CONSERVATION & USE OF CROP WILD RELATIVES IN ARIZONA
Colin K. Khoury and Gary Paul Nabhan, eds (2019)
We welcome you to join us – farmers, foragers, scholars, plant breeders, and conservationists -working to recognize, protect, and utilize the wild relatives of domesticated crops that naturally occur in Arizona and the other nine states along the U.S./Mexico border. North of the border, Arizona is among the states with the richest flora of these culturally and economically valuable wild plants, with species from over 50 genera (Table 1). Many of the species found in the Grand Canyon State occur in national forests, national parks and monuments, and on Indian reservations. These crop wild relatives (CWR) are the cousins of important plants cultivated for food, fiber, forage, beverage, and industrial uses around the planet.
While many people might assume that wild crop relatives hold little food value, the native and immigrant foragers of Arizona and surroundings would argue otherwise. Nutritionally and culturally important harvests in the desert Southwest may have begun as early as 10,900–10,100 calendar years B.P. (Louderback and Pavlik 2017) and continue to this day for wild potatoes (Solanum L. spp.) onions (Allium L. spp.), the wild chile peppers (Capsicum annuum var. glabriusculum (Dunal) Heiser & Pickersgill) known as “chiltepines,” and for many other wild berries, fruits, greens, and culinary herbs. In Arizona alone, native species belonging to at least 24 of the genera listed in Table 1 have been documented as collected and used by the state’s culturally diverse residents. Many of these foods are gathered from vacant lots, along roadsides, and in other urban or disturbed habitats, while others require long treks into wild places. Native traditional knowledge and permits for collecting in protected natural areas enable sustainable management of harvests.
Chiltepin (Capsicum annuum var. glabriusculum (Dunal) Heiser & ) Photo by G. Nabhan.
Table 1: Major crop wild relative genera occurring in Arizona
COMMON ENGLISH NAME OF GENUS
|NUMBER OF WILD SPECIES (TAXA) IN ARIZONA||DIRECT USES AS FOOD BY INDIGENOUS & OTHER NORTH AMERICANS||DOCUMENTED AS USED SOMEWHERE IN MODERN PLANT BREEDING OR AS ROOTSTOCK|
|Agave L.||Agave, Century plant|
|Capsicum L.||Chile pepper|
|Chenopodium L.||Goosefoot, Lambsquarters|
|Cucurbita L.||Gourd, Squash|
|Drymocallis Fourr. ex Rydb.||Strawberry|
|Elymus L.||Wheat, Rye|
|Macroptilium (Benth.) Urb.||Siratro|
|Opuntia Mill.||Prickly pear, Cholla|
|Panicum L.||Millet, Panicgrass|
|Phaseolus L.||Bean, Tepary|
|Physalis L.||Groundcherry, Tomatillo|
|Physaria (Nutt. ex Torr. & A.Gray) A.Gray||Bladderpod|
|Proboscidea Schmidel||Devil’s Claw, Unicorn Plant|
|Prunus L.||Cherry, Plum|
|Ribes L.||Currant, Gooseberry|
|Sesbania Scop.||Colorado River Hemp|
|Simmondsia Nutt.||Goatnut, Jojoba|
|Solanum L.||Potato, Wonderberry|
|Stevia Cav.||Stevia, Sweetleaf|
|Tagetes L.||Marigold, Mexican Tarragon|
|Vaccinium L.||Blueberry, Huckleberry, Whortleberry|
|Yucca L.||Banana Yucca, Soapweed, Spanish Bayonet|
|Zizyphus Mill.||Jujube, Lotebush|
In addition to these direct uses, crop wild relatives in at least 20 genera are among those utilized by plant breeders and nurserymen for crop improvement. These wild plants have improved crops’ tolerance to abiotic stresses, enhanced their resistance to pests and diseases, increased their nutritional quality, made their breeding more efficient, and offered hardier rootstock for fruit, nut, and berry crops.
Of close to 4,600 crop wild relative and other wild useful plant taxa (species, subspecies and varieties) inventoried in the United States, over 1,000 (22%) occur in Arizona (Khoury et al. 2013). Some 450 of these may be prioritized for their close (congeneric) relationship with one or more crops, or because they are an important food source in their own right. Of these, around 150 are high priority for conservation and research due to their relation to important crops, with 40 of these being of greatest interest to agriculture, as crop progenitors or close cousins with much potential for use in plant breeding (Table 2).
Table 2: Close/useful relatives of important or iconic crops, distributed in Arizona
|CROP WILD RELATIVE |
|COMMON NAME||CONFIMED OR POTENTIAL AGRICULTURAL USE AS BREEDING STOCK, FORAGE, OR ROOTSTOCK|
|Amaranthus powelli S. Watson||Powell’s amaranth||Grain amaranths|
|Capsicum annuum var. glabriusculum (Dunal) Heiser & Pickersgill||Chiltepin||Chile peppers|
|Cucurbita digitata Gray||Fingerleaf gourd||Squashes, pumpkins, trap crop for beetles|
|Cucurbita foetidissima Kunth||Buffalogourd||Squashes, pumpkins, trap crop for beetles|
|Cucurbita palmata S. Wats.||Coyote gourd||Squashes, pumpkins, trap crop for beetles|
|Fragaria virginiana Mill. ssp. glauca (S. Watson) Staudt|
|Glaucous strawberry||Yield, disease resistance, and day-neutral traits for strawberries|
|Gossypium thurberi Tod.||Arizona (desert) cotton||Insect resistance for cottons|
|Helianthus annuus L.||Common sunflower||Pest and disease resistance, salinity tolerance, yield, oil content, early maturation, and breeding traits for sunflowers|
|Helianthus anomalus S. F. Blake||Anomalous sunflower||Alkaline soil tolerance, pest resistance, oil content, drought tolerance, and fertility restoration genes for sunflowers|
|Helianthus arizonensis R. C. Jacks.||Arizona sunflower||Drought tolerance, oil content for sunflowers|
|Helianthus deserticola Heiser||Desert sunflower||Downy mildew resistance and drought tolerance for sunflowers|
|Helianthus niveus (Benth.) Brandegee ssp. canescens (A. Gray) Heiser||Snowy sunflower||Drought and heat tolerance for sunflowers|
|Helianthus niveus (Benth.) Brandegee ssp. tephrodes (A. Gray) Heiser||Algodones Dunes sunflower||Drought and heat tolerance for sunflowers|
|Hordeum pusillum Nutt.||Little (Hohokam) barley||Old World barley, plus North American prehistoric domesticate of this species|
|Juglans major (Torr.) A. Heller var. major||Arizona walnut||Rootstock for Old World walnuts|
|Lactuca canadiensis L.||Canada lettuce||Lettuce|
|Lactuca graminifolia Michx.||Grassleaf lettuce||Lettuce|
|Lactuca saligna L.*||Willowleaf (least) lettuce||Insect and disease resistance for lettuce|
|Lactuca serriola L.*||Prickly lettuce||Insect resistance for lettuce|
|Lactuca tatarica (L.) C. A. Mey. ssp. pulchella (Pursh) Stebbins||Blue lettuce||Lettuce|
|Macroptilium atropurpureum (DC.) Urb.||Purple bushbean; Siratro||Forage legume now cultivated in Australia and South America|
|Panicum hirticaule J. Presl var. hirticaule (=P. sonorum Beal sensu latu)||Sonoran panicgrass||Old World barley, plus North American prehistoric domesticate of this species|
|Phaseolus acutifolius A. Gray var. acutifolius||Broadleaf tepary bean||Insect and disease resistance, salinity, heat, and drought tolerance, seed protein, and gene transfer for domesticated tepary and common bean|
|Phaseolus acutifolius A. Gray var. tenuifolius A. Gray||Narrowleaf tepary bean||Insect and disease resistance, salinity, heat, and drought tolerance, seed protein, and gene transfer for domesticated tepary and common bean|
|Physalis philadelphica var. Lam.*||Wild husk tomato/Tomatillo||Once cultivated by Zuni on AZ-NM border, relative Cape gooseberry and other domesticated husk tomatoes|
|Physaria fendleri (A. Gray) OʼKane & Al-Shehbaz||Fendler’s bladderpod||Industrial oil|
|Prunus emarginata (Douglas) Eaton||Bitter cherry||Disease resistance for cherries and plums|
|Ribes inerme Rydb.||White-stem gooseberry||Spinelessness for gooseberries and currants|
|Ribes leptanthum A. Gray||Trumpet gooseberry||Pest and disease resistance, growth habit for gooseberries and currants|
|Ribes pinetorum Greene||Orange gooseberry||Gooseberries and currants|
|Ribes quercetorum Greene||Oakwoods gooseberry||Gooseberries and currants|
|Ribes velutinum Greene||Desert velvet gooseberry||Gooseberries and currants|
|Rubus leucodermis Douglas ex Torr. & A. Gray||White-stem raspberry||Raspberries and blackberries|
|Simmondsia chinensis (Link) C. K. Schneid.||Goatnut, Jojoba||Wax for shampoos and lubricants|
|Solanum jamesii Torr.||Colorado wild potato||Fingerling potatoes once cultivated like the papita guera of Mexico|
|Solanum stoloniferum Schltdl.||Wild potato||Fingerling potatoes once cultivated like the papita guera of Mexico, and offer heat and drought tolerance and insect and disease resistance|
|Tripsacum lanceolatum Rupr. ex E. Fourn.||Western gamagrass||Forage grass now in cultivation as well as use in breeding perennial maize|
|Vaccinium myrtillus L.||Billberry, Wimberry, Whortleberry||Cranberries, blueberries and others|
|Vitis arizonica Engelm.||Arizona wild grape||Hardy or disease-resistant rootstocks for cultivated grapes, disease resistance in grape breeding|
|Vitis girdiana Munson||Desert wild grape||Hardy or disease-resistant rootstocks for cultivated grapes|
*Non-native taxon, recognized by plant breeders as harboring traits of interest for crop improvement. Table 1 and Table 2 Sources: Metcalf (1980); Nabhan et al. (1986); Nabhan (1991); Moerman (1998); Hodgson (2001); Hajjar and Hodgkin (2007); Khoury et al. (2013); Hodgson (2015); USDA-ARS GRIN Taxonomy for Plants (2018)
Wild Plum (Prunus sp.) Drawing by Paul Mirocha.
Envisioning a future of greater conservation, appreciation and use of crop wild relatives
Our growing human population and changing dietary expectations across the world are increasing the demand for more and better food at rates that bring into question how agriculture will keep pace both in terms of availability and affordability (Ray et al. 2013). Meanwhile farmers are facing natural resource input limitations and changing weather patterns, while trying to respond to calls to improve soil and water conservation, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and better protect the pollinators and other ecosystem services that bolster crop production (Cordell et al. 2009; Godfray et al. 2010; Asseng et al. 2015).
To produce good, affordable food while reducing the environmental impacts of production, more diversity will be needed – both in the variety of plants cultivated or foraged for the market, and in the genetic variation within domesticated crops. Crop wild relatives offer the world both of these gifts.
Crop wild relatives are often more adapted than their domesticated kin to extreme climates and difficult soils, and to challenging pests and diseases (Hajjar and Hodgkin 2007; Dempewolf et al. 2013). Due to the close genetic relationship of these plants with their cultivated cousins, useful traits can be introgressed from wild relatives into crops (Dempewolf et al. 2017). Their value is enormous- the annual economic contribution of sunflower wild relatives was recently estimated at $267-384 million (Seiler et al. 2017). Their uses as genetic resources are expected only to increase in the future alongside the ongoing improvements in information on the plants and their diversity, and well as the continuing advances in breeding methods and tools (McCouch et al. 2012).
Conservation and community-based restoration
Our high hopes for crop wild relatives are based on the assumption that they will be readily available for use, which requires their conservation – both in genebanks where they are accessible to plant breeders, and in their natural habitats, where they can continue to evolve alongside pests, diseases, heat, drought, and other stresses. Unfortunately, public genebank collections of crop wild relatives are known to be deficient for most crop genepools (Ramírez-Villegas et al. 2010; Castañeda-Álvarez et al. 2015; Kantar et al. 2015; Khoury et al. 2015; Castañeda-Álvarez et al. 2016; Khoury et al. 2019). At the same time, the habitats of a wide range of wild relatives are threatened by habitat fragmentation through urbanization and agricultural expansion, invasive species, mining, climate change, pollution, over-harvesting, and more (Jarvis et al. 2008; Zhang et al. 2017; Frances et al. 2018). Even in protected natural areas, such plants are often susceptible due to inadequate prioritization and insufficient resources to manage the populations (Hampe and Petit 2005; Le Saout et al. 2013).
More than six dozen crop wild relatives have been considered as candidates for Federal listing as threatened and endangered species since the first “redbook” of plants at risk in the United States was published by the Smithsonian (Ayensu and DePhillips 1978). However, only a small percentage of these taxa have actually been formally listed, and fewer still have been afforded critical habitat protection for their populations. Thus in situ conservation has mainly been achieved by other means. Examples include reserves within California state parks for wild strawberries (Cristopher et al.1984), botanical areas on USDA Forest Service lands such as the Rock Corral Canyon Wild Chile Botanical Area in Arizona for wild chile peppers and other species (Nabhan 1990; USFS 2016) (Table 3), and community-based reserves on Native American Nations’ sovereign lands or Indian Reservations.
Conserving and studying these crop wild relatives in their natural habitats can provide plant breeders and evolutionary biologists unique insights into these plants’ interactions with pollinators, seed dispersers, predators, and pests and diseases (Tewksbury et al. 1999; Chen 2017; Luna-Ruiz et al. 2018). Such insights may prove to be useful not only in crop improvement but also in devising novel strategies for integrated pest and disease management.
Table 3: Crop wild relatives occurring in Rock Corral Canyon, Santa Cruz County, AZ
|CROP WILD RELATIVE TAXON||COMMON NAMES||STATUS AND NOTES|
|Agave palmeri Engelmann*||Palmer’s agave, Lechuguilla||Although distantly related to agave domesticates it is wild-harvested for distilling Mezcal Lechuguilla in Sonora|
|Agave parviflora Torrey*||Santa Cruz striped agave, Amole||Once used as soap and shampoo|
|Agave schottii Engelmann*||Amole; Shindagger||Still used as soap and shampoo in Mexico|
|Allium plummerae S. Watson*||Plummer’s wild onion||Historically eaten as ramp-like wild onion|
|Amaranthus palmeri* S. Watson||Palmer’s amaranth; Bledo; Quelite de las aguas||Although distantly related to domesticates, it is still widely harvested as summer spinach green|
|Amaranthus powellii S. Watson||Powell’s amaranth; Quelite||Probable progenitor or introgressed relative of domesticated grain amaranths of the Colorado Plateau and Mexico|
|Capsicum annuum L. var. glabriusculum (Dunal) Heiser & Pickersgill*||Wild chile, Chiltepín||Closely related to & introgressed with domesticated C. annuum L. var. annuum, with unique genes at northern limits of its range|
|Chenopodium berlandieri Moquin-Tandon*||Pitseed goosefoot; Chual, Huazontle silvestre||Closely related to and probable progenitor of domesticated C. berlandieri Moq. ssp. nuttalliae (Saff.) H. D. Wilson & Heiser; still widely wild-harvested as spinach green|
|Chenopodium fremontii S. Watson*||Fremont’s goosefoot; Chual||More distantly related to domesticates but wild-harvested as spinach green|
|Chenopodium neomexicanum Standl.*||New Mexico goosefoot||More distantly related to domesticates but wild-harvested as spinach green|
|Cucurbita digitata A. Gray*||Coyote gourd, Calabacilla del coyote||Although distantly related to domesticates was experimentally grown in Arizona as oilseed & starch sources in 1980’s|
|Cucurbita foetidissima Kunth.*||Buffalogourd; Calabacilla loca||Although distantly related to domesticates was experimentally grown in Arizona as oilseed & starch sources in 1980’s; still used as trap crop for diabrocite beetles|
|Gossypium thurberi Todaro||Wild cotton; Algodoncillo||Used as breeding material to reduce calyx dust causing black lung disease|
|Helianthus annuus L.||Common sunflower; Girasol; Mirasol||Closely related to and progenitor of sunflower domesticate. Used for pest and disease resistance, salinity tolerance, yield, oil content, early maturation, and breeding traits for sunflowers|
|Helianthus petiolaris Nuttall||Prairie sunflower||Secondary relative of the domesticated sunflower|
|Hordeum murinum L. ssp. glaucum (Steudel) Tzvelev)||Mouse barley|
|Hordeum pusillum Nutt.||Little barley||Closely related to and progenitor of prehistoric domesticated little barley of Mississippi Basin and Sonoran Desert|
|Jaltomata procumbens (Cavanilles) J. L. Gentry||Jaltomate||Progenitor of one of three tomato-like crops of this genus in Latin America|
|Juglans major (Torrey) Heller *||Arizona walnut; Noga;||Closely related to domesticated walnuts and used as commercial rootstock|
|Linum puberulum (Engelm.) Heller*||Plains flax||Medicine and dye|
|Macroptilum atropurpureum (Mossino & Sesse ex. DeCandolle) Urban||Purple bushbean; Siratro||Closely related to and progenitor of forage domesticate siratro, which is displacing poorly-adapted alfalfa and clover in arid zones of Australia|
|Manihot angustiloba (Torrey) Mueller||Desert mountain manihot||Not closely related to domesticates|
|Manihot daviseae Croizat*||Arizona manihot||Not closely related to domesticates|
|Morus microphylla Buckley*||Littleleaf mulberry, zarza mora||Not closely related to domesticate; wild harvested for tart fruits|
|Opuntia chlorotica Engelm. & J. M. Bigelow var. santa-rita (Griffiths& Hare) Rose*||Pancake prickly pear cactus; Santa Rita prickly pear||Distantly related to domesticates; wild-harvested for fruits|
|Opuntia macrocentra Engelm.*||Long-spine purple prickly pear||Distantly related to domesticates; wild-harvested for fruits|
|Opuntia phaecantha Engelmann||Engelmann’s prickly pear||distantly related to domesticates; fruits wild-harvested commercially for syrup, jelly and “nectar”|
|Panicum hirticaule J. Presl.||Sonoran/Mexican panicgrass||Progenitor of millet-like domesticated Sonoran panicgrass of U.S. & Mexico|
|Passiflora foetida L. var arizonica (Killip) D. H. Goldman||Arizona passion-flower, Scarlet-fruit passionvine; Tayalote, Buli de venado||Distantly related to domesticates; wild-harvested|
|Passiflora mexicanaJussieu||Mexican passion-flower, Ojo de venado||Distantly related to domesticates; wild-harvested|
|Phaseolus acutifolius A. Gray||Tepary bean, frijol tepari;||Progenitor of heat-adapted tepary bean and used as genetic bridge in hybridization with common bean; rarely wild-harvested|
|Phaseolus maculatus Scheele;||Metcalfe’s bean, Cocolmeca||Distantly related to domesticates but cultivated as forage crop in New Mexico a century ago|
|Physalis acutifolia (Miers) Sandwith||Sharpleaf groundcherry||Fruits wild harvested as food|
|Physalis longifolia Nutt.||Longleaf groundcherry||Fruits wild harvested as food|
|Prunus serotina Ehrh.||Southwest black cherry; Capulín||Rootstock for cherries & plums|
|. Davis*||American red raspberry||Possible source of cultivars of commercial selections|
|Solanum douglasii Dunal||Wonderberry, Chichiquelite||Closely related to and possible progenitor to domesticated S. M. Martens & Galeotti or S. americanum Mill.|
|Tagetes lemmoni A. Gray*||Mexican bush marigold; Mt. Lemmon marigold; Tangerine scented marigold||Widely-cultivated bedding and spice plant|
|Tagetes micrantha Cav.*||Mountain marigold, Yerba anís; Licoricemarigold||Cultivated aromatic bedding plant|
|Stevia lemmonii A. Gray||Mt. Lemmon Stevia; Sweetleaf||Herbaceous perennial shrub distantly related to the commercial sugar crop Stevia rebaudiana (Bertoni) Bertoni|
|Stevia micrantha Lagasca||Annual candtleaf; Sweetleaf||Erect annual distantly related to the commercial sugar crop Stevia rebaudiana (Bertoni) Bertoni|
|Stevia serrata Cavanille||Sawtooth candyleaf||Distantly related to the commercial Stevia rebundiana|
|Vitis arizonica Engelmann||Arizona wild grape; Parra Silvestre; Uva silvestre||Related to and has already been experimented with as potential rootstock for domesticated V. vinifera Merlot|
|Zizyphus obtusifolia (Hooker) ex Torrey & A Gray||Lotebush||Distantly related to jujube but possible rootstock|
*flowering and/or fruiting herbarium specimens useful in making valid specific or subspecific identifications of plants collected in the 2300 acre Rock Coral Canyon Botanical Area are available at the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, and/or Desert Botanical Garden herbaria. All other taxa listed in Table 4 are either in the 6300 acre Rock Corral Canyon watershed above Tumacacori AZ, but not in the botanical area, or are sightings of plants without flowers or fruit. (See Nabhan 1990).
Collaborations over the past few decades demonstrate diverse efforts to come together to fill the conservation gaps for crop wild relatives and to increase their use:
- The U.S. public genebank system is prioritizing native crop wild relatives, including within its plant exploration program. Most of the 218 explorations conducted in the U.S. over the past 65 years supported by this program targeted native wild species (Williams and Greene 2018).
- Many botanic gardens and other ex situ conservation institutions are collaborating on crop wild relative conservation and education (Miller et al. 2015; BGCI 2016; Krishnan and Novy 2016).
- Federal lands, State and local forests and parks, Native American lands, conservation organizations, and private lands offer critically important habitat for a wide diversity of native crop wild relatives, particularly in the Western U.S.
- The U.S. Forest Service and local organizations combined forces to create the Wild Chile Botanical Area in Arizona (Nabhan 1990; USFS 2016).
- The USDA Agricultural Research Service and the Forest Service have created a Strategic Framework on the Conservation and Use of Native Crop Wild Relatives in the United States (USFS and USDA-ARS 2014). Under these arrangements, the agencies are collaborating on conserving the wild relatives of cranberry (USFS 2016), and are looking to expand to other taxa.
- The Bureau of Land Management-led Seeds of Success (SOS) program has accumulated over 15 years of experience of Federal and non-Federal partners collecting wildland native seed for long-term germplasm conservation and for use in seed research, development of native plant materials, and ecosystem restoration (Haidet and Olwell 2015; SOS 2018). The program is interested in prioritizing crop wild relatives during collecting targeting.
- The National Seed Strategy for Rehabilitation and Restoration, created by twelve Federal Agencies and over 300 non-Federal cooperators has outlined native seed collection, research, and land management needs from 2015-2020, including specifically targeting crop wild relatives (PCA 2017).
- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides Federal protection for threatened and endangered plants, including a handful of native crop wild relatives, under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Two nongovernmental organizations- Natureserve and the IUCN, provide threat-related information on U.S. flora, including crop wild relatives, which are important to prioritization setting (Frances et al. 2018).
- Researchers across North America have recently come together to begin to document current conservation needs for crop wild relatives (Greene et al. 2018, 2019).
Protected areas in the United States. Based on data downloaded from the Protected Areas Database (PAD-US)
(U.S. Geological Survey 2016). Map from Williams and Greene (2018).
Building on this momentum, agencies, organizations, and individuals from different sectors are looking to combine forces to more effectively celebrate, conserve, and make use of crop wild relatives. Five priority areas for action have been identified:
- Understand and document native crop wild relatives, assess threats to their natural habitats, and determine gaps in their conservation
- Collect native wild relative populations not yet represented in the public genebanks, botanic gardens, or other conservation repositories
- Make native crop wild relatives accessible to plant breeders, researchers, and educators
- Protect native crop wild relatives in their natural habitats
- Raise public awareness about native crop wild relatives
We invite you to join us in the effort to recognize, protect, and utilize our natural heritage of crop wild relatives.
Pecos sunflower (Helianthus paradoxus Heiser) at Blue Hole Cienega, Santa Rosa, New Mexico.
Pecos sunflower is a source of salt tolerance for cultivated sunflower, and is listed threatened under
the Endangered Species Act and globally imperiled in NatureServe (Khoury et al. 2013). Photo by Laura Marek.
This executive summary was prepared for a forum at the University of Arizona from January 13-15, 2019. The editors of this publication are grateful to Paul Mirocha of the Tumamoc Hill Desert Laboratory for the illustration of Cucurbita digitata A. Gray and design of the cover. We are also grateful to Wendy Hodgson of the Desert Botanical Garden for revising our counts of CWR in Arizona based on latest taxonomic changes and phytogeographic data being incorporated into a new Flora of Arizona by a network of botanists in universities, botanical gardens, and other organizations.
Wild potato (Solanum jamesii Torr.) in New Mexico. Photo by John Bamberg.
Asseng R et al. (2015) Rising temperatures reduce global wheat production. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5, 143–147.
Ayensu ES, DeFilipps RA (1978) Endangered and Threatened Plants of the United States. Smithsonian Institution and the World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C
BGCI (2016) North American Botanic Garden Strategy for Plant Conservation, 2016-2020. Botanic Gardens Conservation International U.S., Chicago IL.
Castañeda-Álvarez N et al. (2015) Ex situ conservation priorities for the wild relatives of potato (Solanum L. section Petota). PLoS One 10(4), e0122599.
Castañeda-Álvarez N et al. (2016) Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. Nat. Plants 2(4), 16022.
Chen YH (2017) Back to the origin: In Situ studies are needed to understand selection during crop diversification. Front. Ecol. Evol. 5, 125.
Cordell D et al. (2009) The story of phosphorus: Global food security and food for thought. Glob. Environ. Chang. 19, 292–305.
Cristopher WY et al. (1984). Plant genetic resources. A conservation Imperative. AAAS Selected Symp. 87. Westview Press, Inc., Boulder, CO.
Dempewolf H et al. (2013) Adapting agriculture to climate change: A global initiative to collect, conserve, and use crop wild relatives. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 38, 369–377.
Dempewolf H et al. (2017) Past and future use of wild relatives in crop breeding. Crop Sci. 57(3), 1070.
Fraile A et al. (2017) Environmental heterogeneity and the evolution of plant-virus interactions: Viruses in wild pepper populations. Virus Research 241.
Frances A et al. (2018) Conservation Status and Threat Assessments for North American Crop Wild Relatives. In: Greene SL et al. eds., North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 1: Conservation Strategies. Springer International Publishing AG, 189-208.
Godfray HCJ et al. (2010) Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science 327, 812–818.
Greene SL et al. (eds.) (2018) North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 1: Conservation Strategies. Springer International Publishing AG.
Greene SL et al. (eds.) (2019) North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 2: Important Species. Springer International Publishing AG.
Haidet M, Olwell P (2015) Seeds of Success: A National Seed Banking Program Working to Achieve Long-Term Conservation Goals. Natural Areas Journal 35(1), 165–73.
Hajjar R, Hodgkin T (2007) The use of wild relatives in crop improvement: a survey of developments over the last 20 years. Euphytica 156, 1–13.
Hampe A, Petit RJ (2005) Conserving biodiversity under climate change: the rear edge matters. Ecology Letters 8(5), 461–467.
Hodgson W (2001) Food Plants of the Sonoran Desert. University of Arizona Press, Tucson AZ.
Jarvis D et al. (2008) The effect of climate change on crop wild relatives. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 126, 13–23.
Kantar R et al. (2015) Ecogeography and utility to plant breeding of the crop wild relatives of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Front. Plant Sci. 6, 841.
Khoury CK et al. (2013) An inventory of crop wild relatives of the United States. Crop Sci. 53(4), 1496;
Khoury CK et al. (2015) Distributions, ex situ conservation priorities, and genetic resource potential of crop wild relatives of sweetpotato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam., I. series Batatas]. Front. Plant Sci. 6, 251.
Khoury CK et al. (2019) Comprehensiveness of conservation of useful wild plants: an operational indicator for biodiversity and sustainable development targets. Ecological Indicators 98, 420-429.
Krishnan S, Novy A (2016) The role of botanic gardens in the twenty-first century. CAB Reviews 11(023).
Le Saout S et al. (2013) Protected Areas and Effective Biodiversity Conservation. Science 342 (6160), 803–805.
Louderback LA, Pavlik B (2017) Starch granule evidence for the earliest potato use in North America. PNAS 114 (29), 7606-7610.
Luna-Ruiz JJ et al. (2018) Shifts in plant chemical defenses of chile pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) due to domestication in Mesoamerica. Front. Ecol. Evol 6, 48.
McCouch S et al. (2012) Genomics of gene banks: A case study in rice. Am. J. Bot. 9, 407–423.
Metcalf RL et al. (1980) Cucurbitacins as kairomones for diabrocite beetles. PNAS 77(7), 3769-3772.
Miller A et al. (2015) Expanding the role of botanical gardens in the future of food. Nature Plants 1(6), 15078.
Moerman D (1998) Native American Ethnobotany. Timber Press, Portland OR.
Nabhan GP (1991) Genetic resources of the U.S./Mexico border states: wild relatives of crops, their uses and conservation. In: Ganster P, Walter H (eds) Environmental Hazards and Bioresource Management in the U.S./Mexico Borderlands. UCLA Latin American Studies Center, Los Angeles CA.
Nabhan GP et al. (1986) At the edge of extinction: useful plants of the border states of the United States and Mexico. Arnoldia 4(6), 33-35.
Nabhan GP (1990) Conservationists and forest service join forces to wave wild chiles. Diversity 6(3&4), 47-48.
Plant Conservation Alliance (2017) National Seed Strategy for Rehabilitation and Restoration https://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/Native_Plant_Materials/documents/SeedStrategy081215.pdf
Ramírez-Villegas J et al. (2010) A gap analysis methodology for collecting crop genepools: a case study with Phaseolus beans. PLoS One 5(10), e13497.
Ray DK et al. (2013) Yield trends are insufficient to double global crop production by 2050. PLoS One 8, e66428.
Seiler G et al. (2017) Utilization of sunflower crop wild relatives for cultivated sunflower improvement. Crop Sci. 57(3), 1083-1101.
SOS (2018) Native Seed and Plant Material Development. https://www.blm.gov/programs/natural-resources/native-plant-communities/native-plant-and-seed-material-development/collection
Tewksbury JJ et al. (1999). In situ conservation of wild chiles and their biotic associates. Cons. Biol, 13(1), 98-107.
USDA ARS GRIN Taxonomy for Plants (2018) https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearchcwr.aspx
USDA Forest Service (2016) Chiltepine or Bird Pepper (Capsicum annuum var. galbriusculum). http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/beauty/Sky_Islands/plants/Capsicum_annuum/index.shtml
USDA Forest Service (2016) Complementary Conservation of Wild Cranberry. http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/ethnobotany/cranberry/index.shtml
USDA Forest Service, USDA Agricultural Research Service (2014) Joint Strategic Framework on the Conservation and Use of Native Crop Wild Relatives in the United States. http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/ethnobotany/documents/cwr/FrameworkNativeCropWildRelativesOct2014.pdf
U.S. Geological Survey (2016) Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US), version 1.4 Combined Feature Class. https://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/
Williams KA, Greene SL (2018) “Conservation of crop wild relatives in the USA”. In: Greene SL et al. eds., North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 1: Conservation Strategies. Springer International Publishing AG, 97-154.
Zhang J et al. (2017) Extinction risk of North American seed plants elevated by climate and land-use change. J. Applied Ecol. 54(1), 303–12.
Released January 2019 by Southwest Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona