Awareness of the need for biodiversity conservation is now universally accepted, but most often recent conservation activities have focused on wild species. Crop species and the diversity between and within them has significant socioeconomic as well as heritage value. The bulk of genetic diversity in domesticated species is located in traditional varieties maintained by traditional farming systems. These traditional varieties, commonly referred to as landraces, are severely threatened by genetic extinction primarily due to their replacement by modern genetically uniform varieties. The conservation of landrace diversity has been hindered in part by the lack of an accepted definition to define the entity universally recognized as landraces. Without a definition it would be impossible to prepare an inventory and without an inventory changes in landrace constituency could not be recognized over time. Therefore, based on a literature review, workshop discussion and interviews with key informants, common characteristics of landraces were identified, such as: historical origin, high genetic diversity, local genetic adaptation, recognizable identity, lack of formal genetic improvement, and whether associated with traditional farming systems. However, although these characteristics are commonly present they are not always all present for any individual landrace; several crop-specific exceptions were noted relating to crop propagation method (sexual or asexual), breeding system (self-fertilized or cross-fertilized species), length of formal crop improvement, seed management (selection or random propagation) and use. This paper discusses the characteristics that generally constitute a landrace, reviews the exceptions to these characteristics and provides a working definition of a landrace. The working definition proposed is as follows: 'a landrace is a dynamic population(s) of a cultivated plant that has historical origin, distinct identity and lacks formal crop improvement, as well as often being genetically diverse, locally adapted and associated with traditional farming systems'.

The world's wealth of plant genetic resources has much value for world food security, but these resources are under considerable threat. Crop improvement, particularly under climate change, depends on the genetic diversity of our plant genetic resources, which are arguably inadequately conserved and poorly used. There is wide recognition that the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010 targets to reduce the loss of biodiversity have not been met. Biodiversity is at risk from multiple threats, including climate change, and the genetic diversity contained within plant genetic resources, particularly of species that are wild relatives of our crops, faces similar threats but is essential to our ability to respond to the new stresses in the agricultural environment resulting from climate change. It is important to consider the genetic value of these crop wild relatives, how they may be conserved, and what new technologies can be implemented to enhance their use.

Crop wild relatives are an important socio-economic resource that is currently being eroded or even extinguished through careless human activities. If the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD 2010 Biodiversity Target of achieving a significant reduction in the current rate of loss is to be achieved, we must first define what crop wild relatives are and how their conservation might be prioritised. A definition of a crop wild relative is proposed and illustrated in the light of previous Gene Pool concept theory. Where crossing and genetic diversity information is unavailable, the Taxon Group concept is introduced to assist recognition of the degree of crop wild relative relatedness by using the existing taxonomic hierarchy.

Growing concern over the potentially devastating impacts of climate change on biodiversity and food security, considered together with the growing world population, means that taking action to conserve crop wild relative (CWR) diversity is no longer an option-it is an urgent priority. Grop wild relatives are species closely related to crops, including their progenitors, which have the potential to contribute beneficial traits for crop improvement, such as biotic and abiotic resistances, leading to improved yield and stability. Having already made major contributions to crop improvement in the 20th century, GWRarerecognizedasacritical resource to sustain global food security; therefore, their systematic conservation is imperative. However, extending their conservation and promoting more systematic exploitation is hindered by a lack of understanding of their current and potential value, their diversity, and practically how they might be conserved. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to (i) demonstrate the current and potential use of GWR in crop improvement, (ii) estimate how many GWR species exist and how many are a global priority for active conservation, and (iii) describe how a global network for the in situ conservation of GWR might be established that could help to underpin future food security.

BackgroundThe brown planthopper (BPH) Nilaparvata lugens (Stal) is a serious pest of rice in Asia. Development of novel control strategies can be facilitated by comparison of BPH feeding behaviour on varieties exhibiting natural genetic variation, and then elucidation of the underlying mechanisms of resistance.Methodology/Principal FindingsBPH feeding behaviour was compared on 12 rice varieties over a 12 h period using the electrical penetration graph (EPG) and honeydew clocks. Seven feeding behaviours (waveforms) were identified and could be classified into two phases. The first phase involved patterns of sieve element location including non penetration (NP), pathway (N1+N2+N3), xylem (N5) [21] and two new feeding waveforms, derailed stylet mechanics (N6) and cell penetration (N7). The second feeding phase consisted of salivation into the sieve element (N4-a) and sieve element sap ingestion (N4-b). Production of honeydew drops correlated with N4-b waveform patterns providing independent confirmation of this feeding behaviour.Conclusions/SignificanceOverall variation in feeding behaviour was highly correlated with previously published field resistance or susceptibility of the different rice varieties: BPH produced lower numbers of honeydew drops and had a shorter period of phloem feeding on resistant rice varieties, but there was no significant difference in the time to the first salivation (N4-b). These qualitative differences in behaviour suggest that resistance is caused by differences in sustained phloem ingestion, not by phloem location. Cluster analysis of the feeding and honeydew data split the 12 rice varieties into three groups: susceptible, moderately resistant and highly resistant. The screening methods that we have described uncover novel aspects of the resistance mechanism (or mechanisms) of rice to BPH and will in combination with molecular approaches allow identification and development of new control strategies.