first time participant of an e-conference, I am totally delighted by its concept and the way it was conducted. I thank the moderator for a nice moderation and FAO for organising such a worthy conference. This conference has helped me to brighten my understanding and gave me an opportunity to learn new concepts in the field of molecular biology with respect to conservation. I appreciate the way the participants responded and shared their experiences. Simply saying I like it very much. Thank you all.
Vijay.D, PhD
Scientific Assistant
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute
IPGRI Office for South Asia
NASC Complex, Pusa Campus
New Delhi - 110 012, India
Office: +91-11- 25847537/46/47
Mobile: +91- 09868412855
Email: vijaydunna (at) gmail.com
URL: http://www.geocities.com/vijaydunna