H.A. Fitzhugh1 and M.S. Strauss2
1 Introduction
Widespread concerns about the loss of genetic diversity from domestic livestock populations are of relatively recent origin. However, within the past few decades many reports have called attention to such losses and the probable future consequences (Maijala et al, 1984; FAO, 1984a,b; Hall 1990). Public awareness and concerns have been stimulated by the well-publicized losses of species, especially in tropical rain forests. This has led to calls for action programmes by existing organizations and the establishment of new organizations to conserve genetic diversity.
Loss of species diversity is not a concern for domestic livestock. However, there is potential for loss of genetic diversity within the 30 plus domesticated mammalian and avian species. The nature of these losses and their consequences have relevance to the organizational structures required for conservation.
To date, most attention about loss of genetic diversity has been directed towards rare breeds in developed countries - particularly in so far as attention has been translated into action programmes. However, most who have studied the problem agree that both the greatest diversity and the highest loss potential are in the developing regions (FAO, 1984a,b). This, too, has important ramifications for programme and organizational requirements.
Significant advances in biotechnology in the past decade have increased the value of genetic diversity as well as the potential for genetic erosion. Additionally, social and economic issues arise with the growing ability to modify domestic livestock through genetic engineering. These require an organized forum for debate and resolution.
As a consequence of concerns for genetic diversity, the Board on Agriculture of the US National Research Council, National Academy of Science undertook the study: “Managing Global Genetic Resources: Agricultural Imperatives”. A subcommittee3 on animal genetic resources was assembled to develop a report on livestock genetic resources.
1 International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA), P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
2 American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1333 H Street NW, Washington, DC. USA.
The deliberations of this subcommittee have substantially influenced the views expressed in this paper; however, other sources and the authors' own experience are also brought to bear on the topic of organizational and institutional structures for management of animal genetic resources.
2 Approach to conservation
Two general approaches can be discerned in livestock conservation: utilization and preservation (Notter and Strauss, 1992). In the first approach, priority is given to utilization of genetic resources to improve livestock production. Emphasis is given to the fact that most genetic diversity is maintained in working herds and flocks kept by farmers and pastoralists around the world. Utilizationists endorse the preservation of that genetic diversity which has current or potential utility, including scientific as well as commercial uses.
The preservationists emphasize importance of preserving all genetic diversity, because of the difficulty of predicting future needs accurately. Cultural and historical values associated with breeds also are considered. Emphasis is placed on maintaining breed identity.
Proponents of both approaches can, however, agree that conservation of genetic diversity is an essential component of sustainable livestock improvement, given the vagaries of future production and market requirements. Recognizing the limited resources available to support conservation, priorities must be set both in terms of genetic diversity to be conserved and the conservation programmes and organizational structures developed and supported. Minimally, conservation should focus on that genetic diversity which either has potential economic value or is both threatened and biologically unique.
2.1 Maintenance of breeding populations
Most genetic diversity will be maintained in herds and flocks for agricultural production. Most of these are privately owned. As long as the effective population size (Ne) remains sufficient, directed conservation efforts are not needed. For effective populations that are declining sharply in number or those which are already small, purposeful conservation in live herds or flocks allow continued adaptation to changing environmental conditions.
Conservation may involve maintaining breed integrity through pure breeding or through crossbreeding to establish gene pools. The organizational requirements and net costs of conservation through maintenance of breeding populations largely depend on the type and amount of income earned from sale of livestock products (including fees earned from exhibiting rare and unusual breeds). Generally, however, some external subsidy is required because most breeds have become rare because they are not economically competitive under prevailing production and market conditions.
2.2 Cryopreservation of gametes and embryos
The major costs for conservation are in sampling populations. However, when the costs of collection are combined with those for maintaining frozen specimens they are low, relative to the maintenance of breeding populations (Smith, 1984a,b). There are differences among and within domestic species in the success rate for cryopreservation. However, the presumption is that research can improve success rate where there are difficulties. The greater problems (which have increasing political overtones) are deciding where frozen stores will be maintained and the criteria determining who has access to them and for what purpose.
3 Conservation activities
Organizational support will be required for a range of activities in order for conservation programmes to be effective.
3.1 Inventory and characterization of existing populations
Priorities for conservation should be populations sharply declining or already small in number, especially if these populations are genetically unique. Much progress has been made in the inventory and characterization of livestock populations in developed regions (e.g. Maijala et al, 1984) but little is known about population number or biological characteristics of livestock in developing regions. Biotechnological advances provide additional means to measure genetic distance between populations as part of the process to identify candidates for conservation.
3.2 Genetic evaluation
Characterization, at least in the early stages, will likely concentrate on phenotype because of limited time and financial resources and limited knowledge of relationships among individuals sampled. However, decisions on sampling for conservation and for future utilization of genetic resources will require evaluation at genotypic level. This has major organizational implications, particularly in the need for programme continuity at least equivalent to the life cycle of populations being evaluated. Use of genetic markers and other biochemical tools may shorten this time requirement in future.
3.3 Maintenance
Whether as breeding populations or frozen stores, organizational requirements are for stability and continuity over an indefinite time period. Unless these organizational requirements can be met with high degree of certainty, initiating programmes may actually do harm. At minimum, failure will discourage future initiatives. And if a population is seriously at risk, the sampling process may further erode genetic diversity to no avail.
3.4 Research
Although technologies are available to support effective conservation of most livestock species, research is needed to provide more efficient, less expensive technologies. These are needed to improve the success rate of cryopreservation for sheep, goats, pigs, horses, poultry and most minor domestic species. Readily applicable molecular techniques are needed to help characterize genetic diversity and measure genetic distance between populations.
3.5 Training
Training is an effective means of mobilizing and motivating technical personnel required to staff conservation programmes. Generally these personnel, whether from private or public sector, will service conservation on part-time basis. They may include farmers, extension agents, veterinarians. AI specialists, as well as scientists. Training is needed in the areas of inventory and characterization, data base management, sampling and performance evaluation, maintenance of living herds and frozen stores, etc.
3.6 Public awareness
Public concerns that genetic diversity is at risk is an important element in directing attention and securing resources to conservation programmes. Short-term private interests may be set aside if the long term public interests served by conservation efforts are generally known. In any event, organizations involved in conservation require considerable resources, some of which may come from private sector, but most will come from the public sector.
4 The plant conservation experience
It is useful when considering programmes for conserving livestock genetic resources to examine the experiences and lessons from plant genetic resources conservation. Efforts to conserve plant germplasm have been ongoing for most of this century, but it was not until the 1960s that their importance gained major international prominence. An FAO technical conference, held in the late 1960s, alerted the scientific, agricultural, and policy communities to the need to conserve plant germplasm for future use. Since then, national and international conservation programmes and a loose global network have been established (Anishetty and Esquinas-Alcazar, 1991; Plucknett et al., 1987; Keystone Centre 1990, 1991).
In total, world collections of plant genetic resources comprise approximately 3.5 million accessions. Half of these are conserved in subfreezing storage. Some fifty nations have facilities for long term storage with more than half of these (29) located in developing countries. Global expenditures for plant germplasm conservation are an estimated US$75 million (Keystone, 1991).
Plant germplasm conservation efforts have not, however, developed without encountering some significant challenges. Today, there are national and international efforts in the public and private sectors. These programmes do not always co-operate and important questions of ownership and control of germplasm remain to be resolved.
Plant germplasm programmes include those sponsored or administered by governments, international organizations, and those co-ordinated through private nongovernmental organizations, including botanic gardens and arboreta. While the goals for all such programmes are largely the conservation of plant genetic resources, the methods and objectives may differ.
Most frequently, governmental programmes seek to preserve agricultural genetic diversity for use in breeding and development. These programmes have historically focused on landraces, breeding lines, and a few related wild species. By contrast, private nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) frequently preserve particular obsolete or antique cultivars for cultural, historical, or social reasons as well as to conserve crop genetic diversity. These efforts may also be linked to preserving traditional agricultural systems and community or on-farm conservation. World wide, NGOs foster on-farm conservation of approximately US$7 million annually (Keystone Centre, 1991).
4.1 National programmes
National programmes have been identified as the essential core for plant conservation activities (Keystone Centre 1990). There is, however, no uniform model for public sector national programmes. Activities are most frequently administered through a ministry of agriculture, but range from those operating a central seed bank, such as programmes in Greece, Italy, or a consortium of Nordic countries; to the more decentralized system of sites and activities of the U.S. NPGS.
A national programme to conserve genetic resources may have many elements (Keystone Centre, 1991). In addition to collections of seeds or plants, these include facilities and staff for collecting, managing, multiplying, characterizing, and documenting holdings; linkages to crop breeding and improvement programmes; and for large programmes, a formal co-ordinating mechanism to include the concerns of NGOs, private industry, and relevant conservation groups.
Significant government-sponsored plant conservation efforts exist in developed and developing nations. The National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS) of the United States is the largest and most diverse. Important and growing programmes exist in virtually all regions. Many, such as those in India, Ethiopia, and China have received significant bilateral aid from industrialized countries for their development. FAO and IBPGR also have supplied assistance in the form of equipment, expert advice, and information to establish national programmes.
NGOs, such as the Seed Savers Exchange (SSE) in the U.S., frequently depend on a network of non-technical volunteer farmers or gardeners to preserve seed. SSE serves as a model for independent seed conservation networks around the world. Another private group, Native Seed/SEARCH, includes aspects of in situ monitoring and conservation, particularly within the American Southwest. Similar programmes to preserve heirloom and antique crop varieties, such as Arche Noah, which coordinates more than 200 individuals in European German-speaking countries, exist.
Although many of the goals of NGO and government-sponsored conservation efforts may differ, they should not be considered mutually exclusive. Neither, however, should they be seen as competitive. Because the holdings of each are to some extent unique, the potential exists for the exchange of both germplasm and technical assistance. Thus, it is important for national programmes to allow for co-operation between the private and nongovernmental sectors. Because they frequently operate at the community level, NGOs foster increased public awareness and support of conservation and, thereby, may benefit more formal national programmes (Keystone, 1991).
Despite significant growth in national programmes for conserving plants since 1970, much remains to be accomplished. Collection size for many major crops has grown to a degree that the cost of their maintenance threatens to exceed the available resources. Proposals for establishing core subsets of large collections are intended to address this by improving access, guiding priorities for such activities as characterization and evaluation, and providing a mechanism for more rational genetic screening of collections (Brown, 1989a,b; Marshall, 1989; NRC, 1991, Strauss et al., 1988). Collecting of wild species that could provide important genetic improvements and traditional landraces in many areas is needed.
With political and economic changes, such as those in the former Soviet Union, have come fiscal constraints and changing priorities that can render the future of historically important collections unsure. In such situations the links with other national and international programmes can provide security against loss.
Ultimately, conservation efforts must be an essential part of national agriculture, development, or environment programmes. Despite bilateral or international funds to support facilities construction, some national programmes have not functioned effectively because of a lack of basic operating funds or adequately trained personnel (Keystone Centre, 1991). In the absence of such support, germplasm programmes become little more than what one report has termed “seed morgues” (Goodman and Castillo-Gonzales, 1991).
4.2 International programmes
International programmes are the mechanisms for linking diverse national programmes. They provide important resources of information, germplasm conservation, co-ordination, and a limited level of funding. Involvement ranges from the major collections of the International Agricultural Research Centres (IARCs) to the policy and community-level advocacy of NGOs such as the Rural Advancement Foundation, International (RAFI).
The collections of IARCs are important elements of the global plant genetic resources effort. At least twelve of the centres of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) are involved in aspects of the conservation and use of plant genetic resources. These centres have provided collections to national programmes, trained national germplasm scientists and technicians, supported exploration and collection, fostered in situ conservation of unique materials, and been leaders in the use of germplasm in crop improvement, particularly in developing countries.
The establishment of the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR) as part of the CGIAR in 1974 was a significant step forward in the fostering of national and international conservation (Keystone Centre, 1991). IBPGR has coordinated a wide and diverse array of programmes and encouraged establishment of many national efforts. For the future it is looking to the establishment of crop networks and the support and encouragement of research to improve conservation, management and use of germplasm.
The FAO has long provided a forum for discussions and the advocacy of germplasm conservation, management, and use. Through the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources and the Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, the FAO provides for discussion and airing of national and international concerns. In the past, the relationships between FAO Commission, the IBPGR, and national programmes have been strained, but recent developments within the Commission and the imminent move of IBPGR from FAO (to become the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, IPGRI), have led to improved, co-operative arrangements (Keystone Centre, 1991).
Private, nongovernmental groups, such as RAFI and the Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN) work to influence national and international policies related to germplasm access, management, and use. They operate through liaison with other international organization, such as the FAO or the European Community (Keystone Centre, 1991). At the national and regional level they may provide support to community-based activities.
Some regional networks of national programmes co-operatively support facilities. These provide links for programmes having common concerns but limited resources. Examples include the collaboration of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC) countries to foster the development of national programmes among its member states (Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe) and to operate a regional bank for crops and forest seeds (Kyomo, 1991). The Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigaciónes y Enseñanza (CATIE) is an active centre for regional research and co-operation in Central America. Other examples of regional co-operation include the Nordic Gene Bank, the Andean Crop Network, the Southeast Asian Regional Committee on Plant Genetic Resources; the European Cooperative Programme on Genetic Resources, and the Mediterranean Gene Bank.
4.3 Private industry
Industry has continued to play a role in the conservation and use of genetic resources. This has historically been a source of controversy for some who have viewed the involvement as detrimental to the welfare of developing countries (see for example, Fowler and Mooney, 1991). The involvement of industry has been in a relatively few major, largely grain, crops; and primarily as a user of germplasm resources.
Emerging technologies have provided powerful new tools for isolation and use of specific genes. Private industry has frequently been in the forefront of developing and applying these tools to the improvement and development of major crops. This, however, has led to discussion of patenting and other forms of proprietary protection, which in turn has led to debate in fora such as the FAO Commission about ownership, exchange, and use of genetic resources.
5 Organizational and institutional structure for livestock programmes
The organizational requirements for effective conservation of livestock genetic diversity obviously start at the local level where the populations to be conserved are found. Most conservation efforts at the local level will depend on the interests and priorities of individual farmers. However, there may be an opportunity to establish conservation activities within producer associations. Breed societies and groups of producers who share interest in conservation can provide necessary organizational infrastructure for maintaining data bases and gene banks (e.g. the British Rare Breeds Survival Trust which has 8500 members, 1000 of whom keep small herds of rare breeds).
Although specific circumstances vary from site to site, the general requirements of conservation programmes will be consistent across locales and even across national boundaries. In contrast, public interests, policies and priorities (and institutional capacities to service conservation programmes) vary greatly among nations. Therefore, the success of a global programme for management of animal genetic resources rests on establishment of effective programmes at the national level which address these specific national priorities.
In support of national programmes, international activities should focus on:
5.1 National programmes
National programmes should address the dual goals of aggressively pursuing genetic improvement while protecting the genetic resource base required for future improvement. They should coordinate public and private efforts within the country and with relevant regional and global programmes. Therefore, a single entity should be given a clear mandate to coordinate the national programme. This may be an institution, an agency, a standing committee or even an individual as long as there is a clear mandate and necessary resources are provided.
Important elements of national programmes include:
5.1.1 Inventory, characterization and documentation
Assessment should be made of population number, status, (increasing, decreasing, stable) and vulnerability including risk of dilution or replacement by different populations. All populations should be characterized phenotypically and genetically with first priority given to indigenous populations and those thought to be at risk of loss of genetic diversity. Populations at risk should be monitored periodically to assess current status. Nations may pool resources to develop and maintain computerized data bases with the caveat that there must be clear agreement about who has access to data and under which circumstances.
5.1.2 Conservation of unique and threatened populations
Although most genetic diversity is maintained in working herds, threatened breeds may not be commercially viable. National programmes may provide subsidies for private efforts to conserve these stocks (Henson, 1990). Cryogenic stores of gametes and embryos will most likely be managed by public institutions, (e.g. research organizations); however, commercial firms might also contract to provide these services.
5.1.3 Collaboration with other conservation programmes
Collaboration should take many forms including participation in international fora which develop standard procedures, provide training, support cooperative data bases and gene banks, propose policy options on access, movement and utilization of germplasm and other legal and technical issues. Collaboration with regional data bases and gene banks will often be more cost-effective and may encourage financial support from these developed countries concerned with conservation of genetic diversity in developing countries.
5.1.4 Research
Priority research needs include: characterization and evaluation of indigenous populations; cryopreservation technology for avian semen, swine and poultry embryos, and semen and embryos from minor species and wild relatives; development of effective field techniques for collecting semen and embryos; molecular techniques to measure genetic differences within and between breeds; development and utilization of DNA libraries; and methods for fertility and reproductive enhancement.
Results from basic, strategic and most applied research can be readily transferred among agro-ecological zones and nations. However, national capacity is required for adaptation of technologies to the specific local requirements for conservation of genetic diversity. National scientists in developing countries have major comparative advantages in terms of access to local populations. These advantages include first-hand knowledge of local production conditions, long term continuing presence required for life cycle characterization, and the political approval more likely to be granted to nationals.
5.1.5 Policy
An agreed national policy for conservation of animal genetic resources is essential. Elements of this policy include decisions on legal issues involving ownership and access to data bases and germplasm, especially those maintained with public support. These issues have become increasingly complex with the availability of research-based biotechnologies to manipulate genetic diversity (Belcher and Hawtin, 1991). The development of an effective policy will depend on building consensus among representatives from private and public sector including both non-profit and for-profit organizations. This will not be a simple task because the vested interests of these groups often do not coincide.
5.2 International programmes
International programmes include both regional or global levels. Established regional organizations such as the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE) in Central America, the Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources of the Organization for African Unity (OAU-IBAR) in Africa and the Southern African Centre for Cooperation in Agricultural Research (SACCAR) in the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) region have in place intergovernmental agreements which could allow them to service regional programmes for conservation of genetic diversity. However, these regional organizations were not established for this purpose. Therefore, an expansion of their mandate will be required, and perhaps, the establishment of necessary infrastructure (e.g. computerized data bases, cryogenic stores).
Even if effective national and regional institutional structures are established, a global mechanism is required as well. Three options can be envisioned.
5.2.1 Institutes within CGIAR
As described earlier, IBPGR has been an effective means to promote and coordinate the inventory, collection, exchange, evaluation and preservation of crop germplasm. Within CGIAR, two centres have a livestock mandate: International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA) and International Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases (ILRAD). Both are based in sub-Saharan Africa; however, ILRAD has a global mandate for animal disease and much of ILCA's research is relevant to livestock production systems outside Africa. With respect to research on genetic diversity, ILRAD collaborates with other research institutes mapping the bovine genome. ILCA supports substantial efforts by national and ILCA scientists to analyze performance records and describe African livestock populations (cattle, sheep, goats). Additionally, the evaluation of performance of cattle and sheep under trypanosomiasis challenge has received particular attention by ILCA in the past decade. A new initiative to inventory and characterize indigenous populations of cattle, sheep and goats in sub-Saharan Africa has started in 1992 (Rege, 1992). This initiative will contract with national scientists to inventory and describe local population following standard protocols to obtain minimum essential data for characterization.
These efforts by ILCA and ILRAD can provide a base for extension outside Africa. However, there would be value in an institution such as IBPGR to coordinate research based conservation of animal genetic resources on a global basis. Establishing a new institute within the CGIAR would require additional new funding or major reductions in ongoing programme activities of existing CGIAR centres; neither seems appropriate. A less costly option would be to expand the mandate of IBPGR to include animal genetic resources. Another possibility would be to expand the mandate of ILCA outside sub-Saharan Africa and to change ILCA programme strategy to include all livestock (currently ILCA only deals with cattle, sheep and goats). Conservation activities within CGIAR would necessarily focus on research.
5.2.2 Conservation organizations
Organizations such as the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) have been in the forefront of developing public support for conservation. The IUCN membership includes governmental as well as nongovernmental organization. It has been highly effective in fostering international cooperation for conservation, developing and maintaining data bases, monitoring populations at risk and generally supporting conservation efforts. However, IUCN does not address livestock at present. Philosophical conflicts between the environmental priorities of IUCN and similar organizations and economic development through livestock might also arise.
5.2.3 Food and Agriculture Organization
FAO has been concerned with animal genetic resources for more than two decades. In 1973, FAO and UNEP initiated a livestock conservation programme and, subsequently, in 1980 established the Joint Expert Panel on Animal Genetic Resources Conservation and Management. This panel has developed technical recommendations on data bases, cryogenic storage, genetic engineering and other aspects of conservation and utilization of animal genetic resources, especially for developing regions.
The FAO and UNEP have encouraged and supported both national and regional efforts to manage animal genetic resources. Regional activities have included establishment of the Expert Committee on Animal Genetic Resources by the OAU-IBAR; a commission on evaluating and conserving animal genetic resources in Latin America within the Asóciacion Latino-americana de Production Animal (ALPA); and an expert committee on animal genetic resources within the Society for the Advancement of Breeding Researches in Asia and Oceania (SABRAO). The European Association for Animal Production (EAAP) established a working party which assists and coordinates various European activities involving animal genetic resources. In 1985, EAAP supported development of a central data base for European countries by the University of Hannover, which has been expanded in cooperation with FAO to create the Global Animal Genetic Resources Data Bank (Simon, 1990).
FAO and UNEP have also supported training courses for scientists, development of manuals on operation of data bases and gene banks, and publications describing indigenous livestock populations in developing countries and regions, including China and the former Soviet Union.
In recent years, funding has not been adequate for FAO to implement many of the recommendations made by the Expert Panel and other advisory committees. However, a five-year, five point programme has been recently announced (Food and Agriculture Organization, 1992). The goals of this programme are:
The announcement indicated that the programme would be “…funded jointly by FAO, international donors and the participating countries in the developing world. Those nations would provide the physical infrastructure and operating costs, largely in kind. FAO will fund the major professional staff costs, plus professional support costs, and technical consultancies. Donor funding of $15 million is sought to meet the direct action costs of the programme.” (Food and Agriculture Organization, 1992)
6 Conclusions
The most effective global strategy to promote and secure conservation of animal genetic resources will combine the best elements of the three options presented. By doing so, organizational strength in building research, public awareness, development and coordinating programmes will be combined. However, there will be need for a single institution to assume leadership for this effort. The FAO, because of its record of activities in this area is a most appropriate institution for facilitating and coordinating a global effort. However, because of the significant levels of extra budgetary funding that will be required, FAO will need to secure and maintain confidence of potential donors in its ability to accomplish this task. Essential to this will be actions that will prevent the animal genetic resources activities from becoming embroiled in the political controversies that have, in the past, hindered plant genetic resources efforts.
Perhaps the most important lesson to be gained from the experience with plant germplasm conservation is the need for continuing international dialogue. While it may not be necessary to establish a parallel commission for livestock, it is essential that a continuing flow of information about national and international activities be maintained. This information provides a basis for establishing cooperative efforts and enables limited international resources to address the most urgent needs.
The significant of the issue of proprietary ownership of germplasm must not be underestimated. For plants, it is somewhat simplified by the uniqueness of the seed as a fully contained, reproducible unit. The issues of access and control of resources become more complex where regional facilities must depend on original donors for renewal of accessions, as might be the case for animal semen or embryo storage.
Ultimately, the basis for success must rest on the establishment of functional national programmes. This does not necessarily imply creation of institutes, laboratories, or storage facilities in all nations. However, it minimally necessitates the commitment to conservation of genetic resources in the form of an agreed national policy and programme. Operational responsibilities can fall to national institutes or cooperative regional programmes. Such efforts must be closely linked to the use of conserved resources for the support and economic development of national agriculture.
The need is sufficiently great that all institutions - whether private or public - should pool their capabilities and seek complementarities in order that a global conservation programme will be successful.
7 References
Anishetty, N M and J T Esquinas-Alcazar, 1991. Plant Genetic Resources Activities of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Pp 53–61 in Crop Genetic Resources of Africa, Volume II, N.Q. Ng, P Perrino, F Attera, and H Zedan, eds. Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture: Rome: International Board for Plant Genetic Resources; Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme: Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
Belcher, B and G Hawtin, 1991. A Patent on Life - Ownership of Plant and Animal Research. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, 40p.
Brown, A H D, 1989a. The case for core collections. Pp 136–156 in The Use of Plant Genetics Resources, A H D Brown, O H Frankel, D R Marshall, and J T Williams, eds. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, A H D, 1989b. Core collections: A practical approach to genetic resources management. Genome 31(2): 818–824.
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. 1984a. Animal Genetic Resources Conservation by Management, Data Banks and Training. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 44/1. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. 1984b. Animal Genetic Resources: Cryogenic Storage of Germplasm and Molecular Engineering. FAO Animal production and Health Paper No. 44/2. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. 1992. Livestock Breeds in Developing World Threatened. Press Release, January 28, 1992. Washington, D.C.: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Fowler, C. and P Mooney, 1991. Shattering: Food, Politics and the Loss of Genetic Diversity. Tucson, Arizona: The University of Arizona Press.
Goodman, M M and F Castillo-Gonzalez, 1991. Plant Genetics: Politics and Realities. Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 6(3): 74–85.
Hall, S J G, 1990. Genetic Conservation of Domestic Livestock in Oxford Reviews of Reproductive Biology Vol. 12, S R Milligan ed. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. Pp 291–318.
Henson, E L, 1990. The Organization of Live Animal Preservation Programmes. Pp 103–117 in Animal Genetic Resources: A Global Programme for Sustainable Development, G Weiner, ed. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 80. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Keystone Centre, 1990. Final Consensus Report of the Keystone International Dialogue Series on Plant Genetic Resources. Madras Plenary Session, January 29 to February 2, 1990. Keystone, Colorado: The Keystone Centre.
Keystone Centre, 1991. Final Consensus Report: Global Initiative for the Security and sustainable Use of Plant Genetic Resources. Oslo Plenary Session, May 31 to June 4, 1991. Keystone, Colorado: The Keystone Centre.
Kyomo, M L, 1991. Conservation and Utilization of Genetic Resources in the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) region: A Collaborative Approach. Pp 277–286 in Crop Genetic Resources of Africa, Volume I, F Attere, H Zedan, N Q, Ng, and P Perrino, eds. Ibadan: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture: Rome: International Board for Plant Genetic Resources; Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme; Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
Maijala K, A V Cherekaev, J M Devillard, Z Reklewski, G Rognoni, D L Simon, and D E Steane, 1984. Conservation of animal genetic resources in Europe. Final report of an EAAP (European Association of Animal Production) working party. Livestock Prod. Sci. 11:3–22.
Marshall, D R, 1989. Limitations To The Use of Germplasm Collections. Pp 105– 122. in The Use of Plant Genetic Resources. A H D Brown, O H Frankel, D R Marshall, and J T Williams, eds. New York: Cambridge University Press.
National Research Council (NRC) 1991. Managing Global Genetic Resources: The U S National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, D C: National Academy Press.
Notter, D R and M S Strauss, 1992. Conservation and Use of Genetic Diversity in Domestic Animals. Symposium on Managing Genetic Resources. Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of science, February 6 to 11, 1992, Chicago, Illinois.
Plucknett, D L, N J H Smith, J T Williams, and N M Anishetty 1987. Gene Banks and the World's Food. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Rege, J E 1992. African Animal Genetic Resources: Their Characterization, Conservation and Utilization. Proceedings of Research Planning Workshop, 19–21 Feb. 1992. ILCA, Addis Ababa.
Simon, D, 1990. The Global Animal Genetic Data Bank. In: Animal Genetic Resources: a Global Programme for Sustainable Development. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 80. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp 153–166.
Smith, C, 1984a. Estimated Costs of Genetic Conservation in Farm Animals. Pp 21–30 in Animal Genetic Resources Conservation by Management, Data Banks and Training. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 44/1. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Smith, C, 1984b. Genetic aspects of conservation in farm livestock. Livestock Prod. Sci. 11:37–48.
Strauss, M S, J A Pino, and J I Cohen. 1988. Quantification of diversity in ex-situ plant collections. Diversity 16:30–32.
