Participatory Plant Breeding in Iran: Report of the First Five Years (2006-2011)

Participatory Plant Breeding in Iran: Report of the first five years (2006-2011)

Salvatore Ceccarelli with M. Rahmanian, K. Razavi, R. Haghparast, M. Salimi and A. Taheri

Participatory Plant Breeding in Iran: Report of the first five years

Contents Contents ...... 2 Background ...... 2 The partners ...... 2 The area and the crop ...... 3 Results ...... 4

Background

Beginning in 1996, ICARDA has used Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB) as a breeding strategy which on one side serves more efficiently those areas and those farmers which already benefited from conventional, i.e. centralized and non participatory, plant breeding, and on the other side reaches the most marginal and neglected areas as well as the people living there.

Since its inception in Syria, PPB has been tested successfully in Morocco, Tunisia, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Algeria; in the last five countries the programs are currently active (in Syria the program was discontinued because of the situation in the country) on a number of crops (barley, bread and durum wheat, lentil, chickpea and faba bean) and they have different types of impacts ranging from a) varieties developed and the consequent economic benefit to farmers, b) farmer (men and women) empowerment, c) changes in policies (e.g. change of the variety release system in Jordan), d) institutionalization of participatory plant breeding as in Yemen, partly in Morocco, Jordan, Algeria and Eritrea), and e) capacity building of the scientists associated with the projects.

Through informal contacts with CENESTA, an Iranian NGO, and informal discussion with the AREO provincial office in Kermanshah, in 2007 we started a Participatory Breeding Program in two areas, namely Garmsar, an area with irrigated agriculture where CENESTA was already working, and Kermanshah (about 800 km south of Tehran). In this report we will refer the progresses and the achievements of the Garmsar program during its first five years.

The partners

The Centre for Sustainable Development (CENESTA) is a non-governmental, non-profit organization dedicated to promoting sustainable community- and culture-based development. It works closely with farmers in Iran, including the Group for the Sustainable Development of Garmsar Plain, a farmers' cooperative in Garmsar. The initial donor of the PPB project was the Challenge Program for Water and Food (CPWF) of the CGIAR. CENESTA led a small grants project as a part of the CPWF entitled "Out scaling and up scaling community-based water management strategies in the Karkheh River Basin". The project focuses on PPB (for rain-fed wheat and barley) as a strategy for better use of water for food production with the twin aims of building field experience on PPB in Iran and also calling for a more supportive policy and legislative framework. This project was supported by ICARDA, the Department of Agriculture of Kermanshah province,

and the Dryland Agriculture Research Institute of Iran (Sararood Station).

As the project grew, support was secured from the Global Crop Diversity Trust for the evaluation of landraces in Kermanshah and Garmsar in 2009 (to 2011). In 2010 IFAD began supporting the project in terms of using agricultural biodiversity and farmers' knowledge to adapt to climate change (to 2013).

The area and the crop

The trials conducted in the cropping season 2006-2007 were the results of consultations with farmers of the two communities conducted during 2006. The consultations were organized and facilitated by CENESTA.

Garmsar is a town (with its outlying villages) located about 110 km to the south-east of the capital of Iran, Tehran. It is in the province of Semnan and is a part of the Hableh Rood river basin, between the Alborz Mountains and the central desert of Iran. It has a total population of about 80,000 and is one of the most important agricultural areas in Semnan province. Its most important agricultural products are cotton, wheat, barley, pomegranates, and melons (there are several renowned traditional varieties). Garmsar has about 30,000 hectares of farm land of which about 8,000 is dedicated to irrigated wheat (with an average yield of 3,800 kg/ha) and 8,700 has to irrigated barley (average yield of 3,400 kg/ha). In addition to numerous industrial livestock units, the surrounding area is the wintering ground of several pastoral clans.

The crop initially used in the program was irrigated barley and for this reason the original germplasm was obtained from a special nursery prepared at ICARDA for the Irrigated areas of Iran.

Meeting in Garmsar

Results

First year (2006 – 2007)

The barley PPB trials

The first cycle of PPB in barley started in Garmsar with 70 barley lines selected in 2006 from an ICARDA special nursery for irrigated conditions grown by the Seed and Plant Production Institute

(SPII) in Karaj. Since during the consultation the farmers quoted resistance to lodging as one of their more desirable traits, only lines resistant to lodging under the high input management conditions of Karaj were included in the trial.

The trial was planted by five farmers around the city of Garmsar (the lines were planted in a different sequence in each farmer’s field) and were handled by the farmers themselves. At flowering, we met with farmers to discuss how to conduct the selection: issues discussed ranged from the appropriate time to do selection, the frequency of selection (whether selection should be done just once or more than one time, the criteria to use, and the scoring method. Eventually the farmers decided to conduct selection only once, and decided to score a number of traits such as tillering, height, spike length, number of spike per m2 and lodging using, for each character a score from 0 = bad to 10 = highly desirable.

Discussing Selection Methods in Garmsar

Most of the field work, from planting to harvesting to threshing to some of the note taking and data computerization was done by farmers with minimum inputs from scientists.

Planting Harvesting

Threshing Measuring Grain yield

Preparing seed samples for 1000 kernel weight Preparing data files for analysis

Harvesting was done manually and threshing was done using locally available equipment adapted to the purpose by the farmers. Eventually, grain yield and 1000 kernel weight were measured using balances borrowed from local shops.

Table 1 Mean, minimum and maximum grain yield (kg/ha) of 70 barley lines grown in 5 locations in 2006-2007. Location Mean Min Max Qods 5446 5194 5847 Malijan 6657 5884 7782 Sarasyab-e Kardevan 5582 1633 10848 Mandulak 2574 0 6652 Ghaleh Kharabeh 4860 4669 5156

Average grain yield varied considerably both between locations (from about 2.5 t/ha in Mandulak to

about 6.5 t/ha in Malijan) and within locations (from about 0.5 t/ha in Qods and Ghaleh Kharabeh to nearly 2 t/h in Malijan, and to between 6 and 8 t/ha in the other two locations) (Table 1). Selection was conducted by an average of between 6 and 7 farmers including between 2 and 4 women in four of the five locations.

At the end of the process the farmers used the results of the analysis conducted on the total biomass, grain yield, harvest index and 1000 kernel weight, as well as their own visual selection to select the best entries. Furthermore, they decided to select the best entries in each individual location regardless of their performance in the other locations. This was a consequence of the large genotype x locations interaction (Fig. 1); locations 3 and 5 ranked the genotypes in opposite way, while locations 1 and 2 ranked the genotypes in an almost identical way.

Fig. 1 Biplot of grain yield of 70 breeding lines of barley measured in 5 locations in Garmsar (L1 = Qods; L2 = Malijan, L3 = Sarasyab-e Kardevan; L4 = Mandulak and L5 = Ghaleh Kharabeh ) in 2006-2007.

Farmers’ preferences differed considerably between locations (Fig. 2): even though lines such as line 1, 4, 20 and 58 received a high score in all locations, farmers selected also those lines which received a high score in specific locations. The final selections included almost all the lines which received a high score but also a number of lines, such as lines 5, 8 and 22 which received a low score and were therefore selected because of their yield.

Fig. 2. Biplot of farmers’ preferences for 70 breeding lines of barley measured in 5 locations in Garmsar (L1 = Qods; L2 = Malijan, L3 = Sarasyab-e Kardevan; L4 = Mandulak and L5 = Ghaleh Kharabeh). The lines in red are those selected for further testing in 2008.

The activities of the first year resulted in a total of 37 lines selected for a second year testing. Of these, four lines were selected in four of the five locations, five in three locations, eight in two locations, and 19 in only one location. One improved variety, Rihane-03 was added as a check in all five locations.

Second year (2007 – 2008)

The barley PPB trials

In 2007-2008 the farmers evaluated the 37 barley lines selected from the trials conducted in 2006 - 2007 in five locations.

The selected entries were planted in replicated trials in five locations in 2007 (Ghods, Malijan, Sarasyab-e-Kardovan, Mandoolak and Ghaleh Kharabeh). In each location 13 lines and a common check were evaluated except Ghods were 14 lines and a common check were evaluated. Because of the drought, only three locations were harvested (Ghods, Sarasyab Kardovan and Mandoolak). These were the locations were the irrigation water provided by the river could be supplemented by water provided by wells.

As in 2007, the trials were completely managed by the farmers, who also recorded all the data, namely plant height, total biomass yield, grain yield and 1000 kernel weight.

Between six (location 1) and nine farmers (location 4) visited the trials and gave a score from 1 to 9 to each of 5 traits (plant height, spike length, spike density, tillering and lodging). The average of the scores given by all farmers to all traits was considered as the overall farmers score for each plot. The yield reduction in 2008 as compared with 2007 was 31% and 25% in locations 1 and 3, and as much as 95% in location 4 (Table 2).

Table 2. Average grain yield in 2007 (GY07) and 2008 (GY08), grain yield of the best line (GYBL), of the best check (GYBC), yield advantage (% advantage), mean grain yield of lines selected (GYS) and their yield advantage (%) of the participatory trials evaluated in three locations. Location GY07 GY08 GYBL GYBC % advantage GYS % Ghods 5542 3828 6174 3008 2.05 4876 1.27 Sarasyab Kardovan 6979 5209 5459 5071 1.08 5235 1.00 Mandoolak 4051 185 280 212 1.32 219 1.18

There were lines out yielding the check (the improved variety Rihane-03) in all 3 locations with a large yield advantages in Ghods (105%) and Manoolak (32%) and more modest in Kardovan (8%). After the selection conducted by farmers on the basis of the analyzed data, 8 lines were selected in each location. The average yield of the selected lines (GYS) was 27% and 18% highest that the trial mean in location 1 and 3 respectively and only marginally higher in location 2 (Table 2).

Among the selected lines (Table 3) five were selected in two of the three locations. Interestingly, these lines were selected in between 2 and 4 locations also in the previous year.

Table 3. Lines selected from the trials conducted in 2008 and locations in which they were selected in the cropping season 2007-2008. Location Line Name 2008 1 QB813-2/Kabbar//M204/4/Rhn-03/Asse//RWA-M54/3/80-5145/N-Acc4000-.... 3 2 Carbo/Hamra/4/Rhn-08/3/DeirAlla106//DL71/Strain205 4 3 Alanda/Zafraa//Gloria'S'/Copal'S'/3/Hamra//Lignee527/ 3 4 Rhn//Bc/Coho/3/DeirAlla106//Api/EB89-8-2-15-4/5/CM67/3/Apro//Sv02109/Mari/4/.. 4 5 As46/Rhn-05/3/Arbayan-01//M6/Robur-35-6-3 3 6 Rhn//Bc/Coho/3/DeirAlla106//Api/EB89-8-2-15-4/4/Fassa-01 4 7 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 1 8 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 3 and 4 9 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 3 10 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 1 and 3 11 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 1 12 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 1 13 M126/CM67//As/Pro/3/Alanda/4/Ssn/Bda//Arar/3/F2CC33MS/CI07555/5/Lignee640/… 4 14 Arar/Lignee527//Arar/PI386540/3/Rhn-03 3 15 Rhn-03//Lignee527/NK1272/3/Lignee527/Chn-01//Alanda/4/Sutter//Sutter*2/Numar 1 16 Rhn-03//Lignee527/NK1272/3/Lignee527/Chn-01//Alanda/4/Gustoe/NK1272 3 17 QB813-2/5/Aths/Lignee686/4/Rhn-03/3/Bc/Rhn//Ky63-1294 1 and 4 18 Lignee527/NK1272//JLB70-063/3/Rhn-03 1 and 4 19 Rihane-03 1 and 4

Extension of PPB to melon and cucumber

Farmers in Garmsar have a strong interest in melon and cucumber, two important cash crops and particularly in evaluating the landraces available in Iranian Gene Bank and they are keen to start this work with the aim of developing flavorful and more productive cucumber (and melon) varieties for the field and the greenhouse.

This first informal discussion was followed by a meeting with Mr. Kohpayegani, from the Iranian Gene Bank, to start developing a project proposal on participatory evaluation of melon and cucumber. On this occasion a number of methodological and technical issues were discussed and defined.

Eventually, in December 2008, Mr. Kohpayegani met a group of melon and cucumber growers in Garmsar to finalize the extension of the PPB program to melon and cucumber.

Evolutionary plant breeding

The farmers were seriously affected by the 2008 drought. Therefore, during the year we started discussing with farmers what could be done to reduce the negative impact of drought on the lives of the farmers and their families. We discussed the disadvantages of uniformity and the advantage of growing mixtures. Syrian farmers in three villages have been growing mixtures on their own initiative for the last three years and have been observing their constant superiority. For a crop that is grown as animal feed there are no reasons to grow uniform varieties particularly in unpredictable environments and in a situation in which climate changes are already occurring.

We discussed the differences between Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB), defined as a dynamic and permanent collaboration between Plant Breeding Institutions (national or international) and farmers (including other partners), and evolutionary plant breeding which provides farmers with an evolving population which represents a readily available source of new and better adapted germplasm (a sort of living gene bank).

Because of farmers’ interest, we started discussing that the evolutionary capacity of a mixture is an additional benefit, which can be exploited, particularly by farmers who have already developed some breeding skills through participatory plant breeding, to increase the adaptation to higher temperatures and lower precipitation.

The farmers decided that they were interested in experimenting with the idea and the program started in 2008 with a mixture of nearly 1600 F2s of barley, which was planted by two farmers in Kermanshah and one farmer in Garmsar in 2008.

As we will see below, this program expanded to wheat a year later.

Participatory evaluation of germplasm collections

During the discussions with farmers in a number of villages many farmers reported that in a dry year like 2008 the landraces tend to perform better than the improved varieties.

The interest of the farmers suggested as a new activity to be conducted in parallel with, and later to

become part of the PPB programs, the participatory evaluation of germplasm collections starting with barley and wheat’

ICARDA Gene bank holds a collection of 945 accessions Iranian wheats (173 of T. aestivum, 5 of T. compactum; 29 of dicoccon and 738 of T. durum) and of 493 accessions of Iranian barley.

During the autumn of 2008 160 accessions of wheat and 160 accessions of barley were planted under irrigation in DARSI Research Station of Sararood, near Kermanshah.

In 2009 the 160 accessions of wheat and 160 accessions of barley were grown in 3 locations (one Research Station and two farmers’ fields) with the objective of allowing the farmers to conduct an evaluation under their conditions and eventually to capture and document any information they may have about the germplasm.

Several characters were scored and the accessions were evaluated by farmers. In the case of wheat the characters scored were days to heading, plant height (cm), spike length (cm), peduncle length (cm), peduncle extrusion (cm), grain yield (Kg/ha), 1000 kernel weight (g), and farmers’ score. In the case of barley, the characters scored were plant height (cm), biomass yield, grain yield (g/m2), harvest index and 1000 seed weight (g). In the case of wheat farmers based their scores on drought resistance, good tillering, broad spike with many seeds, in Garmsar medium height (tall varieties are susceptible to lodging in the strong winds of Garmsar and short varieties are not of interest to farmers with livestock), while in Kermanshah there was a lot of emphasis on the bread and nutritional quality of landraces. In the case of barley, farmers scores were based on: drought resistance size of spike, “filling in” of the seed (i.e. seeds that are completely formed), resistance to lodging, early maturation and less need for water (especially because farmers often plan cotton immediately after barley and varieties that need lots of water would cause harm to the cotton crop), in Kermanshah black seeded barley varieties were totally avoided by farmers, although they did give good scores to some 6-rowed varieties even though they had only ever planted 2-rowed varieties.

The National Workshop on Participatory Breeding of Cereal Crops

The workshop was held on October 4-5, 2008 at the Mahidast Agricultural Education Center, 30 Km South of Kermanshah with the following objectives:

1. Understanding participatory breeding of cereal crops 2. Examining the role of participatory breeding in increasing productivity and farmers' incomes 3. Creating common understanding and coordination among relevant organizations in order to effectively implement participatory breeding in Iran 4. Discussion on existing obstacles and possible solutions to effective implementation of participatory breeding 5. Discussion on participatory breeding in relation to seed certification and registration systems 6. Discussion on participatory breeding as an entry point for participatory research in farmers' fields.

The workshop was attended by about 100 participants including representatives of national breeding institutions, universities, all departments of the Ministry of Agriculture, NGOs and farmers organizations from across the country.

After the opening remarks of Eng Ramezan Roointan, and of Dr. M Solh, the Director General of ICARDA (represented by Salvatore Ceccarelli), the workshop started with two presentations by Abdol'Ali Ghaffari, Director of the Dryland Agriculture Research Institute and by Dr. Javad Mozafari, Director, Plant Gene Bank of Iran. While Dr. Ghaffari stressed the large yield gaps still existing in Iran, Dr. Mozafari presented a strong case in favor of participatory breeding as a way to utilize and to enhance crop biodiversity.

Dr. Ceccarelli gave a presentation on "What is Participatory Plant Breeding and where is it headed?" and was followed by a presentation on "Participatory Plant Breeding in Iran (Aims and challenges)" by Dr. Reza Haghparast, and one on Farmers’ experience with participatory plant breeding by Mr Ahmad Taheri, farmer and Director of the Group for the Sustainable Development of Garmsar Plain.

The second day of the workshop was dedicated to seed issues with two presentations: the first by Mr. Samad Mobasser (Seed and Plant Certification and Registration Research Institute) on the Seed certification and registration systems in Iran, and the second by Ms Maryam Rahmanian (CENESTA) on UPOV and the consequences for Iran.

According to Eng. R. Roointan, the workshop has played a fundamental role in strengthening the commitment of Jihad – e – Agriculture in Kermanshah Province to Participatory Plant Breeding.

As a conclusion of the workshop Eng. R. Roointan decided to a) increase the PPB sites throughout all important agro ecosystems of the province of Kermanshah (the province has among the largest producers of cereals in the country and is known as the bread basket of Iran); b) involve an increasing number of Jihad – e – Agriculture staff, the breeders of the Dryland Agriculture Research Institute and particularly their research station in Sararood, and farmers; c) Institutionalize the PPB approach in the province, and eventually throughout the country; and d) turn Kermanshah into a national (and perhaps one day regional) training centre of excellence on PPB. The Jihad – e – Agriculture vision is that one day, farmers, breeders and extension agents from throughout the country will come to Kermanshah to receive practical training on PPB, which they will then put to use in their own provinces for the collective benefit of the country.

Extension of PPB to Shahrood Province

In December 2008 CENESTA Staff and Dr. Ceccarelli visited the Agricultural Office in Sharhood (a large province with 5.2 million hectares ranging from permanent snow cover to dates production) and they had a meeting with farmers, University Staff, Extension and Ministry of Agriculture staff. During the meeting, various aspects of participatory research in general and of participatory plant breeding in particular were discussed.

In a wrap-up meeting the head of the Agricultural office decided to start PPB on both irrigated and rain-fed wheat and barley, on chickpea and on lentil.

Training

In December 2008 a practical training course on how to interact with farmers was organized by CENESTA and DARSI in Kermanshah

Farmers Conference (http://www.icarda.org/FarmersConference)

Some 53 farmers from six countries exchanged experiences and knowledge through story telling during the Farmers' Conference held at ICARDA Headquarters in Aleppo, 4-8 May. The conference was supported by CGIAR’s Knowledge Sharing Project of ICT-KM. Farmers from Syria, Algeria, Iran, Jordan, Egypt and Eritrea attended the first Farmer's Conference organized by the Barley Research Program of the BIGM.

Iran participated with five farmers from Garmsar and one from Kermanshah: they were accompanied by Ms Maryam Rahmanian (CENESTA) and by Mr. Allahbaksh Rezaiee (Jihad-e Agriculture Organization).

The objective of the conference was to bring farmers from different countries together to share their experiences and learn from each other. This also created the opportunity for the farmers to visit a research center like ICARDA and for the researchers to learn from the farmers.

During the Conference, the participants visited ICARDA facilities and farmers' fields in Souran, about 100 km south of ICARDA where they interacted with local farmers. Each day the farmers had sessions devoted to storytelling, which gave them an opportunity to narrate their own experiences and learn from other farmers.

The Iranian farmers contributed with the following four presentations: a) He who gives bread can give orders b) God provides but we must all play our part c) Farmer independence; management of rain water d) Traditional varieties in Kermanshah The conference was successful in establishing linkages between national level networks of barley farmers in these six countries.

Third year (2008 – 2009)

The barley PPB trials

In the third year, the 19 lines which survived the first two rounds of selections (Table 3) were tested in the same three locations as in the previous cropping season, namely Ghods, Sarasayab, and Ghaleh Kharabeh. In each location we tested 8 lines (not the same but with some degree of overlapping) in a replicated trial with 2 replications laid out as a row and column design. In a fourth location (Sanard) the remnant seed of the 37 lines selected in the first year was rejuvenated.

In Sarasayab the season was very dry and we were only able to conduct farmers’ selection on the amount of biomass produced by the various entries.

Grain yield in Ghods (1538 kg/ha) was only 33% and 27% of that obtained in 2008 (4643 kg/ha)

and 2007 (5597 kg/ha), respectively. Because of this large difference between the three cropping seasons it was not surprising to find large Genotypes x Years interactions as shown by the spreading of the vectors representing grain yield (GY) and farmers’ selection (FS) in the three years (Fig. 3). Large interactions imply a different ranking of the lines from year to year and also a different preference by farmers. In this location, during an ad hoc meeting (Fig. 4) farmers eventually selected the two lines shown in red in Fig. 3 for further testing.

In Sarasayab there was very little development and no measures could be taken. However, farmers could detect differences in the development of the different lines and it was decided to record these differences. Based on the records of previous years farmers decided to promote to the following year testing line nr 3.

In Ghaleh Kharabeh grain yield (3538 kg/ha) was much higher than in Ghods. It was similar to the grain yield obtained in the same location in 2007 (4229 kg/ha) and about 15 time higher than in 2008. Therefore, it was not surprising that also in this case there were large genotype x year interactions (Fig. 6) with the ranking of lines in 2007 being the opposite of what is was in 2008, and the ranking in 2009 being unrelated to either 2007 or 2008. The same applies to farmers’ selection that in 2009 was negatively correlated to that in 2007 (there was no farmers’ selection in 2008 as the crop was very poor).

While we need to specify that the entry numbers in each location do not necessarily refer to the same line, the message emerging from the data in 2009, after three years of testing, is that the climate conditions vary so much from year to year that it is very unlikely that the same variety will perform consistently well over time.

Fig. 3. Biplot of grain yield and farmers’ preferences for 8 breeding lines of barley evaluated in Ghods in 2008- 2009 (GY = grain yield; FS = farmers’ selection). The lines in red are those selected for further testing in 2009-2010.

Fig. 4. Discussion among farmers during the final selection.

Fig. 5. Biplot of grain yield and farmers’ preferences for 8 breeding lines of barley evaluated in Sarasayab in 2008- 2009 (GY = grain yield; FS = farmers’ selection). The line in red is the one selected for further testing in 2009-2010. There was no harvest in 2009.

Fig. 6. Biplot of grain yield and farmers’ preferences for 8 breeding lines of barley evaluated in Ghaleh Kharabeh in 2008- 2009 (GY = grain yield; FS = farmers’ selection). The line in red is the one selected for further testing in 2009-2010. There was no farmer selection in 2008. As we will see in the following sections, farmers in Garmsar started considering the option of mixtures as one way of coping with the large year-to-year variability.

During 2008-2009 farmers in Garmsar started planting an evolutionary population of barley obtained by mixing an equal number of seeds of nearly 1600 F2. The population raised a considerable interest and together with the results of the PPB trials strongly affected the decisions on how to organize the PPB trials for the fourth year.

Fourth year (2009 – 2010)

The barley PPB trials

Out of the initial 70 lines only four (Table 4) lines were selected for a fourth year of testing.

Table 4. Lines selected from the trials conducted in 2007, 2008 and 2009 for testing in 2009- 20010. Line Name 1 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 2 As46/Rhn-05/3/Arbayan-01//M6/Robur-35-6-3 3 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 Rhn//Bc/Coho/3/DeirAlla106//Api/EB89-8-2-15- 4 4/5/CM67/3/Apro//Sv02109/Mari/4/Carbo

It was decided to test these four lines together with the predominantly grown barley variety Karoon dar Kavir and two mixtures: one made with all the 37 lines which were selected after the first year and one made with eight lines.

The experiment with 7 entries was planted in three locations (Ghods, Ghaleh Kharabeh and Javad Abad) as a Randomized Complete Block Design with two replications arranged in 2 rows and seven columns.

Grain yield varied from about 1600 kg/ha in Ghods to more than 4000 kg/ha in Ghaleh Kharabeh and Javad Abad. Biomass, plant height and 1000 kernel weight followed the same pattern of grain yield.

The seven entries behave differently depending on the location (Fig. 7). For example line 1 was the highest yielding in Ghaleh Kharabeh but the lowest in the other two locations. The lines 2, 3 and 4 and the Mixture of 37 were the most stable as indicated by their position near the origin (PC1 = PC2 = 0). The mixture of 8 lines was consistently the most preferred entry by the farmers while the improved variety Karoon dar Kavir was the least preferred. Farmers’ selection was only weakly correlated with either grain yield or biomass yield; we therefore investigated whether the other two traits, plant height and kernel weight, were more closely related with the farmers’ preferences: as shown in Fig. 8 this was not the case. Fig. 8 shows that the differences in plant height were consistent across locations as it was farmer’s preference (the angles between the three vectors for PH are very small as those between the three vectors of FS. On the contrary 1000 kernel weight showed a large interaction with locations.

Fig. 7. Biplot of grain yield (GY), Biomass Yield (BY) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 4 breeding lines of barley (1 to 4), two mixtures of 8 (Mix8) and 37 (Mix37) lines, and the improved variety Karoon dar Kavir (KdK)evaluated in Ghods (L1), Ghaleh Kharabeh (L2) and Javad Abad (L3) in 2009- 2010.

Fig. 8. Biplot of 1000 kernel weight (KW), plant height (PH) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 4 breeding lines of barley (1 to 4), two mixtures of 8 (Mix8) and 37 (Mix37) lines, and the improved variety Karoon dar Kavir (KdK) evaluated in Ghods (L1), Ghaleh Kharabeh (L2) and Javad Abad (L3) in 2009- 2010.

During 2009-2010 the interest for mixtures in Garmsar increased considerably. Farmers stared experimenting with their own mixtures. Also the evolutionary population expanded from the original three farmers in 2008-2009 to 10 farmers in 2009-2010, of which 9 in Semnan province and one in Qazvin province. In addition an evolutionary population of wheat was grown in Cham Khorram (Chahar Mahal and Bakhtiari province).

In addition the farmers decided to start with a PPB program on triticale and with a new set of 61 barley lines which were planted in Malijan together with Karoon dar Kavir as repeated check. Farmers’ score was correlated mostly with biomass yield and several entries out yielded Karoon dar Kavir (indicated with a red arrow in Fig 9).

Fifteen entries (indicated in red in Fig. 9) were selected for further testing in 2010 -2011; their position in the biplot suggests that important selection criteria were grain yield (entries 26, 38, 47, 13, 12, 22, 60 and 14), a combination of grain yield and biomass yield (entries 10, 11, 16, 39, 8 and 4), kernel weight (entry 37).

Fig.9. Biplot of 1000 kernel weight (KW), plant height (PH), Grain Yield (GY), Biomass yield (BY), Straw yield (SY), Harvest Index (HI) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 62 breeding lines of barley including the improved variety Karoon dar Kavir (KdK) evaluated in Malijan in 2009- 2010. The entries in red are those selected for testing in 2010-2011.

Table 5. Comparison between the means of the 15 selected lines and the check Kavir Trait Selected LinesKavir Difference Ph 72.53 70.78 1.75 By 9400.00 9185.19 214.81 Gy 6082.79 3973.27 2109.52 Hi 0.55 0.42 0.13 Kw 45.19 43.95 1.24 Fs 1.79 1.37 0.42

The comparison between the average of the selected lines and the check variety (Table 5) shows that the selected lines were marginally taller, higher yielding both in grain and biomass, a higher harvest index and had a higher farmers’ score while the differences for plant height and kernel weight were smaller.

These 15 lines, together with the four lines selected from the original set of 70 lines (Table 4), and two checks (Karon dar Kavir and the mixture of 8 lines described earlier) were tested in the fifth year of PPB (see below).

The wheat PPB trials

In 2009-2010 a PPB work on wheat started in Cham Khorranwith breeding material provided by the Dryland Agricultural Research Sub-Institute at Kermanshah. Two experiments were conducted one with 69 entries and three checks (Pato, Roshan and Sardari), and one with 64 entries and three check (Azar 2, Pato/call/.. and Roshan).

Fig.10. Biplot of plant height (PH), Grain Yield (GY), Biomass yield (BY), Straw yield (SY), Harvest Index (HI), Spike Length (SL) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 65 wheat breeding lines and three checks, Pato (Ch1), Roshan (Ch2) and Sardari (Ch3) evaluated in Cham Khorran in 2009- 2010. The entries in red are those selected for testing in 2010-2011.

In the first experiment Roshan ranked first in farmers’ score, plant height, biomass yield and straw yield (Fig. 10). It ranked 4th for spike length and 19th for grain yield. Farmers selected 23 entries (indicated in red in Figure 9) for further testing in 2011-2012.

Fig.11. Biplot of plant height (PH), Grain Yield (GY), Biomass yield (BY), Straw yield (SY), Harvest Index (HI), Spike Length (SL) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 65 wheat breeding lines and three checks Azar 2 (Ch1), Pato/call/.. (Ch2) and Roshan (Ch3) evaluated in Cham Khorran in 2009- 2010. The entries in red are those selected for testing in 2010-2011.

In the second trial Roshan was again the tallest entry but 27 entries yielded more grain than Roshan which was the highest yielding check. The farmers selected 45 lines (indicated in red in Fig. 11) and their spreading suggests that farmers used a multitude of selection criterion even though grain yield was the most important (the correlation coefficient between GY and FS was r = 0.432, P<0.0001) followed by biomass yield (r between BY and FS was 0.249, P<0.05).

Fifth year (2010 – 2011)

The barley PPB trials

In the fifth year of PPB on barley the 15 entries selected in the fourth year together with the four lines selected from the 70 introduced in 2006 were tested together with Karon dar Kavir and a Mixture of 8 lines used as checks in two locations Malijan and Ghods.

There was a considerable difference between the two locations with a weak negative correlation between grain yield and an even stronger negative correlation between farmers’ score (Fig. 12).

Because of the contrasting performance in the two locations and the contrasting preferences, farmers conducted independent selection within location thus deviating greatly from what professional breeders would normally do.

Fig.12. Biplot of Grain Yield (GY) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 19 barley breeding lines, a mixture of 8 lines (Mix 8) and the check cultivar Karon dar Kavir evaluated in two locations Malijan (L1) and Ghods (l2) in 2010- 2011. The entries in red are those selected from the initial set of 70 lines evaluated in 2006. indicates the entries selected in Malijan, indicated the entries selected in Ghods, and indicates the entries selected in both locations for the next year of evaluation and selection.

Table 6. Biomass Yield (BY) and Grain yield (GY) of the 4 lines derived from the set evaluated in 2006-2007 in % of the check Karon dar Kavir and of the Mixture of the 8 lines % Entry Name Pedigree BY GY % KdK Mix8 16 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//…. ICB95-0602-0AP-10AP-0AP.. 4.67 2.42 1.35 1.48 17 As46/Rhn-05/3/Arbayan-01//M6/Robur-35.. ICB01-0282-4TR-0AP 4.57 1.83 1.02 1.12 18 Rihane-03/3/As46/Aths*2//Aths/Lignee686 ICB95-0602-0AP-5AP…. 5.05 2.50 1.39 1.52 19 Rhn//Bc/Coho/3/DeirAlla106//Ap…… ICB01-0236-8TR-0AP 5.07 2.11 1.18 1.28 20 Karon dar Kavir - 4.27 1.79 1.00 1.09 21 Mixture 8 - 5.22 1.64 0.92 1.00

The four lines which were left after 5 years of selection from the initial set of breeding lines evaluated in the first year allow an estimate of the gain achieved in terms of biomass yield and grain yield. Table 6 shows that in the case of GY this gain varies from 2 to 39% over Karon dar Kavir and from 12 to 52% in the case of the mixture of 8 lines. In the case of BY (data not shown) this gain varies from 7 to 18% over Karon dar Kavir while there has been no gain over the mixture of 8 lines.

The analysis of the 5 years data of the four lines evaluated for five years (from 2007 to 2011) shows that for grain yield (Figure 13) there was a large Genotype x Locations interactions but also large Genotype x Years within Location Interactions particularly in locations 1, 2 and 4.

Fig. 13. Biplot of Grain Yield for the four barley breeding lines (16, 17, 18 and 19) tested for five years, a mixture of 8 lines (Mix 8), a mixture of 37 lines (Mix 37) and the check cultivar Karon dar Kavir (KdK). The two mixtures and Karon dar Kavir were tested only in the last two cropping seasons.

Figure 13 shows that is impossible to identify which of the four lines is the superior one. The same type of analysis applied to the farmers’ scores shows that even though large interactions still exist, in the majority of the years and locations there was a preference for lines 19 and 18 (Figure 14). The

figure shows that men and women preferences were sometimes similar (example locations 2 and 4) and sometimes nearly independent like in location 5.

Fig. 14. Biplot of farmers’ scores for the four barley breeding lines (16, 17, 18 and 19) tested for five years, a mixture of 8 lines (Mix 8), a mixture of 37 lines (Mix 37) and the check cultivar Karon dar Kavir (KdK). The two mixtures and Karon dar Kavir were tested only in the last two cropping seasons.

The wheat PPB trials

The 23 entries selected in 2010-2011 (Fig. 9) were tested in 2012 in Cham Khorran in a replicated trial with two checks, Roshan (already used in the first year) and Roshan Back Cross.

Data were on plant height, spike length, biomass yield, grain yield, harvest index and farmers preference.

There was a large diversity between the 23 lines (Table 7) except for spike length, possibly for a strong selection pressure during farmers’ selection in 2010. With the exception of spike length the maximum values expressed by the breeding lines are well above those of the checks.

In the case of grain yield 17 breeding lines out yielded the best check (Roshan Back Cross) from 2 to 65%.

Table 7. Mean, minimum and maximum of plant height (PH in cm), spike length (SL in cm), farmers preference (FS from 1 to 5), biomass yield (BY in ql/ha)), grain yield (GY in ql/ha)) and harvest index (HI) of 23 wheat breeding lines and two checks. PH SL FS BY GY GY Mean 73.2 9.51 2.42 9.39 2.70 0.28 Min 64.9 9.44 1.51 7.67 1.92 0.25 Max 80.8 9.57 3.15 11.54 3.92 0.33

Roshan 76.4 9.51.69 7.82 1.88 0.25 Roshan Back Cross 75.5 9.51 2.04 9.06 2.37 0.26

Only five lines were rejected because almost all performed better than the local check (Fig. 15). Five lines were rejected because of their appearance (dark color and small seed size).

Fig.15. Biplot of Grain Yield (GY), Plant height (PH) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 23 wheat breeding lines, and two checks, Roshan (24) and Roshan Back Cross (25) tested in Cham Khorram in 2010 and 2011.

Farmers’ preference was strongly for grain yield in 2011 but much less so in 2010 when plant height was more strongly associated with farmers’ score.

The triticale PPB trials

On 2011 we repeated a trial with triticale lines obtained from Algeria. The trial was a repetition of a similar trial conducted in 2010 and in which it was not possible to collect data.

In 2011 we tested 27 triticale lines together with a local triticale, a Mixture of 10 barley lines, a triticale mixture, a mixture of 4 lines selected in 2010 and a mixture Triticale and the 4 lines selected in 2010. The check varieties were Karoon and Karoon-dar-kavir. The trial was planted in Mehdi Abad and data were recorded on plant height, biomass yield, grain yield, kernel weight and farmers preference (Fig. 16).

Fig.16. Biplot of Grain Yield (GY), Biomass Yield (BY), , Kernel Weight (KW), Plant height (PH) and farmers’ preferences (FS) for 27 triticale breeding lines tested in Mehdi Abad in 2011 , together with a local triticale (LT), a Mixture of 10 barley lines (Mix10), a triticale mixture (MixT), a mixture of 4 lines selected in 2010 (Mix 4), a mixture of Triticale and barley ((MixTB) and the two check varieties Karoon (K) and Karoon-dar-kavir (KdK).

As expected most of the mixtures, particularly the most complex ones were close to the grand mean for most of the traits; several triticale lines yielded more than any of the checks and the check variety Karoon-dar-kavir received the highest score from the farmers. This has obviously a relative value depending on the other entries in the trial.

Evolutionary populations

During the last four cropping seasons, the barley evolutionary population expanded from one farmer in 2008 to 9 in 2011. We are in the process of monitoring the area planted by each farmer.

Table 8. Diffusion of a barley evolutionary population in the Semnan province from 2008 to 2011. Farmer City 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 Ahmad Mohammadi Garmsar Mohammad Hossieni Garmsar Ghodratollah Boron Garmsar Shah Hosseini Garmsar Abdol Reza Biglari Garmsar Shahroo Reza Salehi d Ahmad Taheri Garmsar Shahroo Davood Karimi d Morteza Akhlaghi Damghan Mohammad Akhlaghi Damghan .

Table 9. Diffusion of a barley evolutionary population in the different province from 2008 to 2012.

2008‐9 2009‐10 2010‐2011 2011‐2012 Weig Produ Name Area Weigh Product Area Product Area Weight Product Weight ht Area (M2) ct (M2) t (kg) (kg) (M2) (kg) (M2) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Kermanshah 2000 16 179 5460 82 2145 90995 1741 22737 249840 3241 Semnan 160 4 80.1 1610 44 566.5 800 20 59.1 11538 315 Chahar Mahal and Bakhtiari 150 6 90 1000 30 256 980 9 Khuzestan 1235 20 Fars 1163 20 Razavi Khorasan 264756 3605 Yazd 752 4 Ardebil 750 20 Golestan 100 4 Tehran 400 4 100 Total 2160 20 259.1 7220 532 2805.5 92895 1791 23052.1 531114 7238

In relation to the use of the evolutionary population as source of material to be used in the PPB program in the future we have also produced a technical manual.