ASSESSMENT OF THREAT to CWR - CGIARarchive-ecpgr.cgiar.org/fileadmin/ · assessment of threat to cwr and a possibilitu to use iucn criteria for their conservationfor their conservation

L/O/G/O

ASSESSMENT OF THREAT to CWR AND

A POSSIBILITU TO USE IUCN CRITERIA FOR THEIR CONSERVATIONFOR THEIR CONSERVATION

T SmekalovaT.SmekalovaI.Chukhina

N.I.Vavilov Institute of Plant Industry (VIR)Russia, St-Petersburg

Successful PGR conservation requires simultaneous studies ofTAXONOMIC DIVERSITY (diversity of the plants themselves)

1 TAXONOMIC DIVERSITY (di it f th l t

TAXONOMIC DIVERSITY (diversity of the plants themselves)

1.TAXONOMIC DIVERSITY (diversity of the plants themselves) on different levels:

-Super-species genus, etc.), Species (central)-Species (central)

-! Intra-species (of paramount importance for cultivated plants)

- Populations of various ranks (from geographical populations to coeno-populations)- Individual plants, their genotypes and phenotypes

- Genes and functional gene complexes- Genes and functional gene complexes,the following segments being specific for species and populations:

- a set of genotypes as a gene system,

www.themegallery.com

- correlation between genotypes

2. TYPOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

(diversity of their environments)

• Geographical• Ecological• Coenotic• Biological • Composite (eco-geographical, coeno-geographical,

historical-typological, etc.) features


Both parameters of diversity (taxonomic and typological)(taxonomic and typological)

are inseparably linked with each other:

The entire plant

Not a single taxon can exist outside

pdiversity, as an object of research and

ti i t f can exist outside a definite biocoenosis

conservation, consist of taxa of various ranks (of species in the first N

or ecosystemspecies, in the first place)


Conservation of TAXONOMIC DIVERSITY UNITSUNITS

usually employs Red Books

Since the first one - IUCN Red Data, 1964 -IUCN Red Books have never beenIUCN Red Books have never been

regulatory or legal instruments, but onlyscientific guidelines

developed by qualified experts-

developed by qualified experts who assessed the status and dynamics of the

populations of rare taxa.Specific feature of Red Books in the Russian Federation

(previously the Soviet Union): Red Books are the synthesis of a research work with a y

regulatory instrumentadministering conservation of rare species,

d th h th h bit t d t


and through them – habitats and ecosystems

I. PROBLEMS OF USING IUCN CRITERIA FOR CWR CONSERVATIONCWR CONSERVATION

If the status of taxa is assessed at all stages according to g gunified criteria and with

comparable methods (which unfortunately is not observed p ( yin the national practice),

it helps to avoid inconsistencies in practical approaches to p p ppregional Red Books.

The major inconsistency in making Red Books is- the absence of integrated clear principles

of their development and - unified criteria for selecting taxa to be included in RBs.


unified criteria for selecting taxa to be included in RBs.

One more problem when using unified criteriafor making regional national and IUCN Red Books

– the absence of unified (unambiguous) definitions and

for making regional, national and IUCN Red Books

Text in herenotions, such as

•“individual”• individual , •“mature individual”, •“generation time” or in particular “ f t ti ”•“area fragmentation”.

these notions

- form the foundation of the global criteria (IUCN)- require unified definitions coordinated between experts from q pvarious countries


The most cautious approach - with the notion “fragmented area” -fragmented area areas of distribution of such type are typical both for: -• endangered species (relicts, paleoendemics) Allium ursinum L.


- young species actively conquering new territoriesAmaranthus retroflexus L.


Important for the criteria is the issue of their “legitimacy”:p g y

-what extent the same criteria may be applied to asses the y ppsame taxa on the regional and global levels.

Practical experience has shown –-most frequent category is Vulnerable” (VU)Vulnerable (VU).Distribution of taxa among other categories becomes possible only if tp y- here are data available on the dynamics of their populations (size, area, habitat, etc.) or

d i f th i i t- dynamics of their environment, but

accumulation of such data would require quite a lot of time


accumulation of such data would require quite a lot of time.

Besides,,

CWR are often attributed to the categoriesCWR are often attributed to the categories • “Near Threatened” (NT) or • “Least Concern” (LC) !The species ranked among these categories are p g g

usually not listed in the Red Book.So,many taxa appear to be referred either to the single category -

“Vulnerable” or to - no category at all- no category at all. It is necessary, therefore, to rank the taxa within this category in order

to identify priorities for conservation, research and monitoring.


Such cases may require an evaluation made by experts ill b b dby experts, will be based upon:

(б) a possibility (б) a possibility (a)

assessment of the

So, will beSo, will be

to maintain stability of to maintain stability of

assessment of the safety degree in the known localities of a So, will be

subjective to an extent

So, will be subjective to an extent

Populations by an inflow of individuals f i hb i

Populations by an inflow of individuals f i hb i

localities of a taxon

from neighbouring regions and other similar

from neighbouring regions and other similarand other similar haracteristics.and other similar haracteristics.


II. Application of the IUCN Red List criteria in Red Books on CWR conservation

The problems arising when IUCN criteria are used for CWR conservation are somewhat different,

Books on CWR conservation.

due to the specific features of CWR as an object of

ticonservation.

Attribution of this or that species with a CWR groupAttribution of this or that species with a CWR group is linked with its

economic importance,specifically with

human utilization of a crop to which such species is related (either closely orto which such species is related (either closely or

remotely).


A great number of CWR species are:

- common widespread species of natural vegetation and, according to IUCN criteria,

- does not need special conservation measures.

2 virtually different criteria are applied to identify conservation priorities y pp y pamong CWR :

- natural (objective) –criterion of rarity or vulnerability of a species in natural environmentscriterion of rarity or vulnerability of a species in natural environments

within the limits of its natural area of distribution; and - anthropogenous (relatively subjective) -criterion of economic demandcriterion of economic demand.

In different countries there are different views on the importance of both criteria

) i i t i d d i ifi ta) economic importance is regarded as more significant in most European countries

b) rarity and vulnerability is more important - national approach


so it has traditionally been used by CWR conservation experts (Korovina, 1975;1980; 1982)

CWR species are:p

Integral components of the natural vegetation, g p g ,• exposed to the effect of natural selection and • laws regulating historical development of vegetation

(florogenesis)(florogenesis)

When the criterion of economic importanceWhen the criterion of economic importance is SECONDARY,

they should be made subject to the same criteria as all th i f th t l flother species of the natural flora.

In such cases, application of the IUCN Criteria seems inevitable.inevitable.

With this, however, considerable part of widespread species are not liable to be


considerable part of widespread species are not liable to be included in the Red Book.

When the number one criterion is economic importance:economic importance:

• A LIST of the economically most important CWRA LIST of the economically most important CWR within this or that territory SHOULD BE MADE, and

• THE DEGREE OF ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE SHOULD BE ESTIMATED.

Depending on the estimated degree, g g- the working list of CWR liable to conservation is made.

With this in view, - the degrees of economic importance may vary in different

t i b i t itiwww.themegallery.com

countries or even be in contraposition.

Lathyrus tuberosus L.in Russiain Russia – No breeding varieties -no economic importanceIn many countriesy– forage crop

Echinochloa frumentaceae LinkCultivated plant in India,

KoreaKorea,Japan

In Russian Far East – weed


In Russian Far East weed

Heracleum sosnowskyi Manden.– forage plant,In the North-West of Russia-

dweed

Avena fatua L. in West Europe possibly - rare plant;in West Europe, possibly, rare plant;

In Russia (both Asian and Europaean) -weed in the fiends.

-Easy migrates to a long distance-In case of stop the control in any region it easy


p y g yremove there.

Is there any sense to include such species in a pan European Red Book?in a pan-European Red Book?

If in one European region a species • deserves listing with the regional Red Book• deserves listing with the regional Red Book but in others, • is reputed to be a malignant weed p g

what will be the most fitting solution for Europe as a whole?

This q estion demands closer consideration and caref lThis question demands closer consideration and careful approach.

If only one European country has listed a species among its y p y p gharmful weeds,

it should not be included in the Red Book of European CWRCWR,

because in future it may lead to the expansion of this species over new territories.

???www.themegallery.com

???

It is reported by various local and regional vegetation reviews that quite frequently

Elytrigia stipifolia

- the same CWR species listed in the Red Books - of different regions are attributed to

diff t t i f it d l bilit- -different categories of rarity and vulnerability.


Elytrigia stipifolia

1.- RB of Northern Osetia - 4 «Undetermined Status»2.- RB of Krasnodar distr.,- RB of Karachajevo-Cherkesia- Volgograd distr.,- Rostov distr.- 2 «Decreased in number»Rostov distr. 2 «Decreased in number»3. - RB of Russia - 2 (V) 4.

IUCN (I)- IUCN (I)5.- RL Europea (V)

Inclusion (non-inclusion) in a Red Book of a larger ( ) gregion seems questionableDefinition of their status becomes problematic.


III.No less crucial for CWR conservation is:

to find a maximum number of unitswithin a taxon’s taxonomic and geographical differentiation

by analyzing -the taxonomic structure-the taxonomic structure, -morphological traits and -eco-geographic features of the conserved taxon.

It is of special importance for the species with wider areas of distribution

This problem lies in the sphere of nomenclature and taxonomy, when inclusion or non-inclusion in a Red Book depends on a narrower or broader understanding of a species.

The genus Lotus may serve as an example of wide-area species conservation.


g y p p

Area of distribution of Lotus corniculatus s.l.

L. dvinensis Min. et UlleL peczoricus Min et Ulle

L. balticus Min

L. peczoricus Min. et Ulle

L. komarovii Min.

L. zhegulensis Klok.


One of the topmost priorities is to conserve the taxa:

- adapted to unique ecological environments and- growing in marginal parts of their area of distributiongrowing in marginal parts of their area of distribution

- or on isolated sites of a fragmented area.

Nikolai Vavilov was exploring the north regions of Russia) and found white-flower forms of flax

ThusThus, the most important issue of CWR conservation is

finding an answer to the question:finding an answer to the question: -which taxonomic, -ecotypic or -geographical fragment of a species


needs to be preserved?

With this purpose in mind, target conservation measures should be based onconservation measures should be based on

prearranged detailed - taxonomic and - geographical reviews of the species conserved.

Priority in conservation is to be given tointra specific taxa whose genetic compositionintra-specific taxa whose genetic composition

includes rare and unique genes as well as thoseas well as those

responsible for economically important crop traits:

high baking qualities (wheat), salt tolerance, winter hardiness, disease and pest resistance, etc.


Therefore, prior to conservation it is necessary

to develop in every detail the intrato develop in every detail the intra-specific systems of polytypic species

(conspects of taxonomics systems) andand • to study the ecological and

geographical features of intra-specific taxa.

(GIS-mapping, etc.)


А. tauschii Coss., 1850, Notes pl. crit.l (2b): 69• 1.А. tauschii Coss. subsp. tauschii• 1)А. tauschii Coss. var. tauschii)• 1/А. tauschii Coss. f. tauschii

• 2/А. tauschii Coss. f. ferruginea (Popova) Hammer, • 3/А. tauschii Coss. f. brunnea (Popova) Hammer,

• 2)А. tauschii Coss. var. meyeri (Griseb.) Tzvel.• 4/А. tauschii Coss. f. meyeri f. • 5/А. tauschii Coss. f. avellana Antonov5/А. tauschii Coss. f. avellana Antonov

• 3)А. tauschii Coss. var. anathera (Eig) Hammer, • 4)А. tauschii Coss. var. paleidenticulata (Gandiljan) Hammer,

C ( )2.А. tauschii Coss. subsp. strangulata (Eig) Tzvel.• 5)А. tauschii Coss. var. strangulata • 6/А. tauschii Coss. f. strangulata Antonovg• 7/А. tauschii Coss. f. chokolata Antonov • 8/А. tauschii Coss. f. rubiginosa Antonov

• 6)А. tauschii Coss. var. iranica Antonov


• 9/А. tauschii Coss. f. iranica • 10/А. tauschii Coss. f. flavescens Antonov

Aegilops tauschii Coss. Area of DistributionArea of Distribution


Map of Disribution of Aegilops tauschii Coss.i t ifi tintraspecific taxa


Area of distribution of Aegilops tausciion the territory of former USSRon the territory of former USSR


Map of Disribution of Aegilops cylindrica Host intraspecific taxaintraspecific taxa


IV. Special attention and approaches to conservation of p pp

weedy plants

Especially - specialized weeds tending to occur only within plantings of a certain crop

In the past decades Russia, like most of the world’s countries hascountries, has

extinction of traditional crops, such as - flax (Linum), - camelina (Camelina), - poppy (Papaver), etc.,

has been observed practically everywhere.


• Together with these crops, the weeds typical for their fields have also disappeared –

-Spergula linicola Boreau,-Camelina alyssum (Mill.) Thell.,-Vaccaria hispanica (Mill.) Rauchert, etc.

EXAMPLE:

Avena volgensis (endem) is a specialized weed of the dinkel wheat Triticum dicoccon subsp. volgense (Flaksb.) Tzvel.This subspecies is extincting now, having disappeared

together with the crop.


Many cultivated plants are known to descend directly from weedy ones (rye oat etc )from weedy ones (rye, oat, etc.)

Some weedy plants are crop relatives • with a potential that may help to improve cultivars of such crops

A number of weedy plants, including CWR, y p , g ,• have been shifted to the category

of rare and threatened plants,mostly because of active weed control measures – the use of chemicalsmostly because of active weed control measures the use of chemicals

in the first place It is not at all easy to to find in the field such plants as - cornflower,cornflower, - larkspur, - some species of vetch, - peavine, p ,- camelina, etc.

It seems sensible to preserve endangered weedy plants on farm,


p g y p ,and the Red Book should contain such reference.

On the whole, IUCN criteria prove applicablef j it f d l tfor a majority of weedy plants

however,

the status of separate species should undergo - special analysisspecial analysis

together with the - assessment of crop acreage dynamics.

In a number of cases, it would probably be expedient to developdevelop

special criteriafor their inclusion in the Red Book.


L/O/G/O

Th k !Thank you!


Documents

ASSESSMENT OF THREAT to CWR - CGIARarchive-ecpgr.cgiar.org/fileadmin/ · assessment of threat to cwr and a possibilitu to use iucn criteria for their conservationfor their conservation