View
36
Download
3
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Plant Genetic Resource Gap Analysis: targeting CWR for in situ and ex situ conservation. Nigel Maxted DRAFT THOUGHTS. Talk Objectives. Need to improve conservation through better prioritisation What is ‘Gap Analysis’ and how to apply for PGR? Proposed methodology for discussion - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Plant Genetic Resource Plant Genetic Resource Gap Analysis: targeting Gap Analysis: targeting CWR for CWR for in situin situ and and ex ex
situsitu conservation conservation
Nigel MaxtedNigel Maxted
DRAFT THOUGHTSDRAFT THOUGHTS
Talk ObjectivesTalk Objectives Need to improve conservation Need to improve conservation
through better prioritisationthrough better prioritisation
What is ‘Gap Analysis’ and how to What is ‘Gap Analysis’ and how to apply for PGR?apply for PGR?
Proposed methodology for Proposed methodology for discussiondiscussion
Exemplar: Cowpea and its relative Exemplar: Cowpea and its relative ((VignaVigna Savi) in Africa Savi) in Africa
The need for increased The need for increased efficiency of conversationefficiency of conversation
““Develop, where necessary, guidelines Develop, where necessary, guidelines for the selection, establishment and for the selection, establishment and management of protected areas or management of protected areas or areas where special measures need to areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological be taken to conserve biological diversity.”diversity.”
Article 8 - CBDArticle 8 - CBD (UNCED, 1992) (UNCED, 1992)
What is ‘gap analysis’?What is ‘gap analysis’? So called ‘Gap analysis’ was initially So called ‘Gap analysis’ was initially
associated with Margules associated with Margules et al.et al. as a as a conservation evaluation technique conservation evaluation technique
To identifies areas in which selected To identifies areas in which selected elements of biodiversity are represented then elements of biodiversity are represented then by comparison with protected areas identify by comparison with protected areas identify under-represented areas or gaps (Margules, under-represented areas or gaps (Margules, 1989) 1989)
Largely applied to indigenous forests Largely applied to indigenous forests particularly on small islands rich in endemic particularly on small islands rich in endemic species species
Goal of Plant Genetic Goal of Plant Genetic ConservationConservation
““95% of all the alleles at a random locus occurring 95% of all the alleles at a random locus occurring in the target population with a frequency greater in the target population with a frequency greater than 0.05” Marshall and Brown (1975) than 0.05” Marshall and Brown (1975)
Equates to approx. 50 sites x 100 plant collections Equates to approx. 50 sites x 100 plant collections or 5,000 individuals in a genetic reserveor 5,000 individuals in a genetic reserve
Post-CBD add “using a range of conservation Post-CBD add “using a range of conservation techniques”, which takes account of techniques”, which takes account of complementary conservationcomplementary conservation
Has this goal been Has this goal been achieved?achieved?
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Wheat
Barley
Rice
Maize
Phaseolus
Soybean
Sorghum
Brassica
Cowpea
Groundnut
Tomato
Chickpea
Cotton
Sweet potato
Potato
Faba bean
Cassava
Rubber
Lentil
Garlic/onion
Sugarbeet
Sugar cane
Oil-palm
Coffee
Yam
Banana/plantain
Cocoa beans
Taro
Coconut
Number of Accessions (x 1,000)
FAO (1998)
Is Is ex situex situ / / in situin situ conservation conservation working effectively?working effectively?
PGRPGR ex situ ex situ NO, except for major crops! NO, except for major crops!
FAO figures for gene bank holdings show that for minor FAO figures for gene bank holdings show that for minor crops few species meet needs but some are over crops few species meet needs but some are over collectedcollected
PGRPGR in situ in situ NO! NO!
Heywood review of genetic reserves approx 10 genetic Heywood review of genetic reserves approx 10 genetic reserves for all cropsreserves for all crops
On-farm projects possibly 10-20 project and all lack On-farm projects possibly 10-20 project and all lack consistency of funding – no sustainabilityconsistency of funding – no sustainability
Traditional gap analysis techniques may be adapted to Traditional gap analysis techniques may be adapted to use in the PGR contextuse in the PGR context
Gap Analysis MethodologyGap Analysis Methodology Burley (1988) identified four steps in Burley (1988) identified four steps in
traditional gap analysis: traditional gap analysis:
1.1. identify and classify biodiversityidentify and classify biodiversity
2.2. locate areas managed primarily for biodiversitylocate areas managed primarily for biodiversity
3.3. identify biodiversity that is underrepresented in identify biodiversity that is underrepresented in those managed areas, and those managed areas, and
4.4. set priorities for conservation action. set priorities for conservation action.
Still applied to ecosystem conservation, can Still applied to ecosystem conservation, can we adapt for plant genetic conservationwe adapt for plant genetic conservation
Adaptation of Gap Analysis for Adaptation of Gap Analysis for PGR ConservationPGR Conservation
Not just dealing with ecosystem Not just dealing with ecosystem conservation in protected areasconservation in protected areas
Conserving genetic as well as taxonomic Conserving genetic as well as taxonomic diversitydiversity
Complementary conservation, two Complementary conservation, two strategies (strategies (in situin situ and and ex situex situ) and a range ) and a range of techniques for eachof techniques for each
Linking conservation to utilisationLinking conservation to utilisation
PGR Gap Analysis PGR Gap Analysis MethodologyMethodology Essentially PGR gap analysis involves: Essentially PGR gap analysis involves:
– Comparison of range of diversity with Comparison of range of diversity with
– Conserved sample of that range of diversityConserved sample of that range of diversity
– The ‘analysis’ comes in the comparisonThe ‘analysis’ comes in the comparison
– Does the sample provide a efficient representation Does the sample provide a efficient representation of the range of diversity?of the range of diversity?
– The diversity not represented in the sample is the The diversity not represented in the sample is the gap!gap!
PGR Gap Analysis PGR Gap Analysis MethodologyMethodologyIn the PGR context implies a series of steps: In the PGR context implies a series of steps:
Step 1:Step 1:Circumscription of target taxon and target area Circumscription of target taxon and target area
Step 2: Step 2: Assessment of natural Assessment of natural in situin situ diversity diversity 2a - Taxonomic Diversity Assessment 2a - Taxonomic Diversity Assessment 2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Assessment Genetic Diversity Assessment 2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment 2d - Threat Assessment 2d - Threat Assessment
Step 3:Step 3:Assessment of current conservation strategies Assessment of current conservation strategies 3a 3a - - In situIn situ techniques techniques 3b - 3b - Ex situEx situ techniques techniques
Step 4: Step 4: Setting priorities for conservation action Setting priorities for conservation action 4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation priorities conservation priorities 4b - 4b - Ex situEx situ conservation priorities conservation priorities
When to apply PGR GA?When to apply PGR GA?
Once target taxon selected?Once target taxon selected?
As part of ecogeographic study?As part of ecogeographic study?
Before application of conservation Before application of conservation strategy?strategy?
When reviewing conservation strategy?When reviewing conservation strategy?
Step 1:Step 1:Circumscription of Circumscription of target taxon and target areatarget taxon and target area
Defined by Defined by project commission for project commission for conservation actionconservation action
– Breadth of target taxonBreadth of target taxon
– Breadth of target area Breadth of target area
Step 2: Step 2: Assessment of natural Assessment of natural in in situsitu diversity – 2a Taxonomic diversity – 2a Taxonomic
DiversityDiversity Need to select a classificationNeed to select a classification
– List of accepted taxaList of accepted taxa– Descriptive dataDescriptive data– Distributional dataDistributional data
How to find the appropriate classificationHow to find the appropriate classification– Specialist publications Specialist publications – Taxon experts Taxon experts – Various media searches (International Legume Various media searches (International Legume
Database and Information Service (Database and Information Service (http://http://www.ildis.orgwww.ildis.org//) or Species 2000 () or Species 2000 (http://www.sp2000.org/http://www.sp2000.org/))
2a Taxonomic Diversity: 2a Taxonomic Diversity: VignaVigna
Classification of African Classification of African VignaVigna
– MarMarchal chal et al.et al. (1978) + subsequently (1978) + subsequently described taxadescribed taxa
– Pasquet (2001) conception of Pasquet (2001) conception of V. unguiculataV. unguiculata
– Tomooka Tomooka et al.et al. (2002) conception of subgenus (2002) conception of subgenus CeratotropisCeratotropis. .
– 61 species and 56 subspecific taxa for Africa61 species and 56 subspecific taxa for Africa
2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Genetic Diversity AssessmentAssessment
Need to understand patterns of Need to understand patterns of genetic diversity for target taxagenetic diversity for target taxa
– Is it correlated with ecogeography or Is it correlated with ecogeography or not?not?
2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Genetic Diversity AssessmentAssessment
Comparison of Genetic Comparison of Genetic diversity with Ecogeographydiversity with Ecogeography
UK study of UK study of UK native plant species: UK native plant species: Beta vulgaris Beta vulgaris subsp.subsp. maritima maritima (L.) Arcang., (L.) Arcang., Brassica rapaBrassica rapa L., L., Calluna vulgarisCalluna vulgaris (L.) Hull, (L.) Hull, Chamaemelum nobile Chamaemelum nobile (L.) (L.) All. and All. and Trifolium repensTrifolium repens L. L.
Correlated - Correlated - Chamaemelum nobileChamaemelum nobile, , Calluna vulgarisCalluna vulgaris, , Brassica rapaBrassica rapa
No obvious correlation -No obvious correlation -Beta vulgaris Beta vulgaris subsp.subsp. maritima maritima and and Trifolium repensTrifolium repens
Possible association with introgression with cropsPossible association with introgression with crops
In the absence of genetic diversity information, In the absence of genetic diversity information, ecogeographic data provides the best approximation!ecogeographic data provides the best approximation!
2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Genetic Diversity AssessmentAssessment
Too expensive to collate Too expensive to collate de novode novo
Review what is available via a web Review what is available via a web searchsearch
2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Genetic Diversity Assessment: Assessment: VignaVigna
Entirely restricted to cowpea gene Entirely restricted to cowpea gene pool studiespool studies
– Eleven subspecies plus several varieties Eleven subspecies plus several varieties
– Pasquet (1993a, 1993b, 1997)Pasquet (1993a, 1993b, 1997)
– Coulibaly Coulibaly et al.et al. (2002) (2002)
Is this situation typical?Is this situation typical?
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Ecogeographic Diversity AssessmentAssessment
In the absence of genetic diversity In the absence of genetic diversity data ecogeographic data provides data ecogeographic data provides the most appropriate proxythe most appropriate proxy
Established models for Established models for ecogeographic data collection, ecogeographic data collection, analysis and application, e.g. Maxted analysis and application, e.g. Maxted at al.at al. (1995, etc.) (1995, etc.)
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Assessment: Vigna Vigna
Based on 7,300 herbarium specimens and Based on 7,300 herbarium specimens and 1,912 germplasm accessions1,912 germplasm accessions
Herbarium specimens from 30 herbaria in Herbarium specimens from 30 herbaria in Africa, Europe and North AmericaAfrica, Europe and North America
Germplasm accessions from 4 gene banks Germplasm accessions from 4 gene banks (IITA, ILRI, CIAT and Jardin Botanique (IITA, ILRI, CIAT and Jardin Botanique Nationale de Belgique)Nationale de Belgique)
Basis of analysisBasis of analysis
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVigna
Density of collections in 200 km x 200 km grid cells
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVigna
Observed geographic area of distribution calculated using the Circular Area statistic with a 50km radius (CA50)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500unguiculata
vexillata
ambacensis
reticulata
frutescens
racemosa
luteola
oblongifolia
gracilis
membranacea
comosa
parkeri
macrorhyncha
multinervis
nigritia
radicans
schimperi
kirkii
monophylla
venulosa
antunesii
pygmaea
adenantha
platyloba
fischeri
marina
juruana
filicauli
schlechteri
friesiorum
juncea
heterophylla
angivensis
triphylla
gazensis
longifoli
desmodioides
stenophylla
radiata
longissima
decipiensis
bequaertii
davyi
benuensis
praecox
haumaniana
laurentii
subterranea
kokii
procera
hosei
phoenix
keraudrenii
monantha
virescens
mudenia
nyangensis
bosseri
richardsiae
mungo
umbellata
nuda
debanensis
dolomitica
kassneri
somaliensis
tisserantiana
trilobata
Species
CA
50 (
1000
's k
m2)
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVigna
Species richness per degree latitude
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Latitude (o)
Sp
ecie
s R
ich
nes
s
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVigna
Species richness per 50m altitude class
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Altitude (m)
Sp
ecie
s R
ich
nes
s
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVignaSpecies richness of Vigna in 20 km x 20 km grid cells
smoothed using inverse distance weighting and a window of 200 km radius
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVignaAbsolute species richness based on herbarium collections only
in 200 km x 200 km grid cells
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVignaAbsolute species richness of germplasm collections only in 200
km x 200 km grid cells
2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment:Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment: VignaVignaPredicted distribution of species richness
2d - 2d - Threat AssessmentThreat Assessment Media reportsMedia reports
– Target taxon specificTarget taxon specific– Region or nation specific Region or nation specific
IUCN categoriesIUCN categories– Need to understand is incompleteNeed to understand is incomplete
IUCN Assessment for IUCN Assessment for VignaVigna
AssessorsAssessors Red List Red List Criteria Criteria VersionVersion
CategoriesCategories
Walter and Walter and Gillett (1998) Gillett (1998)
Pre-1994Pre-1994 V. debanensis V. debanensis (Ethiopia) = Vulnerable(Ethiopia) = Vulnerable
V. dolomiticaV. dolomitica (Zaire) = Rare (Zaire) = Rare
Golding Golding (2002) (2002)
19941994 Vigna comosaVigna comosa subsp. subsp. abercornensis abercornensis (Zambia)(Zambia) = Vulnerable = Vulnerable
Maxted Maxted et al.et al. (2005)(2005)
20012001 6 6 VignaVigna = Critically Endangered = Critically Endangered
8 8 VignaVigna = Endangered = Endangered
10 10 VignaVigna = Vulnerable = Vulnerable
5 5 VignaVigna = Near Threatened = Near Threatened
28 28 VignaVigna = Least Concern = Least Concern
4 4 VignaVigna = Data Deficient = Data Deficient
Taxon Vulnerability Taxon Vulnerability AssessmentAssessment
IUCN Red Listing is best assessment, but not always IUCN Red Listing is best assessment, but not always sufficient datasufficient data
Can approximate vulnerability to genetic diversity and Can approximate vulnerability to genetic diversity and even extinction using seven criteria: even extinction using seven criteria: – rarity rarity – distributional rangedistributional range– gross representation in gross representation in ex situex situ collections collections– geographic coverage of geographic coverage of ex situex situ collections collections– coverage of coverage of ex situex situ collections collections– utility utility – extinction assessment extinction assessment
Crude measureCrude measure
Taxon Vulnerability Taxon Vulnerability Assessment AnalysisAssessment Analysis
Rarity - estimated from the total number of herbarium Rarity - estimated from the total number of herbarium
specimens and gene bank accessions of each taxonspecimens and gene bank accessions of each taxon
Distributional range – calculated from a radius around Distributional range – calculated from a radius around each collecting locality and then by merging the each collecting locality and then by merging the resulting circles calculates the total distributional area resulting circles calculates the total distributional area
Gross representation in Gross representation in ex situex situ collections - numbers of collections - numbers of gene bank accessions should be approximately 10% of gene bank accessions should be approximately 10% of the number of herbarium specimens, any species with a the number of herbarium specimens, any species with a lower proportion are vulnerable lower proportion are vulnerable
Taxon Vulnerability Taxon Vulnerability Assessment AnalysisAssessment Analysis
Geographic coverage of Geographic coverage of ex situex situ collections - collections - compares the geographic distribution of compares the geographic distribution of ex situex situ conserved accessions with the entire range of conserved accessions with the entire range of geographic distribution geographic distribution
Intra-species coverage of Intra-species coverage of ex situex situ collections – collections – compares compares ex situex situ sampling with actual sampling with actual distributiondistribution
Utility – Within the genetic resource context it is Utility – Within the genetic resource context it is entirely viable to include a use factorentirely viable to include a use factor
Taxon Vulnerability Taxon Vulnerability Assessment AnalysisAssessment Analysis
Extinction assessment - Solow’s equation (Solow, Extinction assessment - Solow’s equation (Solow, 1993) as proposed by Burgman 1993) as proposed by Burgman et al.et al. (1995), (1995), which uses a combinationwhich uses a combination– Collection timingCollection timing– FrequencyFrequency– Specimen numbers Specimen numbers
Each one generates a numeric score of 0 – 10Each one generates a numeric score of 0 – 10
Scores are calculated for taxaScores are calculated for taxa
Taxon Vulnerability Taxon Vulnerability Assessment Analysis: VignaAssessment Analysis: Vigna
Species Rarity Distrib-ution
Ex situ holdings
Ex situ coverage
Taxoncoverage
Use Taxon extinction
TVA score
V. adenantha 5 2.5 9 8 0 4 4 4.6
V. ambacensis 1 0 2 4 0 10 1 2.6
V. angivensis 2 5 10 10 0 6 4 5.3
V. antunesii 3 2.5 10 10 0 0 3 4.1
V. benuensis 7 7.5 9 6 0 0 6 5.1
V. bequaertii 7 7.5 10 10 0 0 1 5.1
V. bosseri 10 10 10 10 0 0 9 7.0
V. comosa 2 0 8 6 10 0 1 3.9
V. desmodioides 7 5 10 10 0 0 4 5.1
Step 3:Step 3:Assessment of current Assessment of current conservation strategiesconservation strategies
In situIn situ– Genetic reserve of CWRGenetic reserve of CWR– On-farm of landracesOn-farm of landraces
Ex situEx situ– Seed bank of germplasmSeed bank of germplasm– Other techniques ?Other techniques ?
3a 3a - - In situIn situ techniques / techniques / reservereserve
No active genetic reserves for No active genetic reserves for Vigna Vigna speciesspecies
Passive conservation which is Passive conservation which is coincident with existing protected areacoincident with existing protected area
Likely to establish reserve in existing Likely to establish reserve in existing protected areaprotected area
MAB Protected Areas in MAB Protected Areas in AfricaAfrica
3a 3a - - In situIn situ techniques / techniques / reservereserve
MAB not only protected areas, many other see IUCN MAB not only protected areas, many other see IUCN listing of National Parks and Protected Areaslisting of National Parks and Protected Areas
Few countries have adequate represented of Few countries have adequate represented of protected areas like Kenya, Guinea and South protected areas like Kenya, Guinea and South Africa Africa
54% of wild species 54% of wild species VignaVigna are predicted to have are predicted to have populations present in at least one protected area populations present in at least one protected area
In reality, the number and ecogeographic diversity In reality, the number and ecogeographic diversity of African of African VignaVigna species makes species makes in situin situ conservation conservation the only practical conservation option for adequate the only practical conservation option for adequate conservation of the broadest gene pool conservation of the broadest gene pool
Need to match distribution to existing protected Need to match distribution to existing protected areasareas
3a 3a - - In situIn situ techniques / on- techniques / on-farmfarm
Find by literature / media / internet reviewFind by literature / media / internet review
Cowpea (Cowpea (V. unguiculataV. unguiculata) is included in IPGRI’s ) is included in IPGRI’s current on-farm conservation project in Burkina current on-farm conservation project in Burkina Faso (Jarvis and Ndungứ-Skilton, 2000)Faso (Jarvis and Ndungứ-Skilton, 2000)
Shea project in Uganda includes Bambara Shea project in Uganda includes Bambara groundnut (groundnut (Vigna subterraneaVigna subterranea))
Community Technology Development Trust Community Technology Development Trust project in Zimbabwe includes project in Zimbabwe includes V. subterranea V. subterranea and and V. unguiculataV. unguiculata (Odero, 2001) (Odero, 2001)
But no systematic on-farm conservation of But no systematic on-farm conservation of VignaVigna in Africain Africa
3b - 3b - Ex situ Ex situ techniquestechniques Review of gene bank holdings, SINGER, Review of gene bank holdings, SINGER,
EURISCO, but little help for AfricaEURISCO, but little help for Africa
SpeciesSpecies IITAIITA NBGNBGBB
USDUSDAA
OtheOtherr
V. unguiculataV. unguiculata subsp. subsp. unguiculataunguiculata
14,8814,8877
1515 4,394,3999
--
V. unguiculataV. unguiculata wild wild 553553 188188 244244 5151
V. subterraneaV. subterranea 20322032 00 6464 --
Other Other VignaVigna taxa taxa 12161216 304304 5050 111111
3b - 3b - Ex situ Ex situ techniquestechniques Regression of Regression of VignaVigna species against herbarium species against herbarium
specimens and gene bank accessions from each specimens and gene bank accessions from each countrycountry
Results indicate Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland were over-collected, while Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Nigeria, Tanzania and Zambia remain under-collected.
Step 4: Step 4: Setting priorities for Setting priorities for conservation actionconservation action
Having provided Having provided – The best possible picture of The best possible picture of in situin situ
natural diversitynatural diversity
– A review of current A review of current in situin situ and and ex situex situ conservation actionsconservation actions
Comparison of the two identifies Comparison of the two identifies ‘Gaps’ ‘Gaps’
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Highest concentration of taxa in Highest concentration of taxa in three three hotspots of hotspots of VignaVigna species richness species richness– around the Great Lakesaround the Great Lakes– the southern tip of Lake Tanganyikathe southern tip of Lake Tanganyika– the Cameroon Highlands the Cameroon Highlands
But crude species richness can give a But crude species richness can give a false impressionfalse impression
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Complementarity analysis Complementarity analysis
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Country Protected area name
Type of protected area
IUCN protected area categories
Location Area(km2)
Zambia Lusenga Plain National Park II 9°23'S/ 29°13'E 88,000
Mweru-Wantipa National Park II 8°44'S/ 29°38'E 313,400
Nsumbu National Park II 8°47'S/ 30°30'E 206,300
Tanzania Uwanda Game Reserve IV 8°32'S/ 32°08'E 500,000
Katavi National Park II 6°53'S/ 31°10'E 225,300
Mahale Mountain National Park II 6°10'S/ 29°50'E 157,700
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Areas of Africa where Areas of Africa where in situin situ VignaVigna conservation action is conservation action is requiredrequired
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiesprioritiesExisting protected areas where in situ Existing protected areas where in situ VignaVigna reserves could be established reserves could be established
4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
With 23 of the 61 African With 23 of the 61 African VignaVigna species species being utilised and many of the species have being utilised and many of the species have multiple uses within subsistence agriculture, multiple uses within subsistence agriculture, on-farm conservation should be a priority!on-farm conservation should be a priority!
Inevitably it will focus initially on the two Inevitably it will focus initially on the two most widely cultivated grain legume most widely cultivated grain legume species, species, V. subterranea V. subterranea and and V. unguiculataV. unguiculata
But a more geographically systematic But a more geographically systematic approach that considers full taxonomic approach that considers full taxonomic breadth is requiredbreadth is required
4b - 4b - Ex situEx situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Country basedCountry based prioritiespriorities– Highest priority: Cameroon, Democratic Highest priority: Cameroon, Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Guinea Bissau, Republic of the Congo, Guinea Bissau, Nigeria and ZambiaNigeria and Zambia
– Other priorities: Angola, Benin, Burundi, Other priorities: Angola, Benin, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, the Democratic Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Liberia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tanzania and Zambia. Tanzania and Zambia.
4b - 4b - Ex situEx situ conservation conservation prioritiespriorities
Priority Rating
Vigna taxa
High priority
V. dolomitica, V. haumaniana var. pedunculata, V. monantha, V. nuda, V. richardsiae, V. somaliensis, V. stenophylla, V. subterranea var. spontanea, V. unguiculata subsp. unguiculata var. spontanea, V. unguiculata subsp. aduensis, V. unguiculata subsp. baoulensis, V. unguiculata subsp. burundiensis, V. vexillata var. dolichonema and V. virescens.
Medium Priority
V. bequaertii, V. comosa subsp. comosa var. lebrunii, V. desmodioides, V. haumaniana, V. haumaniana var. haumaniana, V. hosei, V. laurentii, V. multinervis, V. parkeri subsp. parkeri, V. phoenix, V. procera.
Low priority
V. adenantha, V. angivensis, V. antunesii, V. bosseri, V. comosa, V. comosa subsp. abercornensis, V. fischeri, V. frutescens, V. frutescens subsp. kotschyi, V. gazensis, V. juncea, V. juncea var. corbyi, V. juruana, V. keraudrenii, V. kokii, V. longifolia, V. longissima, V. macrorhyncha, V. membranacea subsp. macrodon, V. microsperma, V. monophylla, V. mudenia, V. parkeri, V. praecox, V. pygmaea, V. schimperi, V. triphylla and V. venulosa.
ConclusionConclusionProposed MethodologyProposed Methodology
Step 1:Step 1:Circumscription of target taxon and target area Circumscription of target taxon and target area
Step 2: Step 2: Assessment of natural Assessment of natural in situin situ diversity diversity 2a - Taxonomic Diversity Assessment 2a - Taxonomic Diversity Assessment 2b -2b - Genetic Diversity Assessment Genetic Diversity Assessment 2c -2c - Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment Ecogeographic Diversity Assessment 2d - Threat Assessment 2d - Threat Assessment
Step 3:Step 3:Assessment of current conservation strategies Assessment of current conservation strategies 3a 3a - - In situIn situ techniques techniques 3b - 3b - Ex situEx situ techniques techniques
Step 4: Step 4: Setting priorities for conservation action Setting priorities for conservation action 4a - 4a - In situIn situ conservation priorities conservation priorities 4b - 4b - Ex situEx situ conservation priorities conservation priorities
Need refinement but could be a working basis for PGR GA?Need refinement but could be a working basis for PGR GA?
Recommended