PART C: FINAL TECHNICAL ACTIVITY REPORTaegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/uploads/tx_neofileshare/... · AGRI GEN RES 057- Acronym: AEGRO AGRI-2006-0396

I

PART C: FINAL TECHNICAL ACTIVITY

REPORT

AGRI GEN RES 057- Acronym: AEGRO AGRI-2006-0396

1

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) N° 870/2004 of 26 April 2004

establishing a Community programme on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture

AGRI GEN RES 057 Acronym: AEGRO Action title: An Integrated European In situ Management Workplan: Implementing

Genetic Reserve and On Farm Concepts“ (AEGRO)

FINAL TECHNICAL ACTIVITY REPORT

Reporting period from 01/10/2007 to 31/03/2011

Action starting date: 01/10/2007

Action closure date: 31/03/2011

Action duration (in months) 42 months

Total budget € 829.625

EC contribution: € 413.077

(%) of total costs 49,79

(%) of eligible costs 49,81

Data Coordinator

Name of the coordinator

(Partner no 00)

Mr Lothar Frese

Contact person Mr Lothar Frese

Postal address

Erwin-Baur-Str. 27, 06484, D, Quedlinburg, Germany

Telephone + 49 3946 47 701

Fax: + 49 3946 47 255

E-mail [email protected]

Action Website http://aegro.jki.bund.de/

Data Co-beneficiaries

Partner no 01 Mr Nigel Maxted, Mr Brian Ford-Lloyd

School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, B15 2TT, UK, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Partner no 02 Mrs Valeria Negri

Dipartimento Biologia Applicata, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Borgo XX Giugno 74, 06121, IT, Perugia, Italy


2

Data Co-beneficiaries

Partner no 03 n.a

Partner no 04 Mrs Gitte Kjeldsen Bjørn

Aarhus University, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Kirstinebjergvej 10, 5792, DK, Årslev, Denmark

Partner no 05 Mr Andreas Katsiotis

University of Athens, Plant Breeding & Biometry Lab, Iera Odos 75, 118 55, GR, Athens, Greece

Partner no 06 Mr José Maria Iriondo

Universidad Rey Juan Carlos Dpto. Biología y Geología, Tulipán s/n, E, Madrid, Spain

Partner no 07 Mr Miguel Pinheiro de Carvalho

University of Madeira, Campus da Penteada, 9000-390, P, Funchal, Portugal

Partner no 08 Mr Ferdinando Branca

DOFATA -Università di Catania, Via Valdisavoia, 5, 95123, IT, Catania, Italy


3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 04 Action objectives during the entire period of the action 04 Summary of key deliverables and outputs 06

2. SUMMARY OF DETAILED RESULTS ACHIEVED 10

Work package 01: Project coordination 10 Work package 02: National CWR Strategy 15 Work package 03: Case study landraces 21 Work package 05: Case study Prunus 28 Work package 06: Case study Beta 33 Work package 07: Case study Brassica 37 Work package 08: Case study Avena 41 Work package 09: Synthesis & common quality standard for genetic reserves 46 Work package 10: Documentation 50

3. SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED 57 4. SUMMARY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF ACTION 57 5. SUMMARY OF THE DISSEMINATION OF THE ITERIMS RESULTS 60 6. INPUT FOR THE COORDINATOR’S WEBSITE 60 7. ANNEXES 61 8. SUMMARY OF MANPOWER BY WORK PACKAGE FOR THE ENTIRE

PERIOD OF THE ACTION 62


4

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Action objectives during the entire period of the action

The project “An Integrated European In situ Management Work Plan: Implementing Genetic Reserves and On Farm Concepts“ (AEGRO) provided an opportunity for testing, refining and developing in situ CWR conservation management concepts developed by the EU Framework 5 „European Crop Wild Relative Diversity Assessment and Conservation Forum“ (PGR Forum, http://www.pgrforum.org/) project team. The action AEGRO not only evidenced the usefulness and applicability of the PGR Forum concepts but also provides a set of tested methodologies, crop specific case studies, and tools that can be applied by any institution engaged in the conservation of crop wild relatives and landraces in the European region.

The action has resulted in knowledge and tools that may contribute to the Commission’s vision of slowing down the loss of biodiversity by 2020. The preservation of the genetic diversity of crop wild relatives (CWR) and landraces is possible within the EU-27 given sufficient resources, the will of the EU member states to act in unison to achieve a common goal and the appropriate support of the European Commission. The required expertise in the European region is readily available and can be deployed as was shown by the AEGRO action.

The action brought together national experts working either in the agricultural or in the species conservation sector. It delivered significant added value for the EU-27 not only by promoting collaboration between specialists working in different member states but also by bringing together the knowledge available in the species conservation and agricultural sectors in a complementary manner. The developed strategies, methodologies, information systems and knowledge are of use to a range of stakeholders in both sectors; including conservation managers, researchers, plant breeders, policy-makers, PGR national programmes and the European Commission. Some of the outcomes of the AEGRO project are being taken forward in the context of the project „Novel characterization of crop wild relative and landrace resources as a basis for improved crop breeding“ (PGR Secure, www.pgrsecure.org/). The sustainable conservation of genetic diversity of CWR and landraces in a network of national, regional and global CWR genetic reserves with the aim of eventually ensuring that the genetic diversity that we may rely on in years to come is our common major goal.

Objective 01: Project coordination The tasks of work package 1 encompassed (i) the technical and financial coordination of the project, (ii) the organisation of the communication between the project partners and the EU Commission, (iii) the progress project control as well as (iv) the diffusion of the combined results.

Objective 02: Development of national CWR strategies for case study taxa The tasks of workpackage 2 were (i) to identify and provide a list of data sources needed to effect in situ conservation of crop wild relatives, (ii) to develop a step-wise methodology for identification of genetic reserves for individual taxa and to test the genetic reserve conservation technique, (iii) to provide a helpdesk giving advice and guidance on the application of the step-wise methodology.

Objective 03: Implementation of the case study on landraces The tasks of workpackge 3 comprised (i) in the establishment of a EU standard definition for landrace (LR) conservation, (ii) the development of strategies for establishing on farm conservation areas, (iii) the application of the developed strategies, (iv) the recommendation of an efficient strategy to establish LR conservation areas in EU member states, and (v) the integration of crop wild relative conservation into landrace conservation actions.

Objective 04: n.a


5

Objective 05: Implementation of the case study on Prunus (cherry) The tasks of workpackage 5 comprised (i) the collation of population distribution data existing in various information systems, (ii) the agreement on a database structure for cherry genetic reserves, (iii) the establishment of criteria for cherry genetic reserves and the establishment of baseline descriptors, (iv) the recommendation of priority sites suited for establishing GR for Prunus in the EU, (iv) the development of a guideline for GR design, management and monitoring, (v) the engaging of owners of priority GR to promote appropriate management, and (vi) the supporting of the establishment of a European integrated workplan for in situ management of crop wild relatives.

Objective 06: Implementation of the case study on Beta (sugar beet and related crops) Objective 07: Implementation of the case study on Brassica (crop Brassicas) Objective 08: Implementation of the case study on Avena (oat) The task structure concerning the workpackages 6, 7, and 8 was almost identical. The tasks comprised (i) the collation of species and population distribution data existing in information systems, (ii) the prioritisation of species and populations, (iii) the development of species specific guidelines for GR, (iii) the establishment of a demographic and genetic baseline for a single GR for Beta, Brassica and Avena, respectively (iv) the compilation of the national legal framework related to in situ management, and (vi) the support for the establishment of a European integrated workplan for in situ management of crop wild relatives.

Objective 09: Synthesis and development of common quality standards The tasks of workpackage 9 comprised (i) the analysis and synthesis of results obtained from the case studies in terms of geographic location, habitat, conservation status of the selected sites and status of the populations, (ii) the identification of other CWR taxa that can be conserved under the umbrella of selected taxa in order to transform the original single oriented GR into habitat specific multi-crop GR, and (iii) the development of baseline quality standards for GR based in the characteristics of the selections made by crop-specific workpackages.

Objective 10: Documentation for genetic reserves management field work and European Central Crop Databases (ECCDB) capacity building

The tasks of workpackage 10 comprised (i) the establishment of a project database and web portal, (ii) the collectiopn and integration of distribution and occurrence information, (iii) the development of ontologies, data and object models for the domain of in situ management of plant genetic resources field work on the population level, and (iv) the integration of project results in existing information systems and thereby capacity building for ECCDB managers.


6

Summary of key deliverables and outputs

Workpackage 01: Project coordination In order to to publicise the project in the internet the coordinator designed and operated a project web site (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/) which was establised in cooperation with WP10. The web site provides access to information of the action’s objectives, the partner’s contact details and the work package description. The intranet component of the web site allowed the up- and download of working documents facilitating the communication between project partners and the documentation of the work progress. Coordination meetings were attended by non-AEGRO partners or organised back-to-back to other expert meetings in order to achieve an intensive discussion with the wider expert community on the AEGRO objectives and outputs. The content of the web site was also managed by the University of Birmingham. The internet component of the web site allows unrestricted access to the CWR In situ Helpdesk (see WP2), the Population Level Information System (PLIS) developed by WP10 and the Genetic Reserves Information System (GenResIS) developed by the University Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, in the final phase of the project. Additional links guide (i) to past and new projects related with AEGRO, (ii) to the programm and presentations given during the Symposium held at University of Madeira (Portugal) in September 2010: Towards the establishment of genetic reserves for crop wild relatives and landraces in Europe, the final project dissemination conference, (iii) to the web site of the European Cooperative Programme for Plant Genetic Resource and additional web sites relevant to the in situ management of crop wild relatives (CWR) and landraces. The web site informs the wider public on strategies for in situ management of CWR and landraces, provides tested methodologies for selecting genetic reserves sites, informs on the application of the genetic reserves conservation technique, contains data bases and information systems, crop case studies, reports and other dissemination materials. The web site will be maintained beyond the lifetime of the AEGRO project and form a recognizable and valuable element of the European plant genetic resources information network.

Workpackage 02: Development of national CWR strategies for case study taxa A training workshop was implemented to achieve a common understanding of the objectives of the project. A detailed survey on the sources of CWR data was undertaken by WP2, categorized into taxonomic, distribution, conservation and environmental data and the results made available to the project partners via an early version of the Helpdesk published in the intranet of the project web site. The CWR In situ Strategy Helpdesk was completed and published as a major component of the project website. The Helpdesk provides a step-wise methodology for identifying CWR genetic reserve sites for a target crop gene pool, a national CWR flora methodology, the above-mentioned data source and a list of references. A report on the assessment of the application of the crop gene pool methodology was written. The purpose of the report was to present the generic methodology and provide a detailed assessment of its application in the context of each of the four crop gene pool case studies. By applying the methodology to the gene pools of a range of different crop types — a cereal, leafy vegetable, root crop and broad‐leaved tree, it was found that the methodology is relevant to all the crop gene pools it

was applied to, although the approach to each step varied slightly according to the specific characteristics of the gene pool. The methodology can now be applied to develop conservation strategies for more priority crop gene pools.

Workpackage 03: Case study landraces WP3 orginally aimed for the establishment of a EU standard definition for landrace conservation. By the start of the AEGRO project the Commission Directive 2008/62/EC 20 June 2008 on conservation varieties published a set of definitions ruling on farm management actions. As legally binding standard definitions were thus set WP3 undertook a detailed analysis of existing definitions of the terms “landraces”, “geographic origin” and “genetic erosion”. The key objective was to find definitions for landrace conservation allowing for the development of a more systematic approach for conservation of vivid landraces which are used by people today and therefore are still embedded in a social and cultural context. Such definitions were found and used for development of a strategy for establishing on farm conservation areas. The strategy was assessed by using landrace distribution data available for Central Italy, the approach was validated, published and recommended for the establish LR conservation areas

http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/


7


in EU member states. It turned out that crop wild relatives are occurring in areas of high landrace diversity. These areas can then be classified as the Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for plant genetic resources for food and agriculture in situ conservation actions. Workpackage 05: Case study Prunus Raw data on Prunus avium and its occurrences have been acquired from various data sources, compiled, processed in cooperation with WP10 and improved by geo-referencing. Herbaria in the UK, Austria, France, Georgia, and Russia were visited and records on P. avium occurrences not yet digitzed added to list. The final data set of European occurrences comprised approximately 15,000 records. A standard taxonomy has been adopted and implemented. A data base structure for Cherry genetic reserves was discussed with WP10 which resulted in a general data concept published by WP10. criteria for selecting cherry genetic reserves were established and applied as well as list of recommended genetic reserve sites published. Genetic data (SSRs) that are compatible with the existing UK data were compiled for the complete geographic range of P. avium in Europe. The analysis of the data set allowed P1 to identified and propose other reserve sites in other geographical regions. Three sites were finally proposed as shown by the Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/ above and beyond the two sites identified for management purposes within the UK. Owners of priority GR have been contacted to promote appropriate management. The results of the WP5 were taken into consideration by the EUFORGEN programme which is a great success of WP5 and contribution to the establishment of a European integrated workplan for in situ management of crop wild relatives.

Workpackage 06: Case study Beta

WP6 received from WP10 a list of taxonomic names which had to be reviewed and edited to allow for the establishment of a taxonomic reference system later integrated and used by the Beta specific Population Level Information System (see WP10 results). The species and population distribution data existing in information systems were collated, reviewed and edited in cooperation with WP10 as well. The step-wise methodology for identifying CWR genetic reserve sites for a target crop gene pool applied for wild beets and the Crop case study Beta L. (including Patellifolia A. J. Scott et al.) written. The study provides information on the taxonomy and geographic distribution of wil d beet species, explains why species were recommended for the establishment of genetic reserves, i.e. prioritized, and summarizes current knowledge on the ecogeography and genetic diversity of selected species. The case study includes a list of literature on 10 wild beet species. WP6 infered from the study that 26 genetic reserves for seven taxa should be established. For these species genetic reserve guidelines were developed. A demographic and genetic baseline for a single Beta genetic reserve, i.e. Beta patula, was established. The national legal framework related to in situ management of B. patula was compiled, contacts with the nature conservation agency responsible for the Natura 2000 site where this species occurs have been established and a Beta patula Aiton genetic reserve action plan has been proposed. Under the umbrellar of a Beta priority species CWR of other crops occur (see WP9, GenResIS). Hence, WP6 contributed to a European integrated workplan for in situ management of CWR.

Workpackage 07: Case study Brassica Brassica is included in the tribe Brassiceae, which contains approximately 50 genera and 240 species. WP7 undertook a detailed literature study on CWR of the Brassica crops to delineate the primary genepool of the crop Brassica. For the EU-27 region the need to establish genetic reserves for species belonging to the Brassica oleracea cytodeme was assessed and species ranked. A list of species distributed in Sicily was produced and populations identified during a series of field surveys. The list of populations found on Sicily was then added to the PLIS (see WP10) to complete the list of Brassica species and population distribution data. Plant material sampled during field surveys in Sicily were morphologically and genetically analysed to establish a demographic and genetic baseline for four Brassica species and a total of 8 sites. WP7 produced a species specific guideline for Brassica GR and analysed in collaboration with the Sicilian nature conservation agency the national legal framework to facilitate the in situ management of Brassica CWR. Within proposed Brassica GR CWR of other crops

http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/%1faegro/


8

can be found (see WP9). The WP7 thus contributed to a European integrated workplan for in situ management of CWR.

Workpackage 08: Case study Avena WP8 undertook a detailed literature study on the phyllogenetic relationships between oat CWR. A list of Avena species and population distribution data has been produced in collaboration with WP10. Renowned European oat genetic diversity experts attended a workshop organized by WP8 to assess the need for establishing genetic reserves. Species were ranked, a priority list produced and populations identified during a series of field surveys in Cyprus, Spain and Sicily. Plant material sampled during field surveys were genetically analysed to establish a preliminary demographic and genetic baseline for A. ventricosa, A. insularis and A. murphy. WP8 produced a species specific guideline for Avena GR and analysed in collaboration with WP7 and WP9 the national legal framework to facilitate the in situ management of Avena CWR. Within the 9 GR proposed for four Avena species CWR of other crops can be found (see WP9). The WP8 thus contributes to a European integrated workplan for in situ management of CWR.

Workpackage 09: Synthesis and development of common quality standards The selection of sites for the establishment of genetic reserves at the European level by the case study work packages is a central element of the AEGRO project. A Geographic Information System has been developed to provide the case study work packages with data and tools required to take informed decision. On one side, information has been extracted from the PLIS database on the species occurrences (see WP10) that lie within the Natura 2000 sites and made it available to the case study work packages. On the other side a systematic methodology has been developed on how to select and rank genetic reserve sites for the creation of a network at the European level (based on the case of Beta). An important step of this methodology is the development of a European ecogeographical land characterization map exclusively based on environmental variables that are deemed important for each model genus. The results of the work performed by WP9 with the help of WP5, 6, 7, and 8 are presented in the Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS). GenResIS synthesises the results obtained from the case studies in terms of geographic location, habitat, conservation status of the selected sites and status of the populations. Furthermore, WP9 identified other CWR taxa that can be conserved under the umbrella of the proposed single species genetic reserves which allows transformation of the single species oriented GR into habitat specific multi-crop GR. For the establishment and operation of a integrated network of GR in Europe a set of minimum quality GR management standards is required which was developed and published by WP9.

Workpackage 10: Documentation for genetic reserves management field work and ECCDB capacity building

WP10 established the web portal using the Typo 3 technology as well as the Population Level Information System (PLIS) which is an essential and indispensible data source used by the crop case study work package leaders to take informed decisions on the selection of genetic reserves. Prior to programming the information system ontologies, data and object models for the domain of in situ management of plant genetic resources field work on the population level were developed, discussed with the project partners and approved. An unexpectedly high amount of person months had to be invested by WP10 to restructure and edit the raw data derived from various international information systems. Tools such as the SiteConverter had to be developed in order to aid the data processing. The result has been a set of harmonized data which were integrated into 4 crop specific modules of PLIS.


9


PLIS now allows (i) the search for occurrences by taxon information, (ii) the search for occurrences by geographic information, (iii) a combined search for occurrences by Natura 2000 protected areas, and (iv) the displayed of search results on a map or downloading of the results as a file. Despite the fact that more work would be needed to raise the data quality PLIS likely is the only information system at the international level that works with reviewed and standardized data sets. PLIS thereby contributes to the capacity building for managers of European Central Crop Databases (ECCDB). The products of AEGRO can be used and further developed by crop working groups different from those represented by WP5, 6, 7 and 8. Procedures such as the establishment of a demographic base line or the documentation of georeferenced plant samples required for the establishment of a genetic base line can be supported by recording the data at the site with the help of handheld digital devices and specific software applications. The freeware CyberTracker tool kit was used to develop a first version of a field data acquisition tool which can be further improved by any interested group.

Summary of achievements and outputs The action developed an integrated, adaptable in situ management workplan for crop wild relatives and landraces based on the genetic reserve conservation technique concept. The step-wise methodology for identifying CWR genetic reserve sites for a target crop gene pool and the national CWR flora methodology provided by the CWR In situ Strategy Helpdesk are the main and durable outputs of this process as well as the strategy for the identification of Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for efficient conservation of CWR and landraces. Four crop case studies were implemented using the genepools of Avena, Beta, Brassica oleracea cytodeme, and the species Prunus avium as model objects. The results of these case studies will be published in the year 2011 and taken as blueprints by working groups interested in expanding the in situ management worplan. Geographic information systems have been developed to discover the MAAs where a high amount of genetic diversity can be maintained at a good cost-value ratio. The Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) provides detailed information on the proposed genetic reserve sites, visualizes the core of a expandable European network of genetic reserves and evidences that the establishment of habitat specific multi-species genetic reserves is an achievable goal. A European genetic reserve network requires a set of management quality standards which were elaborated by the action and published. The collaboration between institutions within a decentralized network of genetic reserves requires crop specific information systems such as the modules for Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus collectively called the Population Level Information System (PLIS) and an information system for all CWR and landraces in Europe. How to integrate the needs of a crop specific user community into an all-species information system still needs to be discussed and decided by the European PGRFA and species conservation expert community. The AEGRO action developed and published a concept and placed it at disposal for discussion. This work will be taken forward in the context of the EU Framework 7 project, PGR Secure (www.pgrsecure.org).

The strategies, methodologies, tools and knowledge documented in reports and in the Helpdesk are publicly available via the web site http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/. The project team made a significant contribution to the in situ conservation of CWR and landraces in Europe. AEGRO may become a model for a more effective collaboration between the agriculture and nature conservation sectors. Joining forces is certainly a prerequisite for meeting the biodiversity conservation targets set by the European Commission.



10

2. SUMMARY OF THE DETAILED RESULTS ACHIEVED

Work package number WP 1 Start date: 01-10-2007 Month 1

Work package title: Project coordination No of lead partner P.0 No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8.

Total person-months 12

Main objectives

Objective 1: Technical and financial coordination During the lifetime of the project four meetings will be organised to provide a forum for reporting, review of the work plan and detailed planning of the technical work due to be undertaken before the next meeting as well as the planning of the financial statement according to the standards set by the AGRI GENRES programme officers.

Objective 2: Communication with the EU Commission Project partners communicate with the AGRI GENRES programme officer only through the project coordinator and vice versa to allow a stringent management of the technical implementation of the project as well as its financial execution.

Objective 3: Project progress control The AGRI GENRES programme team has provided the coordinator with technical instruments for progress control. These instruments are being applied by the project coordinator to describe progress and changes of the work plan.

Objective 4: Diffusion of the combined results The AEGRO project was set up by a group of experts working together within the framework of the ECPGR programme. The transfer of experiences and knowledge gained during the implementation of AEGRO into other crop specific working groups of the ECPGR is a major objective of the project which can only be achieved by active diffusion of the AEGRO results and products as well as a close cooperation with these working groups during the AEGRO lifetime.

Task 1 title: Coordination Sub-task 1 title: Start-up meeting & first workshop report Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8.

Preceding Years: The start-up meeting was initiated by the coordinator. The University of Birmingham (P1) organised and implemented the training workshop which took place at Evershot, UK from 2-3- November, 2007. Non-AEGRO partners also attended the workshop promoting the flow of information from the project team into the wider ECPGR (European Cooperative Programme on Plant Genetic Resources) and the species conservation expert community. P1 compiled the workshop report with the support of the project participants (see P1 report on sub-task 1).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: During the training workshop a common understanding of the objectives of the project, the products to be delivered and time schedule was achieved. The project was introduced to the wider expert community.


11

Task 1 title: Coordination Sub-task 2 title: Public project web site, intranet and content

management for documents Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8. Preceding Years: The web site has been established during the first project year. Since then all partners could access the intranet and up- and download working documents as well as other files. As P1 received full access to the Typo 3 tool the content of web site can also be managed by the University of Birmingham. In the second year the CWR In situ Helpdesk and the CWRIS—AEGRO Population Level Information System (PLIS) was added. Both are accessible via the internet.

Final Year : The web site was moved to http://aegro.jki.bund.de and is continuously updated (latest update on 23 August, 2011). As this typo 3 application is now running on a virtual server the stability and performance is improved. The methodology for the development of national (floristic) CWR in situ conservation strategies as part of the project helpdesk was added before the closer of the project. A link to the Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) established by P6 was added which increased the information content and attractiveness of the website considerably.

CONCLUSION: The web site is being maintained and managed beyond the project lifetime and provides the wider public as well as the expert community with useful information and tools. A google search for “AEGRO CWR” produces many hits in the meanwhile.

Task 1 title: Coordination

Sub-task 3 title: First annual progress, financial report, coordination meeting report

Start date: 01-09-2008

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8.

Preceding Years: The coordination meetings always took place in September just before the end of a project year. The first coordination meeting (Quedlinburg, Germany, 18 September, 2008) was again attended by non-AEGRO partners to allow discussion of the objectives and work programme with experts from the species conservation sector or ECPGR working groups’ representatives. The coordination meeting report was produced and submitted along with the first annual technical report to DG AGRI. Due to a delayed submission of the financial report caused by administrative problems at the JKI the project partners received their share of the first cost reimbursement in November 2009, only.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The project was introduced to and discussed with additional experts who also actively contributed to the meeting by presenting own research activities in the field of CWR and landrace in situ conservation. From the coordinators point of view the preparation of the financial report proved to be time-consuming and demanded unusual strong efforts.

http://aegro.jki.bund.de/


12

Task 1 title: Coordination Sub-task 4a title: Second annual progress, financial report,

coordination meeting report Start date: 01-09-2009

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8. Preceding Years: The second coordination meeting was organised by P6 and took place at Almeria, Spain on 14-15 September, 2009. This meeting was organised back-to-back to the Congres of the Spanish Society for the Conservation Biology of Plants which allowed the presentation and discussion of AEGRO results with the congres participants. At the second meeting the AEGRO partners decided to organise a symposium instead of a final technical project coordination meeting. The coordination meeting report was produced and submitted along with the second annual technical report to DG AGRI. Due to a delayed submission and late approval of the financial report the project partners received their share of the second cost reimbursement in November 2010, only.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The project was introduced to and discussed with Spanish Conservation Biologists representing the agencies which would have to agree with the genetic reserve concept and assist in the establishment of genetic reserves within protected areas following the recommendation of the AEGRO project team. The feedback from the congres participants showed that there is interest within Spain to integrate genetic reserves into protected area management plans. From the coordinators point of view the preparation of the financial report proved again a time-consuming task stretched over a period of several months.

Task 1 title: Coordination

Sub-task 4b title: Third annual progress, financial report, coordination meeting report



Preceding Years: The third coordination meeting took place at Funchal, Portugal on 13-16 September, 2010. The symposium “Towards the establishment of genetic reserves for crop wild relatives and landraces in Europe” was held at the University of Madeira and jointly organised by the ECPGR In situ and On farm Conservation Network and the AEGRO team. The coordination meeting report was produced and submitted along with the third annual technical report to DG AGRI.

Final Year : The third technical report was approved in July 2011. Due to a number of requests of the DG AGRI for missing documents and explanations the approval of the third financial report is still pending (status: 30 September, 2011).

CONCLUSION: The symposium was attended by 84 experts from 38 countries. Therefore the joint AEGRO / ECPGR symposium can be considered a very useful and successful event (see chapter dissemination).


13

Task 1 title: Coordination Sub-task 5 title: Final report including fourth interim progress and

financial report, collection and analysis of legal texts relevant to in situ management


No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8. Preceding Years: The project lifetime was extended by 6 months and ended on 31 March, 2011.

Final Year : Until the termination of the project the coordinator continued to communicate with the partners and the DG AGRI with the aim to get the required approvals of the technical and financial reports. The development of the legal framework conditions which could either disencourage or promote the integration of genetic reserves into Natura 2000 protected areas were further observed by the coordinator. In July the EC published the “COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION of 11 July 2011 concerning a site information format for Natura 2000 sites (notified under document C(2011) 4892) (2011/484/EU)”. The text mentions amongst other type of protected sites the “Biogenetic reserve”. In the nature and species conservation the term describes a network of sites required to maintain specific, rare, or endangered species, respectively habitats. The protection of intraspecific genetic diversity of a crop wild relative will, depending on the species, also require an international network. The concept of the “Biogenetic reserve” could therefore form a basis for the implementation of the genetic reserve conservation technique. Instead of a comprehensive analysis of legal texts, as suggested in the project’s implementation plan, a more straightforward way of problem solution would be to lobby for the modification of existing nature conservation regulations so that activities related to the management of genetic reserves get an obligatory task. The nature conservation agencies contacted by the AEGRO partners (see reports on WP5, 6, 7, and 8) expressed interest in our approach and their willing to support the establishment of genetic reserves.

CONCLUSION: With respect of the four objectives of WP1 the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. The coordination meetings were implemented in time and used to prepare the reports and for the detailed planning of the technical work to be undertaken during the next project period. The meetings were also used to discuss our objectives and results with the wider expert community. Problems related to the preparation of the reports were always solved, although with delays. 2. Project partners were supposed to communicate with the DG AGRI programme team only through the project coordinator and vice versa to allow a stringent management of the technical implementation of the project as well as its financial execution. Delays in the reporting were partly caused by events which could be called “force majeure”. From the coordinator’s perspective the communication with the DG AGRI was always very useful, constructive, fast and effective. 3. The DG AGRI programme team provided the coordinator with technical instruments for progress control, i.e. templates of the technical reports and template for the cost statements. These instruments were applied by the project coordinator to describe the work progress. Looking back on more than 42 month of project coordination work and an impressive list of 941 Emails in the AEGRO folder that arrived only between July 2010 and August 2011 some self-critism may be adequate: for a complex project as the AEGRO project is we should have applied for an additional part-time coordination position to avoid the competition for manpower between WP6, WP10 and WP1 tasks. 4. The transfer of knowledge gained during the implementation of AEGRO into other working groups of the ECPGR was a major objective which was achieved by active diffusion of the AEGRO results and products as well as a close cooperation with experts during and beyond the AEGRO project lifetime. The promotion of the project results can be considered as one of the obvious successes of the project team. The fact that the ECPGR Review Panel Report (July 2010) mentions AEGRO and recommends to […] fully integrate in situ and on-farm activities in The European Genebank Integrated System (AEGIS), expanding in a second step the Genebanks’ ex situ coverage to both in situ crop relatives’ populations and on farm managed landraces […] confirms this conclusion.


14

Overview of deliverables (revised)

Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status

Achieved On going* Not started yet*

D1.1 Month 4 Start-up meeting & training workshop report Month 4

D1.2 Month 6 Public project web site, intranet and content management for documents

Month 3

D1.3 Month 12 1st annual progress, financial report, 1st coordination meeting report Month 21

D1.4a Month 24 2nd annual progress, financial report, 2nd coordination meeting report Month 37

D1.4b Month 36 3rd annual progress, financial report, collection and analysis of legal texts relevant to in situ management, 3rd coord. meeting report

Month 45

D1.5 Month 45 Submission of the 4th as well as final technical and financial report Month 50 financial report

Overview of milestones (revised)

Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M1.1 Month 2 Start-up meeting done Month 2

M1.2 Month 4 Public project web site designed and implemented Month 2

M1.3 Month 10 1st year coordination meeting done Month 9

M1.4a Month 22 2nd year coordination meeting done, analysis of legal text done Month 36

M1.4b Month 34 3rd and final coordination meeting done Month 36

M1.5 Month 42 Preparation of the final report and cost statement started Month 47

*: If applicable, enter a Χ in the appropriate cell


15


Work package title: Development of National CWR Strategy for case study taxa No of lead partner P.1 No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8.


Main objectives

Objective 1: Identification of sources of CWR data. Access to various types of data is needed to effect in situ conservation of crop wild relatives (CWR). As part of the generalized methodology for the identification of CWR genetic reserves (Objective 2), Objective 1 is to identify and provide a list of data sources with advice on how to extract the data needed for analysis.

Objective 2: Establishment of protocols for the development of National CWR Strategy.

The overarching aim of the AEGRO project is to test and develop methodologies for the in situ conservation of CWR and landraces (LR) by applying the methodologies to a number of crop case studies. Objective 2 is to provide detailed protocols for undertaking national CWR strategies, as well as a step-wise methodology for identification of genetic reserves for individual taxa, both at national and European level.

Objective 3: Provision of a helpdesk for National CWR Strategy case study application.

Objective 3 is to provide a helpdesk giving advice and guidance on access to CWR data (Objective 1) and on the application of the protocols described under Objective 2.

Task 2 title: Provision of a National CWR Strategy Methodology Sub-task 1 title: Organization of the project start-up meeting and

training workshop Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P2. P.4. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8.

Preceding Years: The meeting and workshop was organised by P1 as reported by P0 under subtask 1. It was successful in meeting its aims and objectives and resulted in agreement on the way forward for the rest of the project as regards scientific and business procedures (see Annex 1). The project partners together clarified the main framework within which the activities of the project would be implemented.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The project meeting was attended by all project partners and three external participants representing different disciplines (i.e. conservation biologists, database experts, crop specific plant genetic genetic resources experts and plant breeding researchers). The discussion of the work plan in a very early phase of the project and the steps required to reach the project aims was vital for the success of the project and the comprehensive meeting report served as a reference document throughout all project phases.


16

Task 2 title: Provision of a National CWR Strategy Methodology Sub-task 2 title: Provision of a list of CWR data types and sources Start date: 01-02-2008

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6.

Preceding Years:

P6 proposed a preliminary list of data types and sources at the start-up meeting and training workshop (Annex 1, chapter 4.1). As part of the generalized methodology for identification of CWR genetic reserves, Partner 1 reorganized and elaborated this list and provided it as a component of the step-wise case study methodology (sub-task 3). The data sources are organized in four main categories:

1. Taxonomic data [for selection of target taxa] 2. Distribution data [for selection of target taxa based on distribution range and ecogeographic

diversity analysis] 3. Conservation data [for selection of target taxa and sites] 4. Environmental data [for ecogeographic diversity analysis, leading to selection of target

populations] Within each of these categories, a list of online and other data sources are provided with details of how to retrieve the data needed for the analysis and their application in the case study methodology. The list of data types and sources were first made available to the project partners via the online helpdesk in the project intranet and after some improvement are now public accessible via the internet (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=193).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: A comprehensive list of data sources needed for effective in situ CWR conservation has been provided via the online project helpdesk. Data sources are many and diffuse and it is important to ensure that detailed searches are undertaken for individual taxa to achieve the best possible analysis of CWR occurrences leading to the identification of suitable genetic reserve sites. Data quality is a critical issue and the range of data sources that is likely to be consulted when undertaking in situ CWR gap analysis will inevitably lead to potential inaccuracies and uncertainties in the results. This issue was discussed at the start-up meeting and training workshop and further at the first coordination meeting. Ways of dealing with the issue of data quality were developed by Partners 0, 1 and 6. Ultimately, whichever data are used, the establishment of genetic reserves must be preceded by field work to verify the results of desk-based gap analysis.

http://www.bafz.de/aegro/index.php?id=154



http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=193


17

Task 2 title: Provision of a National CWR Strategy Methodology Sub-task 3 title: Publication of National CWR Strategy generation

protocol Start date: 01-02-2008

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years:

A step-wise methodology was developed in the first year to facilitate the implementation of each of the four crop case studies and to provide the basis for a generic CWR in situ conservation methodology which is one of the products of the AEGRO project. The methodology was built on those proposed by Maxted et al. (2007) and Maxted and Kell (2009), which address monographic and floristic approaches to CWR conservation. It is a generic methodology intended for application to any crop gene pool. Although it may be necessary to adjust parts of the methodology according to the specific biological, ecological and geographical attributes of individual crop complexes, the methodology provides the framework within which the case studies were implemented and for the conservation of other crop gene pools in the future.

The end point of the methodology is the identification of ‘ideal’ CWR genetic reserve (GR) sites. The political and legal steps that need to be taken beyond this point to establish the GRs are not part of the methodology. The next step beyond the methodology for identification of GRs is to make recommendations for site and population management.

There are four basic steps in the methodology. Within each of the four steps, precise instructions are provided on how to carry out the methodology in the AEGRO Helpdesk.

The crop genepool methodology was first made available to the AEGRO project partners via the intranet and after some amendments the methodology was made available to any user via the internet (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=198).

Importantly, while the original intention was to focus only on the identification of GRs at national level, the methodology was extended to apply in a regional context as well. Therefore, for each of the crop case studies, recommendations for potential genetic reserves sites were not only be made in the country that was the focus of the case study, but also for the whole of the EU. During the third reporting period, the CWR strategy methodology and Helpdesk were publicized during a presentation given at the NordGen conference, ‘Genetic resources in protected areas – management and access’, Röstånga Gästgiveri, Söderåsen National Park, Sweden on 1st December 2009.

Final Year : In addition to the taxon specific case study methodology (the monographic approach), a methodology for planning and implementing a national CWR strategy (the floristic approach) was presented at the start-up meeting and training workshop. While it was agreed that it was not within the scope of this project to plan and implement strategies for the entire CWR flora of the partner countries, it was agreed that the partners could be proactive in promoting the methodology within their respective countries as a component of the AEGRO project. Therefore, during the final phase of the project the work on the national approach to CWR conservation was completed and the National CWR Flora Methodology published as part of the AEGRO Helpdesk (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=199). In addition to the gene pool and national conservation strategies being published online in the AEGRO Helpdesk, a presentation was given on these approaches at the AEGRO final dissemination conference (http://www3.uma.pt/cem/aegro.ecpgr.symp/index.html) and a chapter based on this work will be published in early December 2011. The reference details for this chapter are:

Kell, S.P., Maxted, N., Frese, L. and Iriondo, J.M. 2011. In situ conservation of crop wild relatives: a strategy for identifying priority genetic reserve sites. In: Maxted, N., Dulloo, M.E., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Frese, L., Iriondo, J.M. and Pinheiro de Carvalho, M.A.A. (eds). Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. Pp. 7‒ 19.

CONCLUSION: A comprehensive step-wise methodology for the identification of genetic reserve sites has been



http://www3.uma.pt/cem/aegro.ecpgr.symp/index.html


18

developed and made available via the online helpdesk of the project website. The case study WP leaders have applied the methodology in their respective crop case studies and have found it straightforward and user friendly. In addition to the taxon specific case study methodology (the monographic approach), a methodology for planning and implementing a national CWR strategy (using the floristic approach) was developed and published. The CWR strategy protocol developed in the AEGRO project was publicized at two key conferences and is being taken forward in the context of the EC-funded project ‘PGR Secure’ which started in March 2011. In addition, the methodologies have been developed further in the context of an initiative commissioned by the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (led by the University of Birmingham) to produce a Toolkit for countries to develop CWR (and LR) conservation strategies. Taking forward this product in the context of other projects demonstrates how beneficial the methodologies developed in AEGRO are likely to prove, both within and outside of Europe.

Task 2 title: Provision of a National CWR Strategy Methodology

Sub-task 4 title: Completion of the project helpdesk Start date: 01-02-2008

No of participating partner(s) P.1.

Preceding Years: P1 developed a project helpdesk to assist the case study WP leaders in carrying out their respective crop case studies. The helpdesk is accessible via the internet (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=188). The primary function of the Helpdesk is to assist in meeting the following project objectives:

1. Development of in situ management work plans for CWR and LR conservation. 2. Recommendation of sites suited to the establishment of genetic reserves for selected

model crops (Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus). 3. Development of procedures required to establish multi-CWR-species sites to allow

maximum use of the recommended sites.

The three main components of the online helpdesk are:

1. A step-wise methodology for the identification of genetic reserve sites for a target crop gene pool (see sub-task 3).

2. A step-wise methodology for the identification of genetic reserve sites for a national CWR flora (see sub-task 3).

3. A list of data sources that can be consulted to aid the development of a CWR in situ conservation strategy (see sub-task 2).

The helpdesk web pages were created by P1 using TYPO3 with remote editing access provided by the coordinator.

Final Year : The coordinator agreed to maintain the AEGRO web site including the helpdesk. The coordinator has moved the AEGRO website and all applications to a new server and address in May 2011 and is routinely checking its operational availability.

CONCLUSION: The project helpdesk is functioning successfully and all those who have tested it have found it clear and user friendly. It is published in the public domain and accessible to any user. The Helpdesk content will be developed further In the context of the EU Framework 7 project, PGR Secure and will be available via the project website in the future at: www.pgrsecure.org.



19

Task 2 title: Provision of a National CWR Strategy Methodology

Sub-task 5 title: Report on application of CWR strategy methodology to case study taxa



Preceding Years: The purpose of the report on the application of the CWR strategy methodology was to present the generic methodology and provide a detailed assessment of its application in the context of each of the four crop gene pool case studies. The draft report containing an introductory section, the detailed methodology and outline of the individual case study report sections, along with instructions to the contributors (case study WP leaders) was circulated early in the third reporting period and draft contributions from the case study WP leaders were provided for three out of the four case studies towards the end of the reporting period.

Final Year : The report was completed and includes an analysis of ways in which the methodology has been differently interpreted by each of the case study WP leaders. The final case study report is now provided as Annex 2.

CONCLUSION: The report on the application of the CWR strategy methodology is provided In Annex 2. Elements of the report were used to inform the publication:

Kell, S.P., Maxted, N., Frese, L. and Iriondo, J.M. 2011. In situ conservation of crop wild relatives: a strategy for identifying priority genetic reserve sites. In: Maxted, N., Dulloo, M.E., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Frese, L., Iriondo, J.M. and Pinheiro de Carvalho, M.A.A. (eds). Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. Pp. 7‒ 19.

By applying the methodology to the gene pools of a range of different crop types—a cereal, leafy vegetable, root crop and broad‐leaved tree, it has been possible to a) reveal different perspectives on

its application by several experts, b) investigate ways in which the application of the individual steps may differ between different crop groups, c) scrutinize the methodology to confirm its applicability to a range of crop groups and d) refine the methodology to ensure that it is widely applicable to any crop gene pool and easily understood by all those involved in CWR in situ conservation strategy planning. Most importantly, it was found that the methodology is relevant to all the crop gene pools it was applied to, although the approach to each step varied slightly according to the specific characteristics of the gene pool (e.g., number of species) and the extent and quality of data available (e.g., distribution, genetic diversity and potential use). The methodology can now be applied to develop conservation strategies for more priority crop gene pools with the aim of eventually ensuring that the genetic diversity that we may rely on in years to come is secured in a network of national, regional and global CWR genetic reserves. In Europe, this work is being taken forward in the context of the EU Framework 7 project, PGR Secure (www.pgrsecure.org). The case studies themselves have resulted in the identification of target genetic reserves for four crop gene pools which are socio‐economically important in Europe.

The next step (which is beyond the scope of the AEGRO project) will be to put in place the practical and legal requirements to establish the sites and ensure their long‐term sustainability.

In summary it can be concluded that all five products were delivered and that all of the three objectives have been achieved.


20

Overview of deliverables

Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D2.1 Month 3 Start-up meeting report and workshop report available Month 5

D2.2 Month 6 CWR data types and sources available to partners Month 6

D2.3 Month 20 Publication of National CWR Strategy generation protocol Month 20

D2.4 Month 14 Completion of provision of National CWR Strategy case studies helpdesk available

Month 6

D2.5 Month 35 Report of National CWR Strategy application for case study taxa published

Month 42

Overview of milestones

Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M2.1 Month 2 Workshop training for National CWR Strategy case studies, training

materials for CWR Strategy Protocol generation Month 2

M2.2 Month 2 Identification of CWR data types and sources Month 2

M2.3 Month 9 Draft National CWR Strategy generation protocol Month 9

M2.4 Month 12 National CWR Strategy case studies helpdesk function developed Month 6

M2.5 Month 35 Report of National CWR Strategy application for target taxa Month 41



21

Work package number WP 3 Start date:01-10-2007 Month 1

Work package title: Case study landraces No of lead partner P.2 No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6.

Total person-months 18.5

Main objectives

Objective 1: Establishment of an EU standard definition for landrace (LR) conservation.

Objective 2: Development of strategies for establishing on farm conservation areas.

Objective 3: Application of developed strategies for on farm areas including the four case study crops (highest concentration of landraces by case crop) where LRs have been catalogued.

Objective 4: Recommendation of an efficient strategy to establish LR conservation areas in EU member states.

Objective 5: Integration of crop wild relative conservation into landrace conservation strategy.

Task 3 title: Case study landraces Sub-task 1 title: List of shared definitions for ‘landrace, ‘under threat’,

‘biogeographic region’ Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years: Objective 1 planned the establishment of EU standard definitions for landrace (LR) conservation. Since the submission of the AEGRO project proposal the conditions have changed owing to the publication of the COMMISSION DIRECTIVE 2008/62/EC 20 June 2008 on seed production and marketing of conservation varieties and other varieties which is based on the following concepts:

1. Landrace and other varieties 2. Region of origin 3. Genetic erosion risk

The directive also provides definitions of terms “landrace”, “geographic origin” and “risk of genetic erosion”. Therefore, the sub-task 1 had to be tuned, accordingly. The lists mentioned in sub-task 1 were compiled but efforts were then focussed on the development of scientific decision criteria required to intentify within the framework of the AEGRO project Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for PGRFA conservation, areas which include a high diversity of landraces and CWR as well. Landrace definition Within AEGRO we worked with a combination of definitions of Negri (2005), Camacho Villa et al. (2006), Asfaw (2000), Louette (2000), Brush (1992) and Papa (1996). A landrace of a seed-propagated crop can be defined as “a variable population, which is identifiable and usually has a local name”. It lacks formal crop improvement, is characterized by a specific adaptation to the environmental conditions of the area of cultivation (tolerant to the biotic and abiotic stresses of that area) and is associated with the traditional uses, knowledge, habits, dialects, and celebrations of the people who developed and continue to grow it”. This definition was proposed at the Second Meeting of the On-farm Conservation and Management Task Force of ECPGR (19-20 June 2006, Stegelitz, Germany) (del Greco et al., 2007; see also http://www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/Networks/Insitu_onfarm/OnfarmTF_intro.htm). It accentuates the social and cultural aspects of landraces and allowed us to focus our work on vivid landraces which are still

use by people.

http://www.ecpgr.cgiar.org/Networks/%1fInsitu_onfarm/OnfarmTF_intro.htm


22

Region of origin definition The Italian Law no. 46 (2007) and its Application Procedures (2008) on the subject mention that a conservation variety must be integrated in local agro-environment for 50 years (at least), i.e. must have verifiable historical records of its use within a certain territory where the conservation variety evolved its characters. The “region of origin” is understood within the AEGRO context as the region where a conservation variety was first developed and/or grown over a significant period of time. Only those conservation varieties performing well during such a period, because they are evidently adpated, will leave a trace in documents or will be remembered by people. Germplasm meeting these criteria can then be called a landrace.

Genetic erosion risk definition The concept of genetic erosion is generally understood as “diversity loss on the level of varieties or species” (Hammer 2004, Gepts 2006).The term genetic erosion is sometimes used in a narrow sense, such as for the loss of alleles or genes. We considered necessary a distinction between 1) LRs still cultivated and 2) the other varieties. 1) For the LRs maintained on farm the genetic erosion should be estimated both at the i) among and ii) within LR levels i.e. loss of a LR and the loss of variation within it, respectively. LRs are genetically different from each other and may be organised as meta-populations (see for example Gautier et al, 2002; Lanteri et al. 2004; Negri and Tosti, 2002; Tiranti and Negri 2007; Negri et al, in press). As a consequence to loose a LR, as well as a population within a certain LR, means a loss of genetic diversity.

LR estimate of erosion risk (risk of loosing a LR). It has to be noted first that complete inventories of cultivated LRs are required in every EU country. In absence of such inventories it is impossible to estimate the risk of genetic erosion. When on farm LRs inventories are compiled, an example concerning how to evaluate the risk of a LR loss could be the one proposed by Agenzia Regionale per lo Sviluppo e l’Innovazione dell’Agricoltura del Lazio (ARSIAL) Technical Committee for the implementation of the Lazio (Italy) Regional Law for the safeguard of agrobiodiversity (LR March 1st 2000, n.15). This is going to serve as a prioritization tool to fund on farm conservation of existing LRs under the scheme set by the above mentioned Regional law. Details concerning this model can be found in Annex 3.

within LR estimate of erosion risk. Recent studies have shown that LRs are frequentl y organised as meta-populations where farmers maintain different sub-populations more or less connected by gene flow, and where events of sub-population extinction and recolonizations are present (Louette 2000; Negri et al 2007; Tiranti and Negri 2007). Therefore the evaluation of the risk of loosing diversity within LR would require an initial assessment of genetic diversity, an analysis of the population structure and of socio-economic aspects that induce farmers to continue/discontinue cultivation. In addition a periodical monitoring of the above mentioned traits appears to be required.

2) Other varieties (according to CD 2008/62 EC). The risk of loss of genetic erosion should be estimated both at the i) among and ii) within variety level also in this case. Unlike landraces in the case of other varieties the conservation status of accessions of these varieties stored in germplasm banks should be considered when assessing the risk of genetic erosion. In genebanks genetic erosion can occur when non-correct conservation/management procedures are applied or in the case of catastrophes. With respect to pure lines no genetic erosion should take place if correctly managed while in genetically heterogeneous populations of outbreeding species, genetic erosion may occur during regeneration/multiplication due to drift. The breeding system plays a crucial role when genetic erosion within an accession is to be assessed.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The aim of WP03, objective 1 changed due to the publication of the CD 2008/62 EC. WP03 focussed therefore on a critical review of several definitions laid out in chapter I and II of CD 2008/62 EC. Furthermore, WP3 targets at the development of methodologies facilitating the establishment of protected areas for landraces (LRs) and policies in favour of LRs conservation. A list of definitions for


23

“landrace”, “biogeographic region” and “genetic erosion threat” has been generated (for more details see first annual report). It was noticed that the implementation of CD 2008/62/EC at the national level within the EU-27 countries is difficult due to the general lack of inventory data for LRs and (other) varieties, lack of data required assessing the threat of genetic erosion, and lack of data on the adaptedness of (other) varieties. Product 3.1 has been delivered in time and provided the work basis for sub-task 2. Objective 1 was achieved.

Task 3 title: Case study landraces

Sub-task 2 title: List of criteria to be taken into account in delimitating areas rich in LR diversity


No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years: Identification of the steps to be followed for on-farm conservation activities (conservation aim, data collection, priority attribution, criteria definition, area identification) With the aim to elaborate methods for planning of landrace on-farm conservation activities, a panel of experts has been established at the Applied Biology Department of Perugia University. The Panel initially defined the items that needed to be discussed, namely:

Definition of a clear conservation aim.

Baseline data to be collected.

Definition of criteria to be taken into account for giving priority among areas.

Methods to be used in applying criteria.

The definition of a strategy

Need to have a preliminary testing of the strategy.

Considered the specific task, and after extensive discussion, the conservation aim was set as the ‘Conservation and valorisation of areas with high level of agro-biodiversity’, i.e. areas rich in diversity for landraces, agro-ecosystems types and crop wild relatives. Data collection and organization Complete LR inventories do not exist in any country of the world (Maxted et al., in press). Only once these data have been collected and organized in a database, it is possible to identify the areas to be subjected to conservation activities.

The definition of criteria to be taken into account for giving priority among areas Priority attribution In situ conservation activities have a cost and, considering that the resources are often limited, it is necessary to choose among the areas suitable for conservation activities those of main interest. When more than one area would be identified, priorities need to be established Criteria definition The panel of experts identified the following criteria for the on farm conservation priority setting:

1. Number of different species and LRs per species For LRs, it is not possible to attribute priority by taxa as suggested for wild species, since they are cultivated populations. As they are cultivated for economic reasons all taxa are equally important.

2. Agro-ecosystem ecological diversity The agro-ecosystem diversity is an essential point to be considered since it is usually associated with the level of inter and intra population diversity. However, the diversity of the habitats can only be evaluated using ‘surrogate traits’. The panel of experts decided that the CORINE land use map, (http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/landuse/clc-download) was the most suitable source of information. CORINE land use classes are defined as follows: 1. Artificial surfaces; 2. Agricultural areas; 3. Forest and semi-natural areas; 4. Wetlands; 5. Water. For LRs protection, priority was

http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/landuse/clc-download


24

given to areas where the agricultural, natural, semi-natural and wet areas are prevalent (i.e. land use classes 2, 3, 4).

3. Presence of protected areas The presence of protected areas (national parks etc.) inside or close to the areas to be subjected to on farm conservation activities could positively influence and facilitate the valorisation of products from LRs. It was therefore considered as a useful criterion to be taken into account.

4. Presence of crop wild relatives (CWRs) The presence of CWRs was considered an added value and a useful discrimination criterion among areas. However, it was noted that a detailed review of bibliographic records followed by attentive surveys in the area are needed since updated CWR presence data are most generally lacking in European information systems.

5. Threat of extinction Finally, the threat of extinction was considered an additional criterion to give priorities among areas. For each LR it can vary in dependence of the characteristic of the crop (i.e. the product destination) as well as of socio-economic traits (i.e. farmer age, political context etc). A model concerning how to evaluate the risk of LR loss has been elaborated by ARSIAL Technical Committee for the implementation of the Lazio Regional Law for the safeguard of agro-biodiversity (Porfiri et al. 2009). This model could be usefully applied for the quantification of the extinction risk of LRs, but it also needs a large amount of data to be collected before being used. The panel of expert noted that the criteria 4. and 5. can only be applied when comprehensive data are available. Methodology aspects of MAA identification For the application of selected criteria the different approaches listed below can be considered:

1. Index utilization In order to facilitate the selection process, indices able to describe in numerical terms the biological diversity can be used. Several diversity indexes have been elaborated for the measuring of biological diversity in terms of species richness and evenness (see Shannon and Weaver, 1949; Simpson, 1949; Lande, 1996; Pielou, 1969, 1975; Berger & Parker, 1970). However it is necessary to evaluate their applicability in the case of LRs

2. Area identification through pragmatic procedures Very often areas to be protected are proposed simply on the base of considerations linked to feasibility or conservation urgency. However, in order to identify areas most suitable for on farm conservation a pragmatic process that considers the developed criteria in order of importance could be easily applied.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The list of criteria to be taken into account in delimitating areas rich in landraces diversity was compiled and methodological aspects discussed and reviewed. Product D3.2 was delivered in time which is an essential contribution to the the development of strategies for establishing on farm conservation areas (objective 2).


Sub-task 3 title: Recommended strategy to define areas where LR diversity is maximum


No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years: The establishment of a strategy: a mixed model The panel of experts suggested a strategy taking into account the use of indexes but also practical aspects. It considers:

a) The need to have a reliable inventory of LRs and a database with georeferenced LR occurrences suited for a GIS analysis.


25

b) The need to identify those areas where the number of LR justifies the setting of conservation and valorisation activities.

c) The need to choose the most appropriated area for conservation activities on the base of the defined criteria (see sub-task 2) applied in sequence. For each level of the decision making schema a threshold has to be arbitrary defined, below this threshold areas will not be admitted to the following level (area discrimination).

d) The opportunity to evaluate which areas contain the greatest diversity by using indices. Initial efficiency testing of the proposed strategy: a practical experience In order to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed strategy before the submission of this deliverable, the first three criteria (i.e. number of different species, agro-ecosystem ecological diversity, presence of protected areas) were practically applied to a case study (i.e. 761 LRs from Central Italy). The test was elaborated during the preparation of a MS thesis (Cenci, 2009).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The strategy proved to be effective and results were presented at the 45th International Congress of the Italian Society of Vegetation Science (SISV) and Fédération Internationale de Phytosociologie (FIP) (Siciliano et al., 2009; Barocco et al., 2009). Product D3.3 was delivered in time which is an essential contribution to the the development of strategies for establishing on farm conservation areas (objectives 2 and 3).


Sub-task 4 title: Assessment of the applicability of the strategy Start date: 01-02-2009

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years: LR inventory creation, mapping and counting

A LR inventory was created using data available in various official Italian, regional inventories. Details on the taxa listed and the GIS (geographic information system) analysis are given in the second annual report. For 943 LRs exact latitude and longitude of the site of cultivation were available. LRs were found in one hundred and five quadrants (raster of 20 x 20 km). By using the counter function of the QGIS program, the density, i.e. the number of points corresponding to each LR cultivation site, was also calculated for each quadrant. Application of the strategy

The 105 quadrants where LRs were present have been initially selected on the base LR density. A threshold of 10 LRs (corresponding to about 10% of the maximum density recorded, i.e 114 LRs/quadrant) was chosen for quadrant selection. The 24 quadrants containing 10 or more LRs were then used to calculate the Shannon index (H’). A threshold of Shannon index value of 1.2 was arbitrary defined, below which areas were not admitted to the following discrimination step. This selection allowed choosing 17 quadrants for further investigations. Tthe CORINE land use map was overlaid to the previously created LR density map. Within the selected squares the number of different CORINE land use classes was counted and the percentage of each class, referred to the total number of classes present inside the quadrant, was calculated. A value of 70% for the CORINE classes 2+3+4 was chosen as a threshold. On this base, 13 quadrants were selected for the following discrimination step. The presence protected areas inside or close to the areas to be subjected to on farm conservation activities was then assessed by using the on-line web site www.parks.it. The application of this criterion finally reduced the number of areas to 5. The results of this work were presented at the Spanish Conservation Biology Society Congress held in Almeria (16-18 September 2009) (Negri et al., 2009) and discussed among AEGRO partners during the 2nd project meeting.

http://www.parks.it/


26

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The strategy enabled us to prioritize 5 areas within a set of 105. It proved to be useful in identifying areas to be recommended for on farm conservation at regional level. Indeed, it allowed selecting those areas that not only include the maximum LR and ecological diversity and are located within or nearby protected areas. It also allowed identifying occurrence of CWR within area. Hence these areas could be proposed as Most Appropriate Areas.

Product D3.4 was delivered in time. The strategy was initally tested in the region of central Italy. Its applicability was evidenced and the strategy can be recommended as as strategy for establishing LR conservation areas in other EU member states (objective 4).

Sub-task 5 title: Identification of Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for

PGRFA conservation Start date: 01-03-2010


Preceding Years: It was planned to look for recommended LR reserves overlapping with suggested CWR reserves to make maximum use of a genetic reserve once it is established. Considering the fact that it was not possible to gather data on the LR distribution in other countries, the work was carried for Central Italy only. Based on the already developed strategy to identify Most Appropriate Areas for on farm conservation six areas were identified in Central Italy where CWR are present. A list of CWR and a map depicting these 6 areas are presented in Annex 4. A review of the Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus wild relatives and re-naturalized forms present in central Italy was also carried out in detail in the third year. Finally, the mapping of Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus CWR occurrences in Umbria was carried out using information on the occurrence of species of these CWR in locations published in literature.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for PGRFA conservation were identified also by checking for the CWR presence. The strategy could not be tested in the countries of the project partners due to a lack of data on the landrace distribution in these countries. This objective of WP3 proved to be a too ambitious one. As a consequence of Commission Directives 2008/62/EC, 2008/90/EC, 2009/145/EC databases will be developed by national authorities such as the German red list of endangered crops (http://pgrdeu.genres.de/index.php?tpl=roteListe) which may contain landraces in the sense of the definition of the term given in the first report. Stimulated by these Commission Directives more data may become available for compiling an EU landrace inventory. Product D3.5 was delivered in time although with minor curtailments the reason of which beyond the workpackage leader’s control. The LR strategy developed in the AEGRO project will be taken forward in the context of a new EC-funded (FP7) project, ‘PGR Secure’ in which a European inventory of LR will be created. The objective 5 „Integration of crop wild relative conservation into landrace conservation strategy“ was achieved.


27


Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D3.1 Month 14 List of shared definitions for ‘landrace, ‘under threat’, ‘biogeographic

region’ Month 12

D3.2 Month 18 List of criteria to be taken into account in delimitating areas rich in LR diversity

Month 20

D3.3 Month 22 Recommended strategy to define areas where LR diversity is maximum

Month 22

D3.4 Month 26 Assessment of the applicability of the strategy Month 24

D3.5 Month 35 Identification of Most Appropriate Areas (MAA) for PGRFA conservation

Month 36


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M3.1 Month 10 Compilation and analysis of literature dealing with ’landrace’, ‘under

threat’, ‘biogeographic region’ definitions done. Month 12

M3.2 Month 16 Criteria suited to delimitate areas rich in LR diversity compiled Month 20

M3.3 Month 20 Strategy proposed and sent to partners as well as to members of the ECP/GR in situ management working group for comments

Month36

M3.4 Month 24 Strategy applied to a specific region and the four case study crops Month 22

M3.5 Month 30 Information on CWR reserves gathered from the other partners Month 30



28


Work package title: Case study Prunus No of lead partner P.1 No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.6.


Main objectives

Objective 1: To collate the population distribution data existing in various information systems, including EUFORGEN’s Scattered Broadleaves Network.

Objective 2: To agree database structure for cherry genetic reserves (harmonised with other crops).

Objective 3: To establish criteria for cherry genetic reserves (based on size, isolation, ownership, and biological criteria such as molecular diversity if known) and to establish demographic and genetic baseline descriptors (harmonised with other crops where appropriate and with reference to EUFORGEN’s descriptors).

Objective 4: To recommend priority sites suited for establishing genetic reserves for Prunus in the EU.

Objective 5: To develop species guidelines for genetic reserve design, management and monitoring.

Objective 6: To engage owners of priority genetic reserves to promote appropriate management and characterisation.

Objective 7: To aid the establishment of a European integrated workplan for in situ management of crop wild relatives.

Task 5 title: Case study Prunus Sub-task 1 title: List of cherry species and distribution data in Europe Start date: 01-02-2008

No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.6. Preceding Years: Data have been compiled and analysed in close cooperation with WP10. Raw data on Prunus avium and its occurrences have been acquired from the GRIN (Germplasm Resources Information Network) (http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/index.pl), GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility (http://www.gbif.de/), EURISCO web catalogue (http://eurisco.ecpgr.org/_1About/index.php), ePIC Electronic Plant Information centre (http://epic.kew.org/), EUNIS biodiversity database (http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/) in total accounting for over 18,000 records. The data processing work is described by WP10 as the problems encountered with Prunus are similar for all case study crops and have called for a generic solution. The major problems have been: lack of standardized description of the data and a low data quality. Many site descriptions exist without geographic coordinates. The processed data sets of global occurrences have been reduced to European occurrences to the 15,000 level, and the presence of species records within countries counted. France has the greatest number of records currently (6,749) followed by the UK (5,929). The information content of the Prunus list has been standardised with the “site converter programme” (see WP10), and improved by geo-referencing. A standard taxonomy has been adopted and implemented. The basic objectives agreed for the project have been met. However, it become desirable to add further records for geographical regions absent from the raw data sources but where Prunus avium is known to occur. By agreement with the DG AGRI and the partners in the project, this was achieved by visits to herbaria in the UK, Austria, France, Georgia, and Russia targeted countries. See also WP10:

http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/index.pl

http://www.gbif.de/

http://eurisco.ecpgr.org/_1About/index.php

http://epic.kew.org/

http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/


29

http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegroprod_prunus/home.seam.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: A Europe wide list of cherry species and distribution data has been compiled and is available in the project database. Product D5.1 was delivered in time and objective 1 and 2 achieved.

Task 5 title: Case study Prunus

Sub-task 2 title: List of recommended genetic reserve sites for Prunus avium



Preceding Years: Two potentially suitable reserves have been identified during the first project year, one in the UK and one in Germany that will provide the necessary requirements for in situ conservation of maximum genetic diversity. The primary source of data used for making reserve site suggestions in this project has largely been natural history collections. These data are known to be particularly biased, usually towards rare species and easy to access locations; and are not generally collected for the purpose of determining a species’ distributional limit. In such cases, modelling and spatial analyses can be used to aid in the prediction of suitable locations. Spatially balanced subsampling was carried out in an attempt to remove some of the bias, then a GIS database of environmental layers was collated, and was used to generate input predictor variables which might influence distribution of the species. These were subsequently reduced to a manageable number using principal components analysis and used in modelling to elucidate areas of suitability for Prunus avium in Europe. The results of this work were incorporated into existing results in order to increase the number of recommendations for potential genetic reserves before the end of the project. Genetic data (SSRs) that are compatible with the existing UK data were compiled for the complete geographic range of Prunus avium in Europe. The analysis of the data set allowed P1 to identified and propose other reserve sites in other geographical regions. Three sites were finally proposed as shown by the Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/-aegro/ above and beyond the two sites identified for management purposes within the UK.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: A distribution list has been produced, analysed and geo-referenced as well as criteria for genetic reserve selection have been established and applied. A list of recommended genetic reserve sites has been proposed and published. This list can be further enhanced to take the products beyond what had originally been planned. It will now be possible to identify by way of genetic data other European regions where other reserves should be planned. Product D5.2 has been delivered and objective 3 and 4 has been achieved.

http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegroprod_prunus/home.seam




30

Task 5 title: Case study Prunus Sub-task 3 title: For cherry, specific genetic reserve design,

management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature



Preceding Years: Recommendations for Prunus genetic reserve design, management and monitoring have been described and are based upon those which pertain to the recommended reserve 1 – Saxten’s and Cage’s Wood, Fawkham Green, Kent, and made up of two separate woodlands, managed by the Woodland Trust who implement the management plan. In summary, major points regarding management to optimise genetic diversity are: core populations of at least 20 genetically distinct individuals should be identified, natural regeneration should be a management priority, corridors should link populations and trees occurring at the extreme margins of populations should be conserved. Further detail and a full list of relevant literature are available ( Annex 5).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: Wild cherry reserves can be successfully established in Europe under simple guidelines that are known to maintain high genetic diversity. Only under certain circumstances is there a need for molecular genetic studies. Product D5.3 was delievered and objective 5 achieved.

Task 5 title: Case study Prunus

Sub-task 4 title: Basic demographic and genetic data collected for recommended UK sites.



Preceding Years: Demographic data as well as genetic data (in the form of microsatellites) are available for the recommended UK woodland sites referred to as Reserve 1 – Saxten’s and Cage’s Woods, Fawkham Green, Kent, UK see the following papers for details: Cottrell, J.E., Vaughan, S.P., Connolly, T., Sing, L., Moodley, D.J. and Russell, K. (2009) Contemporary pollen flow, characterization of the maternal ecological neighbourhood and mating patterns in wild cherry (Prunus avium L.), Heredity 103, 118–128. Vaughan SP, Cottrell JE, Moodley DJ, Connolly T, Russell K (2007) Distribution of fine-scale spatial-genetic structure in British wild cherry (Prunus avium L.). Heredity 98:274–283. Vaughan SP, Cottrell JE, Moodley DJ, Connolly T, Russell K (2007) Clonal structure and recruitment in British wild cherry (Prunus avium L.). For Ecol Manag 242:419–430.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: These data have been used to inform the development of guidelines for management. Product D5.4 was delivered and objective 3 achieved.


31

Task 5 title: Case study Prunus Sub-task 5 title: National concept for Prunus in situ management

proposed and recommendation for EU elaborated Start date: 01-03-2010

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.6. Preceding Years: Contacts with the forest genetic resources sector have been established in the first year (see report on the first coordination meeting, Annex 6).

Final Year : Discussions were held during the 4th reporting period with representatives of EUFGIS and EUFORGEN, at Forest Research in the UK and INBO in Belgium; discussions included the current stage of work and next steps for both projects. Improving the management and documentation of dynamic gene conservation units (GCUs) was an aim of the EUFGIS project, agreeing minimum requirements for the GCUs of forest trees; in this case, the aim of management is “to maintain and enhance the long-term evolutionary potential of tree populations” (Bioversity, 2011). A provisional list of sites for conservation of forest genetic resources was suggested by the UK national focal point for inclusion in the EUFGIS database. However, these suggestions were not eventually incorporated into the data portal; and overall unit data is not as yet available from the EUFGIS website. The EUFORGEN project is in Phase IV and an aim of the project was to develop ‘common action plans’ for model tree species. Pan-European minimum requirements for dynamic gene conservation units of forest trees have been developed, and one of the five main topics of the expert groups now being formed by EUFORGEN is promoting cooperation and incorporation. According to the EU forestry strategy, forestry policy is implemented through national forest programmes (NFP), and although Natura 2000 special protection areas exist, forest management with the aim of biodiversity conservation might not incorporate a particular species, such as wild cherry. For example, in a UK woodland being used for another case study, the focus of restoration of the forest is solely on oak and, although wild cherry would not be intentionally removed from the woodland, it is also not specifically considered within management plans for biodiversity conservation. Within the AEGRO project, two sites in the UK have been discussed and strongly recommended as genetic reserves. One of these sites, Saxten’s and Cage’s Wood, Fawkham Green, Kent, has been the subject of self-incompatibility studies and of research into the development and maintenance of spatial genetic structure in wild Prunus avium, as affected by asexual reproduction and the applied management regime. The value of these sites has been particularly highlighted during the AEGRO project but they have not as yet been incorporated into the EUFGIS database, along with the other UK sites of interest for different species. Differing national priorities for long term management and legal constraints regarding land ownership comprise some of the reasons for these issues. However, both sites suggested as genetic reserves of wild Prunus avium in the UK are already owned and managed by either the Woodland Trust or Wildlife Trust and are therefore properly protected and managed for conservation purposes. There is therefore no apparent reason why these sites should not be added to the EUFGIS database.

CONCLUSION: WP5 had been suggested by the AEGRO team with the objective to link crop genetic resources in situ management actions with forest genetic resources in situ management actions. The results of the WP5 were taken into consideration by the EUFORGEN programme which is a great success of WP5. A national concept for Prunus in situ management was proposed and recommendation for the EU elaborated. Sub-task 5 is therefore achieved. Further details are provided in the annex to the final report. However, better integration of results and experiences of all interested groups is recommended for future work, particularly during the early stages to prevent duplication of results, alongside improved communication and data sharing (i.e. The EUFGIS web site and database) to make better use of time and financial resources.


32


Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D5.1 Month 14 List of cherry species and distribution data in Europe Month 13

D5.2 Month 16 List of recommended genetic reserve sites for Prunus avium Month 16

D5.3 Month 20 For cherry, specific genetic reserve design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature

Month 16

D5.4 Month 26 Basic demographic and genetic data collected for recommended UK sites.

Month 16

D5.5 Month 34 National concept for Prunus in situ management proposed and recommendation for EU elaborated

Month 41


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M5.1 Month 12 All sources accessed and data downloaded/documented Month 13

M5.2 Month 15 Prioritisation of species and populations completed and national focal points informed

Month 34

M5.3 Month 18 Demographic data recorded Month 24

M5.4 Month 24 Recom. UK sites visited and data recorded and sent to d.base Month 34

M5.5 Month 30 Legal framework analysed, GR design, management & monitoring plans finalised

Month 34



33


Work package title: Case study Beta No of lead partner P.0 No of participating partner(s) P.6. P.7. P.1. P.4.


Main objectives

Objective 1: Collation of species and population distribution data existing in various information systems in collaboration with WP1 and WP10.

Objective 2: Priorisation of species and populations.

Objective 3: Recommendation of sites suited to establish genetic reserves for Beta in the EU.

Objective 4: Development of species specific guidelines for genetic reserves design, management and monitoring.

Objective 5: Establishment of a demographic and genetic baseline for a single Beta genetic reserve.

Objective 6: Compilation of the national legal framework related to in situ management (Germany and Portugal), annotation of the legal and organisational national framework and derivation of recommendations for a national strategy for in situ management.

Objective 7: Contribution to the establishment of a European integrated workplan for in situ management of crop wild relatives.

Task 6 title: Case study Beta Sub-task 1 title: List of Beta species and their distribution sites in

Europe Start date: 01-10-2007


Preceding Years: The distribution data were compiled and analysed as described in WP10. Problems related with the data processing were similar for all case study crops and are described in the WP10 report. To improve the data quality and useability a taxonomic system for Beta was elaborated in WP6 taking into account the recent publications of Kadereit et al. (2006). The raw data set contained 481 distinct taxon names either created by typing mistakes or the use of synonyms. These taxon names were matched on three taxonomic systems (see http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegroprod_beta/home.seam) which are part of the crop specific module of the Population Level Information System (AEGRO PLIS). By means of this webbased information system a global list of Beta species and their distribution sites can be produced and downloaded as well as visualized on maps.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: A distribution list was produced and analysed. Product D5.1 was delivered and objective 1 achieved.

http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegroprod_beta/home.seam


34

Task 6 title: Case study Beta Sub-task 2 title: List of recommended genetic reserve sites Start date: 01-11-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.4. Preceding Years: The processed data set was reduced to European occurrence (15,275 data sets, incl. subsp. vulgaris, the cultivated form). Eight taxa are naturally distributed within the EU-27. By applying the step-wise methodology for identifying CWR genetic reserve sites for a target crop gene pool elaborated by P1 six of them were selected and set on the priority list, namely B. patula, B. macrocarpa, B. vulgaris subsp. adanensis, B. nana, P. webbiana and P. procumbens. Details on the application of the 4-step-methodolgy are described in the Crop case study Beta L. (including Patellifolia A. J. Scott et al.) (Annex 7). The case study also discusses why genetic reserves for a non-priority species should also be established. A total of 26 genetic reserve sites for seven taxa were proposed. The selected taxa and sites are also documented by the Genetic Reserve Information System developed and hosted by P6 (see http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: Product D6.2 was delivered and objective 2 and 3 achieved.

Task 6 title: Case study Beta

Sub-task 3 title: Species specific GR design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature (10 species)


No of participating partner(s) P.7. P.4. P.6.

Preceding Years: Advanced drafts of the “Crop case study Beta L. (including Patellifolia A. J. Scott et al.)” as well as the “Genetic reserve guideline for Beta (including Patellifolia)” were produced during the second project year and distributed to project partners as well as counterparts in Portugal with the request for a critical review.

Final Year : Both documents have been thoroughly reviewed, edited and completed in the final year (see Annex 7 and 8). A detailed analysis of the legal potentialities for the establishment of a genetic reserve was initiated by the WP6 leader and performed by the University of Aarhus in the final year. The study describes the Danish laws and authorities regulating the species and habitat protection. A description of regulations and plans which can further the establishment of a precise genetic reserve for BVM at the Kalundborg Fjord in Denmark is presented in the Annex 9 to the final report. A genetic Beta patula Aiton genetic reserve action plan was written by M. Pinheiro de Carvalho and L. Frese during the last project phase (Annex 10).

CONCLUSION: Aspects of the design of species specific genetic reserve have been investigated. The results have been presented in the study of the University of Aarhus as well as in Chapter 6 (Beta patula (Ait.): Genetic diversity analysis) of the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces”. Guidelines as well as an action plans for B. patula were produced. In addition, literature on 10 Beta / Patellifolia species is listed in the Case study and guideline as well. Product D6.3 has been delivered and objective 4 achieved.

http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/


35

Task 1 title: Case study Beta Sub-task 4 title: Demographic and genetic baseline required for

monitoring (1 site). Survey data available in project database



Preceding Years: P8 started with the detailed inventory of B. patula during the first project year. In addition, occurrences of B. vulgaris and P. procumbens were recorded. The data were published the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces”. During the inventory of the species leaf samples of single plants of were taken and sent to P0 for genetic analysis of the B. patula and B. vulgaris subsp. maritima material with SSR marker.

Final Year : In the final year all data were analysed and the results published. The development of a data repository and tool for managing genetic marker data was completed (Annex 11).

CONCLUSION: A demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring has been established for one taxon / site. The data is available in databases. Product D6.4 was delivered and objective 5 achieved.

Task 1 title: Case study Beta

Sub-task 5 title: Recommendation for in situ management (Germany, Portugal, EU)



Preceding Years: Recommendations for in situ management of wild species related with the cultivated Beta taxa are presented in the “Crop case study Beta L. (including Patellifolia A. J. Scott et al.)” as well as in the “Genetic reserve guideline for Beta (including Patellifolia)”.

Final Year : During the 4th reporting period the case study was critically reviewed by Dr. C. Duarte (Lisboa, Portugal) and based on her input the final document was produced. The guideline document was completed and finalized during the 4th reporting perioid. As a recommendation to local nature conservation agencies, the genetic reserves action plan was written for B. patula.

CONCLUSION: The recommendations will be discussed with the ECPGR working group on Beta at the next meeting which will take place in France, June 2012 to promote the in situ management of Beta / Patellifolia genetic resources in Europe. The principles underlying this crop specific work will be used to elaborate a national in situ management strategy for Germany. Product 6.5 was delivered and objective 6 and 7 have been achieved.


36


Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D6.1 Month 14 List of Beta species and their distribution sites in Europe Month 12

D6.2 Month 16 List of recommended genetic reserve sites Month 23

D6.3 Month 20 Species specific GR design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature (10 species)

Month 36

D6.4 Month 26 Demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring (1 site). Survey data available in project database

Month 36

D6.5 Month 34 Recommend. for in situ management (Germany, Portugal, EU) Month 36


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status



M6.2 Month 15 Priorisation of species and populations completed and national focal points informed

Month 23

M6.3 Month 18 Species specific genetic reserve design, management and monitoring guidelines drafted.

Month 23

M6.4 Month 24

B. patula site visited, data recorded, leaf samples taken and analysed, data sent to database, existence of other recommended sites ascertained.

Month 15

M6.5 Month 30 Legal framework analysed, GR plans finalised Month 36



37


Work package title: Case study Brassica No of lead partner P.8 No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.4.


Main objectives

Objective 1: Collation of species and population distribution data existing in various information systems.

Objective 2: Priorisation of species and populations.

Objective 3: Recommendation of sites suited to establish genetic reserves for Brassica in the EU.


Objective 5: Establishment of a demographic and genetic baseline for a single Brassica genetic reserve.

Objective 6: Compilation of the national legal framework related to in situ management (Italy, Denmark, EU), annotation of the legal and organisational national framework and derivation of recommendations for a national strategy for in situ management.


Task 7 title: Case study Brassica Sub-task 1 title: List of Brassica species and their distribution sites in

Sicily Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.4. Preceding Years: The European Brassica Database (Bras EDB) was used in the first project year to produce a list of wild species distributed in Europe. Sites of Sicilian Brassica CWR were identified and located, such as B. incana, B. rupestris, B. macrocarpa and B. villosa. B. incana: In eastern Sicily five sites and in the province of Siracusa three sites were visited. B. rupestris: In north-west Sicily five sites in the province of Palermo. One site was found southeast to the island at Ragusa and another in the province of Messina. B. macrocarpa: This species is endemic the island of Favignana in the province of Trapani. B. villosa: The species was found on four sites. During the visits, seed samples were collected and added to the DOFATA ex situ collections of wild Brassicas. Accessions of all four species altogether sampled on 10 sites were sown to produce plants required for the study of the within and between species variation.

The species and site data recorded during the field visits were sent to WP10 and added to the Brassica specific module of AEGRO PLIS.

Final Year : During the final year the publication of the AEGRO Brassica Case Study was prepared which contains the species list, information on the species distribution and plant features as well as on the possibility of producing intergeneric and interspecific hybrids. The study was published the CABI


38

book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces in 2011 (Annex 12).

CONCLUSION: A list of Brassica species distributed in Europe was produced. Known distribution areas of Sicilian wild Brassica CWR were visited and growing sites identified. Product D7.1 was delivered and objective 1 achieved.

Task 7 title: Case study Brassica

Sub-task 2 title: List of recommended genetic reserve sites Start date: 01-11-2009

No of participating partner(s) P.0.

Preceding Years: The primary genepool of the crop “Brassica” contains a very high number of species amongst them many that do not belong to the genus Brassica. As established in the AEGRO project contract WP7 focussed on the Brassica oleracea cytodeme. In the third project period the WP7 team determined genetic reserves target species of the Brassica oleracea cytodeme based on information found in various publications and databases on the distribution areas and number of occurrences within these areas. The following five Brassica taxa were then prioritized: Brassica cretica Lam. (mainly the subspecies cretica and laconic), B. incana Ten., B. insularis Moris, B. montana Pourr., and B. macrocarpa. Further species have also rather restricted distribution areas and should be taken into account when genetic reserves are to be established. These are B. balearica Pers., B. bourgeaui (Webb. ex H.Christ) Kuntze, B. cadmea Heldr. ex O.E.Schulz, B. gravinae Ten., B. hilarionis Post, B. nivalis Boiss. & Heldr., B. procumbens (Poir.) O.E.Schulz and B. tyrrhena Giotta, Piccitto & Arragoni. Danish Brassica has not been included in the case study as no species within the cytodeme “oleracea” is present in Denmark. B. rapa is considered native to Denmark, whereas B. napus and B. nigra are introduced or escaped from cultivation. All the target species are characterized by relative large genetic differences among populations and isolation of populations by distance. Thus a relative large number of populations of each species have to be protected in order to maintain a large part of the genetic variation. For four of the proposed five priority species altogether 15 genetic reserves sites were proposed (see http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/).

Final Year : During the final year all findings were compiled, analysed and published in the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces (Annex 12).

CONCLUSION: Species within the Brassica oleracea cytodeme were prioritized and a list of recommended genetic reserve sites produced. This list includes sites within the EU-27. Product 7.2 was delivered and objectives 2 and 3 were achieved.


Sub-task 3 title: Genetic reserve guideline Start date: 01-02-2010


Preceding Years: A genetic reserve guideline was written as shown in Annex 13.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: Product 7.3 was delivered and objective 4 achieved.



39

Task 7 title: Case study Brassica Sub-task 4 title: Demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring

(1 site). Survey data available in the project database Start date: 01-02-2010


Preceding Years: The establishment of a demographic and genetic baseline for a single Brassica genetic reserve are to be based on knowledge of the structure of genetic diversity of the target species. The genetic and morphological diversity of four species found in Sicily during the field trips was investigated. It concerns B. incana (2 sites), B. villosa (1 site), B. rupestris (4 sites), and B. macrocarpa (1 site).

Final Year : During the final year the data analysis was completed and the results prepared for publication in the CABI book, Chapter 7, “Assessing Genetic Reserves in Sicily (Italy): the Brassica Wild Relatives Case Study” (Annex 13). All data are kept in a project database at the UniCT.

CONCLUSION: The difference between species and the variation within species was determined. Baseline information is now available which can be used to establish monitoring actvities, if need arises. Product 7.4 was delivered and objective 5 achieved.


Sub-task 5 title: Recommendation for in situ management of CWR (Italy, Denmark, EU)



Preceding Years: The rational for the establishment of a genetic reserve for B. macrocarpa were given in the second report. With regard to this species the task of genetic reserve data recording, documentation and management of the Egadi genetic reserve have to be solved through close cooperation between DOFATA, CUTGANA and the local and protected areas authorities. The WP7 leader contacted the respective persons. It was recommended using a participatory genetic reserve planning approach which includes in the decision making process the protected area managers and the local people having a long tradition in using the area. An analysis of the legal framework is given for the Egadi marine nature reserve (see Annex 13)

Final Year : The legal and organisational Danish framework for in situ management was reviewed by P4 (Annex 9). Recommendation for the establishment of genetic reserves for Italy with a focus on Sicily as well as for the EU will be published in the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. The legal context was described for Sicily and for Denmark as well. With respect to the planned analysis of the legal context at the EU level the WP7 team agrees with the coordinator’s comment on sub-task 1.5.

CONCLUSION: The case study and related documents will be discussed with the ECPGR working group on Brassica at the next meeting. The interaction between the WP7 team and the ECPGR will contributed to the establishment of a crop specific European integrated workplan for in situ management. Product 7.5 was delivered and objectives 6 and 7 achieved.


40


Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D7.1 Month 14 List of Brassica species and their distribution sites in Sicily Month 36


D7.3 Month 20

Species specific genetic reserve design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature (5 species)

Month 36

D7.4 Month 26 Demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring (1 site). Survey data available in the project database

Month 36

D7.5 Month 34 Recommend. or in situ management of CWR (Italy, Denmark, EU) Month 41


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status



M7.2 Month 15 Priorisation of species and populations completed and national focal points informed

Month 28

M7.3 Month 18 Demographic data recorded, samples for genetic analysis taken Month 32

M7.4 Month 24

Brassica spp. sites visited, data recorded, leaf samples taken and analysed, data sent to database, existence of species at other recommended sites ascertained

Month 32

M7.5 Month 26 Legal framework analysed, GR plans finalised Month 36



41


Work package title: Case study Avena No of lead partner P.5 No of participating partner(s) P.0. P.6. P.8

Total person-months 6.5

Main objectives

Objective 1: A list of all known populations of wild and marginally cultivated Avena species will be extracted from data sources as outlined in work package 10 and collated.

Objective 2: Prioritisation of species and populations.

Objective 3: Recommendation of sites suited to establish genetic reserves for Avena in the EU.


Objective 5: Establishment of a demographic and genetic baseline for a single Avena genetic reserve.

Objective 6: Compilation of the national legal framework related to in situ management, annotation of the legal and organisational national framework and derivation of a national strategy for in situ management.


Task 8 title: Case study Avena Sub-task 1 title: List of Avena species and their distribution sites in

Europe Start date: 01-10-2007

No of participating partner(s) P.0

Preceding Years: During the first project year phylogenetic aspect of the genus Avena L. (Poaceae) were reviewed and compiled in a working document. The review revealed apparent disagreement in literature over the species concept within the genus. Furthermore, during the last 20 years new species have been described, such as diploid A. atlantica (1985), and tetraploids A. agadiriana (1985) and A. insularis (1998). Speciation in Avena has been approached either by the biological or taxonomical concept. Baum’s monograph (1977) (taxonomical approach), based on micromorphological characters, divide Avena species into 7 Sections and 27 species, later revised to also include the newly discovered species and increase the number of species to 31 species (Legget and Thomas, 1995). The biological classification by Ladizinsky (1989) on the other hand includes only 14 species and 9 synonyms. However, under this classification the hexaploids A. sterilis, A. fatua, A. byzantina, A. hybrida, A. atherantha, A. occidentalis, A. trichophylla and A. sativa are classified as A. sativa. In the databases different numbers of species are presented (i.e. in EURISCO 43 species are identified, in GBIF 71 species, in GRIN 83 species). Avena species are distributed mostly in the Northern hemisphere and mainly around the Mediterranean Sea and the Canary islands. The genus highest diversity in found in northern Africa (Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco), Southern Spain and Sicily (Italy). All major biological species are found in Morocco except A. canariensis, A. ventricosa, A. insularis and A. macrostachya. Species A. agadiriana, A. atlantica and A. maroccana are found only in Morocco. A. canariensis is unique to the Canary islands, A. damascena to Syria and Morocco and A. insularis to Tunisia and Sicily (Italy). A. murphyi, A. longiglumis, A. prostrata are found in restricted areas in Southern Spain. A. ventricosa is found in Cyprus, while A. insularis was firstly discovered in Sicily. For the case study Avena (WP8) a meeting with Avena expert was organised and hosted by the Agricultural University of Athens (P6) on March 26th and 27th, 2008. People attending the meeting were: J.M. Leggett (IGER, UK), G. Ladizinsky (Hebrew University, Israel), I. Loskutov (Vavilov Institute, Russia), P. Garcia (Leon University, Spain), C. Germeier (Julius Kühn Institute, Germany), A. Katsiotis (Agricultural University of Athens, Greece), N. Nikoloudakis (Agricultural University of Athens, Greece) and A. Drossou (Agricultural University of Athens, Greece). During the meeting


42

subjects relating to the project were discussed, including taxonomy, species distribution, species presence in databases, evolutionary schemes, species presence in Southern Spain. All of the above presentations were of great importance to come into decisions and proposals regarding the objectives of the project. All presentations have been uploaded to the AEGRO intranet (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=133, “Athens meeting”).

Final Year : The findings were used in the publication of Chapter 9 “Surveying and Conserving European Avena Species Diversity” of the CABI book (Annex 14).

CONCLUSION: The WP8 leader decided to adopt the biological species classification with modifications. During the first year of the project a list of all Avena species has been agreed based on the biological classification. Furthermore, the species distribution sites in Europe have been recognized and mapped. Product 8.1. was delivered and objective 1 achieved.

Task 8 title: Case study Avena

Sub-task 2 title: List of recommended genetic reserve sites Start date: 01-10-2007


Preceding Years: A total of 32 taxonomic entities are recognized, though there is some disagreement over classification of some species/taxa, while Ladizinsky (1988) recognize 14 biological species. One of the tasks of the present project is to identify and prioritize those species for in situ conservation in order to maintain their genetic variability. The general methodology for crop wild relative in situ conservation includes four basic steps:

taxon delineation,

selection of target taxa,

ecogeographic diversity analysis,

selection of target sites. The above steps were comprehensively discussed and analyzed during a two-day meeting in Athens during 2008. Minutes and decisions taken during this meeting are presented in Annex 14 which contains more details on the work performed. Four species were set on the priority list.

Final Year : The final selection of target sites was performed in the last year. Altogether 9 sites were proposed and registered in GenResIS (see http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/.)

CONCLUSION: Product 8.2 was delivered and objective 2 and 3 achieved.


Sub-task 3 title: Species specific GR design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature (26 species)



Preceding Years: An outline of the species specific genetic reserve design, management and monitoring guidelines, description of the conservation context, the site abiotic conditions, as well as the site management policy, monitoring and management has been developed.

Final Year : The draft developed in the preceding years was reviewed and will be published along with the list of




43

literature on Avena species in the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces.

CONCLUSION: Product D8.3 was delivered and objective 4 achieved.


Sub-task 4 title: Demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring (1 site). Survey data available in project data base



Preceding Years: The population size of A. longiglumis and A. hirtula were recorded in Sicily and Spain during surveys in spring 2010. Details on this plant exploration are given in Annex 14. The census data are kept in a project data base at the University of Athens. The genetic analyis was performed using RAPDs, a well-established method used in the P5 laboratory for the last 15 years. The laboratory work was performed by undergratuate and gratuate students for two reasons: (i) They are not paid by the AEGRO project which kept the project costs low. (ii) It allowed training of the students in the field of genetic diversity analysis which in turn results in capacity building.

Final Year : Based on Annex 14, chapter 9 “Surveying and conserving the European Avena spp. diversity” of the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces” was prepared and will be publised in 2011. Chapter 9.4 presents information on the population baseline of three species and discusses technical problems with respect to gathering demographic data of a monocotyle species based on single plant counts during a plant exploration with limited time resource. Chapter 9.5 reports on the results of the genetic analysis. Genetic similarities among entries within A. ventricosa ranged from 0.72 to 0.99, for A. insularis from 0.80 to 0.95 and for A. murphyi from 0.75 to 0.96. For all three species no clustering according to their geographic origin of the samples was observed. All data are kept in a project database at the University of Athen by P6.

Conclusions: Although with some delay, but as planned (M8.4) selected recommended sites were visited, data recorded, leaf samples of a wild oat species taken at one site and, in addition to the work seed samples from other site were taken and analysed. Hence more species was surveyed and analysed than proposed in the work plan which adds value to the project. A demographic and genetic baseline was described. Product 8.4 was delivered and objective 5 achieved.


44

Task 8 title: Case study Avena Sub-task 5 title: Draft national concept for in situ management

published and recommendation for EU elaborated Start date: 01-07-2010


Preceding Years: Contacts with conservations agencies in Sicily and Spain were established. It was agreed to jointly elaborate recommendations for the in situ conservation of A. longiglumis, A. hirtula and A. murphyi as well as guidelines for monitoring populations at their cited sites. Recommendations (EU level) for the in situ conservation of Avena have already been described in the second annual technical report.

Final Year : Recommendations for in situ conservation of the most threatened species were discussed with the Italian and Spanish authorities responsible for species conservation. The result of this consultation process was published in the above mentioned chapter 9 of the CABI book. It was not possible for the WP8 leader to comment the legal Italian and Spanish framework for in situ management actions. Practical organisational aspects were however addressed and are discussed in Chapter 9.6.

CONCLUSION: The case study describes experiences gained during working with an annual, self-pollinated monocotyle genus. The case study contributes therefore a specific and unique component to an integrated European in situ management workplan. The results of case study will be discussed at the next meeting of the ECPGR Avena working group. Product D8.5 was delivered and objective 6 (partly) and 7 (fully) achieved.


45


Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D8.1 Month 14 List of Avena species and their distribution sites in Europe Month 30


D8.3 Month 20 Species specific GR design, management and monitoring guidelines including a list of relevant literature (26 species)

Month 38

D8.4 Month 26 Demographic and genetic baseline required for monitoring (1 site). Survey data available in project data base

Month 42

D8.5 Month 34 Draft national concept for in situ management published and recommendation for EU elaborated

Month 42


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status



M8.2 Month 14 Prioritisation of species and populations completed and national focal points informed

Month 34

M8.3 Month 18 Demographic data recorded, samples for genetic analysis taken Month 34

M8.4 Month 24 Selected recommended site visited, data recorded, leaf samples at least one site taken and analysed

Month 40

M8.5 Month 26 Legal framework analysed, GR design, management & monitoring plans finalised

Month 41



46


Work package title: Synthesis & development of common quality standards for genetic reserves (GR)

No of lead partner P.6…

No of participating partner(s) P.0 P.1 P.2 P.4 P.5 P.7 P.8


Main objectives

Objective 1: To analyse and synthesize the results obtained from the case studies in terms of geographic location, habitat, conservation status of the selected sites and status of the populations.

Objective 2: To identify other CWR taxa that can be conserved under the umbrella of selected taxa in order to transform the original single oriented genetic reserves into habitat specific multi-crop genetic reserves.

Objective 3: To develop baseline quality standards for genetic reserves based in the characteristics of the selections made by crop-specific WPs.

Task 9 title: Synthesis & development of common quality standards for GR Sub-task 1 title: Synthetic evaluation of locations, habitats and

conservation status of selected sites of genetic reserves from all CWR case studies



Preceding Years: A considerable amount of time has been dedicated to looking for suitable sources of data that can be incorporated to the programmed Geographical Information System for the synthetic evaluation. Finally contacts were established to obtain the database of Natura 2000 Network. This database is not publicly available but access to data was kindly made possible by DG ENV – B2, Nature & Biodiversity, European Commission. A bibliographic search has also been made to identify and locate existing European-wide GIS modelling studies that can provide suitable data and approaches. These data was later used in connection with Workpackage 10 to conduct a pilot gap analysis with Prunus population occurrences obtained from the Prunus database, in order to get the population occurrences data that lie within the boundaries of Natura 2000 sites. The resulting information was incorporated into the Prunus database and set the basis for the identification of potential sites where genetic reserves could be established. The gap analysis also allowed for the identification of issues related to data quality (accuracy of geographic coordinates) that need to be taken into account in this process. The data layer of the Natura 2000 Network has been used in connection with Workpackage 10 and the thematic Workpackages 5, 6, 7 and 8 to conduct gap analysis with Avena, Brassica and Beta population occurrences obtained from the Avena, Brassica and Beta databases, as done for Prunus in the first year. The resulting information was incorporated into the Avena, Brassica and Beta databases, setting the basis for the identification of potential sites where genetic reserves could be established (see AEGRO PLIS: http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=168). The selection of genetic reserves at the European level by the case study workpackages is a central piece for the development of this sub-task. Therefore, great dedication has been given to provide the case study workpackages information and methodological approaches that should be helpful in making this decision. On one side, information has been extracted from the PLIS database on the species occurrences that lie within the Natura 2000 sites and made it available to the case study workpackages. On the other side a systematic methodology has been developed on how to select and rank genetic reserve sites for the creation of a network at the European level (based on the case of Beta. An important step of this methodology is the development of a European ecogeographical land characterization map exclusively based on environmental variables that are deemed important



47

for each model genus. For that purpose a survey was conducted among the partners of the case-study workpackages to obtain expert knowledge on this issue. Consequently, European-level ecogeographical land characterization maps have been developed for Beta and Avena based on environmental variables selected by expert criteria and predictive modelling software (Maxent). Then work was concentrated on the design of a database and web-based information system that should provide information on proposed genetic reserves such:

- geographic location - habitat - conservation status of the selected sites - ecogeographical characterization - presence of the species and status of the populations of:

o priority CWR of AEGRO model genera o non-priority CWR of AEGRO model genera o other CWR

Final Year : This Geographical Information System holding information at the European level became operational in the final project phase and has been named “Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) and. GenResIS is now available to experts and to the public at http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/ and is integrated in the AEGRO homepage. This website provides information on recommended locations, mainly in protected areas, suited for the establishment of genetic reserves for Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus targeted crop wild relative taxa across Europe. The information includes ecogeographical data as well as an inventory of crop wild relatives belonging to the four target genera occurring at each location. The selection of these sites follows the principles established in the crop-genepool methodology for the identification of genetic reserve sites developed in WP 2. Full data contents of GenResIS are included in the DVD (Annex 15) provided with the final report. The scope, methodology, results and conclusions of this sub-task are fully developed in the “Synthesis of proposed sites” report (Annex 16).

CONCLUSION: With the preparation of the “Synthesis of proposed sites” report, the establishment of GenResIS and its publication on the web a useful product D9.1 was delivered and objective 1 achieved.

Sub-task 2 title: List of groups of CWR taxa that can be associated to

the CWR case study genetic reserves acting as umbrella species



Preceding Years: A thorough bibliographical search on scientific literature has been conducted to assess the arguments in favour and against the use of umbrella species to warrant the conservation of other species. At the same time, different strategies have been studied and applied to pilot cases on how to identify CWRs that would find additional protection by the establishment of selected genetic reserves. Since the actual geographical delimitation of the polygon of the selected genetic reserves is not going to be defined the polygon of the protected areas where the genetic reserves would be established and/or the habitat characteristic of the umbrella species have been taken as proxies.

Final Year : All the information available through the AEGRO PLIS and the EUNIS databases was gathered for the final selection of proposed sites of the Natura 2000 Network. Furthermore, the managers of these protected areas were contacted by email and fax to obtain the inventories of flora of the selected sites. With this information a list of groups of CWR taxa has been produced that can be associated to the CWR case study genetic reserves. P6 has classified these taxa according to different priority criteria. The GRIN database was consulted to quantify the number of CWR that related to food crops and the number of CWR that share the same habitat than the focal species was quantified. All the resulting information and assessments are included in Annex 16. Results show that the focal species selected could be used to provide umbrella conservation on a relevant number of CWR species,



48

especially in the cases of Avena and Beta species. However, the heterogeneous information obtained in the different sites indicates that the current state of information available through databases is deficient and that on-site inventories of flora are necessary to adequately assess the value of using focal species as umbrella species.

CONCLUSION: A report compiling the list of CWR taxa that can be conserved under the umbrella of selected taxa in order to transform the original single species oriented genetic reserves into habitat specific multicrop genetic reserves has been produced and the possibility of using the umbrella species approach for the in situ conservation of CWR has been assessed. Accordingly, product D8.2 was delivered and objective 2 achieved.

Sub-task 3 title: Set of minimum quality standards for an integrated network of genetic reserves in Europe



Preceding Years: In year 2, a draft text for the set of minimum quality standards for an integrated network of genetic reserves in Europe was produced after analysing the needs for implementing effective in situ conservation procedures in CWR and reviewing existing literature on genetic reserves and protected areas in general. The draft has experienced several rounds of reviews and improvements from contributions of AEGRO partners and additional information obtained from a further review of the existing literature. The last version of the document has been disseminated to the CWR conservation community through the presentation of an oral communication entitled “Identifying quality standards for genetic reserve conservation of CWR” at the international Symposium “CWRs & Landraces in Europe” held in Funchal, Madeira, on 13-16 September, 2010. Moreover, to promote the additional discussion on this document by other members of the conservation community a web site has been designed and established at: https://sites.google.com/site/qualitystandardsforcwrs/home. Along with this web site a

discussion group on the same subject has been established at http://groups.google.com/group/quality-standards-CWR as well as a mailing list ([email protected]).

Final Year : The consultation process on the quality standards as described in the 3rd report has been complemented with the dissemination of the draft document to specialized mailing lists of the Plant Genetic Resources and Protected Areas Communities (i.e., [email protected] and the Europarc Federation). Furthermore, the managers of the protected areas selected for the establishment of genetic reserves (Subtask 1) were contacted by email or fax concerning this issue to gather additional feedback. The consultation process ended in month 40. Relevant feedback was used to produce a final version of the quality standards document. This final version is now available at: https://sites.google.com/site/qualitystandardsforcwrs/home. Furthermore, the final version will also be published by CABI as a chapter of the book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces“. Annex 17 provides the content of the quality standards as well as a detailed account of the context and the way they were developed.

CONCLUSION: A revised document containing the basic framework of quality standards has been produced. A reviewed paper on quality standards was written and will be published in 2011 as chapter 10 in the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces“. The final document is also available at https://sites.google.com/site/qualitystandardsforcwrs/home. Product D9.3 was delivered and objective 3 achieved.

https://sites.google.com/site/qualitystandardsforcwrs/home

http://groups.google.com/group/quality-standards-CWR

mailto:[email protected]






49

Overview of deliverables *: If applicable, enter a Χ in the appropriate cell

Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D9.1 Month 25 Synthetic evaluation of locations, habitats and conservation status

of selected sites of genetic reserves from all CWR case studies Month 42

D9.2 Month 30 List of groups of CWR taxa that can be associated to the CWR case study genetic reserves acting as umbrella species

Month 42

D9.3 Month 34 Set of minimum quality standards for an integrated network of genetic reserves in Europe

Month 40

Overview of milestones *: If applicable, enter a Χ in the appropriate cell

Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M9.1 Month 24 Collate thematic layers of Europe for the establish. of GIS platform Month 12

M9.2 Month 26 List of CWR taxa that can potentially be conserved along with each case study species using the latter as umbrella species

Month 40

M9.3 Month 26 Collate locations and characteristics of sites proposed to hold genetic reserves by the case study workpackages

Month 40

M9.4 Month 28 Synthetic assessment of genetic reserves of all case study species Month 42

M9.5 Month 30 Identification of CWR taxa that will be conserved in the selected sites using case study species as umbrella species

Month 41

M9.6 Month 32 Min. quality standards for the conservation of CWR taxa in EU GRs Month 40


50


Work package title: Documentation for genetic reserve management field work & ECCDB capacity building

No of lead partner P. 0

No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.4. P.5 P.6. P.7. P.8.


Main objectives

Objective 1: Establishment of a project database and web portal.

Objective 2: Collect and integrate distribution and occurrence information for the case study crops (Avena, Beta, Brassica, Prunus, and, if applicable, their landraces).

Objective 3: Development of ontologies, data and object models for the domain of in situ management of plant genetic resources field work on the population level.

Objective 4: Integration of project results in existing information systems and thereby capacity building for ECCDB managers.

Task 10 title: Documentation for genetic reserve management field work & ECCDB capacity building

Sub-task 1 title: Internet accessible, easily searchable, completed and updated list of known and probable occurrences on a population level for the model crops derived from the mentioned data sources refined


No of participating partner(s) P.1. P.2. P.5. P.6. P.7. P.8. Preceding Years:

A web portal of the AEGRO project was established and is available at http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/. The button CWRIS-AEGRO-PLIS leads users to four independent instances of the same web application collectively called "Population Level Information System". It has been developed to work separately for Avena, Beta, Brassica and Prunus so that it would be possible to integrate it into respective applications for these or other CCDBs. It allows the search for occurrences within a specific taxon on various taxonomic levels. PLIS combines different data sources, including GBIF, EURISCO and USDA-GRIN and uses partially harmonized data. It allows (i) the search for occurrences by taxon information, (ii) the search for occurrences by geographic information (Eurostat administrative units, NUTS, LAU) and Natura 2000 protected areas, (iii) a combined search for occurrences by taxon and geographic information, and (iv) the display of search results on a map or downloading of the results as a file (see Appendix 18).

Final Year : During the project phase work focussed on the integration of the JSF Marker Clusterer, which supports the mapping of unlimited result sets. It has been found out, that when communicating thousands of points to the web service Google Maps the number of data points was restricted by performance reasons as well as by limited allowance to send requests. To overcome the “Too Many Markers Problem”, Wu (2009) developed a marker clusterer as JavaScript API, which collects markers into clusters adapted to the zoom level and displays the number of markers in each cluster with a label. This API has been integrated into the gmaps4jsf Framework for using Google Maps with JSF. Several data points in the source data are wrongly geo-referenced. This is most obvious, if occurrences of terrestrial plants appear within the oceans or water bodies. In many cases sufficient description of the site is available in locality strings to improve the geo-referencing by using Google – Maps Services. All these errors would be optimally corrected online by local experts well familiar with the local geography. The corrections appear in the interpreted data displayed to the user. The original data will be conceptually not affected. For fulfilling respective use cases the site form has been made editable and enabled to use the GoogleMaps geo-referencing service.



51

CONCLUSION: An internet accessible, easily searchable, completed and updated list of known occurrences on a population level for the model crops is available and functioning. In addition to the work agree under sub-task 1 an online editing module for correcting wrong data has been developed and is functioning. Product D10.1 has been delivered and objective 1 achieved.

Sub-task 2 title: Feasibility study for a stronger integration of the mentioned data sources



Preceding Years: Data modelling focussed on taxonomic and geographic information. (i) Without clear taxonomic concepts quantitative estimates of rareness necessary for species prioritisation will not be possible. (ii) Historical distribution data may indicate plant groups that do no longer exist. Yet, such data are useful as they provide information on habitats appropriate for the respective species. Administrative units indicate political entities responsible for their protection. Like taxonomic ranks administrative levels allow for hierarchical search. The results of the feasibility study and a description of the software approaches is available in Annex 19. After downloading taxonomic and geographic data from data sources as decribed in Annex 19 it turned out that without improvement of the raw data the use of the data to the crop specific workpackages (WP5, 6, 7, and 8) would be rather limited. Thus the data were harmonised to make them searchable by hierarchical taxonomic and geographic criteria. A first requirement is an atomized representation of taxonomic ranks and administrative levels. Taxonomic synonymy relations have been established for all AEGRO model taxa in order to correctly identify all reported occurrences of a taxon. An application was developed in MS Access VBA to atomise the scientific name strings to their taxonomic ranks. The locality descriptions had to be atomized as well and the administrative levels harmonised with the Eurostat standard. This was done with an MS Access VBA application called SiteConverter or SiteInterpreter, which was developed allowing the interactive processing of location names. Parts of the functionality have been reimplemented in Java and integrated in the site editing module of the web application. A consistent representation of geographic coordinates was needed for mapping and geographic analysis. The SiteConverter also transformed geographic coordinates given in degrees to decimal coordinates. It was possible to process 700-1000 locality strings in one day.

Final Year : n.a. CONCLUSION: Data were downloaded from various information systems relevant to the AEGRO objectives. Using these data the feasibility study for the integration and quality improvement of historic occurrence data was performed. Low data quality in some information systems turned out to be a significant problem limiting the use of the available information sources to the crop specific work packages. Applications have been developed to atomise the scientific name strings to their taxonomic ranks and locality descriptions to administrative levels harmonised with the Eurostat standards. The data modelling and data processing was successful as evidenced by the crop specific modules of CWRIS-AEGRO-PLIS (http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/index.php?id=168). Product D10.2 was delivered and contributes to objective 1 and 2.



52

Sub-task 3 title: Project database documentation and DDL available in the project portal


No of participating partner(s) P.1. Preceding Years: The project database has been documented in the Annex 19 “Ontologies, data and object models”. Various MS Access versions of the databases including all data have been made available in the working documents.

Final Year : MySQL dumps and DDL for MySQl have been made available in the working documents for the core database on which the web application is based and for an enlarged database representing the XML schema and the Cybertracker application

CONCLUSION: Project documentation and DDLs are available in the working documents of the project portal.

Sub-task 4 title: First version of use cases, entity relationship and object models for a survey tool online

Start date: 15.11.2007


Preceding Years : CyberTracker (http://www.cybertracker.co.za/) was used for the implementation of a tool for recording data in the field/ natural habitat. The tool is operating on mobile data acquisition devices. A pilot application was developed and first tests have been made in the Beta case crop study. In the proposal it has been assumed that the data acquisition tool will be part of CWRIS PLIS. But with the decision for CyberTracker, a framework optimized for use on personal digital assistants (PDAs), this application became stand alone and technologically different from CWRIS PLIS. Yet, its use relieved us from going into details of software development for PDAs. During the project meeting in Almeria it was decided to test a refined tool also in the Avena crop case study during a visit to Spain in May 2010. A user manual of the refined tool can be found in Annex 20. Four use cases have been identified to generate demographic and genetic baselines for crop wild relatives in situ: 1. Define monitoring plots: A plot is geographically localised, described and documented for

continued monitoring to control the success of management plans. 2. Define patches: A patch is an agglomeration of individuals of a certain plant species. It is

geographically localised, described and documented for continuing monitoring. 3. Demographic monitoring: An occurrence is geographically described and the demographic status

(number or percentage of individuals in certain age cohorts) is observed. This can be done on a patch or a plot level (see previous use cases).

4. Genetic monitoring – sampling: An occurrence is geographically described. Individuals are located, geo-referenced and samples are taken from them for (genetic) analysis.

The data recorded in the field/habitat can be exported in a table structure and uploaded to a crop specific information system.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: CyberTracker has been identified as a widely distributed easy to use framework to generate tools used with portable data acquisition devices in field work. CyberTracker applications have been successfully applied in the Beta crop case study for the use cases necessary in demographic monitoring and sampling for generating a genetic baseline. Product D10.4 was delivered which contributed to objectives 2 and 3.

http://www.cybertracker.co.za/


53

Sub-task 5 title: First version of use cases, entity relationship and object models for additional modules in CWRIS and ECCDBs online



Preceding Years: Besides user authentification and authorisation, which is necessary, whenever writing into a database is allowed, the following domain objects (entity classes) are necessary to cover the range of information acquired in the CyberTracker applications discussed before. Class diagrams for the domain entity classes are presented in Annex 19 and use cases in Annex 21. Survey: A coherent field study with certain aims. General geographic information as administrative units (location), protected areas and occurrence sites have been already extracted from the historical data sources represented in CWRIS-PLIS. An identity checker will be necessary to find out the relationship of uploaded or input data to data already existing in the database or if it is necessary to add new data of these types. Monitoring plot: fixed experimental area with following attributes: localisation in a field design matrix (lane, plot), status (e.g. control, special treatment etc.), area (length, width), and geo-reference (reference points). Plots normally have a regular, usually quadratic or rectangular shape. Patch: A localised agglomeration of plants with following attributes: identifier, shape, area (length, width as largest and smallest extension), geo-reference (reference point(s)). Reference point: Reference points relate to plots and patches (n:m) and represent geographic co-ordinates to localise them with following attributes: object (plot or patch), designation (e.g. “upper left”, “upper right”, “lower left” etc.), description (e.g. “near bridge”), geographic coordinates. Taxonname: Taxonnames have been already extracted from the historical data sources represented in CWRIS-PLIS. An identity checker will be necessary to find out the relationship of uploaded data to data already existing in the database or if it is necessary to add a new taxonname. Cohort: A group of individuals with similar development stage. This class has following attributes: stage class (seedling, juvenile, flowering, senescent), observed minimum and maximum development stage within the cohort, number of individuals or estimated percentage of the cohort in the total of plants of this taxon. Cohorts are related to (observed in) plots or patches. Individual: Individual plant observed and / or used for sampling with attributes code, sex, health condition, development stage and georeferencing (coordinates).

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The entities and basic class diagrams have been described. Product D10.5 was delivered and a contribution to objectives 3 and 4 made.

Sub-task 6 title: Technical specification for data exchange, XML schema online



Preceding Years: An XML schema was developed based on the schema described by Moore et al. (2008) as Crop Wild Relative Markup Language. Only those elements have been considered, which are related to work done in AEGRO. This affects only a small part of the entire schema. Modifications are shown in Annex 22. They apply to the following elements: (i) nomenclature / taxonomy, (ii) ecogeography and distribution, (iii) location and site, (iv) additional subpopulation elements, and (v) monitoring.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: The XML Schema published by Moore et al. (2008) as Crop Wild Relatives Markup Language (CWRML) was taken as a basis and was amended and modified where suggested by results of AEGRO. Product D10.6 was delivered and a contribution to objectives 3 and 4 made.


54

Sub-task 7 title: Modules for in situ management on site and population level implemented (pilot version 0) in CWRIS and EADB and IDBB respectively



Preceding Years: The CyberTracker tool kit is freeware. Modules for in situ management on site and population level have been implemented as stand alone product which can be used and/or further developed by any interest group according to the needs. The data can be exported from the CyberTracker tool to a table and from there uploaded in information systems such as CWRIS or crop specific information systems.

Final Year : n.a.

CONCLUSION: See sub-task

Sub-task 8 title: Reference implementation for in situ management on site and population level (version 0) documented uploaded to CropForge



Preceding Years: The CyberTracker tool developed within AEGRO was uploaded to the internet and is freely available.

Final Year : Further testing and debugging is ongoing before all source code will be uploaded to CropForge.

CONCLUSION: Although the tool was not yet uploaded to CropForge it is freely available to any user as is software uploaded to CropForge. Product D10.8 was delivered. It contributes to the achievement of objective 3 and 4.

Sub-task 9 title: Reference implementation for in situ management on site and population level refined (version 1) and implemented in all participating ECCDBs

Start date:01-09-2009


Preceding Years: Following the monographic approach of CWR treatment, and in consideration of developing modules, which can be used by the CCDBs, the databases for the different crops were kept separate, but the same web application is used in four instances to make the data available in the web. The databases and the application can be integrated into the CCDBs and the respective web applications.

Final Year : The issue was raised in the ECPGR Avena Working Group, whether these data should be integrated to the EADB. Because the majority of GBIF data is without representation by a genebank accession it would considerably affect the character of the CCDB currently focussed to germplasm collections. A decision on this is not yet made. Further it will require considerable technical modernisation on the CCDBs side to integrate both applications on the bases of most advanced technology, which was used for CWRIS-PLIS. Modernisation of the EADB and the IDBB is currently ongoing

CONCLUSION: Integration of databases and web application into the CCDBs is possible. It will

need to be agreed by the Crop Working Groups and it will require technical modernisation of the web applications of EADB and IDBB, which is currently ongoing.


55

Overview of deliverables *: If applicable, enter a Χ in the appropriate cell

Deliverable number

Planned completion

Description Status


D10.1 Month 3 Internet accessible, easily searchable, completed and updated list

of known and probable occurrences on a population level for the model crops derived from the mentioned data sources.

Month 45

D10.2 Month 5 Feasibility study for a stronger integration of the mentioned data sources

Month 24

D10.3 Month 8 Project database documentation and DDL available in the project portal

Month 36

D10.4 Month 10 First version of use cases, entity relationship and object models for a survey tool online

Month 12

D10.5 Month 18 First version of use cases, entity relationship and object models for additional modules in CWRIS and ECCDBs online

Month 24

D10.6 Month 20 Technical specification for data exchange, XML schema online Month 36

D10.7 Month 22 Modules for in situ management on site and population level implemented (pilot version 0) in CWRIS and EADB and IDBB respectively

Month 24

D10.8 Month 34 Reference implementation for in situ management on site and population level (version 0) documented uploaded to CropForge

Month 45

D10.9 Month 34 Reference implementation for in situ management on site and population level refined (version 1) and implemented in all participating ECCDBs

Month 45


56


Milestone number

Planned completion

Description Status


M10.1 Month 2 During first project meeting: field work and respective hard- and

software requirements roughly defined. Month 3

M10.2 Month 4 Ontologies, data and object models for the domain of in situ management of PGR field work on the pop. level further developed

Month 12

M10.3 Month 6 Distribution and occurrence information for the model crops on the population level collected and integrated

Month 24

M10.4 Month 9 A project information system (use cases, object model, entity relationship models) modelled

Month 12

M10.5 Month 17 Results of first field works with the online survey tool evaluated, refinements of requirements proposed and of the implemented

Month --

M10.6 Month 19 Requirements analysis for the present. of project results in the web Month 12

M10.7 Month 21 Source code survey tool (V 1) documented on CropForge Month 45

M10.8 Month 23 Requirements of additional modules for target information systems to upload project results defined

Month 24

M10.9 Month 24 Additional modules in target info. systems modelled and described Month 24

M10.10 Month 28 Data exchange technically described (architecture, XML schema) Month 36

M10.11 Month 30 Reference (Version 0) implementation of additional modules and data exchange with the project db for CWRIS, EADB and IDBB

Month 45

M10.12 Month 32 Ref. implemen. (V1) upgraded/adapted for participating ECCDBs. Month 45



57

3. SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PROBLEM(S)

ENCOUNTERED

4. SUMMARY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE ACTION

Meetings, workshops and seminars organised by the coordinator and the

Partners

Preceding Years: All planned workshops (Evershot, UK, 2007) and coordination meetings (Quedlinburg, Germany, 2008; Almeria, Spain, 2009) have been organised and implemented in time. The final coordination meeting (Funchal, Portugal, 2010) was jointly organised with the ECPGR In situ and On farm Conservation Network and proved to be a very successful international dissemination conference attended by 84 participants from 38 countries.

Final Year : n.a. CONCLUSION: During the coordination meetings the project partners reviewed the aims and objectives as well as the milestones and achieved deliverables. During the project year the contact between project partners was maintained by email correspondence.

Technical problem(s) and alternative viable plan in case of significant problem(s)

Preceding Years: The crop specific work package leader/team had to take informed decisions with respect to the prioritisation of species and populations and the selection and recommendation of sites suited for the establishment of genetic reserves. For that purpose distribution data had to be acquired, compiled in crop specific information systems later called Population Level Information System (PLIS) and analysed. The most striking technical problem proved to be the low quality of the data sets downloaded from various existing information systems causing an unexpected high work load. Before any data could be used by the crop specific work packages teams, the data had to be processed with the help of half-automatic procedures such as the SiteConverter software developed by the WP10 leader shortly after the project start. Insufficient data quality is a problem which can only be solved by investing time into the improvement of the quality there was no alternative. However, the delay caused by WP10 for objectives reasons was catched up as evidenced by the project results. In this context the suggestion of a project reviewer to extent the project duration by 6 months poved to be very helpful.

Final Year : n.a CONCLUSION: All project products have been delivered at the end. Although the WP10 caused delays the most prominent result, a network of recommended genetic reserves site in Europe was achieved as can be seen at http://www.agrobiodiversidad.org/aegro/.



58

Changes in the action's management structure (If any)

The organisation of an international final dissemination conference was not foreseen in the project workplan. For that resean, and to allow for catching up work backlog, the coordinator sent a request for prolongation of the action duration by 6 months to the DG AGRI on May 20, 2010. The DG AGRI agreed to the change and the project duration was extended to 31 March, 2011.


59

Descriptive graph illustrating the distribution of the labour among the partners for all work packages

WP02, Leadpartner: P1

Strategy

P0, P1, P2, P5, P6, P8 WP03, Leadpartner: P2

Case study landraces

P0, P1, P6

WP06 Leadpartner: P0

Case study Beta

P0, P1, P6, P7


Case study Prunus

P0, P1, P6 P0, P2


Case study Brassica

P0, P1, P4, P6


Documentation

P0, P1, P2, P5, P6, P8

WP01, Leadpartner: P0 Coordination

P1, P2, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8

WP09

LP: P6

GIS

&

Quality

&

Synthesis

P0

P1

P2

P5

P8


Case study Avena

P0, P1, P6

Blue: data & information, green: genetic reserve, black&white: concepts, synthesis, protocols


60

5. SUMMARY OF THE DISSEMINATION OF THE

INTERIM RESULTS

Preceding Years: All partners have contributed to the dissemination of project results by presenting the actions aims and result at national and European meetings and conferences. The start-up meeting and training workshop as well as the 1st coordination meeting at Quedlinburg in 2008 and the final conference at Funchal, 2010 were attended by non-project partners allowing to publicise the work and to interact with experts from a range of ECPGR working groups. Papers and posters were presented by the AEGRO team at the following opportunities: 2008: Plant breedering conference, Göttingen, Germany 2008: National CWR project workshop, Lebus close to Frankfurt/Oder, Germany 2009: Spanish congress of conservation biology, Almeria, Spain 2009: Summer School Programm, Witzenhausen, Germany 2009: ECPGR SSF & MAP Network Coordination Group meeting, Quedlinburg, Germany 2009: SISV & FIP congress, Cagliari, Italy 2009: NordGen conference, Röstanga Gästgiveri, Sweden 2009: National CWR project workshop, Vilm, Germany 2010: ECPGR working group on forages meeting, Poel, Germany 2010: Meeting of the societa botanica italiana, Milano, Italy 2010: Workshop, INIA, Oeiras, Portugal 2010: NordGen conference “GRIPA”, Malmö, Sweden 2010: Baltic sea network, Tallin, Estonia 2010: Symposium “Towards the establishment of genetic reserves for crop wild relatives and landraces in Europe”, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal

Final Year : 2011: IIRB study group genetics and breeding meeting, Valladolid, Spain The AEGRO project partners contributed chapters 1–10, 16 and 30 to the proceeding of the conference ‘Towards the establishment of genetic reserves for crop wild relatives and landraces in Europe’. Through the book „Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces“ (eds. Maxted et al.) the results of the AEGRO project will be widely disseminated. Most of the final editing work was performed in the forth project period.

CONCLUSION: The project results were presented at a total of 16 opportunities. Our strategy was to use international fora as well as meetings of national stakeholder groups for the dissemination of our results. Via the international fora we aimed at influencing the international species conservation policy (CBD / conference of the parties). At the national level we addressed the experts from the species conservation sector and the local decision makers.

6. INPUT FOR THE COORDINATOR'S WEB SITE

The web site http://aegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/ provides access to the Population Level Information System (PLIS) as well as to the Genetic Reserve Information System (GenResIS) and to all public available working documents.



61

7. ANNEXES

The annexes are also posted on the public part of the AEGRO web site. The annexes printed in bold will be published in late 2011 in the CABI book “Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces“. A01_AEGRO_Startup_Meeting_Report.pdf A02_Case_Study_Methodology_Application_Report.pdf A03_Maxted_Ch_16_VNegri_etal_2011.pdf A04_Identification_of_MAA.pdf A05_Maxted_Ch_04_CTeeling_etal_2011.pdf A06_Report_First_Coord_Meeting.pdf A07_Crop_Case_Study_ Beta.pdf A08_Genetic_Reserve_Guideline_Beta.pdf A09_Legal_Framework_Denmark_Establishment_Genetic_Reserves.pdf A10_Action_Plan_Beta_Patula_Genetic_Reserve.pdf A11_Guide_InGerman_Monitoring_Database_V1_0.pdf A12_Maxted_Ch_08_KKristiansen_2011.pdf A13_Maxted_Ch_07_FBranca_etal_2011.pdf A14_Maxted_Ch_09_AKatsiotis_2011.pdf A15 (DVD) A16_Synthesis_Proposed_Sites_Report.pdf A17_Maxted_Ch_10_JIriondo_etal_2011.pdf A18_WebApp_User_Manual_CWRIS_PLIS.pdf A19_Ontology_Data_Object_Model.pdf A20_Cybertracker_Application_Data_Aquisition_Device_Manual.pdf A21_Use_Cases_Descriptions.pdf A22_XML_Schema.pdf A23 Summary table of man days worked

8. SUMMARY OF MANPOWER BY WORK PACKAGE FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD OF THE ACTION

The summary table of man days worked is attached as Annex 23.

Documents

PART C: FINAL TECHNICAL ACTIVITY REPORTaegro.jki.bund.de/aegro/uploads/tx_neofileshare/... · AGRI GEN RES 057- Acronym: AEGRO AGRI-2006-0396