[MPWG] Contribution of biotechnology to in situ conservation

[Danna J. Leaman]

This is in response to the description of current work on threatened species in the Lamiaceae/Labiatae family, from JN Covanes (Botreasearch).

My questions concern how, not whether, biotechnology contributes to in situ conservation of threatened species, medicinal or otherwise.  I'm not a biotechnologist, so do forgive and correct me if I misunderstand the science.  I'm much encouraged by the forward-looking approach Botresearch is demonstrating in anticipating the possibility of increased harvest pressure on particular species, particularly those that are already threatened.  I'm not necessarily expecting that Botresearch will have answers to my questions, but I'd like to probe the assumptions and objectives of biotechnology/reintroduction with respect to conservation.

Question 1:  What is cause of the current decline or vulnerability of these species, if not harvest pressure?  Might the re-introduced individuals and enriched populations be threatened by these circumstances also?

Question 2:  When germplasm is selected for tissue culture and mass reproduction of these species, is this done with a knowledge of existing genetic diversity in the species and in the populations from which material is selected?  

I ask this question because there are several objectives, not necessarily mutually compatible, and not necessarily serving conservation or long-term sustainable use, that might be a priority in selecting this material in situ, and further along in the process, in selecting the individual seedlings produced ex situ (in tissue culture) that will be added to natural populations.

Question 3:  How can we monitor the long-term result and contribution to conservation of re-introduction / enrichment of populations?   If maintaining or enhancing the production value of a population is an objective, this would be encouraged, at least in the short term, by selecting for desirable qualities, such as root mass, shape, chemical composition, and the result would become evident in a genetic shift in-situ towards these characteristics (unless the process of selection has the perverse impact of diminishing the survivorship/competitive/reproductive advantage) of these individuals and the population overall).  The long-term result, however, has potential to be decreased natural and adaptive genetic diversity in these now-managed populations.  

Question 4:  Is it feasible to use biotechnology, such as tissue culture, to maintain intra-specific genetic diversity as a primary objective?  Or, assuming that we could document and select for the broad range of existing genetic diversity in a species, might we run the risk of competing with natural selection by working to preserve genotypes that are no longer of adaptive value to a species in nature, however desireable they might be to us as sources of medicine?

I leave this listserve with this burden of questions to ponder.  I am away from my email for the coming week, so there is no rush to reply!

Kind regards,
Danna Leaman, Chair, IUCN/SSC Medicinal Plant Specialist Group

*********************************
Botresearch USA is currently working with plants in one of the largest medicinal plant families, that being the Lamiaceae/ Labiatae family. Most people are familiar with those species eg. Mint, thyme ,basil and oregano which have culinary applications, but far fewer are familiar with  those which have recently been found to have medicinal applications. A case in point is that of Agastache rugosa which has shown inhibitory reactions to  HIV-1  virus. While this native of Japan is not currently threatened or endangered now, its future in light of new research is likely to lead to  one of concern as a result of  high demand.
     

    Since only a small percentage of the species in this family have been researched for potential medicinal applications or as a potential source for new pharmaceuticals, what is to say that other Agastache species eg. A. scrophulariifolia, A nepetoides, or A. foeniculum could not have similar potential. These species which so far have not been evaluated  are currently on the threatened and endangered species by state list in Connecticutt, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, Vermont, and Tennesee as being of Special Concern, Threatened or Endangered. What will happen if they turn out to have a similar value to A. rugosa ?

     

    As a result of this, Botresearch USA is taking a proactive stance and utilizing biotechnology to mass produce these species via tissue culture and retuning them to their natural habitats utilizing university students, and interested conservation organizations.

     

    We would challenge others to join with us, or begin work on medicinal species in other plant families to prevent or reverse the conditions which currently or could in the future cause concern for these species. I hope this answers your query as to what we are doing currently.

    Regards,
    J.N.Covanes
    Director of Research
    Botresearch USA
    23410 Harpergate
    Spring, Texas 77373
    USA
    fax: (281)355-1857
    www.botresearch.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



  _______________________________________________
  MPWG mailing list
  MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
  http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org

  Disclaimer                                                                
  Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments etc. reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the message. The information contained in posts is not intended nor implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice relative to your specific medical condition or question. All medical and other healthcare information that is discussed on this list should be carefully reviewed by the individual reader and their qualified healthcare professional. Posts do not reflect any official opinions or positions of the Plant Conservation Alliance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20040130/ce39931d/attachment.html>