Funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union

Natura 2000 and conservation of genetic resources for food and agriculture

S. Kell, J.M. Iriondo, M.L. Rubio Teso, C. Alvarez, and N. Maxted

30 YEARS OF EUROSITE New approaches to nature conservation and securing resources Museo della Biodiversità di Monticiano, , 05–07 November 2019 In this presentation….

1. Importance of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA), and the policy context 2. PGRFA in the Euro-Mediterranean region: diversity, threats and in situ conservation status 3. Crop wild relatives (CWR) in the Natura 2000 Network 4. Introduction to the Farmer’s Pride project 5. Potential collaboration with protected area managers Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture “Any genetic material of plant origin of actual or potential value for food and agriculture” (FAO ITPGRFA 2001)

§ Wild plant species with potential as trait donors to crops [crop wild relatives ‒ CWR]

§ Cultivated varieties of plant species [landraces/farmers’ varieties] [modern cultivars] § Wild-harvested species used for human and animal food

§ Plant breeders’ material [advanced lines, élite varieties and DNA] Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture

“PGRFA are the biological basis of world food security and, directly or indirectly, support the livelihoods of every person on earth” (FAO CGRFA, 1996)

Provisioning ecosystem services PGRFA ‒ diversity for food and economic security

Imperative for greater use of both within and between species diversity in farming systems to provide sufficient options for the adaptation of crops as an insurance against climate variability (IPCC, 2014) Examples of agriculturally important traits from CWR

§ Resistance to pests – for example, nematodes in sugar beet and potato; hessian fly in potato and wheat; aphids in barley and lettuce; and weevil in pea. § Disease resistance – for example, powdery mildew and leaf rust in barley, oat and wheat; downy mildew in lettuce and sunflower; stem rust and fusarium head blight in wheat; yellow dwarf virus in barley; and bacterial blight common bean. § Environmental stress tolerance – for example, drought, high temperature and salinity in common bean; low temperate in apple; frost in potato; drought in oat and wheat; and salinity in sunflower, potato and wheat. § Quality improvements – for example, wheat protein content; fruit size and shape, and processing ability in tomato; freezing ability in pea; and increased tillering in maize. Policy context for PGRFA conservation and sustainable use

§ International Treaty on PGRFA [ITPGRFA]

§ Second Global Plan of Action for PGRFA [Second GPA]

§ Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD]

Ø Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 (Aichi Biodiversity Target 13) Ø Global Strategy for Plant Conservation 2011–2020 Ø Programme on Agricultural Biodiversity—in particular, the International Initiative on Biodiversity for Food and Nutrition PGRFA policy context

Target 2.5 By 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and promote access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed PGRFA in the Euro-Mediterranean region

Important crop species and their wild relatives include several cereals and legumes (e.g., wheat, oat, chickpea, lentil, pea and faba bean), fodder and forage crops (e.g., lucerne, white and sugarbeet), and many vegetables, fruits, nuts, herbs and oils (e.g., brassicas, lettuce, grape, almond, pistachio, sage and olive) Priority CWR taxa in Europe 863 taxa (485 species) Globally important sites for CWR conservation 40 out of 150 are in the Euro-Mediterranean region

Global diversity analysis of priority wild relatives of 192 food and beverage crops (Vincent et al., 2019) PGRFA are threatened

Crop wild relatives (CWR) ‒ threatened by climate change, agricultural intensification, land-use transformation, habitat destruction and pollution

Traditional crop varieties (farmers’ varieties, or ‘landraces’) ‒ threatened by under-use or abandonment Red List status and population trends of 192 high priority European CWR

CR 9 NE EN 38 17

VU NA 17 2

Increasing NT 2.3% Decreasing 16 10.9% DD 36

LC 57 Unknown 48.2%

31% threatened or Stable Near Threatened 38.7% Globally and regionally threatened European CWR

35

30

25

20

15 No. of species Regional assessments

10 Global assessments

5

0

Beet Oats Pear Alliums Lettuce Wheat Chickpea Asparagus Grass pea Garden pea Legume forages Brassica complex Faba bean/vetch

Stone fruits and almond

Globally and regionally threatened (CR, EN or VU) or Near Threatened (NT) species, out of 571 assessed in 14 crop gene pools/groups CWR diversity is barely conserved in situ

Very few examples of active in situ conservation of CWR Aegilops species in Ceylanpinar of southeast Citrus, Oryza and Alocasia species in Ngoc Hoi, Vietnam Solanum species in Pisac Cusco, Peru Triticum species in Ammiad, Eastern Galilee, Zea perennis in the Sierra de Manantlan, México Can we conserve CWR in N2K? Identifying CWR taxa in the Network

2. Taxa 66 (14%) of priority CWR species in Europe in the characteristic Interpretation Manual of of Annex I EU Habitats habitats

1. Habitats 3. GIS Directive taxa analyses

30 (6%) of priority CWR 4. taxa in Europe ‒ 21 listed in Identification Annexes II and IV (none in by PA Annex V) managers Can we conserve CWR in N2K? GIS analyses Collation, cleaning and formatting of occurrence data (GBIF & Genesys)

Diversity and gap analyses: Taxon richness, Ecogeographic, Complementarity, Protected areas

Proposal for priority localities for CWR conservation action CWR taxon richness by country

Country Num of taxa Country Num of taxa 470 113 423 Czechia 112 356 105 Italy 328 100 308 97 Preliminary results: Turkey 304 92 278 91 § 753 taxa with ≈ 4M 263 85 data points (87.2% of 260 84 target CWR taxa) Russian Federation 256 52 § Distributed in 43 243 51 European territories 225 50 225 Kosovo 39 § Hotspots in Spain, 205 Iceland 35 195 33 France, Germany, Bosnia and Italy, Greece and 180 Herzegovina 33 168 31 Turkey 152 Andorra 24 145 , Republic of 16 139 9 131 Liechtenstein 1 Luxembourg 115 CWR in N2K

Preliminary results: § 606 taxa in N2K à 70% of target CWR taxa have populations in protected areas § ≈ 643K CWR populations (≈ 16% of occurrence data) § Presence in N2K sites in all EU 28 Passively protected CWR populations CWR taxon richness in N2K sites

Order SiteCode Site Name Num diff taxa Country

1 ES5110024 Serra de Collserola 132 Spain 2 ES0000049 Los Alcornocales 130 Spain 3 ES6140004 Sierra Nevada 128 Spain Preliminary results: 4 ES0000031 Sierra de Grazalema 126 Spain 5 ES5110011 Serres del Litoral Septentrional 125 Spain § 8302 sites in N2K L'Alt Maestrat, Tinença de Benifassà, hosting CWR 6 ES0000465 Turmell i Vallivana 119 Spain 7 FR4211811 Vallée du Rhin de Lauterbourg à Strasbourg 119 France populations (29.8% 8 ES5140011 Sistema Prelitoral meridional 116 Spain of total N2K sites) 9 ES0000035 Sierras de Cazorla, Segura y Las Villas 113 Spain Vallées de la Warche et du Bayehon en aval § Hotspots in Spain, 10 BE33042C0 du barrage de Robertville 110 Belgium 11 DE4545301 Elbtal zwischen Schöna und Mühlberg 109 Germany France, Belgium, 12 DE6715302 Bellheimer Wald mit Queichtal 109 Germany Germany, Italy and 13 ES0000051 Sierra de Aracena y Picos de Aroche 108 Spain 14 ES5110013 Serres del Litoral central 108 Spain Portugal 15 DE6533471 Nürnberger Reichswald 105 Germany Serres de Mariola i el Carrascal de la Font 16 ES0000474 Roja (ZEPA) 105 Spain

RICHEST AREAS PASSIVELY PROTECTING CWR POPULATIONS CWR conservation planning Next steps

§ Ecogeographic and complementarity analyses to identify the minimum number of PAs and other locations that include the target CWR taxa and their intra-specific diversity § Feasibility study to determine the suitability of the identified locations for active CWR conservation § Addition of other localities where CWR are already under a level of active management Networking, partnerships and tools to enhance in situ conservation of European plant genetic resources

Overarching aim: Enhance and promote the in situ management, conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources in Europe to provide greater diversity for food, nutrition and economic security Primary objective: Establish a European network for in situ conservation and sustainable use of Europe's plant genetic www.farmerspride.eu resources Collaborators: More than 40 national and international organizations representing stakeholder groups with an interest in the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources – protected area community; farmer, agrobiodiversity, conservation and civil society NGOs; plant Funded by the Horizon breeding/seed sector; public research 2020 Framework institutes Programme of the European Union

ECPGR Concept for in situ conservation of crop wild relatives in Europe

Nigel Maxted, Alvina Avagyan, Lothar Frese, José Iriondo, Joana Magos Brehm, Alon Singer and Shelagh Kell

Endorsed by the ECPGR Steering Committee in March 2015

Towards the first UK genetic reserve for CWR on the Lizard, Cornwall The Lizard NNR in Cornwall SW England: survey of CWR Spring 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 • Allium schoenoprasum • Allium ursinum • Asparagus officinalis subsp. prostratus • Beta vulgaris subsp. maritima • Daucus carota subsp. gummifer • raphanistrum subsp. maritimus • Trifolium occidentale •

O Towards the first UK genetic reserve for CWR on the Lizard, Cornwall Management implications – wild chives genetic diversity

• Inland and coastal Traboe Cross sites

Clahar Water • Routine monitoring

• Cattle grazing

Wild chives, Allium Soapy Cove schoenoprasum Kynance Cliffs • Controlled burning of heath

Conservation management and monitoring of diverse CWR populations needs to be formally incorporated into the management of the designated protected areas (e.g. SSSIs, SACs, NNRs, etc.), as well as informal protected locations Minimum standards for CWR population inclusion in the European Network

Criteria related to: § Location and spatial structure (e.g., site management plan that acknowledges conservation of PGR diversity; sufficient extent to conserve CWR populations and associated abiotic / biotic natural processes) § Taxa and populations (e.g., not threatened, or actively managed to remove the threat; populations sizes are large enough to sustain them in the long-term) § Management and documentation (e.g., managers of the PA are aware of the target CWR population and include its conservation among their conservation objectives; the population is sampled at regular intervals for complementary ex situ conservation) § Use of the plant material (e.g., clearly-defined procedure to regulate the use of genetic material; accessible for utilization in accordance with International Treaty on PGRFA from a known national ex situ facility as part of Multilateral System) Farmer’s Pride collaboration with PA managers

If you are interested in exploring PGRFA conservation in your PA: § Keep in touch with the Farmer’s Pride project and related ongoing activities ‒ email me at: [email protected] § Let us know whether we can keep in touch with you § Identify CWR populations inside your PAs ‒ we can provide lists of: Ø CWR taxa listed in the Habitats Directive Ø CWR taxa characteristic of Annex I habitats Ø PAs and geographic coordinates of CWR populations according to the results of the diversity and gap analyses Ø CWR taxa for the region or country according to data in Euro+Med PlantBase § Consider whether landrace populations may also occur inside your PA Thank you!

30 YEARS OF EUROSITE New approaches to nature conservation and securing resources

Thank you

www.farmerspride.eu [email protected]