Farmer Participatory Crop Improvement. I. Varietal Selection and Breeding Methods and Their Impact on Biodiversity

Witcombe, J. R.; Joshi, Arun Kumar; Joshi, K.D.; Sthapit, B.R.

doi:10.1017/s001447970000380x

Cited by 118 publications

(137 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is especially important when considering changing yearly or long-term environmental variation (e.g., global climate change, disaster and extreme weather events like hurricanes, droughts or floods) and landscape-or regional-level conservation (Holt-Giménez 2002;Hooper et al 2005;Tscharntke et al 2005;Kibblewhite et al 2008;Lin et al 2008). Without such insurance and resilience, systems that are intensified and simplified end up with their yield (and profit) dependent on an optimized environment, defined by high-input, irrigated, fertile zones free from disease, rather than the local conditions in any given area (Witcombe et al 1996;Ceccarelli et al Unpublished manuscript, in Rhoades and Nazarea 1999;Tilman et al 2002). To maintain an optimized environment, wide-spectrum pesticide applications are used to control pests, but they can also wipe out useful pest predators that may come as stragglers or newcomers (Swift and Anderson 1995).…”

Section: Production Methods and Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an extensive literature review exploring the relationships between food insecurity and rapid biodiversity loss, and the competing methods proposed to address each of these serious problems. Given a large and growing human population, the persistence of widespread malnutrition, and the direct and significant threats the expanding agricultural system poses to biodiversity, the goals of providing universal food security and protecting biodiversity seem incompatible. Examining the literature shows that the current agricultural system already provides sufficient food on a worldwide basis, but in doing so methodically undermines the capacity of agroecosystems to preserve biodiversity. However, the available evidence emphasizes the interdependence of biodiversity and agriculture, and the important role each plays in the maintenance of the other. Thus, our review supports the claim that the solutions to the problems of widespread food insecurity and biodiversity loss need not be mutually exclusive, and that it may be possible to address both using appropriate alternative agricultural practices.

show abstract

Section: Production Methods and Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plant breeders now routinely find participatory plant breeding useful. New crop varieties developed or selected with farmers often have the characteristics that the farmers demand (Witcombe et al, 1996;Thiele et al, 1997;Bellon and Reeves, 2002;Lançon et al, 2004). Farmers' biggest role in participatory plant breeding is to say what they want in new crop varieties (not do the actual crosses) and then to judge the more promising lines.…”

Section: Science and Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Folk experiments

Bentley

2006

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Folk experiments in agriculture are often inspired by new ideas blended with old ones, motivated by economic and environmental change. They tend to save labor or capital. These notions are illustrated with nine short case studies from Nicaragua and El Salvador. The new ideas that catalyze folk experiments may be provided by development agencies, but paradoxically, the folk experiments are so common that the agencies that inspire them usually pay little attention to them. Some folk experiments are original, but others simply copy innovations that farmers have seen somewhere else. Unlike formal scientific research, in which results are consistently written, folk experiments are rarely ''inscribed,'' because the results are for use by individual farmers and need not be shared with an audience.

show abstract

“…Eleven breeding lines were disregarded based upon their poor performances, for instance accessions with low values for yield components such as pods plant -1 or with long pods but a low number of seeds per pod. An approach to participatory varietal selection (Witcombe et al 1996) was made by farmer's assessment of the field pea breeding lines under real farm practices as wide as possible. Compared to conventional plant breeding, participatory varietal selection is more likely to produce farmer-acceptable products, particularly for marginal environments as many on the North of Spain are.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of variation for sustainable field pea breeding

Rodiño

Hernández-Nistal

Hermida³

et al. 2008

Euphytica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pea crop (Pisum sativum L.) is a convenient source of plant protein for animal feeding. The objective of this research was to evaluate field pea breeding lines for agronomic performance and seed quality focussed to their use in a sustainable production. Thirty-five field pea breeding lines and six elite cultivars were evaluated for their agronomic value in field in Spain upon 20 traits related to flower, cycle, plant architecture, productivity and seed quality. The lines showed significant differences in all the quantitative traits evaluated and three of them, namely MB-0307, MB-0308, and MB-0319 were chosen to be evaluated, together with the advanced cultivar ZP-1233, in field and in growing chamber for agronomic performance, seed quality and ability for sustainable production. The four accessions displayed high seed protein content that had significant effect of cropping density with averages of 253.6 g kg -1 under low cropping density of 60 plants m -2 and 259.1 g kg -1 under high cropping density of 90 plants m -2 , therefore, the low cropping density should be regarded as the most convenient. Average yield of the lines MB-0307, MB-0308 and MB-0319 and the cultivar ZP-1233 was fair (197.5 g m -2 ), probably due to the absence of fertilizers and irrigation, aiming for the sustainability of the crop. Intercropping with rye and herbicide application resulted in no differences on the seed yield; therefore, the ability of the breeding lines to grow without herbicide seems to be demonstrated, while the germination of the seeds at low temperature was very good. These results indicate that field pea could be a new protein crop in the North of Spain to satisfy the demand of plant protein for animal feed, based upon adapted breeding lines that combine the ability for growing under sustainable conditions with other desirable agronomic traits maintaining an adequate productivity.

show abstract

Farmer Participatory Crop Improvement. I. Varietal Selection and Breeding Methods and Their Impact on Biodiversity

Cited by 118 publications

References 7 publications

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

Folk experiments

Sources of variation for sustainable field pea breeding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About