roundtable: conserving cacao genetic resources · biological features of cacao important for pgr...

Roundtable: Conserving CacaoGenetic Resources

We are mankind’s stewardsWe are mankind s stewardsof the

Food of the GodsDr. Pathmanathan Umaharan, CRU Trinidad

Brigitte Laliberté, Bioversity InternationalPeter Bretting USDA ARS

1

Peter Bretting, USDA-ARSEd Seguine, Mars, Chair

World Cocoa Foundation Partnership, Washington DC, Roundtable June 13, 2012

Demands on the sectorChild labor

Demands on the sector

SustainabilityMarket demandMarket demandDisease pressuresM t f diMovement of diseasesLocal climate changes / erraticnessCompetitive crops / land useMultiple outside pressures

2

p p

Typical Germplasm Collection Trips:Typical Germplasm Collection Trips:

-Pound (1930-4) Peru, Ecuador, Colombia

-Allen (1987): Ecuador, Colombia

-Almeida et al (1982-7): Brazilm a t a ( 9 7) raz

-Barriga et al. (1985): Brazil

Ch l (1973) E d P-Chalmers (1973): Ecuador, Peru

-Lachenaud and Sallee (1993): French Guiana

-Sallee (1987): French Guiana

-New collecting focus: Perug f

Breeding

• Early Institutions –Imperial College “5 year scheme”• Collecting and preservation begins, 1930‐34 (Pound)• CRIG created 1938 as CCRS‐GC (research station Gold 

Coast)Coast)• Breeding begins in earnest in 1940s• CATIE created 1940 (USDA driven)• INIAP created 1959• CRU formed 1964

• What progress have we made??????

Theobroma cacao L.

Genetic GroupsGenetic GroupsCheesman (1944)

I Criolloa) Central

AmericaAmericab) South

AmericaII Forasteroa) Lower Amaz. F.b) Upper Amaz Fb) Upper Amaz. F.

CriolloForastero

Trinitario

New Classification Today—

Mars Researcher & USDAMotamayor, et. al., Geographic and y , , g pGentic Population Differentiation of the Amazonian Chocolate Tree (Theobroma cacao L.), PLoS ONE 3(10):e3311

7

September –December 2010

A new dayA new daydawns

2 Genome Sequences Released

Criollo & Forastero

Before:Before: Breeding takes 7 yearsg y

Now: B di t k 7 thBreeding takes 7 monthsAnd you can plan what you do!

Saturated Genetic Marker Maps (SSR + SNPs)

��1��2��3��4��5

Mine the genome for meaning

Use markers to build the future—for farmers and chocolate lovers of thechocolate lovers of the world

11

DIVERSITY is the KeyYield Disease and pest resistance Tree architecture Tree architecture Drought tolerance Photosynthetic efficiency Fl d ll it di it

12

Flavor and all its diversity

13

We are mankind’s We are mankind s stewards

of the F d f th G dFood of the Gods

14

Breeding Progress? NO!Breeding Progress?  NO!We’ve been doing it wrongg g

• Mislabeling (it wasn’t what we thought it was)g g• Just plain not picking good choices

• Agricultural practices just not adequate• How do we teach 6,000,000 small farmers?• How do we make it sustainable?• Will the next generation want to grow cacao?

Global cacao genetic resource managementmanagement 

Peter Bretting, USDA/ARSWCF Partnership Meeting, 13 June 2012

• Acquisition • Characterization• Acquisition

• Maintenance

• Characterization

• Evaluation

• Regeneration

• Documentation/

• Enhancement

• Overall goal is to• Documentation/ Data M t

• Overall goal is to maintain genetic di it itManagement

• Distribution

diversity ex situ for the long‐term.

• Understory tree • Indigenous to theUnderstory tree

• Reproduced by seeds,  chupones, grafting or 

Indigenous to the humid Neotropics, usually at lower p , g g

by cuttings ‐ (S.E.).

• Susceptible to a 

elevations; cold‐sensitive.

variety of diseases and pests.

• Mainly cross‐pollinated by small insects; some• Seeds are short‐lived, 

cold‐and desiccation‐iti

insects; some genotypes are self‐compatible.sensitive. compatible.

Biological features of cacao important for PGR managementimportant  for PGR management

• Genetic profile is usually highly heterozygous and• Genetic profile is usually highly heterozygous and heterogeneous.

• Wild populations consist of widely‐dispersedWild populations consist of widely dispersed groves

• Generally cultivated by farmers in relatively smallGenerally cultivated by farmers in relatively small orchards or plots. 

• Some trees might live to 100+ years in the wild.g y

• Under cultivation, the typical longevity might be 20‐50 yrs.

• In genebanks, they live perhaps 60‐90 yrs. 

Germplasm exchange and

• Collect endangered wild trees and acquire

Germplasm exchange and collecting Plant exploration for cacao

trees, and acquire threatened material to fill collection gaps.

• Sample sizes can be large;Sample sizes can be large; seek locally frequent “adaptive” alleles or key horticultural traits.

• Relatively complicated and expensive because of biology of seeds, clonal 

i ipropagation, quarantine,  legal issues, etc.

Maintained as trees or in Cacao genebank, UWI‐CRU,

• Maintaining long‐term orchards plantings is

Maintained as trees or in tissue culture

Cacao genebank, UWI CRU, Trinidad and Tobago

orchards plantings is expensive; trees face continual biotic and abiotic threats.

• Accessions must be backed up in duplicate plantings; in the future in vitro or in cryo?

• Continual vigilance for tree health and trueness‐to‐type.

�������� �������� ����������� ������������������� ��������

������� � ����� ��������� ����������

Primarily via shoots, grafted Plantlet derived from somatic embryo

• Relatively few plants per 

Primarily via shoots, grafted scions 

Plantlet derived from somatic embryo for experimentation, Corozal, PR

accession, but generating, planting, or grafting each plant can be costly.p y

• Much care required to maintain trueness‐to‐type.

• Large backlog of data to be 

An assortment of databases USDA GRIN database

entered; need for “curator’s 

information tool?”

• Local databases might containLocal databases might contain 

data which aren’t widely 

accessible

• Some overlap in coverage by 

different databases; ideally, 

through time all databases 

would become compatible.

• Shipping cuttings‐scion d i i ll i

Quarantine required ICQC, Reading, England

wood internationally is costly and complicated.

• Must be maintained inMust be maintained in quarantine, subject to phytosanitary testing. E CSSV tiE.g., CSSV quarantine period is 2 yrs.

Cost per data point decreasing, Automated SNP genotyping

• Primary rationale for sequencing the cacao genome was to identify

Cost per data point decreasing, but many trees to analyze

Automated  SNP genotyping  with a 6000 SNP chip

genome was to identify more and better genetic markers.

• Considerable research• Considerable research progress, but continued need for integration into curatorial effortscuratorial efforts.

• Technically complicated, but cost is decreasing. 

Increasing cost of labor, land, Bean quality evaluation,

• Much to be done, building li ff

Increasing cost of labor, land, inputs

Bean quality evaluation, Mayagüez, PR

on earlier efforts at genebanks, INGENIC, USDA/ARS, CATIE, UWI‐CRU, CIRAD and CFC/ICCO/Bioversity.

P l d i d• Properly designed, replicated field trials are expensive.

• Combine with genetic markers.

Pre‐breeding, transition to Collecting field data,

• Some genetic enhancement is conducted at genebanks, but it is secondary to other

Pre breeding, transition to cultivar development

Collecting  field data, Corozal, PR

but it is secondary to other activities.

• Costly and complicated; genetic markers shouldgenetic markers should increase efficiencies.

Some progress attained, but

• Maintain and enhance funding for an intrinsically long‐term 

Cacao researchers and genebank staff from 

Some progress attained, but many challenges remain Thanks!

y gand costly enterprise: cacao genebanks.

• Fill key gaps in collections.D l d i l i

USDA/ARS, UWI‐CRU, CATIE, U. of Reading, Bioversity, CIRAD NARS and industry• Develop and implement in 

vitro‐cryo back‐up and more effective regeneration procedures.

CIRAD, NARS, and industry partners

• Curatorial applications of genetic markers, more effective disease assays.

• Database efficiencies and• Database efficiencies and access to local information.

GLOBAL CACAO GENETIC RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

Peter Bretting, USDA/ARSWCF Partnership Meeting, 13 June 2012

Major Phases of Plant Genetic     Resource ManagementResource Management 

Acquisition CharacterizationAcquisitionMaintenance

Characterization Evaluation

RegenerationDocumentation/

EnhancementOverall goal is toDocumentation/ 

Data ManagementDi t ib ti

Overall goal is to maintain genetic diversity ex situDistribution diversity ex situ for the long‐term.

Some biological features of cacao important for PGR managementimportant for PGR management

Understory tree Indigenous to the Understory tree

Reproduced by seeds,  chupones, grafting or

Indigenous to the humid Neotropics, usually at lower chupones, grafting or 

by cuttings ‐ (S.E.).

Susceptible to a

elevations; cold‐sensitive.

Susceptible to a variety of diseases and pests.

Mainly cross‐pollinated by small 

Seeds are short‐lived, cold‐and desiccation‐

insects; some genotypes are self‐compatiblesensitive. compatible.

Biological features of cacao important for PGR managementimportant  for PGR management

Genetic profile is usually highly heterozygous and Genetic profile is usually highly heterozygous and heterogeneous.

Wild populations consist of widely‐dispersed groves Wild populations consist of widely dispersed groves

Generally cultivated by farmers in relatively small orchards or plots.orchards or plots. 

Some trees might live to 100+ years in the wild.

Under cultivation the typical longevity might be Under cultivation, the typical longevity might be 20‐50 yrs.

In genebanks, they live perhaps 60‐90 yrs. In genebanks, they live perhaps 60 90 yrs. 

Acquisition

Germplasm exchange and Pl l i f

Collect endangered wild trees and acquire

Germplasm exchange and collecting Plant exploration for cacao

trees, and acquire threatened material to fill collection gaps.

Sample sizes can be large; Sample sizes can be large; seek locally frequent “adaptive” alleles or key horticultural traits.

Relatively complicated and expensive because of biology of seeds, clonal propagation, quarantine,  legal issues, etc.

Maintenance

Maintained as trees or in Cacao genebank, UWI‐CRU,

Maintaining long‐term orchards plantings is

Maintained as trees or in tissue culture

Cacao genebank, UWI CRU, Trinidad and Tobago

orchards plantings is expensive; trees face continual biotic and abiotic threats.

Accessions must be backed up in duplicate plantings; in the future in vitro or in cryo?

Continual vigilance for tree health and trueness‐to‐type.

USDA-ARS Tropical Agriculture Research Station Cacao germplasm collectionStation - Cacao germplasm collection

Regeneration

Primarily via shoots, grafted Plantlet derived from somatic embryo

Relatively few plants i b t

Primarily via shoots, grafted scions 

Plantlet derived from somatic embryo for experimentation, Corozal, PR

per accession, but generating, planting, or grafting each plant o g a g eac p acan be costly.

Much care required to maintain trueness‐to‐type.

Documentation and Data Management

A f d b USDA GRIN d b

Large backlog of data to be 

An assortment of databases USDA GRIN database

entered; need for “curator’s 

information tool?”

Local databases might contain Local databases might contain 

data which aren’t widely 

accessible

Some overlap in coverage by 

different databases; ideally, 

through time all databasesthrough time all databases 

would become compatible.

Distribution

Q i i d ICQC R di E l d

Shipping cuttings‐i d

Quarantine required ICQC, Reading, England

scion wood internationally is costly and ycomplicated.

Must be maintained in quarantine subjectin quarantine, subject to phytosanitary testing. E.g., CSSV quarantine period is 2 yrs.

Characterization 

Cost per data point decreasing Automated SNP genotyping

Primary rationale for sequencing the cacao

Cost per data point decreasing, but many trees to analyze

Automated  SNP genotyping  with a 6000 SNP chip

sequencing the cacao genome was to identify more and better genetic markers.markers.

Considerable research progress, but continued need for integration intoneed for integration into curatorial efforts.

Technically complicated, but cost is decreasingbut cost is decreasing. 

Evaluation

Increasing cost of labor, land, Bean quality evaluation,

Much to be done, building li ff

Increasing cost of labor, land, inputs

Bean quality evaluation, Mayagüez, PR

on earlier efforts at genebanks, INGENIC, USDA/ARS, CATIE, UWI‐CRU, CIRAD and CFC/ICCO/Bioversity.

P l d i d Properly designed, replicated field trials are expensive.

Combine with genetic markers.

Enhancement

Pre‐breeding, transition to Collecting field data,

Some genetic enhancement is

Pre breeding, transition to cultivar development

Collecting  field data, Corozal, PR

enhancement is conducted at genebanks, but it is secondary to other activities.other activities.

Costly and complicated; genetic markers should increase efficiencies.increase efficiencies.

Summary

Some progress attained, but Th k !

Maintain and enhance funding for an intrinsically long‐term  Cacao researchers and 

Some progress attained, but many challenges remain Thanks!

y gand costly enterprise: cacao genebanks.

Fill key gaps in collections.

genebank staff from USDA/ARS, UWI‐CRU, 

f di Develop and implement in vitro‐cryo back‐up and more effective regeneration procedures.

CATIE, U. of Reading, Bioversity, CIRAD, NARS and industryp

Curatorial applications of genetic markers, more effective disease assays.

NARS, and industry partners

Database efficiencies and access to local information.

A Gl b l St t f thA Global Strategy for the Conservation and Use of Cacao 

Genetic Resources

As the foundation for a sustainable cocoa economy

Brigitte Laliberté, CacaoNet Coordination, 

Bioversity International

WCF Partnership meeting, June 2012, Washingtonp g g

ContentContent

• Acknowledgement of contributors and partnersAcknowledgement of contributors and partners

• Premise

• Vision and Goal• Vision and Goal

• Outputs

• Where we are today

• What needs to change

• Where we want to go

• How you can helpy pCredit: M. Gilmour

Y. Adu‐Ampomah (Cocobod)P. Aikpokpodion (CRIN)A. Alias (MCB)F. Aranzazu (FEDECACAO)

J.C. Motamayor (Mars Inc.)C. Nicklin (CCD)S. Nyassé (IRAD)

ContributorsA. Ebert (AVRDC, formerly of CATIE)( )

E. Arevalo (ICT)E. Arnaud (Bioversity)F. Amoah (CRIG)F. Amore (INIAP)

D. Pokou (CNRA)W. Phillips (CATIE)M. Resende (UFLA)E. Rosenquist (consultant to WCF, 

M. End (CRA Ltd.)J. Engels (Bioversity)A. Eskes (Bioversity)J. Flood (CABI)( )

I. Azhar (MCB)V.C. Baligar (USDA)F. Bekele (CRU/UWI)DM Botello (FEDECACAO)

formerly USDA)M. Ruas (Bioversity)BB Saripah (MCB)Ray Schnell (Mars Inc. formerly 

M. Gilmour (Mars Inc.)K. Gramacho (CEPLAC/CEPEC)B. Guyton (WCF)P. Hadley (UoR)( )

NGR Braz (UESC)P. Bretting (USDA)D. Butler (consultant, 

formerly of CRU/UWI)

USDA)S DVM Silva (CEPEC/CEPLAC)C. Suarez (INIAP)S. Surujdeo‐Maharaj (CRU/UWI)

B. Irish (USDA)M. Kolesnikova‐Allen (formerly of IITA)P. Lachenaud (CIRAD)y / )

C. Campbell (consultant to ICQC)

M. Canto‐Saenz (UNA la Molina)

M. ten Hoopen (CIRAD)J‐M Thévenin (CIRAD)M. Thresh (consultant to ICQC)BL Ttacca (ICT)

B. Laliberté (Bioversity)K. Lamin (MCB)S. Lambert (Mars Inc.)C. Lanaud (CIRAD))

J. Cascardo (UESC)N. Coulibaly (COPAL)N. Cryer (UoR)A. Daymond (UoR)

C. Turnbull (UoR)P. Umaharan (CRU/UWI)J. Wallace (CEPEC/CEPLAC)S. Weise (Bioversity)

T. Lass (CRA Ltd.)R. Lockwood (consultant)R. Lumsden (consultant to WCF)E. Luz (CEPEC/CEPLAC)y ( )

AA de Paiva Custódio (UFLA)M. Ducamp (CIRAD)H. Dzahini‐Obiatey (CRIG)

A. Wetten (UoR)D. Zhang (USDA)

U. Lopes (CEPEC/CEPLAC)R. Markham (ACIAR, formerly of Bioversity)

Y. Adu‐Ampomah (Cocobod)P. Aikpokpodion (CRIN)A. Alias (MCB)F. Aranzazu (FEDECACAO)

J.C. Motamayor (Mars Inc.)C. Nicklin (CCD)S. Nyassé (IRAD)

ContributorsA. Ebert (AVRDC, formerly of CATIE)( )

E. Arevalo (ICT)E. Arnaud (Bioversity)F. Amoah (CRIG)F. Amore (INIAP)

D. Pokou (CNRA)W. Phillips (CATIE)M. Resende (UFLA)E. Rosenquist (consultant to WCF, 

M. End (CRA Ltd.)J. Engels (Bioversity)A. Eskes (Bioversity)J. Flood (CABI)( )

I. Azhar (MCB)V.C. Baligar (USDA)F. Bekele (CRU/UWI)DM Botello (FEDECACAO)

formerly USDA)M. Ruas (Bioversity)BB Saripah (MCB)Ray Schnell (Mars Inc. formerly 

M. Gilmour (Mars Inc.)K. Gramacho (CEPLAC/CEPEC)B. Guyton (WCF)P. Hadley (UoR)( )

NGR Braz (UESC)P. Bretting (USDA)D. Butler (consultant, 

formerly of CRU/UWI)

USDA)S DVM Silva (CEPEC/CEPLAC)C. Suarez (INIAP)S. Surujdeo‐Maharaj (CRU/UWI)

B. Irish (USDA)M. Kolesnikova‐Allen (formerly of IITA)P. Lachenaud (CIRAD)y / )

C. Campbell (consultant to ICQC)

M. Canto‐Saenz (UNA la Molina)

M. ten Hoopen (CIRAD)J‐M Thévenin (CIRAD)M. Thresh (consultant to ICQC)BL Ttacca (ICT)

B. Laliberté (Bioversity)K. Lamin (MCB)S. Lambert (Mars Inc.)C. Lanaud (CIRAD))

J. Cascardo (UESC)N. Coulibaly (COPAL)N. Cryer (UoR)A. Daymond (UoR)

C. Turnbull (UoR)P. Umaharan (CRU/UWI)J. Wallace (CEPEC/CEPLAC)S. Weise (Bioversity)

T. Lass (CRA Ltd.)R. Lockwood (consultant)R. Lumsden (consultant to WCF)E. Luz (CEPEC/CEPLAC)y ( )

AA de Paiva Custódio (UFLA)M. Ducamp (CIRAD)H. Dzahini‐Obiatey (CRIG)

A. Wetten (UoR)D. Zhang (USDA)

U. Lopes (CEPEC/CEPLAC)R. Markham (ACIAR, formerly of Bioversity)

Genetic diversity managers ffrom 31 institutions:

• Benin ‐ CRA‐SB • Malaysia ‐MCB• Brazil – CEPEC‐CEPLAC• Brazil – CEPLAC‐SUEPA• Brazil – CEPLAC‐SUERO

Côt d’I i CNRA

• Nicaragua ‐ UNAN• Nigeria ‐ CRIN• Papua New Guinea ‐ PNGCCI

• Côte d’Ivoire ‐ CNRA• Cuba ‐ EIC‐ECICC• Dominican Republic ‐ IDIAF• Ecuador ‐ INIAP

• Peru ‐ CEPICAFE• Peru – ICT• Peru – UNAS

P UNSAEcuador ‐ INIAP• France ‐ CIRAD• French Guiana ‐ CIRAD• Ghana ‐ CRIG

• Peru ‐ UNSA• Thailand ‐ CHRC• Togo ‐ CRAF• USA ‐ USDA

• Guyana ‐MHOCGA• Honduras – FHIA• India – CPCRI

• USA ‐ USDA• Venezuela – INIA

• Costa Rica ‐ CATIE• Indonesia – Bah Lias• Indonesia – ICCRI

Costa Rica CATI• Trinidad and Tobago ‐ CRU/UWI• UK ‐ ICQC,R

The development of this Global Strategy was supported by financial and in‐kind contributions from:

• Bioversity International• CGIAR Research Programme 

on Forests, Trees & Agroforestry

• Cocoa Research AssociationCocoa Research Association Ltd., UK (CRA Ltd.) 

• Mars Inc.• USDA Agricultural Research• USDA Agricultural Research 

Service • World Cocoa Foundation

Credit: M. Gilmour

Premise• The future of the world cocoa economy depends on the availability of a 

wide range of genetic diversity and the sustainable use to breed improved varieties. 

• Decreasing cacao genetic diversity is a serious problem and all its many causes need to be urgently addressed: g y

– Destruction of the Amazonian rainforests impacting

– Threats from natural disasters and extreme weather

L f t diti l i ti– Loss of traditional varieties

• The loss of diversity increases the vulnerability of cacao to sudden changes in climate and to new pests and diseases. 

• Most of the countries involved in cacao improvement and production are highly dependent on genes and varieties from other countries and regions. 

• The efforts necessary to manage cacao genetic resources effectively can therefore only be carried out through international collaboration.

A Gl b l St tA Global Strategy

VisionTo improve the livelihoods of the 5‐6 million farmers in developing countries across tropical Africa, Asia and Latin America who produce around 90% of cocoaLatin America who produce around 90% of cocoa worldwide, and the 40‐50 million people who depend upon cocoa for their livelihoods.

GoalGoalTo optimize the conservation and facilitate the use of cacao genetic resources, as the foundation of a 

i bl b b i i hsustainable cocoa economy, by bringing together national and international players in public and private sectors.

O tp ts of the Global StrategOutputs of the Global Strategy1. The cacao genepool is conserved in situ and ex situ g p

for the long term by a global network of partners maintaining the most important diversity.

2 Th l b l t f th f h f2. The global system for the safe exchange of cacao germplasm is strengthened.

3. The use of cacao genetic diversity is optimized.3. The use of cacao genetic diversity is optimized.4. The effectiveness of global efforts to conserve and 

use cacao genetic resources is assured. Credit: M. Gilmour

Facts• 90% of cacao is produced on small‐scale farms (2‐5 hectares) in 

developing countries in West Africa, Asia and Latin America

• By 5‐6 million cocoa farmers• By 5‐6 million cocoa farmers

• Impacting on 40‐50 million people who depend upon cocoa for their livelihood

• 3 million tons ‐ annual cocoa production worldwide

• $5.1 billion ‐ current global annual market value

• 3% annual increase in demand for cocoa per year – now exceeding3% annual increase in demand for cocoa per year  now exceeding production

• 1 million tons is needed by 2020

• Most of the planting material is low yielding due to susceptibility to pests and diseases

• 30‐40% of global production ($1‐2 billion) is lost due to pests and g p ($ ) pdiseases

Genetic DiversityGenetic DiversityTheobroma species are found naturally in tropical lowlandnaturally in tropical lowland rainforests extending from the Amazon basin through to gsouthern Mexico.

Cacao diversity in CATIE, Costa Rica.  Credit: A. Mata/ W. 

The genus Theobromais divided into 22

Phillips

is divided into 22 species of which Theobroma cacao is the most widely known. Credit: Evert Thomas, Bioversity International, 2012

Ref. Fig. 35 in B.G.D. Bartley, 2005

• Cacao was domesticated at least 3000 years ago in Mesoamerica. 

• The diverse use of cacao led to it being widely grown in Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Europeans with further subsequent spreadbefore the arrival of the Europeans, with further subsequent spread through South America and then globally in the early 18th century.

• Hybridization between genetic groups, both natural and as a result of human actions has resulted in novel hybrid populations and varietieshuman actions, has resulted in novel hybrid populations and varieties.

Where we are todayWhere we are today• Over 35 collections maintain more than 24,000 samples of cacao diversity

• Wide variation for disease resistance and quality exists in ex situ collections q yand in farmers’ fields but its use it not optimised

• Access is often restricted by lack of legal & policy framework

• Only 2 international collectionsmanaged by CRU/UWI, Trinidad and TobagoOnly 2 international collections managed by CRU/UWI, Trinidad and Tobago and CATIE, Costa Rica with an international agreement to maintain global collections of cacao genetic resources for the long term and to make this germplasm freely available to any bona fide user

• Most collections have duplications internally and with other collections and misidentification of trees within collections can be as high as 30%

• Only a few have strategic safety duplication of unique materialsOnly a few have strategic safety duplication of unique materials

• Movement of germplasm brings risk of transferring pests and diseases

• The safe global movement of cacao germplasm is through the International Cocoa Quarantine Centre at the University of Reading UK (ICQC R) TheCocoa Quarantine Centre at the University of Reading UK, (ICQC,R). The USDA/ARS facility in Miami offers quarantine facilities for regional transfers

Asia/Pacific:Fiji ‐ DobuilevuIndia ‐ CPCRI

Americas:Bolivia ‐ El Ceibo CooperativeBrazil ‐ CEPEC‐SUEPA–SUERO‐ICA

Africa/EuropeBenin – CRA/SBCameroon ‐ IRADIndia  CPCRI

Indonesia ‐ Bah Lias‐ICCRIMalaysia ‐MCBPapua New Guinea ‐ PNGCCIPhilippines ‐ USMARC/PICRI

Brazil  CEPEC SUEPA SUERO ICAColombia ‐ CORPOICACuba – EIC/ECICCDominican Republic – IDIAFEcuador ‐ INIAP

Cameroon  IRADCôte d’Ivoire ‐ CNRAGhana ‐ CRIGNigeria ‐ CRINTogo ‐ CRAF

Solomon Islands ‐ BPCUThailand ‐ CHRCVanuatu ‐ VARTCVietnam ‐ Nong Lam University

French Guiana ‐ CIRADGuyana ‐MHOCGAHonduras ‐ FHIAMexico ‐ INIFAPNicaragua ‐ UNAN

France – CIRAD

International collections:Costa Rica ‐ CATIETrinidad & Tobago ‐ CRU/UWI

Credit: C. Turnbull

gPeru ‐ CEPICAFE–ICT‐UNAS‐UNSAUSA ‐ USDAVenezuela ‐ INIA

g /

International quarantine:UK ‐ ICQC,R

What needs to changegTo increase the use of cacao genetic diversity in breeding: 

1. Few breeding programmes and breeders

2. Constraints in accessing to the range of diversity as what is currently available has a narrow genetic base.  

– Not all useful diversity is in ex situ collections

– What is in ex situ collections is not available internationally (except from a few)

– Quarantine facilities need to be strengthened

– Legal and policy frameworks need to be clarified in many countries

3. Lack of information and knowledge (particularly evaluation) about the materials allowing its efficient selection

4. Lack of or inadequate funding for the long‐term management of collection, for research on diversity conservation and distribution evaluation and use in breedingresearch on diversity, conservation and distribution, evaluation and use in breeding

Although the 2 international collections at CATIE and CRU/UWI and the ICQC,R have been supported by public and industry sources for many years, this support has not yet been secured for the long term.  g

Their strong international commitment requires sustainable funding to ensure these resources are conserved in perpetuity. 

Where we want to go• Safeguarding the entire global genetic• Safeguarding the entire global genetic 

diversity• Filling in the gaps in ex situ collections

E i th i it d f• Ensuring the in situ and on‐farm conservation of wild species and landraces

• Increasing access to information on diversity for use

• Ensuring the safe movement of cacao germplasm for use

diversity for use

germplasm for use

• Strengthening the use of genetic resources through evaluationg

• Formalising the global partnership with all key players

• Building a sustainable funding mechanism

Credit: C. Montagnon

Credit: C. Turnbull

How you can helpLong‐term support for:the on‐going management of the GSCC including CANGISpriority collecting missions for capturing new diversityemergency support to safeguard threatened materialtraining and capacity building for national partners in the GSCCthe safe‐movement of germplasmC N hi d k h ld l iCacaoNet partnership and stakeholders consultations

Research agenda:Genetic diversity analysis and identification of gaps for priority collectingGenetic diversity analysis and identification of gaps for priority collectingTissue culture methods for the safe movement of germplasmDevelopment of in situ and on‐farm conservation options and plansMulti‐site evaluation trials of priority GSCC materialsMulti site evaluation trials of priority GSCC materialsEstablishment of regional quarantine centres

CacaoNetCacaoNet is the Global Network for 

Cacao Genetic Resources.

It i t ti i th tiIt aims to optimize the conservation and use of cacao genetic resources as the foundation of a sustainable cocoa economy (fromsustainable cocoa economy (from farmers, through research, to consumers), by coordinating and strengthening the conservation g gand related research efforts of a worldwide network of public and private sector stakeholders, with member representatives from various cocoa research institutes and organizations that support 

hcocoa research. 

www.cacaonet.orgCredit: M. Gilmour

Thank youThank you

Conserving Cocoa Genetic Resources: The ICG,T Experience

Path Umaharan

Cocoa Research UnitCocoa Research UnitThe University of the West Indies

International Cocoa genebank TrinidadInternational Cocoa genebank, Trinidad(www.cacaocentre.com)

Statisticso 2400 accessions

Fi ld ll ti o Field collection 100 acres

o 16 clonal trees per iaccession

o 22 accessions of related species (4)

d li d io 28% duplicated in another location

o Errors in plot 25-30%

Cocoa Genetic Resources (Ex situ)

2500

3000

1500

2000

cces

sion

s

1000

5

No.

Ac

0

500

Genetic diversity of cacao in the ICG,T (400 SNPs)

ECUADOR

MISC.

CRIOLLO

TRINITARIOOLOW AMAZ.

VENEZUELA

FRENCH GUIANAGUIANA

PARINARI

NANAY

IMC

Representation of ICG TRepresentation of ICG,TUA FORASTERO

35

40

45

TRINITARIO

20

25

30

f IC

G,T

CRIOLLO

TRINITARIO

10

15

20

% o

f

LA FORASTERO

0

5

Motilal et al 2010. PGRCU

Obj i f ICG TObjectives of ICG,T

1 Conservation of cacao germplasm1. Conservation of cacao germplasm2. Provision of genetic resources to support worldwide

cacao breeding.3. Provision of information on the genetic resources –

characterisation/ evaluation of germplasm4 Prebreeding to improve populations4. Prebreeding to improve populations5. Opportunity for gene mining using OMICS and GWAS

H l h f ICG THealth of ICG,T

1.1. Level of Genetic ErosionLevel of Genetic Erosion2.2. ErrorsErrors

-- Plot homogeneityPlot homogeneity-- Plot homogeneityPlot homogeneity-- Plot labeling errorsPlot labeling errors

4.4. Safety duplicationSafety duplicationhh d ld l5.5. CharacterisationCharacterisation and Evaluationand Evaluation

6.6. Gene mining/ Gene mining/ prebreedingprebreeding

G i i ICG TGenetic erosion – ICG,T

12

14

16

s

8

10

acc

ess

ion

2

4

6

% o

f a

0

2

0 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95% surviving trees

Genetic erosion Field 6BGenetic erosion

30

35

Field 6A

12

14

16

18

ion

s

15

20

25

30

Acc

ess

ion

s

2

4

6

8

10

% A

cce

ssi

0

5

10

0 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95

% A

00 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95

% Surviving trees

20

25

s

Field 4A% Surviving trees

5

10

15

% A

cce

ssio

ns

0

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

% Surviving trees

Errors – plot homogeneity

HOMOGENOUS

HETEROGENOUS

39%

HETEROGENOUS

61%

39%

61%

Errors Level of plot homogeneityErrors – Level of plot homogeneity

5%2%

5%

21% 123

72%

3≥4

72%

Errors – plot labeling

553646

548637

600

700

394 374

548

351 374400

500

101 100100

200

300

0

100

F4A F5A F5B F6A F6B

Duplication

Marper farm – 37%Campus fields – 4 %p 4University of Reading – 12.5%

Challenges

1. Vagaries of climate- Freak storms (wind breaks)

D ht ( bt i i ti )- Drought (subterranean irrigation)- Forest fires (fire watch, fire trace)- Flooding (drainage)- Flooding (drainage)

2. Vandalism3. Cost of maintenance (25% of CRU’s budget)4. Inadequate funding for genebank activities

Conclusions

1. Considerable phenomic data on accessions have been collected; and continue to be accumulated.

2. A number of prebreeding initiatives to improve resistance to diseases etc are underway.

3 Within plot errors can affect progress3. Within plot errors can affect progress4. Adequate funding is required to prevent genetic erosion5. Complete duplication must be the long-term goal

A k l dg tAcknowledgementsStaff of the Cocoa Research Unit

Descriptors/ AgronomyFrances BekeleGillian Bidassie

PathologyLate David IwaroSurendra Surujdeo-MaharajGillian Bidassie

Balram LatchmanValmiki Singh

i

Surendra Surujdeo-MaharajRomina Umaharan

GeneticsMichel BoccaraLambert MotilalAntoinette SankarAntoinette Sankar

PostharvestDarin SukhaNaailah AliNaailah AliSarah Bharat

Acknowledgements

Core Funding1. Ministry of Food

Research Collaborators1. CIRAD, Francey

Production, Trinidad2. Cocoa Research Association

2. USDA-ARS3. Univ. of Reading, UK4. Univ. of Hamburg, Germany

Other funding1. World Cocoa Foundation2. Dutch Ministry of

4 U b g, G y

2. Dutch Ministry of Agriculture

3. Common Fund for Commodities

4. Co-financing from the industry.