EVALUATION OF OUTREACH EFFORTS Michael Coe Cedar Lake Research Group

1. EVALUATIONOF OUTREACH EFFORTS Michael Coe Cedar Lake Research Group

2. Feedback From RosBREED Events RosBREED

3. Feedback From RosBREED Events Note: Values are average response rates across 38 specific workshop sessions (weighted equally) from 4 workshops in which these questions were asked (PBA 2010 & 2011 and ASHS 2010 & 2012). Row percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Note: Values are average response rates across all 5 RosBREED 2010-2012 workshops (weighted equally). Row percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. RosBREED

4. Feedback From RosBREED Events Note: Values are average response rates across all 5 RosBREED 2010-2012 workshops (weighted equally). Row percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. RosBREED

5. Feedback From RosBREED Events • Participant Recommendations for • Future educational events and technical assistance (format and content) • Further development of software tools and online resources • Further MAB research and development • Example: • Themes in recommendations for future R&D • from participants in the 2012 Pedigree-Based Analysis workshop • Further development of analytic corrections for years, locations, and repetitions; enhanced analysis of phenotypic data • An improved interface and more complete documentation for the FlexQTL software • More analysis of non-additive marker-locus-trait association (QTL) models • Inclusion of dominant gene effects • More measurement and analysis of gene by environment interactions • More direct application of marker-assisted methods to breeding program decisions RosBREED

6. Input From the U.S. Rosaceae Breeding Community Upcoming 2013 Breeding Program Survey will examine changes since 2010 RosBREED

7. What Have We Learned? Some Highlights: • There is wide variation in Rosaceae breeder preparedness for MAB • Attitude and knowledge regarding the feasibility and value of MAB • Knowledge and skills for applying MAB • Intention to apply MAB: Whether or not, and When – soon vs. someday • Intention to apply MAB: How – Desire to be personally involved vs. hire staff to do it vs. work with collaborators or vendors • Variation by crop, market, region: availability of “jewels” (validated marker-locus-trait associations; QTLs), differing problems to be solved, support and resources available • RosBREED Response: • Publicize “jewel” use as examples of success, feasibility • Develop tools and approaches useful for a wide variety of breeding programs • Provide tailored professional development and technical assistance to breeding programs through small-group, crop-specific workshops and individual consultations RosBREED

8. What Have We Learned? Some Highlights: • Breeding program economics are a challenge for MAB implementation • Increasing costs for core breeding operations: basic personnel, equipment, field and greenhouse operations • Budgets are shrinking relative to costs for maintaining current operations; mere survival of current breeding programs is an issue for many • MAB requires additional personnel, training, equipment, collaborators, services – start-up costs are a challenge • Administrative and public support is often lacking – low awareness of the value of breeding programs; poor infrastructure in many public programs and crops/market sectors for marketing, publicity, recovering return on investment • RosBREED Response: • Socio-economic research to help prioritize desired traits • Low-cost tools, training opportunities, technical assistance, and collaboration opportunities • Assistance identifying the most appropriate “next steps” toward MAB for breeding programs RosBREED

9. What Have We Learned? Some Highlights: • Needed: More QTLs and greater assurance they will work • within specific breeding programs, lineages, environments • Breeders want more QTLs (M-L-T associations) and more validation studies, especially within their programs • Breeders want more knowledge about gene by environment interactions in their crops and environments • Breeders want to be able to improve traits that are currently poorly defined and difficult to phenotype • However • Desire and program capacity to participate in QTL discovery or validation varies greatly • RosBREED Response: • Leadership, tools, examples of how programs can participate in marker discovery and validation studies efficiently, given their program circumstances • Development of more analytic tools for gene by environment interactions • Standardized tools for collecting, managing, sharing, analyzing phenotypic & genotypic data RosBREED

10. What Have We Learned? Some Highlights: • Needed: Expansion to more cropsand more traits • Breeders appreciate the current focus on fruit quality traits • Breeders want marker-assisted methods applied to additional crops and traits: • Pest or disease resistance (or tolerance) • High yield • Phenological or adaptive traits(e.g. ability to grow in different climatic zones or adapt to changing or broader climate and weather conditions; ability to produce multiple crops during a season) • Suitability for machine harvesting • Post-harvest traits • RosBREED Response: • Tools, concepts, processes that can be applied to many crops and traits • Extension, training opportunities for all Rosaceous crops, including programs that are focusing on various kinds of traits RosBREED

11. Plans for 2013 2013 Rosaceae Breeding Program Survey Breeders + Allied Scientists Contribute your observations and recommendations for the future of marker-assisted breeding in Rosaceae Coming to your email account in spring 2013! RosBREED