Novel Plant Bioresources

Novel Plant BioresourcesApplications in Food, Medicine andCosmetics

Ameenah Gurib-FakimCenter for Phytotherapy Research (CEPHYR), Mauritius

This edition first published 2014 © 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Registered office: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial offices: 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK

The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse

the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs

and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by

any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and

Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product

names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The

publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book,

they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specif-

ically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that

the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages

arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be

sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Novel plant bioresources : applications in food, medicine and cosmetics / [edited by] Ameenah Gurib-Fakim.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-118-46061-0 (cloth)

1. Plant diversity. 2. Germplasm resources conservation–Economic aspects. 3. Germplasm resources,

Plant–Economic aspects. 4. Plant biotechnology. I. Gurib-Fakim, Ameenah, editor of compilation.

QK46.5.D58N68 2014

333.95’3416–dc23

2013046825

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in

electronic books.

Cover image: Close-up of neem leaves © istock/ Focal.Point

Cover design by Meaden Creative

Set in 9.25/11.5pt Minion by Laserwords Private Limited, Chennai, India

1 2014

Content

List of contributors xiii

Foreword xvii

PART ONE NOVEL PLANT BIORESOURCES: APPLICATIONS IN MEDICINE, COSMETICS, ETC. 1

1 Plant Diversity in Addressing Food, Nutrition and Medicinal Needs 3M.E. Dulloo, D. Hunter and D. Leaman

1.1 Introduction 31.2 Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture 71.3 Plant genetic diversity for nutrition 101.4 Plant diversity for medicines 14

Acknowledgements 16References 16

2 World Health Organization Perspective for Traditional Medicine 23Ossy M. J. Kasilo and Jean-Baptiste Nikiema

2.1 Introduction 232.2 Policies on traditional medicine 242.3 Tools and guidelines 242.4 Implementation of the regional strategy on traditional medicine 352.5 The way forward 402.6 Conclusion 41

References 41

3 Cultivation of Novel Medicinal Plant Products and Associated Challenges 43Ulrich Feiter

3.1 Introduction 433.2 Basic principles of novel crop cultivation 433.3 Case study 1: Pelargonium sidoides 513.4 Case study 2: Sutherlandia frutescens 523.5 Case study 3: Euphorbia resinifera 543.6 Conclusion 55

References 55Further reading 56

4 Enabling Technologies to Facilitate Natural Product-Based Drug Discovery from AfricanBiodiversity 57Nyaradzo, T., L. Chigorimbo-Murefu, Grace Mugumbate and Kelly Chibale

4.1 Introduction 574.2 Enabling-technology platforms 594.3 Natural product diversification and drug metabolite generation platform 654.4 Conclusion 65

References 66

5 Assessing Biodiversity: A Molecular Approach Using DNA Sequencing 69Yasmina Jaufeerally-Fakim

5.1 Introduction 695.2 Taxonomy and evolution 695.3 Assessing diversity 705.4 DNA sequencing and barcoding 735.5 Plant genomics 755.6 Analysis of marker data 79

References 79

v

vi Content

6 Conservation of Endangered Wild Harvested Medicinal Plants: Use of DNA Barcoding 81Sarina Veldman, Joseph Otieno, Barbara Gravendeel, Tinde van Andel and Hugo de Boer

6.1 Wild harvested medicinal plants: background and challenges 816.2 DNA barcoding general 826.3 DNA barcoding and species delimitation 826.4 DNA barcodes for plants 836.5 Examples of DNA barcoding of cryptic and prepared plant material 836.6 Plant DNA authentication, verification and certification 856.7 Future opportunities and challenges 85

Acknowledgements 86References 86

7 Market Entry, Standards and Certification 89Susan A. Wren

7.1 Sustainable utilization of indigenous plant products 897.2 Market entry 907.3 Certification 937.4 Developing indigenous plant-based enterprises as viable businesses with developing

country communities 102Acknowledgements 105References 105Further reading 105

8 European Union Market Access Categories and Regulatory Requirements for NovelNatural Products 107Thomas Brendler and L. Denzil Philipps

8.1 Introduction 1078.2 Raw materials 1078.3 Finished products 1118.4 Summary 122

Reference 123Further reading 123

9 Nutrition, Health and Food Security: Evidence and Priority Actions 125L. J. Ferrao and T. H. Fernandes

9.1 Introduction 1259.2 Well-being and nutrition 1259.3 Traditional food cultures 1269.4 Nutrition in pregnancy and infancy 1269.5 Health and nutrition education is central for development 1279.6 Research and development 1289.7 Role of agricultural growth on reducing poverty, hunger and malnutrition 1289.8 Concluding remarks 129

References 129

PART TWO MEDICINE (PLANTS AS MEDICINE: HUMANS AND ANIMAL HEALTH) 131

10 Anticancer Potential of African Plants: The Experience of the United States NationalCancer Institute and National Institutes of Health 133John A. Beutler, Gordon M. Cragg, Maurice Iwu, David J. Newman and Christopher Okunji10.1 Introduction 13310.2 The United States National Cancer Institute programme 13310.3 The International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups programme 13910.4 Conclusions 145

Acknowledgements 145References 145

11 Biodiversity as a Source of Potent and Selective Inhibitors of Chikungunya Virus Replication 151Pieter Leyssen, Jacqueline Smadja, Philippe Rasoanaivo, Ameenah Gurib-Fakim,Mohamad Fawzi Mahomoodally, Bruno Canard, Jean-Claude Guillemot, Marc Litaudonand Françoise Guéritte11.1 The epidemiology of chikungunya virus 15111.2 The PHYTOCHIK programme for the discovery of natural compounds active against

chikungunya virus 154

Content vii

11.3 Euphorbiaceae, abundant source of anti-chikungunya virus compounds 15711.4 Conclusion 159

Acknowledgements 159References 160

12 Using African Plant Biodiversity to Combat Microbial Infections 163J. N. Eloff and L. J. McGaw12.1 Introduction and problem statement 16312.2 Commercial use of African medicinal plants in the herbal medicine industry 16412.3 Why is there such a difference in product development for antimicrobials versus

other medicinal applications? 16412.4 Methods used in developing useful products 16412.5 Results of random screening of large number of species 16712.6 Our approach to random screening 16812.7 Activity of compounds isolated against Staphylococcus aureus 16912.8 Discovering antifungal compounds from natural products 16912.9 Review papers focusing on antimicrobial activity of plants from Africa 169

12.10 Promising new approaches 17012.11 The potential of using African medicinal plants as extracts 17012.12 Conclusions 171

Acknowledgements 172References 172

13 Plant Medicines Used in the Treatment of Malaria 175John R.S. Tabuti, Antonia Nyamukuru and Mohammed Lamorde13.1 Introduction 17513.2 Approach used in the review 17513.3 Plant species commonly used to treat malaria in Uganda 17613.4 Conclusions and recommendations 177

References 177

14 Multiple Anti-Infective Properties of Selected Plant Species from Zimbabwe 179Rumbidzai Mangoyi, Tariro Chitemerere, Theresa Chimponda, Elaine Chirisaand Stanley Mukanganyama14.1 Introduction 17914.2 Preparation of plant extracts 18114.3 Conclusions 188

Acknowledgements 188References 188

15 Development of Phytodrugs from Indigenous Plants: The Mali Experience 191Rokia Sanogo15.1 Introduction 19115.2 Development of new phytodrugs 19815.3 Discussion 19915.4 Conclusion 200

References 200

16 Healing Aloes from the Mascarenes Islands 205Joyce Govinden-Soulange16.1 Introduction 20516.2 The Asphodelaceae 20516.3 Prospects and research avenues 211

References 212

17 Pharmacological Activities of Some of the Neglected and Underutilized TropicalPlants in Malaysia 215Z.A. Zakaria, F. Yahya, T. Balan, S.S. Mamat, R. Rodzi, F.H. Kamisan, C.A. Fatimahand A.L. Ibrahim17.1 Introduction 21517.2 Muntingia calabura 21517.3 Dicranopteris linearis 21817.4 Bauhinia purpurea 219

viii Content

17.5 Melastoma malabathricum 22217.6 Conclusion 224

References 224

18 Multiple Applications of Endophytic Colletotrichum Species Occurring in Medicinal Plants 227Mahendra Rai, Gauravi Agarkar and Dnyaneshwar Rathod18.1 Introduction 22718.2 Diversity of endophytic Colletotrichum sp. in medicinal plants 22818.3 Biomedical applications 22818.4 Agriculture applications 23118.5 Industrial applications 23318.6 Perspectives 23418.7 Conclusion 234

References 234

19 African Plants with Potential for Development into Ethnoveterinary Products 237L.J. McGaw and J.N. Eloff19.1 Introduction 23719.2 What is ethnoveterinary medicine? 23719.3 Ethnoveterinary medicine in Africa 23819.4 African plants as sources of commercial remedies 25519.5 Examples of African medicinal plants used for ethnoveterinary purposes with scope

for commercialization 25619.6 Toxicity 25819.7 Conclusions 258

References 258

20 African Plant Biodiversity in Pest Management 263S. N’Danikou, D.A. Tchokponhoue, C.A. Houdegbe and E.G. Achigan-Dako20.1 Introduction 26320.2 History of humans’ use of plant biodiversity in pest management 26420.3 Methods and approaches in pest management 26420.4 Research on plant use in pest management 26620.5 Biodiversity of African plants used in pest management 26720.6 Benefits of the use of plants in crop pest management 27020.7 Limits of the study 27020.8 Conclusion 270

References 270Appendices 275

21 Commercialization of Ethnoveterinary Botanical Products 285David R. Katerere21.1 Introduction 28521.2 Therapeutic areas for ethnoveterinary applications 28721.3 Conclusion 290

Acknowledgements 290References 290

22 Plants Used for Pest Management in Malawi 295Cecilia Maliwichi-Nyirenda, Lucy Lynn Maliwichi and John F. Kamanula22.1 Introduction 29522.2 Merits and demerits of pest management systems in Malawi 29622.3 Plant species used in pest management 297

References 301

PART THREE FOOD (SPICES, FRUIT AND VEGETABLES, ETC.) 303

23 Aromatic Plants: Use and Nutraceutical Properties 305Lucia Guidi and Marco Landi23.1 Introduction 30523.2 Mediterranean aromatic plants 30723.3 Concluding remarks 325

References 325

Content ix

24 ‘Let Your Food Be Your Medicine’: Exotic Fruits and Vegetables as Therapeutic Componentsfor Obesity and Other Metabolic Syndromes 347Mohamad Fawzi Mahomoodally24.1 Introduction 34724.2 Obesity, diabetes and metabolic syndromes 34724.3 Medicinal food plants against metabolic diseases 34824.4 Conclusion 355

References 356

25 Strategic Repositioning African Indigenous Vegetables and Fruits with Nutrition, Economicand Climate Change Resilience Potential 361M.O. Abukutsa-Onyango25.1 Introduction 36125.2 African indigenous vegetables and fruits 36225.3 Strategic repositioning of indigenous vegetables and fruits in the horticulture 36425.4 Concluding remarks 367

References 367

26 Hepatoprotective, Antiulcerogenic, Cytotoxic and Antioxidant Activities of Musa acuminataPeel and Pulp 371Fatimah Corazon Abdullah, Lida Rahimi, Zainul Amiruddin Zakaria and Abdul Latif Ibrahim26.1 Introduction 37126.2 Hepatoprotective activity 37326.3 Antiulcerogenic activity 37726.4 Cytotoxic activity 37926.5 Antioxidant activity 38026.6 Conclusion 381

References 381

27 Plant Bioresources and their Nutrigenomic Implications on Health 383Maznah Ismail and Mustapha Umar Imam27.1 Introduction 38327.2 Plant bioresources for health uses: beyond traditional uses 38427.3 Bioactivity of plant bioresources: nutrigenomic implications 38427.4 Potential implications of the rising trend in the use of plant bioresources for remedies 39027.5 Conclusions 390

Acknowledgements 391References 391

28 Safety of Botanical Ingredients in Personal Healthcare: Focus on Africa 395R. Vihotogbé, C.N.A. Sossa-Vihotogbé and G.E. Achigan-Dako28.1 Introduction 39528.2 Safety in healthcare via food consumption 39528.3 Medicinal plants in healthcare 396

References 405

PART FOUR COSMETICS (INCLUDING DYES, AROMAS) 409

29 Aromatic and Medicinal Plants in North Africa: Opportunities, Constraints and Prospects 411Mohamed Ghanmi, Abderrahman Aafi, Badr Satrani, Mohamed Aberchane, Abderrahim Khiaand Salah Eddine Bakkali Yakhlef29.1 Introduction 41129.2 Aromatic and medicinal plants in North Africa: a snapshot on the countries of the

Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia) 41129.3 Aromatic and medicinal plants in North Africa: overview and prospects 41329.4 Aromatic and medicinal plants in Morocco: opportunities, constraints and prospects 41329.5 Development of the aromatic and medicinal plants sector in Morocco: the strategy

adopted 41529.6 Research conducted in the field of aromatic and medicinal plants: achievements and

prospects 415

x Content

29.7 Medicinal and aromatic plants in Algeria 41729.8 Medicinal and aromatic plants in Tunisia 41829.9 Molecular techniques as tools for conservation and valorization of aromatic and

medicinal plants 41829.10 Sector of aromatic and medicinal plants in North Africa: prospects 421

References 421

30 Development of Natural Cosmeceuticals: Harnessing Asia’s Biodiversity 425Azila Abdul-Aziz, Mariani Abdul Hamid, Norhayati Mohammad Noor, Harisun Yaakob,Rosnani Hasham and Mohamad Roji Sarmidi30.1 Introduction 42530.2 Mangosteen: a ‘fruity’ depigmenting agent 42530.3 Ficus deltoidea: the ‘golden’ treasure from nature 42630.4 Labisia pumila: Malaysia’s queen of herbs 42730.5 Andrographis paniculata: a ‘bitter’ therapy for the skin 42830.6 Centella asiatica: herbs’ jack of all trades 42930.7 Future trends 429

References 430

31 Unique Bioresources from Ethiopia for Food, Medicine and Cosmetics 433E. Dagne31.1 Introduction 43331.2 Boswellia species (Burseraceae), etan (Amharic) 43331.3 Catha edulis (Celastraceae), khat 43331.4 Coffea arabica (Rubiaceae), buna (Amharic) 43431.5 Commiphora myrrha (Burseraceae), kerbe (Amharic) 43531.6 Croton macrostachyus (Euphorbiaceae), bissana (Amharic) 43531.7 Echinops kebericho (Asteraceae), kebericho (Amharic) 43531.8 Ensete ventricosum (Musaceae), enset (Amharic) 43631.9 Eragrostis tef (Poaceae), tef (Amharic) 436

31.10 Hagenia abyssinica (Rosaceae), koso (Amharic) 43831.11 Moringa stenopetala (Moringaceae), shiferaw (Amharic) 43831.12 Nigella sativa (Ranunculaceae), tikur azmud (Amharic) 43931.13 Phytolacca dodecandra (Phytolaccaceae), endod (Amharic) 43931.14 Sorghum bicolor (Poaceae), mashla (Amharic) 43931.15 Taverniera abyssinica (Leguminosae), dingetegna (Amharic) 44031.16 Civettictis civetta: source of civet zebad (Amharic) 44031.17 Conclusion 440

References 440

32 Aromatic Plants from Reunion Island (France) 443Anne Bialecki and Jacqueline Smadja32.1 Introduction 44332.2 Aromatic plant production: economic data 44332.3 Extraction techniques used in Reunion Island 44432.4 Analysis of essential oils and plant headspace in the Chemistry Laboratory of

Natural Substances and Food Sciences 44532.5 Identification of volatile compounds at the Chemistry Laboratory of Natural

Substances and Food Sciences 44632.6 Conclusion 451

Acknowledgements 452References 452

33 Anti-Parasitic Activity of Essential Oils and their Active Constituents against Plasmodium,Trypanosoma and Leishmania 455Joanne Bero, Salomé Kpoviessi and Joëlle Quetin-Leclercq33.1 Introduction 45533.2 Essential oils 45533.3 Compounds isolated from essential oils 46033.4 Discussion and conclusion 460

References 467

Content xi

34 Metabolomic Analysis of a Commercially Important Aromatic Plant from the IndianOcean: Vanilla planifolia 471Tony L. Palama34.1 Introduction 47134.2 Vanilla description 47134.3 Vanilla metabolomics 47334.4 Other future prospects 47534.5 Conclusions 476

References 477

35 Natural Dyes for Photonics Applications 479M. Maaza35.1 Introduction 47935.2 Nonlinear optical properties of natural dyes: χ(3) and optical limiting applications 47935.3 Linear optical properties of natural dyes: Grätzel dye solar cells 48535.4 Conclusion 491

Acknowledgements 491References 492

36 The Host Innate Immune Response to Propionibacterium acnes and the Potential ofNatural Products as Cosmeceutical Agents 495Marco Nuno de Canha, Smeetha Singh and Namrita Lall36.1 The skin and its function 49536.2 The impact of skin disorders with focus on acne 49536.3 Propionibacterium acnes: is it the culprit? 49536.4 Acne vulgaris (acne) 49636.5 The activation of innate and adaptive immune system 49736.6 The host immune response to infection by Propionibacterium acnes 49836.7 Conventional treatments available for acne vulgaris 49936.8 Potential of natural products to treat acne vulgaris 50036.9 The importance of the emergence of plant life on Earth 501

36.10 A proposed stepwise approach from plant extract to cosmeceutical product 501References 505

37 New Natural Aromatic Products: Search, Evaluation and the Development Issues 507Murray Hunter37.1 Introduction 50737.2 The family of natural aromatic extracts 50737.3 The search and screening process 50837.4 Sources of potential plant opportunity identification 50937.5 The characteristics and classification of natural aromatic materials 51037.6 Evaluating the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of natural aromatic materials 51237.7 The development issues 51237.8 Conclusion 522

References 523Further reading 524

Index 525

List of contributors

Abderrahman Aafi, Forest Research Center, High Commission for Water, Forests and Combat Desertification, Agdal, Rabat, Morocco

Azila Abdul-Aziz, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Jalan Semarak, Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia

Fatimah Corazon Abdullah, Natural Products Discovery Laboratory, Institute of Bio-IT Selangor, Universiti Selangor, Malaysia

Mohamed Aberchane, Forest Research Center, High Commission for Water, Forests and Combat Desertification, Agdal, Rabat, Morocco

M.O. Abukutsa-Onyango, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kenya, Department of Horticulture, Nairobi, Kenya

E.G. Achigan-Dako, Laboratory of Plant Science, Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences (FSA), University of

Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Republic of Benin

Gauravi Agarkar, Department of Biotechnology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati (MS), India

T.Balan,Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty ofMedicine andHealth Sciences, Universiti PutraMalaysia, Serdang, Selangor,Malaysia

Joanne Bero, Pharmacognosy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Bruxelles, Belgium

John A. Beutler,Molecular Targets Laboratory, Center for Cancer Research, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA

AnneBialecki, Laboratoire de Chimie des SubstancesNaturelles et des Sciences des Aliments, Faculté des Sciences et Technologies, Université

de la Réunion, La Réunion, France

Thomas Brendler, Plantaphile Ltd, Collingswood (USA), Eastbourne (UK) and Berlin (Germany)

Bruno Canard, Laboratoire d’Architecture et de Fonction des Macromolécules Biologiques (AFMB-AMU-UMR7257), Marseille, France

Kelly Chibale, Department of Chemistry, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa

Nyaradzo T.L. Chigorimbo-Murefu, Department of Chemistry, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa

TheresaChimponda,Biomolecular InteractionsAnalysesGroup,Department of Biochemistry,University of Zimbabwe,Mt. Pleasant,Harare,

Zimbabwe

Elaine Chirisa, Biomolecular Interactions Analyses Group, Department of Biochemistry, University of Zimbabwe, Mt. Pleasant, Harare,

Zimbabwe

Tariro Chitemerere, Biomolecular Interactions Analyses Group, Department of Biochemistry, University of Zimbabwe,Mt. Pleasant, Harare,

Zimbabwe

Gordon M. Cragg, Natural Products Branch, Developmental Therapeutics Program, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA

E. Dagne, African Laboratory for Natural Products (ALNAP), Department of Chemistry, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Hugo de Boer, Systematic Biology, Department of Organismal Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;

Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Faculty of Science, Leiden, The Netherlands; Faculty of Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

M.E. Dulloo, Bioversity International, Rome, Italy

J.N. Eloff, Phytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onder-

stepoort, South Africa

C.A. Fatimah, Institute of Bio-It Selangor, Universiti Selangor, ShahAlam, Selangor,Malaysia, Faculty of Sciences & Biotechnology, Universiti

Selangor, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Ulrich Feiter, Parceval Ltd, Cape Town, South Africa

T.H. Fernandes, Lúrio University, Nampula, Mozambique

L.J. Ferrão, Lúrio University, Nampula, Mozambique

xiii

xiv List of contributors

Mohamed Ghanmi, Forest Research Center, High Commission for Water, Forests and Combat Desertification, Agdal, Rabat, Morocco

Joyce Govinden-Soulange, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Mauritius, Réduit, Mauritius

Barbara Gravendeel, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, National Herbarium Nederland – Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

Françoise Guéritte, Centre de Recherche de Gif, Institut de Chimie des Substances Naturelles (ICSN), CNRS, LabEx LERMIT, Gif sur Yvette

Cedex, France

Lucia Guidi, Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

Jean-Claude Guillemot, Laboratoire d’Architecture et de Fonction des Macromolécules Biologiques (AFMB-AMU-UMR7257), Marseille,

France

Ameenah Gurib-Fakim, Center for Phytotherapy Research (CEPHYR), Ebene, Mauritius

Mariani Abdul Hamid, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

Rosnani Hasham, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

C.A. Houdegbe, Laboratory of Plant Science, Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences (FSA), University of

Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Republic of Benin

D. Hunter, Bioversity International, Rome, Italy, School of Agriculture and Wine Sciences (SAWS), Charles Sturt University, Orange, New

South Wales, Australia

Murray Hunter, School of Business Innovation & Technoentrepreneurship, University Malaysia Perlis, Malaysia

Abdul Latif Ibrahim, Natural Products Discovery Laboratory, Institute of Bio-IT Selangor, Faculty of Sciences & Biotechnology, Universiti

Selangor, Malaysia

MustaphaUmar Imam, Laboratory ofMolecular Biomedicine, Institute of Bioscience, Universiti PutraMalaysia, Serdang, Selangor,Malaysia

Maznah Ismail, Laboratory of Molecular Biomedicine, Institute of Bioscience, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Medicine

and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Maurice Iwu, Bioresource Development & Conservation Programme, Nigeria, Head Office, Abuja, FCT, Nigeria

Yasmina Jaufeerally-Fakim, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Mauritius, Reduit, Mauritius

John F. Kamanula, Chemistry Department, Mzuzu University, Luwinga, Mzuzu, Malawi

F.H. Kamisan, Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor,

Malaysia

Ossy M.J. Kasilo,World Health Organization, Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo

DavidR.Katerere,Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Science, TshwaneUniversity of Technology, Arcadia Campus, Pretoria,

Republic of South Africa

Abderrahim Khia, Laboratory of Biotechnology, Environment and Quality, Faculty of Sciences, University Ibn Tofail, Kénitra, Morocco

SaloméKpoviessi, Pharmacognosy ResearchGroup, LouvainDrug Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Bruxelles, Belgium,

Laboratory of Physic and Synthesis Organic Chemistry (LaCOPS), University of Abomey-Calavi (UAC), Faculty of Sciences and Technics

(FAST), Cotonou, Benin, Laboratory of Pharmacognosy and Essential Oils (LAPHE), University of Abomey-Calavi (UAC), Faculty of Health

Sciences (FSS), Faculty of Sciences and Technics (FAST), Cotonou, Benin

Namrita Lall, University of Pretoria, Department of Plant Science, Lynwood, Pretoria, South Africa

Marco Landi, Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

Mohammed Lamorde, Infectious Diseases Institute, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

D. Leaman, Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa, Canada

Pieter Leyssen, Rega Institute for Medical Research (KU Leuven), Leuven, Belgium

Marc Litaudon, Centre de Recherche de Gif, Institut de Chimie des Substances Naturelles (ICSN), CNRS, LabEx LERMIT, Gif sur Yvette

Cedex, France

List of contributors xv

M. Maaza, UNESCO–UNISA Africa Chair in Nanosciences/Nanotechnology, College of Graduate Studies, University of South Africa

(UNISA), Muckleneuk Ridge, Pretoria, South Africa, Nanosciences African Network (NANOAFNET), iThemba LABS–National Research

Foundation, Somerset West, Western Cape Province, South Africa

Mohamad Fawzi Mahomoodally, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Mauritius, Réduit, Mauritius

Lucy Lynn Maliwichi, University of Venda, Thohoyando, Republic of South Africa

Cecilia Maliwichi-Nyirenda, Indigenous Knowledge Centre, Blantyre, Malawi

S.S. Mamat, Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor,

Malaysia

RumbidzaiMangoyi,Biomolecular InteractionsAnalysesGroup,Department of Biochemistry,University of Zimbabwe,Mt. Pleasant,Harare,

Zimbabwe

L.J. McGaw, Phytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Onder-

stepoort, South Africa

Grace Mugumbate, Department of Chemistry, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa

Stanley Mukanganyama, Biomolecular Interactions Analyses Group, Department of Biochemistry, University of Zimbabwe, Mt. Pleasant,

Harare, Zimbabwe

S. N’Danikou, Laboratory of Plant Science, Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences (FSA), University of

Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Republic of Benin; Bioversity International, West and Central Africa Office, Cotonou, Benin

David J. Newman, Natural Products Branch, Developmental Therapeutics Program, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA

Jean-Baptiste Nikiema,World Health Organization, Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo

Norhayati Mohammad Noor, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

Marco Nuno de Canha, University of Pretoria, Department of Plant Science, Lynwood, Pretoria, South Africa

Antonia Nyamukuru, Sustainable Use of Plant Diversity (SUPD), Kampala, Uganda

Christopher Okunji, US Pharmacopeial Convention, Rockville, MD, USA

Joseph Otieno, Department of Medical Botany, Plant Breeding and Agronomy, Institute of Traditional Medicine, Muhimbili University of

Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

TonyL.Palama,UnitéMixte deRecherche –PeuplementVégétaux et Bioagresseurs enMilieuTropical,Université de LaRéunion, Saint-Denis,

La Réunion, France

L. Denzil Phillips, Denzil Phillips International Ltd, Richmond (UK) and Sinsheim (Germany)

Joëlle Quetin-Leclercq, Pharmacognosy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Bruxelles,

Belgium

Lida Rahimi, Natural Products Discovery Laboratory, Institute of Bio-IT Selangor, Universiti Selangor, Malaysia

Mahendra Rai, Department of Biotechnology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati (MS), India

Philippe Rasoanaivo, Institut Malgache de Recherches Appliquées (IMRA), Avarabohitra Itaosy, Antananarivo, Madagascar

Dnyaneshwar Rathod, Department of Biotechnology, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati (MS), India

R.Rodzi,Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty ofMedicine andHealth Sciences,Universiti PutraMalaysia, Serdang, Selangor,Malaysia

Rokia Sanogo,Faculté de Pharmacie,Université des Sciences, des Techniques et desTechnologies deBamako,Mali,Département deMédecine

Traditionnelle, Institut National de Recherche en Santé Publique, Bamako, Mali

Mohamad Roji Sarmidi, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

Badr Satrani, Forest Research Center, High Commission for Water, Forests and Combat Desertification, Agdal, Rabat, Morocco

Smeetha Singh, University of Pretoria, Department of Plant Science, Lynwood, Pretoria, South Africa

Jacqueline Smadja, Laboratoire de Chimie des Substances Naturelles et des Sciences des Aliments (LCSNSA), Faculté des Sciences et Tech-

nologies, Université de La Réunion, La Réunion, France

C.N.A. Sossa-Vihotogbé, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences, University of Abomey-Calavi (FSA/UAC, Benin), Cotonou, Benin

xvi List of contributors

John R.S. Tabuti,Makerere University, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences (MUCAES), Kampala, Uganda

D.A. Tchokponhoue, Laboratory of Plant Science, Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences (FSA), University of

Abomey-Calavi, Cotonou, Republic of Benin

Tinde van Andel, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, National Herbarium Nederland – Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

SarinaVeldman, Systematic Biology, Department of Organismal Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

R. Vihotogbé, Faculty of Agronomic Sciences, University of Abomey-Calavi (FSA/UAC, Benin), Cotonou, Benin

Susan A. Wren, International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE), Nairobi, Kenya

Harisun Yaakob, Institute of Bioproduct Development, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

F. Yahya,Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty ofMedicine andHealth Sciences, Universiti PutraMalaysia, Serdang, Selangor,Malaysia

Salah Eddine Bakkali Yakhlef, Forest Research Center, High Commission for Water, Forests and Combat Desertification, Agdal, Rabat,

Morocco

ZainulAmiruddinZakaria,Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty ofMedicine andHealth Sciences, Universiti PutraMalaysia, Serdang,

Selangor, Malaysia, Natural Products Discovery Laboratory, Institute of Bio-IT Selangor, Universiti Selangor, Malaysia

Foreword

Biodiversity is the basis of life. At the dawn of a newmillennium, one

of the most pressing challenges of our time is the continuing, and at

times irreversible, loss of biodiversity on our planet.

Global efforts to reduce biodiversity loss began in earnest with the

establishment of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in

1993 at the Rio Earth Summit. Today, the CBD counts 193 parties

(or governments) as members, representing a dramatic step for-

ward in the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use

of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits

arising from the use of genetic resources. To maintain focus, the

United Nations has decreed the period 2011–2020 as the Decade on

Biodiversity.

Nowhere is the need for conservation and sustainable utilization

of biodiversity greater than in sub-Saharan Africa, whose biodi-

versity wealth is uniquely important from a global conservation

viewpoint. The African continent is home to between 40 000 and

60 000 plant species, of which at least 35 000 are found nowhere

else. Africa’s biodiversity wealth is not uniformly distributed. The

Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar and South Africa have

each been classified as ‘megadiverse’ countries, the world’s 17 most

biologically diverse countries that together account for nearly 70%

of global species diversity. South Africa’s Cape Floristic Region

(CFR) represents less than 0.5% of the area of the African continent

but is home to nearly 20% of its flora, containing nearly 3% of the

world’s plant species.

Despite its enormous natural wealth, sub-Saharan Africa faces

daunting conservation challenges. Its flora and fauna are under

unrelenting assault from a variety of threats: agricultural expan-

sion, habitat loss and degradation, overexploitation, illegal hunting

and trade, invasive alien species, rapid population growth, urban-

ization and climate change to name just a few. As argued in Freedom

to Innovate: Biotechnology in Africa’s Development, biodiversity loss

in Africa has a significant impact on economic growth and social

development. For Africa’s rural citizens, it has the effect of removing

key sources of food, fuel andmedicines, as well as adversely affecting

tourism and pharmaceuticals – from a reduction in the availability

of medicinal plants. New knowledge, about conservation and whole

plant utilization, is needed, not just to strengthen the conservation

effort, but to harness Africa’s unique patrimony of natural resources

to foster economic development, reduce poverty and protect the

environment.

Seen in this context, this volume,Novel Plant Bioresources: Applica-

tions in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics edited by Professor Ameenah

Gurib-Fakim of Mauritius, is a major new contribution for promot-

ing sustainable utilization and management of novel plant genetic

resources in Africa and beyond. It advances our understanding of

the increasingly crucial role that plants play in the economic, cul-

tural, medical and social spheres of our lives. The volume’s focus on

underutilized plant species is welcome, and marks a first-of-its type

effort to marshal, in one publication, novel uses of plants for food,

cosmetics and medicines.

The volume includes contributions from a diverse range of schol-

ars – amajority hailing from the African continent – who offer fresh,

new insights on novel plants and a wide range of important, related

topics, including conservation, discovery of new drugs, new molec-

ular approaches, market standards, nutrition and commercial appli-

cations of medicinal plants, among others.

Sustainable utilization andmanagement of plant genetic resources

is a topic of contemporary significance. Bymarshalling the latest evi-

dence and cutting-edge knowledge, this volume should find broad

appeal among activists, business leaders, scientists, farmers, policy-

makers and all those who are committed to reducing biodiversity

loss on our planet.

Ismail Serageldin

Director

Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Egypt

xvii

Part One

Novel Plant Bioresources: Applicationsin Medicine, Cosmetics, etc.

1

1 Plant Diversity in Addressing Food,Nutrition and Medicinal NeedsM.E. Dulloo1, D. Hunter1,2 and D. Leaman3

1Bioversity International, Rome, Italy2School of Agriculture and Wine Sciences (SAWS), Charles Sturt University, Orange, New South Wales, Australia3Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa, Canada

1.1 Introduction

The world presently still faces tremendous challenges in securing

adequate food that is healthy, safe and of high nutritional quality

for all, and doing so in an environmentally sustainable manner

(Pinstrup-Andersen, 2009; Godfray et al., 2010). With the grow-

ing demand of an expected 9 billion people by 2050, it remains

unclear how our current global food system will cope (Foley et al.,

2011; Tilman et al., 2011). Compounded with climate change,

ecosystems and biodiversity under stress, ongoing loss of species

and genetic diversity, increasing urbanization, social conflict and

extreme poverty, there has never been a more urgent time for col-

lective action to address food, nutrition security and health globally

(Hunter and Fanzo, 2013). Currently, 868 million people suffer

from hunger in spite of the target of Millennium Development Goal

No. 1 to halve hunger by 2015, while micronutrient deficiencies,

known as hidden hunger, undermine the growth and development,

health and productivity of over 2 billion people (Micronutrient

Initiative, 2009). At the same time, over 1 billion people, worldwide,

are overweight (WHO, 2012), and as many as 80% of the world’s

people depend on traditional medicine (which involves the use of

plants extracts or their active principles) for their primary health

care needs (WHO et al., 1993).

As we shall see in this chapter, plant diversity has a critical role

to play in addressing the food and nutrition security and medicinal

needs of people of this world. The Plant List (2010) reports that

there are just over 1 million recorded scientific plant names at the

species ranks, of which about 30% have accepted species names,

45% are synonyms and 25% are still unresolved. This reflects the

estimations of the number of plant species that exist in the world

as being between 250 000 and 400 000 (Govaerts, 2001; Bramwell,

2002). These numbers are most likely to change as new plants are

being discovered and as taxonomists resolve the nomenclatures

of recorded plant species. The plant diversity is not evenly dis-

tributed across the world and tends to be concentrated in specific

diversity-rich areas. It is generally known that most diversity of

species occurs within the warm regions of the tropics and less diver-

sity exists in temperate and boreal regions of the world (Dulloo,

2013). Barthlott et al. (2005) has identified five centres that reach a

species richness of more than 5000 plant species per 10 000 square

kilometres (Costa Rica-Chocó, Atlantic Brazil, Tropical Eastern

Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics, First Edition. Edited by Ameenah Gurib-Fakim.© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Andes, Northern Borneo, New Guinea). Most of the global centres

are located in mountainous regions within the humid tropics, where

suitable climatic conditions and high levels of geodiversity (i.e. the

diversity of abiotic conditions) coincide (Barthlott et al., 2005).

Myers et al. (2000) noted that as many as 44% of all species of

vascular plants and 35% of all species in four vertebrate groups are

confined to 25 hotspots comprising only 1.4% of the land surface of

the Earth, mostly located in tropical areas. Among crops plants, the

Russian breeder Nicolai Vavilov identified eight centres of origin of

cultivated plants including South Mexican and Central America,

Southern America, Mediterranean centre, Middle East, Ethiopia,

Central Asia, India and China (Vavilov, 1931).

As the primary producers of our planet, capturing sunlight energy

that fuels life on Earth in the process of photosynthesis, plants are the

most fundamental and essential resources for humankind. Besides

this fundamental function, plant species provide us with sources

of foods, medicines, clothes, ornamentals, building materials and

other uses. Plants are also an intricate part of all our ecosystems and

provide all the essential ecosystem services, including the provision-

ing, regulating, cultural and supporting services. Besides the obvious

provisioning of food in ensuring that people are food and nutrition-

ally secured, many plants contribute directly to our agriculture by

providing valuable traits and genes that are used by modern-day

breeders for crop improvement, in particular those plants which

are closely related to crop plants, the so-called crop wild relatives

(CWRs). In addition, all human societies use plants as medicines.

Many plant species protect and enrich our soil: nitrogen-fixing bac-

teria in root nodules of leguminous plants fertilize the soil. They

form an essential link in the biogeochemical cycles, including water,

nitrogen and other nutrient cycles. Plants provide direct support for

other life forms. For example, trees are habitats for many organisms,

including providing nesting sites for birds and a harbour for many

other animals. Mangroves protect our coasts and provide a breeding

ground for many marine organisms. There is also an inextricable

link between plants and culture (Posey, 1999). Many plant species

play important cultural roles in the development of human cultures

throughout the world. Indigenous, traditional and local communi-

ties have a deep knowledge about plants and their uses as medicines,

in traditional customs and rituals and have sustainably used and

conserved a vast diversity of plants. The use of biologically active

materials from the natural environment as medicines to maintain

3

4 Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics

and restorehealth is an importanthumanadaptation, as fundamental

a feature of human culture as is use of fire, tools and speech (Alland,

1966; Johns, 1990). Having evolved over millennia, the knowledge,

cultural traditions andmedicinal resources ofmany human societies

may be rapidly disappearing with the loss of cultural and biological

diversity (Principe, 1991; Schultes, 1991).

In spite of this great diversity of plants on Earth and the funda-

mental role they play, the story of crops and humanity has shown

an increasing reliance on a small proportion of plant species used

by humans (Murphy, 2007). The beginnings of exploitation of plant

diversity for food and nutrition are as old as humankind, and early

hunter–gatherers in pre-agricultural times would have exploited

their local environment for readily available fruits, berries, seeds,

flowers, shoots, storage organs and fleshy roots to complement meat

obtained from hunting.

Furthermore, the evolution of crop plants that began about

10 000 years ago resulted in an even greater reliance by humans

on much-reduced plant diversity than was previously utilized for

food supply. While the number of plant species used for food

by pre-agricultural human societies is estimated at around 7000

(Wilson, 1992), another 70 000 are known to have edible parts

(Kunkel, 1984). An estimated 50 000–70 000 plant species are used

medicinally around the world (Schippmann et al., 2002, 2006),

of which relatively few are produced in cultivation (Mulliken and

Inskipp, 2006). Prescott-Allen and Prescott-Allen (1990) calculated

that the world’s food comes just from 103 plant species based on

calories, protein and fat supply; 30 crops provide 95% of the world

food energy needs (FAO, 1998). However, only four crop species

(maize, wheat, rice and sugar) supply almost 60% of the calories and

proteins in the human diet (Palacios, 1998). Today, in population

terms, 4 billion people rely on rice, maize or wheat as their staple

food, while a further 1 billion people rely on roots and tubers

(Millstone and Lang, 2008), and as these authors point out there

are thousands of plant species with neglected potential utility for

humans and which represent one of the most poorly underutilized

and underappreciated food resources we have.

The great majority (70–90%) of the market demand for medicinal

and aromatic plants is supplied through wild collection (Lange,

1998; Bhattacharya et al., 2008), providing many rural communities

with important sources of income. While some wild-sourced plants

appear to be produced in a sustainable manner, others, particularly

high-demand species in international trade, evidently are not sus-

tainably sourced (Sheldon et al., 1996; Oldfield and Jenkins, 2012).

Moreover, medicinal plant species are likely to be threatened by

loss of habitat, climate change and other factors contributing to the

extinction of plants and other species worldwide (Vié et al., 2009).

1.1.1 Threatened plants and crop varieties

There have been many studies and assessments undertaken at

national, regional and global levels to show that plant diversity is

globally threatened. Historically, our knowledge of the threatened

plants stems from the pioneering work of Sir Peter Scott (then chair-

man of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Species Survival Commission) who initiated the compilation of a

list of threatened plants which led to the publication of the IUCN

Plant Red Data Book in 1978 (Lucas and Synge, 1978). This book

provided the conservation status of 250 species (mainly European

plants) of the 25 000 plant species estimated to be threatened at this

time. This work encouraged other countries to develop their own

lists of threatened plants and Plant Red Data Books (Gabrielyan,

1988; Strahm, 1989; Fu and Chin, 1992; Golding, 2002). The 1997

IUCN Red List of Threatened Plants was the first-ever published

list of threatened vascular plants, including ferns and fern allies,

gymnosperms and flowering plants, and listed 12.5% of the world’s

vascular flora (estimated at 270 000 at this time) as being threatened

at the global scale, recognizing though that this assessment was

based on incomplete data sets and the quality of data, which varied

considerably depending upon regions and taxonomic groups (Wal-

ter and Gillett, 1998). The work did not take into account genetic

erosion within the populations of species, which is important for

plant genetic resources and wild relatives of cultivated plants.

IUCN (2001) has developed a uniform way of estimating the

degree of threat to taxa. Taxa are listed in the IUCN Red List under

categories that indicate the varying degrees of their probability of

extinction. There are nine clearly defined IUCN categories under

which every species (or lower taxonomic unit) in the world can be

classified (Figure 1.1). Taxa are then classified to these categories, by

assessment using five quantitative criteria and sub-criteria that take

into account the population sizes, distribution range and degree of

threats (IUCN, 2001). Such criteria, however, cannot be applied to

cultivated plants, which require a different paradigm. Padulosi and

Dulloo (2012) proposed a novel approach for monitoring cultivated

plants that is based on assessing current trends and possible decline

of its cultivation over time. The ultimate objective of monitoring

cultivated species is to secure their effective use by people so as

to meet sustainably their livelihood needs. This approach would

allow us to ‘raise the red flag’ when such a decline goes below that

level (compared with past use-trends) under which its benefits

(nutritional, income generation, etc.) are no longer spread over

the community. Thus, a four-cell framework has been proposed

for assessing cultivated plants, mostly at varietal levels, based on

the number of households and areas of cultivation (Padulosi and

Dulloo, 2012) (Figure 1.2). Several countries have attempted to

produce a red list of cultivated plants, including Romania (Antofie,

2011), Germany (Hammer and Khoshbakht, 2005; Meyer and

Vögel, 2006) and Nepal (Joshi et al., 2004).

This global concern about loss of plant diversity led botanists

convened at the XVIth International Botanical Congress in St Louis

Missouri, USA, in August 1999 to call for plant conservation as

a global priority in biodiversity conservation. This in turn led to

the development of The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation

(GSPC), which was first adopted at the sixth meeting of the Con-

ference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity

(CBD) in April 2002 and was subsequently revised at the tenth

Conference of Parties in 2010 in Nagoya, Japan. The GSPC estab-

lished 16 outcome-oriented targets to halt the loss of plant diversity

and provided a framework which facilitated harmony between

existing initiatives aimed at plant conservation. It stimulated many

countries to make progress to achieve the GSPC targets, including

undertaking preliminary assessment of conservation status of their

known species and lists of their threatened species. Recently, an

ad hoc international expert group of ethnobotanists meeting at

Missouri Botanic Garden (1–2 May 2013) called for a develop-

ment global programme on the conservation of useful plants and

associated knowledge for the successful implementation of the

1 Plant Diversity in Addressing Food, Nutrition and Medicinal Needs 5

Extinct (EX)

Extinct in the Wild (EW)

Critically Endangered (CR)

Endangered (EN)

Vulnerable (VU)

Near Threatened (NT)

Least Concern (LC)

Data Deficient (DD)

Not Evaluated (NE)

(Adequate data)

(Evaluated)

(Threatened)

Figure 1.1 The IUCN Red List categories

STAGE 2Five Cell Analysis

STAGE 5Community Documentation &Monitoring (CBR, DB, others)

STAGE 1General assessment

and inventorying

Status andTrends

CELL BSmall AreaMany HH

CELL DSmall Area

Few HH

CELL CLarge Area

Few HH

CELL ALarge AreaMany HH

Red List

VulnerabilityList

STAGE 3First validation of Red List

(fairs, extension work, schools etc)

STAGE 4Second validation of Red List

(use of descriptors, molecular tools)

RegionalConsolidation

NationalDocumentation

CELL ELost varieties

National PGRConservation Strategy

Selection offocus species

Figure 1.2 Five-cell framework for assessing threatened cultivated plants. Source: Padulosi and Dulloo (2012)

GSPC objectives and targets by 2020 (Peter Wyse-Jackson, 2 May

2013, personal communication).

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) identified five

major direct drivers of biodiversity loss and ecosystem service

changes. These are habitat change, climate change, invasive alien

species, overexploitation and pollution. A study on the patterns of

threats to the flora of an entire continent (South America) showed

that population accessibility, expansion of agriculture and grazing

pressure are also key drivers of immediate extinction risk of plant

diversity (Ramirez-Villegas et al., 2012).

6 Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics

With regard to plant biodiversity important for agriculture, the

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

second State of the World Report on Plant Genetic Resources for

Food and Agriculture (PGRFA; FAO, 2010) provided a review of the

change in state of PGRFA since the first report was published in 1998

(FAO, 1998). By PGRFAwemean cultivated crops and their varieties

as well as their wild relatives andwild food plants (i.e. wild harvested

plants). PGRFA has an enormous contribution to make in ensuring

food security, livelihood and resilience of the production system and

in coping with climate change.

The FAO’s recent publication on Save and Grow (FAO, 2011)

informs us that 50% of food production growth actually comes from

PGRFA, and consequently plays an important role in improving

crop production. With the challenge of the need to increasing food

production by 50–70% in order to meet the demand for food by

9.1 billion people by 2050 (Tomlinson, 2013), the FAO proposed a

new paradigm of sustainable crop production intensification (SCPI)

for producing more from the same land while conserving resources,

reducing negative impacts on the environment and enhancing natu-

ral capital andflowof ecosystemservices (FAO, 2011). To achieve this

paradigm the FAO SCPI strategy quotes, ‘Farmers will need a genet-

ically diverse portfolio of improved crop varieties that are suited

to a range of agro-ecosystem and farming practices and resilient

to climate change’ (FAO, 2011). In other words, the paradigm can

only be realized if the production system is diversified. Jarvis et al.

(2007) previously showed that the broader the diversity employed

on farm, the more resilient will be the production system. In par-

ticular, local landraces, which are considered to be the reservoirs of

adaptive variation in crops (Sthapit and Padulosi, 2012), will be key

in sustaining on-farm production as well as providing raw materials

for future plant breeding. Crop diversity also helps to reduce genetic

vulnerability, whereby diversity within a field or within a production

system helps to ensure stability in overall food production and thus

reduces the risks to agricultural production. A more diverse crop-

ping system helps to buffer against the spread of pests and diseases

and the vagaries of weather, likely to occur in uniform monocul-

ture cultivation. A bioversity project in Kitui, east of Kenya, showed

that farmers who grew a wider range of crops on the farm coped

better with drought conditions. While maize crops failed during

April 2009, farmers who grew local drought-resistant crops such as

ngelenge (a local type of lima bean, Phaseolus lunatus L.), cowpeas

(Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) andmbumbu (hyacinth bean, Lablab

purpureus (L.) Sweet) and some forms of sorghum successfully gath-

ered a good harvest (Bioversity International, 2009). In the global

context, the phenomenon of genetic vulnerability represents amajor

risk with regard to the capacity of our agricultural systems to ensure

sustainable food security, as well as the livelihoods of farmers.

With regard to medicinal plants, The World Bank has called on

health officials, economists and other planner/decision-makers

the world over to include the contribution of medicinal plants to

national health and local economies in national resource accounting

(Srivastava et al., 1996; Lambert et al., 1997). The contribution of

medicinal plants to health and livelihoods is recognized directly

and indirectly in international and regulatory policy frameworks

focusing on the relationship between biodiversity conservation

and human social, cultural, health, and economic security and

development (see Box 1.1).

Box 1.1. Relevant Targets on Agricultural Biodiversity

Millennium Development Goal

Target 7.B: Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant

reduction in the rate of loss.

Global Strategy on Plant Conservation (2011–2020)

Target 6: At least 75% of production lands in each sector managed

sustainably, consistent with the conservation of plant diversity.

Target 7: At least 75% of known threatened plant species conserved in situ.

Target 8: At least 75% of threatened plant species in ex situ collections,

preferably in the country of origin, and at least 20 % available for recovery

and restoration programmes.

Target 9: 70% of the genetic diversity of crops including their wild

relatives and other socio-economically valuable plant species conserved,

while respecting, preserving and maintaining associated indigenous and

local knowledge.

Target 11: No species of wild flora endangered by international trade.

Target 12: All wild-harvested plant-based products sourced sustainably.

Target 13: Indigenous and local knowledge, innovations and practices

associated with plant resources, maintained or increased, as appropriate,

to support customary use, sustainable livelihoods, local food security and

health care.

Source: https://www.cbd.int/gspc

United Nations Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020(Aichi biodiversity targets)

Target 2: By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated

into national and local development and poverty reduction strategies and

planning processes and are being incorporated into national accounting,

as appropriate, and reporting systems.

Target 4: By 2020, at the latest, governments, businesses and stakeholders

at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for

sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use

of natural resources well within safe ecological limits.

Target 7: By 2020, areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are

managed sustainably, ensuring conservation of biodiversity

Target 12: By 2020, the extinction of known threatened species has been

prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in

decline, has been improved and sustained.

Target 13: By 2020, the genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed

and domesticated animals and of wild relatives, including other

socio-economically as well as culturally valuable species, is maintained

and strategies have been developed and implemented for minimizing

genetic erosion and safeguarding their genetic diversity.

Target 18: By 2020, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices

of indigenous and local communities relevant for the conservation and

sustainable use of biodiversity, and their customary use of biological

resources, are respected, subject to national legislation and relevant

international obligations, and fully integrated and reflected in the

implementation of the convention with the full and effective participation

of indigenous and local communities, at all relevant levels.

Source: www.cbd.int/sp/targets

World Health Organization

The Alma-Ata Declaration (1978) urged countries and their governments

to include traditional medicine in their primary health systems, and to

recognize traditional medicine practitioners as health workers,

particularly for primary health care at the community level.

1 Plant Diversity in Addressing Food, Nutrition and Medicinal Needs 7

International Consultation on Conservation of Medicinal Plants

(Chiang Mai, Thailand), convened by WHO, IUCN and WWF in 1988,

resulting in the ‘Chiang Mai Declaration’ calling for action to ‘Save the

Plants that Save Lives’ (WHO et al., 1993).

World Health Assembly resolution on medicinal plants (WHO, 1988),

referring to the Chiang Mai Declaration, placed medicinal plants, their

rational and sustainable use, and their conservation firmly in the arena of

public health policy and concern.

WHO traditional medicine strategy (WHO, 2002a), included com-

ponents to protect indigenous traditional medical knowledge aiming to

promote their recording and documentation, and to protect medicinal

plants aiming to promote their sustainable use and cultivation.

World Health Assembly resolution on traditional medicine (WHO,

2003a) requested the WHO to collaborate with other organizations of the

UN system and nongovernmental organizations in various areas related to

traditional medicine, including research, protection of traditional medical

knowledge and conservation of medicinal plants resources.

Guidelines on good agricultural and collection practices (GACP) for

medicinal plants (WHO, 2003b) provide general technical guidance on

quality assurance and control of herbal medicines, including obtaining

herbal materials of good quality for the sustainable production of herbal

medicines.

1.2 Plant genetic resources for foodand agriculture

In this section we provide a review of plant diversity within culti-

vated plants and their wild relatives, as well as wild harvested food

plants. Plant and animal species for food have been collected, used,

domesticated and improved through traditional systems of selec-

tion over many generations, resulting in even more intraspecific

diversity developed by early farmers in terms of crop varieties and

local landraces and breeds. Many of these varieties and their wild

relatives are at risk from a wide range of drivers of biodiversity

loss – changes in land use, replacement of traditional varieties by

modern cultivars, agricultural intensification, increased population,

poverty, land degradation and environmental change (includ-

ing climate change) (van de Wouw et al., 2009; FAO, 2010). The

third report on the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO3) gives

the example of the decline in the numbers of local rice varieties

in China from 46 000 in the 1950s to slightly more than 1000

in 2006 (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity,

2010). The threats also threatened the attainment of global tar-

gets established by governments at the global level, such as those

of the Millennium Development Goals, GSPC and CBD Aichi

targets (see Box 1.1 for targets relevant to genetic diversity) and

recently by the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food

and Agriculture (CGRFA) (CGRFA, 2013). With regard to genetic

diversity, there is currently no monitoring mechanism in place to

inform us of the status and trends of genetic diversity of PGRFA

at the global level (Dulloo et al., 2010; Pereira et al., 2013), except

for some 200–300 crop species for which it is thought that 70%

of genetic diversity is conserved in genebanks (Secretariat of the

Convention on Biological Diversity, 2010). For monitoring the

status and trends of PGRFA and to take remedial actions to ensure

both their conservation and use, biodiversity indicators have been

developed by these global initiatives (Millennium Development

Goals, GSPC, Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, Aichi Biodiversity

targets and CGRFA) to monitor progress towards achievements of

their respective targets.

1.2.1 Crop diversity

As mentioned earlier, of the 400 000 plant species, about 100 000

species are used by mankind, 30 000 species are edible, 7000 crop

species are used as food at local levels, 120 crop species are impor-

tant at the national scale, 30 crop species provide 90% of the world’s

calories and only 4 crops provide 60% of the calories and proteins

globally (Prescott-Allen and Prescott-Allen, 1990; Wilson, 1992;

FAO, 1998; Palacios, 1998). Food crops can be differentiated into

major crops and minor crops, but the distinction can be very

arbitrary depending on the criteria used to differentiate between

them. Based on area harvested worldwide, FAOSTAT data for 2011

produces some 36 crops that are grown over more than 4 million

hectares (http://faostat.fao.org/) (Table 1.1). The first State of the

World Report on PGRFA (FAO, 1998) provides an overview of 30

crops that feed the world. Among the major crops, it lists wheat,

rice, maize, millet, sorghum, potato, sugarcane, soybean, sweet

potato, cassava, beans and banana/plantain as being crops that each

supplies more than 5% of the plant-derived energy intake in one or

more subregions (see Annex 2 in FAO (1998)).

1.2.2 Landrace diversity

Throughout history, farmers have subjected their domesticated

plants to strong selection pressures, thereby developing a large

diversity of morphologically recognizable traditional varieties or

landraces as a result of selection, genetic drift or fragmentation

of their populations (Harlan, 1992). Although these landraces are

generally recognized, there is still a lack of a universally accepted

definition of landrace. The on-farm Conservation and Management

Taskforce of the European Cooperative Group onGenetic Resources

defines a landrace as follows:

A landrace of a seed-propagated crop is a variable population

which is identifiable and usually have a name. It lacks formal

crop improvement, is characterised by a specific adaptation to

environment conditions of the area of cultivation, (tolerant to

biotic and abiotic stresses of that area) and is closely associated

with the use, knowledge habit, dialects and celebrations of the

people who developed and continue to grow it.

Vetelainen et al. (2009)

For each crop species there may exist thousands of landraces, but

there is a lack of information on the number of extant landraces,

although there have been attempts at making inventories of lan-

draces in many European countries (Vetelainen et al., 2009) and for

some major crops. By definition, every crop that has been grown on

a specific farm long enough for it to develop distinctive character-

istics would make it a landrace in its own right. However, without

a clear definition of a landrace and a nomenclature for landraces,

it will be difficult to estimate the number of landraces globally.

It should also be borne in mind that the evolutionary processes

and selection forces that help shape diversity in agroecosystems is

extremely dynamic and takes place at a much higher rate than in

8 Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics

Table 1.1 World’s major food crops (above 4 million ha, harvested)

Crops Area harvested

(ha)

Production

(million tonnes)

Wheat 220 385 285 704 080 283

Maize 170 398 070 883 460 240

Rice, paddy 164 124 977 722 760 295

Soybeans 102 993 246 260 915 871

Barley 48 603 576 134 279 415

Sorghum 35 482 800 54 198 010

Rapeseed 33 645 342 62 454 482

Millet 31 929 408 27 705 271

Beans, dry 29 211 491 23 250 253

Sunflower seed 26 049 793 40 206 186

Sugarcane 25 436 924 1 794 359 190

Groundnuts, with shell 21 770 537 38 614 053

Cassava 19 644 071 252 203 769

Potatoes 19 248 586 374 382 274

Oil palm fruit 16 265 248 233 810 539

Chick peas 13 202 603 11 623 787

Coconuts 11 437 523 59 189 887

Cow peas, dry 10 426 698 4 928 280

Cocoa beans 10 003 270 4 395 657

Oats 9 679 190 22 504 708

Olives 9 634 576 19 845 300

Sweet potatoes 7 953 196 104 259 988

Grapes 7 086 022 69 654 926

Sesame seed 6 628 276 4 092 236

Plantains 5 496 411 38 901 406

Bananas 5 157 466 106 541 709

Rye 5 113 145 12 948 841

Mangoes, mangosteens,

guavas

5 066 918 38 899 593

Sugar beet 5 061 732 271 644 917

Yams 4 882 306 56 613 722

Apples 4 766 775 75 635 283

Tomatoes 4 734 356 159 023 383

Cashew nuts, with shell 4 701 983 4 201 010

Onions, dry 4 290 645 85 375 125

Lentils 4 169 382 4 411 104

Oranges 4 039 313 69 605 815

Source: http://faostat.fao.org/, accessed 13 March 2013.

natural ecosystem, thus making an estimate of landrace diversity

even more complicated.

However, some estimates of order of magnitude of landrace diver-

sity and for specific crops are possible. For example, Delêtre et al.

(2013) mentioned an estimated 200 000 or more landraces of rice

(Oryza sativa L.) worldwide and about as many varieties of wheat

(Triticum aestivum L. subsp. aestivum). There are about 47 000

varieties of sorghum, 30 000 varieties of common bean (Phaseolus

vulgaris L.), chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and maize (Zea mays L.),

approximately 20 000 varieties of pearl millet, 15 000 varieties of

peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.), and between 7000 and 9000 varieties

of manioc (Manihot esculenta Crantz) (FAO, 1998). In Nepal, over

132 local varieties of mango (Subedi et al., 2008) and 2000 local

varieties of rice (Gupta et al., 1996) are known to exist, while in India

there are about 1000 mango varieties and 5000 local rice varieties

(B. Sthapit, 3 April 2013, personal communication). In China, there

are just over 1000 varieties of rice, although it is believed that this

number was more than 46 times higher 56 years ago (Secretariat

of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2010). In the Andean

region of Peru, a main centre of domestication and diversification

of crop plants of the world, Velasquez-Milla et al. (2011) found 1483

farmers’ varieties of Andean tuber species maintained by house-

holds in the village Huánuco (Central Sierra region), while there

were 507 in Cajamarca (Northern Sierra region). This difference

was attributed to cultural identity, extent of cultivated land area, dif-

ferences in the way of practicing traditional agricultural techniques

and the levels of self-sufficiency of households. The Andean region

of Peru is a highly specialized production system developed at high

altitudes between 3300 and 4200m and composed of many native

tuber crops, including seven potato species (Solanum ajanhuiri,

S. chaucha, S. curtilobum, S. juzepzuckii, S. phureja, S. stenotomum

and S. tuberosum), with about 3000 varieties characterized by botan-

ical descriptors: ‘oca’ (Oxalis tuberosa) with at least 50 technically

described varieties, ‘olluco’ (Ullucus tuberosus) with 50–70 clones

and ‘mashua’ (Tropaeolum tuberosum) with nearly 100 described

varieties (Velasquez-Milla et al., 2011).

1.2.3 Crop wild relatives

CWRs are another constituent of PGRFA that are important for

food and agriculture. Generally, they are not directly used as food,

although some are; for example, wild yams (Dioscorea spp.) (Hunter

and Heywood, 2011) and many wild species of potatoes in Andean

regions (Vellasquez-Milla et al., 2011). Broadly speaking, CWRs are

any species of the same genus as cultivated plants (i.e. crop) to which

they are related (Maxted et al., 2006). A more precise definition of

a CWR refers to its degree of relationship with the crop and based

on the Harlan and de Wet genepool concept or on a taxonomic

relationship (Maxted et al., 2006).The taxon group concept employs

the taxonomic hierarchy as a proxy for taxon genetic relatedness,

and thus crossability. Thus, a CWR is a wild plant taxon that has an

indirect use derived from its relatively close genetic relationship to a

crop; this relationship is defined in terms of the CWR belonging to

genepools 1 or 2, or taxon groups 1 to 4 of the crop (Maxted et al.,

2006), where genepools 1 and 2 refer to primary and secondary

genepools and taxon groups 1 to 4 are: taxon group 1a, crop; taxon

group 1b, same species as crop; taxon group 2, same series or section

as crop; taxon group 3, same subgenus as crop; taxon group 4, same

genus; and taxon group 5, same tribe but different genus to crop.

The most comprehensive review of CWRs has been the work

of Maxted and Kell (2009) that made an attempt at estimating

the number of CWRs that may occur worldwide and described

the centres of diversity for CWRs for 14 priority crops for food

and agriculture. Based on the broad definition of a CWR, as any

taxon belonging to the same genus as a crop, Maxted and Kell

(2009) estimated that there are between 50 000 and 60 000 crop and

CWR species. More recently, using genepool and/or taxon group

concepts, Vincent et al. (2013) made the first global priority CWR

inventory, along with analysis of its composition and geographic

distribution, as a basis for future in situ and ex situ conservation and

sustainable use. The inventory (www.cwrdiversity.org/checklist/)

contains 1667 taxa from 37 families, 109 genera, 1392 species and

1 Plant Diversity in Addressing Food, Nutrition and Medicinal Needs 9

Figure 1.3 Global priority genetic reserves locations for CWRs of 12 crops. Source: Maxted and Kell (2009). Reproduced with permission

299 sub-specific taxa and identified the regions with highest CWR

presence in Western Asia (262), then China (222) and southeastern

Europe (181). In addition, there are 203 countries that have at least

one global priority native CWR (Vincent et al., 2013). Maxted and

Kell (2009) also identified priority locations to implement genetic

reserves to conserve CWRs of 12 selected crops that may result in

a global network of in situ conservation areas targeting CWRs and

the development of guidelines for site selection and management of

these resources (Maxted and Kell, 2009). For example, high-priority

locations were identified in sub-Saharan Africa for the conservation

of two high-priority wild relatives of finger millet (in Burundi,

Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda),

one pearl millet wild relative (in Sudan), two garden pea wild rel-

atives (in Ethiopia) and numerous cowpea wild relatives in several

African countries (Maxted and Kell, 2009) (Figure 1.3).

CWRs represent an important reservoir of genetic resources for

breeders (Maxted and Kell, 2009). Many useful traits from CWRs,

such as pest and disease resistance, abiotic stress tolerance or qual-

ity improvements, have been introgressed in today’s crops (Hajjar

and Hodgkin, 2007). Like other wild plant species, CWRs are cur-

rently suffering genetic erosion – some entire CWR taxa are being

lost, while for others their genetic diversity is being reduced or is

shifting in response to environmental changes (Maxted et al., 2012).

There is an increasing awareness about the importance of CWRs and

the role they play in ensuring food security.This has prompted IUCN

to prioritize threat assessment of CWRs. The first extensive IUCN

Red List assessment of CWR diversity has recently been published

for European species (Kell et al., 2012). In total, 571 native Euro-

pean CWRs of high-priority human and animal food-crop species

were assessed: 313 (55%) were assessed as least concern, 166 (29%)

as data deficient, 26 (5%) as near threatened, 22 (4%) as vulnerable,

25 (4%) as endangered and 19 (3%) as critically endangered. Many

countries have also carried out inventories of CWRs (Idohou et al.,

2012). An analysis of the floras from the Arabian Peninsula shows

that there are over 400 wild relatives of some 70 food and forage

crops (Rao, 2013).The attention to the conservation of CWRs is also

emphasized within the FAO second Global Plan of Action for the

conservation and sustainable utilization of plant genetic resources

for food and agriculture (FAO, 2012), which includes conservation

of CWRs as a priority area, and Article 5 of the International Treaty

on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA)

(FAO, 2002). The tenth Conference of the Parties to the Conven-

tion on Biological Diversity (CBD) also underlined the importance

of CWRs in their Strategic Plan 2011–2020 agreed in Nagoya: ‘Tar-

get 13: By 2020, the status of crop and livestock genetic diversity in

agricultural ecosystems and of wild relatives has been improved.’

Indicators to monitor the in situ conservation of CWRs and wild

food plants have been developed (CGRFA, 2013).

Conservation interventions for CWRs have also gained impor-

tance. In Ethiopia, wild populations of Coffea arabica L. are

conserved in the montane rainforest, and a study of their genetic

diversity and economic value is being carried out in order to develop

models for conserving C. arabica genetic resources both within and

outside protected areas (Gole et al., 2002). Bioversity International’s

UNEP/GEF project ‘In situ conservation of crop wild relatives

through enhanced information management and field application’

has made significant advances in promoting the in situ conservation

of over 39 CWRs in protected areas in Armenia, Bolivia, Mada-

gascar, Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan (Hunter and Heywood, 2011).

Within ex situ collection, they represent only between 2 and 18%

of accessions, depending on estimates (Khoury et al., 2010). The

Global Crop Diversity Trust in partnership with Royal Botanic

Gardens Kew has embarked on an ambitious project funded by the

Norway Government to prioritize CWR population for collecting

10 Novel Plant Bioresources: Applications in Food, Medicine and Cosmetics

and conservation in genebanks. The greatest challenge is how to

ensure that relevant national authorities give adequate attention to

in situ conservation of CWRs within their territories, given that

in many countries there is no one agency that has responsibility

for their conservation – they are outside the remit of established

nature conservation agencies, and agricultural ministries have no

conservation remit. There is a need for promoting the collaboration

between the agriculture and environment sectors and for building

local and national capacities for in situ conservation of CWRs.

1.3 Plant genetic diversity for nutrition

Addressing the challenge of malnutrition is complex and mul-

tifaceted. There is no panacea. It requires interventions that are

interdisciplinary, that address improving agricultural productivity,

dietary diversity, health status, sanitation, education, infrastructure

and markets as well as raising incomes and moving people out

of poverty. There is no silver bullet, and any solution will require

appropriate actions and interventions from within a range of disci-

plines and across many sectors and a diversity of organizations and

institutions, from implementation to policy. Plant diversity, both

wild and cultivated, is an important component of our arsenal in

efforts to improve nutrition and health. Staple crops such as wheat,

maize and rice have been crucial in supporting global food security

to the present day and will be equally important in the future. How-

ever, there is a wider plant diversity (neglected and underutilized

species (NUSs)) that is largely untapped and which has high nutri-

tional significance and is rich in proteins, fats, vitamins, minerals,

antioxidants, nutraceuticals and other beneficial phytochemicals

which, if made available and utilized effectively, could contribute

significantly to enhancing dietary diversity, improving nutrition

and health, as well as the livelihoods and well-being of millions

of individuals in communities all over the world, both developed

and developing. Unfortunately, there are numerous barriers that

have hindered the effective and sustainable utilization of this wider

plant diversity which has seen much of it relegated to a relatively

minor role in agriculture, though important in local and regional

food systems.

1.3.1 Neglected and underutilized plant diversityin addressing nutrition

Besides the major crops, there are also over 7000 crops species

which are important at local and national levels. Many of those

have historically been marginalized by mainstream agricultural

research (Padulosi et al., 2012). These so-called NUSs are known to

play an important role in food security, nutrition, health, income

generation and cultural practices (Jaenike and Hoeschle-Zeledon,

2006). Padulosi and Hoeschle-Zeledon (2004) described the main

features that NUSs have in common. NUSs are an integral part

of local culture, are present in traditional food preparations and

are the focus of current trends to revive culinary traditions. They

are highly adapted to agro-ecology niches and marginal areas,

and are represented by ecotypes and landraces. Underutilized

plant species are also cultivated and used by drawing on indige-

nous local knowledge. They are not well represented in ex situ

genebanks and are characterized by a poor or non-existent local

seed supply system and which renders them inaccessible (Padulosi

and Hoeschle-Zeledon, 2004). NUSs encompass a variety of plant

species that are farmed (local crops), reared (semi-domesticates)

or gathered from the wild for a variety of uses and may contribute

to nutrition (food, beverage), medicine, cosmetics, fodder, fibres

or fuel, or provide material for building (Delêtre et al. 2013). The

importance of NUS conservation and use has been recognized by

many global initiatives, such as the FAO Global Plan of Action

on Plant Genetic Resources (GPA) (FAO, 1996), Agenda 21 and

the Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR). There has

also been international support for increased work on NUSs,

and a number of initiatives have been undertaken. Although the

promotion and conservation of NUSs has been part of FAO’s

first Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustain-

able Use of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

since 1996, NUSs represent less that 20% of all accessions held

in germplasm collections (Padulosi et al., 2002a). Inadequately

described or characterized, NUSs are at high risk of cultural and

genetic erosion (Vietmeyer, 1986). Further, only very limited

inventories have so far been made owing to the lack of financial

support and skilled people (Padulosi et al., 2002a; FAO Country

Reports, 2009).

On a more positive note, there is a growing body of evidence that

many of the neglected and underutilized species and cultivars are

nutritionally superior compared with their mainstream agriculture

counterparts. Nutrient composition can differ dramatically between

species and among cultivars of the same species. For example, sweet

potato cultivars can vary in their carotenoid content by a factor of

200 or more (Box 1.2); protein content of rice cultivars can range

from 5% to 13 % by weight; provitamin-A carotenoid content of

bananas can be less than 1 μg/100 g for some cultivars and as high

as 8500 μg/100 g for others (Box 1.3), meaning the consumption of

one cultivar as opposed to another could be the difference between

micronutrient deficiency and micronutrient adequacy (Burlingame

et al., 2009).

Box 1.2. Orange-Fleshed Sweet Potatoes and Vitamin ADeficiencyIntake of adequate vitamin A is critical for good health. Deficiency can

limit growth, undermine immunity and lead to blindness, and increased

mortality. Deficiency of vitamin A is particularly widespread among

young children in sub-Saharan Africa. Food-based efforts to combat

vitamin A deficiency aim to improve access to and intake of

vitamin-A-rich foods. Among plant sources, orange-fleshed sweet

potatoes (OFSP) have been demonstrated to have good to excellent

amounts of beta-carotene, which is highly bioavailable. As little as 100 g of

boiled or steamed OFSP can meet the daily-recommended intake levels of

vitamin A of a child under 5 years old. Furthermore, unlike a number of

vegetables, sweet potato also contains significant amounts of energy as

well as vitamin A. In sub-Saharan Africa, the majority of cultivated

landraces are white-fleshed, lacking in beta-carotene. One approach to

reducing vitamin A deficiency in the region is the promotion of OFSP, and

this intervention is based around working with households and

communities to make changes in their sweet potato production and

consumption practices to enhance the eating of orange-coloured cultivars

instead of, or in conjunction with, white cultivars.

Source: Low et al. (2013)