HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0728.064 2000-2002 TESTIMONY AGAINST THE INTRODUCTION OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED COFFEE
CULIVARS INTO TI-IE KONA COFFEE REGION.
Ken Sheppard, Coffee Cognmittee chair, Kona Farmers Alliance. I am here to present testimony
against the introduction of genetically modified coffee cultivars into the Kona growing region
for Federal Trade Mark protected coffees.
I will unlit my testimony to the science of cross fertilization which I believe has not been fully
appreciated .or addressed.
My main reference is "Coffee Botany, Biochemistry and Production of Beans"( extracts
attached written by eminent scientists from prestigious organizations,itprovidcs ample data
on many tests which determined the degree of cross pollination under various situations
worldwide.
Kona Typica is coffee arabica which is a very strong pollinator. Not ®nly will it pollinate itself
but it will cross pollinate with nearby trees due to windrift and insects and much further afield
with flee help of bees. Depending on conditi®ns, the studies say, the degree of outcrossing can
vary from ~ to 93%; Dr. Bittenbender of CTAI-IR suggests 9 to 16%, a not insignificant number.
I-IOW FAR AND I-IOW QUICKY WILL UNWANTED GENES SPREAD?
No-one knows for certain in the Kona region; this maybe a useful project for UPI to do before
we get to the point of no -returry ~~:s~~ve
dh~~~ - B mom:
BUT: ~
G~sa~ty Ccun~E~
We do know that the yield in a coffee field increases by up to 17% when bees are present,
indeed farmers are bringing in hives just for this reason.
We do know that when we have a full~on coffee flowering the noise of the millions of bees on
the coffee is almost deafening.
We do know that bees can travel from 2. to 8 miles( or more
We do know that five well placed bee colonies could cover the whole of North and South Kona
We do know that there are many more than five commercial honey bee colonies in Kona as
well as untold numbers of wild colonies. -
WHAT ARE TI-iE CONSEQUENCE OF CROSS FERTILIZATION WITI~i GM COFFEE?
• The coffee bean will have a GM element that will be consumed...affect unknown as no
studies have been done that we are aware of.
• Any new coffee trees propagated from seed will contain a GM element that will be passed on
through the generations.
• Traditionally farmers have planted new plants either from volunteer seedlings commonly
called pule-pule or seeds selected from their favorite healthy and best producing trees. Both of
these cost effective .methods could no longer be practiced.
• The only way to guarantee new non-contaminated stock would be to propagate vegetatively
from coffee trees known to exist before the GMO spill. 'This leas traditionally not been done in
Kona but assuredly it will be yet another cost burden on already strapped farmers.
~~nn. N®.
~tle Ia1o.
t
~ a
~
def. D~~~
t
• If we have an unwanted GMO spill we could only eradicate it by locating and destroying alI
of the planted and wild GIVI contaminated trees throughout flee island. This would be
impossflble and be prohibitvely expensive for the Industry, flee County and flee State who
would have to fund flee clean-up, notwithstanding the cost of litigations.
• It has been suggested fleet we hand pollinate and bag our trees to produce seed. I--Iow would
we get uncontaminated pollen? I-Iow would we guarantee that the seeds were
uncontaminated? Who would. pay for flee testing and certification?
• A less sure method would be to set up a certified seed and / or nursery programs to provide
new stock at subsidized prices again s~sluiring County, State and Federal funding, Non-
complying Nurseries would be out of business.
For the above scientifically based reasons I respectfully submit to the Council that there is no
safe way to field test a genetically modified coffee in or near North and South Kona.
I urge the council, no I beg you, to pass this resolution tm show that you understand and
support us in our wish to preserve our livelihoods and way of life.
I am a new coffee farmer, many of you have grown up with Kona Coffee always being here
but r ctfuliy, some~nes flee eyes of a child can see the beauty of a flower zxaore clearly,
please help us preserve the world's best coffee that the Kona Coffee pioneers put their life's
blood, sweat and tears into providing such an economically important legacy for I-iawaii.
Thank you.
t
b~
c~~
L~~d~n ~ ~ye~~~y
,A41~~~4~1 ~~~~N
Pubtis~~~4 ~y
~d~~t~scsrt, ~e~~~~ti~ 9~
E+
2$ Botrcnical Classi~aation of Coffee
small (1 - 3µm), but modern rtBethods o#~ staining chromosomes (banding}
open up possibalitaes of studying the chromosome morphology in more
detail.
Reproductive Sysierras
Psil[anihtas. In than genus dowers have a short style and long corolla tube
(Figure 2.6-1). Systems of incompatibility appears to be absent anti most
species, e.g. P. lsengalensis, are autogamous. However, occasional cross
pollination and consequently geaatic exchatsge stay occaar, as heterozygous
plants have heart found after analysis by electrophoresis.
Gaffes arabica. Flowers of this species are typical of the genus Coffeex
short corolla tube, long style and exerted . staattens (Figure 2.6-2).
rpholo ~~it raattaral cross pollination, but nevertheless C
~r'Q atxa is ely autogarnous. Fruit set after self pollination is tai per cent
or lter (Carr
~$to et a~,
2~~3). Its. ivory Coast, Le Paerr~s (personal cozrt-
munication) e~ecteci self palliaon Dag 32 trees of Ft progenies of crosses
between vagioats accessions of G ~tafiicre from Ethiopia, ®f the 8,~Q
flowers 5,4~€IO set fruit after self pollination. 'I°lsis means a succxss rate of ~5
fruits to 112€3 dowers. Hovae~aer, this perccgat varied fgotn 3 to 41 peg
cent betwe try, which coasld indicate variation in the sde~ree of self f~ir-
tzitty its getld populatiotas of C. ~tr~al~iecz, A/deveg (19t3S1 reoort,~l_~ -
cent cross ptallinati~ iza w~ uiata C: ~r'abic~ ant E 'o ' .
ost stu es on degr~ of natnt ero~ pollinataost avem carried oast
on ettltivars of C. earcadsica, ~arhich tandea-aye~ti many cycles of selection. ~y
tasirsg the recessive des genes Cera (yellow endospe~n) and Paaagsaar~-
scerrs (purple leaves) Caavalho ~a€td i~.ru i 49 an ~ er
~~(1~7~) in Kenya f percentages of natural Dart-pollination-rang-
ing fromre 7 to 25 per cent_
f=igure 2.6: 1. Fiowreas of Psrlanthres, orr the Right: Flower eroith Removed
Corolla; 2. Flowers of Comma
-
y.
'F
area,-.vp•+d+XV _
Boaeeraica! Clrrssgfzrx~Pion of Coffee . 29
. Dipdt~id .Sj~ecies of the Genus Coffe,~ Nlosl dipload coffee species have
proved to be l:igttly self ixaconapatible including ?14 tested species of the
section l~cascearocoffe~. Deer ~'allayes, Pochet seed. Gilles {1959)
describe how, after self polliaaation, pollen tube growth on flee stigma of C.
can~hora becomes ciastoated and further penetration into the style is
blocked. aaud { 19812} produced further evidence for a toplaytic
system of incompatibility C_ ctaraephor~, which is conecolled by one gene
with xnaxttiple alleles. t~ sinaalar rnechanism appears to operate also in Con-
gusta coffee (a hybrid between C. eongegasis seed C. cane~daor~t). ~ the
other hand, observations sin ~ liberic~ indacate that the isacoaupatebility
reaction can be delaye€! until the day of anthesis, Pecletration of the pollen
tubes in the stigma and style could take place with `bud pollination'
(Ramon, personz+l coaaaaication).
One notable exception appears to be an accession in the living coffee
collections tea Ivory Coast of aaraknown origin but resembdaaag C, brevapes
and self-eon~pa~'!a!e (Le l~aer~s seed Louarn, persoaarsal comnawaicataon).
VVe observed mat some pollen tubes ~w through the style while others
were blocked of ~e platy none of the etageres, as an i~i~le co~n-
binations_ '1`he offspring of such try was very homogeneous. Could this F
mean xneetatiosa o sae ~ a! altng it inoperatsve?
l3cca of the dew of self isacoartpaiability in most diploid
spceies, a high !$ve! of hroaygosity will be mailatained iII populations and
this leas great coazse~uera~ to biding (see Chapter 3).
~bratd i~ofa~s~tdoaes Coffer
'The variafility existi~ ~ nateara! coffee populations has been studied to a
limited extent ~ fs~ port~.s (1937) eves one of the first to describe the
variability of populations caf G e~laora, C. laberica and C. s8eraopltyl![a
and their offsprialg in Ivory Coast. Cotesiderable work was also carries! out
on Sava oa €auaaecrous prnies of gntroduced coffee species (Cramer,
1957}.
Botanists and geneticists have in their recent effarts to explore and pre-
serve coffees betas t~saears~s applied varioxes lsaethods to d~screbe the var4
ability print wits! coffee pcspuions, ncleading: (a) tnorphcrlogicat
observations and na>xnert~l omo€say; (b) araaiy~is of electrophoretic vari-
ants; (c) steadies of the #ire~s~ncy dis~beatioar of incosnpatibiiity alleles
$rithin and between populate®~rs; and (d) gcaeetac analyses with progen$es of.
controlled cznsse,~.
A few examples of natetzal coffee populations ~aay serve as an illeastra
lion.
G{~t°~EE SELECT(®N AND ~REEt3ttVG
~E~r~SerY A.N. van der Vossen
ate 'ern
In spite of the tremendous genetic potential revealed by reo~t botanical
and (cyto}genetic a~eseaarh Ito the genus Coffee (see Cfaaptea~ 2), coffee
hreediaag is soli largely restricted to the two species, CofJ`~ ur~bicd and C
caraephora, (lent dQnBiaaate world coffee prodaxction.
G liberica and C. excedra live lost most of their earner significance,
althoaagh they aru still grown to soffie eaten( iaa a few countries (I~g grad
de 1'o~erck, 1968). ;~I~awevm-, C. dfir~ica-and ether species Ire G corage~asas
leave contnbtated faal characters to flee gene pools of ~spectivety iG
asalaica anal C rraah~rra through natural. and artifficiai is c hybri- "
disatioaa (G~rasaaer, 1957; o ~ 1969).
~rabiea cee is prefer€ed over all other species' because of its sui~rr
quality aaad it wtsaald leave s~ntinued to be the e~ais$ve prodeaa~r •
of alt coffer in the world, aas it lead been. for Fnore these IS€P maul t
end of the 19th tuxy, of it had not been so vaal;aerable to p~-
ticaalarly coffee mast (~a'~rideia usastaa~lx perk. ~c when grown ~t
lower altitudes in flee tropical zoaaes. AE tine present (inns st still oonmbut~s
aboast 75 per cent off dae ~orid coffee mainly dcxe to the fact thin
more finnan two-(lairds of all coffer is produced by the Centcat and South- '
A~msric~a countries, where aambiea eo~ee was free from ,He~raaleaea epi-
demics aants7 197®.
Although most ®f the arabica coffee cultivated there is of the same
narrow genetic origin seed therefore as susceptible as the wiped oft
by Heraail~a ~ Sri I.:arslm need d+onesia a centaary ago, it is uaah'kely that tine
least will repeat itself €or the reasons.
first, atnaost .all coffee z~s cultivated ins subtropical areas (23razil) or at
altitaades alxave 1,41 m in. tine tropical zones, where cliaaaatic conditioBas
favocar the lmst r~t€aer than flee pathogen. ~ I
8eccsndly, the avaaB~biiity of modems f®ragicades raxakes ef€e~tive ooratsot
possibte, thoaa~ at ~nsideralsle cost and therefore decreased profitability
of coffer prodaaetion. "
~airdly, lDa~eedixag programmes to develop disease-resistant varieties,
which .had started iaa countries like ~razal (Monaco, 1977) nand Ccalonabia
(C:"astillor and Moreno, 1984?) already in flee 1960s iaa aaaticipation of pos-
sible 17earaideiat epidemics, leave made oiderable progre~ mad the fia^st
rust-resistant e~arieties are aalready lseiaag rely in soraae ocsaantries. liow=
ever, gn a pereraraial c€gsp like coffee a to new varieties is 've
~48
Co,
ffee Stlectaon card Breedang ~9
and along-tarrtax pr~ss_ Ttie econoffiic nnpact of the breeding ef~oata on
eo~ee lsax>duction ~ thesz gauntries rsaay, tJherefore, not be noticed for
another decade.
At the time of the Heeradleica epidemics ist South-East Asia (1870-19530)
fungicides lied not yet been inv~ated aced lithe eras known about the gene-
tics of host anti pathogen. while iAa Sti Lanka, ~ffec gultivation was almost
coxnplcteiy ~piaced lay Lea, ties s;oi zndustry Indonesia. eras saved by
tkae introdugtion of the r®isusta forte of Cta,~ r.~raephorca, which ca~bined
vigorous grower and produceion w~ a high level of resistaxace to coffee
leaf reset. l~iowever, the price to be paid was the mss of good quality. '
From flee pioneerixag ~rork on goff~ biology seed selection carraed gait on
Feist lava during the period 1900-192 (Fe~t~'da, 1948; Gamer, 1957)
evolved Llae systgraaatac br~ding daas, which e~naplary to all
subsegaaent breeding probes of rolausta goffee ixa India and Africa.
Ise arabica coffee at~aaal br was given ~rious attention at a much
later dat;, and ntosi varieties commera~ally at presesat Latin .
Aaraergca ~ weli. as iae ~A.frica and Asia. have arms iroxn sixreplc systenns of
line ~le~ion withsza gen hta~ogenetaaxs ~xaren€ populations gaxri~
out an period 19?.53~1940. E~ rxrtt~ly oa good adagtatioA to
local ecologigal conditit3ns, yield asrad t}uality. T.~ise resistance wag giveA
lo®v prioxBty, either bemuse of tixe als~nce of ~xioaas as in Latin
Anaex'ica, or the relati`re of e~trol by chemical encases as with f~a~aii-
eia in thc: highlaaeds of ~t Afrit~. An e~geption ass the ra~€
€~es€sta€et era-
lsica varieties released India 19451 (l~arasixnhaswanay, 19b1), but
these are root grtsw~ moth cosxexnercia.~y outside Asia xuaiAly bec~axse of
their iatferior best and lagaxor quality.
~.ais situatioxa has contpl~eiy changed during tlxe last tevo decades.
Erg efforts have bey greatly in ~ Latin America in the face
of cofffee l raxst (h~fona~, 19
i7}, while the grave of ooff~ Merry
disease (C~ike~®t~ac~.aa~n ea~a ~oack sac ~dorf) to arabiga coffee
in the hi ds of Eat seed Central Africa have prompted a number of
exatireiy xae~ra prtagra~m~, partigta#arly ixn lCenya (Van der Vossen and
~dalyaro,1980,1981) axed in 'a (Van der (Xxraaff,1978,1981). Con-
- sideranle program l~s lien aa~s~a a relatively short period, not in the
least due to tBae applis~tion of a~van~ breetliaag and selection xuethods.
IElo~vevar, resaalts would have far less spectacular without the basic
iraforx~aa2ion on gtaff~ genetics pa' by-ties eminent coffee scientists of -
earlier days (aeviewed by S 1960; Calho ea al, 1969) axed Lhe
fi3ndamental work on ~easaileaa tarried oug by tk?e C.off~ Must research
Centre xn 1°oatugal (1Z , l~ttencourt and 12.1)0, 1975). CDf sixeaalar
importance are the Lirele~ efforts of anti geneticists to collect
gerrnplastn of his coffer fa~a its €aenRrgs of high genetic diversity in '
Ethiopia (Meyer ~ 19b8; (auiliauffiet and I~allb, 1967, 1978).
Successfaal i~ybridisation of ties two specaes Coffee savx'abicea aaaci C.
50 Coffee Selea'tion arad lireedang
' canephorc~ originally achie®~ in ~raail around 1950 (l0~donaco, 1977), has
graved the way for a~eutirrely new appsoa~la ~ robusta coffee breeding.
'Fhe arab hybrids developed in Ivory Coast (Caput, 1972) appear to
have the potential, on acc°ouaat of their begfer liquor quality and power
caffeine conterai, of eventually repflas much of ~e traditional robusta
coffee of the humid trolrical regions of lowland Africa and Asia.
l[tr I'°opaa3at~ns -
Co,
ff~ arrabica ~ .
The large number of nasaed varieties and selections of arabica coffer;
encountered in the variety collections at coffee research ceaatres and also
grown ~anmercisply ((~eIlmaaa, 1351; I-1earer, 1952) belies tiZe actually
very aaarrow genetic da`versity of the base populations from which they were
select. dosing the first ]self of this venturg i~istorieal .evidence
Chapter iiadicat~ that t~aese bssE pQpsalations a$! desceaadorl from ~e -
few tease moved various effort to iaatrodt~ce arabir~ cof#~ fe~axa
Souther Arabia, aaovr Yezn~i, ~Lo Asia anti Latina Aaaeerira duriaag the
y pmt of tic ei~nth €~atury and taster ljasast Afcaca to the enrt ~f
tpae nineteenth centaary. But rscs~ arntx~ a 5fl years ago did eoe breeders .
start trr rise ~t even flee ro~~ ire Yeaale€a represented jaast a ~sall fr~c-
tion of ~e po~dtial genetic variability found tat the reap titre of origin, or
at least the t~ta~ of genetic daver~ty, for arabica comae in flee south
westerct #aigpalandc of ~tlaiopia {Sylvaitra, 19§5; Carvalho, 1959; l0~oaaaco, .
1968).
~Tlae coffer frosrs Yeffien have rase to two distinct types: G ~~lrs
tPrab ~ usually ~ ~ vrhich =a+as the earpiest grown coffee tat Asia
axe ~ A~erit~ an G ~°ubBcra var. fara~€ard~crn which. came to Soak
Aztaerica tparough ~c d of 1~ l~~uniora, forrraerpy t~plett ~ourbt~n
(C~rvslho 1959). The ~,ssrt~n type pis a snore compact and upr~a€
grower habit tau tpac coffee seed is generally higher yielding seed
produces bettea- gaeality coffee.
Similar boaax~ia types of +ec were brou~lzt io fast Afrit~, either fprx~
La l$~cznion og• directly f~€ssax eAdeta by ratissionaries. 'tae raaffit; `~rerscpa
fission' given to the coffer which vras €~serl to establispa snort of the coffee
_ estates in I~euya untiF 1940 bears testianony to these early-stay aggaicultu~
picaa~eeas.
The genetic uniformity within these populations is further etapsanced by
the predomiasatatly sel#
patirag zaataare of G ~arabicta, ~`be suta~que€atly
eeacountered variateon, which gave rise to so many .txdtivars, is generally
believed to be taarare the result of spontaneous mutations 'of mayor genes
conditioning Iapt, fait and seed characters tl€an of resida3al taeteroaygosity
{C~rvalho ~ , 1969). ~iow-ever, Bvhere ~ and hoaarbrrre were planted
Cof
fie Selection and ~re~rling 51
• in ciosc Iasi a.~ oaa rte ti •islisation mm o
d~t~ ~ ~a~ crops- a~cccasso~,aifl ve to
vigoazzaas d aasedo P~oao ~
a~ ~ c rabic scats Y ln'c'
of idaac ;~8 }1~€, anal ~ rsysnce a~ lac French ~Iis-
a~ ~rrB~caaz ~a~ei in F 'ia~ (Fc, 197(i} woad ~t a
of ~#~liity of use briar popaala8iorss.
The ~c~~ €~dae3s ~S a~ Cho, .
1951} ~ ~ facaxid iga aira~ t~tfee t~satra'bufi:id to a
emery i.~caa~ btr z~€icrstasg~g of fhe ~eeactia~ of arabica coffee a~
claraalg~ duo €;laar alipl~sl aaioa.}~ o$ i~cce of all ciaaaacters in
this a~astt~fsiosci cics. Tine anaaaa t;ha~C~ras ®f a few rnu~acats with
sa~i~saec breczting are ~retscta~a~ Table 3.1.
The . ch~~.t of Cam (F~ 3.1} days aaa ess~tiad
role asp ~osg ~ gssogrcs, as ai eaf~ a tatvmt;aadtaaas
for ai~tcs of axsff ~aotli€~ i.e. lag procluc~i`?i~y bgr ita,~-
' ~'raressceaa~ a~.d Cera ham btu eased as ma~lCer ~
lfa~ 3.i: !~ltatat~ in aG ~a~6~Vdittgch are of ~rt3et~~ S~$nificancc to
Srt3~~r?g
~esass E2ormiaaaracaa origiratt? i4lalra
P~oaatfaaa zeiisYSasa population charactar?is~s
Cafusaa G't aisaaos2 amrratsias~ Aour3sttaa. Std fgi compact groa4rtla dasa tD
r4oaaairaa~aaas siaort ireternode:A.
small baans
Purpursscerag pr racs~sius foamad ss:va3fai iirts~ purple issues
sera ~ reca.~ive Brain (393Sy yellow eeadosperm
Erects Er • i:a~mpl~ Br~el, #atiotaaffFa, orthotropic issanch
doaninaaace !Essays #ra typaca grovath
taourmon
R4sragog6pe ~3 comply 3ygaica. BrazN Ci83[~3 large leaves and
docaairs~,nce ~eds,loaa8 'snteraeodes,
vigorous grouMa, ie;~
Lauriraa tr va?cessiue IaocsrtsorL BraE€E aaarrow issues, ln~u
protlatctirity, sued
- raarrovv seed paiacCaaad a2
on® tread. ions ca~eiaat:
ConffiraY
Pdtokka rrao, it dotattiE eery old iratmt?uction eery small mares and
rra~.E3SiVB frYla4a Ysirrtera (fi) bt:8rt3. Very COmpeiCY
ptaDt
Sao Bsmardo SB elmost ~ampfete typ~a, Braal short internodes and
domiraasacta c~mpaa:t groYVth like
Caturra
San Ramon Sii cora~ataete typica, Braii extremely short
doaaz'arsBnCe iaaternades
52 Cofj~ee Selection and Breeding
Figure 3.1: Cvffes araklca. Young coffee lzlarets, one year after Meld
{slanting at ~uiru, Kenya; on the left cuitivar ~L28 about 1.60m high, on
the rigP?t a plant of the saev~ compa~et gro+nring hybrid variety resistant to
Coffee Berry disease and Leaf !Rust, about 1.10 to high.
:eta s ~
r
a- - . i,~ -
+ , n~ t fit: ~
~ ~t ~
E:'.
t''.
Aar III
::y±
;t~,.;.
r
t.'.
"ate
i
.k. %
/ A
to deteY~Ri~1e t~3~ ~ 13atfllFal CrOSS-~ollilHltaOAI flY! ~abaCa o0ffee.
~I'~a:ta ~nhaffi~s talc possi~sa~at~ of platttttR~ a$ Still cla~.cer Sp+~,$. 'c~da~a-
gogigse has men a~r~ae~-c~.Yly to a kited ext~t irra a f I.at~
ePacan coatattties (a;.g. Colasaaabaa.), as ate large limns seed flavor
were of integest to same ~aagogsearg conseatsters. Lauriaaa has bin n~ ~n
l~te~liog b~ of its low aeaate cotatent. Cay~ee 8srecrlers have fawn
time to time slaz3w~a itatcr~t an oilier dw~f type caffees sa~ch as ~okka, Sao
IReriiarai® aiid Sao 1~anion, but their low productivity anal sfil beau. s8.~
eve lar® to he a jags hanalia~. 1~'or ~taiaex3 dripcecsaas of naa~st
aa~tatao~ seta! ty~s faaiand in arals coffee refnce is male ~ reva~w
~l~rs by C"ter (1957) std (a~9~o). .
f3f the titttne setecti®~ made watl~an arabica a~~e lao~ulations in
~rarioais axattntiies otttside the taetitrc of genetic tlivexsity, followi#ig
should be rnention~ because of their iiitporeauce as cultivars and/or pao-
genitors in cavff~ breading:
- bent: a vaiietq developed from a single tree selectioaz ~ Jhrlysore,
inaiia, aroiiaid 1.920 {lmdaraciitthaswsy, 1950), ~isty a--
be n icy and an uailanowia arches ig~e; it is yieidiitg and
resistant tv ice II of ~letpir ezts aratst~trtx; ectaons within li`eot lilac flee
Coffee ~eiectec~n grad Breeding 53
cv. K7 shoe~ed also sarcte resisee to coffee Merry disease {CBD) in
Kenya: .
-~~~-.~.aaad ~t ~I~eo~ of the ~aiclaoaaoaar Cofer
Resea~h Sta~sn in India: flee are ant to Wren mast races and are
to fix. ° " red f a aaa ra beteveerE G nr
1
a
- IJlaae P~oaaa~aira; a ~~aa~ioty ~thag from t}~pircz ~ffee ire Jamaica
and found to soffie ce to G~3I? ire Kenya;
- k1i fir- a r€ety beiie~osl to be flee result of nataaral hybr;-.
t3on between C ~rr~ar~ and. ~ phor~a (Rodrigues ea aL, 1975)
anal groom ~?sdeIy ore ~e ici of `I"unor. It flee most ~anportant
~egaator for rtance to coffs~ !f east egad Itas niso good resistance to
CI3D (Van der Vossea and ~tlaiyaro, 1980).
S~sternatic collection of ~exnaplassaa of arrabiea coffee in its centre of
higia ~netic dimity st~ta;d ~itlt flee I~.~O Coffer Mission to Ethiogia in
1964-65 (Fal~y~ et i96~). l~a~~y oga soeas e$rlaer oecasaons nsate-
rial had been axallect~ , I?thio ~ ' I ~ot~^s. Aby~€nian .
coffee ~owax ort 3a~a arose f by C~am~r (1957) during
leis ,sit to ~ 192. Valli ~ taaa, o and kJarar,
svhici< .d ant tga ioaas ~i des befoee fl9~, ire
supplenaente^d tla ~a Iakc Ike, I~ilia, Cst` ' aaad ours,
eolleetcd by ~ Isf the British ~ fees isi E duri~
191-2 (Jones, 1956) Thgr ` ' of ~m~s (194~~) to the
I~Iateau ass souEb-eass~rsa ~~aacia~ag resnlte~ tees a ltu~e Sudast,
llarbaa~ Sudan a loo ateaa, of ieh one ~roaeld e~aeaatuaily
p€o~e to be o~ of t t genitc~s fur G'I~D resistance (Van der
Vossen and ~Iaalyaxo, 19g~).
'Tlae botauis~ .and. geaaetic su~4~et~s oaa~ta~asetal a~LQba~~ca pogulations in
Ethiopia by ~yl~~lra (1955)y I.~VS.GXiar (1958) and ®thVf.U, aS Weil as on a .
! po¢suiatlon of Ethatslsinn ire I3ra~il by Carvalho (1959) prepared
ties groaand fuse flee subt e$'fo by tias.I~~fl (i~deyer ~ 1960, flee
®RSI'Glbf (cae de la Rer ~ieratafi~aac et Te~ielue Gates-il+d~r)
(Guiilauuaet and 1~aLI~, 1967, 1978) arad floe ivthiopiaxa institcats of Agri-
caaltaaaal Rsses (Eis, 1971) to oolleCt and preserve valuabls germs-
plasm of biea hsfor~ permaneaatiy Iost. Coratateiss
e,?laere germplasna gaf a.bica. coffee is p$escntly being a~intained lases beers
listed iaa Table Z.€ae Tlae claaracterastics_of tI~ anatsrial and its si ce
to ba~eding ~1 be discus~d later. -
Co,
f,~ca craratphvra (Figaare 3.2
j .
This diploid coffer spceies is iaadigsrious to dts n equatorial Iowlaaad
forest zone frown Caeaaraea to Uganda. It ~ ciaar~acteris~ by its great variatian
in forrnc or ,y of them oeiginally described sander different
6tT Coffee Sedtetiart and ~e~eedang
ing and the stiga~ is then also receptive. Flowers wither in one or two
days after pollination. _~lowers of rotausta coffee rcx3, t
tares a~_ :~~,g~ of 3~~t~ ~Rn
(4) Aaica ~ffee is aaatagarnous witty a loan Id per cent degree of
z~ n ottaoa, ~ ; ~
Voss, m con to rotsustst coffer, ~flch is strictly alloganimus
with a etolrhytic syst~a of aeelfi
flncoaxapatt~slity (l~erthaud, 291})_
the styles of ro'ou flowers a~ somewhat longer compares to those of
aral~is~ flowers, Melt ateay Aso far~itate cross-pollia~.tion. Can the other
hand, ~ arat~ic~c cofff~ elf-gsollissation slaortiy befonr ogenimg of t~
fflower buds ~ not €~ncommon (Stoffels, 193.
Ardafictal Hybrid$rataan
Techniques of artificial cross-pollination applied in most breeding pro-
ga~agnanes ®f a~°aaca coffee are very ~zailar €o those described by Carvalho
and l~ona~ (1969). z~cul~tioaa, necx;s~ry to event selfing, is ef'fec.
by removing tic whole coxxilla ~ q sped scissors ~e -
or two dam amore flow.. (genre 3.3a). Tfie section ~ a lcla with
osculated flowers is the emclos~ aa~ a bag. Ac~rding to e
m ossen, 1977)
~teoaa a&ed ~aalcF ~ fely dog aaratfll flee evening Mare the
day of antlx (Figure 3.3tD). The stagm~ of uaef~ ffowers ~rere
f®aartcl to r~lstave f~ at least nee days (l~Hgu~ 3.~6). dais names -
tha€ asolataon ~ shaaatd €ts~ tic reano~d un~ two weep after aaattt~sis ~ ,
rev Ili:~~t~zn.. e ~ 5 aege cross~g pro
poltirtataa~ -shad ores sear€se days without ~'ec1~g freai€ set.
Flos~rin a t~ i~u~ by agp$ping overlt~d irrigation to a
coffee field, provides period of water str~ Iles In ade-
quate, in practac~ oazly towards tltc ~d of a dry seasota (~rowttidb, 1975).
'T'his offers ~e ogportunity to stagger the f4owering tame and so to increiise
the olrportaartity of co~ag large progra~~,s of hybridisation for
breed~g or hybrid sced 'oar itt one s~son.
~ c r~u coffee emaseu4ation shoaald, strictly
spealda~g, not ~ rt . kiowever, a srr3a.#l. amount of s~elfang occurs
occasionally d ~q of ' I crass- 'oaa, to
' for t3IC~ iX$, ~@ 8~sually applied flit robusta
(1<eT'wesria, 1969).
~~~Q.'9t S#afltg~ .
~fftcaent pollen stowage is of pr~ctacat ittng~ortancse ~ ooffec breeding, since
crosses y leave to be raaadc bin parents wl.~fla;tt do not Rower sitraul
~ateously, or wl~xiclt ~ far ags~t. t is oaf gseaY advantage Bn the -
x ro4~agsta x~tersc hybridasatiog pt'ogrammes ~s
rase
ca u dory Cx~ast (f
apat, 1992) and iat Kenya. (C~vvuor and Van
.
116 Physiology of the Coffee Crop
l
ieldlaer Tree
`ITne yield of indawiduad trees at caondentional slaacings is bggh~y dependesat
~n the nuusaber of poterstial flowering nodes produced the previous year
(e.g. ~eaurxsosat and ~a~aanag~, 19~f3;'~!€osstoya, 8yhaain and Unzana, 1961;
Gebre°~grinbffier, 1978). 'Ilse raas.ffiber of frsaitirtg modes per tree is the most
variable coss~ponent of }field arnos.g trees, and it is the oosnponent that is
increased assost by tr~.tssaents such as irrigation., rgauiching a~ad Iii-fercilisa-
tiom {Figasre 5.4}. lta i~ersya, those treatrisesats isa~~ !attic effect on either ttse
seasonal fruiting pattern or the average bean sip (Carsnell, 1974). .
Fsuia.Set
'Tl'ba ausnber of fraaits per node stands oast as an important yield coanponexst
~hass cornparireg cropping masons, ber.~use fr€~(t sct differs be$we~n ftovver-
ings, firs the range 20-0 per cent Arabi co {1~togueira, Car~rallao and
~tatasnes,1959; teddy and S~risaivasass, 1979). poor ftasit ~t sass ~ cawed
by (a) ttse de~elop~eret o#Yatrog~aaed #Toevers, att~baated to paolong~i
droasght or eacse raisafall during critl stages csf flo~sr~ #sud develo~-
mesat {I-Iaaxley Issra~l, 19b9; ~urraar, 19$2), andlor (b) ina,orsaplete
pollinatioss or Rion owissg to 'heavy lain, loss trdrL's or a
shortage of pators at bflossosn times. in ~:~aya, lire stigmas of arabi~a
coffee are receptyve for only 48 h; the porn, vahiclass shed gsredosas'snars~y
after flo~rer o~ni~, gable for o3sly 214-3b is; and the gAOllecs taat~s
cnaist groe~ sapidiy saaoaagh to reach rise oearies witlsim 2-3 da3~s (Figs
5.5). et a~#., {19b9) quoted ~s o€ e~ess shoa~r ~riods ?of
pollee ttabe groves. Ccartditaons faeourisa win€I and insect polliuatioss ire
insport~t ties ~ -messssspatt'lsle robaasta
sei~
fertile a~ s~ ets ee ere is cotes e e cross-pollinatioia 4 tc~ 93
r o - ~schdijan, ~avv seed ree j
(1977} shovaed that Baal wit sew oaa aralsica tree caged ~+ith and w'sth®ut ~
bee poilinators werre 45 per sent and 32 per sent €espectavely. also
Cisapter 3.)
Frs~aR Drop aaracd Qe+erbe~rirtg .
in favourable oorsditions 12_Z{} fruits cars be set per mode, each of vrh%ch _
carries a maxixuunx of two 3~4fl cnz~ leaves. Sttaclies on axabica coffee
iasdieate that ak>out ZQ ctrs' of I€~f is needed tQ suppoat each fitait withcaut _
severely +eltecli~ vegetative grovatls, Ieadiatg to bi-seasonal or baemniai.
beariysg {Caranell, 1974; Vasudeva and Itatageri, 1981). Consequently,
even coxantflng leaves at non-fruitassg nt9des, coffce is aisle to set snore frasits
than it can sustain. Some fruit shedding does occur, principally during the
period of ralaid f'rerit sv~relliaag (Fires 5.5 and 5.9); this sheds8aag is exacer-
bated by droaaght, tau~aeast defisiens.°y, defoliation (and etisrel sprays), seed
can be decreased easing auxin sprays {~rasvassirig and Canrsell,1970; Gopal,