Download - Maize
Download - Maize
Download - Maize
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
What's new in this initiative?<br />
Drought tolerance breeding will be extended to Asia and Latin America, where the combination of<br />
increasing yields, climate change, and increasing costs of irrigation water will give rise to more<br />
frequent large‐volume production shortfalls in maize and price variations that affect poor<br />
consumers.<br />
Breeding for waterlogging tolerance will be scaled up in Asia, particularly targeting areas receiving<br />
high rainfall in the monsoon season and prone to floods during crop growth and development.<br />
Screening under heat stress will be incorporated, based on recent studies of significant climate<br />
change‐related impact in tropical maize, which may include heat‐related impacts on flowering and<br />
grain filling (Lobell and Burke 2010).<br />
Screening for combinations of stresses—particularly drought plus heat and drought plus<br />
waterlogging—ill be initiated for the first time, because of the evidence that genotypes respond in a<br />
non‐additive manner to combinations of stresses.<br />
A coordinated, inter‐institutional biotic stress tolerance screening network will be established.<br />
A systematic public pipeline for marker development for biotic and abiotic stress tolerance genes<br />
will be implemented.<br />
Innovative seed production systems will be developed, allowing small‐scale seed companies to<br />
produce hybrids at low cost without the need to produce large quantities of seeds of low‐yielding<br />
and sensitive inbred lines.<br />
Innovative partnerships with multinational seed companies and emerging biotechnology capacities<br />
in China, India, and Mexico will be expanded to accelerate breeding gains for the benefit of the most<br />
disadvantaged countries and farmers, using both native and transgenic variation.<br />
Greater focus will be placed on the search for innovative approaches to speed the dissemination of<br />
drought‐tolerant maize into areas with weaker seed value chains.<br />
Targeting and impact estimates<br />
Ten farming systems with greatest losses due to drought are included in this Initiative (Figure 5). La<br />
Rovere et al. (2010) estimated the impact of maize tolerant to drought and nitrogen stress in sub‐<br />
Saharan Africa at 1.2 million tons annually after 10 years of research, assuming most likely rates of<br />
adoption and conservative yield improvements of 3–20%, depending on the site and seasonal<br />
conditions. Assuming proportional but delayed impact in Asia and Latin America (due to lack of previous<br />
research investments) and based on maize area affected by drought (PDII Index in Hyman’s study ;<br />
Hyman et al. 2008) and doubling impacts for the period 2020–30 in Africa, this initiative would result in<br />
at least 1.7–4.5 million tons of additional grain valued at USD 280–815 million by 2020–30. La Rovere et<br />
al. (2010) indicated that a monetary benefit of an additional 50% would arise from reduced yield/price<br />
fluctuations, with a total producer benefit of USD 42–1,215 million by 2020–30.<br />
Other issues<br />
Gender<br />
This strategic initiative is targeted at some of the poorest people in the developing world: smallholders<br />
who grow maize for subsistence in drought‐prone environments, and who are unable to afford the tiny<br />
investment in fertilizer needed to improve their maize yields above the 1–2 tons per hectare level<br />
achievable without fertilizer in soils with low organic matter. Such farmers, primarily in sub‐Saharan<br />
Africa, also usually have very little political influence and find it difficult to access input‐subsidy<br />
programs. In general, women farmers in male‐dominated households have primary responsibility for<br />
food crop production, while male household members invest their labor in more profitable cash‐crop<br />
production or off‐farm work. Women‐headed households are usually poorer and less able to acquire<br />
inputs than households headed by males (Doss 1999).<br />
114