World Water Day: How can research and technology reduce water use in agriculture?

Record breaking temperatures in 2018 led to drought in many European countries. Image credit Wikimedia Domain Mimikry11.

World Water Day draws attention to the global water crisis and addresses why so many people are being left behind when it comes to having access to safe water. The UN estimates that globally 80% of people who have to use unsafe and unprotected water sources live in rural areas. This can leave households, schools, workplaces and farms struggling to survive. On farms water is vital for the production of food and is used in a huge range of processes, including irrigation and watering livestock. In this blogpost I will lightly review the current issues around water in agriculture and highlight some exciting research projects that may offer potential solutions.

What is the water crisis?

The UN Sustainable Development Goal 6 is to ensure that all people have access to sustainable, safe water by 2030. Unfortunately, we’re a long way off achieving this goal as a recent report from UNICEF/WHO estimates that there are currently 2.1 billion people living without access to safe water in their homes and workplaces. Another report estimates that 71% of the global population experiences severe water scarcity during at least one month of the year. In recent years we have seen water risks increase, with severe droughts in Africa, China, Europe, India and the US. In sub-Saharan Africa, the number of record breaking dry months increased by 50% from 1980 to 2013. Unfortunately droughts, floods and rising sea levels are predicted to continue and become more unpredictable under climate change scenario models and as the global population continues to grow, there will be increasing demands on water supplies. Increases in water scarcity are likely to lead to increases in political and economic instability, conflict and migration.

Why is water important to agriculture?

In agriculture, water is vital for growing crops and sustaining livestock. Farmers use water to irrigate, apply pesticides and fertilizer and protect from heat and frost. This heavy reliance means that when water supplies run out, farmers are unable to effectively maintain their crops and livestock, leading to food insecurity. Drought stress can result in yield losses of 64% in rice, 50% in chickpea, 18 – 32% in potato. Drought has particularly devastating effects in tropical and sub-tropical regions, where climate change is predicted to have the biggest impact.

The amount of water it takes to produce food and drink products is pretty shocking. Beef production in particular is associated with high levels of water usage. It is estimated that the global average water footprint of a 150g beef burger is 2350 litres; despite producing just 5% of the world’s food calories, beef production is reported to create 40% of the water scarcity burden. Although there are big variations in the environmental impacts of beef farming, with grassland fed, rotational systems being less intensive than grain fed herds on deforested land.

Where does water used for agriculture come from?

The water that is used in agriculture comes from a range of sources, including surface and ground water supplies, rivers and streams, open canals, ponds, reservoirs and municipal systems. Globally, the FAO estimates that agriculture accounts for 70% of freshwater withdrawals, which is predominately used for irrigation. In many areas the high level of groundwater used for irrigation is unsustainable, leading to depletion. For instance, the OECD estimates that groundwater supplies 60% of India’s agricultural water needs but groundwater sources are suffering from depletion and pollution in 60% of states. A big problem is that irrigation is often highly inefficient; in the US the FAO estimates that the amount of irrigated water that is actually used by plants is only 56%. Large amounts of energy are also needed to withdraw, treat and supply agricultural water, leading to significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

What happens to agricultural water after use?

As well as depleting freshwater supplies, agriculture can also pollute them, with runoff containing large quantities of nutrients, antibiotics, growth hormones and other chemicals. This in turn has big affects on human health through contamination of surface and ground water with heavy metals, nitrate and pathogens and in the environment; it can cause algal blooms, dead zones and acidification of waterways. Combined these issues mean that better management of water in agriculture has huge potential for improving sustainability, climate resilience and food security, whilst reducing emissions and pollution.

What are the potential solutions?

Thankfully there are many innovative projects that are working to improve issues around water in agriculture. Below are a few examples that I find particularly promising.

How can technology help?

To reduce water wastage on farms, agri-technology is being developed whereby multiple wireless sensors detect soil moisture and evapotranspiration. The sensors feed this information to a cloud-based system that automatically determines precisely how much water to use in different parts of the field, leading to increased yields and saving water. Farmers can get water management recommendations via a smartphone app and the information automatically instructs irrigation systems. At a larger scale, these data systems can feed into a regional crop water demand model to inform decision-making on agricultural policies and management practices, and to provide early warnings of potential flood and drought risks.

Sensor that detects leaf moisture levels. Image credit: Wikimedia Domain Massimiliano Lincetto

Irrigation systems are also being made more efficient; one study found that simply changing from surface sprinklers to drip irrigation that applies water directly to plant roots through low-pressure piping, reduced non-beneficial water wastage by 76%, while maintaining yield production. In arid areas these systems can be used for a technique called partial root drying, whereby water is supplied to alternate side of the roots, the water stressed side then sends signals to close stomatal pores which reduces water lost through evapotranspiration.

These efficient precision irrigation systems are becoming cheaper and easier for farmers to use. However in tropical and sub-tropical areas, the technology can be difficult to apply smallholder farming, where there is often insufficient Internet connectivity, expertise, capital investment, and supply of energy and water. Several precision agriculture projects are working to overcome these challenges to promote efficient use of irrigation water, including in the semi-arid Pavagada region of India, the Gash Delta region of Sudan and São Paulo, Brazil. In Nepal, a Water Resources Information System has been established that collects data to inform river management, whereas in Bangladesh hundreds of solar-fuelled irrigation pumps have been installed that simultaneously reduce reliance on fossil fuels and reduce GHG emissions.

Hydroponic systems whereby plants are grown in water containing nutrients are becoming increasingly popular; the global market for hydroponics is projected to reach £325 million by 2020. Compared with land-based agriculture, hydroponics uses less land; causes less pollution and soil erosion and so these systems are less vulnerable to climate change. Critically they also reduce water use; once the initial water requirements are met, the closed-system recycles water and there is less evapotranspiration. The adoption of these systems is predicted to occur predominately in water stressed regions of the Middle East and Africa and in highly urbanised countries such as Israel, Japan and the Netherlands.

How can researching traditional approaches help?

It’s not just about agri-tech; there are relatively simple, traditional ways to tackle water issues in agriculture. To protect against drought, farmers can harvest and store rainwater during heavy downpours by building ponds and storage reservoirs. To reduce water wastage, farmers can improve the ability of soil to absorb and hold water through reducing tillage and using rotational livestock grazing, compost, mulch and cover crops. Wetlands, grasslands and riparian buffers can be managed to protect against floods, prevent waterlogging of crops and improve water quality. Increasingly these traditional methods valued and research is being done to optimise them. For instance a novel forage grass hybrid has been developed that is more resilient to water stress and can reduce runoff by 43 – 51% compared with conventional grass cultivars.

A small-scale farmer in Kenya who is harvest rainwater. Image credit: Wikimedia Domain Timothy Mburu.

How can crop and livestock breeding help?

In the past, crop and livestock varieties have been selected for high productivity. However, these varieties are often severely affected by changes in climate and extreme weather events such as drought and require high levels of water and nutrients. To improve resilience and sustainability, breeders increasingly need to also select for stress responses and resource use efficiency. In crops, drought resilience and water use efficiency is influenced by many traits, including root and shoot architecture, stomatal density and thickness of the waxy cuticle that covers leaves and reduces evapotranspiration. The complexity of these traits makes breeding crops for drought resilience challenging, as many different groups of genes need to be selected for. To deal with this, the International Rice Research Institute’s Green Super Rice project has been crossing high-yielding parent lines with hundreds of diverse varieties to produce new high-yielding varieties that require less water, fertilisers and pesticides. These varieties are now being delivered to farmers in countries across Asia and Africa. Similarly, climate change resilience is also vital for current and future livestock farming. Projects run by Professor Eileen Wall (SRUC) have identified novel traits and genes associated with drought and heat resilience in UK and African dairy cattle, which can be incorporated into breeding programmes.

What are the incentives?

Although these projects might sound promising, without incentives to drive their uptake it may take a long time for real impacts to come to fruition. Unfortunately, in some countries such as India there can be a lack of monetary incentives that would effectively enable farmers to take up new water management technology and practices. In the EU, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has allocated funds to support farmers in complying with ‘greening rules’ that improve sustainability, preserve ecosystems and efficient use of natural resources, including water. Farmers across the EU receive CAP payments for environmentally friendly farming practices, such as crop diversification and maintaining permanent grassland.

In many European countries, there is increasing consumer demand for sustainably farmed food products. This is driving large and small manufacturers to seek out sustainable suppliers and so farmers are incentivised to improve the sustainability of their farming practices so that they can be certified.  For instance the Sustainable Farming Assurance Programme requires farmers to follow good agricultural and environmental protection practices, including sustainable water use. In the coming years, more food products are likely to have water foot print labels that provide the consumer with information on the amount of water used during production and processing. This places considerable power in the hands of the consumer and large manufacturers are responding. For instance, by 2020 Kellogg has pledged to buy ten priority ingredients (corn, wheat, rice, potatoes, sugar and cocoa) only from farms that prioritise protecting water supplies, as well as using fertilizers safely, reducing emissions, and improving soil health. And Pepsico has created sustainable agriculture sourcing programmes that aim to help farmers improve water and soil resource management, protect water supplies, minimise emissions and improve soil health.

What can we do?

There are ways to take responsibility for reducing our own water footprints, including reducing meat and animal production consumption, reducing food wastage and buying sustainably farmed products. Finally, we can all get involved with communicating and promoting the importance of water in agriculture so that more people are aware of the issues. Head to the World Water Day website to find out about resources and events that may be happening near you.

——————————
This blog is written by Caboteer Dr Katie Tomlinson, who recently completed her PhD at the University of Bristol on cassava brown streak disease. Katie is now an Innovation and Skills manager at the BBSRC and is running the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Innovation Club. Views presented in this blog are her own. You can follow Katie on Twitter: @KatieTomlinson4.

Dr Katie Tomlinson

 

Travelling through Asia’s breadbasket

This is the second of a series of blogs from a group of University of Bristol Cabot Institute researchers who are on a remote expedition (funded by BCAI) to find out more about Kazakh agriculture and how farmers are responding to their changing landscape. 

Image credit: Hannah Vineer

Queen’s ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ played on the car radio as we drove through endless fields of stubble stretching into the horizon in every direction. We were 2 days into our 3-day, 2,345km journey from Astana to our field site, and it was easy to see why Kazakhstan is referred to as Asia’s breadbasket. Spring had finally arrived after an unusually long winter.  Tractors were busy burning, ploughing and planting, disappearing into the distance with each pass of the field.

The vast, flat steppe has provided the opportunity for cereal production on a scale unrivalled by the UK’s comparatively small field enclosures. In 2017, Kazakhstan held wheat stocks of 12MMT (million metric tonnes), making UK’s 1.4MMT seem like a drop in the ocean by comparison. Kazakhstan exports wheat globally and is a key player in global food security. Grain elevators capable of storing more than 100,000 tonnes of grain dominate the skyline of every major town and soon became a familiar feature of the landscape to us.

Image credit: Hannah Vineer

Our journey was punctuated every 6 hours or so by stops at restaurants that seemed to appear out of nowhere. Each one was as unique as the last, their bright colours a reflection of the cheerful nature of the Kazakh people. The popular Tabletkas parked outside reminded me of VW Transporters, and the friendly locals reminded me of my Welsh roots, where strangers greet you on the street.

Image credit: Hannah Vineer

The restaurants served a range of traditional Kazakh comfort food – meat and milk based meals like borscht, always served with bread, of course. Bread, or нан (pronounced naan) is a staple food here and is said to be the most important part of the dinner table. The menu, written in the Cyrillic alphabet, was indecipherable to me at first and I had to pester the Kazakh and Russian members of our team to help me choose a meal each time. Based on my excited reaction when I finally discovered the image recognition feature of my Google Translate app, you would have thought that I had never seen modern technology before. In truth, I was just relieved to not be such a burden on the rest of team!

Image credit: Hannah Vineer

Before long we were back on the road and as the hours passed I looked forward to getting to camp and getting started with our work. We planned to visit remote villages, thousands of kilometres off the tourist track, to survey farmers about how they cope with weather extremes such as this year’s particularly harsh winter. But for now, we had run out of time and energy. The sun was setting and we needed to find a place to rest for the night. We headed for the dim twinkling lights of Aktobe, passing a tractor working into the night, illuminating a cloud of dust in its wake. When we eventually found a motel with rooms available, I found it difficult to sleep. I couldn’t wait for the final leg of our journey to our wild camp in the Kazakh steppe.

———————————
This blog is written by Cabot Institute member Hannah Rose Vineer.  This expedition has been kindly funded by the Bristol Centre for Agricultural Innovation.  This blog was reposted with permission from the BCAI blog site.

Setting off on a BCAI expedition to Kazakhstan

This is the first of a series of blogs from a group of University of Bristol Cabot Institute researchers who are on a remote expedition (funded by BCAI) to find out more about Kazakh agriculture and how farmers are responding to their changing landscape. 

Abandoned machinery. Image credit Hannah Vineer.

Ghost towns on the Kazakh steppe look as though they are centuries old, but it is an illusion. They have been sandblasted relentlessly by the force of the steppe since they were abandoned, less than 40 years ago, after the breakdown of the Soviet Union. This is one area on earth that people have largely failed to tame, but as the human population increases the country’s agricultural systems are rapidly developing and focus is turning to the steppe once again. At the same time, farmers must adapt to recent changes in climate – drier summers limit crop production and water availability, and changing patterns of snowfall and snowmelt threaten the lives of livestock. I am about to embark on a remote expedition to find out more about Kazakh agriculture and how farmers are responding to their changing landscape. Follow this blog series for updates from the field.

Since 2000, approximately 5,000,000 additional hectares of land have been sown for cropping, and approximately 2,000,000 each additional sheep, cattle and horses are kept in Kazakhstan. This increase in livestock productivity is largely driven by smallholder farmers, who rely on livestock for up to a fifth of their family’s food. However, climate change has been felt disproportionately in Central Asia, threatening food security. National Geographic recently reported that over half a million animals failed to survive the winter in neighbouring Mongolia due to a combination of lethal winter conditions and poor summer crop growth, so I’m anxious to see how the Kazakhs fared.

Image credit: mapchart.net

I’m told that in the Ural region in Western Kazakhstan, wheat production, livestock and wildlife exist in close contact, and that this is the best place to start my research. I’m set to fly to Astana tomorrow to join colleagues from the Association for the Conservation of Biodiversity of Kazakhstan (ACBK) on the three-day, 2,000km journey to the far west. With the help of ACBK and Bristol PhD student Munib Khanyari, I will interview farmers spread out over an area the size of England, skirting along the Russian border and the Caspian Sea. I’ll spend my evenings wild camping off-grid under the stars for 2-3 weeks. There will be no fresh water, no toilets and no internet – the team and I have to carry everything we need in order to survive the duration. Wish me luck!

———————————

This blog is written by Cabot Institute member Hannah Rose Vineer.  This expedition has been kindly funded by the Bristol Centre for Agricultural Innovation.  This blog was reposted with permission from the BCAI blog site.Read part two of this blog – Travelling through Asia’s breadbasket.

CAP should be replaced by a sustainable land-use policy

Wheat harvest by Jim Choate

Whatever your thoughts about Brexit, one thing most agree on is that it offers an opportunity to rethink how we in the UK look after our agricultural land.  The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has long been a source of resentment. It accounts for 40% of the EU budget yet has systematically failed to address, in some cases even exacerbated, the biggest concerns in European agriculture. Unlike most transnational sectoral market correction schemes, even much of the general public are aware of its shortcomings.

CAP is formed of 2 pillars. Pillar 1, which accounts for the 70% money spent, is simply a payment for land owned. The more land you own, the more money you get. This promotes large-scale mono-cropping, and acts as a rigid barrier to entry for young would-be farmers. Pillar 2 makes up the rest of CAP’s budget and consists of agri-environment schemes. Whilst well intentioned, Pillar 2 promotes an agricultural divide, where some land is responsibly stewarded while other land is intensively farmed. It is not the most efficient or effective means of improving the state of our land.

Public money for public goods

Michael Gove made a lot of enemies whilst at the Department for Education. However, since being appointed Minister for the Environment, he appears to have bucked the trend of expert-bashing. The government’s 25 Year Green Plan talks a very good talk – it’s a re-affirmation of the government’s laudable aim of leaving the environment in a better state than they found it, following on from the Lawton principles – but fails to walk the walk. There is much rhetoric, but very little explanation as to how goals will be met.

One consistent theme is that of spending public money on public goods. What this means is that tax-payers money should only be used to pay for the goods and services which are ‘consumed’ but for which there is currently not market. It is a way of addressing the tragedy of the commons argument, whereby, in pursuit of personal gain, individuals neglect that which they rely on for that gain, to the detriment of all.

Lake District by Les Haines

The Lake District as we know it has been shaped by generations of upland sheep farming. This practise offers extremely marginal returns, but many would agree there is a huge (but hard to quantify) value to the landscape of the Lake District. Public money should be spent to support such farmers.

In a post-Brexit landscape, there will be many competing demands on the public purse. The challenge, then, is to find alternative sources with which to finance the provision of these services provided by natural ecosystems.

Payments for Ecosystem Services

It is exceptionally difficult to put a value on nature. A market is needed through which farmers can ‘sell’ the services the land they own is able to provide, and beneficiaries of these services can purchase them. In many cases, one service may be provided by many land-owners, a single piece of land may provide many services, and there may be many consumers of each of these services. Clearly, this represents a complicated market structure.

But we can’t shy away from the task. The West of England Nature Partnership, as well as Green Alliance and the National Trust, have conceptualised a system through which such transactions can take place. Functioning as a sort of Green Investment Bank, an institution will package the suggested provision of a consortium of land-owners (for instance, the planting of woodland) for sale to a consortium of buyers. This might include water companies who benefit from cleaner water, Wildlife Trusts with a remit of improving the local access to nature, and developers with a requirement to offset/mitigate the impacts of their development.

In a similar light, Wessex Water have an online platform via which farmers can bid for money in return for adopting more sustainable farming practices. This system directly reduces the cost of water purification for the Water Company, acts as an incentive for good practice to the landowner, and provides landscape and wildlife benefits for the local population – a win-win-win.
Clearly its easier to pay farmers per hectare of land owner. But with the growing demands placed on our environment, and an increasing understanding of our reliance on it, such a system as described here could radically alter the terminal decline of Britain’s natural capital.

————————
This blog was written by Matthew Whitney who is currently studying an MSc in Environmental Policy and Management at the University of Bristol.

Matthew Whitney

 

The Sarstoon-Temash National Park, Belize: Whose land, whose development?

 

View of the Temash River, Toledo, Belize

This October I spent time with the Sarstoon-Temash Institute for Indigenous Management (SATIIM), an NGO which integrates forest conservation with indigenous community development, the only one of its kind in Belize.

The organisation is located in Belize’s southernmost district of Toledo, reachable by a bumpy six hour bus ride from the country’s northern hub, Belize City. Government roadside adverts dot the route advising youngsters to ‘Stay Out of Crime’, and Belizeans to ‘Protect the Cayes and the Mangroves: your social security benefits’. Belize City is beset by gang violence, but high-end eco-tourism is booming in the north around the country’s cayes, beaches, and pristine conservation areas. Over 26% of Belize’s land and territorial waters have been designated as protected areas which play a crucial part in tourism, a major contributor to the economy as its second largest industry, and fuelling growth in many other sectors. The ads tail off by the time we reach Toledo, a safer but poorer district. From here to the River Sarstoon, the border with Guatemala, lie dense wetlands, forest and mangroves, and some of the country’s poorest communities, including many Q’eqchi Maya and Garifuna indigenous peoples.

Over four weeks I spent time here in SATIIM’s office, in the villages they work with, and in the forest, learning about their work and recording the voices of community members. On a visit to the sleepy Q’eqchi Mayan village of Crique Sarco Andres Bo, an active member of SATIIM, explained how the organisation began. Belize has been praised for its pioneering approach to conservation, using a series of legislative acts for protecting areas since gaining independence in 1981. But when it ringfenced a wetlands and forest area in order to create the Sarstoon-Temash National Park in 1994, the government ignored the collective land tenure of many Maya and Garifuna communities in the area, neglecting to consult or even inform them. Villages are largely forest dependent, employing milpa farming, a form of slash and burn subsistence agriculture – but using forest resources such as materials for house building, farming, hunting and fishing on part of their ancestral lands was now outlawed. “We can’t do hunting, we can’t do fishing, we can’t take out logs in there, we can’t have plantations there. But that is land we used, part of Crique Sarco….the vines and sticks which we used to build houses and posts are in those areas,” Andres explained.


Community conservation

In order to try to maintain influence in the area, and recognising that conserving the forest would have a beneficial impact on the surrounding areas’ ecosystems and resources, six villages came together to form SATIIM. The organisation then formed a successful partnership with the Belize Government to monitor the park under a co-management agreement using community led patrols. The community led element is key: SATIIM’s aims are to integrate environmental protection, human rights and development, and their work challenges any notion of conservation which promote reforestation at the expense of or exclusive from the forest communities whose livelihoods depend on it. “If you want to have effective development and effective conservation, the communities must be involved in the development of any plan that affects their livelihood,” explains SATIIM’s Director Froyla Tzalam.

Froyla and the SATIIM office team

Oil and development?

However in radical opposition to the NGO’s approach and in contradiction to the park’s protected status, the government decided to relax its ban on extractive activities and grant oil exploration permits to Texas-based corporation US Capital Energy, who began to cut paths and build exploratory oil drills, wreaking havoc on the forest’s ecosystems. They constructed a major drill site in a low-lying and extremely wet area, where any spills would quickly impact surrounding wildlife and waterways. I learnt more about the site on joining a community forest patrol in the following weeks, which is described in the second-part of this blog series.

The incident brought to the fore tensions between national development, local community interests, and land tenure rights. While environmental protection strategies have been used to bolster the success of the tourism industry and economic development in other areas of Belize, the government had clearly decided to pursue a different strategy in the impoverished and underinvested Toledo District, with Prime Minister Dean Barrow stating that US Capital be allowed to “Drill at Will” in the STNP.

Are you telling us that we may spend decades protecting an area which over night can be turned into an extractive zone?” Froyla Tzalam

Concerned about the environmental impacts and effect on the villages’ livelihoods, SATIIM decided to fight back. In 2006 they filed a case against the government at the Supreme Court on the basis of its own environmental policy, as no environmental impact assessment has been conducted prior to the explorations. The court ruled against the government, triggering a string of cases in which the communities built the case for their land rights. Rulings from the Supreme Court and the Caribbean Court of Justice have subsequently stated that the government and US Capital Energy acted without the ‘Free, Prior, Informed Consent’ (FPI) of the Mayan and Garifuna communities, a principle defined by the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and recognised in international law. FPI recognises indigenous people and forest communities’ rights to consent to projects in lands that they customarily own, occupy or use. Court cases up to 2016 have reaffirmed tenure rights of the Maya and Garifuna communities in southern Belize, that their traditional land rights constitute property equal in legitimacy to any other form of property under Belizean law. In addition the Supreme Court has ordered the government to conduct work on the communities’ land boundaries and  is ‘supervising’ its implementation.


Choosing development

The arrival of the oil company brought villages into conflict. Some labelled SATIIM as ‘anti-development’ for challenging US Capital. But Juan Choc, Village Leader of Crique Sarco tells me that since promises of job offers with US Capital haven’t materialised, more and more villagers are coming to realise that oil extraction may not be the type of development they need. The few short term jobs that appeared during oil exploration offered poor working conditions and were poorly paid. Better paid roles were reserved for staff with special skills brought in from Mexico. Orange and green paint, US Capital colours, coats the village schools around the exploration site. However the schools remain government funded, and the paint jobs seem little more than a branding exercise. Tangible benefits from the oil company have been few and far between.

Crique Sarco Village School

Community land tenure

SATIIM will now be working on georeferencing their ancestral land boundaries in order to get more solid legal recognition, and focusing on land rights awareness and environmental education. For the moment the low global oil price has meant that the impetus from US Capital has been lost and the drill site sits empty. But as the government has extended their permits to Feb 2017 in spite of court rulings, further drilling remains a possibility. Even once their land is demarcated communities will still have to decide whether they are for oil extraction or against it. SATIIM has been working on a program of environmental education so that communities are able to make more informed decisions about the benefits and risks involved. For Froyla the communities are now more informed, empowered and more ready to fight for what happens in their land: “It is clear when I attend the community meetings now that the villagers have a different vision of development for themselves. So that’s what gives me hope”.

Rachel Simon is a former part-time Environmental Policy MSc student, graduating in 2016. During her time at university Rachel was part of the Fossil Free Bristol University group. Following the completion of her MSc Rachel spent time with an indigenous conservation organisation in Belize, recording voices of land rights activists for the Latin American Bureau’s [http://lab.org.uk/] forthcoming book, Voices of Latin America.

The second blog in this series is available here.

Working with the weather to manage parasites of livestock in changing climates

Parasites can be found in every environment on earth and infect a wide range of hosts – birds, fish, plants, insects, wild animals, domesticated animals and humans.  When parasites are discussed they often trigger an “ewww” reaction.  However, they have much more serious economic, food security and animal health and welfare impacts when they infect grazing livestock.  Grazing livestock contribute greatly to food security and this is not going to change any time soon.  Not only is the global population (and therefore food requirement) growing, there is an increasing demand for animal-based food products in developing regions and there is an essential role of animal products in marginal environments where crop production is infeasible.  Parasite control is therefore vital, but is not easy to achieve.

Many parasites have complex lifecycles which depend upon specific climatic conditions.  For instance, temperature and moisture determine development rates and survival.  Farmers could once use this to their advantage as the predictable, seasonal weather patterns led to predictable, seasonal patterns of parasites.  Reliable livestock husbandry practices therefore developed for parasite management.  However, in recent years there have been changes in climate and less predictable weather patterns.  Traditional management practices are often no longer effective as parasites are being found in unexpected regions and at unexpected times of year.  What’s more, whilst other organisms are being put under threat by climate change, parasites are successfully evolving and adapting to these changes in environment due to their short reproductive cycles.

Predicting the risk of infection to parasites involves multiple areas of expertise.  An in-depth knowledge of parasite characteristics is essential, and needs to be updated as they evolve.  Accurate forecasts for climate are also needed to help predict which regions may have an environment suitable for the parasite and changes to its seasonality.  An accurate forecast for weather (daily climatic conditions) is essential for certain parasites.  Combining historical data with forecasts, knowledge of the parasite’s requirements for development and farm characteristics (such as altitude and orientation) within complex models gives precise information on infection risk and helps farmers to be one step ahead of the parasites.  Technology is also aiding the rapid diagnosis of specific parasite infections to guide effective management practices.

Despite these advancements in parasite control, uptake of the technologies by farmers is often slow. The science behind parasites and the models developed are complicated and daunting.  Livestock farming is demanding, both economically and in terms of labour.  Therefore farmers need these complex technologies to be transformed into tools that are still effective, yet simple and easy to integrate into their current practices.  They need to feel confident in using the tools and understand the benefits that come with them – not the science.  These benefits include more efficient animals, both economically and environmentally, and improved animal health and welfare.

There is still much to learn about parasites. The rapid changes to the environment, the livestock industry and the parasites themselves means that this is an area of work that will be ongoing for the foreseeable future.  There is a huge need for collaboration between disciplines to not only develop the tools, but also to communicate their need and promote their use on farms.  This barrier to technology uptake could be a bigger hurdle for scientists than technology development itself.

 
This blog is written by Cabot Institute member Olivia Godber, a PhD student in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Bristol.
 

Breeding cassava for the next generation

Last week I helped to harvest and score cassava tubers a breeding trial at the National Crops Resources Research Institute (NaCRRI). The trial is part of the NEXTGEN Cassava project which applies genetic techniques to conventional breeding and aims to produce new varieties with Cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) and Cassava mosaic disease (CMD) resistance.

Why cassava and what’s the CBSD problem?

Approximately 300 million people rely on cassava as a staple food crop in Africa. It is resilient to seasonal drought, can be grown on poor soils and harvested when needed. However cassava production is seriously threatened by CBSD, which can reduce the quality of tubers by 100% and is currently threatening the food security of millions of people.

Cassava brown streak symptoms on tubers

Crossing cassava from around the world

Cassava varieties show a huge variation in traits including disease resistance. The NEXTGEN Cassava project has crossed 100 parent plants from Latin America with high quality African plants to produce new improved varieties, with higher levels of CBSD and CMD resistance. Crossing involves rubbing the pollen from one parent variety on to the female flower part (pistil) of the second parent variety to produce seeds.

Cassava flowers used to cross different varieties

 

Cutting back on time

The process is not easy. The complex heritability of traits in cassava means that many plants have to be screened to identify plants with the best traits. To cut down on this time, researchers from Cornell University sequenced the DNA from 2,100 seedlings and selected plants containing sequences linked to desirable traits.

Screening for resistance

These plants were transferred to field site in Namulonge, where there is a high level of CBSD, making it easier to spot resistant plants. After 12 months the tubers were dug up and cut into sections. Each root was scored for the severity of CBSD. Plants which  show no disease symptoms have now been selected for the next stage of breeding. Eventually varieties will be tested for their performance at sites across Uganda and given to farmers for their feedback.

We harvested and scored tubers for Cassava brown streak symptoms. I then tagged disease free plants for selection!

 

Time to harvest!

 

Alfred Ozimati is managing the breeding  programme

I helped to score and tag plants, it was hard work! I was impressed by the stamina of the workers who harvested from 8 am until 3 pm without a rest. I was struck by the mammoth task of breeding cassava for so many traits and by the programme manager Alfred Ozimati’s determination to get the work done as quickly as possible. Alfred is currently a  PhD student at Cornell University; he kindly offered to answer these questions:

What are the challenges of conventional breeding and how does sequencing help to address these?

Typical conventional breeding cycle of cassava is 8-10 years before parents are selected for crossing. The sequencing information allows a breeder to select parents early at the seedling stage, allowing more crossing cycles over time than conventional cassava breeding. With sequencing, the process of releasing varieties with improved CBSD and CMD resistance should take about 5 years.

What are your long term hopes for the project and the future of cassava breeding?

We hope to use genomic selection routinely, to address any other challenges cassava as a crop of second importance to Uganda will face. And also to take the technology to other East African, cassava breeding programs to faster address their major breeding constraints.

———————————–
This blog has been written by University of Bristol Cabot Institute member Katie Tomlinson from the School of Biological Sciences.  Katie’s area of research is to generate and exploit an improved understanding of cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) to ensure sustainable cassava production in Africa.  This blog has been reposted with kind permission from Katie’s blog Cassava Virus.

 

Katie Tomlinson

More from this blog series:  

Talking sweet potatoes at the Source of the Nile

Last month I was invited to the Source of the Nile agricultural trade show in Jinja, Uganda. The show brings together all aspects of agriculture: from crops to chickens, cows and tractors. The event attracts over 120,000 visitors each year and runs for seven days.

I was needed on a National Crops Resources Research Institute (NaCRRI) stand where Agnes Alajo (a PhD student and breeder) was selling improved sweet potato varieties, which are resistant to pests and diseases with higher levels of pro-vitamin A.

It is estimated that around 35% of children and 55% of child-bearing mothers in rural Uganda suffer from vitamin A deficiency, which is associated with preventable child blindness and mortality. The orange-fleshed NAROSPOT varieties developed by NaCRRI are enriched with pro-vitamin A and it’s hoped their adoption will help improve the deficiency problem.

The stand also had an impressive array of biscuits, cakes and even juice made from processing sweet potato. Agriculture is very important in Uganda; it accounts for around 24% of GDP and 43% of the working population are subsistence farmers (2013). Processing sweet potatoes to produce flour can be economically viable and provides farmers with an opportunity to add value to their crop, boost income and reduce poverty.

The range of products made through processing sweet potato

I had to hurriedly absorb information about sweet potato, as very soon hoards of excited school children arrived. The main challenge was that not everyone can speak English and my UK accent was quite difficult for them to understand. I had to speak clearly and slowly to get my message across. Often teachers had to repeat what I had said in their local language. There are over 40 local languages in Uganda, so even Ugandans can find it difficult to communicate!

Agnes explains the importance of pro-vitamin A rich sweet potatoes to school students

Agnes explains the importance of pro-vitamin A rich sweet potatoes to school students
There was a lot of interest from young people who want to pursue agricultural careers and are attracted to opportunities for commercialization. Most people were very intrigued about the cakes, and couldn’t believe that they were made using sweet potato flour. Unfortunately, we couldn’t give out samples to taste until the end of the week, which caused a lot of pleading and disappointment!

Walking around the show I discovered giant cassava tubers, a “speaking head” and impressive looking cabbages. I later  saw the source of the Nile itself!

I had a great time walking around. There was plenty of entertainment and I also got to see where the Nile flows from Lake Victoria!

———————————–
This blog has been written by University of Bristol Cabot Institute member Katie Tomlinson from the School of Biological Sciences.  Katie’s area of research is to generate and exploit an improved understanding of cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) to ensure sustainable cassava production in Africa.  This blog has been reposted with kind permission from Katie’s blog Cassava Virus.

 

Katie Tomlinson

More from this blog series:  

Using GM to fight cassava brown streak disease

Last week I helped plant a new confined field trial for genetically modified (GM) cassava in western Uganda. The aim is to find how well the plants resist Cassava brown streak disease (CBSD).

Before planting, the National Crops Resources Research Institute (NaCRRI) held discussions with people from the local government and farmers’ groups. It’s vital to engage the local community so that people are correctly informed and on-board with the project. There were certainly some very strange myths to debunk!

Henry Wagaba (Head of Biosciences at NaCRRI) explained the huge losses caused by CBSD, which spoils tubers and can wipe out entire fields. CBSD is now the most devastating crop disease in Uganda and there are no resistant varieties currently available.

To fight the disease, NaCRRI researchers have developed GM cassava plants, which show high levels of resistance to CBSD at sites in southern and central Uganda. This trial will test how the plants perform in the growing conditions in western Uganda. Work will also be carried out to cross the GM plants wither farmer varieties to improve their growing and taste qualities.

I enjoyed getting stuck in and planting my first GM cassava!

GM crops are a contentious topic in Uganda. The passing of a National Biotechnology and Biosafety law has stalled in Parliament for over three years due to disagreements. Currently GM technology is used for research on banana, cassava, maize, potato, rice and sweet potato. However these are not approved for human consumption.

In nearby countries Kenya and Sudan, GM food products have been approved and many of these food products are imported into Uganda without regulation. It’s hoped the law will be passed soon to enable Ugandan farmers to reap the benefits of GM crops and protect against any potential risks.

Before the trial, I went on a safari in the Queen Elizabeth National Park, where I saw elephants, hippos and even lions!
———————————–
This blog has been written by University of Bristol Cabot Institute member Katie Tomlinson from the School of Biological Sciences.  Katie’s area of research is to generate and exploit an improved understanding of cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) to ensure sustainable cassava production in Africa.  This blog has been reposted with kind permission from Katie’s blog Cassava Virus.

 

Katie Tomlinson

More from this blog series:  

Taking a trip to the cassava field!

At the end of last week I was lucky enough to be invited on a trip to the field. I didn’t really know what to expect but was very excited to find out!

The purpose of the trip was to collect data for the 5CP project to find out how different varieties of cassava respond to Cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) and Cassava mosaic disease (CMD) in different areas.

We set off at 5.30am in the morning; the first stop was Lake Victoria to catch a ferry to the Sesse Islands. The team consisted of me, the driver (Bosco), research assistant (Gerald Adiga) and research technician (Joseph). Along the road, we saw several accidents, sadly a far too common occurrence in Uganda…

Due to delays, the ferry was rammed, and by the time we arrived it was almost the evening. We raced to the agricultural school with the field trial. Here the team have planted blocks of 25 clean cassava varieties from five African countries and our job was to score them for disease symptoms. CBSD and CMD are not very common on the Sesse Islands, and so most of the plants were healthy.

An agricultural student digs up a healthy cassava plant.

After a night of drinking Guinness in a corner shop we headed out, again at 5.30am! This time we headed to the city of Mbarara in the western region. The drive was really beautiful, passing Lake Mburo National Park and mountains covered with matoke.

Whilst scoring the cassava plants here we noticed a super abundance of whiteflies, which carry CBSD viruses. The weather had been particularly dry, allowing the whiteflies to breed like crazy. Fortunately, CBSD is also uncommon in this area and very few plants were diseased.

Super abundance of whiteflies on cassava which carry CBSD viruses.

The data from the 5CP project will help farmers to decide which cassava varieties offer the most protection against CBSD and CMD in their local areas; helping to protect them from the devastating yield losses caused by these diseases.

Fun stuff

On the way back we passed the equator line, and I got the chance to take some touristy photos. This week I also saw the Ndere dance troupe, who showcase the different dance and music styles from all over Uganda and other neighbouring countries. It was a lot of fun, some dances bared a weird resemblance to morris dancing and marching brass bands!

Crossing the equator!
———————————–
This blog has been written by University of Bristol Cabot Institute member Katie Tomlinson from the School of Biological Sciences.  Katie’s area of research is to generate and exploit an improved understanding of cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) to ensure sustainable cassava production in Africa.  This blog has been reposted with kind permission from Katie’s blog Cassava Virus.

 

Katie Tomlinson

More from this blog series: