Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T05:49:38.143Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards a conservation strategy for Aegilops species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2008

N. Maxted ,
K. White ,
J. Valkoun ,
J. Konopka  and
S. Hargreaves
N. Maxted*
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
K. White
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
J. Valkoun
Affiliation:
International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, PO Box 5466, Aleppo, Syria
J. Konopka
Affiliation:
International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, PO Box 5466, Aleppo, Syria
S. Hargreaves
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: n.maxted@bham.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aegilops species provide an invaluable source of genes for the improvement of cultivated wheats. This paper illustrates how the existing geo-referenced passport data associated with Aegilops species can be used to identify gaps in current conservation and also to develop a more systematic conservation strategy for the genus. Taxonomic, ecological, geographic and conservation information for the 22 Aegilops species were collated from ICARDA, EURISCO, GRIN and SINGER datasets, synthesized and analysed. The combined database contained 9866 unique geo-referenced observations collected between 1932 and 2004. Patterns of specific distribution based on the germplasm accession data and the predicted distribution using climatic models were compared in conservation gap analysis using GIS tools. The ex situ conservation status of each taxon was assessed and used to provide a priority ranking. Future ex situ collection is recommended in Cyprus, Egypt, Greece, Iran, Israel, Libya, Spain, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The species identified with the highest ex situ conservation priority are as follows: Aegilops bicornis, Aegilops comosa, Aegilops juvenalis, Aegilops kotschyi, Aegilops peregrina, Aegilops sharonensis, Aegilops speltoides, Aegilops uniaristata and Aegilops vavilovii. Patterns of species richness based on the germplasm accession passport data are presented and five complementary regions of Aegilops diversity were identified in west Syria and north Lebanon, central Israel, north-west Turkey, Turkmenistan and south France. Within these areas, 16 IUCN-recognized protected areas are found and these are identified as potential sites to establish genetic reserves. However, the premier Aegilops hotspots on the Syrian/Lebanese border are not coincident with any existing internationally recognized protected areas, and here there is a need to establish a novel protected area.

Keywords

Aegilopsconservationcrop wild relativeex situin situwheat
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , August 2008 , pp. 126 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anikster, Y and Noy-Meir, I (1991) The wild-wheat field laboratory at Ammiad. Israel Journal of Botany 40: 351–362.Google Scholar
Anikster, Y, Feldman, M and Horovitz, A (1997) The Ammiad experiment. In: Maxted, N, Ford-Lloyd, BV and Hawkes, JG (eds) Plant Genetic Conservation: The in situ Approach. London: Chapman & Hall, pp. 239–253.Google Scholar
Aryavand, A, Ehdaie, B, Tran, B and Waines, JG (2003) Stomatal frequency and size differentiate ploidy levels in Aegilops neglecta. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 50: 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balmford, A (2003) Conservation planning in the real world: South Africa shows the way. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 435–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, TM, Bakarr, MI, Boucher, T, Da Fonesca, GAB, Hilton-Taylor, C and Hoekstra, JM (2004) Coverage provided by the global protected area system: is it enough? Bioscience 54: 1081–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burley, FW (1988) Monitoring biological diversity for setting priorities in conservation. In: Wilson, EO and Peter, FM (eds) Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, pp. 227–230.Google Scholar
CBD (1992) Convention on Biological Diversity. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.Google Scholar
Cox, TS and Hatchett, JH (1994) Hessian fly-resistance gene H26 transferred from Triticum tauschii to common wheat. Crop Science 34: 958–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, PH (1985) Aegilops L. In: Davis, PH (ed.) Flora of Turkey. vol. 9. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 233–245.Google Scholar
Dietz, RW and Czech, B (2005) Conservation deficits for the continental United States: an ecosystem gap analysis. Conservation Biology 19: 1478–1487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dvorák, J, McGuire, PE and Cassidy, B (1988) Apparent sources of the A genome of wheats inferred from the polymorphism in abundance and restriction fragment length of repeated nucleotide sequences. Genome 30: 137–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dvorák, J, Luo, M-C and Yang, Z-L (1998) Genetic evidence on the origin of Triticum aestivum L. In: Damania, AB, Valkoun, J, Willcox, G and Qualset, CO (eds) The Origins of Agriculture and Crop Domestication. Aleppo, Syria: ICARDA, pp. 235–251.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT (2007) FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.faostat.fao.org/ (accessed 03 August 2007).Google Scholar
Fritz, AK, Cox, TS, Gill, BS and Sears, RG (1995) Molecular marker facilitated analysis of introgression in winter wheat and Triticum tauschii populations. Crop Science 35: 1691–1695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkes, JG, Maxted, N and Ford-Lloyd, BV (2000) The ex situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedge, SG, Valkoun, J and Waines, JG (2000) Genetic diversity in wild wheats and goat grass. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 101: 309–316.Google Scholar
Hedge, SG, Valkoun, J and Waines, JG (2002) Genetic diversity in wild and weedy Aegilops, Amblyopyrum and Secale species – preliminary survey. Crop Science 42: 608–614.Google Scholar
Heywood, VH and Dulloo, ME (2006) In situ conservation of wild plant species – a critical global review of good practices. IPGRI Technical Bulletin No. 11. Rome, Italy: International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Hijmans, RJ, Guarino, L, Jarvis, A, O'Brien, R, Mathur, P, Bussink, C, Cruz, M, Barrantes, I and Rojas, E (2005) DIVA-GIS version 5.2 Manual. Accessed at www.diva-gis.org.Google Scholar
Horovitz, A and Feldman, M (eds) (1991) International workshop on the dynamic in situ conservation of wild relatives of major cultivated plants. Israel Journal of Botany 40: 509–519.Google Scholar
Iriondo, JM, Dulloo, E and Maxted, N (eds) (2008) Conserving Plant Genetic Diversity in Protected Areas: Population Management of Crop Wild Relatives. Wallingford: CAB International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, SK (1975) Genetic reserves. In: Frankel, OH and Hawkes, JG (eds) Crop Genetic Resources for Today and Tomorrow. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 379–396.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D (2008) A designated nature reserve for in situ conservation of wild emmer wheat (Triticum dicoccoides (Körn.)) Aaronsohn in northern Israel. In: Maxted, N, Ford-Lloyd, BV, Kell, SP, Iriondo, J, Dulloo, E and Turok, J (eds) Crop Wild Relative Conservation and Use. pp. 389–393. Wallingford: CAB International Publishing.Google Scholar
Karagöz, A (1998) In situ conservation of plant genetic resources in the Ceylanpinar State Farm. In: Zencirci, N, Kaya, Z, Anikster, Y and Adams, WT (eds) The Proceedings of International Symposium on in situ Conservation of Plant Diversity. Ankara, Turkey: Central Research Institute for Field Crops, pp. 87–91.Google Scholar
Keiša, A, Maxted, N and Ford-Lloyd, BV (2007) The assessment of biodiversity loss over time: wild legumes in Syria. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution. DOI 10.1007/s10722-007-9264-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerber, ER and Dyck, PL (1969) Inheritance in hexaploid wheat of leaf rust resistance and other characters derived from Aegilops squarrosa. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 11: 639–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lage, J, Warburton, ML, Crossa, J, Skovmand, B and Anderson, SB (2003) Assessment of genetic diversity in synthetic hexaploid wheats and their Triticum dicoccum and Aegilops tauschii parents using AFLP's and agronomic traits. Euphytica 134: 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, H, Singh, RP and Mujeeb-Kazi, A (1994) Resistance to stripe rust in Triticum turgidum, T. tauschii and their synthetic hexaploids. Euphytica 82: 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manners, GR and van Slageren, M (1998) Research and production: cereal taxonomy used in Rachis. Rachis 17: 1–6.Google Scholar
Margules, CR (1989) Introduction to some Australian developments in conservation evaluation. Biological Conservation 50: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margules, CR and Pressey, RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maxted, N (1990) An Herbarium Based Ecogeographic Study of Vicia Subgenus Vicia. Rome, Italy: International Board for Plant Genetic Resources.Google Scholar
Maxted, N, van Slageren, MW and Rihan, J (1995) Ecogeographic surveys. In: Guarino, L, Ramanatha Rao, V and Reid, R (eds) Collecting Plant Genetic Diversity: Technical Guidelines. Wallingford: CAB International, pp. 255–286.Google Scholar
Maxted, N, Dulloo, E, Ford-Lloyd, BV, Iriondo, J and Jarvis, A (2008) Genetic gap analysis: a tool for more effective genetic conservation assessment. Diversity and Distributions (Accepted).Google Scholar
Maxted, N, Ford-Lloyd, BV and Hawkes, JG (1997) Plant Genetic Conservation: The in situ Approach. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxted, N, Mabuza-Diamini, P, Moss, H, Padulosi, S, Jarvis, A and Guarino, L (2004) An Ecogeographic Study African Vigna. Systematic and Ecogeographic Studies on Crop Genepools 11. Rome, Italy: International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Monneveux, P, Zaharieva, M, Rekika, D, Royo, C, Nachit, MM, Fonzo, ND and Araus, JL (2000) The utilisation of Triticum and Aegilops species for the improvement of durum wheat. Options Méditerranéennes. Serie A Séminaires Méditerraneens XX: 71–81.Google Scholar
Mujeab-Kazi, A, Rosas, V and Roldan, S (1996) Conservation of the genetic variation of Triticum tauschii (Coss.) Schmal. (Aegilops squarossa aut. Non L.) in synthetic hexaploid wheats (T. turgidum L. s.lat. × T. tauschii; 2n = 6x = 42 AABBDD) and its potential utilisation for wheat improvement. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 43: 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noy-Meir, I, Agami, M and Anikster, Y (1991) Changes in the population density of wild emmer wheat (Triticum turgidum var. dicoccoides) in a Mediterranean grassland. Israel Journal of Botany 40: 385–396.Google Scholar
Rajaram, S (2000) International wheat breeding: past and present achievements and future directions. Warren E Kronstad Symposium. Oregon State University Special Report 1017.Google Scholar
Rebelo, AG (1994) Iterative selection procedures: centres of endemism and optimal placement of reserves. Strelitzia 1: 231–257.Google Scholar
Rebelo, AG and Sigfried, WR (1992) Where should nature reserves be located in the Cape Floristic Region South Africa? Models for the spatial configuration of a reserve network aimed at maximizing the protection of diversity. Conservation Biology 6: 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riemann, H and Ezcurra, E (2005) Plant endemism and natural protected areas in the peninsula of Baja California Mexico. Biological Conservation 122: 141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasanuma, T, Chabane, K, Endo, TR and Valkoun, J (2002) Genetic diversity of wheat wild relatives in the Near East detected by AFLP. Euphytica 127: 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolton, S, Maxted, N, Ford-Lloyd, BV, Kell, SP and Dudley, N (2006) Food Stores: Using Protected Areas to Secure Crop Genetic Diversity. WWF Arguments for Protection Series. Gland, Switzerland: WWF.Google Scholar
Tutin, TG and Humphries, CJ (1980) Aegilops L. In: Tutin, TG (ed.) Flora Europaea. vol. 5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 200–202.Google Scholar
Valkoun, J, Giles Waines, J and Kanopka, J (1998) Current geographical distribution and habitat of wild wheats and barley. In: Damania, AB, Valkoun, J, Willcox, G and Qualset, CO (eds) The Origins of Agriculture and Crop Domestication. Aleppo, Syria: ICARDA, pp. 293–299.Google Scholar
van Slageren, MW (1994) Wild Wheats: A Monograph of Aegilops L. and Amblyopyrum (Jaub. & Spach) Eig (Poaceae). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University.Google Scholar
Villareal, RL, Mujeeb-Kazi, A, Fuentes-Davila, G, Rajaram, S and Del Toro, E (1994) Resistance to Karnal bunt (Tilletia indica Mitra) in synthetic hexaploid wheats derived from Triticum turgidum × T. tauschii. Plant Breeding 112: 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, KS and Gillett, HJ (1998) 1997 IUCN Red List of Threatened Plants. Compiled by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN – The World Conservation Union.Google Scholar
Whelen, EDD and Thomas, JB (1989) Chromosomal location in common wheat of a gene (Cmcl) from Aegilops squarrosa that conditions resistance to colonization by the wheat curl mite. Genome 32: 1033–1036.CrossRefGoogle Scholar