3. Variety Names

Sadiki, M.; Jarvis, D. I.; Rijal, Deepak; Bajracharya, J.; Hue, N. Ngoc; Camacho-Villa, Tania Carolina; Burgos-May, L. A.; Sawadogo, Mahamadou; Balma, D.; Lope, D.; Arias, Liliana; Már, I.; Karamura, D.; Williams, Dana E.; Servia, José Luis Chávez; Sthapit, B.R.; Rao, V. Ramanatha

doi:10.7312/jarv13648-005

Cited by 30 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The level of consistency in naming and distinguishing local varieties is essential in such socio-economic studies. If the farmer-named varieties are not genetically distinct, then the usefulness of names as a means to identify and quantify the diversity in agricultural ecosystems will be limited (Sadiki et al, 2007). In the present study sites, however, Bajracharya (2003) reported high consistency between farmersÕ naming of rice varieties and results obtained from agro-morphological and bio-chemical characterizations, which indicates that farmersÕ named varieties could be used as an independent units for analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Influence of socio-economic and cultural factors in rice varietal diversity management on-farm in Nepal

Rana

Garforth

Sthapit³

et al. 2007

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A questionnaire survey of 408 households explored the role of socio-economic and cultural factors in rice (Oryza sativa L.) varietal diversity management on-farm in two contrasting eco-sites in Nepal. Multiple regression outputs suggest that number of parcels of land, livestock number, number of rice ecosystems, agro-ecology (altitude), and use of chemical fertilizer have a significant positive influence on landrace diversity on-farm, while membership in farmersÕ groups linked to extension services has significant but negative influence on landrace diversity. Factors with significant positive influence on diversity of modern varieties on-farm were number of parcels of land and of rice ecosystems, access to irrigation, membership in farmersÕ groups, and use of insecticide. Within communities, resource-endowed households maintain significantly higher varietal diversity on-farm than resource-poor households and play a significant role in conserving landraces that are vulnerable to genetic erosion and those with socio-cultural and marketpreferred traits. Resource-poor households also contribute to local diversity conservation but at lower richness and area coverage levels than resource-endowed households. Households where a female had assumed the role of head of household due to death or migrant work of her husband had less diversity due to lower labor availability. Landraces with socio-cultural and market-preferred traits are few in number but have potential to be conserved on-farm.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Influence of socio-economic and cultural factors in rice varietal diversity management on-farm in Nepal

Rana

Garforth

Sthapit³

et al. 2007

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some cases, the number of traditional varieties in a production system as tallied by farmer-names is corroborated by genetic data. In other cases, names do not appear to fit the patterns of diversity suggested by molecular mapping, but do align with those measured by farmer descriptions of crop traits in the field (Sadiki et al 2007;Baymetov et al 2009). Several findings are unique to crop and country.…”

Section: Naming Diversity Culturally and Biologicallymentioning

confidence: 78%

Are we losing diversity? Navigating ecological, political, and epistemic dimensions of agrobiodiversity conservation

Wit

2015

Agric Hum Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Narratives of seed 'loss' and 'persistence' remain at loggerheads. Crop genetic diversity is rapidly eroding worldwide, we are told, and numerous studies support this claim. Other data, however, suggests an alternative storyline: far from disappearing, seed diversity persists around the world, resisting the homogenizing forces of modern capitalism. Which of these accounts is closer to the truth? As it turns out, crop biodiversity is more easily invoked than measured, more easily wielded than understood. In this essay, I contend that the impasse reveals an error in the asking. We must, instead, look to the ontological, epistemic, and narrative dimensions of agrobiodiversity-and to the science, politics, and cultures of each. How is diversity empirically defined and measured? Who creates and categorizes diversity? Who does not? How is such knowledge mobilized in the accounts and narratives of different interest groups? Where, when, and why does a narrative hold true? This multi-dimensional view of agrobiodiversity makes space for a greater understanding of how diversity is created, maintained, and renewed. It suggests policy and institutional support for systems that engender such renewal of diversity, both in and ex situ.

show abstract

“…Varieties are usually considered as an entry point to the genetic diversity and its conservation (Jarvis et al 2008;Sadiki et al 2007). Because the relation between variety names and genetic diversity will impact the evolution of the crop diversity, it will impact the way we can preserve this diversity.…”

Section: Farmers' Classification Versus Genetic Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic structure of farmer-managed varieties in clonally-propagated crops

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relative role of sexual reproduction and mutation in shaping the diversity of clonally propagated crops is largely unknown. We analyzed the genetic diversity of yam-a vegetatively-propagated crop-to gain insight into how these two factors shape its diversity in relation with farmers' classifications. Using 15 microsatellite loci, we analyzed 485 samples of 10 different yam varieties. We identified 33 different genotypes organized in lineages supported by high bootstrap values. We computed the probability that these genotypes appeared by sexual reproduction or mutation within and between each lineage. This allowed us to interpret each lineage as a product of sexual reproduction that has evolved by mutation. Moreover, we clearly noted a similarity between the genetic structure and farmers' classifications. Each variety could thus be interpreted as being the product of sexual reproduction having evolved by mutation. This highly structured diversity of farmer-managed varieties has consequences for the preservation of yam diversity.

show abstract

3. Variety Names

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Influence of socio-economic and cultural factors in rice varietal diversity management on-farm in Nepal

Influence of socio-economic and cultural factors in rice varietal diversity management on-farm in Nepal

Are we losing diversity? Navigating ecological, political, and epistemic dimensions of agrobiodiversity conservation

Genetic structure of farmer-managed varieties in clonally-propagated crops

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About