British Nutrition Foundation annual lecture: chips with everything? Nutritional genomics and the application of diet in disease prevention

The development of high throughput techniques ('chip' technology) for measurement of gene expression and gene polymorphisms (genomics), and techniques for measuring global protein expression (proteomics) and metabolite profile (metabolomics) are revolutionising life science research, including research in human nutrition. In particular, the ability to undertake large-scale genotyping and to identify gene polymorphisms that determine risk of chronic disease (candidate genes) could enable definition of an individual's risk at an early age. However, the search for candidate genes has proven to be more complex, and their identification more elusive, than previously thought. This is largely due to the fact that much of the variability in risk results from interactions between the genome and environmental exposures. Whilst the former is now very well defined via the Human Genome Project, the latter (e.g. diet, toxins, physical activity) are poorly characterised, resulting in inability to account for their confounding effects in most large-scale candidate gene studies. The polygenic nature of most chronic diseases offers further complexity, requiring very large studies to disentangle relatively weak impacts of large numbers of potential 'risk' genes. The efficacy of diet as a preventative strategy could also be considerably increased by better information concerning gene polymorphisms that determine variability in responsiveness to specific diet and nutrient changes. Much of the limited available data are based on retrospective genotyping using stored samples from previously conducted intervention trials. Prospective studies are now needed to provide data that can be used as the basis for provision of individualised dietary advice and development of food products that optimise disease prevention. Application of the new technologies in nutrition research offers considerable potential for development of new knowledge and could greatly advance the role of diet as a preventative disease strategy in the 21st century. Given the potential economic and social benefits offered, funding for research in this area needs greater recognition, and a stronger strategic focus, than is presently the case. Application of genomics in human health offers considerable ethical and societal as well as scientific challenges. Economic determinants of health care provision are more likely to resolve such issues than scientific developments or altruistic concerns for human health.

Development of a dense SNP-based linkage map of an apple rootstock progeny using the Malus Infinium whole genome genotyping array

Background A whole-genome genotyping array has previously been developed for Malus using SNP data from 28 Malus genotypes. This array offers the prospect of high throughput genotyping and linkage map development for any given Malus progeny. To test the applicability of the array for mapping in diverse Malus genotypes, we applied the array to the construction of a SNPbased linkage map of an apple rootstock progeny. Results Of the 7,867 Malus SNP markers on the array, 1,823 (23.2 %) were heterozygous in one of the two parents of the progeny, 1,007 (12.8 %) were heterozygous in both parental genotypes, whilst just 2.8 % of the 921 Pyrus SNPs were heterozygous. A linkage map spanning 1,282.2 cM was produced comprising 2,272 SNP markers, 306 SSR markers and the S-locus. The length of the M432 linkage map was increased by 52.7 cM with the addition of the SNP markers, whilst marker density increased from 3.8 cM/marker to 0.5 cM/marker. Just three regions in excess of 10 cM remain where no markers were mapped. We compared the positions of the mapped SNP markers on the M432 map with their predicted positions on the ‘Golden Delicious’ genome sequence. A total of 311 markers (13.7 % of all mapped markers) mapped to positions that conflicted with their predicted positions on the ‘Golden Delicious’ pseudo-chromosomes, indicating the presence of paralogous genomic regions or misassignments of genome sequence contigs during the assembly and anchoring of the genome sequence. Conclusions We incorporated data for the 2,272 SNP markers onto the map of the M432 progeny and have presented the most complete and saturated map of the full 17 linkage groups of M. pumila to date. The data were generated rapidly in a high-throughput semi-automated pipeline, permitting significant savings in time and cost over linkage map construction using microsatellites. The application of the array will permit linkage maps to be developed for QTL analyses in a cost-effective manner, and the identification of SNPs that have been assigned erroneous positions on the ‘Golden Delicious’ reference sequence will assist in the continued improvement of the genome sequence assembly for that variety.

Analysis of DNA polymorphism in ancient barley herbarium material: validation of the KASP SNP genotyping platform

The availability of crop specimens archived in herbaria and old seed collections represent valuable resources for the analysis of plant genetic diversity and crop domestication. The ability to extract ancient DNA (aDNA) from such samples has recently allowed molecular genetic investigations to be undertaken in ancient materials. While analyses of aDNA initially focused on the use of markers which occur in multiple copies such as the internal transcribed spacer region (ITS) within ribosomal DNA and those requiring amplification of short DNA regions of variable length such as simple sequence repeats (SSRs), emphasis is now moving towards the genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), traditionally undertaken in aDNA by Sanger sequencing. Here, using a panel of barley aDNA samples previously surveyed by Sanger sequencing for putative causative SNPs within the flowering-time gene PPD-H1, we assess the utility of the Kompetitive Allele Specific PCR (KASP) genotyping platform for aDNA analysis. We find KASP to out-perform Sanger sequencing in the genotyping of aDNA samples (78% versus 61% success, respectively), as well as being robust to contamination. The small template size (≥46 bp) and one-step, closed-tube amplification/genotyping process make this platform ideally suited to the genotypic analysis of aDNA, a process which is often hampered by template DNA degradation and sample cross-contamination. Such attributes, as well as its flexibility of use and relatively low cost, make KASP particularly relevant to the genetic analysis of aDNA samples. Furthermore, KASP provides a common platform for the genotyping and analysis of corresponding SNPs in ancient, landrace and modern plant materials. The extended haplotype analysis of PPD-H1 undertaken here (allelic variation at which is thought to be important for the spread of domestication and local adaptation) provides further resolution to the previously identified geographic cline of flowering-time allele distribution, illustrating how KASP can be used to aid genetic analyses of aDNA from plant species. We further demonstrate the utility of KASP by genotyping ten additional genetic markers diagnostic for morphological traits in barley, shedding light on the phenotypic traits, alleles and allele combinations present in these unviable ancient specimens, as well as their geographic distributions.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Identification of domestication-related loci associated with flowering time and seed size in soybean with the RAD-seq genotyping method

Flowering time and seed size are traits related to domestication. However, identification of domestication-related loci/genes of controlling the traits in soybean is rarely reported. In this study, we identified a total of 48 domestication-related loci based on RAD-seq genotyping of a natural population comprising 286 accessions. Among these, four on chromosome 12 and additional two on chromosomes 11 and 15 were associated with flowering time, and four on chromosomes 11 and 16 were associated with seed size. Of the five genes associated with flowering time and the three genes associated with seed size, three genes Glyma11g18720, Glyma11g15480 and Glyma15g35080 were homologous to Arabidopsis genes, additional five genes were found for the first time to be associated with these two traits. Glyma11g18720 and Glyma05g28130 were co-expressed with five genes homologous to flowering time genes in Arabidopsis, and Glyma11g15480 was co-expressed with 24 genes homologous to seed development genes in Arabidopsis. This study indicates that integration of population divergence analysis, genome-wide association study and expression analysis is an efficient approach to identify candidate domestication-related genes.

Metal bioaccumulation and cellular fractionation in an epigeic earthworm (Lumbricus rubellus): the interactive influences of population exposure histories, site-specific geochemistry and mitochondrial genotype

Subcellular fractionation techniques were used to describe temporal changes (at intervals from T0 to T70 days) in the Pb, Zn and P partitioning profiles of Lumbricus rubellus populations from one calcareous (MDH) and one acidic (MCS) geographically isolated Pb/Zn-mine sites and one reference site (CPF). MDH and MCS individuals were laboratory maintained on their native field soils; CPF worms were exposed to both MDH and MCS soils. Site-specific differences in metal partitioning were found: notably, the putatively metal-adapted populations, MDH and MCS, preferentially partitioned higher proportions of their accumulated tissue metal burdens into insoluble CaPO4-rich organelles compared with naive counterparts, CPF. Thus, it is plausible that efficient metal immobilization is a phenotypic trait characterising metal tolerant ecotypes. Mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II (COII) genotyping revealed that the populations indigenous to mine and reference soils belong to distinct genetic lineages, differentiated by 13%, with 7 haplotypes within the reference site lineage but fewer (3 and 4, respectively) in the lineage common to the two mine sites. Collectively, these observations raise the possibility that site-related genotype differences could influence the toxico-availability of metals and, thus, represent a potential confounding variable in field-based eco-toxicological assessments.

Comparison of the euryarchaeal microbial community in guts and food-soil of the soil-feeding termite Cubitermes fungifaber across different soil types

Termites are an important component of tropical soil communities and have a significant affect on the structure and nutrient content of soil. Digestion in termites is related to gut structure, gut physico-chemical conditions and gut symbiotic microbiota. Here we describe the use of 16S rRNA gene sequencing and Terminal-restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (T-RFLP) analysis to examine methanogenic Archaea (MA) in the guts and food-soil of the soil-feeder Cubitermes fungifaber Sjostedt across a range of soil types. If they are strictly vertically inherited, then MA in guts should be the same in all individuals even if the soils differ across sites. In contrast, gut MA should reflect what is present in soil if populations are merely a reflection of what is ingested as the insects forage. We show clear differences between the euryarchaeal communities in termite guts and in food-soils from five different sites. Analysis of 16S rRNA gene clones indicated little overlap between the gut and soil communities. Gut clones were related to a termite-derived Methanomicrobiales cluster, to Methanobrevibacter and, surprisingly, to the haloalkaliphile Natronococcus. Soil clones clustered with Methanosarcina, Methanomicrococcus or Rice Cluster I. T-RFLP analysis indicated that the archaeal communities in the soil samples differed from site to site, whereas those in termite guts were similar between sites. There was some overlap between the gut and soil communities but these may represent transient populations in either guts or soil. Our data does not support the hypothesis that termite gut MA are derived from their food soil but also does not support a purely vertical transmission of gut microflora.

Comparison of Euryarchaea strains in the guts and food-soil of the soil-feeding termite Cubitermes fungifaber across different soil types

Termites are an important component of tropical soil communities and have a significant effect on the structure and nutrient content of soil. Digestion in termites is related to gut structure, gut physicochemical conditions, and gut symbiotic microbiota. Here we describe the use of 16S rRNA gene sequencing and terminal-restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) analysis to examine methanogenic archaea (MA) in the guts and food-soil of the soil-feeder Cubitermes fungifaber Sjostedt across a range of soil types. If these MA are strictly vertically inherited, then the MA in guts should be the same in all individuals even if the soils differ across sites. In contrast, gut MA should reflect what is present in soil if populations are merely a reflection of what is ingested as the insects forage. We show clear differences between the euryarchaeal communities in termite guts and in food-soils from five different sites. Analysis of 16S rRNA gene clones indicated little overlap between the gut and soil communities. Gut clones were related to a termite-derived Methanomicrobiales cluster, to Methanobrevibacter and, surprisingly, to the haloalkaliphile Natronococcus. Soil clones clustered with Methanosarcina, Methanomicrococcus, or rice cluster I. T-RFLP analysis indicated that the archaeal communities in the soil samples differed from site to site, whereas those in termite guts were similar between sites. There was some overlap between the gut and soil communities, but these may represent transient populations in either guts or soil. Our data do not support the hypothesis that termite gut MA are derived from their food-soil but also do not support a purely vertical transmission of gut microflora.

Nutrition Society Silver Medal Lecture Nutrigenetics and personalised nutrition: how far have we progressed and are we likely to get there?

Nutrigenetics and personalised nutrition are components of the concept that in the future genotyping will be used as a means of defining dietary recommendations to suit the individual. Over the last two decades there has been an explosion of research in this area, with often conflicting findings reported in the literature. Reviews of the literature in the area of apoE genotype and cardiovascular health, apoA5 genotype and postprandial lipaemia and perilipin and adiposity are used to demonstrate the complexities of genotype-phenotype associations and the aetiology of apparent between-study inconsistencies in the significance and size of effects. Furthermore, genetic research currently often takes a very reductionist approach, examining the interactions between individual genotypes and individual disease biomarkers and how they are modified by isolated dietary components or foods. Each individual possesses potentially hundreds of 'at-risk' gene variants and consumes a highly-complex diet. In order for nutrigenetics to become a useful public health tool, there is a great need to use mathematical and bioinformatic tools to develop strategies to examine the combined impact of multiple gene variants on a range of health outcomes and establish how these associations can be modified using combined dietary strategies.

ApoE genotype, cardiovascular risk and responsiveness to dietary fat manipulation

Cardiovascular risk is determined by the complex interactions between genetic and environmental factors. The apoE genotype represents the most-widely-studied single nucleotide polymorphism in relation to CVD risk, with >3600 publications cited in PubMed. Although originally described as a mediator of lipoprotein metabolism, the lipoprotein-independent functions of apoE are being increasingly recognised, with limited data available on the potential impact of genotype on these metabolic processes. Furthermore, although meta-analyses suggest that apoE4 carriers may have a 40-50% increased CVD risk, the associations reported in individual studies are highly heterogeneous and it is recognised that environmental factors such as smoking status and dietary fat composition influence genotype-phenotype associations. However, information is often derived from observational studies or small intervention trials in which retrospective genotyping of the cohort results in small group sizes in the rarer E2 and E4 subgroups. Either larger well-standardised intervention trials or smaller trials with prospective recruitment according to apoE genotype are needed to fully establish the impact of diet on genotype-CVD associations and to establish the potential of dietary strategies such as reduced total fat, saturated fat, or increased antioxidant intakes to counteract the increased CVD burden in apoE4 carriers.

Personalised nutrition: status and perspectives

Personalised, genotype-based nutrition is a concept that links genotyping with specific nutritional advice in order to improve the prevention of nutrition-associated, chronic diseases. This review describes the current scientific basis of the concept and discusses its problems. There is convincing evidence that variant genes may indeed determine the biological response to nutrients. The effects of single-gene variants on risk or risk factor levels of a complex disease are, however, usually small and sometimes inconsistent. Thus, information on the effects of combinations of relevant gene variants appears to be required in order to improve the predictive precision of the genetic information. Furthermore, very few associations between genotype and response have been tested for causality in human intervention studies, and little is known about potential adverse effects of a genotype-derived intervention. These issues need to be addressed before genotyping can become an acceptable method to guide nutritional recommendations.

Detection and identification of species-specific bacteria associated with synanthropic mites

Internal bacterial communities of synanthropic mites Acarus siro, Dermatophagoides farinae, Lepidoglyphus destructor, and Tyrophagus putrescentiae (Acari: Astigmata) were analyzed by culturing and culture-independent approaches from specimens obtained from laboratory colonies. Homogenates of surface-sterilized mites were used for cultivation on non-selective agar and DNA extraction. Isolated bacteria were identified by sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene. PCR amplified 16S rRNA genes were analyzed by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (T-RFLP) and cloning sequencing. Fluorescence in situ hybridization using universal bacterial probes was used for direct bacterial localization. T-RFLP analysis of 16S rRNA gene revealed distinct species-specific bacterial communities. The results were further confirmed by cloning and sequencing (284 clones). L. destructor and D. farinae showed more diverse communities then A. siro and T. putrescentiae. In the cultivated part of the community, the mean CFUs from four mite species ranged from 5.2 × 102 to 1.4 × 103 per mite. D. farinae had significantly higher CFUs than the other species. Bacteria were located in the digestive and reproductive tract, parenchymatical tissue, and in bacteriocytes. Among the clones, Bartonella-like bacteria occurring in A. siro and T. putresecentiae represented a distinct group related to Bartonellaceae and to Bartonella-like symbionts of ants. The clones of high similarity to Xenorhabdus cabanillasii were found in L. destructor and D. farinae, and one clone related to Photorhabdus temperata in A. siro. Members of Sphingobacteriales cloned from D. farinae and A. siro clustered with the sequences of “Candidatus Cardinium hertigii” and as a separate novel cluster.

Evaluation of the use of high-density SNP genotyping to implement UPOV Model 2 for DUS testing in barley

Developments in high-throughput genotyping provide an opportunity to explore the application of marker technology in distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS) testing of new varieties. We have used a large set of molecular markers to assess the feasibility of a UPOV Model 2 approach: “Calibration of threshold levels for molecular characteristics against the minimum distance in traditional characteristics”. We have examined 431 winter and spring barley varieties, with data from UK DUS trials comprising 28 characteristics, together with genotype data from 3072 SNP markers. Inter varietal distances were calculated and we found higher correlations between molecular and morphological distances than have been previously reported. When varieties were grouped by kinship, phenotypic and genotypic distances of these groups correlated well. We estimated the minimum marker numbers required and showed there was a ceiling after which the correlations do not improve. To investigate the possibility of breaking through this ceiling, we attempted genomic prediction of phenotypes from genotypes and higher correlations were achieved. We tested distinctness decisions made using either morphological or genotypic distances and found poor correspondence between each method.

Mapping the platelet profile for functional genomic studies and demonstration of the effect size of the GP6 locus

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests the wide variation in platelet response within the population is genetically controlled. Unraveling the complex relationship between sequence variation and platelet phenotype requires accurate and reproducible measurement of platelet response. OBJECTIVE: To develop a methodology suitable for measuring signaling pathway-specific platelet phenotype, to use this to measure platelet response in a large cohort, and to demonstrate the effect size of sequence variation in a relevant model gene. METHODS: Three established platelet assays were evaluated: mobilization of [Ca(2+)](i), aggregometry and flow cytometry, each in response to adenosine 5'-diphosphate (ADP) or the glycoprotein (GP) VI-specific crosslinked collagen-related peptide (CRP). Flow cytometric measurement of fibrinogen binding and P-selectin expression in response to a single, intermediate dose of each agonist gave the best combination of reproducibility and inter-individual variability and was used to measure the platelet response in 506 healthy volunteers. Pathway specificity was ensured by blocking the main subsidiary signaling pathways. RESULTS: Individuals were identified who were hypo- or hyper-responders for both pathways, or who had differential responses to the two agonists, or between outcomes. 89 individuals, retested three months later using the same methodology, showed high concordance between the two visits in all four assays (r(2) = 0.872, 0.868, 0.766 and 0.549); all subjects retaining their phenotype at recall. The effect of sequence variation at the GP6 locus accounted for approximately 35% of the variation in the CRP-XL response. CONCLUSION: Genotyping-phenotype association studies in a well-characterized, large cohort provides a powerful strategy to measure the effect of sequence variation in genes regulating the platelet response.

Detection and molecular characterisation of Pyrenopeziza brassicae isolates resistant to methyl benzimidazole carbamates

BACKGROUND Methyl benzimidazole carbamate (MBC) fungicides are used to control the oilseed rape pathogen Pyrenopeziza brassicae. Resistance to MBCs has been reported in P. brassicae, but the molecular mechanism(s) associated with reductions in sensitivity have not been verified in this species. Elucidation of the genetic changes responsible for resistance, hypothesised to be target-site mutations in β-tubulin, will enable resistance diagnostics and thereby inform resistance management strategies. RESULTS P. brassicae isolates were classified as sensitive, moderately resistant or resistant to MBCs. Crossing P. brassicae isolates of different MBC sensitivities indicated that resistance was conferred by a single gene. The MBC-target encoding gene β-tubulin was cloned and sequenced. Reduced MBC sensitivity of field isolates correlated with β-tubulin amino acid substitutions L240F and E198A. The highest level of MBC resistance was measured for isolates carrying E198A. Negative cross-resistance between MBCs and the fungicides diethofencarb and zoxamide was only measured in E198A isolates. PCR-RFLP was used to screen isolates for the presence of L240F and E198A. The substitutions E198G and F200Y were also detected in DNA samples from P. brassicae populations after cloning and sequencing of PCR products. The frequencies of L240F and E198A in different P. brassicae populations were quantified by pyrosequencing. There were no differences in the frequencies of these alleles between P. brassicae populations sampled from different locations or after fungicide treatment regimes. CONCLUSIONS The molecular mechanisms affecting sensitivity to MBCs in P. brassicae have been identified. Pyrosequencing assays are a powerful tool for quantifying fungicide-resistant alleles in pathogen populations.