Integration of Conservation Strategies of Plant Genetic ... - Genres

Plants and Gardens in the UK. These organisations have the conservation and utilisation of plant
genetic resources as their main aim, although each approaches this goal in an individual way.
While all informal sector activities -- individual and organised -- approach the task in their own
ways, they are united by a strong belief in conservation through utilisation. That is, their aim is
to make varieties available to growers. This is based on the firm belief that not only does this
represent a beneficial activity in its own right, because the varieties they maintain are in many
senses better than others that may be available commercially, but also that by stimulating demand
for diversity they are helping to counter the structural forces that favour uniformity and underpin
genetic erosion.
One of the great difficulties faced by the informal sector, and any elements of the formal sector
who wish to work with the informal sector, is the lack of information. I know of no exhaustive
directories of individuals or organisations dedicated to the conservation of plant genetic resources,
and there is certainly no compendium of the holdings of the informal sector. Saving the Seed, by
R. Vellvé (Earthscan Publications, London. 1992) offers an overview of the spectrum of informal
sector activities in Europe, but is accepted to be incomplete. This makes it extremely difficult to
plan future work, to co-operate, and to exchange information and ideas that would make us all
more effective. I have singled out a few examples that I happen to be aware of, but there is no
comprehensive source of information. 2
Although every member of the informal sector has their own reasons and their own methods for
conserving genetic resources, they share a common concern that diversity is best conserved by
being used. Their "clients" are growers, not breeders.
That provides some insights into the next semantic question, that of ex-situ conservation. While
I cannot speak for the entire informal sector, I sincerely believe that none of them would
characterise what they do as ex-situ conservation. For myself, I reject completely the false
dichotomy between in-situ and ex-situ conservation. The distinction is a hang-over from the
conservation of species in the wild, where some kind of useful distinction can be made between
"the wild" or "nature" -- characterised as in-situ -- and "captivity" in zoos, on breeding stations,
or in botanic gardens -- characterised as ex-situ. Applied to crops sensu latu the distinction is
both sterile and meaningless. Indeed, when one considers one of the defining characteristics of
in-situ conservation -- that the species are conserved without human interference -- it becomes
clear just how meaningless the concept is.
The natural habitat of crops (and domestic animals, though they do not concern us here) is on
farms and in gardens. There, they rely on human interference to survive; having bred plants for
certain characteristics, such as non-shattering, we now need to take an active part in their life
cycle to ensure that they are capable of reproducing. Thus it is clear, to me, that the conservation
through utilisation of crop plants is, if anything, in-situ conservation. Not even the NCCPG,
whose members account for 500 collections of 400 genera, encompassing some 50,000 taxa, is
involved in ex-situ conservation, for the natural habitat of garden plants is in gardens.
2
As a result of the Gatersleben m eeting, HDRA and I PGRI are collaborating on a
survey of the inform al sector in Europe, which should provide the kind of
inform ation currently lacking.