National Academies Press: OpenBook

The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System (1991)

Chapter: 4 Prescription for Effectiveness

« Previous: 3 Administration of the National System
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

4

Prescription for Effectiveness

T he United States, through the National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS), distributes free of charge more germplasm around the world than any other nation and plays an important role in efforts to manage and protect the world's crop genetic resources. The creation of the national system more than 15 years ago was intended to herald an efficient effort aimed at coordinating activities throughout the country. Instead the system has been burdened by a cumbersome administrative structure inappropriate to managing a program that has substantial national and international responsibilities. A plethora of advisory and administrative bodies make it difficult to discern where, or if indeed, there is any central germplasm leadership and authority in the United States. Central, unified, budgetary authority for NPGS activities is similarly lacking. These dispersed, sometimes overlapping administrative, advisory, and budgetary components have often confused and hampered the effectiveness of NPGS.

The administrative and advisory organization of the National Plant Germplasm System should be structured to provide for efficient national coordination.

The administrative structure of the NPGS is inefficient and far too complex. The great strategic importance of plant genetic resources requires that the system be administered centrally, at the national level. Stronger and clearer liaison among the cooperating units and agencies is needed if the NPGS is to address effectively the many issues that confront it. More direct lines of authority must be vested in a central

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

management unit to address long-standing needs and concerns and to reduce the complex bureaucracy separating individual site activities from those who should exercise coordinated national management. To be effective, however, this national authority must possess the capability of linking program and policy development with budget authority. Placing greater decision-making and budgetary authority in a central unit and reducing the administrative inputs will reduce the multiple authorities to which individual sites are responsible and will enable the NPGS to deal directly with national needs.

Furthermore, a centralized system would provide much needed coordination, guidance, and direction to U.S. policies regarding the collection, exchange, and use of genetic resources around the world. A centralized NPGS could act as the liaison to other parts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), other executive branch departments (e.g., the U.S. Department of State), Congress, industry, and other private efforts to manage germplasm. In so doing, the many and sometimes disparate interests and concerns of these groups would receive greater attention when policies, directions, and budgets for the NPGS are developed.

ACHIEVING A NATIONALLY MANAGED SYSTEM

The primary barriers to consolidated, central management of the NPGS are that it is a dispersed system and that clear authority and responsibility for program direction and budget are not vested in a single office or individual. There is no distinct budget for the NPGS. Because responsibility for activities and budgets are dispersed, there is no well-defined mechanism for assuring that budgets accurately reflect or address the needs of the system. Its support is derived as a portion of the funds more broadly directed toward germplasm-related work.

Because the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the primary source of funds for most of the principal NPGS sites, the NPGS is frequently perceived as an ARS responsibility. Other public and private entities, however, play important roles. This perception of ARS responsibility has sometimes hampered interagency cooperation. Within ARS, management of germplasm activities through the Germplasm Matrix Team and the ARS area directors has been an obstacle to achieving a coordinated nationally focused program.

More direct control must be vested in a central, national authority. The policies and directions of the NPGS should originate from this authority and be overseen by a national board that is representative of

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

the wide array of agencies, offices, and public and private groups that work with or are served by the NPGS. The office must provide liaison with agencies, offices, and groups at the national and international level with regard to U.S. germplasm activities, and, where appropriate, have authority to foster cooperative activities. The committee has identified two options to give the NPGS greater visibility within the USDA and to simplify and centralize its management: the creation of a reorganized national system apart from the ARS, or the elevation of the NPGS within the ARS.

Creation of a Reorganized System Outside the ARS

The NPGS could be removed from the ARS to become a separate entity within the USDA's Office of Science and Education. It would cease to be the responsibility of the National Program Staff, and would be overseen by an administrative unit reporting to the assistant secretary for science and education. The unit would have direct responsibility for NPGS budgets, staffing, and program execution. Sites and program activities would be administered directly by this new body rather than through the ARS areas or the regions of the Cooperative State Research Service (CSRS). Cooperative support from ARS, CSRS, or others would be provided for specific activities, but the national office would coordinate activities and funds. The National Plant Genetic Resources Board (NPGRB) would provide oversight and guidance for policies and programs.

The reorganized system would administer sites, collections, international activities, germplasm acquisition, data and germplasm management, research, and advisory and other activities related to managing plant germplasm in the United States. The new NPGS should also, with guidance from the NPGRB and through appropriate government offices (e.g., U.S. Department of State), provide liaison for bilateral cooperative agreements and for international germplasm activities with, for example, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations.

Removing the administration of the national system from the ARS would provide more direct line authority and budgetary control from the system leader to individual sites. Budgets could be administered centrally and activities coordinated nationally. ARS scientists or others with responsibilities in addition to germplasm could hold joint appointments. In this way, salary and other costs attributable to germplasm

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

could be covered by the NPGS. Given a clear national plan for managing germplasm in the United States, the NPGS would be more responsive to the needs of individual sites and to the requirements of international collaboration.

Moving the NPGS out of the ARS would pose some difficulties. Such a change could distance germplasm management from basic research efforts that have proved to be important parts of the overall activity. An NPGS that is organized outside and parallel to the much larger ARS could have reduced visibility when budgets are developed or other resources allocated. As a relatively small unit, it might be difficult for the NPGS to obtain cooperation from larger services, such as the ARS or CSRS.

Such a reorganization would necessitate creation of new administrative staff to provide services related to personnel, contracts, accounting, and purchasing. The NPGS could consider obtaining administrative services through cooperation with either ARS or CSRS, but not without providing funds to accomplish them. Difficulties might also arise when the NPGS develops policies and procedures that depart from those in their cooperating agencies. Providing these services within an independent NPGS would be possible, but it would require additional funds to achieve, beyond those presently allotted to germplasm work in ARS.

The association of the national system with the basic and mission-oriented research of the ARS has been an asset, particularly for the application of new technologies to germplasm management. Development of methods for the cryopreservation of seeds and tissues by ARS researchers at the National Seed Storage Laboratory (NSSL) should, for example, lead to improved methods for maintaining materials in long-term storage. Basic research at that same facility on the biophysics of water in dried seed could lead to new technologies for storage and viability assessment. ARS researchers involved in germplasm enhancement or evaluation are significant users of NPGS germplasm, whether located at an NPGS site or elsewhere. Removing the national system from ARS could weaken the important link between germplasm management and basic research.

As in many organizational structures, power bases can be very important. The power base for an independent NPGS would be small. The NPGS could find itself competing, rather than cooperating, with the ARS for funds, staff, and equipment. Where sites would be occupied by both NPGS and ARS scientists, or those with joint appointments in the two units, competition for oversight of resources and facilities could exist. There are, of course, conflicts similar to this now. The question

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

is whether they could be better resolved outside rather than inside the ARS.

Elevation of the NPGS Within ARS

It may be possible to continue the administration of the NPGS within the ARS. However, the responsibility for oversight of NPGS activities would have to be elevated from the National Program Staff and vested in a director who would report to the administrator of ARS on budgets and program direction.

This change would require an organization that would, to some degree, push aside the present ARS system of area administration. Responsibility for budget, staffing, and program direction would rest with the central office. This change would also obviate the need for the Germplasm Matrix Team, although recommendations on programs could be sought from the National Program Staff as needed to coordinate activities.

The NPGS director should be responsible for formulating an overall budget for the system that would take account of funding and other resources provided by other cooperating agencies (e.g., CSRS, state agricultural experimental stations). In developing a budget, the director should address the concerns and priorities of the national system as identified by the NPGRB. The NPGS budget should be a separate element of the ARS budget, clearly distinguished from other ARS activities. An annual report should be made to the NPGRB by the leader of the NPGS on the effectiveness with which the board's recommendations for budget and program were addressed.

The USDA must develop an NPGS organization with minimal bureaucratic and administrative entanglements and maximal independence. Of the two options, the committee favors creation of a reorganized NPGS outside ARS as the most likely to bring about the positive administrative and advisory changes that it recommends. The second option would perpetuate many of the current administrative constraints on the operation of the NPGS.

Addressing the crucial needs of the NPGS will require significant changes in budget responsibility and in the way the NPGS is organized and managed. The committee cautions the USDA not to respond to these recommendations solely by generating more cooperative or informal agreements. Such agreements are valuable mechanisms for enabling the NPGS to achieve important specific goals, through the sharing of resources and responsibilities among NPGS cooperators. However, they

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

cannot alone provide the sharp national focus and central authority needed.

CHANGES IN THE ADVISORY STRUCTURE

At present, the responsibilities of advisory units within the NPGS often overlap. In many cases, no mechanism exists for considering the advice or reports of these groups. The responsibilities of the advisory groups must be clearly defined and their advice must be used in developing the system's activities, programs, and budgets. Site-specific advisory committees (such as the technical advisory committees described in Chapter 3) could be established by individual sites in cooperation with the central management office. These committees should provide expert technical and scientific advice in support of the site's nationally mandated activities.

The National Plant Genetic Resources Board must have greater independence as an adviser on national and international policies.

During its first years the NPGRB showed strong leadership in its policy recommendations and monitored their implementation diligently. By the early 1980s its role had diminished. Little regard was paid to the terms of appointment and rotation of membership, and a wholesale turnover of members resulted in a lack of continuity. The executive secretary's position, initially filled by a CSRS senior staff person, was given to a member of the ARS National Program Staff. The style of operation of the board also changed as ARS appeared to influence its agendas, recommendations, and activities more than in the past.

Despite the intent that “the Board will be composed of individuals with diverse capabilities distinguished by their knowledge and interest in plant genetic resources management” (National Plant Genetic Resources Board, 1984), the diversity of representation narrowed. The minutes of board meetings reveal that informational items were discussed and that substantive policy issues, such as plant patenting and international activities, were neither discussed nor pursued. The board produced few written formal or official statements, recommendations, or positions. Thus, it had little influence over genetic resources issues.

Although the current chair of the NPGRB has made the board more vocal about and responsive to policy issues, the board must have greater independence in advising on plant genetic resources policy. The focus of the board's activities must be clearly distinct from that of other advisory bodies, such as the National Plant Germplasm Committee

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

(NPGC) or the Plant Germplasm Operations Committee (PGOC). Its primary concerns should be genetic resources policy, strategy, and international cooperation. Its recommendations should be incorporated into the formulation of NPGS budgets and programs.

The NPGRB should have greater independence from those who receive its reports and advice. At present the assistant secretary for science and education, as chair, both transmits and receives the board's reports and advice for the secretary of agriculture. The board would be better served if its chair were elected from the membership. The chair should be the board's advocate in presenting its decisions and recommendations to the secretary of agriculture and the leader of the national system. The chair, on behalf of the board, should transmit an annual report summarizing the board's activities to the secretary of agriculture, the relevant congressional committees, the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, and other interested parties. The report should address U.S. germplasm activities and the effectiveness of the NPGS in achieving the board 's budgetary and programmatic recommendations.

The executive secretary of the NPGRB is responsible for administrative activities. This individual should be independent of the ARS National Program Staff and, with the chair, should aid in developing and setting agendas.

Representation on the NPGRB should include public and private sector scientists and administrators with responsibilities and expertise for managing or using plant germplasm. Representatives from other relevant federal offices, such as the Departments of State and Interior would ensure that the board's deliberations include the concerns of all NPGS participants. Private, nonprofit groups with interests in managing and conserving plant genetic resources should also be represented.

The National Plant Germplasm Committee should be disbanded.

The NPGC is superfluous and should be eliminated. The committee was once an effective advocate for the NPGS, but today its members' expertise in and commitment to germplasm varies considerably. Some members, while interested in the subject, have little prior experience with the germplasm system. As a consequence a major part of the NPGC' s work has been to educate its members about plant genetic resources. A clear role distinct from other advisory groups no longer exists for the committee. No designated individual or office within the NPGS receives its reports and advice, and its ability to influence policy is limited.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

The crop advisory committees should be provided financial support, and a mechanism should be created to use their reports when developing policies and priorities.

The crop advisory committees could be valuable in assessing the status and needs of NPGS collections. They need encouragement and financial support, but have received little of either from the National Plant Germplasm System. As a result their impact and effectiveness are reduced.

The committee's reports can be very useful as sources for developing plans and priorities for the NPGS. However, there is no mechanism to ensure they are used to set national priorities and develop plans. The more assertive committee members go directly to the NPGS, the USDA, and even to the Congress, either independently or through a commodity group, to obtain action on their concerns. This can lead to unbalanced treatment for some crops and to priorities that take no account of the relative needs of other crops.

Recently the ARS national program leader for plant germplasm has brought together the chairs of the crop advisory committees, crop curators, and others for annual meetings that have been useful for promoting communication. However, well-attended, regular meetings of the crop advisory committees are needed to discuss tasks and produce reports. Some support to chairs for administrative expenses would facilitate communication with the membership between meetings when urgent questions arise.

These committees must be developed further as key elements of the national system. If they are to receive a minimal level of support, their numbers should be reassessed. There should also be a central review of all of the reports by an existing group, the PGOC, or a committee drawn from the committees' chairs.

The Plant Germplasm Operations Committee should be given responsibility for advising the leader of the National Plant Germplasm System on management, operations, and priorities.

The PGOC has become an effective and responsive advocate for the needs and priorities of site managers in the NPGS. It provides a forum for debating the various needs of sites and collections that allows for the balancing of divergent priorities. It should report to the leader of the NPGS on matters pertaining to operations and functions at germplasm sites, and to provide advice on coordinating and developing management plans and priorities derived, in part, from the reports of the crop advisory committees.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

GERMPLASM ACQUISITION AND COLLECTIONS

New germplasm should be acquired in response to a long-range plan based on analyses of present holdings and future needs and goals. As collections grow in size it is increasingly important to develop procedures that allow them to be used easily and managed efficiently. This will require the NPGS to give continuing attention to quarantine, information management, development of criteria for entry of new accessions, and the problems of managing large collections (Chang, 1989).

Plant Exploration

The National Plant Germplasm System should develop a comprehensive plan for plant exploration.

Successful explorations depend, in part, on clear, scientifically based objectives. In the past, lack of a plan for exploration has resulted in some crops receiving greater attention while others, with few champions, went unserved.

Until very recently, the guidelines for plant exploration activities were too rigid and complex for even a relatively simple collecting trip. Flexibility is needed to approve, fund, and expedite the various endeavors in plant exploration. These may involve a single collector, a team of individuals, multinational fieldwork, collection of a precisely located endemic species, or collection of many species over a wide range. Past difficulties have led to a decline in requests for support and for exploration activities, and to criticisms about the lack of these activities in the national system. In recent years, actions have been taken to address these deficiencies.

Since 1988, the national system has begun to develop priorities based on deficiencies in its collections and on expected germplasm needs. The crop advisory committees can play an important part in priority development. Qualified people are being sought to collect germplasm in accordance with established priorities and standards. This approach is a considerable departure from the past practice of assuming that exploration proposals submitted to the Germplasm Matrix Team through the then existent Plant Exploration Office would reflect the appropriate priorities for the NPGS.

It is very important to address national and local concerns when planning explorations. Cooperative efforts that include U.S. and local scientists working together throughout a growing season should be sought through FAO or the International Board for Plant Genetic

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Resources (IBPGR), or through bilateral agreements. Local scientists should participate in exploration and collection, and receive samples of all of the accessions obtained.

Finally, germplasm exchanges can be hampered by international trade embargoes that restrict the shipment of agricultural products or commercial grain. Germplasm exchange should be exempt from such embargoes.

The Plant Introduction Office

The role of the Plant Introduction Office within the national system should be clearly defined.

The Plant Introduction Office (PIO) plays an important and highly visible role in international cooperation and exchange. These activities should be centrally managed within the NPGS. In the past, its international visibility has led to the incorrect assumption that the PIO or its leader controlled the NPGS.

The PIO should be the site of germplasm entry and assignment of plant introduction (PI) numbers, and the validation of documentation, nomenclature, and site of origin. Its activities should be clearly within the management jurisdiction of the NPGS leader.

Quarantine

The National Plant Germplasm System should continue to seek the development of policies, procedures, and cooperative arrangements that promote the safe, yet rapid and efficient, acquisition of germplasm.

Quarantine policy, under the regulation of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), attempts to prevent the importation of disease and insect pests not indigenous to the United States. Approximately 90 percent of the germplasm that enters the United States moves relatively unimpeded through quarantine, following routine inspection and occasional fumigation, on arrival. Some 8 percent of items entering the country are placed under a postentry quarantine while 2 percent, about 10 genera, mostly vegetatively propagated, are prohibited from entry (H. Waterworth, U.S. Department of Agriculture, personal communication, September 1987). These percentages, however, do not reflect some important materials that because of quarantine restrictions are simply never acquired. In the past, some accessions of Prunus (e.g., plums, nectarines, apricots, cherries, peaches) have been delayed in quarantine for more than two decades (S. M. Dietz, U.S. Department of Agriculture, personal communication, July 1990). Because

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Accessions of glabrous apricots from Alma-Ata in the south central Soviet Union were introduced into the United States in July 1990 and placed under quarantine. They cannot be made available to researchers until tests to detect plant pathogens in them have been completed, which can take several years. Credit: Calvin Sperling.

of a lack of facilities to grow them under quarantine in the United States, a number of items (such as corn and sorghum accessions from Africa and Asia) must be grown in Europe or Latin America before becoming a part of the 90 percent that pass quickly. An offshore quarantine site, such as that being developed by ARS in St. Croix under a permit from APHIS, will greatly expedite the entry process for many accessions.

Recent agreements between ARS and APHIS have promoted cooperation on importing germplasm for scientific purposes. The National Plant Germplasm Quarantine Center near Beltsville, Maryland, run jointly by NPGS and APHIS, was established to facilitate exchange and importation and to eliminate a rapidly growing backlog of germplasm materials. However, the center's isolation areas, greenhouses, controlled environment rooms, laboratories, and staff members will be insufficient

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

to process the expected volume of materials. ARS and APHIS are seeking funds to expand these facilities.

Cooperation with other sites, such as the national clonal germplasm repositories, may also relieve the burden on APHIS facilities and speed the release of materials. Arrangements can be made to transfer germplasm to selected facilities under APHIS-approved protocols of postentry quarantine. The recipient institution, while gaining access to the material, also would accept responsibility for performing tests to detect pathogenic agents and for developing pathogen-free stocks for distribution. However, facilities located within the primary agricultural region for a crop may not be appropriate for quarantine.

Greater use of the option to release quarantined germplasm to qualified scientists, with the provision that it remain under quarantine, should be considered. This would apply only to materials being introduced for scientific purposes and not to commercial-sized lots.

More use should be made of overseas, third-party, or isolated offshore quarantine facilities.

Isolated or third-party quarantine facilities outside the United States that are developed with other nations or international centers provide good alternatives for supplementing present facilities or to access environments more suitable to the growth of the plants being introduced. The testing of material in a non-U.S. location would be acceptable if it meets scientific and quarantine criteria. Stations in Europe, for example, could serve well for the quarantine of certain kinds of material. The location should be one where the tested crop is not grown and endemic hosts for its pathogens are not present. Environmental, biological, and political aspects must be considered in developing cooperative arrangements. Benefits to both the United States and the cooperators must be clearly established and set forth.

The NPGS provides third-party quarantine services for other institutions. The Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT, International Center of Tropical Agriculture) in Colombia, for example, uses the Western Regional Plant Introduction Station to quarantine bean germplasm from Africa. The CIAT is an international research center in the CGIAR system.

The National Plant Germplasm System should work with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, which is responsible for quarantine programs, to support research on technologies for rapid and reliable detection and elimination of pests and pathogens.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Selected plant species are placed in quarantine when they enter the United States to prevent the introduction of pests or diseases that could harm U.S. agriculture. This requirement is often seen as an impediment to germplasm acquisition. Most imported plants pass through quarantine following little more than visual inspection, but in some cases (e.g., Prunus species) quarantine can entail years of isolation and testing before the germplasm is released. The NPGS has developed priorities for the materials and agents of greatest concern to guide research on quarantine, but has limited funds. Molecular technologies now emerging hold the potential to greatly reduce quarantine periods, particularly for detecting viruses or mycoplasmas. Methods should be further developed and adopted to screen for intracellular organisms.

The protocols developed for molecular identification should be rapid, definitive, and relatively simple to use to enable the screening of greater numbers of entries. While the technologies for developing such methods are available, their application to disease agents of particular significance has been slow.

The development of pathogen-specific protocols for routine use in quarantine is needed. Chemotherapy, thermotherapy, and meristematic tissue culture are examples of such procedures. The required research could be accomplished by specialists in cooperation with scientists at USDA facilities.

National Collections

Collections must be managed as national, not regional, resources.

If germplasm activities are to have a national focus and international recognition, collections should be fully integrated into a national system. The management of that system should be coordinated at national rather than regional or area levels. For example, all of the NPGS sites could be designated as national plant genetic resources centers, and individual collections could be designated as national plant genetic resources collections.

These or similar designations will underscore the national focus for germplasm activities. While many of the national system's sites arose as regional efforts, they must now have stronger national and international significance. The national germplasm collections could be managed uniformly, with budget and administrative oversight exercised by one central office. The designation “national collection” would carry with it the requirements for certification and adherence to basic management standards, and the assurance of basic support to ensure safekeeping.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Crop Curators

Curators with specific knowledge should be appointed for each major crop or crop group, and they should be given management responsibilities.

Knowledgeable curators must oversee the acquisition and management of all of the major or essential NPGS collections, and promote their use. The lack of many such curators requires some site managers to oversee a number of different crop species. Curators must have specific knowledge about their crops, collections, maintenance sites, needs, and enhancement plans. With advice from the crop advisory committee, a curator should work with the leader of the NPGS to develop and implement plans for exploration, management, documentation, regeneration, evaluation, and enhancement. By fostering the breeding of potentially useful genes into appropriate genetic lines, curators can greatly enhance the use of NPGS collections.

Base Collections

The base collections at the National Seed Storage Laboratory should reflect all of the seed collections in the national system.

The NSSL is intended to provide base storage for all materials held in the national system's seed collections, but it cannot because of space limitations. Expansion of the laboratory is therefore imperative (National Research Council, 1988). However, as collections enlarge, the size of the NSSL's task will increase. The development of improved protocols for storing seed, monitoring its viability, and regenerating small or declining samples is imperative.

The National Plant Germplasm System must devote more of its resources to regenerating seed accessions.

Regeneration is costly in time and resources, and introduces the risk of genetic shifts, particularly where an accession is genetically heterogeneous. It is, however, necessary if seed viability has declined, or if distribution or testing has depleted the accession.

Regeneration must take account of the breeding structure and population genetics of the sample. Errors, such as the lack of cages or inadequate separation distances to prevent cross-pollination of open-pollinated accessions in the field, can result in irretrievable genetic damage. For some accessions, unique, non-native-pollinating insects may need to be maintained with the accession.

In the past, resources to increase or regenerate such samples have been inadequate. For about 60,000 NSSL accessions, mostly named

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

cultivars without PI numbers, no site has been identified where samples could be sent for regeneration. The NPGS needs to develop long-range plans for regenerating accessions with few seeds and those of low or declining viability. Where responsibility for providing fresh seed cannot be assigned to an NPGS site or collection, funds should be available to the curator to secure regeneration on a contract basis, with appropriate supervision and safeguards. In a survey of tests conducted at the NSSL over the past 10 years, the committee found that 71 percent of the laboratory's collection was above 65 percent germinability (see Table 2-10). However, 45 percent of the samples contained less than 550 seeds. Regeneration of these samples is urgently needed.

Regeneration activities will increase over time, and as collections enlarge and more NPGS material is stored as backup at the NSSL. Technologies to decrease viability loss such as cryopreservation (storage in or suspended over liquid nitrogen at temperatures between −150°C and −196°C) should be pursued. Methods of identification are needed to ensure that seed received after regeneration is genetically the same as that sent out.

Seeds are kept in cryogenic storage at the National Seed Storage Laboratory. Credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Special Collections

A plan should be developed for monitoring, supporting, and conserving important special collections.

There are many collections outside the federal system that vary in their taxonomic or geographic emphases, completeness, and scope. Many were assembled by university, state, or ARS scientists. Others were developed outside the regional station system, or were begun prior to its formation. Some accessions are genetically unique, and others are similar to those already held by the national system. The extent of duplication between these collections is largely unknown.

It is difficult to ascertain who is responsible for these collections. The intermingling of commodity, germplasm, financing, and other program responsibilities at ARS has made it difficult to manage these collections as parts of the NPGS. Some collections are the responsibility of an individual with narrow and specific commodity interests. The leader of the NPGS and the appropriate crop advisory committee should have access to information about the status of these collections.

A management plan for these special collections should cover four points. First, many collections still need to be identified. At least three are known to have been partially lost due to lack of a timely transfer of materials or mishandling after transfer (i.e., the Mangelsdorf maize collection, the Stephens cotton collection, and the Whitaker Cucurbita species collection). Second, such collections need back-up storage at the National Seed Storage Laboratory. Third, unique collections should be duplicated and made a part of the NPGS. Fourth, the maintenance status of important collections outside the national system and held by individuals should be monitored to provide insurance against their future loss.

The collection of tomato species at the Charles M. Rick Tomato Genetics Resource Center is an outstanding example of an important special collection (Genetic Resources Conservation Program, 1988). This collection is maintained at the University of California at Davis, with partial support from ARS through special funding arrangements. Most (97 percent) of the available accessions at the Rick Center are duplicated at the NSSL.

Genetic Stocks

The National Plant Germplasm System should provide secure, long-term storage at the National Seed Storage Laboratory for genetic stocks and should assist in the support of collections that are considered important for agriculture or basic research.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Genetic stocks typically possess one or more genetic anomalies (e.g., multiple or missing chromosomes, unique genetic markers) that make them of interest to researchers. The management of these stocks involves a continuing search and examination for particular genetic traits or anomalies. Maintaining genetic stocks can be complicated by mutant genes or chromosome aberrations that reduce the viability of their seed. Mutant stocks often can only survive under very specific conditions and frequently require highly specialized procedures to multiply, identify, and maintain them. Genetic stocks are therefore not generally held in active germplasm collections, such as those of the regional stations.

There is an acute awareness of the importance of genetic stock centers as essential underpinnings of basic and applied research and education on plants both in the United States and throughout the world (McGuire and Qualset, 1990). These collections have been and are important for plant breeding, biosystematics, genetics, development, physiology, biochemistry, and molecular genetics. Advances in knowledge that came through the use of materials in these collections include the regulation of gene function, processes of genetic mutation, fine structure of genetic material, behavior and mechanics of chromosomes, starch and storage protein biosynthesis, and the existence and properties of transposable elements (migrating genetic materials). Stocks with multiple markers are frequently requested for linkage analysis studies.

Over the years, genetic stock collections have been financed by a combination of National Science Foundation, USDA, state, or other funds on an ad hoc basis. With the current emphasis on molecular biology and plant genome mapping, such collections have become even more important, yet ARS has no program for these collections, and the NPGS is only beginning to develop policies for handling them when they become endangered. Efforts are being made to provide secure conservation for selected collections and important stocks. However, many individuals who maintain important barley, corn, tomato, and wheat genetic stocks are at or past retirement age; few replacements are in sight. Furthermore, there appears to be no plan to encourage or engage other suitably qualified scientists to replace them.

Because of the specialized nature of mutant stocks, the difficulty of deciding what to maintain or expand, and the expense that maintenance could entail, a decision must be made about the extent to which the NPGS should be involved in their maintenance and elaboration. The Crop Science Society of America has adopted a recommendation that genetic stocks of significance be registered and samples of those stocks be deposited in the NSSL (White et al., 1988). This policy was encouraged by the NPGS. The NSSL is able to store most genetic stocks, but their management, characterization, regeneration, and distribution should

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

remain the responsibility of the knowledgeable scientists actively studying and using them.

The NPGS should have the capacity to provide a limited amount of supplemental funding for selected critical collections, including mutant genetic stocks important to agriculture and biology. Funding, on a limited basis, should be available to provide a safety net against loss of important collections. First priority should be given to the rescue of orphaned and endangered mutant genetic stock collections.

Establishing Core Subsets

The management and use of large collections, such as those for wheat, corn, and soybeans, could be aided by the identification of core subsets, but this method must be applied cautiously.

As collections of plant germplasm around the world have grown over the past 25 years, so has the magnitude of the task of managing them. Concerns have been raised that many major crop collections, such as wheat, barley, and rice, have grown so large and diffuse that they inhibit, rather than promote, effective management and use (Brown, 1989a,b; Holden, 1984). Increased emphasis on collecting wild and weedy relatives and expanding genetic coverage of present collections has created the potential for collections to grow even larger. While it can be argued that collections of large numbers of accessions are indeed valuable resources (Chang, 1989), their management can be difficult with only limited resources available.

Removal of duplicate accessions in a collection can reduce maintenance costs (Chang et al., 1989), but it is unlikely to have a significant impact. While the identification of duplicates is conceptually simple, the accuracy of technologies (e.g., restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis and protein electrophoresis) in identifying duplicate accessions in larger collections is still a matter for debate. This is especially true for crops to which such technologies have not previously been applied. Further, applying the newer molecular technologies to a large collection can be time consuming and expensive.

The problem is not so much to remove redundant materials as it is to enable efficient management and use of the wide range of diverse materials in collections. This has led to proposals for developing core collections worldwide. To underscore the fact that these are not separate collections, but a set of designated accessions within an existing collection, they are here referred to in this report as core subsets.

The core concept entails identifying a range of accessions within a collection, the total of which would include, with an acceptable level of

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

probability and with minimum redundancy, most or much of the range of genetic diversity in the crop species and its relatives (typically no more than 10 percent of the whole collection) (Brown, 1989a,b; Frankel and Brown, 1984). The goal of this subdivision is to facilitate use, and in particular, to provide efficient access to the probable range of variation in the whole collection in which a scientist may have interest (Brown, 1989a,b). It is envisioned that a breeder or researcher seeking particular traits could first examine a well-defined core and, if necessary or desirable, use the results of that search for a precise examination of the collection on the basis of passport or characterization data.

The core subset should contain the breadth of genetic diversity available for a crop. However, it is probable that if 10 percent of the total accessions are assigned to a core subset, no more than 70 percent of the alleles in the whole collection will be included (Brown, 1989a,b; Strauss et al., 1988). The entire collection, therefore, must continue to be maintained. It serves two crucial functions: first, as a source of additional diversity that may be similar to the core, but due to different genes or allelic combinations could differ appreciably from core germplasm; and second, as a source of genetic variation for traits that are not represented in the core subset. While use of a core concept for managing a collection might shift the priority for evaluating certain accessions, it does not provide information for eliminating, bulking, or combining accessions.

The core subset has advantages for curators. It would be more widely and readily distributed than the whole collection. It is also expected that the core would receive priority in evaluation and characterization. Thus, curators could make more efficient use of limited budgets through directed efforts, promote the distribution of their materials and information, and facilitate use of the collection.

It should be emphasized that core subsets are management and record-keeping tools. They guide activities and the development of priorities for evaluation, characterization, and distribution. They do not require the physical construction of separate facilities or storage areas. They do, however, require availability of a basic amount of passport information for each accession in a collection. This basic information enables the individual accessions in the core subset to be linked to potentially wider diversity in the entire collection.

Implementation of the core subsets concept in NPGS collections is presently constrained by practical and scientific difficulties. The concept requires that much basic information be available on accessions, but many accessions lack such information. Methods for selecting a core subset are still a matter of scientific debate (Brown, 1989a,b; Chapman,

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

1987; Strauss et al., 1988). Current proposals are based on sampling theory and population genetic theory, but they are as yet untested in large collections.

Core subsets for some of the larger NPGS collections such as wheat, barley, and beans, could aid curators in management and exchange, providing sufficient documentation was accessible. Although unlikely to reduce the size of present collections, they might reduce the frequency of acquiring duplicate or near-duplicate samples, and increase the ease of access to the collection by simplifying the screening process for particular traits. The danger, however, is that this approach could be seen as a mechanism for reducing collection size, combining materials, or simply neglecting germplasm that is not part of the core. For collections that already are small or that represent limited geographic distribution, a core subset could be too small to represent the collection's diversity, thus being an inappropriate management strategy.

Cooperation with Other Collections

The National Plant Germplasm System should seek opportunities for cooperation with other efforts to preserve plant germplasm.

Collections of heirloom and specialty crops may hold germplasm not found in NPGS collections (Office of Technology Assessment, 1985). They are resources for which little USDA maintenance effort is required, and are sources of old varieties no longer available and not now part of NPGS collections. Private groups that maintain heirloom and specialty crops should have access to the expertise of NPGS scientists and backup facilities for their collections. For example, through a memorandum of understanding with the Center for Plant Conservation (CPC), the national system provides base collection storage of the seeds of rare plants held by CPC's cooperating institutions. Communication with individuals from private interest groups could be improved by their membership on relevant crop advisory committees.

Botanical gardens and arboreta hold large numbers of species not found in NPGS collections. These are often very small, or single plant, samples from natural populations and are not genetically diverse. It would be desirable for the NPGS to cooperate to a greater extent with botanical gardens in evaluating ornamental species, as is done at the U.S. National Arboretum. With the help of botanical gardens in the CPC consortium, the NPGS could evaluate plant materials in a wide range of regions and habitats. Efforts along these lines have been made at the regional station in Ames, Iowa.

The national system also could provide support through special grants

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

for activities such as the Garden Seed Inventory of the Seed Savers Exchange (1989a). This is a potentially valuable resource for monitoring the genetic diversity of commercially available vegetable seed. A minimal level of support from the NPGS could assure its continuance.

Cooperation could reduce the tensions that occur when private groups must compete with the national system for limited quarantine resources. Space for importing materials that must be quarantined for extended periods is limited and access is provided to the NPGS on a priority basis. This could lead to APHIS refusing requests for imports by other interests (Yazzie, 1989). Cooperation with groups such as the Seed Savers Exchange or CPC could lead to more equitable agreements and help to reduce unauthorized importation of plants.

Companies with access to subtropical sites with warm winters and short day-lengths are particularly useful for regenerating certain species. Their nurseries, located in the southern United States and abroad, can readily facilitate large-scale increases of seed. The Latin American Maize Project—a cooperative venture with private financing that involves U.S. universities, several Latin American countries, and the USDA—is evaluating seed stocks from a wide array of Latin American maize landraces (White and Briggs, 1989).

Demands for exotic, wild, and weedy species related to crops are expected to increase as molecular technologies for transferring alien genes to crop plants become readily usable. The search for new characteristics requires the availability of germplasm beyond that contained in current cultivars and breeding lines. The biotechnology industry should be encouraged to support the activities of the national system. The amount of university and industry biotechnology research projects that complement USDA's germplasm activities should expand and enhance the use of a broader array of genes from a widening base of germplasm.

In Situ Conservation

In situ conservation methods should be used to complement the primarily ex situ activities of the National Plant Germplasm System.

These methods include maintenance of wild plant genetic resources where they occur naturally or maintenance of domesticated materials where they were originally selected. For many species native to the United States, such as blueberries, cranberries, or Rubus species, in situ conservation may be accomplished through the designation of existing parks, wildlife refuges, or other protected areas as in situ reserves. The status of species or populations conserved in these areas would have

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Wild barley, wild oat, and wild wheat are grow at an in situ research site at Ammiad in the eastern Galilee region of Israel. Credit: Calvin Sperling.

to be monitored and the information could be maintained in the Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Cooperation with groups, such as Native Seeds/SEARCH (Southwestern Endangered Aridland Resource Clearing House), that are already involved with in situ monitoring of selected species might also be arranged.

Efforts should be made to promote in situ conservation for plant genetic resources outside the United States. For example, financial aid through programs of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) or technical assistance coordinated by the NPGS could be provided to enable developing nations to conduct surveys, identify regions, or establish appropriate in situ reserves or activities. Where aid is provided through another agency or department, the advice and technical expertise of the NPGS should be sought. Funds, for example, could be provided by USAID for the in situ conservation of Hordeum spontaneum, a barley wild relative, and Triticum dicoccoides, a wheat wild relative, in Israel, and technical support could come from the NPGS.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

FACILITIES AND PERSONNEL

The national system's germplasm is housed in collections at many sites in the United States. The use of multiple sites are necessary because of the diverse environments needed to maintain all of the accessions, but it makes overall management of the system difficult. Many accessions require specialized environments not available at the given maintenance site or within the system.

National Seed Storage Laboratory

The National Seed Storage Laboratory must be expanded.

Several reports have stressed the importance of upgrading the physical facility at the NSSL (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, 1984; General Accounting Office, 1981a,b; National Research Council, 1988; Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1981). Expanded facilities should provide significantly more space for the storage of accessions, for the separate storage of quarantined germplasm, and for collections held as backup for other national and international institutions. The committee endorses these earlier reports.

The securing of an appropriation for this expansion must continue to be a high priority for the USDA. A federal restriction prevents construction until appropriations sufficient for completion have been received. The combination of an aging facility and insufficient space make it increasingly difficult for the NSSL to serve the purposes for which it was built. Space constraints have forced the NSSL to develop plans for temporarily storing selected materials at alternate sites, which lack longterm storage capacities (S. A. Eberhart and H. L. Shands, U.S. Department of Agriculture, personal communication, August 22, 1990).

Coupled with expansion of the NSSL must be an increased regeneration of samples at regional stations or other locations and additional funds to support this activity. Where an NPGS maintenance site does not exist, funds must be available to contract for and inspect grow-outs.

External Review

Facilities and programs of the National Plant Germplasm System should undergo periodic external review.

National germplasm sites and crop-specific collections should be reviewed regularly to ensure that their programs, resources, and staff capabilities meet the needs of the germplasm for which they are

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

conservators. Reviewers should have technical or management experience in plant germplasm or its use, and should be drawn from outside the national system. The appropriateness of a site's location should also be considered. While it is not advisable for collections to be moved frequently, the location of collections should be based on scientific considerations and opportunities for cooperation with universities or experiment stations. The selection of reviewers, the development of guidelines, and the evaluation of results and their distribution should be the responsibility of the leader of the NPGS, with direction and advice from the Plant Germplasm Operations Committee, a research advisory committee, or an ad hoc committee assembled to oversee the external review of a site.

Location

The locations of national system sites should be reviewed and where needed alternate locations should be identified.

Existing clonal repositories were established on the basis of regional interest, growing conditions, lack of pathogens, and local expertise. A wide range of state, federal, and private sector experts provided advice to the site selection process. The risk of maintaining plants that may harbor pathogens not yet found in the region was considered. Further, some collections have proved difficult to maintain in the presence of specific pathogens that have been found to exist in a region. Eastern filbert blight (Anisogramma anomala), for example, presently occurs within 50 miles of the Corvallis, Oregon, repository and thus may hamper maintenance of this germplasm at that site.

Close collaboration with local institutions is essential and must be recognized. The physical proximity of NPGS facilities to university campuses and state agricultural experiment stations is an asset. So, too, is the sharing of staff and program activities. However, there should be no ambiguity about the primacy of national policy and authority over managing collections, or using resources and personnel provided for that purpose. Where support from an experiment station has declined or maintenance has been inadequate, the possibility of moving a collection to a more suitable location should be considered.

New Facilities

Sites should be established for the growth and maintenance of germplasm that requires short day-lengths or arid environments.

The management of accessions with physiological and environmental constraints related to their maintenance can be difficult. These are plants

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

that cannot be reproduced because day-length or temperature requirements cannot be met in the United States. Some accessions requiring warm, short days are amenable to winter culture at facilities in Puerto Rico or St. Croix, but for other reasons cannot be grown at these sites. Some short-day beans, from the Regional Plant Introduction Station in Pullman, Washington, for example, will flower at these Caribbean stations, but native insects increase cross-pollination among accessions and the difficulty of maintaining genetic integrity. High-elevation materials often require cooler temperatures (especially cooler nights) than available in tropical or subtropical island habitats. Controlled greenhouse facilities have been used to meet some of these needs, but they are very costly. Controlled facilities do, however, provide security from the often unpredictable hazards (e.g., pests, disease, weather extremes, unanticipated pollinators) that can make field increase a risky endeavor. The need for an adequate population size to preserve genetic diversity can constrain the use of controlled environment facilities for regular regeneration.

Facilities at which short-day responsive plants can be grown and multiplied in the field should be found. They are required for a wide range of annual and perennial plants that must be regenerated, characterized, and evaluated. Field maintenance and growth would greatly increase the capacity for these activities over that of greenhouses. The site should be frost-free throughout the year, with low relative humidity, freedom from violent storms, and at a sufficient altitude to avoid extremes of heat. It must be accessible to irrigation and sufficiently isolated from general agriculture to provide a relatively disease-free environment. A site outside the United States that meets these requirements could be established by cooperation among USDA, USAID, and IBPGR. Adequate monitoring and precautions must be taken at such sites to prevent contamination of regenerated accessions with pests or pathogens that could be inadvertently spread when seed is distributed.

The United States also needs a facility located in an arid region, such as the drier desert southwest where pests and disease are typically less abundant. Cooperative agreements already provide for regenerating cotton and some small grains in this region. An NPGS site would be particularly valuable for maintaining selected accessions of sorghum, bean, grass, small grains, and jojoba.

Staffing

The federal and state partnership for managing plant germplasm should be reappraised and reinforced.

Because it is sometimes difficult for ARS employees to supervise state

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

workers directly, the ARS has tried to bring the staffing of some sites under the control of its personnel system. This has led to “federalizing” sites, such as the National Clonal Germplasm Repository at Corvallis, Oregon. As a result, the system has been perceived as drifting away from the original concept of shared responsibility and support.

Continuing the association of federal scientists with state university colleagues is important because it permits access to a broad array of expertise. Germplasm sites require staff trained in agronomy, horticulture, plant pathology, genetics, entomology, and plant systematics. Achieving this disciplinary mix has not been possible at all sites, and the needs of many germplasm centers have only been partially filled. More recently, staffing has been increasingly controlled by ARS. This shift has come about in part because of declines in CSRS or host university support relative to current costs. Efforts are needed to renew and strengthen the cooperative environment that has made available much needed expertise.

Individual interests of scientists at NPGS sites with specialized research responsibilities occasionally have conflicted with germplasm maintenance needs. In general, the committee has been favorably impressed with the focus, energy, expertise, and enthusiasm of many NPGS staff. However, many valuable individuals could become discouraged and leave unless actions to provide suitable opportunities for advancement and career development, while promoting the management of NPGS germplasm, are taken.

Training

A clearly defined policy for training scientists and technicians in the management of germplasm should be developed and implemented.

As the activities of the NPGS grow, so will its need for new professional and support staff. Further, as a partner in managing the world's genetic resources, the United States has an obligation to provide training opportunities for international scientists. By training international scientists, the NPGS can open opportunities for closer cooperation in managing and exchanging genetic resources. The best mechanism is site-based training.

While the NPGS is in an ideal position to train new professional and support staff, little coordination exists to guide and direct training. Opportunities for providing on-site training are not utilized at some sites. Central administration of training would enable more efficient use of limited staff time and facilities. Both long-term training and study opportunities for scientists and short-term workshops or in-service training are needed.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Training takes a significant amount of time and resources, both of which are limited. However, the committee found that for many NPGS sites the existing level of training is far below the present capacity to provide it. Many sites would not need larger staffs or increased budgets to support training. It should also be possible as well as advantageous to coordinate training with the academic programs of institutions where NPGS facilities reside.

In-service training is a necessary and an integral part of the NPGS. When sites are developed or enlarged, their potential to provide training should be considered to ensure that suitable space and facilities exist. The committee's report on the National Seed Storage Laboratory included recommendations for training facilities (National Research Council, 1988). Improving these facilities should not add substantially to construction costs when done as part of major expansion or remodeling efforts.

Classification and Promotion

The system of classifying and promoting scientists should be reexamined and adjusted to not only reward, but attract and retain career scientists needed for germplasm work.

ARS research scientists within the NPGS are judged primarily on the basis of published, peer-reviewed research. However, the majority of their work is the evaluation, regeneration, and record-keeping necessary for good germplasm management which may not lead to published papers. A system of classification and promotion that attracts, rewards, and retains career germplasm scientists is needed. It should take account of the considerable time required of NPGS scientists to perform tests, examinations, and other work not related to publication. It must not, however, produce barriers that discourage scientific study and publication in areas related to germplasm and its management.

Germplasm management is now recognized as essential to plant and animal improvement, to conservation programs, and to successful food production. However, there is no scientific classification within ARS commensurate with the significance of this activity. An appropriate system of advancement should be developed that enables adequate recognition of both the service and goal-directed research activities unique to germplasm work.

If the NPGS remains within the ARS, changes in personnel classifications and criteria for evaluation will be needed. One option would be to restructure the evaluation system so that reviews of germplasm scientists and site managers are based on accomplishments in managing collections. Records or evidence of germplasm-related accomplishments,

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

such as evaluation or regeneration, should be considered in addition to published papers. Alternatively, the ARS could create a separate category for germplasm scientists that allows for open-ended promotion, but with evaluation guidelines more appropriate to the work of germplasm maintenance and research. The potential to structure a staff appointment to devote a percentage of time to basic research (e.g., 80 percent for service activities and 20 percent for research) should not be overlooked.

THE MISSION OF THE NATIONAL SYSTEM

The National Plant Germplasm System should develop clear, concise goals and policies that encompass the conservation of plant genetic resources that reflect the world's biological diversity and crop resources of immediate use to scientists and breeders.

Efforts are needed to expand some collections to make them more representative of the available diversity. Assessments of collection completeness must give due regard to the inclusion of close wild relatives and non-crop-related species, which may possess useful genes. National policy should include endangered species of native and exotic taxa and should not be limited to crop genetic resources.

Plans for collecting should include consideration of the range of ecogeographical areas where accessions originate, how broad based or narrow the collection is in terms of known or suspected genetic traits, and what genes might be obtained through various transect or other sampling procedures when rare alleles are sought. These factors must be weighed against cost, accuracy, need, and other criteria for obtaining suitable materials.

Specifically, definitions and plans are needed for

  • Developing a long-term policy, periodically reviewed and revised, that states what genetic resources will be acquired and how to cooperate with foreign germplasm banks and with U.S. collections that are not formally part of the NPGS.

  • Assessing NPGS collections and developing priorities to ensure they sample adequately the genetic diversity for the species.

  • Replenishing seed stocks, with the help of international collaboration where appropriate.

  • Characterizing and evaluating the germplasm held in collections. This information will facilitate wider use of germplasm and make possible more efficient management.

  • Accelerating the adoption of modern technologies for the maintenance and characterization of germplasm.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
  • Promoting the use of conserved germplasm through enhancement efforts that incorporate important new genetic traits into appropriate genetic backgrounds.

  • Clarifying the position of the United States on questions of germplasm ownership, unrestricted exchange, and cooperation that are emerging in international forums. The committee endorses an earlier recommendation (Office of Technology Assessment, 1987) that the United States should not embargo exchanges of germplasm for political, economic, or other reasons.

  • Developing cooperative links between the NPGS and other national and international agencies, institutions, or groups conserving global biological diversity.

The United States must address the problem of the global loss of biological diversity. This can be done in significant part through conserving the genetic diversity of crop species.

The stated mission of the national system is “to acquire, maintain, evaluate, and make readily accessible to crop breeders and other plant scientists as wide as possible a range of genetic diversity in the form of seed and clonal germplasm of our crops and potential new crops” (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1981). The NPGS collections are not storehouses for all of the known crop cultivars. Other groups hold and distribute heirloom varieties no longer commercially available.

While the focus of the NPGS on breeders and researchers as primary users has been satisfactory to date, the need to conserve the world 's biological diversity has become an important issue. Aggressive participation and leadership by the United States in international efforts toward conserving and managing biological diversity are necessary and urgent. In the future, national programs could include broader biological conservation and research interests, such as conserving threatened or endangered wild species unrelated to crops but of potential economic or unique biological interest (Office of Technology Assessment, 1987) or in situ monitoring of the status of crop progenitor species and landraces threatened by habitat decline.

International Policies and Cooperation

The National Plant Germplasm System must take a more active role in developing U.S. policies that guide relations with the Food and Agriculture Organization, international agricultural research centers, and other international agencies and national institutions.

Germplasm management is no longer a strictly national concern. By

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

accepting responsibility for international base collections, the U.S. underscores its international role in maintaining these resources, for itself and for other nations. To fulfill these obligations requires a coherent, science-based policy. To achieve it will require the NPGS and its leadership to have a much greater role in developing U.S. policy related to germplasm and in representing the United States before international germplasm bodies, such as international agricultural research centers and the FAO.

While individuals in the NPGS may cooperate and interact with their counterparts in other nations, there is no U.S. international policy on plant genetic resources. Much of this is due to the domestic focus of the Agricultural Research Service. Many individuals within the ARS have developed international contacts, but such cooperation is not part of the service's policies or goals and there is limited support for it. The USDA generally defers to the U.S. Department of State on international matters. When there is a lack of appreciation or understanding of the scientific and agricultural issues involved, the outcome may not promote germplasm interests.

Cooperation with other nations in managing genetic resources should be more widely pursued. Greater exchange of germplasm and data between the NPGS and similar institutions in other nations (e.g., N. I. Vavilov Institute of Plant Industry in the USSR, National Institute of Agrobiological Resources in Japan, Institute of Crop Germplasm Resources in the People's Republic of China, and the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources in India) will lead to other mutually beneficial cooperative efforts. While some efforts at international cooperation exist, there is no clearly established mechanism or policy for fostering them.

There should be an unambiguous mechanism for establishing U.S. positions with regard to germplasm. In the past, it has been unclear what office is responsible for making recommendations to international forums or for defining U.S. actions regarding the management of genetic resources. Opinions expressed by scientists, administrators, and advisers seemingly disappeared in the interagency bureaucracy. The NPGRB, as an adviser on germplasm issues, could take the lead in discussing these issues. However, there must be a mechanism for acting on its recommendations.

The United States should become a member of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

The United States does not participate in the FAO Commission on Plant Genetic Resources as a member, nor is it a signatory to the FAO

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. The commission is an important forum for discussing international issues related to cooperation, exchange, and ownership of genetic resources, particularly with developing nations. Until recently, the NPGS was not officially represented in the observer delegation sent by the United States to commission meetings.

The NPGRB has only recently begun to discuss the possibility of U.S. participation in the FAO Commission on Plant Genetic Resources. It passed a resolution on November 14, 1989, recommending that the United States become a member of the commission. In August 1990, the Bureau of International Organization Affairs of the U.S. Department of State notified USDA that it concurs. No actions have been taken or recommended by the NPGRB in regard to adhering, completely or with reservations, to the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources or supporting an international fund established by FAO to support the genetic resources activities of commission members.

Membership in the FAO commission does not imply agreement with all of its policies or positions. Because it is possible to join the commission without adhering to all or part of the undertaking, the United States could underscore its concern for genetic resources and gain a voice in this important international forum. Membership would enable the United States to help in shaping the agenda and activities of the commission. [The United States joined in September 1990.]

The National Plant Germplasm System should cooperate with other nations to conserve, collect, maintain, and regenerate germplasm.

U.S. germplasm activities have been largely guided by an unofficial policy of national self-sufficiency that calls for comprehensive collections to reduce dependence on other nations or collections. This policy frequently does not recognize the increasingly international nature of germplasm acquisition, management, and conservation, and the necessity to foster global cooperation. Other collections outside the United States not only hold important germplasm resources but can provide vital support to the NPGS. For example, cooperation on seed regeneration could allow a division of labor and costs among nations or institutions without sacrificing national self-interests.

Many nations, especially those with rich genetic diversity, are reluctant to allow collection and exchange by foreigners. The United States must seek to preserve open and unrestricted exchanges of germplasm. The United States has international base collection responsibilities for maize, but there are no U.S. experimental facilities suitable for regenerating accessions of high-elevation, short day, Andean maize landraces. Agree-

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

ments with other nations are needed for regenerating germplasm materials for which suitable environmental conditions do not exist in this country.

The United States should expand its support of cooperative activities with the international agricultural research centers affiliated with the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.

In 1989, the United States, through USAID, provided about $42 million of the annual budget ($272 million) for core operations of the CGIAR centers and contributed additional funding for special projects. Only a small portion of these funds support germplasm activities. Individuals within the national system work cooperatively at times with scientists in CGIAR institutes (e.g., the NSSL holds partial duplicate collections of rice, maize, wheat, and beans), but there are no formal agreements or coordination of germplasm activities between the research centers and the national system.

In particular, greater collaboration between the NPGS and the IBPGR should be encouraged. The sharing and exchange of computerized inventories and data on germplasm could enhance the sharing of responsibilities between international institutions and the national system for managing many large collections. Back-up storage at the National Seed Storage Laboratory of the rice collection from the International Rice Research Institute and the cooperation of the NPGS in designating many of its collections as international base collections are examples of cooperation.

There is little formal sharing of computerized passport, characterization, or evaluation data between the NPGS and the CGIAR research centers, and no real attempt to standardize data records between them. Many individual scientists and research facilities have developed working relationships with counterparts at the research centers. For example, the regional station in Pullman, Washington, cooperates with the CIAT in Columbia on beans and with the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in India on chickpeas. The North-Central regional station cooperates with the Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center) in Mexico on maize. There is, however, little formal interaction between the NPGS and international organizations.

The NPGS and the CGIAR's research centers develop descriptors for characterization and evaluation of germplasm independently. The United States should seek to use descriptors and other data that are compatible with the centers to improve exchange of information on collections.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

The United States should work with neighboring countries to establish a North American cooperative program in genetic resources.

Both Canada and Mexico have national plant germplasm systems. The NPGS has cordial relations with the genetic resources staffs of both countries. Canada, Mexico, and the United States could benefit from closer linkages and access to materials held by each. Responsibility for specific collections could be shared among them. Other advantages include cost savings for the participants; facilitation of regeneration, germination testing, and quarantine; expansion of the total range of materials accessible to each nation; and increased security, provided by backup for selected collections. As part of this cooperation, representatives of the Canadian and Mexican germplasm programs could hold ex officio membership in the NPGRB.

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

The NPGS has a total of about 380,000 accessions. However, many computer records are incomplete and lack even the most basic descriptive information. Increased funding has made possible some updating of information on priority accessions, but this is a continuing process and must be sustained. The cooperation of all users of NPGS germplasm is essential to gather information about accessions. Recipients of germplasm should share their evaluation and other data with the NPGS.

The system's information, which covers collection inventories and germination records to evaluation data and exchange requests, is managed by the Database Management Unit (DBMU) using the Germplasm Resources Information Network. As noted earlier, the database was set up to serve as a central information repository, begin the standardization of crop descriptors and evaluation information, and help curators manage collections. These are three very different functions. The first entails obtaining and storing detailed information about accessions and requires sophisticated data retrieval capabilities. The second is a data classification activity for uniform and efficient data handling. The third is inventory control to help collection managers. The problem is that in developing a database system, modifications that help one function may hinder the others. The committee questioned whether it is appropriate to pursue a single, all-encompassing system to accomplish these differing tasks. For example, it is possible to develop standardized descriptors, but much of the available entry data may not be expressed in a form compatible with them. In fact, GRIN record formats for individual accessions contain lists of crop descriptors for which little, if any, data have been entered.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Completion of the Database

The Germplasm Resources Information Network must better reflect the collections of the National Plant Germplasm System.

An accurate directory, or central database, of all of the holdings of the national system is essential. The GRIN was intended to be a central data facility. While the structure and operation of the database management system are in place, the NPGS has experienced difficulties and delays in locating, correcting, and loading data that accurately represent its holdings. Access to a directory will make it possible to determine what materials are in the collections and where they are located. A directory would be a valuable tool for establishing priorities and focusing activities.

The GRIN includes inventories of the PI numbers and of several site collections, such as holdings of the NSSL and the clonal germplasm repository at Miami, Florida. The site inventories include items without PI numbers and materials that are not considered part of the national collections. Thus, no single set of inventory numbers can be used to assess the accessions of the NPGS. Further, the GRIN database still does not contain all inventories of all sites. Accession records for much of the clonal germplasm, for example, remain to be entered. Thus it is not yet possible to determine the total inventory of the NPGS.

Individual sites generally have inventories of all of the germplasm that they hold. The NSSL, for example, has conducted an inventory of its holdings to confirm their active status, reduce duplication, and eliminate redundancies. Holdings listed in other collections within the system can range from diverse accessions for a particular species to germplasm represented by only a single accession. For example, the list of germplasm holdings provided to the committee by the National Clonal Germplasm Repository at Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, contains several listings of single accessions representing a species. The national germplasm collections should contain those plant materials held for the purpose of providing a broad, accessible germplasm base. Individual plants may be the only germplasm source and may point to the need for additional material if the species has economic or other value.

Passport and Descriptor Data

A high priority should be placed on completing the listings on the Germplasm Resources Information Network with basic passport and descriptor data.

The major weakness of NPGS database management is not the

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

functioning of the GRIN, but the paucity of data, even for listed accessions. Few records examined by the committee contained useful information. Evaluation data were particularly lacking. There are bits and pieces of data for various crops, but so much is missing that it is difficult to search the collections of many crops for particular characteristics.

The GRIN staff, of about 10 people, is largely responsible for programming, not data preparation. The DBMU has made major improvements in the network and is developing an increasingly fast and efficient system. However, it is difficult to separate the function of a database management system such as GRIN from the completeness of the database it serves. The NPGS must obtain accurate information (especially passport data, much of which is in PIO records). The accessions not presently listed must be added to the database. The absence of this information makes the network of limited usefulness to most researchers and breeders.

The responsibility for completing GRIN files must fall to the central authority who would control the necessary personnel and funds. Evaluation and characterization descriptors should be reviewed to determine whether or not they are appropriate for the purposes of the network and likely to be completed. For nearly all of the crops examined, a large proportion of descriptors listed have no data. During the course of its investigations, the committee was told of various plans for adding new kinds of data to GRIN. These included data on endangered wild plants, livestock resources, and other genetic resources. Adding these data to GRIN should not be considered until the present NPGS databases are more complete. Increasing and revising network software or enlarging the hardware to allow for the addition of new kinds of data should not, in the committee's view, compete for personnel and funding resources that should first be devoted to completing the present database.

Accessibility of Data

The National Plant Germplasm System should continue to seek mechanisms for making the information held in the Germplasm Resources Information Network more easily accessible to scientists and crop specialists in the United States and abroad.

The network has two basic kinds of clients: those who supply information and those who request it (Mowder and Stoner, 1989). The DBMU has issued about 450 public access codes to persons outside the NPGS. As of February 1990 about 80 of those had logged on to GRIN in the preceding 6 months (J. D. Mowder, U.S. Department of Agri-

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

culture, personal communication, January 1990). While many improvements have been made in GRIN that make obtaining information and ordering germplasm easier, data retrieval is slow when compared with the speed of many microcomputers. Many users seeking germplasm do not require a rapid response, and the DBMU has performed searches on request and supplied printed results (Mowder and Stoner, 1989). The NPGS could prepare standardized, printed searches for the more frequently used collections. Individual crop databases should also be made available on diskettes, in a form that can easily be accessed by commercially available software.

RESEARCH

Research is an essential part of genetic resources management. Improvements in long-term seed preservation, seed viability testing, optimization of regeneration procedures, and determination of population size to minimize drift require mission-oriented research. Advances in tissue culture and cryopreservation may require basic research into the processes underlying cell physiology, development, and regulation. Such initiatives and research activities must complement the principal objectives of the NPGS to preserve, regenerate, document, and distribute plant germplasm.

Research Agenda

A research advisory committee should be established to assess and guide the system's research activities.

While some research effort is undertaken by NPGS scientists, there is no guidance as to the most urgent needs. No group within the national system oversees the development of systemwide research goals and priorities.

NPGS research should improve the acquisition and maintenance of plant germplasm and promote its use. Its goal should not exclusively be to elucidate basic principles, but should include application of technologies and principles to the broad range of NPGS germplasm. Research within the national system should be focused on the problems of germplasm acquisition, maintenance, evaluation, characterization, and use.

The research advisory committee would comment on the research plans of NPGS scientists. Its recommendations could then be used by the NPGRB and the leader of the NPGS in developing budget and programmatic priorities for the national system.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

The research advisory committee could also suggest what work might best be accomplished on a contractual or competitive grants basis. This would provide a means for allocating funds for one-time research needs of relatively short duration for which permanent staffing would be inappropriate.

Program Review

External peer review of research should be conducted.

Research programs should be periodically evaluated by a panel of scientists from outside the NPGS. While efforts have been made recently to improve communication between research scientists in the NPGS, the committee felt that the existing in-house peer review of research performance lacked sufficient rigor to ensure that the best possible research is brought to bear on the needs of the national system. Both individual scientific efforts and a site's overall program of research should be reviewed. The reviews should be overseen by the leadership of the NPGS and could be conducted through the proposed research advisory committee.

Promoting Research

Funds should be made available for competitive, goal-directed research in areas of specific need.

There are many capable research scientists who are not part of the national system, but who can undertake research related to plant germplasm. The NPGS must develop a mechanism for providing support to these individuals or institutions to accomplish research essential to its needs. The guidelines for a program of competitive research funding could be developed by the research advisory committee described above.

If funds were provided through the USDA Competitive Research Grants Office, there would be no need to establish a separate program within the NPGS. The research advisory committee's guidelines ensure that only appropriate, mission-oriented, or basic studies would be funded.

Alternatively, the NPGS could administer a limited effort of its own, through its central office and in cooperation with the research advisory committee. One model program was outlined in a report to the National Plant Genetic Resources Board, Basic Research Support Program for the National Plant Germplasm System (an unpublished report of the NPGRB approved in the minutes of its October 98–10, 1985, meeting). The goal of this effort was to encourage and facilitate research by scientists in

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×

the public and private sectors that would lead to improved germplasm collection, documentation, preservation, maintenance, evaluation, enhancement, and utilization. Scientists in the NPGS should also be allowed to compete for this funding. Research would be directed toward developing new information and methods. The NPGRB report estimated that the program would not cost more than $5 million annually.

Many areas of research are of importance to improving germplasm management. Examples include methods for long-term maintenance of seed and clonal germplasm (e.g., cryopreservation), nondestructive methods for assessing seed viability, elucidation of rapid, reliable techniques for detecting pathogenic organisms in germplasm, and molecular techniques to characterize, evaluate, or identify and enhance germplasm accessions.

CONCLUSION

Effective management of the nation's germplasm resources is essential to ensure the present and future security of U.S. agriculture. The conclusions of Nelson Klose more than 40 years ago remain true today (Klose, 1950:139).

It seems certain that plant research and introductions of the future not only will contribute new food crops, but will aid as well the progress of mechanical and chemical technology. Often when experimenters develop disease-resistant plant varieties, the disease organisms in turn adjust themselves by developing new virulent strains. Redesigning plants with the desirable characteristics of many species fused into a single new variety offers a limitless challenge to plant workers. Like the introductions of Colonial days, the plants of tomorrow become America's crop heritage for future generations.

As a participant in global efforts to conserve germplasm, the United States can expect greater benefits and responsibilities. The actions recommended in this report are intended to prepare and equip the National Plant Germplasm System as an effective component of national and international agricultural security.

Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"4 Prescription for Effectiveness." National Research Council. 1991. The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1583.
×
Page 144
Next: References »
The U.S. National Plant Germplasm System Get This Book
×
Buy Hardback | $50.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

In the United States, the critical task of preserving our plant genetic resources is the responsibility of the National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS).

NPGS undergoes a thorough analysis in this book, which offers wide-ranging recommendations for equipping the agency to better meet U.S. needs—and lead international conservation efforts.

The book outlines the importance and status of plant genetic conservation and evaluates NPGS's multifaceted operations. Two options for revamping NPGS within the U.S. Department of Agriculture are included.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!