marker-assisted selection in wheat - ictsd

436Marker-assisted selection – Current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and fishered to farmers. Although documentationwas limited, the current impact seemedsmall while the future impact was likely tobe far more substantial.Priyadarshan (11) indicated that biotechnologyresearch had been supportedactively for over 17 years in India, butwas doubtful about the impact on varietiesreleased to farmers. He believed thatresearch on MAS and other biotechnologieshad remained largely in journal articlesand had not significantly boosted conventionalplant breeding efforts on the ground.Kirti (12) lamented that there was no comprehensivedocumentation regarding thesuccessful use of MAS for breeding newcrop varieties or developing breeding material,as this information would be importantfor evaluating the technology. Collard (45),while noting that MAS had been successfulin cereal crops in his country, Australia,said he was not aware of many examples ofMAS-derived cultivars grown in Australiadespite the wealth of publications fromAustralian institutions on the technology.Sridhar (48) suggested that, in India, mostproducts of MAS are still in the hands ofresearch institutions undergoing evaluation.He suggested that MAS products require a“fast track” evaluation system to expeditethe release of promising germplasm.According to Makkar (52), success indemonstrating genetic gain in the laboratorydid not always equate with successunder field conditions. However, some realsuccesses were reported, including transferof important resistance genes into adaptedrice germplasm for Indian farmers (Sridhar,35 and 54), indicating that more successesmight be in the pipeline. Williams (51) saidthat molecular markers had been used for atleast five years in Australia in some wheatand barley improvement programmes andthat “it is likely that in Australia all breedingprogrammes with industry funding andprobably also the private breeding companiesare currently using MAS to someextent”. However, the potential of the newtechnology has to be weighed against thesuccess achieved using traditional methods.Acikgoz (66) pointed out that the Turkishrice cultivar Tokak was still being solddespite having been released in 1937, andquestioned how much impact populationgenetics studies, popular 20–30 years ago,had on cultivar development, let alone theimpact of biotechnology applications.Buijs (58) mentioned tissue culture, onceregarded as a modern, relatively expensivetechnology, which is now relatively inexpensiveand widely used in developingcountries. It will only be known retrospectivelywhether MAS evolves similarlyto become a standard tool of the plant andanimal breeder in developing countries.Intellectual property rights issuesSome participants felt that intellectualproperty rights (IPRs) were an importantconstraint to development and uptakeof MAS in the developing world. Corva(29) raised the issue of the use of licensedgenomic technology by public institutionsin developing countries, mentioning thatmany useful cattle markers were becomingavailable, but which were patented, andthat there was therefore a demand for practicalinformation about IPRs and violationof IPRs. Weller (30) pointed out that patentsare only valid in the country wherethey are granted, that research tends to beexempted from patent restrictions and thatthere can be long delays between filing ofpatent claims and their eventual granting.Saravanan (31) argued strongly for thefreedom of researchers to use patented biotechnologytools. Storlie (32) argued thatfarmers in the developing world should