It’s obvious to Rob Graf, and many others in Canada’s grain industry, that the country needs a new system for developing cereal crop varieties — one that attracts private investment while preserving public programs for crops too small to interest a company’s bottom line.

Graf is a winter wheat breeder who spent 35 years in public plant science, retiring from Agriculture Canada in 2022. He knows better than most what’s at risk.

“One of the things that concerns me (is) those crops that have lower acreage. How are those going to be funded? How are new varieties going to be developed?” he said.

WHY IT MATTERS: Grain farmers will soon need answers to Graf’s questions. A February report from the Canadian Wheat Research Coalition says the status quo — a public breeding system dominated by Agriculture Canada — is no longer a viable path forward. Federal plans to close research centres and lay off scientists are accelerating the timeline for change.

For decades, growers have relied on Agriculture Canada scientists to develop the latest varieties of spring wheat, durum and other cereals. The coalition’s February report found that Ag Canada varieties are grown on about 80 per cent of all wheat fields in Canada every year.

“It’s clear that the status quo is not a viable path forward,” says Jocelyn Velestuk, Canadian Wheat Research Coalition chair.

The public approach has delivered strong varieties to farmers, but in the last 15 years, the system has grown progressively weaker. It will soon be further undermined as the federal government plans to close research centres and lay off employees in its science and technology branch.

There are real-world examples of what happens when government stops investing in crop breeding. Flax is the clearest cautionary tale.

About 20 years ago, there were three flax breeding programs in Canada. Now, there’s one at the University of Saskatchewan. Without the breeders to improve yields, flax acres on the Prairies collapsed.

Other factors contributed to flax’s decline — competition from the Black Sea region chief among them — but poorly funded breeding programs and flat yields didn’t help.

What a new system could look like

Creating a new system to fund cereal breeding will not be easy. But a transition needs to happen, particularly for spring wheat, said Richard Cuthbert, a former wheat breeder with Agriculture Canada in Swift Current, Sask.

The public breeding system is currently handicapped by an insufficient number of test sites for small plot trials — sites that should cover a range of growing conditions across Western Canada. Without those sites and the related data, developing a competitive spring wheat variety is extremely difficult.

The crops that could fall through the cracks

Graf spent the bulk of his career working on winter wheat — a crop seeded on 300,000 to 350,000 acres on the Prairies. That is a small fraction of the 19 million acres of spring wheat grown in Canada, and a tiny sliver of the 65 million acres of all Prairie crops.

Winter wheat covers the soil through fall and spring, offering real environmental benefits — erosion control, early ground cover, reduced spring runoff. But its small acreage makes it a poor candidate for private investment.

“Will anybody be interested in developing winter wheat? We simply don’t know,” Graf said.

For now, the question is hypothetical — Agriculture Canada still has a winter wheat breeding program. But Graf’s concern applies to any specialty or low-acreage crop that lacks the commercial scale to attract private investment once the public system retreats.

“What we really need is a system where private and public can co-exist,” Graf said.

Key takeaways

• Agriculture Canada varieties cover 80 per cent of Canada’s wheat fields — but that dominance is built on a system the industry itself says in no longer sustainable.

• The federal government plans to close research centres and cut scientists, accelerating the timeline for change.

• Flax acreage fell 67 per cent over 20 years — partly a result of underfunded breeding. That pattern could repeat in other crops.

• Low-acreage crops like winter wheat may not attract private investment, creating a gap no one has a plan to fill yet.

• Industry leaders say the future requires private and public breeding to co-exist — but what that looks like is still unknown.

Read the Canadian Wheat Research Coalition’s February 2026 report.

The post Canada’s cereal breeding system is failing. Who fills the gap? appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Chief executive officer Justine Hendricks announced the funding at Canada’s Farm Show June 18, saying she was thrilled to announce the partnership.

“The accelerated breeding program brings together cutting edge science and practical agricultural knowledge. It will bring new crop varieties and livestock genetics to producers and other stakeholders much faster, which will stimulate rural economic growth and increased revenue,” she said.

Hendricks said sustainability is a key part of FCC’s new strategy, and GIFS’ research into just how sustainable Saskatchewan and Canadian crops are compared to the rest of the world highlights farmers’ good work.

“They found that a bushel of wheat grown in Saskatchewan would need to be on a boat and circle the world 3.5 times to reach the same carbon footprint as some of its global competitors, and that’s something to be really proud of,” she said.

GIFS CEO Steven Webb said the funding will help Canada “get back on the productivity gain timeline.”

The FCC program will deliver innovative products faster with better yields, disease resistance and quality traits, he said.

Genomic selection, bioinformatics, speed breeding and computational simulations are already proven to increase the rate of genetic gain for crops and livestock. Webb said the dairy industry has used these technologies for more than 20 years, while corn and soybean breeders have used them for more than a decade.

He said this means breeders at GIFS will get the same access, and that will boost productivity and reduce the time to access new varieties.

The post FCC invests in breeding innovation appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

That was the focus of a recent paper and webinar by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, which discussed the application benefits of genome editing and to envisioned the future of its applications on society.

Genome editing tools can greatly advance plant breeding progress through less complicated techniques compared to transgenics.

Although CRISPR technology is the most frequently mentioned gene editing technique, the science is relatively young.

“Obviously it’s a very important tool in our field of plant breeding and innovation, but it’s also increasingly something consumers are hearing about in the marketplace,” said Sarah Evanega, associate professor at Cornell University and an author of the council’s issue paper.

Although CRISPR was developed 10 years ago, global events, including the pandemic, changed public attitudes toward technical advances.

Evanega highlighted several applications in the agri-food and agri-business sector, among them Calyno high-oleic soybean oil from Calyxt, waxy corn from Corteva and Sicilian Rouge tomatoes from Sanatech Seeds. All use some form of genome editing to impart desirable traits for specific markets or end uses.

“We then move into the benefits we’re seeing through the application of this tool and we sort of ‘bucket’ those into three key categories,” added Evanega.

“Those are benefits to the environment, benefits that are social in nature as well as economic benefits.”

She noted that U.S. consumers are “especially excited” about the role of genome editing in making food more nutritious while reducing pesticide and water use.

First steps

1. The issue paper made five recommendations to ensure genome editing in agriculture benefits society:Increase public investments that incentivize research and development and minor-use crops, identifying areas of genetic vulnerability to extend applications beyond the major commodity crops and agronomic traits that will be served by the private sector.

2. Increase public investments in genomics, trait discovery and the understanding of the genetics that inform those desirable traits to ensure applications that translate into products that serve and benefit society.

3. Create incentives for start-up companies using new breeding tools to develop products that address consumer demands.

4. Create incentives for developing products with a significant environmental impact, especially in large acre crops that confer big scaling opportunities.

5. Ensure a clearer, transparent, predictable product-based co-ordinated regulatory system (in the U.S.) that does not discriminate against specialty crops and minor-use applications.

Two steps forward?

As with every advance, there are challenges, and Evanega underscored consumer acceptance and governance as primary hurdles.

The first few products of genome editing are entering the marketplace and public perceptions will depend on how and what products are used in food systems.

Those that offer nutritional benefits or promote environmental sustainability are more likely to be in demand, she said.

But lack of global harmonization has slowed commercialization of crops developed through genome editing, noted Evanega.

The regulatory system must recognize product outcomes rather than the process or the technology used. That should be possible since many frameworks distinguish genome editing from transgenics.

Regulations in the European Union are now under revision to recognize the differentiation between those two, and that’s a positive step, according to many researchers, policy makers and farm organizations.

The post Getting acceptance for gene editing appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“The investment of $5.7 million will help grain producers in Ontario and across the country keep their businesses strong and competitive,” Guelph MP Lloyd Longfield said at the funding announcement at Woodrill Farms Ltd. “Every dollar that we invest in research puts almost $33 in the producers’ pocket, and that’s a pretty good return on investment.”

The Cropping Systems Cluster will be led by the Canadian Field Crop Research Alliance (CFCRA) and funding is provided through the AgriScience Program – Clusters Component, an initiative under the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership (SCAP).

The funding will be matched by an additional $4.8 million from industry for a total investment of up to $10.5 million over five years.

The funding supports research exploring environmental and economic impacts of crop rotations integrating soybean, corn and oats, reduction of business risk through secure rotational crops, bolstering Canada’s economy and food supply in the face of climate change for generations to come, Longfield said.

“The research is going to include developing new varieties that meet the quality demands of processors and consumers and new short-season soybean varieties,” he said. “Activities will also explore how diverse crop rotations can play a central role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and how better genetics, land management and fertilizer use can improve nitrogen use efficiency to protect the environment.”

Longfield said last year, Ontario farm cash receipts for soybeans, corn and oats hit $4.2 billion, which is half of Canada’s total farm cash receipts. This is especially significant given Ontario leads in corn production and oat processing and is the birthplace of Canadian-grown soybeans.

Josh Cowan, CFCRA vice-president, said the five research initiatives have already been vetted, approved and collaborated with institutions across Canada and several stakeholders from seed to processing.

“When you look at a breeding program, it doesn’t start and stop at any point in time, but you’re constantly evaluating what you need to do and trying to improve,” explained Cowan. “So there’ll be variety releases throughout the course of the five years, as those breeding programs continue to evolve.”

Greg Hannam, co-owner of Woodrill Farms Ltd. and a director at SeCan, said plant breeding projects crops for corn, soybeans and oats bring will bring new varieties with better disease packages, stress tolerance and beneficial end-user properties to the market and provide the foundation for on-farm profitability and environmental stewardship.

Federal investment in grain research is critical because individual farms and farm associations are limited in what they can achieve. Thin profit margins hinder project financing, Hannam said.

“The opportunity to partner with government and other organizations to be able to scale research up and get more of them going,” he said. “I’m optimistic, excited and there’s comfort there as well. Because we have this (breeding research) going on, I can focus my energies on other things and other research activities.”

Grain Farmers of Ontario CEO Crosby Devitt said the investments in corn, oat, and soybean research through the Cropping Systems Cluster “will keep these crops profitable and sustainable for Ontario farmers, increasing quality and yields while finding new solutions for environmental stressors like drought and diseases. This work will also contribute to understanding practices that might allow farmers to contribute to Canada’s climate targets. Research is the key to meeting those objectives.”

Grain Farmers of Ontario is a founding member of the CFCRA, and also supports eastern Canadian wheat research in the Canadian National Wheat Cluster.

The Sustainable Canadian Agricfulture Partnership (SCAP) is a five-year, $3 billion investment by federal, provincial and territorial governments to strengthen the agriculture and agri-food sector. SCAP builds on the Canadian Agricultural Partnership, the previous five-year agreement that ended on March 31, 2023.

The CFCRA is a not-for-profit entity founded in 2010 with an interest in advancing the economic and environmental sustainability of field crops in Canada, particularly barley, corn, soybean, oat, and wheat. The CFCRA is comprised of provincial farm organizations and industry partners, including Atlantic Grains Council, Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Québec, Manitoba Pulse & Soybean Growers, Manitoba Crop Alliance, Saskatchewan Pulse Growers, Prairie Oat Growers Association, SeCan, and FP Genetics.

The post Feds invest in research to promote more diverse crop rotations appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Research scientist John Laurie has just planted the federal government’s first plots of gene-edited wheat at the Lethbridge Research and Development Centre.

These lines are grown in a greenhouse after being successfully propagated in growth chambers. Laurie is excited for where his work could ultimately lead.

“The best thing that could come out of this would be increased drought tolerance,” he says. “That’s the biggest thing the plants might have to deal with moving forward into the future.”

The edited genes are linked to the plants’ circadian clock. Research scientists in other parts of the world have discovered and isolated a gene called Ppd-1, which regulates how long a plant perceives day length, which translates into date of heading and spike characteristics.

A good example is in tomato, where domestication of a circadian clock gene allowed cultivation in northern latitudes, not just near the equator where it was traditionally grown.

Laurie and project co-lead André Laroche are working with about a half-dozen circadian clock genes similar to Ppd-1 in this spring wheat research. He says if AAFC can create varieties with the Ppd-1-like edits, wheat varieties could function better.

“If these other clock genes are able to even partially do what Ppd-1 has done, then they could have a huge impact on wheat globally,” he says. “In tweaking the clock, we can probably push wheat to maximize its performance.”

Typically, wheat plants have the most photosynthetic ability in the morning and midday. With the edits, Laurie’s research could create wheat with greater ability to receive and use sunlight.

New frontier

During the Green Revolution of the 1960s, innovations were found using mutagenesis, in which plants could be exposed to radiation or various chemicals to create genetic variation. Breeders would then plant those mutated lines and try to discover beneficial mutations.

It was a painstaking process that took years, if not decades, to find improved genetics. Results will presumably flow faster for scientists of all stripes as gene editing gains popularity.

“With gene editing, we precisely target the exact sequence we want,” says Laurie.

His wheat edits were done through dual processes known as Crispr/Cas9 and HI-edit. This shaved years off conventional breeding because uniform genetics are produced the first time, eliminating the need to take a good plant and back-breed it with other crosses to produce new lines.

During the phenotyping stage — observing crop characteristics during selection — Laurie noticed differences in flowering time, plant height and stalk thickness; subtle, yet important, differences.

“It’s not like we’re creating a completely different type of wheat. It’s just we’re tweaking the control that clock has on the plant.”

Spring wheat is a hexaploid, meaning it carries six total genes — two A, B and D genes. Laurie is mixing and matching the edited genes in an attempt to produce elite lines.

“It’s like a thermostat on your house controlling the temperature. You can turn it down a little bit, turn it up a little bit. That’s what we were trying to do with the gene editing.

“It’s not to fully knock out these particular genes, but we actually have the power to regulate those genes.”

Edited lines are being planted alongside the control variety, AC Andrew, a soft white spring wheat.

Welcome development

Laurie’s research is music to the ears of Krista Zuzak, director of crop protection and production at Cereals Canada. Gene editing technology and the edited crops themselves carry significant upside, she believes.

“It can provide many benefits; at the farmer level in terms of production, pest management or better input use efficiency,” she says. “We also see overall benefits for the Canadian economy when we’re protected from pests, especially mycotoxins, which can cause human health issues.”

Zuzak says the technology can help in virtually all areas of production. There is recent gene editing research on powdery mildew resistance and even nitrogen use efficiency in wheat.

“All of it could save farmers money on input costs. That’s one of the exciting parts about gene editing, is that it does have such practical implications and benefits for Canadian farmers as well as the full value chain.”

Funding for this research was provided by RDAR, Alberta Grains, SaskWheat and the International Wheat Yield Partnership.

The post Alberta researcher blazes gene editing trail appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Western Crop Innovations will carry on the Field Crop Development Centre’s substantial legacy, ensuring its work is addressing the issues farmers are facing in the fields,” said RJ Sigurdson, Alberta’s minister of agriculture and irrigation in a news release Wednesday.

The Alberta government pledged $3.2 million to the centre’s establishment, indicating in the news release that some industry support was expected. The relaunch is effective April 1.

The Field Crop Development Centre at Lacombe has been a hub for breeding barley and triticale varieties. The province transitioned it to Olds College in 2021.

Under the leadership of its new board, Western Crop Innovations will review its programming and “where necessary, will be transitioned to ensure crop innovations support Alberta’s farmers’ needs,” the news release said.

The post Alberta barley breeding centre relaunched appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

A lot depends on the weather and markets, but representatives of the soy and pulse industry believe that nitrogen-fixing crops could become 25 percent of total acres in Manitoba.

“We think there should be a legume once every four years (in the rotation),” Daryl Domitruk, executive director of Manitoba Pulse & Soybean Growers, said at the association’s annual meeting held Feb. 14 during the CropConnect conference in Winnipeg.

“In Manitoba, if we have 10 million acres of annual cropland, that’s 2.5 million acres…. We think that it can be anywhere from 1.75 million acres of soybeans and the remainder made up by dry beans and peas.”

Manitoba is the largest dry bean producer in Canada, mostly pinto, navy and black beans.

The 25 percent share for soybeans and pulse crops hasn’t happened yet because soy acres have been highly volatile over the last seven years.

Acres have ranged from 2.3 million acres in 2017 to 900,000 in 2022 and everywhere in between.

Dry growing seasons, novice growers planting varieties that were ill-suited for their farm and disappointing yields pushed acres down from the high point of 2017.

However, soy proponents say the roller coaster may soon calm down.

“If we get out of these dry (growing) seasons we’ve been having, our acres will go up,” said association chair Melvin Rattai, who farms near Beausejour.

Dennis Lange, a soy and pulse specialist with Manitoba Agriculture, is also predicting that soybean acres will stabilize in the coming years. He expects it to settle out at 1.5 to 1.7 million, with an acreage bump in years with strong prices.

Following the annual meeting in Winnipeg, Rattai said there’s a dedicated group of soy growers that represent about one million acres.

The remaining production depends on weather and markets, which are difficult for farmers to control.

What they can control is investment in research, such as development of varieties with improved tolerance of drought and dry conditions.

“We’re starting to see that already…. The breeders are making some progress,” Rattai said.

“They (the newest varieties) can produce more beans with less water.… They are starting to show up.”

Soybean yields in Manitoba were all over the map from 2017-22. The average yield was around 27 bushels in 2019 and then hit a record of 45 bu. in 2022.

That sort of variability creates too much risk so growers will choose canola or wheat instead of soy.

“We’ve invested a lot in drought-tolerant genetics … to stabilize the yield of soybeans,” Domitruk said.

“With science and diligent research, we can get to a stable yield…. I think a warming climate is going to help us. Soybeans, they thrive in that (heat).”

More research is needed to reduce yield volatility, but another opportunity could lift up the province’s soy industry.

A number of growers are experimenting with identity preserved (IP), or food grade, soybeans, which are used to make tofu and other products.

“I just finished a trade mission to Japan.… That is the high-end market that we need to access,” Rattai said.

“They’re using our beans already. They just want more of the IP beans.”

IP soybeans are not genetically modified and don’t come with herbicide tolerance, making them more challenging to grow.

Last year, Rattai planted IP soybeans for the first time on his farm and the crop was a success.

In comparison to Roundup Ready beans, yields were only five percent lower.

“We had a 55 bushel crop… With the new varieties coming out, they’re going to compete very well with the GMO (beans).”

One unknown for Manitoba soybean acres will be demand from renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) refineries in North America.

Azure Sustainable Fuels, a Calgary company, is looking at building a SAF plant in Portage la Prairie, Man., which could produce 20,000 barrels of aviation fuel per day.

The project is still at the design and engineering stage, but if Azure can raise the funds to build the $1.9 billion plant, demand for soybean and canola oil could skyrocket in Manitoba.

—Robert Arnason writes for the Western Producer from Manitoba.

The post Soybean acres may soon stabilize in Manitoba appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Though many within the agriculture industry praised the decision as a win for crop breeders, and Canadians more generally, some academic researchers question whether individuals in the public sector will be able to seize the opportunity.

At issue for researchers is the fact that many end markets have taken a different regulatory stance than Canada on gene editing, and there is an ever-shrinking pool of research dollars.

Stuart Smyth, associate professor and chair of Agri-Food Innovation and Sustainability Enhancement at the University of Saskatchewan, is a long-time advocate of gene editing and other biotechnologies in agriculture.

For Smyth, the decisions made by Health Canada and AAFC bring a number of benefits, including support of Canadian farmers’ competitiveness compared to other countries that had previously adopted a similar regulatory classification – specifically Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and the United States. It also reduces the time it takes to develop new crop varieties from a decade or more to as little as three years.

With such potential in mind, Smyth expresses frustration over a steady decline in how much researchers have been able to squeeze from every government dollar.

“The biggest challenge is there is less funding year over year. There has been no real increase over the last couple decades, as budgets are held constant while inflation happens. There’s less to go around,” he says.

“It doesn’t matter who is applying … that ratchets up the competition. Either fewer projects get selected or the same number of projects get funded and projects need to scale back.”

Smyth’s overarching concern is, as the value of current research investment diminishes, Canadian farmers and businesses will face an increasing disadvantage internationally.

He considers commodity groups and other stakeholders within the agriculture sector to be in a better position when it comes to supporting crop breeders. Continued efforts to make the public aware of and interested in gene editing technologies, and how it could benefit them, would provide more incentive and opportunity for all stakeholders to invest in gene editing projects.

“The days of expecting the federal government to fund everything are gone. We need public-private and producer partnerships,” says Smyth.

“Everybody is at the table, but I think the federal government needs to signal that movement. If the feds are not providing any new grant opportunities, there’s less incentive there for others to make commitments.”

Challenging policies

Funding shortfalls aside, Smyth says some crop breeders are also hesitant to adopt gene editing for practical reasons, such as the costs and complexities incurred from retrofitting old labs. Not every breeder wants to deal with that, particularly those who might be closer to retirement.

Those working on crops destined for markets where gene editing is regulated differently than in Canada is another concern.

Indeed, it’s one Istvan Rajcan, professor of soybean breeding and genetics at the University of Guelph, knows well. He focuses entirely on food grade soybeans in his research program, and soybeans are commonly exported to markets in Europe, Japan, China and elsewhere. The classification of gene edited crops as genetically modified organisms in those markets is a persistent barrier.

“It boils down to where the markets are for the crops each individual plant breeder develops. That’s the main reason for me not using gene editing. It’s simply a practical decision,” says Rajcan, adding he does appreciate and see value in the technology.

“It just wouldn’t make sense. What’s the point of me developing a cultivar that Ontario farmers can grow, but has an issue exporting? I’ve never applied for funding for gene editing for this reason.”

Rajcan says he would consider projects involving gene editing if the regulatory environments in main export countries were to change. In Europe, at least, they might. How gene edited crops are classified is again being debated in the political block, after the European Commission submitted a proposal this summer to align legislation with new developments in biotechnology. The proposal reads as follows:

“New Genomic Techniques (NGT) are innovative tools that help increase the sustainability and resilience of our food system. They allow developing improved plant varieties that are climate resilient, pest resistant, that require less fertilisers and pesticides and can ensure higher yields, helping to cut the use and risk of chemical pesticides in half, and reducing the EU’s dependency on agricultural imports.

“In most cases, these new techniques lead to more targeted, precise, and faster changes than conventional techniques, while growing a crop that is the same as what could have been achieved with classic techniques like seed selection and crossbreeding.

“Our proposal will establish two categories of plants obtained by NGTs: NGT plants comparable to naturally occurring or conventional plants, and NGT plants with more complex modifications;

both categories will be subject to different requirements to reach the market, taking into account their different characteristics and risk profiles. The plants from the first category will need to be notified. The plants from the second category will go through the more extensive process of the GMO directive.”

Both Rajcan and Smyth find such developments encouraging. But for the time being, any gene edited crops and potential royalties from gene edited varieties will be limited to markets in Canada, the United States and other countries with similar gene editing regulations.

“I’m always a bit more of an optimist. Over the next few years we may see more gene editing being used as the European Union opens up to these technologies,” says Smyth.

“That might give some leverage for gene editing research in Canada.”

– Matt McIntosh is a contributor to Glacier FarmMedia.

The post Where are public sector gene editing projects? appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“It really highlights that we can bring these technologies together to improve genetic gain in the crops of the future,” said Lee Hickey, an associate professor and crop geneticist at the University of Queensland in Australia.

“Integration with genomic selection requires bigger databases and major operational changes but it can lead to bigger gains.”

Crop breeders can use speed breeding to produce six generations of wheat (or four of canola) in the time it takes to breed one generation using traditional field breeding, said Hickey, adding the basic process is well established.

Over the past 10 years his research team and partners have developed protocols for using the technology on a wide range of crops including wheat, barley, canola, oats and peas. In a nutshell, speed breeding involves exposing plants to enforced lighting (mainly by LEDs) and temperature control 22 hours per day, giving the plants just two hours to rest.

At the University of Queensland, the process is conducted in a specially modified greenhouse. Control over lighting and heat differentiates speed breeding from standard greenhouse breeding, which relies on highly variable natural light, said Hickey during a presentation at the recent virtual Canola Week.

“I think there’s plenty of room for optimization to improve efficiencies in this protocol and build on this for canola breeding and pre-breeding programs,” he added.

The concept dates back to the 1980s when NASA funded research on breeding wheat on the International Space Station. Utah State University picked up the ball by doing fundamentally the same thing on Earth.

“The research done by Utah State University exposed the plants to continuous light which triggers the wheat plants into flowering earlier so you can grow a vast crop of wheat,” said Hickey.

It allows six generations of wheat to be bred in a single year as opposed to two generations per year using high-volume “shuttle” breeding (growing one generation in the Northern Hemisphere and the next in the Southern Hemisphere) or a single generation using traditional breeding. It typically takes six to eight generations after crossing to develop a cultivar.

Hickey compared the results of the 22-hour lighting protocol versus 16 hours (a standard photoperiod many researchers use for pushing generations) on canola. The number of days until first flower opening, days until drying and days until harvest were all lower when 22 hours of daily lighting were used compared to 16 hours.

Flowering duration was much lower at just over 20 days with the 22-hour protocol compared to just over 60 days with 16 hours.

“The plants flower earlier and you can essentially harvest these materials sooner,” he said.

The 22-hour canola was shorter by about half a metre compared to its 16-hour counterparts, but Hickey considers this to be a feature rather than a flaw.

“Generating smaller plants is really important for packing more plants into a smaller space,” he said.

His university partnered with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) to simulate how integrating speed breeding tools — in this case a fast-tracked genomic selection tool — can impact genetic gain in wheat over 30 years. The result was a 34 per cent genetic gain over conventional breeding, the equivalent of over 1,000 extra loaves of bread per hectare.

“It really highlights that we can bring these technologies together to improve genetic gain in the crops of the future,” said Hickey. “Integration with genomic selection requires bigger databases and major operational changes but it can lead to bigger gains.”

The basic principles are the same for virtually any crop (protocols have been developed for sorghum, millet, pigeon feed and even banana and eucalyptus) and can be done in a space as small as a shipping container for a reasonable price, he said. However, some elements are needed regardless of scale.

“Getting a lighting system and high-quality LEDs are important,” he said. “You need to be aware of the cooling capacity and the biological constraints that you’re facing. Automate everything wherever possible; automating irrigation and nutrient delivery can really reduce the cost.”

That’s good news for small research programs.

“We were thinking out of the box a little bit on how we can deliver these sort of systems and technology to breeding programs that have less resources,” said Hickey. “We came on this idea of speed breeding capsules. They’re glorified shipping containers with solar panels essentially.”

The Queensland team is sharing its research and has produced something of a “how-to” guide, he added.

“In recent years we’ve received a lot of requests for the protocols,” said Hickey. “(There’s an) urgency to speed up all of our crop improvement. Our programs around the world have certainly elevated in recent years around climate change. Also, people just want to be more efficient.”

Speed breeding can bolster both transgenic (GMO) and gene editing pipelines, he said.

“I think there’s a real opportunity around integrating these tools and technologies for better and more efficient outcomes. At the end of the day this is about validating new traits faster, it’s about delivering these new traits into farmers’ fields faster.”

The post When it comes to new varieties, there’s a need for speed, says breeder appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.