OLD SCC80: Sustaining the Future of Plant Breeding

(Multistate Research Coordinating Committee and Information Exchange Group)

Status: Inactive/Terminating

Project Menu

SAES-422 Reports

Annual/Termination Reports:

[08/23/2016] [09/26/2017] [08/29/2018] [10/16/2019] [10/08/2020]

Date of Annual Report: 08/23/2016

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 08/15/2016 - 08/18/2016
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2015 - 08/15/2016

Participants

Chair: Michael Gore
Vice Chair: Thomas Lübberstedt
Secretary: Kate Evans
Incoming Secretary: Ksenija Gasic

Participants: Ksenija Gasic, Kate Evans, Gerald Myers, Eric Young, Ramasamy Perumal, Thomas Lübberstedt, Gary Pederson, Michael Kantar, Vasu Kuraparthy, Jodi Scheffler, Bo Zhang, Barry Tillman, Vince Pantalone, Assibi Mahama, Natalia de Leon, Barbara Liedl, Neil Anderson, Brian Leckie, Rich Pratt, Jim Mcferson, Tesfaye Tesso, Jane Dever, Alison Thompson, Hem Bhandari, Tom Koch, Klaus Koehler, David Francis, Michael Gore, Ali Missaoui, Patricio Munoz, Amy Iezzoni, David Baltensperger, Wayne Smith, Ted Wallace, Karen Moldenhauer, Ed Kaleikau, Ann Marie Thro, Manjit Misra and Pat Byrne.

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

PBCC meeting Raleigh_Minutes_FINAL_20160819.docx

Accomplishments

<ul> <li>PBCC organized a symposium entitled ‘<a href="https://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2016/webprogram/Session11885.html">Unlocking Plant Genetic Diversity for Food and Nutritional Security</a>’ at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Feb. 13, Washington, DC. A written summary was shared with PBCC and NAPB membership, as well as highlighted on the NAPB website. Travel of Pat Byrne to the AAAS meeting was partially supported by NAPB.</li> </ul> <ul> <li>PBCC was granted liaison status on the National Plant Germplasm Coordinating Committee (NPGCC). Pat Byrne represented PBCC at the NPGCC annual meeting, June 14, 2016 in Fort Collins, CO. A written summary was shared with PBCC membership. The meeting registration fee was paid for by NAPB.</li> </ul> <ul> <li>Bill Tracy, lead for the PBCC intellectual property subcommittee, in collaboration with other key stakeholders (e.g., Seeds & Breeds) held an IPR for Public Plant Breeding Summit from August 13 – 15, 2016 in Raleigh, NC. The main goal of the summit was to develop mechanisms that facilitate the commercialization and utilization of publicly developed germplasm in both public and private breeding programs, while providing an income stream from finished varieties to help fund public cultivar development. Often the public breeding sector collaborates with the private sector to commercialize public cultivars, and considerations must be made to facilitate this while ensuring that farmers and the public benefit from public investment in plant breeding. The summit had approximately 50 attendees.</li> </ul> <ul> <li>Internship white paper, including a “best practice protocol” was developed by Stephen Baenziger, Mike Havey, and Thomas Lubberstedt – in interaction with PBCC and NAPB, and posted on the NAPB website.</li> </ul> <ul> <li>Shared with PBCC representatives a report from the National Genetic Resources Advisory Council (NGRAC) for the National Genetic Resources Program (NGRP) that was in response to a specific recommendation of the Advisory Committee on Biotechnology in the 21st Century (AC21). The report was also discussed further by Chair of the NGRAC, Manjit Misra, at the PBCC meeting of State Representatives on August 16, 2016, allowing comments to be directly communicated.</li> </ul> <ul> <li>Shared with PBCC representatives a report titled “Examination of Plant Breeding at U.S. Academic Institutions and Private Companies in 2015” by the IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute (STPI). This report was requested by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and builds on the previous work of Dr. Kenneth Frey and others. It is an examination of (1) the current state of plant breeding in the public and private sectors and (2) the educational pipeline for plant breeding. Weaknesses and flaws of the report identified by PBCC State Representatives were anonymously shared with Ann Marie Thro (NIFA rep), which were then communicated to Emily Sylak of the STPI staff. Efforts need to be taken by PBCC in the future to help fill in the existing information gaps.</li> </ul>

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 09/26/2017

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 08/07/2017 - 08/10/2017
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2016 - 09/30/2017

Participants

Ksenija Gasic SC
Julia Piaskowski WA
Melanie Caffe-Treml SD
Pushpa Kathir DC
Liang-Shiou Lia MD
Kapalatha Melmaiee DE
Peggy Osias-Akins GA
David Stelly TX
Ed Kaleikau DC
Eric Young SAAESD
Vasu Kuraparthy NC
Brian Leckie TN
Felipe Barrios Masias NV
Patrick Byrne CO
Shaun Townsend OR
Emilio Oyarzabal MO
Ann Marie Thro USDA NIFA
Barry Tillman FL
P. Stephen Baenziger NE
Mukhlesor Rahman ND
Jenny Koebermzk Alabama
Kari Hugie SC
Amanda Hulse Kemp NC/USDA
Amy Iezzoni MI
Neil Anderson MN
Kate Evans WA
Thomas Lubberstedt IA
Mikey Kantar HI
Phil Simon WI
Brian Garunia MO
Todd Campbell SC
Jodi Scheffler MS
Seth Murray TX/DC
Alex Lipka IL

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes Attachment:

Minutes_Participants_ PBCC state rep session 8-9-17.docx

Accomplishments

PBCC: Accomplishments 2016/2017, 2017 Meeting, and goals for 2017/2018 2016/2017 PBCC Accomplishments: <ul> <li>The number of state representatives has significantly increased. According to the Participant E list (<a href="../../appendix_e/project?id=17576">https://www.nimss.org/appendix_e/project?id=17576</a>), 44 states are represented, as well as one unincorporated territory of the U.S.: Puerto Rico.</li> <li>‘Sustaining the Future of Plant Breeding: The Critical Role of the USDA-ARS National Plant Germplasm System.’ P.F. Byrne, G.M. Volk, C. Gardner, M. A. Gore, P.W. Simon, and S. Smith. Manuscript submitted to Crop Science, 5/19/17.</li> <li>‘Planning Conference to Develop Strategies for Training the Next Generation of U.S. Plant Genebank Managers.’ P.F. Byrne and G.M. Volk. $37,636. Proposal submitted to USDA-NIFA-AFRI, Plant Breeding for Agricultural Production program, 7/18/17.</li> <li>Key Note presentation by Patrick Byrne, Colorado State University, at the 2017 NAPB/PBCC meeting: “Germplasm Morgue or Gold Mine? Enhancing the Value of Plant Genetic Resource Collections for Plant Breeding”</li> <li>Report on “Intellectual Property Rights and Public Plant Breeding Recommendations, and proceedings of a conference on best practices for intellectual property protection of publically developed plant germplasm” based on a summit prior to the 2016 NAPB/PBCC meeting compiled and edited by William F. Tracy, Julie C. Dawson, Virginia M. Moore, and Jillene Fisch, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison (<a href="http://host.cals.wisc.edu/agronomy/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2016/05/Proceedings-IPR-Final.pdf">http://host.cals.wisc.edu/agronomy/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2016/05/Proceedings-IPR-Final.pdf</a>)</li> <li>Session on Intellectual Property Rights at the 2017 NAPB/PBCC meeting, chaired by William F. Tracy, University of Wisconsin-Madison</li> <li>Stable funding of PBCC of $6,000 annually will be provided by NAPB</li> <li>PBCC modifiable poster established by Mikey Kantar, for presentation at any conference or venue (<a href="https://www.plantbreeding.org/files/napb/pbcc-national-poster.pdf">https://www.plantbreeding.org/files/napb/pbcc-national-poster.pdf</a>)</li> <li>Permanent web-site location on NAPB web-site established: <a href="https://www.plantbreeding.org/content/pbcc">https://www.plantbreeding.org/content/pbcc</a></li> </ul> Annual PBCC Meeting, Davis, CA, August 10, 2017 Goals for 2017/2018 Five objectives were addressed at the annual PBCC meeting within the ongoing SCC80 project, with a focus on objectives 1, 4, and 5, as objectives 2 and 3 were presented at the NAPB/PBCC meeting. Below are goals for each objective for the upcoming year: Objective 1: Collect, analyze, and disseminate information about the U.S. plant breeding effort in both public and private sectors, to include human capacity and access to enabling knowledge, technologies, germplasm, and infrastructure [Lead Drs. Kate Evans and Ksenija Gasic] <ul> <li>Collaborate with NRSP10 to fund development of survey for U.S. public plant breeding capacity, development of on-line database to house the data and an interactive map to enable communication of state-by-state results.</li> <li>Implement survey in early 2018 with a view to presenting first analyses at the NAPB/PBCC 2018 meeting.</li> <li>Build contact list for future private sector survey.</li> </ul> Objective 2: Promote the conservation, characterization, and utilization of plant genetic resources and access to those resources for plant breeding. [Lead Dr. Pat Byrne] <ul> <li>Sponsor or suggest symposium on genetic diversity at the crop and horticultural professional annual meetings to engage broader audience. CSSA on plant genetic resources and ISHS on ornamental germplasm</li> <li>Write white paper on what type of information germplasm repositories collect and how is the germplasm used, GRIN global etc. Less than 10% of those that request germplasm report back to repositories on how is the germplasm used</li> </ul> Objective 3: Identify Best Management Practices for public sector intellectual property protection to encourage the creation and distribution of improved crops for a broad range of needs and opportunities. [Lead Dr. Bill Tracy] <ul> <li>Finalize guidelines on public plant breeding IPR for presentation at the NAPB/PBCC 2018 meeting.</li> </ul> Objective 4: Optimize opportunities for public-private collaboration in plant breeding research and education, including continuing education for plant breeders. [Lead Dr. Thomas Lubberstedt] <ul> <li>Develop a white paper on core concepts in plant breeding, a tool for revising plant breeding curriculum; lead ISU – interact with other universities</li> </ul> Objective 5. Foster communication among public plant breeders and federal agencies on public policy issues, including alerts to existing and emerging threats to agricultural security that are relevant to plant breeding. [Lead Drs. Mikey Kantar and Mike Gore] <ul> <li>Establish new communication channels with NAPB, CSA News or Hort Science News</li> <li>Develop collaborations to enhance science communication education among plant breeding students (i.e. Cornell Alliance for Science)</li> </ul> Other goals: <ul> <li>Increase number of states represented in SSC80</li> <li>Nominate NFAR speaker(s)</li> <li>Participate in 2018 NPGCC meeting</li> </ul>

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 08/29/2018

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 08/07/2018 - 08/10/2018
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2017 - 09/30/2018

Participants

Koebernick Jenny jck0041@auburn.edu AL rep
Van Deynze Allen avandeynze@ucdavis.edu CA rep
Byrne Patrick patrick.byrne@colostate.edu CO rep
Kantar Michael mbkantar@hawaii.edu HI rep
Lübberstedt Thomas thomasl@iastate.edu IA rep
Tan Ek Han ekhtan@maine.edu ME rep
Iezzoni Amy iezzoni@msu.edu MI rep
Sherman Jamie jsherman@montana.edu MT rep
Rahman Mukhlesur Md.M.Rahman@ndsu.edu
ND rep
Graef George ggraef1@unl.edu NE rep
Pratt Richard ricpratt@nmsu.edu NM rep
Gore Michael mag87@cornell.edu NY rep
Francis David francis.77@osu.edu OH rep
Townsend Shaun townsenm@onid.orst.edu OR rep
Foolad Majid mrf5@psu.edu PA rep
Gasic Ksenija kgasic@clemson.edu SC rep
Leckie Brian bleckie@tntech.edu TN rep
Smith Wayne cwsmith@tamu.edu TX rep
Evans Kate kate_evans@wsu.edu WA rep
Thro Ann Marie AnnMarie.Thro@osec.usda.gov
Young Eric eyoung@ncsu.edu
Brown Susan skb3@cornell.edu
Cummings Donn donncummings1@gmail.com
Munoz Patricio p.munoz@ufl.edu
McFerson Jim jim.mcferson@wsu.edu
Kostick Sarah sarah.kostick@wsu.edu
Zankowski Paul paul.zankowski@osec.usda.gov

Brief Summary of Minutes

Minutes for PBCC annual business meeting 2018 Guelph, Ontario August, 7, 2018

Opening Comments:

Introductions: Kate Evans, PBCC Current Chair; Ksenija Gasic, incoming chair; Mikey Kantar, incoming vice chair; Rich Pratt, incoming secretary. Full attendance list at the end of the document.

Overview:

Many people have been involved since the inception in 2005. We currently have 44/50 states represented, we are still missing Alaska, Idaho, Missouri, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Currently we are in the middle of the 5 year project. We will need to start writing the renewal in 2019 and have a more strategic planning meeting. We are still getting up to $6K per year for PBCC activities from NAPB, which has been useful for getting plant breeding representatives to events, manuscripts, printing costs, and travel.

Objective 1: Collect, analyze, and disseminate information about the U.S. plant breeding effort in both public and private sectors, to include human capacity and access to enabling knowledge, technologies, germplasm, and infrastructure.

The initial focus has been on public programs, as there are very different constraints on public and private sector programs. This particular survey has been greatly helped by partnering with Dorrie Main’s NIFA NRSP10 and NSF PGRP projects. This has helped leverage plant genetic resource databases by adding in information about what plant breeders are doing. The survey was very detailed, (we recognize the questions were difficult), but in order to develop a time series we had to align the questions with previously conducted surveys. Good job to the reps who were able to “convince” colleagues to answer questions regarding the survey. Preliminary results suggest that we have pretty good coverage. The current interactive map is available on NRSP10. There is another map and poster associated with survey at the PBCC booth showing the 289 programs by crop that responded.

The goals in the next year are to publish the results, but also develop this survey as a time series where breeders can log in and fairly easily update their information within each 5 year PBCC renewal. The timing of the 5 year repeat is important we want to align the survey with governmental 5 year plans to be in sync with government funding.

What do we do with the programs that missed the survey?

How do we get them involved?

Do we let them register but not fill out the survey?

Do we make a second map to help with the next round of the survey but keep it distinct from the survey?

How do we deal with programs that have closed? This can be done at every survey?

One way to deal with this is to do the survey every 2 years but write a report every 5 years. There is an opportunity to pool data with multiple calls over the 5 year time frame. There is a need to make sure to keep breeding program information current. One potential way to do this is to have a two tiered system, one basic information that can be accumulated by either the reps or the experiment stations, and to have more in depth survey every 2 years. Maybe there are ways of doing this to make reps more involved. This is really a missing data problem, state reps are one way, there was also the IDA survey data where there is a way to do web scraping from university web sites. It will be nice to include some standard interpolation procedures. We would like to be able to get an estimate of the number of total breeders surveyed (i.e. 80%),

There is a lack of a national strategy for breeding (e.g., to adapt crops to climate change); the survey data could be used to gather data for strategic planning. There is a need to vision the future of plant breeding for abiotic /biotic stress.

The private sector is not very interested in using this type of survey as they typically publish what they are willing to say. There is potential to tie this into PBCC objective four to see what private breeding companies need for the future workforce. The survey would have more to do with educational outputs rather than breeding outputs per se. This provides an opportunity for synergistic activities. This will also allow us to build on the current survey and to compare the current survey to published private sector data in order to identify differences and gaps. If you are interested in participating, contact Ksenija.

Objective 2: Promote the conservation, characterization, and utilization of plant genetic resources and access to those resources for plant breeding.

This objective had two major accomplishments, publishing a white paper on plant genetic resources and hosting a conference on training of future germplasm curators. These two activities resulted a large amount information of how to maintain the NPGS as well as developing a strategic plan for how to make sure these key positions will be maintained. The workgroup is currently working on creating online modules that can be used by professors in their classes as well as in NPGS training programs. There is a new proposal led by Pat Byrne to develop a multi-institutional genebank training program. PBCC and the public sector has really done a great job and there is a desire to increase the size of the team working on this objective.

Objective 3: Identify Best Management Practices for public sector intellectual property protection to encourage the creation and distribution of improved crops for a broad range of needs and opportunities.

Bill Tracy has continued to work on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), in addition to the summit and white paper. There is a lot of ongoing work communicating IPR issues to tech transfer professionals and tech transfer officers.

Objective 4: Optimize opportunities for public-private collaboration in plant breeding research and education, including continuing education for plant breeders.

The current focus is working on a common core for plant breeding that can be transferred across institutions. This has been done in the context of developing online degree programs and also comparing the skills gained to what is expected in both the public and private sectors. This is also the case with respect to international constraints. This pedagogy work has been done in collaboration with education researchers as well. This leads to common standards and language regarding what students should know and what results in a professional when they graduate from a program. This is done in context of Bloom’s taxonomy; this standardization leads to greater transferability. Multiple courses covering all levels of the taxonomy are needed in order to ensure that the level of understanding is sufficient for all the students. It is really important to look at what is really taught in all of the courses. It is very unclear what is actually being taught in courses across the country. The current model is based on the publication for developing a common core for genetics. The common core allows one to zoom in and zoom out with regard to the understanding of the students, it allows for scaffolding and level adjustment. It also allows for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of any given cohort of students. The next steps will be to use the Iowa State University distance learning program as a case study, and then use this to refine the initial common core that can be endorsed by PBCC and NAPB.

The second step will be to make all of the material available on line to make it easy for people to access information across institutions. There is also the ability to make a public tool for breeders. What is nice is that it allows for a teacher to have creative space within the common core. It would be nice to see a comparison with the other really good programs such as Texas A&M in addition to ISU. The goal is to have a kind of muscle memory for plant breeding: how do we get students to know what is important and can we test better than what we are doing now?

Objective 5: Foster communication among public plant breeders and federal agencies on public policy issues, including alerts to existing and emerging threats to agricultural security that are relevant to plant breeding.

The communication objective has progressed this year. In collaboration with the Cornell Alliance for Science we held a Science communication workshop for Plant science students with 35 participants (http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/07/workshop-trains-plant-scientists-communicate-science). These students worked on a number of skills, blog writing, talking to the media, podcasting, and video interviews. They all developed products and all of these will be posted on the PBCC website. There are new worksheets available for science communications.

Impact of Agriculture book – impactful varieties

There is a new a book being developed on the impact of agriculture in the United States; Allen Van Deynze is writing the chapter on plant breeding. One of the key questions is what are the 20 most impactful varieties for each state? State reps should be able to help with this effort. The real question is what is the impact of public sector breeding, and what has it done for you in the last 50 years. It will be key to engage the experiment station directors to make sure we have the historical context. Allen will draft a request for PBCC to send to the reps.

Renewal Ideas

Next year’s meeting will focus on renewal. Let’s be mindful and put forward small project teams to work on each objective. Please send Mikey ideas.

Goals for 2018/2019

All five current objectives were addressed at the annual PBCC meeting within the ongoing SCC80 project. Nineteen state reps were in attendance, including four on Zoom (a new option for this year’s meeting) along with Ann Marie Thro and Eric Young. Paul Zankowski (Senior Advisor for Plant Health & Production and Plant Products, Office of the Chief Scientist) joined the meeting for the first time along with five other NAPB members (see appendix list).

Below are goals for each objective for the upcoming year:

Objective 1: Collect, analyze, and disseminate information about the U.S. plant breeding effort in both public and private sectors, to include human capacity and access to enabling knowledge, technologies, germplasm, and infrastructure [Lead Dr. Kate Evans]

Complete analysis of public sector breeding survey for publication

Continue to collaborate with NRSP10 to expand on-line ‘Breeder Map’ to include breeding programs that missed the survey

Collate private sector breeding data from published annual reports

Develop private sector breeding survey

Objective 2: Promote the conservation, characterization, and utilization of plant genetic resources and access to those resources for plant breeding. [Lead Dr. Pat Byrne]

Develop detailed planning for a genebank management program with funding from submitted USDA-NIFA Higher Education Challenge Grant Program, ideally leading to submission of a full three-year proposal to implement the training program.

Develop a series of short instructional videos for genebank training using funding from USDA-NLGRP

Objective 3: Identify Best Management Practices for public sector intellectual property protection to encourage the creation and distribution of improved crops for a broad range of needs and opportunities. [Lead Dr. Bill Tracy]

Continue to provide outreach as opportunities arise

Objective 4: Optimize opportunities for public-private collaboration in plant breeding research and education, including continuing education for plant breeders. [Lead Dr. Thomas Lubberstedt]

“Course pairing” to identify gaps and redundancies; comply with Bloom’s revised taxonomy (F18)

Develop Hierarchical Web-tool for MS PLBR core concept/outcomes/learning objectives (F18)

Feedback from ISU PLBR faculty (F18)

Feedback from stakeholders / other universities outside ISU (S19)

Release Web-tool (F19), instead of white paper

Objective 5. Foster communication among public plant breeders and federal agencies on public policy issues, including alerts to existing and emerging threats to agricultural security that are relevant to plant breeding. [Lead Drs. Mikey Kantar and Mike Gore]

Build on the communication materials developed to reach more students and continue to make all materials available to the plant breeding community and broader public.

Other goals:

Increase number of states represented in SSC80 and encourage participation by state reps in development of renewal objectives

Continue to update and add content to PBCC webpages

Create strategic plan with NAPB for improved alignment towards NAPB/PBCC common goals

Accomplishments

2017/2018 PBCC Accomplishments: <ul> <li>PBCC partnered with NIFA NRSP10 and NSF PGRP projects (PI: Dorrie Main) to develop and deploy a U.S. public sector breeding capacity survey. Funding from the two partner projects enabled to the survey expertise of Michael Coe (Cedar Lake Research Group) and the development of a database support with on-line accessibility <a href="https://www.nrsp10.org/pbcc-survey-geomap">https://www.nrsp10.org/pbcc-survey-geomap</a></li> <li>Initial analysis of the completed surveys revealed 289 crop programs representing breeding research, germplasm enhancement and/or variety development.</li> <li>Publication of the review paper ‘Sustaining the Future of Plant Breeding: The Critical Role of the USDA-ARS National Plant Germplasm System.’ P.F. Byrne, G.M. Volk, C. Gardner, M. A. Gore, P.W. Simon, and S. Smith. 2018. Crop Science 58:451–468. Funding of $1,000 was received from the National Association of Plant Breeders to publish this as an Open Access paper.</li> <li>A grant for $41,500 was received from USDA-NIFA-AFRI for the proposal ‘Planning Conference to Develop Strategies for Training the Next Generation of U.S. Plant Genebank Managers’ (Co-PI’s P. Byrne and G. Volk). The grant resulted in the Plant Genebank Training Workshop, (<a href="http://genebanktraining.colostate.edu/index.html">http://genebanktraining.colostate.edu/index.html</a>), April 24-26, 2018, in Fort Collins, CO, bringing together 33 experts from U.S. and international genebanks, land grant universities, the seed industry, and a botanical garden. Attendees agreed on the need for a diverse array of training materials, including videos, online courses, webinars, and face to face workshops.</li> <li>An immediate outcome of the above-mentioned workshop was a proposal to the USDA-NIFA Higher Education Challenge Grant Program to conduct detailed planning for a genebank management program. This planning phase would last one year and would ideally lead to submission of a full three-year proposal to implement the training program.</li> <li>Bill Tracy represented PBCC at the NPGCC meeting in May, Sturgeon Bay WI.</li> <li>Core outcome/concept/learning objective lists were generated for all eight Iowa State University MS Plant Breeding courses.</li> <li>PBCC partnered with Cornell’s Alliance for Science to conduct a science communication for plant science workshop for over 30 graduate students and post-docs, titled “Speaking Science”, (http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/07/workshop-trains-plant-scientists-communicate-science). Each student had a discrete output in the form of an interview with a journalist (print/radio), a blog, an op-ed piece, a podcast, or a video, which have been made public on the PBCC website. One example is the work of Saarah Kuzay (UC Davis plant breeding PhD candidate), featured by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (https://www.aaas.org/blog/public-engagement-reflections/sharing-science-through-storytelling).</li> <li>A series of worksheets on plant breeding communication were created to help breeders 1) How to write a blog on your research, 2) How to message your research, 3) Tips for speaking to non-scientific audiences, and 4) The Audience Factor: Tips to remove tension. These were available as handouts at the NAPB and PBCC meetings and are available on the PBCC website.</li> </ul>

Publications

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 10/16/2019

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 08/25/2019 - 08/29/2019
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2018 - 09/30/2019

Participants

Koebernick Jenny jck0041@auburn.edu AL rep
Van Deynze Allen avandeynze@ucdavis.edu CA rep
Zhang Donglin donglin@uga.edu GA rep
Kantar Michael mbkantar@hawaii.edu HI rep
Lübberstedt Thomas thomasl@iastate.edu IA rep
Bohn Martin mbohn@illinois.edu IL rep
Walsh Chris cwalsh@umd.edu MD rep
Tan Ek Han ekhtan@maine.edu ME rep
Iezzoni Amy iezzoni@msu.edu MI rep
Anderson Neil Ander04@umn.edu MN rep
Kuraparthy Vasu Vasu_kuraparthy@ncsu.edu NC rep
Graef George ggraef1@unl.edu NE rep
Pratt Richard ricpratt@nmsu.edu NM rep
Francis David francis.77@osu.edu OH rep
Wu* Yanqi Yanqi.wu@okstate.edu OK rep
Gasic Ksenija kgasic@clemson.edu SC rep
Leckie Brian bleckie@tntech.edu TN rep
Smith Wayne cwsmith@tamu.edu TX rep
Evans Kate kate_evans@wsu.edu WA rep
Liedl* Barbara liedlbe@wvstateu.edu WV rep
Young Eric eyoung@ncsu.edu AA
Thro Ann Marie AnnMarie.Thro@usda.gov NIFA
Ashafi Hamid hashraf2@ncsu.edu NAPB
Campbell Todd Todd.Campbell@usda.gov NAPB
Cummings Donn donncummings1@gmail.com NAPB
McFerson Jim jim.mcferson@wsu.edu NAPB
Newell Mark mark.newell@bayer.com NAPB
Tillman Barry btillman@ufl.edu NAPB
Kaleikau Ed edward.kaleikau@usda.gov NIFA
Kathir Pushpa PKathir@usda.gov NIFA
Lin Liang-Shiou llin@usda.gov NIFA
Zankowski Paul paul.zankowski@usda.gov USDA-OCS

Brief Summary of Minutes

Annual PBCC Meeting, Pine Mountain, GA, August 25, 2019

Goals for 2019/2020

All five current objectives were addressed at the annual PBCC meeting within the ongoing SCC80 project. Twenty state reps were in attendance, including one on Zoom, along with Ann Marie Thro (NIFA REP) and Eric Young (ADMIN ADV.). Paul Zankowski (Senior Advisor for Plant Health & Production and Plant Products, Office of the Chief Scientist), two NIFA National Program leaders, Lin Liang-Shiou and Ed Kaleikau, and NIFA Program Specialist Pushpa Kathir, also joined the meeting along with six other NAPB members.

Below are goals for each objective for the upcoming year:

Publish results of public sector breeding survey

Re-issue the survey every 5 years to align the survey with governmental 5-year plans to be in sync with government funding. The first re-issue would be sooner (3 years after the initial survey, 2021) to include all programs that have been registered after the initial deadline, and therefore will not be included in the report/publication.

Collate private sector breeding data from published annual reports

Develop private sector breeding survey

Objective 2: Promote the conservation, characterization, and utilization of plant genetic resources and access to those resources for plant breeding. [Lead Dr. Pat Byrne]

Begin development of online courses and training modules on plant genetic resources, if a USDA-NIFA Higher Education Challenge Grant is funded.

Develop a series of short instructional videos for genebank training using funding from USDA-NLGRP and PROCINORTE, a collaboration among the national germplasm systems of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.

Complete the development of two infographics on plant genetic resources conservation and use.

Continue to provide outreach as opportunities arise

Objective 4: Optimize opportunities for public-private collaboration in plant breeding research and education, including continuing education for plant breeders. [Lead Dr. Thomas Lubberstedt]

Hierarchical Web-tool for MS PLBR core concept/outcomes/learning objectives (S19)

Feedback from stakeholders / other universities outside ISU (F19)

Public availability of Web-tool via NRSP10 (2020)

Establish management team of Web-tool for further development (assignments; learning materials)

Build on the communication materials developed to reach more students and continue to make all materials available to the plant breeding community and broader public.

Establish dissemination of the information to the state representatives from the PBCC leadership, to ensure continuity which is especially important when the administrators change and are not from the agricultural background.

Other goals:

Develop renewal plan and establish ad hoc writing committee

Increase number of states represented in SSC80 and encourage participation by state reps in development of renewal objectives

Continue to update and add content to PBCC webpages

Create strategic plan with NAPB for improved alignment towards NAPB/PBCC common goals

Minutes for PBCC annual business meeting 2019 Pine Mountain, GA August 25, 2019

Opening Comments:

Introductions: Ksenija Gasic, PBCC current Chair; Mikey Kantar, incoming chair; Rich Pratt, incoming vice chair; Wayne Smith, incoming secretary, and Kate Evans, past Chair. Full attendance list at the end of the document.

Overview:

Many people have been involved since the inception in 2005. We currently have 44/50 states represented, we are still missing Alaska, Idaho (Jack Brown agreed to serve. KG will get in touch with Jack to sign him up), Missouri, Massachusetts (Brook Moyers agreed to serve, MK will get in touch to sign her up), Connecticut, and Rhode Island. Currently we are in the fourth year of the 5-year project. We need to plan strategic planning meeting for writing the renewal. We are still getting up to $6K per year for PBCC activities from NAPB, which has been useful for getting plant breeding representatives to events, manuscripts, printing costs, and travel. PBCC reps are encouraged and welcome to become more involved in the project by participating and or leading one or more objectives they find interesting. Activities are not limited to the executive committee.

KG represented PBCC at the NPGCC meeting in June, Washington D.C. “NPGCC … serve as a vehicle for improving communications and discussions about issues impacting the NPGS with ARS, SAES, and NIFA”. (http://escop.info/committee/national-plat-germplasm-coordinating-committee-npgcc/). PBCC is not an official npgcc member, but rather an accepted listener/ stakeholder /input contributor. KG introduced the agenda and current and past PBCC leadership. Administrative advisor Eric Young is ending his involvement with PBCC, and NIFA representative Ann Marie Thro is retiring from federal service.

A motion was submitted by Rich Pratt: “Be it resolved that PBCC wishes to acknowledge the many contributions of Dr. Eric Young, and Dr. Ann Marie Thro, to Plant Breeding, as they plan for retirement.” Motion carried by unanimous acclaim. KG presented brief history of the PBCC and proposed to have the PBCC meeting within the NAPB conference (in the middle not at the beginning), to encourage participation of the NAPB members and graduate students.

Ann Marie Thro presented overview of the PBCC Service and Leadership. She covered origin of multi state projects (MSP), coordinating committees (CC) and the intended roles of these committees, provided few examples of current multistate projects and explained the similarities and difference between the multistate projects and coordinating committees. Quick overview of the establishment of the Plant Breeding CC and accomplishments lead into suggested ideas to consider for renewal (2020-2025). Main message was to keep in mind the Agricultural Research, Extension, & Education Reform Act (AREERA), 1998 outcome types of CC’s when defining the objectives of the renewal project and specifically be aware of the commitment needed to complete proposed objectives. Acknowledge PBCC whenever appropriate to communicate success and importance of the work we are all doing.

The public plant breeding program survey data was compiled into a preliminary report (see appendix). Preparation of a publication is on-going with the aim of submission in December of 2019. Following our attempts to publicize this effort (at NAPB 2018 and ASHS 2019), an additional 79 programs have registered with the NRSP10 bringing the total to 366 that are searchable on the interactive U.S. map https://www.nrsp10.org/. The poster describing this effort will also be presented at the Tri-Societies meeting in November where it will hopefully encourage more breeders to register. The goals in the next year are to publish the results, but also develop this survey as a time series where breeders can log in and fairly easily update their information within each 5-year PBCC renewal. The timing of the 5-year repeat is important we want to align the survey with governmental 5-year plans to be in sync with government funding. The breeding programs are recorded by the crop since many breeders are working on more than one crop.

The private sector survey will focus on understanding the educational profile of the future workforce. Since they typically publish what they are willing to say decision was made to extract information from the annual reports that matches the public survey. There is potential to tie this into PBCC objective four to see what education private breeding companies are looking for in the future workforce. The survey would connect to previously conducted Plant Breeding Education Delphi Study to ensure comparativeness between the studies. Allan VD offered to provide all the information regarding the Delphi study for the development of the survey. Delphi study was targeted to the experts and provides an excellent start for survey development since it is 10 years past the Delphi study. If you are interested in participating, contact Ksenija and or Wayne Smith.

Objective 2: Promote the conservation, characterization, and utilization of plant genetic resources and access to those resources for plant breeding.

Several major accomplishments were completed under this objective: (1)organizing the symposium ‘Unlocking Plant Genetic Diversity for Food and Nutritional Security’ at the 2016 annual meeting of AAAS; (2) publishing a white paper on making the USDA National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS) more relevant to plant breeding; (3) hosting a Genebank Training Workshop to develop a strategy for training the next generation of genebank managers and users. The workgroup is currently working on creating online modules that can be used by professors in their classes as well as in NPGS training programs. A Survey on Plant Genetic Resources Learning Materials was conducted online for two weeks in March 2019. It was advertised broadly to crop science, horticultural, seed trade, and plant genetic resources communities. Over 600 responses were received of which 524 were useable. The publication on the results of the survey has been accepted for publication in Crop Science. Pat Byrne, Gayle Volk, and others have submitted a proposal “Enhancing Educational Outcomes for Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Use” to USDA-NIFA Higher Education Challenge Program with objectives to develop and organize learning resources (videos, ebook chapters, images etc.) covering PGR topics; establish online repository to host, organize, and track usage of the developed content; develop and offer three 1-credit graduate-level modules on PGR conservation and use in plant breeding and genetics; and disseminate the developed material broadly to communities of interest. Development of two infographics on Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Use was contracted with artist Leah Kucera and supported by funding from NAPB. The target is to present these infographics at the Tri-Societies meeting in 2020. Given the number of activities, There is a desire to increase the size of the team working on this objective.

Outcome of this objective (IPR practices) have been found useful for and Land Grant University in developing their own IPR policy. Even though there was no major activity in this objective in the past year Bill Tracy has continued to work on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), communicating IPR issues to tech transfer professionals and tech transfer officers (https://agronomy.wisc.edu/ipr-summit/. University of Hawaii did not have the IPR developed and they invited Bill Tracy to help them develop their own IPR practices based on the general document from the PBCC IPR summit.

Objective 4: Optimize opportunities for public-private collaboration in plant breeding research and education, including continuing education for plant breeders.

The current focus is working on a common core for plant breeding that can be transferred across institutions. This has been done in the context of developed online degree programs and comparing the skills gained to what is expected in both the public and private sectors. This is also the case with respect to international constraints. This pedagogy work has been done in collaboration with education researchers as well. This leads to common standards and language regarding what students should know and what results in a professional when they graduate from a program. This is done in context of Bloom’s taxonomy; this standardization leads to greater transferability. The current model is based on the hierarchical model. In the absence of funding for this activity software FreeMind has been used. The common core allows one to zoom in and zoom out with regard to the understanding of the students, it allows for scaffolding and level adjustment. It also allows for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of any given cohort of students. Recently connection has been made with Dorrie Main and NRSP10 project to develop the tools and host the data at the NRSP10 website. The current state of the list has been presented for core categories and how more detailed information can be accessed through the layers of each major core competency category. This tool was used as internal communication tool at Iowa State University to identify redundancies, and gaps, and also to discuss sequence of courses. There were different rounds of review and the core competency list was agreed upon and the list has been and is being shared outside ISU to external colleagues to obtain feedback on completeness and to explore to which level and depth the teaching on these subjects should go for different levels (undergraduate, graduate etc.). Following similar idea as presented in objective 2 for Plant Genetic Resources education. The next steps are to develop web-based system, to enable regular discussions in the plant breeding community, what is core for graduate level education. This tool could be further developed to incorporate tests, quizzes or similar, to determine, which competencies are mastered by students.

At this moment there is no connection with the learning tools but that is something that could be added through different layers once the web-based tool is developed. It would be very useful for students that are transferring between institutions and to learn where the gaps are that need to be filled. Question is how would it be managed and who would be responsible for management and update of the content? There would have to be a committee that would request input form the community to decide what content should be added, removed or updated, based on the feedback which could be endorsed by PBCC and NAPB.

The communication objective has progressed this year. The Cornell Alliance for Science material from the Science communication workshop for Plant science (http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/07/workshop-trains-plant-scientists-communicate-science) held few years ago is available upon request. Science art collaboration was established, and funding obtained to work with the San Diego Botanical garden and AAAS to organize workshop on development of infographic on plant sciences. We paired up with the artist to work on development of infographics. It works very well if the artist/scientist pair has interest in the topic. Paper “Science-graphic art partnership to increase research impact” was published in Communication Biology 2:295 (2019). It is advisable to budget for this activity in grant proposals, so the outcomes of the grants are developed by artists. The impact is much higher than the cost of the infographic development. Artist names are available upon request and some of them are also published in the above article. Templates on how to write the blog, do an interview etc. are downloadable from the NAPB website as well as the best practices worksheets (https://www.plantbreeding.org/files/napb/science-communication-for-plant-breeding-tips-combined.pdf).

There needs to be a better dissemination of the information to the state representatives from the PBCC leadership. It is especially important when the administrators change and are not from the agricultural background.

Renewal

The discussion regarding the PBCC renewal was captured in real time on the google doc that Mikey Kantar created and provided link to all state representatives (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CPiuoQNGaVrfxEaisZydWiJYJShHfjB2L-UwUmp_2wk/edit?usp=sharing). Comments and discussions on each objective of the current proposal were captured in real time, focusing on which portions of the objectives were complete, which needed more development, and which needed to be repeated. The discussion was based on the current project objectives with changes and additions being made as the discussion developed. The proposed points for discussion were: 1) defining objectives for the PBCC over the next five years; 2) designate the lead scientists for each potential objective; 3) Designate a writing committee; and. 4) develop the timeline for finalizing the renewal process. At the time of this report, the PBCC is considering ten potential objectives that build on the work of the last five years. The major goal for the renewal is to continue to encourage the state representatives to publish results related to the objectives for the larger plant breeding community and encourage the development of teams that represent broad geographies to tackle issues at multiple scales (local, regional, and national).

Accomplishments

2018/2019 PBCC Accomplishments: <ul> <li>The initial phase on the U.S. public sector breeding capacity survey, in partnership with NIFA NRSP10 and NSF PGRP projects (PI: Dorrie Main) and Michael Coe (Cedar Lake Research Group), has been completed and the preliminary report has been generated (see appendix). Publication of the responses obtained is in preparation.</li> <li>Survey was answered by plant breeding programs from 44 states representing 287 breeding programs and crops that are categorized in fourteen major groups as defined by the U.S Department of Agriculture.</li> <li>The survey effort was publicized via poster presentations at the NAPB 2018 and 2019, and ASHS 2019. s a result, 366 breeding programs are currently registered on the NRSP10 map (<a href="https://www.nrsp10.org/pbcc-survey-geomap">https://www.nrsp10.org/pbcc-survey-geomap</a>). Number of breeding programs represents number of different crops being bred rather than actual programs since many breeders are involved in breeding more than one crop. Poster printing and conference attendance was funded by the NAPB.</li> <li>Publication of the report from the Genebank Training Workshop co-hosted by USDA-ARS National Laboratory for Genetic Resources Preservation (NLGRP) and Colorado State University entitled ‘Training in Plant Genetic Resources Management A Way Forward’ by G.M. Volk, D. Namuth-Covert and P.F. Byrne, 2019. Crop Science 59:853–857 doi:10.2135/cropsci2018.11.0689. Funding of $1,000 was received from the National Association of Plant Breeders (NAPB) to publish this as an Open Access paper.</li> <li>One of the outcomes of the Genebank Training Workshop was the ‘Survey on Plant Genetic Resources Learning Materials’, conducted in March 2019. Results of the survey were summarized in a manuscript accepted for publication in Crop Science.</li> <li>A proposal ‘Enhancing Educational Outcomes for Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Use’ was submitted to the USDA-NIFA Higher Education Challenge Grant Program to develop online courses and training materials on plant genetic resources.</li> <li>Development of Infographics on plant genetic resources conservation and use was contracted with artist Leah Kucera. NAPB provided $2,000 for this initiative.</li> <li>Ksenija Gasic represented PBCC at the NPGCC meeting in June, Washington D.C.</li> <li>Core outcome/concept/learning objective lists were generated for all eight Iowa State University MS Plant Breeding courses. A partnership with the NIFA NRSP10 and NSF PGRP projects (PI: Dorrie Main) was initiated to create online access to the core concept list and obtain feedback from stakeholders (other universities outside the ISU).</li> <li>Publication ‘Science-graphic art partnerships to increase research impact’ by Khoury et al (2019) Communication Biology 2:295, reported outcomes of “The Speaking Science” workshop (http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/07/workshop-trains-plant-scientists-communicate-science). Workshop was supported by CALS and the Alliance for Science.</li> <li>In collaboration with San Diego Botanical Garden, Leichtag foundation ($10000) and AAAS ($3000) a funding was obtained (from these institutions) to develop eight infographics focused on plant science.</li> </ul> A series of best practices worksheets on plant breeding communication are available at https://www.plantbreeding.org/files/napb/science-communication-for-plant-breeding-tips-combined.pdf.

Publications

<ul> <li>Publication of the report from the Genebank Training Workshop co-hosted by USDA-ARS National Laboratory for Genetic Resources Preservation (NLGRP) and Colorado State University entitled ‘Training in Plant Genetic Resources Management A Way Forward’ by G.M. Volk, D. Namuth-Covert and P.F. Byrne, 2019. Crop Science 59:853–857 doi:10.2135/cropsci2018.11.0689. Funding of $1,000 was received from the National Association of Plant Breeders (NAPB) to publish this as an Open Access paper.</li> <li>One of the outcomes of the Genebank Training Workshop was the ‘Survey on Plant Genetic Resources Learning Materials’, conducted in March 2019. Results of the survey were summarized in a manuscript accepted for publication in Crop Science.</li> <li>Publication ‘Science-graphic art partnerships to increase research impact’ by Khoury et al (2019) Communication Biology 2:295, reported outcomes of “The Speaking Science” workshop (http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2018/07/workshop-trains-plant-scientists-communicate-science). Workshop was supported by CALS and the Alliance for Science.</li> <li>A series of best practices worksheets on plant breeding communication are available at https://www.plantbreeding.org/files/napb/science-communication-for-plant-breeding-tips-combined.pdf. </li> </ul>

Impact Statements

Date of Annual Report: 10/08/2020

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 08/14/2020 - 08/14/2020
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2019 - 09/30/2020