Page 54 - FAO Aquaculture News, May 2021 - No. 63

that genetic diversity is managed effectively within no such knowledge base to make similar assessments for
aquaculture. While aquaculture might not conserve the aquatic farmed types: the Registry is expected to fulfil this
specific genetic identity of a certain wild stock in the way role and, hopefully, to go beyond. Indeed, FAO is planning
that a gene bank could (due, for example, to genetic drift to further expand the Registry into a global information
or deliberate selection), it is likely that the genes from the system that will include information on wild stocks and
source population are retained within the farmed resource indicators to assess the conservation of farmed species,
overall and thus are not completely lost to aquaculture if and also of their farmed types and wild relatives.
the original wild source population is compromised or goes
extinct. In this sense, aquaculture can help in conserving Because of the absence of relevant information, the
part of the gene pool of the original wild populations; management of AqGR has in part fallen behind the
however, it cannot be the solution, only part of it. management of genetic resources in other sectors in terms
of development of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)
It is crucial, when considering the conservation status of indicators for measuring directly the vulnerability of AqGR,
a species, to analyze the genetic diversity not only of wild both farmed and wild. FAO is the “custodian” agency for
stocks but also of farmed AqGR, such as strains, varieties 21 indicators under SDGs 2, 5, 6, 12, 14 and 15, and
and hybrids, collectively included under the broader also a contributing agency for other SDGs. Nevertheless,
6
definition of farmed types. In this regard, it is interesting to even if several of these indicators measure, directly or
make a comparison between aquaculture and the livestock indirectly, biodiversity for food and agriculture, none of
and crop sectors. Comparing knowledge on cultured them specifically mention AqGR farmed types or their wild Thematic Articles
aquatic genetic resources to that of these other two food relatives living in freshwater habitats. The only indicator
production sectors, it is evident that many countries still covering AqGR for food and agriculture is indicator 14.4.1
have a limited and quite scattered documentation on (“Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable
the characteristics of their aquaculture farmed types, levels”), under SDG 14. However, freshwater fisheries are
including a paucity of information on their intraspecific not directly mentioned under the targets and indicators
genetic diversity. It is essential to note that genetic diversity of SDG 14 and, in general, in any of the 169 indicators
is the basis on which farmers can maintain and improve of the SDGs, making them under-reported, as observed
9
broodstock and develop new farmed types in response to in a recent landmark report from the WWF. This report
different drivers (for example market demand, climate further notes that inland and farmed AqGR are often
change, resistance to diseases, nutritional requirements). 7 undervalued and forgotten by decision-makers although a
third of all freshwater finfish species (which is to say, not
To address the general absence of information on farmed only those used for food and agriculture) are threatened
AqGR, especially below the level of the species, FAO is and 80 species have already gone extinct.
developing a resource for its Members, in the form of a
Registry of farmed types within which countries and Conserving genetic resources for food and agriculture,
stakeholders can report a range of information on the both in the wild and on the farm, means also to maintain
status of management of their cultured genetic resources, the evolutionary potential of a species and its capacity to
including information on distinctive characteristics of respond and adapt to a constantly changing environment
each farmed type (for example production performance, where factors such as climate change and diseases can
phenotypic characteristics and molecular-diagnostic alter ecosystem equilibria and threaten species and
characteristics), their estimated contribution to national populations. Aquaculture is a much more recent food
production and the main reasons for their production. production system compared to the livestock and crop
This information will be made publicly available and will sectors, and we must learn from the experience of these
contribute to fill this knowledge gap that is critical to inform two sectors. Given the relatively recent domestication of
decision-making on possible conservation initiatives. most cultured aquatic species, many farmed types generally
retain high levels of genetic diversity, and it is necessary to
The type of information collected in the Registry for improve genetic management of these resources to ensure
aquatic resources is already broadly available to the this diversity is conserved. In this article, we note that all
livestock and crop sectors, both of which have established, cultured aquatic species still exist in the wild but that a
for many years, dedicated information systems with significant proportion of these species are under threat.
associated indicators to monitor the risk of extinction of Clearly, we have a limited window of opportunity to put
farmed species and of their breeds (livestock sector) and in place measures to conserve these resources for the
varieties (crop sector). For example, thanks to the data future and to generate and make available more and better
collected in these information systems, we know that, information to set and implement successful conservation
globally, 59 percent of livestock breeds are classified as initiatives.
being of unknown risk status, 10 percent as not at risk,
8
24 percent as at risk, and 7 percent as extinct. We have

7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2012.02084.x
8. www.fao.org/3/ca3129en/CA3129EN.pdf
9. https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/worlds_forgotten_fishes___wwf_2021.pdf

FAO AQUACULTURE NEWS – Nº. 63 ■ MAY 2021 53