[Thanks to David Steane for his views on some of the contributions posted in the last couple of weeks. NB !!! Today is the last day for posting messages to this conference !!! ..........Moderator]
It is good to see the excellent contributions over the last two weeks and thanks for the extensions to the conference. I would like to agree with several contributors and then raise some problems.
Thanks to Oliver Hanotte [11 August], Adama Traore [16 August] and others, we can see the real potential for use of biotechnology in genetic conservation - but this is mainly to do with developing strategies to maintain diversity rather than the actual conservation. The costs are really in the proper sampling rather than in the tests and this is crucial because if the samples are not a true sample of the 'breed' the results are relatively worthless. Kui Li from Wuhan [17 August] makes a good point about common standards for analysis but, as far as I understand, even this is not sufficient since, even using the same samples, probes and even equipment, labs come up with different answers. The answer is in 'experience', I am told, which means that, while assisting national labs to do the work, a common base lab should be providing common probes and monitoring a proportion of the same samples. The places capable of this role are limited and, unfortunately at this time, the USA has still not ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and therefore is not bound by it (which effectively rules out USA labs at present !!).
I agree with most of the comments of Keith Ramsey [17 August] and Ned Donkin [21 August] - perhaps I could go further and say that many scientists in developing countries appear more interested in obtaining the technology (perhaps understandably considering how they are judged !) rather than looking at the possible adaptions needed to serve local needs. Some of these may well be infrastructural but this makes it no less a priority, even for the scientist, IF their work is to be of value. Clearly there needs to be much more dialogue between the various interested parties - planners, scientists, extensionists and, above all, farmers. The problems are less to do with technology transfer as such as with technology relevance, the limiting factors at farm level and genuine cooperation of all parties by prioritisation of specific goals.
Can I thank FAO and the Coordinator, in particular, for this opportunity to enter into such discussions - I hope today will not be last we hear from this conference and look forward to learning how the contributions are used in the further development of FAO's programme.
David Steane, Thailand
desteane@chmai2.loxinfo.co.th
[The last day for posting messages in this conference is Friday 25 August. To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room3@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]