Euphytica

, Volume 104, Issue 2, pp 127–139 | Cite as

Landraces: A review of definitions and classifications

  • A.C. Zeven
Article

Abstract

The first reference to landraces as genetic resources dates from 1890. Some 20 years later the first definitions of a landrace were published. In the period 1909–1952 several definitions of the term landrace have been presented. No definitions were discovered in articles published in the period 1953–1974. The reason could be that after the Second World War attention of plant breeders and others was focussed on making instant progress. New definitions have been presented since 1974. Genetically related landraces form a landrace group. Synonyms of the term landrace and landrace group as cited in the literature are also given. The classification of types of landraces given by Mayr in 1934 had been discussed and an amended classification provided, paying attention to contamination caused by seed change. As a landrace has a complex and indefinable nature an all-embracing definition cannot be given. However, I suggest the following: an autochthonous landrace is a variety with a high capacity to tolerate biotic and abiotic stress, resulting in a high yield stability and an intermediate yield level under a low input agricultural system.

landrace garden-race definition classification history 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, E. & H. Cutler, 1942. Races of Zea mays. I. Their recognition and classification. Ann Missouri Botanical Garden 21: 69-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Astley, D., 1991. Exploration: methods and problems of exploration and field collecting, pp. 11-22. In: J.G. Hawkes (Ed.), 1991. Genetic conservation of world crop plants. Academic Press. 87 pp. Also issued as Biol Journal of Linnean Society 43, no. 1.Google Scholar
  3. Banga, O., 1944. Veredeling van tuinbouwgewassen. Zwolle. 211 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Baur, E., 1914. Die Bedeutung der primitive Kulturrassen und der wilden Verwandten unserer Kulturpflanzen für die Pflanzenzuchtung. Jahrb Deutschen Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft 29: 104- 110.Google Scholar
  5. Bellon, M.R. & S.B. Brush, 1994. Keepers of maize in Chiapas, Mexico. Econ Bot 48: 196-209.Google Scholar
  6. Berg, T., 1993. The science of plant breeding - support or alternative to traditional practices? pp. 72-77. In: W.K. de Boef & lK. Wellard (Eds.), Cultivating knowledge. Genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. London. 206 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Bisson, J., 1989. Les Messiles, groupe ampélographique du Bassin de la Loire. Connaissance de la Vigne et du Vin. J Intern Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin 23: 175-191, see Levadoux (1948).Google Scholar
  8. de Blij, H.J., 1970. Wine, a geographic appreciation. Ottowa. 239 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Boursiquot, J.-M., 1990. Evolution de l'encépagemant du vignoble français au cours des trente dernières années. Progrès Agricole et Viticole 107: 15-20.Google Scholar
  10. Bowers, J.E., E.B. Bandman & C.P. Meredith, 1993. DNA fingerprint characterization of some wine grape cultivars. Amer J Enol Vitic 44: 266-274.Google Scholar
  11. Brandolini, A., 1969. European races of maize. Procs 24th Corn & Sorghum Research Conf: 36-48.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, A.H.D., 1978. Isozymes, plant population genetics structure and genetic conservation. Theor Appl Genet 52: 145-157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Camussi, A., 1979. Numerical taxonomy of Italian populations of maize based on quantitative trait. Maydica 24: 161-174.Google Scholar
  14. Ceccarelli, S., 1994. Specific adaptation and breeding for marginal conditions, pp. 101-127. In: O.A. Rognli, E. Solberg & I. Schjelderup (Eds.), Breeding fodder crops for marginal conditions. Dordrecht. 329 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Christiansen-Weniger, F., 1931. Bericht über eine Studienreise durch das ostanatolische Hochland. Zeitschr Züchtung A Pflanzenzüchtung 18: 73-108.Google Scholar
  16. Cleveland, D.A., D. Soleri & S.E. Smith, 1994. Folk crop varieties: do they have a role in sustainable agriculture? BioScience 44: 740-751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dennis, J.V., 1987. Farmer management of rice variety diversity in northern Thailand. PhD dissertation. Cornell University, Michigan University Microfilms print, Ann Arbor 367 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Ehdaie, B. & J.G. Waines, 1989. Adaptation of landrace and improved spring wheat genotypes to stress environments. J Genet Breed 43: 151-156.Google Scholar
  19. Falcinelli, M., L. Russi, V. Negri & F. Veronesi, 1994. Variation within improved cultivars and landraces of lucerne in Central Italy, pp. 81-87. In: O.A. Rognli, E. Stolberg & I. Schjelderup (Eds.), Breeding fodder crops for marginal conditions. Dordrecht. 329 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Frankel, O.H. & M.E. Soulé, 1981. Conservation and evolution. Cambridge. 327 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Fruwirth, C., 1928. Zur Frage der Erhaltung unserer Landsorten. (On the question of maintenance of our landraces). Pflanzenbau 5: 157-158.Google Scholar
  22. Fruwirth, C., 1930. Allgemeine Züchtungslehre der landwirtschaftlichen Kulturpflanzen. Berlin. 478 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Fruwirth, C. & Th. Roemer, 1921. Einführung in die landwirtschaftlichen Pflanzenzüchtung. Berlin. 150 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Goodman, M.M. & W.L. Brown, 1988. Races of corn, pp. 39-79. In: G.F. Sprague & J.W. Dudley. Corn and corn improvement. Madison. 986 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Harlan, H.V. & M.L. Martini, 1936. Problems and results in barley breeding. USDA Yearbook of Agriculture-1936: 303-346.Google Scholar
  26. Harlan, J.R., 1951. Anatomy of gene centers. Amer Nat 85: 97-103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harlan, J.R., 1975. Our vanishing genetic resources. Science 188: 618-621.Google Scholar
  28. Hawkes, J.G., 1983. The diversity of crop plants. Cambridge/ London. 184 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Hawkes, J.G., 1991. The importance of genetic resources in plant breeding, pp. 3-10. In: J.G. Hawkes (Ed.). Genetic conservation of world crop plants. Academic Press. 87 pp. Also issued as Biol Journal of Linnean Society 43, no. 1.Google Scholar
  30. Jacquemart, P., 1987. Les anciennes variétés fruitières en Wallonie. Brussel. 16 pp.Google Scholar
  31. Khairwal, I.S., C. Ram & A.K. Chhabra, 1990. Pearl millet. Manohar. 208 pp.Google Scholar
  32. Kiessling, H., 1912. Die züchterische Bearbeitung der Landsorten in Bayern. Beiträge zur Pflanzenzücht 2: 74-96.Google Scholar
  33. Kuckuck, H., 1939. Pflanzenzüchtung. Berlin. 125 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Kuckuck, H., 1952. Pflanzenzüchtung. Berlin. 132 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Kuckuck, H., G. Kobabe & G. Wenzel, 1991. Fundamentals of plant breeding. Springer Verlag. 236 pp.Google Scholar
  36. La Barre, W., 1974. Potato taxonomy among the Aymara indians of Bolivia. Acta Americana 5: 83-103.Google Scholar
  37. Lehmann, Ch.O., 1981. Collecting European land-races and development of European gene banks - historical remarks. Die Kulturpflanze 29: 29-40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lehmann, Ch.O., 1990. Hundert Jahre Sammlung und Nutzung von Landsorten, pp. 10-22. In: Gemeinsames Kolloquium: Sicherung und Nutzbarmachung pflanzengenetischer Ressourcen. Braunschweig/Gatersleben. 142 pp.Google Scholar
  39. Leng, E.R., A. Tavcar & V. Trifunovic, 1962. Maize of Southeastern Europa and its potential value in breeding programs elsewhere. Euphytica 11: 263-272.Google Scholar
  40. Lester, R.N. & E. Bekele, 1981. Amino acid composition of the cereal tef and related species of Eragrostis(Gramineae). Cereal Chem 58: 113-115.Google Scholar
  41. Levadoux, L., 1948. Les cépages à raisins de cuve. Bull Off Int Vin 21 (203): 39-45, cited by Bisson, 1989.Google Scholar
  42. Louette, D., A. Charrier & J. Berthaud, 1997. In situconservation of maize in Mexico: genetic diversity and maize seed management in a traditional community. Econ Bot 51: 20-38.Google Scholar
  43. Mansholt, U.J., 1909. Van Pesch Plantenteelt, beknopte handleiding tot de kennis van den Nederlandschen landbouw. 3rd revised edition, pt 2. Plantenteelt. Zwolle. 228 pp.Google Scholar
  44. Marchenay, Ph., 1987. A la recherche des variétés locales de plantes cultivées. Paris. 211 pp.Google Scholar
  45. Martin, G. & M.W. Adams, 1987. Landraces of Phaseolus vulgarisin Northern Malawi. I. Regional variation. Econ Bot 41: 190- 203.Google Scholar
  46. Mayr, E., 1934. Die Bedeutung der alpinen Getreidelandsorten für die Pflanzenzüchtung and Stammesforschung mit besonderer Beschreibung der Landsorten in Nordtirol und Vorarlberg. Zeitsch f Züchtung A: Pflanzenzüchtung 19: 195-228.Google Scholar
  47. Mayr, E., 1935. Ueber wissenschaftliche und praktische Ergebnisse der alpinen Landsortenforschung. Forschung und Fortschritt 11: 376-378.Google Scholar
  48. Mayr, E., 1937. Alpine Landsorten in ihrer Bedeutung für die praktische Züchtung. Forschungsdienst 4: 162-166.Google Scholar
  49. Negrul, A.M., 1946. Evropyljsky i aziatsky vinograd Vitis viniferaL. Ampelografiya S.S.S.R., Moskoa 1: 63, cited by Bisson, 1989.Google Scholar
  50. Nüesch, D., 1976. Untersuchungen und Beobachtungen an Hofsorten des Schweizer Mattenklee. Schweiz Landwirt Forschung 15: 401-410.Google Scholar
  51. Oldfield, M.L. & J.B. Alcorn, 1987. Conservation of traditional agroecosystems.Google Scholar
  52. Percival, J., 1921. The wheat plant. A monograph. London. 473 pp.Google Scholar
  53. Prospéri, J.M., F. Demarquet, M. Angevain & P. Mansat, 1994. Evaluation agronomique de variétés de pays de sainfoin (Onobrychis sativaL.) originaires du sud-est de la France. Agronomie 14: 285-298.Google Scholar
  54. Rieger, R., A. Michaelis & M.M. Green, 1991. Glossary of genetics. Classical and molecular. 5th edition. Springer-Verlag. 553.Google Scholar
  55. Rümker, K. von, 1908. Die systematische Einteilung und Benennung der Getreidesorten für praktische Zwecke. Jahrbuch der Deutschen landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft 23: 137-167.Google Scholar
  56. Schindler, J., 1918. Einige Bemerkungen über die züchterische und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Landrassen unserer Kulturpflanzen. Deutsche Landwirt. Presse 45 (25): 155-156.Google Scholar
  57. Sevilla, R., 1994. Variation in modern Andean maize and its implications for prehistoric patterns, pp. 219-244. In: S. Johannessen & Chr.A. Hastorf. 1994. Corn and culture in the prehistoric New World. Westview Press. 623 pp.Google Scholar
  58. Soleri, D. & S.E. Smith, 1995. Morphological and phenological comparisons of two Hopi maize varieties conserved in situand ex situ. Econ Bot 49: 56-77.Google Scholar
  59. Teshome, A., B.R. Baum, L. Fahrig, J.K. Torrance, T.J. Arnason & J.D. Lambert, 1997. Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor(L.) Moench) landrace variation and classification in North Shewa and South Welo, Ethiopia. Euphytica 97: 255-263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Trehane, P., 1995. International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants. Wimborne. 174 pp.Google Scholar
  61. Tschermak, E., 1912. Zur Entstehung der Landsorten. Deutsche Landwirtschaftliche Presse 39 (40): 470.Google Scholar
  62. Voss, J., 1992. Conserving and increasing on-farm genetic diversity: farmer management of varietal bean mixtures in Central Africa, pp. 34-51. In: J.L. Moock & R.E. Rhoades (Eds.), Diversity, farmer knowledge and sustainability. Cornell Univ Press. 278 pp.Google Scholar
  63. Worthington, C.B. (Ed.), 1975. The evolution of IBP-International Biological Programme. Cambridge Univ Press. 268 pp.Google Scholar
  64. Zeven, A.C., 1975. Domesticatie en evolutie van de kultuurplant. Wageningen Agricultural University, Dept of Plant Breeding. Mimeographed Lecture Notes. 177 pp.Google Scholar
  65. Zeven, A.C., 1979. Collecting genetic resources in highly industrialized Europe, especially the Netherlands, pp. 49-58. In: A.C. Zeven & A.M. van Harten (Eds.), Proc of the Conference Broadening the Genetic Base of Crops, Wageningen-1978. Wageningen. 347 pp.Google Scholar
  66. Zeven, A.C., 1986. Landrace groups of bread wheat (Triticum aestivumL. em. Thell.). Acta Hortic 182: 365-375.Google Scholar
  67. Zeven, A.C., 1990. Landraces and improved cultivars of bread wheat and other wheat types grown in the Netherlands up to 1944. Wageningen Agricultural University Papers 90.2. Wageningen. 103 pp.Google Scholar
  68. Zeven, A.C., 1991. Four hundred years of cultivation of Dutch white clover landraces. Euphytica 54: 93-99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zeven, A.C., 1996. Results of activities to maintain landraces and other material in some European countries in situbefore 1945 and what we may learn from them. Genet Res Crop Evol 43: 337-341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zeven, A.C., 1997. The introduction of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgarisL.) intoWestern Europe and the phenotypic variation of dry beans collected in the Netherlands in dy1946. Euphytica 94: 319-328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zeven, A.C., in preparation. The traditional 'irrational' change of seed and seed ware of landraces and cultivars: a review.Google Scholar
  72. Zeven, A.C. & R. Schachl, 1989. Groups of bread wheat landraces in Austrian alps. Euphytica 41: 235-246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.C. Zeven
    • 1
  1. 1.c/o Department of Plant Breeding (I.v.P.)Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations