| |
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpc.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. |
|
Data corrente: |
19/08/2003 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
25/08/2023 |
|
Autoria: |
SPERLING, L.; ASHBY, J. A.; SMITH, M. E.; WELTZIEN, E.; McGUIRE, S. |
|
Título: |
A framework for analyzing participatory plant breeding approaches and results. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2001 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Euphytica, v. 122, n. 3, p. 439-450, 2001. |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Participatory Plant Breeding (PPB) involves scientists, farmers, and others, such as consumers, extensionists, vendors, industry, and rural cooperatives in plant breeding research. It is termed 'participatory' because many actors, and especially the users, can have a research role in all major stages of the breeding and selection process. While some have argued that commercial, private sector plant breeding has long been client-driven, or 'participatory' under another name, the application of 'PPB' to reach poor client groups, to breed for high-stress, heterogeneous environments and to incorporate diverse traits to meet specific client preferences is resulting in fundamental changes in the way plant genetic resources are being managed. PPB merits analysis as a separate approach. The notion of 'PPB' is a relatively recent afire: detailed inventories show that most of the 65 'longer- term' cases have begun within the last 10 years, whether they were located in public sector or non-governmental crop improvement programs. With such 'newness' comes a wealth of terminology and divergent technical, social and organizational strategies under the general rubric of 'PPB'. This article aims to set up a framework for differentiating among PPB approaches. Only by discriminating among cases can one understand how etch PPB approach can lead to a different outcome, and so be able to make informed choices about which approach to í pursue. The key variables explored for discriminating among PPB approaches include: the institutional context, t the bio-social environment, the goals set, and the kind of 'participation' achieved, (including the stage and degree f of participation and the roles different actors undertake)o lt. is only when these variables are clearly described that ~: current and potential practitioners can start to link the 'type of PPB' employed (method and organizational forms) ~ with the type of impacts achieved. An ending illustration of ongoing PPB programs suggests the practical utility of this 'PPB framework'. MenosParticipatory Plant Breeding (PPB) involves scientists, farmers, and others, such as consumers, extensionists, vendors, industry, and rural cooperatives in plant breeding research. It is termed 'participatory' because many actors, and especially the users, can have a research role in all major stages of the breeding and selection process. While some have argued that commercial, private sector plant breeding has long been client-driven, or 'participatory' under another name, the application of 'PPB' to reach poor client groups, to breed for high-stress, heterogeneous environments and to incorporate diverse traits to meet specific client preferences is resulting in fundamental changes in the way plant genetic resources are being managed. PPB merits analysis as a separate approach. The notion of 'PPB' is a relatively recent afire: detailed inventories show that most of the 65 'longer- term' cases have begun within the last 10 years, whether they were located in public sector or non-governmental crop improvement programs. With such 'newness' comes a wealth of terminology and divergent technical, social and organizational strategies under the general rubric of 'PPB'. This article aims to set up a framework for differentiating among PPB approaches. Only by discriminating among cases can one understand how etch PPB approach can lead to a different outcome, and so be able to make informed choices about which approach to í pursue. The key variables explored for discriminating among P... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Client-driven; Farmer participation; Framework research; Melhoramento de plantas; Pesquisa participativa. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Plant breeding. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
G Melhoramento Genético |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02741naa a2200241 a 4500
001 1529607
005 2023-08-25
008 2001 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
100 1 $aSPERLING, L.
245 $aA framework for analyzing participatory plant breeding approaches and results.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2001
520 $aParticipatory Plant Breeding (PPB) involves scientists, farmers, and others, such as consumers, extensionists, vendors, industry, and rural cooperatives in plant breeding research. It is termed 'participatory' because many actors, and especially the users, can have a research role in all major stages of the breeding and selection process. While some have argued that commercial, private sector plant breeding has long been client-driven, or 'participatory' under another name, the application of 'PPB' to reach poor client groups, to breed for high-stress, heterogeneous environments and to incorporate diverse traits to meet specific client preferences is resulting in fundamental changes in the way plant genetic resources are being managed. PPB merits analysis as a separate approach. The notion of 'PPB' is a relatively recent afire: detailed inventories show that most of the 65 'longer- term' cases have begun within the last 10 years, whether they were located in public sector or non-governmental crop improvement programs. With such 'newness' comes a wealth of terminology and divergent technical, social and organizational strategies under the general rubric of 'PPB'. This article aims to set up a framework for differentiating among PPB approaches. Only by discriminating among cases can one understand how etch PPB approach can lead to a different outcome, and so be able to make informed choices about which approach to í pursue. The key variables explored for discriminating among PPB approaches include: the institutional context, t the bio-social environment, the goals set, and the kind of 'participation' achieved, (including the stage and degree f of participation and the roles different actors undertake)o lt. is only when these variables are clearly described that ~: current and potential practitioners can start to link the 'type of PPB' employed (method and organizational forms) ~ with the type of impacts achieved. An ending illustration of ongoing PPB programs suggests the practical utility of this 'PPB framework'.
650 $aPlant breeding
653 $aClient-driven
653 $aFarmer participation
653 $aFramework research
653 $aMelhoramento de plantas
653 $aPesquisa participativa
700 1 $aASHBY, J. A.
700 1 $aSMITH, M. E.
700 1 $aWELTZIEN, E.
700 1 $aMcGUIRE, S.
773 $tEuphytica$gv. 122, n. 3, p. 439-450, 2001.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos (CNPC) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 5 | |
| 1. |  | MORAES, J. C. F.; SILVA, K. de M.; LEAL, T. M.; AZEVEDO, H. C.; SANTOS, S. A.; FACO, O.; BRAGA, R. M. Núcleos de conservação de ovinos. In: ALBUQUERQUE, M. do S. M.; IANELLA, P. (Ed.). Inventário de recursos genéticos animais da Embrapa. Brasília, DF: EMBRAPA, 2016. p. 41-55 Na publicação: Hynerson Costa Azevedo.| Tipo: Capítulo em Livro Técnico-Científico |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos; Embrapa Meio-Norte; Embrapa Pantanal; Embrapa Tabuleiros Costeiros. |
|    |
| 2. | | McMANUS, C.; PAIVA, S. R.; CAETANO, A. R.; HERMUCHE, P.; GUIMARÃES, R. F.; CARVALHO JUNIOR, O. A.; BRAGA, R.; CARNEIRO, P. L. S.; MORAES, J. C. F.; SOUZA, C. J. H. de; FACO, O.; SANTOS, S. A.; AZEVEDO, H. C.; ARAUJO, A. M. de; FAÇANHA, D. A. E.; IANELLA, P. Landscape genetics of sheep in Brazil using SNP markers. Small Ruminant Research, v. 192, e106239, 2020.| Tipo: Artigo em Periódico Indexado | Circulação/Nível: A - 2 |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos; Embrapa Meio-Norte; Embrapa Pantanal; Embrapa Pecuária Sul; Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia; Embrapa Tabuleiros Costeiros. |
|  |
| 3. | | BIAZIO, G. R. de; MCMANUS, C. M.; HERMUCHE, P.; GUIMARÃES, R. F.; CARVALHO JÚNIOR, O. A. de; SILVA, N. C. da; DALLAGO, B. S. L.; MORAES, J. C. F.; SOUZA, C. J. H. de; FACO, O.; ARAUJO, A. M. de; AZEVEDO, H. C.; CARNEIRO, P. L. S.; SANTOS, S. A.; MATTOS, P. S. R. de; LOBO, R. N. B.; PAIVA, S. R. Integração de dados de georeferenciamento e dados genéticos para o manejo da biodiversidade de recursos genéticos de ovinos no Brasil. In: CONGRESSO BRASILEIRO DE RECURSOS GENÉTICOS, 2., 2012, Belém, PA. Anais... Brasília, DF: Sociedade Brasileira de Recursos Genéticos, 2012. 4 p. 1 CD-ROM.| Tipo: Artigo em Anais de Congresso |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos; Embrapa Meio-Norte; Embrapa Pantanal; Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia; Embrapa Roraima; Embrapa Tabuleiros Costeiros. |
| |
| 4. | | MCMANUS, C. M.; HERMUCHE, P.; GUIMARÃES, R. F.; CARVALHO JÚNIOR, O. A. de; DALLAGO, B. S. L.; VIEIRA, R. A.; FARIA, D. A. de; BLACKBURN, H.; MORAES, J. C. F.; SOUZA, C. H.; FACO, O.; ARAUJO, A. M. de; AZEVEDO, H. C.; CARNEIRO, P. L. S.; SANTOS, S. A.; MATTOS, P. S. R. de; PAIVA, S. R. Integration of georeferenced and genetic data for the management of biodiversity in sheep genetic resources in Brazil. Tropical Animal Health and Production, v. 53, n. 126, 2021.| Tipo: Artigo em Periódico Indexado | Circulação/Nível: B - 1 |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos; Embrapa Meio-Norte; Embrapa Pantanal; Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia; Embrapa Tabuleiros Costeiros. |
| |
| 5. | | MCMANUS, C. M.; HERMUCHE, P.; GUIMARÃES, R. F.; CARVALHO JÚNIOR, O. A. de; DALLAGO, B. S. L.; VIEIRA, R. A.; FARIA, D. A. de; BLACKBURN, H.; MORAES, J. C. F.; SOUZA, C. J. H. de; FACO, O.; ARAUJO, A. M. de; AZEVEDO, H. C.; CARNEIRO, P. L. S.; SANTOS, S. A.; MATTOS, P. S. R. de; PAIVA, S. R. Integration of georeferenced and genetic data for the management of biodiversity in sheep genetic resources in Brazil. Tropical Animal Health and Production, v. 53, n. 1, 126, Mar. 2021.| Tipo: Artigo em Periódico Indexado | Circulação/Nível: B - 1 |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pantanal; Embrapa Pecuária Sul. |
| |
| Registros recuperados : 5 | |
|
| Expressão de busca inválida. Verifique!!! |
|
|
