Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres
Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres
Diversity in barley (Hordeum vulgare) nificant decrease so that the variation in wild barley (ssp. spontaneum) is higher than in landraces and even more so than in modern varieties, as shown in several studies (cf. GRANER et al. 2002). The larger variation in ssp. spontaneum is partly due to the higher degree of outbreeding (up to 10-12 % of outcrossing has been reported, cf. BROWN et al. 1979) than in cultivated material (usually < 1 %). Ssp. spontaneum originally had a very large diversity due to adaptation to the versatile environments in the Fertile Crescent. The wild form is obviously particularly variable in Israel, but collections and investigations of material from other areas have been carried out to a much lesser extent. According to several studies by the Israeli research group of Prof. E. Nevo there is a very strong correlation between diversity and stress tolerance (e.g., to salt and drought). Plants in a stressful environment are significantly more variable than plants growing under more optimal conditions (cf. PAKNIYAT et al. 1997). Also for landraces a number of studies based on isoenzymes, hordeins and various molecular markers, indicate a large and often geographically related variation pattern. Particularly variable and subject to clinal differentiation, such as to altitude, climate or other environmental conditions, is material from Ethiopia. A comparison between ssp. spontaneum and landraces showed a significant pattern (Table 1). Tab. 1: Variation in isoenzymes in barley landraces and ssp. spontaneum (after NEVO et al. 1986) 132 No. of alleles detected Loci without polymorphism Landraces Europe 44 10 Iran 40 5 ssp. spontaneum Iran 49 6 Israel 79 0 Several studies show that there generally has been a gradual and steady loss of alleles over time, particularly in modern and high bred varieties. The so-called genetic erosion should thus have been regularly depauperating the available genetic resources making the future breeding material more vulnerable. However, there are also other tendencies. In a study based on isoenzymes it was shown that new varieties (released after 1990) had a reduced variation amplitude compared to earlier varieties of Nordic and Baltic origin, which in turn had a more narrow variation than exotic landraces from C Asia (KOLODINSKA et al. 2001). This trend is also obvious in a broad survey of molecular markers by GRANER et al. (2002). These authors show that in most cases a new cultivar has a reduced diversity in comparison with the foundation lines.
R. V. BOTHMER, TH. V. HINTUM, H. KNÜPFFER and K. SATO The tendency of genetic erosion is, however, not conclusive. Also in the above mentioned study by GRANER et al. (2002) some modern varieties actually showed an increased diversity in some of the markers as compared to the foundation lines. Similar results were reported on Nordic and Baltic material by KOLODINSKA et al. (2001) based on inter-SSR and by MANNINEN and NISSILÄ (1997) based on RAPDs. In areas where older and newer material is grown together, introgression and sowing seed kept by farmers may pertain and even increase diversity. Such is the situation on Sardinia where the common and variable landrace (’S’orgiu sardu’), grown over the entire island for a long time shows evidence of having obtained genes from earlier cultivated, more advanced varieties (PAPA et al. 1998). In many areas a few barley cultivars can be dominating in time and space. So, for example, is the Turkish cultivar ’Tokak’, released already in 1937, grown annually over three million hectares for many years. The Russian cultivar ’Moskovsky 121’, released in 1977 is grown annually over 2 million hectares since then (FISCHBECK 2002). This trend increases the vulnerability and decreases the diversity. If the trend of large acreage over many years is kept too long it will drastically influence the replacement of cultivars and the use of higher number of cultivars per acreage. This will add to the genetic erosion. There may be several reasons for the genetic erosion in barley (FISCHBECK 1992): • The limited number of landraces used to select superior genotypes during the initial phase of breeding; • a small number of outstanding cultivars used as progenitors in breeding programmes; • limited use of exotic germplasm. Future development of diversity in barley Barley is well represented in the world’s genebanks with ca. 378,000 accessions reported (HINTUM 2002). However, duplications are common and of the reported number it is at present not possible to estimate the actual number of unique accessions. Moreover, due to the lack of overview we can neither indicate the “white spots” in current holdings, i.e. from which areas or of which types no or restricted material is available and which are in urgent need for intensified collecting or monitoring. Currently, despite that there has been and still is an ongoing genetic erosion, it is not known how large (or important) this is. It is also amazing that there is still variation left in advanced material, and new genotypes can be obtained by crossing closely related elite lines. This techniques has been used for more than 100 years and one 133
- Page 93 and 94: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 95 and 96: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 97 and 98: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 99 and 100: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 101 and 102: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 103 and 104: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 105 and 106: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 107 and 108: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 109 and 110: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 111 and 112: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 113 and 114: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 115 and 116: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 117 and 118: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 119 and 120: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 121 and 122: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 123 and 124: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 125 and 126: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 127 and 128: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 129 and 130: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 131 and 132: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 133 and 134: Unconscious selection in plants und
- Page 135 and 136: Unconscious selection in plants und
- Page 137 and 138: Unconscious selection in plants und
- Page 139 and 140: Unconscious selection in plants und
- Page 141 and 142: R. V. BOTHMER, TH. V. HINTUM, H. KN
- Page 143: R. V. BOTHMER, TH. V. HINTUM, H. KN
- Page 147 and 148: R. V. BOTHMER, TH. V. HINTUM, H. KN
- Page 149 and 150: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 151 and 152: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 153 and 154: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 155 and 156: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 157 and 158: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 159 and 160: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 161 and 162: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 163 and 164: Diversity of African vegetable Sola
- Page 165 and 166: Molecular diversity studies in two
- Page 167 and 168: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 169 and 170: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 171 and 172: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 173 and 174: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 175 and 176: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 177 and 178: The history of the medieval vegetab
- Page 179 and 180: Paintings from the 16 th to 18 th c
- Page 181 and 182: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 183 and 184: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 185 and 186: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 187 and 188: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 189 and 190: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 191 and 192: Sugar beets and related wild specie
- Page 193 and 194: Utilisation of plant genetic resour
R. V. BOTHMER, TH. V. HINTUM, H. KNÜPFFER and K. SATO<br />
The tendency of genetic erosion is, however, not conclusive. Also in the above mentioned<br />
study by GRANER et al. (2002) some modern varieties actually showed an increased<br />
diversity in some of the markers as compared to the foundation lines. Similar<br />
results were reported on Nordic and Baltic material by KOLODINSKA et al. (2001)<br />
based on inter-SSR and by MANNINEN and NISSILÄ (1997) based on RAPDs.<br />
In areas where older and newer material is grown together, introgression and sowing<br />
seed kept by farmers may pertain and even increase diversity. Such is the situation<br />
on Sardinia where the common and variable landrace (’S’orgiu sardu’), grown over<br />
the entire island for a long time shows evidence of having obtained genes from earlier<br />
cultivated, more advanced varieties (PAPA et al. 1998).<br />
In many areas a few barley cultivars can be dominating in time and space. So, for<br />
example, is the Turkish cultivar ’Tokak’, released already in 1937, grown annually<br />
over three million hectares for many years. The Russian cultivar ’Moskovsky 121’,<br />
released in 1977 is grown annually over 2 million hectares since then (FISCHBECK<br />
2002). This trend increases the vulnerability and decreases the diversity. If the trend<br />
of large acreage over many years is kept too long it will drastically influence the replacement<br />
of cultivars and the use of higher number of cultivars per acreage. This<br />
will add to the genetic erosion. There may be several reasons for the genetic erosion<br />
in barley (FISCHBECK 1992):<br />
• The limited number of landraces used to select superior genotypes during the<br />
initial phase of breeding;<br />
• a small number of outstanding cultivars used as progenitors in breeding programmes;<br />
• limited use of exotic germplasm.<br />
Future development of diversity in barley<br />
Barley is well represented in the world’s genebanks with ca. 378,000 accessions reported<br />
(HINTUM 2002). However, duplications are common and of the reported number<br />
it is at present not possible to estimate the actual number of unique accessions.<br />
Moreover, due to the lack of overview we can neither indicate the “white spots” in<br />
current holdings, i.e. from which areas or of which types no or restricted material is<br />
available and which are in urgent need for intensified collecting or monitoring.<br />
Currently, despite that there has been and still is an ongoing genetic erosion, it is not<br />
known how large (or important) this is. It is also amazing that there is still variation<br />
left in advanced material, and new genotypes can be obtained by crossing closely<br />
related elite lines. This techniques has been used for more than 100 years and one<br />
133