Proceedings of the 10th Banana Asia Pacific …banana-networks.org/Bapnet/files/2017/12/Full...7....

Proceedings of the 10th Banana Asia Pacific

Network Steering Committee Meeting

Yanling Hotel, Guangzhou, China 23-26 August 2016

10th BAPNET Steering Committee meeting

1 23- 26 September 2016

Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________ 2

1.1 BACKGROUND ___________________________________________________________________ 2 1.2 MEETING OBJECTIVES: ____________________________________________________________ 2 1.3 MEETING SUMMARY: ______________________________________________________________ 3

2 INTRODUCTIONS AND DELEGATE PRESENTATIONS ___________________________________ 4

OPENING REMARKS ____________________________________________________________________ 4

3 WORKSHOP PROPER ______________________________________________________________ 5

COUNTRY REPORTS _________________________________________________________________ 5 3.1 CHINA_________________________________________________________________________ 5 3.2 PHILIPPINES ____________________________________________________________________ 5 3.3 AUSTRALIA _____________________________________________________________________ 6 3.4 INDIA _________________________________________________________________________ 7 3.5 INDONESIA _____________________________________________________________________ 7 3.6 TAIWAN _______________________________________________________________________ 8 3.7 VIETNAM _______________________________________________________________________ 8 3.8 MALAYSIA ______________________________________________________________________ 9 EXTERNAL PRESENTATIONS: ________________________________________________________ 10 3.9 AC4 TR4 – AFRICAN CONSORTIUM FOR TR4: __________________________________________ 10 3.10 COSTA RICA (CORBANA) _______________________________________________________ 10 3.11 PROGRAM/ACTIVITIES OF FAO _____________________________________________________ 11 3.12 FOC TR4 PROGRAMME OF TFNET IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC ___________________________________ 12

4 WORKSHOP DISCUSSIONS ON A) PREVENTION OF PREAD AND B) MANAGEMENT OF FOC TR4 IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC ______________________________________________________________ 14

4.1 GROUP 1: MANAGEMENT _________________________________________________________ 14 4.2 GROUP 2 PREVENTION __________________________________________________________ 15

4.2.1 Discussions _______________________________________________________________ 15 4.2.2 TR4 INCURSION MANAGEMENT PLAN _______________________________________ 18

4.3 WORKSHOP PLENARY ____________________________________________________________ 22

5 ANNEXES: _____________________________________________________________________ XXIV

5.1.1 Annex 1 List of participants ________________________________________________ xxiv 5.1.2 Annex 2: Provisional meeting programme ___________________________________ xxix 5.1.3 Annex 3: Meeting press release ___________________________________________ xxxii 5.1.4 Annex 5: BAPNET meeting presentations ___________________________________ xxxiii


2 23- 26 September 2016

1 Introduction 1.1 Background Bananas continue to be a significant food security, livelihood and subsistence crop for millions of households across the Asia-Pacific. Amongst many factors that seriously constrain productivity, banana Fusarium wilt, caused by the fungus Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense (Foc) today poses a key threat, particularly the virulent strain Tropical Race 4 (TR4).

Convened by Bioversity International/BAPNET and deliberating from 23 to 26 August 2016, the 10th Banana Asia-Pacific Network (BAPNET1) Steering Committee meeting was hosted by the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GDAAS), China, and attended by more than 40 delegates representing 11 Asian countries2, 2 international cooperating partners3 and 4 regional and international networks4.

In view of the serious threat posed by Foc TR4, the meeting focused on containing the disease, first discovered in Indonesia in 1990 and subsequently spreading to Malaysia, the Philippines, and China, causing considerable damage to Cavendish bananas and certain locally grown varieties over the last two decades. In 2013-2014, Foc TR4 was found outside Southeast Asia for the first time, when it was discovered in Oman, Mozambique, Jordan, Lebanon and Pakistan. In 2015, Foc TR4 was found in Queensland, Australia, and in 2016 in Vietnam and India (as reported in this BAPNET Meeting), with unconfirmed reports from Laos and Myanmar. These constitute a major threat to bananas globally, as Foc TR4 has a wider host range than any other form of Foc. It is highly virulent to Cavendish bananas, which constitute 45% of bananas grown globally. The epidemics of Foc TR4 in the Philippines, the number 1 Cavendish exporter in Asia, as well as the epidemics in China, whose banana production constitutes 90% Cavendish, represents a huge threat to the banana industry of these countries. The very recent discovery of Foc TR4 in India, the largest producer of bananas worldwide, is further threatening people’s livelihoods and food security.

To address the serious concerns about the spread of Foc TR4 in Asia, its impact and mitigation of this threat, a stakeholder workshop was held, focusing on the theme: “Research and Programs on the Prevention of Spread and Management of Foc TR4 in Asia and the Pacific.”

1.2 Meeting Objectives: 1. To hold detailed discussions on how best to collaboratively address the threat of Foc

TR4 to banana within highly specific and varying Asia-Pacific contexts

2. To strengthen concerned stakeholders’ and countries’ commitments and resolve to collaboratively address this threat

3. In the form of a draft action plan, to develop country and sub-region recommendations on how to effectively:

1 BAPNET is a regional network of the National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) of 12 countries and two institutions from the Asia-Pacific region. It coordinated by Bioversity and guided by a Steering Committee of NARS leaders from member countries. 2 Australia; Bangladesh; Fiji; India; Indonesia; Malaysia; Papua New Guinea; the Philippines; Taiwan; Thailand; Vietnam 3 FAO (Asia Pacific), Stellenbosch University (South Africa) 4 Bioversity/BAPNET; CORBANA, Costa Rica; Secretariat of the??? Pacific Community (SPC); Tropical Fruit network (TFNET);


3 23- 26 September 2016

a. prevent further spread of Foc TR4 into pathogen-free areas b. manage Foc TR4 within already infected areas and mitigate the effects of the

disease, including building capacities and raising awareness on presence and management.

1.3 Meeting summary: As listed below, after official welcomes, those countries with most serious Foc challenges presented their country reports, articulating ongoing Foc research and research needs, and delegates then heard from international invited speakers. Two parallel workshops discussed Fusarium wilt prevention and mitigation respectively, concluding with drafting a BAPNET Declaration that will include a strategy for regional Foc TR4 prevention, mitigation and management concepts, to underscore the need for a strengthened regional R&D collaborative program. The declaration also sought the support of regional and international institutions and donors (see Annex x for draft declaration). The workshop shared disease management technologies developed by each NARS, including positive outcomes in deploying disease-resistant somaclonal variants from the Taiwan Banana Research Institute introduced and evaluated by Bioversity International and national partners in managing and rehabilitating severely affected farms in the Philippines. The group recognized the importance and feasibility of tissue-culture somaclonal variant selection in combination with disease suppression strategies as a banana improvement approach in countries where TR4 is endemic.

During the meeting, the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GDAAS) also provided a night-time riverboat trip and a field trip to visit their state-of-the-art laboratories, research station and banana collection.

(For details, see Annex for full meeting programme):

1. Introductions and opening messages 2. Overview of the Status of Foc TR4 (BAPNET Coordinator, Bioversity International in

Asia and the Pacific); 3. Country reports: China; Philippines; Australia; India; Indonesia; Taiwan, Vietnam;

Malaysia; 4. AC4-TR4 Programme in Africa 5. MUSALAC program on prevention of incursion of Foc TR4 in the Americas and

Caribbean- CORBANA 6. Regional Program/Activities of FAO – Asia & the Pacific in relation to quarantine of

diseases in the region 7. Foc TR4 Program of Tropical Fruit Network (TFNet) in addressing Foc TR4 in Asia-

Pacific Region 8. WORKSHOP: Research & Programs on Prevention of Spread & Management of Foc

TR4 in Asia & the Pacific Breakout Groups

a. Group 1 - Foc prevention of spread and associated research & policies b. Group 2 - R&D on management and mitigation of Foc TR4 c. Presentation of workshop outputs from groups 1 & 2, and plans for next steps

on research for the region


4 23- 26 September 2016

9. Revisit the status of BAPNET relative to its role, structure and resource partnerships in responding to the threat of Foc TR4 in Asia & the Pacific

10. Field visit to GDAAS banana research facilities

2 Introductions and delegate presentations Opening Remarks

After briefly introducing the meeting objectives, thanking the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GDAAS) for their hospitality and welcoming delegates, facilitator Vincent Johnson of Bioversity invited Dr Yi Ganjun (易干军), Vice-President of the host organisation, GDAAS to open the meeting. GDAAS embraces 17 different institutes, researching areas such as rice, fruits, economics, animal sciences, processing research, and genetics. Dr Yi highlighted the critical importance of bananas both for China (as the world’s second largest banana producer) and the Asia-Pacific. He also stressed the need for even stronger international collaboration, especially linked to the roles of the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture and National Science Foundation, bilateral cooperation with other countries, partly facilitated by BAPNET and networking with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). At the end of the session Dr Yi also introduced the attending Chinese research programme graduates, impressively remembering all their names.

Dr Huang from the Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciencesarticulated China’s national and local government support for banana research, mentioning banana's importance within Guangdong, whose largely Cavendish production is now seriously threatened by Foc TR4. He referred to Chinese research efforts in breeding and technology, with new promising Foc-resistant cultivars in the pipeline, also stressing that stronger research for bananas was needed. He finished by thanking BAPNET for the anticipated meeting recommendations for solving the Foc problem and inviting delegates to enjoy the delights of Guangzhou and its world-famous gastronomy.

Representing Dr Stephan Weise (Research Director for Bioversity International) Dr Kumar (Bioversity Asia’s regional representative, based in India) reaffirmed Bioversity’s support for BAPNET, and offered a vote of thanks to GDAAS. Dr Weise referred to the 2009 ProMusa Symposium, also hosted by GDAAS, as a ‘gold standard’, and mentioned how impressively Musa research at GDAAS has taken off and now has solid roots, generating results that are of global interest. He also acknowledged Gus Molina’s successful BAPNET coordination track-record, and regional strategic leadership, citing particularly Gus’ passion in addressing banana diseases, particularly regarding TR4. It was announced that Gus has agreed to remain as BAPNET coordinator until December 2016, by when his successor will hopefully have been appointed.

As BAPNET coordinator, Dr Agustin Molina alluded to the 18-year history of the network, stressing that the real strength of BAPNET lies in its members and links to external stakeholders. He also expressed satisfaction that each TR4-affected member-country is now actively researching banana diseases, funded by their national governments, particularly highlighting the strong Foc research investments by Australia and the Philippines. After acknowledging international partners from Latin America (CORBANA); Stellenbosch University, South Africa; TFNet-Asia and FAO-Asia, Dr Molina introduced the attending BAPNET SC members, and concluded with the epilogue, "Although I say that I am retiring, my heart will not retire because banana research is my passion."


5 23- 26 September 2016

Before the break, delegates posed for the meeting photograph.

3 Workshop proper After highlighting the objectives and expected outputs of the meeting (see section 1.1), Dr Molina provided an overview of the grave regional status of Foc TR4. He outlined the associated research, and re-iterated the need for a concerted regional effort to prevent further disease incursions, at the same time managing the disease in infested areas (see Presentation 1). He then invited those country representatives currently grappling with Foc TR4 problems, to present their country reports.

COUNTRY REPORTS

3.1 China With an average annual per capita consumption of 6.5kg, Dr Yi highlighted the huge Chinese demand for bananas, supplied mostly by TR4-susceptible Cavendish. Chinese TR4 mitigation research has focussed on biological control (soil microbes and Chinese leeks - Allium spp.); breeding for TR4 resistance; germplasm evaluation, and more effective disease management. Ongoing research is yielding some promising TR4-resistant genotypes, possessing attractive agronomic traits, including cold tolerance, dwarf stature and wind resistance, or which can be successfully grown in high-density stands. Gene-silencing and proteomic profiling research are yielding very promising results, for host-induced TR4 resistance, and allowing the possibility of transforming Gros Michel into a resistant cultivar, with thus a potential to revive this old favourite. Gene-editing offers another promising complementary approach, for example editing genes that express skin colour has met with success. Transgenic breeding has been constrained by inadvertently importing unattractive, secondary traits (see Presentation 2).

Discussion

The group expressed a need for more research and data on: field disease incidence and soil inoculum levels on the larger scale; internal Foc TR4 symptoms, and resistant cultivar characterisation. Dr Molina reminded the group that, because one cannot control inoculum levels, TBRI is establishing replicate plots to examine inoculum variation, including susceptible control plots.

3.2 Philippines The Acting Executive Director of PCAARRD, Dr Reynaldo Ebora outlined ongoing Foc research in the Philippines, particularly progress in mapping incidence of TR 1 and 4. Research aims to protect against the industry’s potential annual economic losses to Fusarium wilt of US$427 million, on which 330,000 people depend, with damage particularly severe in the south. Seven TBRI somaclones are under evaluation, with GCTCV 219 being still the best-performing in terms of Foc TR4 resistance. GCTCV 218 is high yielding, better fruit quality, but moderate reistance. It appears more acceptable by growers.. Promising biocontrol agents, singly and in combination have been identified in greenhouse trials, (e.g., combined VAM and T. harzianum reduced infections by 73%, and actinomycetes by 60%


6 23- 26 September 2016

greenhouse trials). Other work includes: research on cover crops (e.g., Arachis pintoi, an herb from Brazil); boot scrub trials; disease management, studies (plant hauling, replanting, optimal fertilizing etc.); evaluating sanitation, and optimizing management practices for somaclones 218/219. (For details, see Presentation 3.)

Discussion

Dr Ebora suggested a consistent source of planting materials was being accessed for their research. Dr Molina reminded delegates these biocontrol studies are part of the ACIAR-funded project, looking also at the effects of cover crops on banana rhizosphere microbial activity. Dr Williams added that using ground-cover aims also to reduce the risk of spreading Foc-infested soil. In the light of mostly variable biocontrol results, Dr Viljoen requested that these positive results be published, to inform the international research community. Dr Molina highlighted a problem that local scientists have little opportunity to publish them in international peer-reviewed journals. 3.3 Australia Representing Mr Stewart Lindsay of the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry, Dr Bob Williams, Director of the Department of Primary Industry & Fisheries, Northern Territories, outlined Foc-associated research for Australia’s sophisticated and exclusively domestic banana production industry. As incursions of subtropical race 4 were first recorded in the 1940s, the Australians have a long and successful track-record of mapping and containing Foc across different production systems, from which BAPNET continues to learn. Measures have included quarantine restrictions on planting material and soil movement and private sector collaboration. Foc management strategies revolve around three scenarios: 1) preventing incursion into disease-free areas; 2) preventing further on-farm disease spread where disease has freshly occurred, or 3) managing disease on completely infested farms. Bob described in some detail the six management components Australia deploys in approaches that vary according to the three above-mentioned scenarios: 1) building on-farm biosecurity; 2) early detection; 3) managing infected soils; 4) introducing more resilient production options; 5) improving germplasm, and 6) developing tools for biosecurity adoption (including individual farm biosecurity planning). From their collaborations with QUT, JC, SAR&D,UNE, interesting cited examples of the current work in these areas included: disinfectant studies (27 compounds), managing contaminated soil (sterilizing/truck dips), water (bores, dams) and banana tissues (pesticide injections) and soil/water/tissue movements; rapid scouting; streamlined Foc diagnoses (reliable primers/markers/water tests/infrared technology//remote sensing); biocontrol; rhizosphere studies; marker-assisted screening of 28 new cultivars, (including sourcing Musa malaccensis (UQ); clean seed systems; digital tools and TR4 capacity building. (For details, see Presentation 4.) Discussion

Responding to questions, Bob described the nascent banana GMO program in the Northern Territory. Cisgenically transformed plants, possessing resistance genes from M. malaccensis are being evaluated for Foc resistance. Early indications show that some transformants are still Foc-susceptible, suggesting that the intended genes have not been effectively transferred. Organoleptic acceptability is yet to be evaluated.


7 23- 26 September 2016

In discussing diagnostics, Bob explained that Australia is developing its own diagnostic molecular markers, as they are not confident that the existing molecular markers (developed by Dita et al) are sufficiently reliable. Regarding developing new Foc-resistant cultivars Dr Kumar highlighted the need for data on their susceptibility to other key diseases of banana. Bob mentioned that whilst host responses to Foc TR4 are being evaluated in NT, responses to other diseases will be evaluated in Queensland where they have BBTV etc. In response to the regional FAO representative Yusof Othman’s question, if Australia planned to eradicate Foc TR4 in NT, Bob said there was no eradication plan, rather the intention to live with it within resilient production systems currently being developed, following the example of Taiwan who is already living with the disease. 3.4 India

Dr R. Thangavelu, Principal Scientist at ICAR-NRC provided a comprehensive overview of Foc status and associated research in India, announcing the very recent detection of TR4 in the Bihar province of India. The first report be published soon. Distribution has been mapped for twelve VCGs spread across the South and East representing all races, with wilt infections being most severe in Tamil Nadu and Bihar. He highlighted the Foc-facilitating incidence of stem-borer and outlined research on measures for Foc management, including molecular diagnostics and studies on endophytic and rhizospheric bioagents active against race 1 (Penicillium pinophilum + trichoderma; T/bacillus, and bioagents from Zimmu (Allium cepa L. × Allium sativum L.). He also reported on successful stem-injection and sucker-drenching fungicide trials, to provide effective protection. Research has identified Foc-resistant Rasthali mutants. Molecular studies have identified 60 genes linked to defence against Foc. Indian proteomics can be linked to gene-silencing work elsewhere, particularly comparative R1//TR4 proteomics. Foc-contaminated TC planting material is a common means of spreading the disease. (For details, see Presentation 5.) Discussion

Dr Kumar confirmed the presence of TR4 in India as official. Dr Thangavelu will furnish the public announcement, and ministers at the highest level and other stakeholders (tissue culture people etc.) have already been informed. There is still speculation as to the source of TR4 infection. Dr Thangavelu clarified for Dr Yi their process for preparing Zimmu extract - collect the leaves, grind in water, and then drench the soil, at planting time. Trichoderma treatments are useful also for treating crown rot and increasing fruit-keeping quality. 3.5 Indonesia

Dr Agus Sutanto from Indonesian Tropical Fruit Research Institute (ITFRI) presented the Indonesian report on Foc research, stressing also that BBD was a parallel Indonesian concern. Cultural control studies have focused on soil solarisation and intercropping (with shallots). Evaluations of Foc-resistant GCTCVs in double-row planting are ongoing. Biocontrol studies have explored using promising agents including: Gliocladium spp. Trichoderma spp., Pseudomonas solanacearum, and Bacillus subtilis (greenhouse) and arbuscular Mycorrhizae in the field. Use of essential oils on mixed banana and mangosteen cropping is offering promising results. ʎ-irradiation mutation-breeding has yet to yield any commercially viable cultivar, but chemical mutagenesis has produced a promising Foc-tolerant Ambon Kuning variant. Conventional breeding has produced a Calcutta 4 parent,


8 23- 26 September 2016

and two cooking banana cultivars. VCG studies have updated Indonesian understanding of existing cultivar Foc-susceptibilities, particularly noting the introduction of Kepok Tanjung (budless Saba), which combines TR4-tolerance with BBD escaping properties, and is good for banana chips. (For details, see Presentation 6.)

Discussion

Dr Molina reminded delegates that Indonesia and Malaysia succumbed to TR4 in the 1990s, after Taiwan (1967). Plantations of big multinationals ccollapsed, but an Idonesian banana company, Nusantara Tropical Fruit (NTF) continued by rehabiklitating their farms with GCTCV 218. NTF selected four GCTCV variants, from 218 and now had expanded their plantation again for the local market. Local markets are usually supplied by small growers planting diversified varieties. These are not as much affected by TR4 compared to the Cavendish plantations. Further clarifications were made regarding different Foc races and cultivar susceptibilities in Indonesia. There were 12 VCGs identified in Indonesiaaaaa. VCG 1213/16 (TR4 strain) is found in all provinces/islands in Indonesia, indicating that TR4 is endemic in Indonesia and may have already been all over even before the TR4 epidemic in cavendish plantations in Sumatra. 3.6 Taiwan

After outlining the history of Foc spread in Taiwan, Dr Chih Ping Chao, the Director of TBRI presented their current work, mostly linked to TBRI’s GCTCV selection and propagation programme in Taiwan, where 90% of banana growing areas are infested with Foc TR4. The programme also has developed effective tissue-culture protocols, is involved in some NGS and other molecular marker work. Highlights feature breeding for resistance beginning in 1984; and ever since several Foc-resistant GCTCVs, including 119 have been improved through recurrent selections, culminating in a Chinese collaborative evaluation programme (2015), and a Mozambique programme for GCTCV 218 commercial evaluation (2016). Evaluations demonstrate different GCTCVs’ strengths in different agroecological and market contexts. Other work has examined organic farming potential, in conjunction with Allium spp. intercropping. The private sector has been propagating TBRI-identified GCTCVs, but so far the associated intellectual property has not been valorised. (For details, see Presentation 7.) Discussion

Some discussion was made around the case of Dwarf Pisang Awak/Kluai Namwa, found to be susceptible to Race 1, but resistant to Foc TR4 in the Philippines. KLuai Namwa is susceptible to Race 1. This variety is being confirmed as to its resistance to TR4 in Taiwan. GxE concept may be in operation here . VCG grouping is not connected to pathogenicity; it could be that they are in the same VCG but different virulence. Dr Thangavelu articulated the need for correct definition and common understanding associated with resistance and tolerance. 3.7 Vietnam Dr Trang Ngoc Hung of the Vietnamese Fruit and Vegetable Research Institute (FAVRI) outlined the current status of banana production and Foc in Vietnam. The most commonly planted bananas include Chuoi Ngu and Pisang Awak (tall group more tolerant to Race 1), and Cavendish (53% Red delta river, 36% Mekong delta). First reported in 1968 (0124, 0124/5), Race 1 has spread throughout Vietnam, and TR4’s first recorded appearance was


9 23- 26 September 2016

in 2014. Deliberations in a 2015 Foc survey by FABRI together with Dr. Molina and Dr. Chao near the Chinese border indicated the infection of FOC in Cavendish plantations. This was confirmed to be TR4 by VCG and molecular tests conducted at Stellenbosh University. This infection may have spread from the Chinese river Con Minh whose waters are used for local irrigation. Follow-up work included TR4 identification by collecting infected pseudostems, observing conidia, molecular characterization confirming VCGs (on Cavendish, 01213/16, and on Pisang Awak 0124/5), with presence confirmed in inoculation and screen house evaluations. Ongoing approaches to address the problem include raising public awareness, somaclonal selection, and training on somaclonal selection. (For details, see Presentation 8.) Discussion

Delegates discussed collective understanding of the VCG work presented. Pisang Awak samples had been sent to Stellenbosch from those Vietnamese areas severely affected by Foc TR4, and subsequently identified as VCG 0124/5. Virulence studies showed that 01213/16 is not as virulent as 0124/5. Dr Viljoen Altus cited observations from Mozambique whereby his team separately inoculated Cavendish plants with Race 1, with TR4 and then in combination. TR4 did not develop in the plants containing inoculum mixture, indicating that Race 1 might have suppressed the development of TR4. However, Dr Yi referred to their experience with R1-infected Pisang Awak, which was subsequently overplanted with Cavendish where TR4 infections occurred, despite the inherited presence of R1. Foc TR4 dispersal by river-water needs further consideration, particularly in terms of associated water-shed management. Managing another serious dispersal channel via tissue-culture planting material also needs further discussion, prompted by confirmations that these Pisang Awak planting materials were indeed TC.

3.8 Malaysia 315,000T bananas are produced in around 31,000 ha in Malaysia, where they are ranked second in terms of crop production area and fourth in export revenues. During the 1990s Fusarium wilt became the most serious banana disease, with Cavendish, Berangan, Rastali and Emas, Lemak Manis being most susceptible to TR4, and Awak Abu, Abu, Masak Hijau being resistant to TR4. Presenting the Foc overview for Malaysia, Dr Pauziah Muda of MARDI’s Horticulture Research Centre, highlighted Malaysian good agricultural practice in standard Foc management, including: 1) using TC plants; 2) providing adequate water; 3) destroying infected plants, and 4) restricting movement of infected planting materials. Ongoing studies include: 1) intercropping studies using three Allium species (effective in pot trials but less effective in the field); 2) development of disease resistance through mutation breeding (8-10wk old plantlets were exposed to gamma rays, screening in screen house, now 1st planting in the field); 3) Musa hybridization with M. balbisiana genome used (with tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses); and 4) genome sequencing work, where Pahang was used as reference for A genome, and Pisang Klutuk Wulung was used to define B genome (For details, see Presentation 9.) Discussion

As much of the presented work overlap work already presented, there was less discussion. Dr Yi was curious about re-sequencing Klutuk Wulung against the Pahang genome. Dr Molina cited further GCTCV 119 selection work in Bioversity’s International Musa Testing Programme (IMTP), where in this case development of new varieties is closely related to commercial/large plantations, and re-iterating that the banana industry plays a key role in developing new somaclones.


10 23- 26 September 2016

EXTERNAL PRESENTATIONS:

3.9 AC4 TR4 – African Consortium for TR4: In his presentation, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Professor Altus Viljoen, senior plant pathologist from Stellenbosch University, South Africa, updated BAPNET on the Foc TR4 situation in eastern and southern Africa. He referred to the efforts of the Africa Consortium for Foc Tropical Race 4 (AC4TR4) and their declaration on Foc TR4 control in Africa. He reiterated the risks of intra-continental spread from the now seriously compromised Mozambique location (>1 million plants already lost), stressing the need to avoid alarmism, and to collaborate more broadly with Asia, as there are several common issues. One example has been Dr Molina’s recent collaboration in Mozambique. FAO now has a plan to support African banana smallholder farmers, and BAPNET can facilitate such a plan for Asia partly by keeping stakeholders informed. In referring to standard Foc TR4 management practices, Dr Viljoen highlighted the value of using resistant cultivars, destroying infected plants, and rigorously controlling movements of infected soil, plant materials or water. All candidate East African Highland Banana (EAHB) cultivars have proved susceptible to TR4 in field evaluations, in contrast to more promising greenhouse evaluation results, but using GCTCV 218 in Mozambique has performed well, with less than 5% losses. AC4-TR4 has helped raise African awareness via trainings and other activities, but the threat of further TR4 spread has now extended to Sudan, which has recently opened large Cavendish plantations. Dr Viljoen highlighted the need for an impact assessment in S Africa, as well as the opportunity for India to meet its new challenge in developing a TR4 management strategy. In Mozambique, capacity is seriously constrained, and the international community needs to unite in addressing this global problem. In acknowledging the efforts of the international community, Dr Viljoen singled out Fen Beed (ex-IITA-a prime mover), Dr Molina, Dr Diane xxx of Stellenbosch (for all the VCG/molecular analyses), and Dr Yi for all the collaborative work. Once data have been checked, a paper on VCGs will soon be published. (For details, see Presentation 10.) 3.10 COSTA RICA (CORBANA)

In his presentation on Prevention of incursion of Foc TR4 in the Americas and Caribbean, Dr Jorge Sandoval, Director of Research, Costa Rican Corporación Bananera Nacional (CORBANA) provided a snapshot of Latin American perspectives and research related to preventing Foc TR4 entering the region. New research has demonstrated that high manganese and low magnesium levels favour disease development, and that the banana weevil (Cosmopolites sordidus) has been implicated in Foc spore dispersal, with inoculum being detected externally and internally, and also in insect secretions. Their research also demonstrates that if protocols are followed, in vitro culture does not transfer the disease. Ongoing CORBANA projects include: 1) collecting isolates for molecular variability studies of race 1 and race 2; 2) evaluation of disinfectants for conidia and chlamydospores control, foot baths etc.; 3) risk of transmission by tools and cultural practices; 4) use of biocontrol (Trichoderma, Bacillus); and 5) field evaluation of varieties in Gros Michel areas as alternatives (FHIA 23, SH 3436-9), areas usually planted with coffee. In conclusion Dr Sandoval noted that whilst it is difficult to stop disease spread, there is a great need to collaborate in public-private political partnerships, and mentioned that Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Honduras and Mexico were making the most concerted efforts but a lack of commitment from other countries has prevailed. (For details, see Presentation 11.)


11 23- 26 September 2016

3.11 Program/Activities of FAO Yusof Othman, FAO representative for the Asia and Pacific region, presented the FAO Regional Action plan (RAP) program/activities in relation to quarantine of banana TR4 disease in the region. He reminded delegates of the RAP’s strategic objectives and outlined global intervention measures for TR4 control advocacy; consultation/dialogue; awareness-raising (WBF, IPPC/APPPC) and capacity development (pest risk analysis, emergency prevention- e.g., preparedness/planning, food chain crises, rapid response, monitoring and surveillance (funding not more than 20% from FAO). The 2014 Rome meeting recommended implementation of a Global Programme to prevent Foc TR4 spread, and produced a policy technical guide and draft programme. The Programme objective is to enhance sustainable banana production by minimizing impacts of FW, improved prevention, awareness and management. There are 6 programme outputs: i) Policies and strategies improved and awareness level enhanced for improved prevention; ii) Surveillance, early detection and monitoring approaches and systems improved: iii) Risks assessed, and plant health-related legislation and phytosanitary practices introduced; iv) Capacities strengthened for improved preparedness and prevention; v) Integrated management strategies improved and implemented to reduce disease impact and pathogen spread; and vi) Regional and international interaction, collaboration and information sharing enhanced. FAO could support efforts to extend advocacy, build national disease plans, conduct national and regional surveys, develop and implement quarantine measures (Pre-border (imported, PRIs), border and post border), and BAPNET members could play a key role in compiling all the necessary regional information. Proposed actions (also covered in the workshop report below) include; i) Awareness building, ii) pest risk assessments; iii) effective farm sanitation; iv) Preventive measures, and v) Capacity building (policy and technical) (For details, see Presentation 12.) Discussion

Dr Molina expressed the desire for FAO to be more directly involved in supporting the Asia Pacific region’s Foc-containment work, as FAO's current focus is on Latin America and Africa. FAO could support regional risk assessments/surveys, especially in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. Dr Othman informed delegates that FAO has almost completed developing a proposal for a regional risk-assessment project, that it is currently awaiting regional offices feedback, and a copy will be shared for BAPNET feedback as soon as possible Dr Molina stressed the importance of working together on an integrated, participatory project, shared and developed with BAPNET. Dr Kumar said that the necessary technology is available but each country is working in silence, so BAPNET needs to know what each country is doing, especially for transboundary diseases. In referring to FAO’s global risk map (see Presentation 12, slide 5) , Dr Birte Komalong, representing NARI Papua New Guinea, pointed out that PNG was wrongly labelled as low risk, despite the fact that the country adjoins Indonesia where TR4 is endemic. Thus, PNG is at high risk, especially as no disease surveillance facilities are available in such challenging terrain. Dr Othman said that the risk map would be updated by 2017. Dr Komalong then offered a general comment related to TR4 risk assessment and incursions, suggesting BAPNET could focus on understanding which banana cultivars are grown. Currently the main focus is on Cavendish, but when considering food security, efforts should focus more on cooking bananas and plantains, and frame any risk assessments accordingly. Indeed, BAPNET could differentiate, and define what Fusarium incursions mean in different countries and contexts.


12 23- 26 September 2016

Dr Viljoen sought clarification regarding the Global Program, for which funds are not yet available, nor for the national programs. For an outbreak to be a priority, the disease has to be reported to the IPPC. Dr Othman said that once a concept note has been endorsed by FAO, the authors can proceed to a full proposal, focusing on risk assessment in relation to different cultivars and not just TR4, but it is not necessary to report first to the IPPC to qualify for funding. Dr Williams expressed frustration with FAO and other delays. Regional TR4 surveys began in 2007, with subsequent delays including in generating the VCG data, and an even longer delay in identifying the pathogen VCGs. The information has subsequently been sitting with FAO for two years, and we may have more pending reports in other countries. CORBANA and EMBRAPA are also working on these issues and a TFNet meeting was convened in Malaysia last year, with four FAO representatives attending. It seems it is high time to move forward. Dr Othman referred to the previously mentioned pest risk assessment FAO proposal, stressing the need for BAPNET collaborators' feedback for fast-tracking the approval of the proposal. Dr Molina asked if financial support for AP could be raised within the next three months, to fund a survey for example, as the BAPNET workshop will publish its action plan for the next steps. Dr Othman indicated that to access EMPRES emergency funds, as with Mozambique, we need to formally declare the threat. Dr Desa Hassim of TFNET called for those countries along the Mekong River, Cambodia, China, Lao, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam to be included in the FAO proposal for risk assessment 3.12 Foc TR4 Programme of TFNet in the Asia-Pacific Dr Desa Hassim, Chief Executive Officer of the International Tropical Fruits Network (TFNet) presented TFNet’s Asia-Pacific Foc-TR4 Programme, in the context of its Global Action Plan for Tropical Fruits. Pending project proposals are to be approved in the board meeting in Davao City (Aug 31-Sept 2), and a planned Foc TR4 side event in FAO will benefit from the BAPNET action plan. Dr Hassim highlighted outputs 1, 4 and 6 of the FAO global program (see FAO Presentation 12, and summary above) as particularly relevant to the Asia-Pacific. These outputs are: i) Policies and strategies improved and awareness level enhanced for improved prevention; iv) Capacities strengthened for improved preparedness and prevention; and vi) Regional and international interaction, collaboration and information sharing enhanced. Delegates agreed that BAPNET and TFNET have both authority and capacity – but need a clear mandate to offer secretariat services for Foc mitigation in Asia Pacific. Both Dr Williams and Dr Yi expressed support for this and the possible formation of a regional TR4 consortium, where TFNet could provide a Secretariat for TR4 program under BAPNET, where BAPNET would report the research findings. Discussions

Dr Molina reminded delegates that the purpose of FAO’s and TFNet’s participation in the meeting is that as BAPNET works not only on TR4 but also on germplasm conservation and use and other banana diseases, the group hopes to form a distinct program that focuses on Foc in the region with FAO and TFNet. India asked what resources are available to TFNet, and Dr Desa mentioned TFNet could provide a facilitation role in program design and implementation. Speaking as the TFNet vice-president, Dr Yi Ganjun reminded delegates that TFNet and FAO can organize country memberships and funding bids. Dr Yi will lobby the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, and others could help with capacity building, germplasm sharing or collection for evaluation, so all countries may benefit.


13 23- 26 September 2016

Dr Williams noted that BAPNET and Bioversity are focused on Foc-management research – ‘the role of BAPNET stops at the border’. Political border problems could best be addressed via TFNet connecting to FAO who can work with the regulatory quarantine with the national governments. Dr Kumar suggested that South Asia could be the next focus for TR4 research, with potential funding BAPNET-member influences from Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka. Dr Molina added the discussion needs more time and will generate appropriate recommendations. BAPNET and TFNet have different mandates and working areas. BAPNET identified the problem in Asia, did monitoring and generated????? strategies, sharing and germplasm evaluation as well as having the mandate of development for extension. TFNet held the 2013 Malaysia meeting that proposed Foc TR4 awareness-raising with FAO present. An action plan for the Rome meeting with FAO was drafted. TFNet has strengths in information sharing, capacity building and engaging with FAO. BAPNET will continue to coordinate the banana R&D but it will be important to (re)define roles and complementarities/synergies. Dr Yi cited the successful example of how 15 years after a Foc awareness-raising program the Chinese ministry of agriculture is now supporting the Foc research program. Dr Molina warned against the risk of bias creeping into any approach, as has happened in Africa, with FAO focusing on a certain group of people with specific interests, rather than more widely benefiting the region. A post-meeting press-release through ProMusa will announce an update on the status of TR4 is Asia Pacific, pending the coming out of technical/scientific publications from India and Vietnam. Foc pathogenicity

• TR4 monophyletic • New virulence genes – discovered, understand how virulence develops and how

pathogenicity develops- • Collected 15 Fusarium spe genomes- analysed virulence components • Mycotoxins- adverse effects documented- BEA and FA- toxins different mechanisms-

affecting metabolic pathways differently 4 steps of infection

• Adsorption, biotrophic, transition and neotrophic Investigate PTI/ETI molecules in hypersensitive response GD disseminating center of Foc Foc Tr4 diff evolutionary origins Dajiao foc direct Mycotoxin Foc tR4 effectors


14 23- 26 September 2016

4 Workshop Discussions on a) Prevention of pread and b) Management of Foc TR4 in the Asia-Pacific

4.1 GROUP 1: Management Discussions

• Policy recommendation/considerations Molina – as researchable area, Foc is transferred by soil and water. In terms of research and how to influence policy makers, like the spread to Vietnam, related to river and expansion of plantations, because of demand, we need to have a PRA, monitor spread in between countries and between local farms – policy recommendations Vincent – need to discuss regional policy considerations with regards to Foc TR4 quarantine, even if the disease is still not present in the country, they have to include Foc TR4 as one of the diseases for quarantine

• General list of stakeholders Thangavelu – should the consumers be included on the list of the stakeholders? Det – Vincent – we should use retailers instead Molina – we will use these recommendations for preparation of proposal Kumar – there are varieties that are susceptible, and we want to inform them of their preference that these are susceptible, so they will not be resistant to change Thangavelu – another researchable area is that in these varieties/the fruits can carry the disease Molina – we need to research that these varieties/fruits do not carry with them the disease, and we need to also do research that TC does not carry the Foc (J. Sandoval thoughts)

• What can BAPNET Do? Molina – we should add/include budget for research mobilization care of BAPNET/Bioversity

• Case Study (Thailand) - Survey of Mekong region (LAO, Myanmar, Thailand) - Info dissemination, capacity building, survey, prevention policy procedure

• Case Study (India)

- We are informed, but we do not tell it to the press, do the diagnostics first. - Immediately inform the people involved - Identify policy issues, training, research & development - Management of infested areas - Inform the international plant protection people about the presence of the disease - Publish a document for field ID of Foc TR4, along with standard collecting

procedures, keeping biosecurity in place (plots handling, movement of plant materials other than banana, shoes, vehicles)

- Develop policy for use of diverse banana varieties - Training network of banana growers - Training of plant pathologists, germplasm workers etc - Survey - Further study of characterization of Foc


15 23- 26 September 2016

- Study on disinfectants, for prevention of spread - Public awareness campaign for stakeholders

Molina – We have been working with other countries for many years, we have learned a lot. But the problem comes in when you don’t have it, you don’t act on it, but am glad Thailand and India are doing something. 4.2 GROUP 2 Prevention

4.2.1 Discussions General brainstorm

• What do we mean by prevention? Perhaps needs common understanding? • Policy elements • Ways of prevention? • Two types of spread - International and In-country (inter-farm and on-farm)

Considering INTERNATIONAL SPREAD

• Need to adapt existing global map indicating what we knew 4 yrs ago vs current status

o current distribution o identifying new risk areas o Not only Cavendish context but more broadly o level of risk assessed in current situation - o What kinds of risks o Need criteria for risk assessment

• Need to determine what are the major routes of spread? • Roles in this

o NPPOs mostly responsible o What should BAPNET do?

• Factors influencing spread o Need to define possible means of spread? o Define risk level of spread o Types of material used (diversity) o Flows of materials o Trade routes o Border locations/proximity o Barriers (physical) o Soils o Water


16 23- 26 September 2016

Begin with countries currently known to have TR4 Foc TR4 Extent AP Countries Widespread: China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan Regional (localised)

Australia, Pakistan, Philippines

Newly recorded India, Vietnam, (Laos? Myanmar?) High Risk Thailand, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Laos, Myanmar, (Nepal), PNG, Intermediate risk • Discussion about Pacific Islands how susceptible are these to

incursion? Probably low risk? But people still transport planting materials, large-scale Cavendish trade routes also. Equipment transfer

• Need for Pacific islands to be monitored • entry routes unmonitored - e.g., Logging companies/fishing-

IN-COUNTRY SPREAD

• Considered e.g., China, India, and the Philippines – risk levels • Discussed • Cavendish expansion • Need for quarantine • Factors contributing to in-country spread - Water, wind, movement of people and

planting materials (TCs suckers etc.), traders, service providers • What is the best way to destroy infected material?

CONTAINING ON-FARM SPREAD

• Too difficult for smallholders? • How are quarantine laws enforced? Including compensating farmers? • Even if they find the disease – spores remain, therefore difficult to prevent further

spread • Thailand case study-

1. Identify new hot spot 2. Apply control measures 3. Isolate, zoned planting- what happens to contaminated areas? 4. Plant other crops 5. How long for quarantine?

a. General perception is that spores survive for decades. b. But if plant other crops, perhaps shorter periods? c. China suggests 6 years? Crop diversity helps

CONTAINING ON-FARM SPREAD 2

• Advocacy • Awareness building • Clean planting material - could border control prevent spread of infected material?

Needs certification? How easily can such schemes be enforced? Smuggling? • Capacity for Diagnosis must be built • In those countries where recently recorded, focus on hot spots and capacity building.

Strategy Plan • Most countries have quarantine facilities in place (some do not), BAPNET may

communicate information for NPPOs to update. E.g. TC – we could assume TC may still transmit the disease.

• Most incursions occur via illicit activities, do disincentives work?


17 23- 26 September 2016

• Soil movements can’t be always controlled by disincentives. • Any imports carry risks of incursion (even with effective quarantine) • Who should be responsible? Government, researchers? Other stakeholders?

Growers? • If they irrigate do they use clean water? Growers need to take more responsibility but

need capacity building/knowledge? • What about those countries lacking capacity for diagnosis or quarantine, or producing

clean planting material - this is where FAO can help? • Also inter-province spread • Are heliconias moved? • Are there incentives for smallholders to take measures to exclude? Most can’t take

measures. • What kind of incentives?

INTER-COUNTRY SPREAD: What happens after an incursion occurs? (Considered successful containment examples like BirdFlu) How do we deal with Bird Flu?

1. Slaughter the birds? 2. Diagnostic capacity important to allow early warning 3. Standard operating procedures are then implemented to contain the disease, buffer

areas, and exclusion zones 4. Reporting rewards offered

Thailand offered a case-study of successful containment

• 4C: 1st step control the situation, 2, concentrate//focus on the area 3, clean/cull (eradicate); 4 communicate

• 4Ps promotion (via extension agents), participation, prevention, protection • Government helps with risk assessment- extension services help to minimise risks, • FAO/BAPNET could set up training and illustrate with successful case studies, • Also offer consider the value/effectiveness of crop replacement schemes. • How do we make use of IT to disseminate information?

Entire bird flu story provides attractive model we may adapt?

1. Improve diagnostic capacity/early warning 2. Reporting mechanism 3. Operational procedures, surveillance buffer zones, quarantine- 4. Then use 4Cs/4Ps –


18 23- 26 September 2016

4.2.2 TR4 INCURSION MANAGEMENT PLAN

Stage(4Cs) Action Research?

I. Control? situation

NPPO to visit site: a. assess the situation √ b. sampling for diagnosis (consider linking to

reference/linking to microbial database) √

c. take baseline info- which Cv (?), owners, planting material source etc. (GPS localisation)

√

d. if emergency need to declare the site at risk/quarantined//

e. inform central gov office/industry/relevant stakeholders (discussion about when is the correct time to inform)…. Can take time, diff approaches in diff contexts

f. make immediate follow up plan (moving to concentrate)

II. concentrate the area for proper investigation, but guided by NPPO

a. surveillance to determine the extent of infection √

b. set up buffer zones based on extent and management capacity/context- to prevent movement

c. detailed analysis of outbreak - source/nature etc. √

d. pest risk analysis √ e. monitor and evaluate

III. Clean-up

a. Immediate response to analysis, killing off infected plants √

b. Restricting movements of material (any planting material, soil etc, equipment) out of area/into area, and people and animals

√

c. Disinfectant barriers √ d. Water management measures (or possibly

earlier) √

e. Controlled access f. Physical barriers such as fences+ notice

boards

g. Inoculum reduction measures (e.g. fumigation, chemicals, bio-pesticides, etc.) √

IV. Communicate

a. Keep farmer fully informed about situation and updated,

b. Sensitising local stakeholder groups? c. Secure grower cooperation d. Liaise with local community - via leaders? e. Engage with mass media to inform wider

community for preparedness (at appropriate time to avoid panic etc.)

f. Also inform borders and neighbouring countries where appropriate, e.g. IPPC/other networks

g. Inform scientific community (scientific journals etc.)


19 23- 26 September 2016

4Ps can occur simultaneously/in parallel with 4Cs

Stage(4Ps) Action Research?

I. Promotion (can overlap with communication)

a. Sensitising local stakeholder groups? b. Awareness raising c. (make stakeholders aware and assimilate and

hopefully adopt messages)

II. Public participation (include regional elements where appropriate)

a. Inform public what needs doing √ b. Also inform in parallel any border meetings if

adjacent borders

c. Incentivise participation (e.g., clean planting material) √

d. Implementation of promoted measures √ e. Sharing benefit of the results

III. Prevention (of spread to another area/country)

a. Quarantine zones √ b. Clean planting material use √ c. Water management √ d. Containment zoning (between

hotspots/boundary zones √

e. Prevent movement beyond area f. Set up boundary area with entrance and exit

controls

g. Phytosanitary precautions h. Policy elements

IV. Protection

a. (Exclusion - similar to protection) b. TC production should ensure hardening zone

sanitation/certification (nursery stage)

c. Use of clean water, plants, planting materials and soils/substrate-

d. Use of FAO phytosanitary guidelines

What can BAPNET do towards implementing an action plan for regional FW control?

• Response plan needed to facilitate working with ‘high risk’ countries • Stakeholder analysis • International coordination and regional coordination needed, via a common policy • Also need to budget resource allocation in an implementation plan • Define research priorities • IPPC and NPPOs are the main bodies who would be involved, but BAPNET needs

to promote it to policy makers • Policy considerations?

a. Conduct a policy review in the region? b. What is the status of policy in each region and in high risk countries?

Which countries do have policies? Which countries do not? c. Commission a study FAO suggests an assessment for each country d. Policy to minimise impact of FW in Asia Pacific e. Will differ from country to country f. One regional policy each for SE Asia, S Asia, and Pacific Islands, g. Assess current status also of awareness, and preparedness as well as

policy? • One part of BAPNET is to do advocacy, to work with NPPO


20 23- 26 September 2016

Next steps? • LAC has a policy. For Asia-Pacific drafting policy depends on individual national

situations • Who makes the policy? • FAO could assess weaknesses and strengths of each country. • FAO could call a meeting to draft a regional strategy, compare national policies, and

then ask them to strengthen//address gaps/weaknesses • BAPNET/Bioversity could help provide policy guidelines/briefs/considerations to

ensure this is a notifiable//quarantine pest? In appropriate countries/contexts Considerations for Policy Makers?

1. BAPNET requests country reps to meet to discuss national/regional policy considerations for Foc TR4

2. Countries where disease is not reported should at any rate include these on their lists of quarantine diseases

3. Cross-border movement of planting materials and other related materials coming from infested areas should be regulated

4. Such materials should have necessary phytosanitary documentation etc 5. Any suspect infections need to be reported and investigated????? 6. Awareness should be raised to support intelligence 7. Regionally report on outbreak/incidence per country

BAPNET,TFNET FAO to be part of working group? Preventative steps Plan for border protection/control

• Awareness-raising (on different levels)/advocacy o with decision makers at national levels o practices to prevent spread o electronic/other tools to share information

• Surveillance o Protocol - adapt FAO international standards

• Early detection and monitoring tools (linked to research) o Reliable rapid diagnostic kit needed

• Capacity building (including for diagnostics) - including piloting o Human o Infrastructure o Funding (if single country can’t afford, resources may be available from FAO

• Linking research to policy: what are the risks/impacts • Participatory processes and coordination between regional/national stakeholders • Pest Risk analysis and Impact assessment (including for countries where no TR4 has

yet been recorded) - three stages: pre-crisis, mid crisis, and post crisis - mitigation comes out differently at each stage)- also including socioeconomic impact assessment (e.g., World Bank project in Laos)

o Production system o Varieties o Plant multiplication

o Irrigation etc o Aspect o Agroecological zones

Policy makers need to know (preliminary information)

1. What is the problem 2. How important is it 3. What is the target of the project/proposed work


21 23- 26 September 2016

4. How can we do the proposed work/why, when, etc/who 5. What are the benefits of implementing/participating?

What resources- 4M 1e 1L Manpower, Money; Management; equipment/material; environmental support/consideration; location (where) Stakeholders: If there is a country strategy, need people to coordinate and implement (Ministers to decide)/NPPOs

1. Growers 2. Private sector (including

importers/exporters/shippers) 3. NGOs, 4. Communications people//media 5. Consumers 6. Transport companies 7. Research community/technical

experts 8. Government sector (including

extensionists) 9. Regional bodies 10. International organisations 11. Donors (R&D partners)


22 23- 26 September 2016

4.3 Workshop Plenary

Bob - Global Strategy for FAO – will add the topics discussed from Groups 1 and 2 to improve the strategy to be submitted to FAO

Molina – These are just lists and the meat will come later, a work in progress, I will be with a team writing and summarizing, putting in a better format the outcome of the workshop. By next month, will circulate to all for your inputs and comments. The things we have listed have 2 objectives – next steps: (1) national programs can adopt these lists of researchable areas, also to give value for collaborations, some on the list may be for multi-lateral collaboration, BAPNET can provide leadership for resource mobilization & collaboration. There can be modification, according to your needs; (2) for influencing policy makers, to come up with a BAPNET declaration, focusing on TR4. We are now drafting the declaration, similar to Africa, aligning it to our station in Asia. We will have it before we leave. We will send you a draft. We hope each country will sign. This will be given to donors, and stakeholders – we have to invest a little bit more in Asia; (3) we have to develop a concrete outcome, project proposals, plans as a country for the mitigation of Foc TR4 (i.e. China and PHL).

We need to elect where we will have our next BAPNET Meeting 2018?

Vincent – suggestion, meeting will happen in a country where TR4 is new?

Molina – India? Thailand? Vietnam? Co-funding is necessary

Kumar – Bioversity? Or as India? Will appoint new representative of India for BAPNET

Next BAPNET Meeting NOVEMBER 2017

Mitigation Characteristics of production system Research themes Next steps-

• Researchable areas that national programmes can adopt as they have funds • Other areas that are relevant to more than one country where BAPNET can lead • Then will look at broader collaboration • Need also all the country papers. • Another output- appeal to international community with a BAPNET declaration focusing on

TR4 (similar to African declaration) • Hope SC will sign the declaration for use when approaching donors and international

stakeholders • Develop concrete outcomes of what projects BAPNET countries will engage in enhancing • Need to select the next BAPNET meeting venue - normally 2 years from now but in view of

TR4 maybe next year India and Thailand, and Kumar will nominate the next India BAPNET in November 2017


23

Last words from Dr Yi • Need to strengthen our research collaboration, and to encourage collaboration • How to organize BAPNET projects/S/S cooperation , including from China’s side • Chinese support also from ASEAN • Visiting scientists programme (200 per year from Asia)/postdocs

www.bioversityinternational.org

5 ANNEXES: 5.1.1 Annex 1 List of participants

Banana Asia Pacific Network (BAPNET) Steering Committee Members

AUSTRALIA 1. Robert Christian Williams Director, Plant Industries, John England Building, Berrimah Farm, Makagon Road, Darwin, Australia Tel. No. : +61 8 8999 2215 Email: [email protected] BANGLADESH 2. Dr. Mossammat Shamsunnahar Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Joydebpur, Gazipur, 1701 Dhaka, Bangladesh Tel. No.: +88 9252715 Mobile No.: +88 0171 190 6653 or +88 0171 190 6653 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] GDAAS, CHINA 3. Dr. Yi Ganjun Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Wushan, Guangzhou 510640 People’s Republic of China Tel. No.: +86 1 330 220 0898 Email: [email protected] SPC, FIJI 4. Ms. Logotonu Waqainabete Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), 3 Luke Street, Nabua, Suva, Private Mail Bag, Suva, FIJI Tel. No.: +679 337 0733 or +679 862 9214 Email: [email protected] INDIA 5. Dr. Thangavelu Raman National Research Center for Banana (NRCB), Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India 620102 Tel. No.: +91 112 584 2068 Email: [email protected]

INDONESIA 6. Dr. Agus Sutanto Indonesia Tropical Fruit Research Institute (ITFRI), Jl. Raya Solok – Aripan Km 2 P.O. Box 5 Solok, West Sumatra Mobile No.: +62 813 10603678 Email: [email protected] Indonesian Centre for Horticulture Research & Development (ICHORD), Jl. Ragunan 29Z, Pasarmingu, Jakarta, Indonesia Tel. No.: +62 21 780 5768 / +62 21780990 / +62 217805135 MALAYSIA 7. Dr. Pauziah Muda Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI), Peti Surat 12301, Pejabat Besar Pos 50774 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel . No.: + 603-89411700 / +60 38 943 7111 Mobile No.: 013 3660555 E-mail: [email protected] PAPUA NEW GUINEA 8. Dr. Birte Nass-Komolong National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI), P.O. Box 4415, LAE, Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea Tel. No. : +675 4784000 Email: [email protected] PCAARRD, PHILIPPINES 9. Dr. Reynaldo Ebora Philippine Council for Agriculture Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD), Paseo de Valmayor, Los Baños, Laguna 4030 Philippines Tel. No. : +63 49 536 4990 Mobile No.: +63 998 500 5123 Email : [email protected] DA-BAR, PHILIPPINES 10. Mr. Joell Lales Bureau of Agricultural Research, Department of Agriculture, RDMIC Building, Visayas Avenue cor. Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines 1104 Tel. No.: +63 2 928 8624 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]


TBRI, TAIWAN, R.O.C. 11. Dr. Chih-Ping Chao Taiwan Banana Research Institute (TBRI), Chiuju, Pingtung, Taiwan, Republic of China Tel. No.: +886 8739 2111 Mobile No.: +886 87392111 / +886 987310083 Email: [email protected] [email protected] THAILAND 12. Mr. Sombat Tongtao Sukhothai Horticultural Research Center, 239 Moo 4, 101 Road, Tambon Tha Chai, Amphoe Si Satchanalai 64190 Sukhothai, Thailand Tel. No.: +66 378 2455 Email: [email protected] VIETNAM 13. Dr. Tran Ngoc Hung Biotechnology Department, Fruit and Vegetable Research Institute (FAVRI) Trau Quy Gia Lam, Ha Noi, Vietnam Tel. No.: +84 43 876 0340 / +84 4 38276148 Mobile No.: +84 912069888 Email: [email protected] Additional BAPNET Participants COSTA RICA 1. Jorge Sandoval Corporacion Bananera Nacional (CORBANA), San José Province, San José, Costa Rica Tel. No.: +506 276 34793 or +506 83255712 Email: [email protected] FAO – Bangkok 2. Othman Yusof Food and Agriculture Organization - Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific Maliwan Mansion, Phra Athit Rd., Phra Nakorn, Bangkok, 10200 Thailand Tel. No.:+66 2 697 4000 or +66 2 697 4344 Email: [email protected]

INDIA 3. B.K. Pandey Horticultural Science Division. Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) Krishi Bhavan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi 110 001, India Tel. No.:+91 9873792941 Email: [email protected] SOUTH AFRICA 4. Albertus Viljoen Private Bag XI, Department of Plant Pathology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland 7602 South Africa Tel. No.: +27 218084797 Email: [email protected] 5. Diane Mostert Private Bag XI, Department of Plant Pathology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland 7602 Tel. No.: +27 828868644 Email: [email protected] TFNet, Malaysia 6. Mohd Desa Hajihassim International Tropical Fruit Network, Box 334, UPM Post Office, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia Tel. No.: 603-89416589 or +6013 3977198 Email: [email protected] THAILAND 6. Det Wattanachaiyingcharoen Faculty of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment, Naresuan University Muang, Phitsanululok 6500 Thailand Tel. No.: +66 81 887 5549 Email: [email protected] 7. Wandee Wattanachaiyingcharoen Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Naresuan University, Muang, Phitsanululok 6500 Thailand Tel. No.: +66 81 887 4354 Email: [email protected]


8. Patrick Cabrera Bureau of Agricultural Research, Department of Agriculture, RDMIC Building, Visayas Avenue cor. Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines 1104 Tel. No.: +63 917 546 6537 Email: [email protected] BIOVERSITY INTERNATIONAL 1. Dr. Agustin B. Molina, Jr. Bioversity International – Philippines 3F GS Khush Hall, IRRI, Los Baños, Laguna 4031, Philippines Tel. No. : +63 49 5360532 or +63 918 9137724 Email: [email protected] 2. Dr. Krishna Kumar Bioversity International – India G-1, B-Block, NASC Complex, DPS Marg,Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, India Tel. No.: (+91) 11 258 49000 or (+91) 258 49002 Email: [email protected] 3. Dr. Vincent Johnson Bioversity International - France Parc Scientifique Agropolis II, 34397 Montpellier Cedex 5, France Tel. (+33) 467 611302 Email: [email protected] 4. Vida Grace O. Sinohin Bioversity International – Philippines 3F GS Khush Hall, IRRI, Los Baños, Laguna 4031, Philippines Tel. No. : +63 49 5360532 or +63 922 8296213 Email: [email protected]

5.1.2 Annex 2: Provisional meeting programme 23 August 2016, Day 1

8:00 – 8:30 Registration

8:31 – 9:30 I. OPENING CEREMONIES

Welcome Remarks Dr. Yi Ganjun

Vice President, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences

Message President, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences

Message Chinese official

Message and Introduction of Participants

Dr. Agustin Molina

Banana Asia Pacific Network (BAPNET) Coordinator, Bioversity International

9:31 - 10:00 Coffee Break

II. WORKSHOP PROPER

10:01 – 10:10 Protocol, Objectives and Expected Output of the Meeting

Dr. Agustin Molina

BAPNET Coordinator, Bioversity International 10:10 – 10:40 Overview of the Status of Foc

TR4 in Asia and the Pacific

10:40 – 11:10 Country Report:

CHINA

Dr. Yi Ganjun

Vice President, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences

11: 10 - 11:40 Country Report:

PHILIPPINES

Dr. Reynaldo Ebora

Acting Executive Director, PCAARRD


Australia

Mr. Bob Williams

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry


12:10 – 1:30 LUNCH


India

Dr. Thangavelu Raman

Principal Scientist

National Research Council for Banana (NRCB)


Indonesia

Dr. Ir. Muhammad Prama Yufdy

Director, Indonesian Centre for Horticulture Research & Development

2:20 – 2:40 Taiwan Banana Research Institute Report (TBRI)

Dr. Chih Ping Chao

Director, TBRI


Vietnam

Dr. Tran Ngoc Hung

Head, Biotechnology Division

Fruit and Vegetable Research Institute

3:00 – 3:20 COFFEE BREAK


Malaysia

Dr. Pauziah Muda

Director, Horticulture Research Center (MARDI)

3:40 – 4:10 AC4 – TR4 Programme in Africa

Dr. Altus Viljoen

Professor, Stellenbosch University

4:10 – 4:40 MUSALAC program on prevention of incursion of Foc TR4 in the Americas and Carribean

Dr. Jorge Sandoval

Research Director,

CORBANA

4:40 – 5:00 Program/ Activities of FAO - Asia and Pacific in Relation to Quarantine of Diseases in the Region

Dr. Yusof Othman

Plant Protection Consultant

FAO Regional Office for Asia Pacific

5:00 – 5:20 Foc TR4 Program of Tropical Fruit Network (TFNet) in addressing Foc TR4 in Asia Pacific Region

Dr. Mohd Desa Haji Hassim

Executive Officer

Tropical Fruit Network

7:00- WELCOME DINNER

24 August 2016 Day 2

8:30 – 12:00 WORKSHOP: Research &Programs on Prevention of Spread & Management of Foc TR4 in Asia & the Pacific

Break Out Groups –

• Group 1 - Foc Prevention of Spread and Associated Research & Policies

• Group 2 - R&D on Management and Mitigation of Foc TR4

12:00 – 1:30 Lunch

1:30 – 3:00 Continuation of Workshop

3:00 – 3:15 Coffee Break

3:15 – 5:30 Presentation of Workshop Outputs from Group 1 & 2

Plenary Discussions

25 August 2016 Day 3

8:30 – 9:30 Summary of Day 2 Workshop Outputs and Plans for Next Steps on Research for the Region

9:30 – 10:00 Coffee Break

10:00 – 12:30 Revisit the status of BAPNET relative to it’s role, structure and resource partnerships in responding to the threat of Foc TR4 in Asia and the Pacific

12:30 – 1:30 Lunch

1:30 Guangzhou City Guided Tour (c/o GDAAS)

2:30 – 5:00 Core Committee to summarize and document workshop recommendations to be submitted to the BAPNET Meeting participants


5.1.3 Annex 3: Meeting press release The Conference Notice This year’s BAPNET Steering Committee meeting will be held at Guangzhou, Guangdong, China, August 23-26. Please pay attention to the following information, it will be helpful for your trip. Conference place: YanLing Hotel (address: Yanling Road No. 29, Tianhe District, Guangzhou) Accommodation: YanLing Hotel, room reservation phone: 020-61131220, web: http://www.huilv.com/H/view11440/ Traffic: From the airport to YanLing Hotel, you have two options, (1) get on the metro line 3 (this is the only line from airport to city center) at Baiyun airport (airport South station, marked with 1*), get off at YanTang station (2*) , through the B exit (3*) , hotel (4*) is 40 meters away on the left of the YanTang station. From the airport to hotel, the metro will take 45 min and ￥7. (2) take taxi from airport to hotel, it will take about 40 min and ￥120. Contact name: Huijun Gao ([email protected]; Tel: 186 6627 7343)

5.1.4 Annex 5: BAPNET meeting presentations 10th BAPNET Meeting presentations can all be found on the BAPNET Website

http://banana-networks.org/Bapnet/resources/publications/10th-bapnet-steering-committee-meeting/

Proceedings of the 10th Banana Asia Pacific …banana-networks.org/Bapnet/files/2017/12/Full...7....

Documents

Transcript of Proceedings of the 10th Banana Asia Pacific …banana-networks.org/Bapnet/files/2017/12/Full...7....