Genetic and phenotypic diversity in selected genotypes of tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.)] Trotter

Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] is an important staple food crop, especially in Ethiopia where it is annually grown on 2.8 million hectares of land. It is important for food security in the region, in spite of having a low yield, mainly due to lodging. In this study, 15 representative landraces as well as three improved varieties have been selected for in-depth characterization of many parameters, especially those implicated in yield. The genotypes were clustered into six groups, mainly based on agronomic traits and about 80% of the diversity in the genotypes could be explained on the basis of four principal components. In general, all traits investigated showed substantial diversity among genotypes, offering high chances for improving tef through direct selection or intra-specific hybridization. Moreover, in view of climatic changes, breeding with early maturing landraces such as Red dabi or Karadebi would be advantageous to cope with moisture scarcity during the later stage of crop maturity.

From 'land grabbing' to sustainable investments in land: potential contributions by land change science

This paper assesses possible contributions of land change science to the growing body of knowledge about large-scale land acquisition. Despite obvious commonalities, such as a problem-oriented and interdisciplinary approach to land change, there seems to be little overlap between the two fields thus far. We adopt a sustainability research perspective — an important feature of land change science — to review research questions about large-scale land acquisition that are currently being addressed, and to define questions for further inquiry. Possible contributions of land change science toward more sustainable land investments are based on understanding land use change not only as a consequence, but also as a cause of large-scale land acquisition and as a solution to the problems land acquisition can create.

Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity

Although temporal heterogeneity is a well-accepted driver of biodiversity, effects of interannual variation in land-use intensity (LUI) have not been addressed yet. Additionally, responses to land use can differ greatly among different organisms; therefore, overall effects of land-use on total local biodiversity are hardly known. To test for effects of LUI (quantified as the combined intensity of fertilization, grazing, and mowing) and interannual variation in LUI (SD in LUI across time), we introduce a unique measure of whole-ecosystem biodiversity, multidiversity. This synthesizes individual diversity measures across up to 49 taxonomic groups of plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria from 150 grasslands. Multidiversity declined with increasing LUI among grasslands, particularly for rarer species and aboveground organisms, whereas common species and belowground groups were less sensitive. However, a high level of interannual variation in LUI increased overall multidiversity at low LUI and was even more beneficial for rarer species because it slowed the rate at which the multidiversity of rare species declined with increasing LUI. In more intensively managed grasslands, the diversity of rarer species was, on average, 18% of the maximum diversity across all grasslands when LUI was static over time but increased to 31% of the maximum when LUI changed maximally over time. In addition to decreasing overall LUI, we suggest varying LUI across years as a complementary strategy to promote biodiversity conservation.

Tools for better SLM knowledge management and informed decision-making in addressing land degradation at different scales: the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology

Desertification research conventionally focuses on the problem – that is, degradation – while neglecting the appraisal of successful conservation practices. Based on the premise that Sustainable Land Management (SLM) experiences are not sufficiently or comprehensively documented, evaluated, and shared, the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) initiative (www.wocat.net), in collaboration with FAO’s Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA) project (www.fao.org/nr/lada/) and the EU’s DESIRE project (http://www.desire-project.eu/), has developed standardised tools and methods for compiling and evaluating the biophysical and socio-economic knowledge available about SLM. The tools allow SLM specialists to share their knowledge and assess the impact of SLM at the local, national, and global levels. As a whole, the WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology comprises tools for documenting, self-evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing and decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. SLM depends on flexibility and responsiveness to changing complex ecological and socioeconomic causes of land degradation. The WOCAT tools are designed to reflect and capture this capacity of SLM. In order to take account of new challenges and meet emerging needs of WOCAT users, the tools are constantly further developed and adapted. Recent enhancements include tools for improved data analysis (impact and cost/benefit), cross-scale mapping, climate change adaptation and disaster risk management, and easier reporting on SLM best practices to UNCCD and other national and international partners. Moreover, WOCAT has begun to give land users a voice by backing conventional documentation with video clips straight from the field. To promote the scaling up of SLM, WOCAT works with key institutions and partners at the local and national level, for example advisory services and implementation projects. Keywords: Sustainable Land Management (SLM), knowledge management, decision-making, WOCAT–LADA–DESIRE methodology.

Are land sparing and land sharing real alternatives for European agricultural landscapes?

There is a lively debate on whether biodiversity conservation and agricultural production could be better reconciled by land sparing (strictly separating production fields and conservation areas) or by land sharing (combining both, agricultural production and biodiversity conservation on the same land). The debate originates from tropical countries, where agricultural land use continues to increase at the expense of natural ecosystems. But is it also relevant for Europe, where agriculture is withdrawing from marginal regions whilst farming of fertile lands continues to be intensified? Based on recent research on farmland biodiversity we conclude that the land sharing – land sparing dichotomy is too simplistic for Europe. Instead we differentiate between productive and marginal farmland. On productive farmland, semi-natural habitats are required to yield ecosystem services relevant for agriculture, to promote endangered farmland species which society wants to conserve even in intensively farmed regions, and to allow migration of non-farmland species through the agricultural matrix. On marginal farmland, high-nature value farming is a traditional way of land sharing, yielding high quality agricultural products and conserving specialized species. To conserve highly disturbance-sensitive species, there is a need for nature reserves. In conclusion, land sparing is not a viable olution for Europe in both productive and marginal farmland but because of different reasons in each type of farmland.

Adapting agricultural land management to climate change: a regional multi-objective optimization approach

In several regions of the world, climate change is expected to have severe impacts on agricultural systems. Changes in land management are one way to adapt to future climatic conditions, including land-use changes and local adjustments of agricultural practices. In previous studies, options for adaptation have mostly been explored by testing alternative scenarios. Systematic explorations of land management possibilities using optimization approaches were so far mainly restricted to studies of land and resource management under constant climatic conditions. In this study, we bridge this gap and exploit the benefits of multi-objective regional optimization for identifying optimum land management adaptations to climate change. We design a multi-objective optimization routine that integrates a generic crop model and considers two climate scenarios for 2050 in a meso-scale catchment on the Swiss Central Plateau with already limited water resources. The results indicate that adaptation will be necessary in the study area to cope with a decrease in productivity by 0–10 %, an increase in soil loss by 25–35 %, and an increase in N-leaching by 30–45 %. Adaptation options identified here exhibit conflicts between productivity and environmental goals, but compromises are possible. Necessary management changes include (i) adjustments of crop shares, i.e. increasing the proportion of early harvested winter cereals at the expense of irrigated spring crops, (ii) widespread use of reduced tillage, (iii) allocation of irrigated areas to soils with low water-retention capacity at lower elevations, and (iv) conversion of some pre-alpine grasslands to croplands.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the hip.

BACKGROUND Current international treatment guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis (OA) report are based on limited evidence. OBJECTIVES To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with hip OA in terms of reduced joint pain and improved physical function and quality of life. SEARCH METHODS We searched five databases from inception up to February 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting people with hip OA and comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercises conducted in water) with a non-exercise group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Four review authors independently selected studies for inclusion. We resolved disagreements through consensus. Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. We conducted analyses on continuous outcomes (pain, physical function and quality of life) and dichotomous outcomes (proportion of study withdrawals). MAIN RESULTS We considered that seven of the 10 included RCTs had a low risk of bias. However, the results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias as none of the RCTs were able to blind participants to treatment allocation and, while most RCTs reported blinded outcome assessment, pain, physical function and quality of life were participant self reported. One of the 10 RCTs was only reported as a conference abstract and did not provide sufficient data for the evaluation of bias risk.High-quality evidence from nine trials (549 participants) indicated that exercise reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.55 to -0.20) and improved physical function (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.05) immediately after treatment. Pain and physical function were estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain or loss of physical function) in the control group; exercise reduced pain by an equivalent of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 11 points; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6) and improved physical function by an equivalent of 7 points (95% CI 1 to 12 points; NNTB 6). Only three small studies (183 participants) evaluated quality of life, with overall low quality evidence, with no benefit of exercise demonstrated (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.36). Quality of life was estimated to be 50 points on a norm-based mean (standard deviation (SD)) score of 50 (10) in the general population in the control group; exercise improved quality of life by 0 points. Moderate-quality evidence from seven trials (715 participants) indicated an increased likelihood of withdrawal from the exercise allocation (event rate 6%) compared with the control group (event rate 3%), but this difference was not significant (risk difference 1%; 95% CI -1% to 4%). Of the five studies reporting adverse events, each study reported only one or two events and all were related to increased pain attributed to the exercise programme.The reduction in pain was sustained at least three to six months after ceasing monitored treatment (five RCTs, 391 participants): pain (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.18). Pain was estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain) in the control group, the improvement in pain translated to a sustained reduction in pain intensity of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 12 points) compared with the control group (0 to 100 scale). The improvement in physical function was also sustained (five RCTs, 367 participants): physical function (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.16). Physical function was estimated to be 24 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no loss of physical function) in the control group, the improvement translated to a mean of 7 points (95% CI 4 to 13) compared with the control group.Only five of the 10 RCTs exclusively recruited people with symptomatic hip OA (419 participants). There was no significant difference in pain or physical function outcomes compared with five studies recruiting participants with hip or knee OA (130 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Pooling the results of these 10 RCTs demonstrated that land-based therapeutic exercise programmes can reduce pain and improve physical function among people with symptomatic hip OA.

Resource-Mediated Indirect Effects of Grassland Management on Arthropod Diversity

Intensive land use is a driving force for biodiversity decline in many ecosystems. In semi-natural grasslands, land-use activities such as mowing, grazing and fertilization affect the diversity of plants and arthropods, but the combined effects of different drivers and the chain of effects are largely unknown. In this study we used structural equation modelling to analyse how the arthropod communities in managed grasslands respond to land use and whether these responses are mediated through changes in resource diversity or resource quantity (biomass). Plants were considered resources for herbivores which themselves were considered resources for predators. Plant and arthropod (herbivores and predators) communities were sampled on 141 meadows, pastures and mown pastures within three regions in Germany in 2008 and 2009. Increasing land-use intensity generally increased plant biomass and decreased plant diversity, mainly through increasing fertilization. Herbivore diversity decreased together with plant diversity but showed no response to changes in plant biomass. Hence, land-use effects on herbivore diversity were mediated through resource diversity rather than quantity. Land-use effects on predator diversity were mediated by both herbivore diversity (resource diversity) and herbivore quantity (herbivore biomass), but indirect effects through resource quantity were stronger. Our findings highlight the importance of assessing both direct and indirect effects of land-use intensity and mode on different trophic levels. In addition to the overall effects, there were subtle differences between the different regions, pointing to the importance of regional land-use specificities. Our study underlines the commonly observed strong effect of grassland land use on biodiversity. It also highlights that mechanistic approaches help us to understand how different land-use modes affect biodiversity.

Functional and Evolutionary Analysis of the CASPARIAN STRIP MEMBRANE DOMAIN PROTEIN Family

CASPARIAN STRIP MEMBRANE DOMAIN PROTEINS (CASPs) are four-membrane-span proteins that mediate the deposition of Casparian strips in the endodermis by recruiting the lignin polymerization machinery. CASPs show high stability in their membrane domain, which presents all the hallmarks of a membrane scaffold. Here, we characterized the large family of CASP-like (CASPL) proteins. CASPLs were found in all major divisions of land plants as well as in green algae; homologs outside of the plant kingdom were identified as members of the MARVEL protein family. When ectopically expressed in the endodermis, most CASPLs were able to integrate the CASP membrane domain, which suggests that CASPLs share with CASPs the propensity to form transmembrane scaffolds. Extracellular loops are not necessary for generating the scaffold, since CASP1 was still able to localize correctly when either one of the extracellular loops was deleted. The CASP first extracellular loop was found conserved in euphyllophytes but absent in plants lacking Casparian strips, an observation that may contribute to the study of Casparian strip and root evolution. In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), CASPL showed specific expression in a variety of cell types, such as trichomes, abscission zone cells, peripheral root cap cells, and xylem pole pericycle cells.

Land-atmosphere coupling over North America in CRCM5

Land-atmosphere coupling and its impact on extreme precipitation and temperature events over North America are studied using the fifth generation of the Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM5). To this effect, two 30 year long simulations, spanning the 1981–2010 period, with and without land-atmosphere coupling, have been performed with CRCM5, driven by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts reanalysis at the boundaries. In the coupled simulation, the soil moisture interacts freely with the atmosphere at each time step, while in the uncoupled simulation, soil moisture is replaced with its climatological value computed from the coupled simulation, thus suppressing the soil moisture-atmosphere interactions. Analyses of the coupled and uncoupled simulations, for the summer period, show strong soil moisture-temperature coupling over the Great Plains, consistent with previous studies. The maxima of soil moisture-precipitation coupling is more spread out and covers the semiarid regions of the western U.S. and parts of the Great Plains. However, the strength of soil moisture-precipitation coupling is found to be generally weaker than that of soil moisture-temperature coupling. The study clearly indicates that land-atmosphere coupling increases the interannual variability of the seasonal mean daily maximum temperature in the Great Plains. Land-atmosphere coupling is found to significantly modulate selected temperature extremes such as the number of hot days, frequency, and maximum duration of hot spells over the Great Plains. Results also suggest additional hot spots, where soil moisture modulates extreme events. These hot spots are located in the southeast U.S. for the hot days/hot spells and in the semiarid regions of the western U.S. for extreme wet spells. This study thus demonstrates that climatologically wet/dry regions can become hot spots of land-atmosphere coupling when the soil moisture decreases/increases to an intermediate transitional level where evapotranspiration becomes moisture sensitive and large enough to affect the climate.

Foreign Direct Investment in Agriculture: Land Grab or Food Security Improvement?

“Large-scale acquisition of land by foreign investors” is the correct term for a process where the verdict of guilt is often quicker than the examination. But is there something really new about land grab except in its extent? In comparison with colonial and post-colonial plantation operations, should foreign investors today behave differently? We generally accept coffee and banana exports as pro-growth and pro-development, just as for cars, beef and insurance. What then is wrong with an investment contract allowing the holder to buy a farm and to export wheat to Saudi Arabia, or soybeans and maize as cattle feed to Korea, or to plant and process sugar cane and palm oil into ethanol for Europe and China? Assuming their land acquisition was legal, should foreigners respect more than investment contracts and national legislation? And why would they not take advantage of the legal protection offered by international investment law and treaties, not to speak of concessional finance, infrastructure and technical cooperation by a development bank, or the tax holidays offered by the host state? Remember Milton Friedman’s often-quoted quip: “The business of business is business!” And why would the governments signing those contracts not know whether and which foreign investment projects are best for their country, and how to attract them? This chapter tries to show that land grab, where it occurs, is not only yet another symptom of regulatory failures at the national level and a lack of corporate social responsibility by certain private actors. National governance is clearly the most important factor. Nonetheless, I submit that there is an international dimension involving investor home states in various capacities. The implication is that land grab is not solely a question whether a particular investment contract is legal or not. This chapter deals with legal issues which seem to have largely escaped the attention of both human rights lawyers and, especially, of investment lawyers. I address this fragmentation between different legal disciplines, rules, and policies, by asking two basic questions: (i) Do governments and parliaments in investor home countries have any responsibility in respect of the behaviour of their investors abroad? (ii) What should they and international regulators do, if anything?

Land deals intensify competition for scarce resources

Since the worldwide food price crisis of 2008, foreign investors have rushed to acquire large amounts of agricultural land in poorer countries. Some observers welcome this, claiming that outside investment in ostensibly underused land will jump-start local development. Others regard such investments as land grabs, stressing that the areas are rarely empty and that local people have little say. This brief identifies the types of land targeted by investors and reveals key socio-ecological patterns of such deals. The evidence indicates that foreign investments are intensifying competition for the best land. Ensuring that such deals instead contribute to sustainable, inclusive use of land requires strong public guidance and oversight.

On the right path? Land concessions in Laos

Land investment is booming in Laos, driven especially by demand for resources among its rapidly developing neighbours. Still, Laos remains one of the poorest countries in Southeast Asia. The government hopes that projects linked to land investments will improve local productivity, infrastructure, and poverty rates. But there are many risks to local livelihoods and the environment. Ensuring that land investment truly benefits the broader population demands effective regulation and strong political will. This policy brief provides key insights and recommendations drawn from the national inventory of land concessions and leases, the most comprehensive accounting of such land deals to date for a single country.