Plant diseases, global food security and the role of R. Glenn Anderson

Abstract

R. Glenn Anderson was Norman Borlaug’s ‘green fingered agricultural scientist’ and a humanitarian who captained the wheat revolution in India during the 1960s. Afterwards, he directed the CIMMYT International Wheat Program where he was instrumental in establishing increased wheat disease surveys, broadening of the wheat genetic diversity for adaptation and disease resistance. He institutionalized multi-location yield and disease testing/analysis and regional breeding programmes, as well as strengthening the training of young scientists. Aspects of his work and other issues will be discussed in relation to present day global food security.

Résumé

R. Glenn Anderson était pour Norman Borlaug « le scientifique agricole au pouce vert » et un humanitaire qui a piloté la révolution du blé en Inde durant les années 1960. Par la suite, il a dirigé le programme international d’amélioration du blé du CIMMYT où il a joué un rôle clé dans l’accroissement du nombre d’études sur le blé ainsi que dans l’élargissement de la diversité génétique chez le blé en vue de son adaptation et de sa résistance aux maladies. Il a institutionnalisé l’analyse multilocale des rendements et des maladies ainsi que les programmes régionaux de sélection. Il a de plus bonifié la formation des jeunes scientifiques. Des aspects de ses travaux de même que d’autres sujets relatifs à l’état actuel de la sécurité alimentaire mondiale seront discutés.

Keywords:

• CIMMYT
• food security
• Green Revolution, R. Glenn Anderson
• Rockefeller Foundation
• wheat diseases

Mots clés:

• CIMMYT
• Fondation Rockefeller
• maladies du blé
• révolution verte
• R. Glenn Anderson
• sécurité alimentaire

Introduction

We have chosen to talk about Dr Glenn Anderson and his achievements after the era often called the ‘Green Revolution’. The initial Anderson lecture, given by Dr Norman Borlaug, at the 1990 joint American Phytopathological Society/Canadian Phytopathological Society (APS/CPS) meeting presented in detail Glenn’s contribution to food security in South Asia in the 1960s to early 1970s (Borlaug, 1992). Given that 28 years have passed since that presentation, it is likely that only the ‘geriatric’ generation of plant pathologists will recall what an outstanding humanist, scientist and administrator Dr Glenn Anderson was. Thus, instead of talking about rust research – past, present and future (which will be amply covered at this meeting), we talk mostly about Glenn, the person, and his contributions to agriculture and humanity as well as science and what he might say about today’s world situation. Without these special kinds of people, the world would certainly be a poorer place in all ways. In the end, all that we do is for people and a better world (Terry, 1999).

Glenn was raised on a small grain and livestock farm in Ontario, Canada. His farm background served him well for his later work in South Asia. He served in the Royal Canadian Air Force during WWII and obtained a BS (Agriculture) in entomology at the University of Manitoba in 1950. Later, Glenn obtained a PhD in plant breeding and genetics at the University of Saskatchewan in 1955. He joined Agriculture Canada in Winnipeg where he worked on genetics of rust and smuts. He had first-hand experience in the race 15B stem rust epidemics of the 1950s and understood the disastrous effects diseases could have on wheat. He spent 11 years working on rust and smut resistance in Canada (Anonymous, 1982; Higgins, 1986).

Dr Anderson was a wheat breeder cum pathologist who headed the Coordinated International Wheat Program for Rockefeller Foundation, Indian Council of Agricultural Research and, later after its creation, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT in Spanish) in India, 1964–1970 (Fig. 1). It was the era of Malthusian fears, and famine was threatening due to drought in South Asia. He was Borlaug’s ‘General Eisenhower’ on the frontline in Asia that launched the ‘Green Revolution’.

Fig. 1 Glenn Anderson, et al. India, ca. 1963. Left to right – Wayne Freeman, unknown, Norman Borlaug, Glenn Anderson, S. P. Kohli (Source: Rockefeller Foundation).

In 1971, Dr Anderson moved to Mexico to become Associate Director of the CIMMYT International Wheat Program and in 1979, upon Norman Borlaug’s retirement, he became the Director. In February 1981, while travelling in Africa for CIMMYT, he became ill, was diagnosed with leukaemia, and died about one week later at his home in Winnipeg, Canada. It was a sudden, terrible tragedy for his family, all those who knew him, and for humanity (Borlaug, 1992).

Dr Norman Borlaug in his 1990 memorial talk at the APS/CPS meeting called Dr Glenn Anderson a ‘green fingered agricultural scientist in the broadest context’, an excellent judge of human character with infectious enthusiasm and motivation (Borlaug, 1992). He was a dedicated trainer with an ability to identify young scientists with potential. Glenn was able to stimulate those whose job it was to increase crop productivity. At the same time, he had little patience with status quo, bureaucracy and lethargy. Dr Borlaug concluded by saying Dr Anderson was the ‘best all around wheat scientist in the world’ (Borlaug, 1992). It is instructive to quote a portion of Dr Borlaug’s job description for Dr Anderson’s position in India – ‘This type of individual must not only be a top scientist, but also a “doer”. He must be able to act as a catalyst and stimulate young scientists. He must have great physical stamina and he must not accept defeat; he must fight back when things look dark. There is a great wealth of scientific talent in India that can be brought to bear upon the research problems and wheat production problems, if the right coordinator is found who can bring about this chain reaction’ (Borlaug, 1963). This was Glenn Anderson.

As we briefly note Dr Anderson’s contributions post ‘Green Revolution’, it is important to realize that all of the achievements were based on genuine interdisciplinary teamwork including the generation of wheat germplasm. Dr Anderson always emphasized that teamwork produced the best results. During the 1970s, after Dr Anderson became Associate Director of the CIMMYT International Wheat Program, Dr Borlaug travelled a great deal, and because of the awarding of the Nobel Prize, had to meet with government leaders, policymakers, the press and donors among others. Dr Anderson had a free hand and, with CIMMYT’s Wheat Program leaders, took the initiative to continue and amplify the technical and training programmes into an ever ‘Green Revolution’. His guidance, and distinctly caring leadership, was the key to the success of these initiatives and results from the 1970s into the 1980s and beyond. This was a major growth period for the wheat programme.

Anderson’s contributions as director of the CIMMYT International Wheat Program

Overview

Dr Anderson, from experience, realized that to really make an impact such as that seen in South Asia in other key wheat producing areas of the less developed countries, he needed boots on the ground and staff placed in countries or regions. They all had to work hand in hand with the national programme scientists and administrators. He knew that well-trained, young, field-oriented scientists were required, as well as improved germplasm and appropriate technology. As an all-round wheat scientist, he also wanted to document as many reliable field observations over time and space as possible, in the shortest time. This meant hiring staff, increasing germplasm flows, data collection and analysis. Multi-location testing had started and needed to be augmented. Increasing pathology staff for screening of additional diseases besides rust was necessary as well. At the same time, laboratories such as soils, grain quality, biochemistry and cytogenetics were strengthened. Dr Anderson honed in on all of these issues with his programme heads.

Thus, starting in the late 1960s and the decade of the 1970s, young international staff were employed in diverse disciplines and a 6-month long field-oriented wheat training course was formalized and expanded. As the staff grew, regional programmes were initiated in the Andean region and southern cone of South America, North Africa, Middle East, East Africa and West Africa. These programmes were modelled on the original country programmes in India and Pakistan of the 1960s. Breeders, pathologists, agronomists as well as allied disciplines were brought in from many nations. Through the training programme and international wheat seed shipments, data and note-taking were standardized in the national wheat programmes in the developing world. Consequently, multi-location data could be analysed statistically over time and space. This was a critical step forward for breeding programmes over large areas. Training of young field-oriented scientists was prioritized. Additionally, a better understanding of the disease situation was clarified with the start of disease surveillance nurseries in North Africa and the Middle East as well as in South America. These were modelled on the USDA International Spring Wheat Rust Nursery (Anderson, 1974). There had been FAO rust nurseries in the Near East since 1952. Dr Anderson continually travelled to the outreach programmes to give support whenever needed, as seen in Fig. 2 in Bangladesh, one of the great warmer climate wheat production success stories (Borlaug, 1992).

Fig. 2 Glenn Anderson in Bangladesh wheat field, ca. 1978 (Source: Hugo Vivar, CIMMYT).

The International Spring Wheat Yield Nursery was started in 1964 by Dr Borlaug and was expanded during the late 1960s into the 1970s and finally ended in 1994 when many more ecologically focused nurseries were developed (Byerlee & Dubin, 2010). Genetic research on rust resistance and types of resistance were initiated. As regional information began to flow into headquarters, studies were started on other diseases of wheat, such as foliar blights, Barley yellow dwarf virus, soil-borne diseases, as well as abiotic stresses, such as drought, heat and aluminium tolerance. Concurrently, increased effort was given to breeding methodology and broadening the genetic base of the germplasm via use of winter wheat, alien species and wheat progenitors. Wide crosses, cytogenetics, statistical analysis, computerization, small grain agronomy and crop physiology were also emphasized.

Human resource development in the CIMMYT International Wheat Program and National Agricultural Research Systems (NARSs)

As the programme grew, so did the number of staff, including international senior, postdoctoral and national researchers. The increase started in the late 1960s and peaked in the mid 1980s, and then decreased slightly for some years (Heisey et al., 2002). Disciplines that received the most increase were: breeding, pathology, training, wide crosses and cytogenetics, agronomy and the international nursery programme. Staffing in support of national and regional programmes in South America, in the southern cone, based in Chile, and in the Andean region, based in Ecuador, commenced. In the Middle East, the Turkish programme in winter wheat was strengthened as was the programme in North Africa and West Africa, located in Portugal. Increased pathology support in the region was based in Lebanon and then Egypt. The eastern and southern Africa programme was opened in Kenya with a focus on rust resistance breeding. During this time, many post-doctoral fellows worked in the wheat programme and many moved into new positions at CIMMYT. Of those who did not, significant numbers stayed in international development and played major roles nationally or internationally in wheat or other crops.

Drs Borlaug and Anderson knew that well-trained, young scientists were imperative to the success of the new programme. Coupled with proper technology, good extension and appropriate policy, they were the key to increased production. Dr Anderson amplified support to the 6-month field-oriented training course to accommodate more students. By 1980, more than 50 students from 25 countries were in training (Fig. 3). Drs Borlaug and Anderson even participated in rust readings as well as evening inoculations of the nurseries with the trainees. Regrettably, to this day, funding and field-oriented training is lacking for breeders at universities and international agricultural centres. The 6-month course served as a means to identify excellent students, the best of whom went on to do graduate studies. Many later became leaders in NARSs in places  like Bangladesh, Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia, Turkey and others.

Fig. 3 Number of wheat programme trainees in Mexico and their countries of origin, 1968–2007. (Source: Byerlee & Dubin, 2010).

Breeding – traditional, wide crosses, alien gene introgression

During Dr Anderson’s management of the Wheat Program, many ideas began to bear fruit. Strategies were discussed and experiments done to guide breeders on how to obtain wheat production increases with reasonable stability over large areas. We will touch on several of the major ones. First, a significant effort was made to enlarge the gene pool through increased number of crosses between spring wheat (SW) and winter wheat (WW) in Mexico. Winter wheat genotypes were used in the cooperating WW programme at Oregon State University and CIMMYT utilized the SW in the base programme for spring wheat genotypes. Increased diversity was obtained for adaptation, disease resistance and abiotic stresses. As an example, the wheat germplasm ‘Veery’ group showed very significant yield increases and broader adaptation coupled with yield stability. In ‘Veery’, the stem rust resistance gene Sr31, from rye, lasted over 20 years before it was overcome in East Africa. Genetic diversity has also been increased in the advanced germplasm starting in the early 1980s (Smale et al., 2002). Increased effort was made to incorporate other alien genes into wheat from rye and wild grasses, especially for rust resistance. Initial work with synthetic hexaploid wheat was started during the late 1970s. Many useful genes, for biotic and abiotic stresses plus other useful characters, have come from these crosses (Ogbonnaya, 2011).

Multi-location testing and Mega-Environments (MEs)

The increased distribution of wheat germplasm over large areas and different environments indicated the need to classify the distinct areas in which wheat was grown. This information, which came from the international nurseries, was used to describe the areas for improving the wheat germplasm. Over the years, better agro-climatic data as well as biotic and abiotic stress data were accumulated. The term, mega-environments, coined by Donald Winkelmann, an economist at CIMMYT, was used to classify a series of environments that are similar agro-climatically and biologically over large geographic areas. The use of MEs to help focus the crosses in the international breeding programme is still of great importance today (Rajaram et al., 1994).

As the CIMMYT mandate expanded to cover more NARSs, so did the types of experimental seed breeding nurseries shipped to cooperators (Table 1) and number of nurseries shipped (Fig. 4). The International Wheat Improvement Network (IWIN) was created to collate, analyse and distribute the information to the world wheat community (Payne, 2002; Byerlee & Dubin, 2010). Disease incidence over sites and years produced data that supported the ME and disease epidemiological unit classification (Rajaram et al., 1994). This was facilitated by the development of the disease surveillance and screening nurseries for Middle East and North Africa as well as for Latin America in conjunction with NARSs (Anderson, 1974). The great success of the IWIN has recently created a call to develop a Global Crop Improvement Network (Reynolds et al., 2018).

Table 1. Evolution of types of international experimental wheat seed nurseries, 1960s–1980s.

Decade	Focus	Main nurseries added
1960s Pre-CIMMYT & early CIMMYT [1966]	Provide best available wheat germplasm to cooperating programmes with broad adaptation, high yield potential, and multiple disease resistance and test these qualities over time and space.	International Spring Wheat Yield Nursery; International Durum Yield Nursery; International Bread Wheat Screening Nursery; International Triticale Yield Nursery; International Triticale Screening Nursery.
1970’s CIMMYT era	Provide high yielding, broadly adapted, daylength insensitive, multiple disease resistant germplasm. Start of spring × winter wheat breeding programme. Earlier nurseries continue with additional ones as needs are determined. Specialty nurseries especially for disease resistance.	Crossing blocks; F2s Irrigated and Dryland; International Septoria Screening Nursery; Elite Spring Wheat Yield Trial; Regional Disease Trap Nursery.
1980s	As before but with additional adaptation for diverse environments. Designated as Mega-environments. Large UNDP programme on wheat for non-traditional, warmer climates.	Semi-Arid Wheat Screening Nursery; Acid Soils Wheat Screening Nursery; High Rainfall Wheat Screening Nursery; International Disease Trap Nursery; Karnal Bunt Screening Nursery.

Source: Modified from Byerlee & Dubin (2010).

Fig. 4 Number of international experimental wheat seed nurseries shipped in 1970’s-2000’s (Source: Byerlee & Dubin, 2010).

Pathology and breeding for disease resistance

The main thrust of the applied pathology research in the CIMMYT Wheat Program was to support the breeding programme with increased and more durable type of resistance. However, aetiology, epidemiology and fungicide research was also concurrently carried out wherever possible. Initial work at CIMMYT, Mexico, started with rust race identification and studies of stem and leaf rust race-specific resistance genes in the programme germplasm. The goal was to pyramid as many of the useful genes as possible. The work was expanded in the 1970s with increased pathology staff and excellent cooperation with rust programmes in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, UK and the USA. Before others, Dr Anderson was worried about stripe (yellow) rust and other, so called, minor diseases. The support of the Dutch government for a period of 10 years in training national programme staff and research on stripe rust races and epidemiology was especially notable (Stubbs, 1988). In the mid-1970s, the authors started research on slow rusting resistance to leaf rust, based on observations from colleagues like Ralph Caldwell (Professor, Purdue University) as well as the literature, with the goal of finding more durable resistance (Dubin & Brennan, 2009). These studies led to incorporation of several slow rusting resistance genes in the CIMMYT germplasm (Rajaram et al., 1988; Singh et al., 2004). Later, genetic studies identified these genes and significant progress has been made on the unique modes of action of this type of durable resistance and its introgression into wheat germplasm (Krattinger et al., 2009). Gene introgression, from other grass species into wheat, for rust resistance, has also been very useful for longer lasting resistance but also has been short lived in many cases. Multilocation testing and use of ‘hot spot locations’ where the virulence spectrum of rusts was diverse helped to produce longer lasting resistance combinations. Key areas continue to be the Kenyan and Ecuadorian highlands for stem and stripe rust, respectively (Rajaram et al., 1988).

Global food security and Glenn Anderson

Dr Anderson had realized in the early 1970s that India’s population would continue to increase rapidly and could reach 1.5 billion people at some future date. He also believed that, if natural resources like soil, water and inputs like germplasm and fertilizer were well managed and sufficient investments were provided in scientific research, as well as sound government policy, India could remain self sufficient in food production.

Currently, India’s population is 1.3 billion and is projected to increase to 1.7 billion by 2050. In the late 1960s, the population growth rate was 2.1% and in 2018 it is estimated to be 1.1%, a remarkable decrease. However, India is still expected to surpass China’s population by 2028 (United Nations, 2018).

The question we pose is – what would Glenn do in the current and future global scenario? One of the most pressing issues today for global food security is the estimated continuing world population increase from 7.4 billion in 2015 to 9.8 billion by 2050. Today, more than 800 million still go hungry. Africa is especially critical in this regard. Although we see population increases as one of the key factors in food security, others consider population less important today than previously, based on the decrease in wheat consumption in recent years except in areas that do not produce wheat. Stabilizing crop yields in the face of climate change and biotic and abiotic stresses is critically important as well. Global warming will be most devastating for agricultural production in parts of the tropical and sub-tropical countries including South Asia, southern Africa, parts of South America and Caribbean. The frequency of high temperatures, freezing, droughts, flooding and salinity will have disastrous consequences for food production especially grains, roots, fibre and forage crops.

How would Glenn have reacted to these issues? He was keenly aware of the ‘population monster’ and of many other issues that still exist today that he faced, like policy, infrastructure, agricultural research (especially yield gap), education, harvest losses and others. Less obvious at that time were issues such as overuse of inputs, social/gender issues and urbanization. His overriding focus was alleviating hunger in time of famine. Climate change and its disastrous effects on the natural resource base were not yet on the horizon.

Some of the problems noted above that were immediate for Dr Anderson in India, in the 1960s, were drought, water availability, poor fertility of the Indian soils and on top of that a huge government bureaucracy. His response was to develop a strong, multidisciplinary and coordinated team of geneticists, plant breeders, agronomists, pathologists, soil scientists, farmers, seed producers and policymakers from different institutions in the states across India. The result was the ‘Green Revolution’.

We believe that the solution for the food security problems worldwide is similar. It will require increased cooperation and coordinated efforts on the part of the international community in relation to the factors noted in order to provide adequate food for the coming generations.

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the CPS/ICPP2018 for the invitation and financial support to present the Glenn Anderson lecture, and the CPS for publication of the presentation. We also thank Brent McCallum for his help. We thank J. P. Gustafson and M. A. McMahon for their comments and inputs on the manuscript. We also are grateful to D. Byerlee and R. DePauw for their role as reviewers. Any inadvertent errors in the manuscript are the sole responsibility of the authors.