APS Council Minutes Annual Meeting 2008, Hilton - Minneapolis, MN
Friday, July 25 7:30-10:00 AM Saturday, July 26 8:00-12 Noon
Friday, July 25, 2008
Guests: Jim MacDonald
7:45 AM Call to Order (Martyn) Welcome and Introductions: Present are Michelle B., Ray M., Amy H., John R., Kate E., Tony K., Wayne W., Randy R., Jan L., Joyce L., Melodie P., Barb C., Margery D., Jim M., Lee C., John S., Barb Mock, Steve N., Marci S., Danise B., and Miles W. Absent: Ann Chase, Mike Boehm, Rob Wick, Bob Gilbertson, Ray Hammerschmidt, Jonathan Walton, and Gary Moorman
Appointment of Parliamentarian (Martyn): Jan Leach
8:00 AM Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting (Beadle): No discussion. Motion to approve 2007 annual council meeting minutes, seconded: passed unanimously
8:15 AM FAC Initiatives (Rowe/Mock) -Reviewed years financials; highlights are the journal revenues (with much credit to staff and the publications board), PMN has much improved and showed almost a breakeven surplus without overhead consideration, and APS Press surplus exceeded last year. The increased overhead allocation is due to an unrealized loss in investments -FAC will make a motion to increase dues of 3.5% which is lower than the suggested 5% CPI
8:30 AM EXEC Initiatives (Martyn/Nelson) -APS membership at all time high with significant increases in three categories: Postdoc, student, and regular members
8:45 AM Report on Auxiliary Meetings Adhoc progress (Hope/Rowe) Recommendations of the adhoc: The APS Ad Hoc Committee on Auxiliary Meetings recommends to APS Council that it form an Auxiliary Meetings Board whose charge would be to oversee the selection, investment, planning, delivery, and assessment of all scientific meetings of the society held apart from the Annual APS Meeting and Divisional Meetings. The Board would be charged also to generate ideas for scientific meetings on important issues that are timely and of broad interest to regional, national, or international constituencies. Guiding principles in constructing an APS portfolio of Auxiliary Meetings would be to conduct meetings that build APS member value, are consistent with the Strategic Plan, enhance APS’ reputation and brand recognition, and that, on balance over the portfolio, produce revenue for APS. We recommend initially that the Board include an appointed director and six appointed Board members who would each have responsibilities for overseeing individual meeting projects approved by the Board and executed by APS staff and a designated program chair. In addition, we recommend that one ex officio Board member be appointed from the Scientific Programs Board and one from the Public Policy Board. These members would participate in all Board discussions and votes, but would not be expected to oversee meeting projects. The Auxiliary Meetings Board would also include at least one senior APS staff member as a non-voting, ex officio member. We suggest that the director be appointed for a three-year term and that the six regular Board members be appointed for staggered three-year terms. The membership of the Board should be broad enough to represent many aspects of the discipline, but it is not necessary that all member areas be represented. It is especially important that Board members encompass expertise and experience in academia, government, extension, industry, private practice, and international agriculture. The most important attributes to consider in identifying candidates for the Board are broad vision, strategic thinking skills, and an enthusiasm for working with diverse people and providing new educational opportunities. We suggest that Auxiliary Meetings be re-assessed by Council after three years to determine whether the Board is accomplishing the mission set out by Council. Motion that council accept the report of the adhoc committee on Auxiliary Meetings and that we move forward to develop a new board based on those recommendations, seconded.
Discussion: initially this should not require additional staff hours as it is in fact formalizing an already existing mechanism. Is it necessary to have the number of members on the board suggested? What if there was one central board (SPB) with two arms, one annual meeting and one auxiliary? These questions have been addressed in the report. Motion to table vote until Saturday, seconded: passed unanimously
9:15 AM Report on Education Committee Adhoc progress (MacDonald) -Has been requested that it is held in DC area. Staff is working on RFP’s currently. The budget and agenda have been revised and the focus streamlined. Jim is working on the invitation list. It should be around 60 people. Still working on additional fund raising: Will meet with OIR and has met with Colein Hefferin who will assist in bringing to other agencies for funding consideration. Originally looking at early to mid December but would like to consider moving this to March, nearer the PPB meeting. Once dates are set Jim will begin contacting presenters.
10:00 AM Adjourn to Leadership Forum (10AM-5PM)
Saturday, July 26, 2008 Present: Michelle B., Rob W., Ray M., Tony K., Kate E., John R., Mike B., Ray H., Randy R., Wayne W., Melodie P., Joyce L., Margery D., Ann C., Barb C., Jim M., John S., Lee C., Jan L., Steve N., Marci S., Danise B., Miles W., Steve K., Barb M., Betty F., and Amy H. (M. Roca) Guests: Kellye Eversole, Jacque Fletcher, Phyllis Himmel, and Cleo D’Arcy
7:55 AM Council Reconvenes (Martyn)
8:05 AM PPB report of activities/priorities (Fletcher/ Eversole) .ppt Are there other ways that PPB can work with council to achieve strategic goals? Are PPB’s priorities still relevant? Internship: There is an OSTP Fellowship opening: Looking into funding to support the fellowship. FDA also has paid Fellowships available. CSREES becoming NIFA (Nat’l Inst. For Food and Agriculture) NRI becomes AFRI (Ag & Food Research Initiative) These will have a unified budget and complete reorganization Significant investments of political and financial capital into the Farm Bill, however, the result is no funding increases. Food Safety funding is relatively flat. No vision for change. Alliance for Abundant Food and Energy. APS can lead the creation of an international industry-public sector alliance to double funding for ag research. Strategic vision for 2050 and beyond: Would like to bring together OIR and OPRO with PPB to work towards this initiative. PPB: Need to put together a plan with council approval to explore this initiative.
8:30 AM APSnet update; progress on CMS implementation process (Kronmiller) .ppt: MOSS “share point” software implementation underway. We are halfway into the information architecture study. OEC will be reviewing the wireframe (basic layout) and assisting to finalize taxonomy. Site design is scheduled for completion by the end of September 08 followed by system installation that same month. Integration with database Nov-Dec 08; content migration/search workshop in Dec 08; user training Jan 09. Final migration Nov 09 and final by Dec 09.
Initial features include “My APS”, searching indexed within and without APS, etc.
8:45 AM ISF Codification Adhoc initiatives (Himmel) .ppt -lack on consistency in naming plant pathogen strains and races; need a system allowing access to differential host and pathogen sets for a unified approach Have secured initial support from USDA Nat’l Plant Germplasm Collections (GRIN) in proposed development of a storage and distribution format. The same proposal was developed for a third party lab for reference isolate storage and distribution. ASTA willing to manage funds to facilitate.
Propose to set up a custom permit for this collection format; working with APHIS to move this forward – no commitment from them at this point. They are working towards a 2009 workshop and securing financial commitment by the seed industry to get the program up and running.
9:00 AM Final Update on the Centennial (D’Arcy) Followed by (Moyer/Ford) .ppt Review of all the components of the meeting and acknowledgement of the volunteers involved. Attendance currently at 1805; anticipating 100 + onsite registrants.
9:45 AM Quick update on governance ad hoc (5 min) (Boehm) Have signed an agreement to work with Bud Crouch (Tecker). Anticipate this effort will take eighteen months.
9:50 AM Quick update from International Collaborations Adhoc (5 min) (Leach) This group is exploring inter-societal alliances to the benefit of all members. Will meet with societies of the Netherlands and Japan at this meeting, at their request.
10:00 AM Review of Annual Communication Updates (Reports) and any issues (Danise) (see comments on consolidated report spreadsheet.)
10:30 AM Capture and synthesize issues and consensus PPB request for input: what is the structure/mechanism for PPB to gain input from council and membership at large; part of that is addressed in Phyto News. Input should go directly to the director. Need clarification from PPB on the specifics of their request(s). Jan will take this discussion to the PPB meeting on Monday.
11:00 AM Council – Business Agenda I. Motions
a. FAC Motions (Rowe/Mock) Motion to raise dues by 3.5% for all categories of membership b. Motions from Annual Communication Updates reporting – none presented within reports c. EXEC Motion: Motion to re-incorporate the Midyear Saturday night stay and work on
an efficient agenda to be able to end early Sunday and begin by noon on Friday Others: TABLED MOTION: Motion that council accept the report of the adhoc committee on Auxiliary Meetings and that we move forward to develop a new board based on those recommendations, seconded. II. Appointments See Appointment Template and council ballot final. Thank you to all outgoing council and welcome to incoming members
11:50 Council Adjourned
2008 APS Council Meeting July 25 – 26, 2008
Hilton Hotel Minneapolis, MN
2007 – 08 Priorities and Initiatives
• Organize the best meeting possible for the centennial.
• Redefine Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) and continue strategic financial planning
– Maintain financial health of our journals and APS PRESS.
• Evaluate APSnet
and develop a plan for redesign and improvement (OEC / staff).
2007 – 08 Priorities (con’t)
• Develop a process by which APS can engage in auxiliary meetings to add member value while being moderately profitable.
• Advance PMN to a position of greater financial stability.
• Advance APS’s international vision and explore mechanisms for intersocietal
collaborations to enhance member value for all.
2007 – 08 Priorities (con’t)
• Continual strategic planning to keep APS at the forefront of plant pathology and a global leader in plant health…
• Evaluate governance models that will help ensure APS remains strategic, timely, and nimble into the future.
• Advance and elevate national priorities – Public Policy Board.– Education of plant pathologists; profession of plant pathology– National plant microbial germplasm
system
– Plant pathogen permitting– Genomics– Food safety
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
The main objective: Ensure the The main objective: Ensure the relevancy of APSrelevancy of APSnetnet and its ability to effectively and its ability to effectively disseminate information and disseminate information and communications into the future communications into the future
APSnet redesignAPSnet redesign
APS took on APS took on Susquehanna Susquehanna Technologies (SusQTech) Technologies (SusQTech) as its implementation as its implementation vendor for MOSS.vendor for MOSS.
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesignBasics of our implementation Basics of our implementation scheduleschedule
Kick off meetingKick off meeting -- met with our met with our project managers in Juneproject managers in June
Halfway through the information Halfway through the information architecture study (development of architecture study (development of content area and navigation)content area and navigation)
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
OEC will be reviewing our OEC will be reviewing our wireframe (the basic site layout with wireframe (the basic site layout with navigation but without design) at this navigation but without design) at this meetingmeeting
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
OEC will help to finalize our OEC will help to finalize our content classification requirements content classification requirements (taxonomy) at this meeting(taxonomy) at this meeting
Site Design complete end of Site Design complete end of September 2008September 2008
System installation System installation -- September September 20082008
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
Integration with backend member Integration with backend member database database -- NovemberNovember--December December 20082008
Content Migration and Search Content Migration and Search workshop workshop -- December 2008December 2008
User Training User Training -- January 2009January 2009
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
Final Content Migration Final Content Migration November 2009November 2009
Launch date December 2009Launch date December 2009
APSnet redesignAPSnet redesignInitial Features of APSInitial Features of APSnetnet by December 2009by December 2009
Modern and flexible design Modern and flexible design
MY APS MY APS -- content tagged to member content tagged to member research interestsresearch interests -- rss alert rss alert systems, saved searchsystems, saved search
Robust search engine with complex Robust search engine with complex filters and indexed content from filters and indexed content from within and without APSwithin and without APS
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesignInitial Features of APSInitial Features of APSnetnet by December 2009by December 2009
"In the News" "In the News" -- News feedNews feed
Integrated commerce and a store Integrated commerce and a store that works!that works!
Ability to supply site with regular Ability to supply site with regular updates from staff and/or membersupdates from staff and/or members
Members only contentMembers only content
APSAPSnetnet redesignredesign
Future Features of APSFuture Features of APSnetnet
Communities and collaboration Communities and collaboration spaces for private or public spaces for private or public document sharing and discussiondocument sharing and discussion
If desired, language translations If desired, language translations
Centennial Planning Committee Final Report
• publicity
• publication
• displays
• sessions
• sponsors
• volunteers
• budget
Publicity
• APSnet
• News Capsules
• Phytopathology News– articles by project leaders
APS Centennial Meeting: History of Excellence, Future of Promise
APSnet Feature July 2008
Publication “Memorable Milestones”
• 100 Year History – Jim Cook
• Oral History DVD – Darin Eastburn
• Member Tribute listings – APS staff
Displays
• SMM – Deb Samac
• Convention Center Lobby– Centennial Timeline – Kurt Schroeder
– Historical Displays – Rose Gergerich
• APS Press– APS t-shirts – Stella Coakley
Sessions• In Celebration of 100 Years of the
American Phytopathological Society– Sunday, 3:15 p.m.
• Plant Pathology in 1908 and 2008– Monday, 8:00 a.m.
• Optimizing Opportunities for Everyone in Plant Pathology– Monday, 3:15 p.m.
• The Future of Plant Pathology– Tuesday, 2:45 p.m.
Sponsor Recognition
• “Memorable Milestones”
• Program Book
• PowerPoint slides before sessions
• Posters
APS Volunteer Recognition
• CPC and Project Chairs– breakfast
– certificate, gift
• APS members– propose publish list on APSnet
and in Phytopathology News
Budget
Income $133,500
Expenditures
Actual $ 94,753
Anticipated $ 36,898
Anticipated Surplus $ 1,849
The APS Public Policy Board
Jacqueline Fletcher, ChairAPS Centennial Meeting
Minneapolis, MN
APS Leadership Workshop
Demonstrate relevance of agriculture and plant pathology to policy makers, industry, and the public
Utilize current events, such as the Salmonella outbreak in tomatoes/peppers, to highlight the vulnerability of sustainable food sources
Respond to emerging issues in a timely and science based manner
Focus Areas 2007-2008Issue Goal %
TimeEducation -Assess US PLP education (survey) -National workshop
-Consistent with APS futuring document-PPB internship
20
Genomics -Expand # species (ex: biofuels for DOE) -Funding for annotation & functional genomics; new workshop to develop future directions
15
Culture Collections
Preliminary workshopStrategy for the futureComprehensive workshop
15
Food Safety Food Safety Interest Symposium 2007International Workshop
15
Industry -Identify priorities of APS industry members-Work with OIR-Develop relationship with EPA-Regulatory Alerts to members
10
*
Focus Areas 2006-2007Issue Goal % Time
Plant Biosecurity -Advocate for national coordination mechanism – Position in Office of Homeland Security-Stable funding for NPDN-Assist NPDRS – Cooperative Agreement-Continue emerging discipline of plant pathogen forensics -Interact with APS efforts (APS Emerging Threats Advisory Committee, etc)
10
Permitting -Timely approval for endemic pathogens-Improve for culture collections & pathogens of concern
5
Funding for Ag Programs
-Increase NRI to authorized level-Continue input on programs-Consider NSF funding priority changes--Farm Bill issues – USDA merger, organic & specialty crops
5
* New & Emerging Issues
Climate changeBiofuelsInternational policy issues
4
DATE TOPIC FUNDING SOURCE AMOUNT APS “CHAMPION”
April 2007 National Plant Disease Recovery System
USDA-ARS $50,000 (?) “
Fall 2007 Culture Collections USDA-CSREES, APHIS
$10,000 Culture Collections Ad Hoc, PPB
FUTURE (PLANNED)Fall 2007 Plant Pathology
EducationUSDA-CSREES, NSF $20,000 Council, Special
Committee, PPB
Spring 2009 Genomics: The Next Steps
USDA-NRI, CSREES, NSF, DOE
$30,000 PPB, Genomics Initiative
Fall 2008 Food Safety FDA, USDA Office of Food Safety
?? PPB, APS Food Safety Interest Group
Fall 2008 National Plant Disease Recovery System
USDA-ARS $50,000 Council;PPB visits to Jennings & Smith were instrumental
PPB Workshops and National Projects
Strategies and issues
Methods
PPB member takes the lead on each issue
Engagement of APS committees, offices, boards, and members
Input from membership sought by various means
Are these the top APS priorities?
Are there other ways that PPB can help achieve APS strategic goals?
New Opportunity -
Fellowships
PPB Internship – 3rd year
OSTP Fellowship – MOU
6 months
Seek experienced plant pathologist
Goal: place people in positions where they will be advocates for agricultural science & technology throughout their careers
Funding – Short- and long-term
PPB
OPRO
Donations
APS Foundation
Other
Other – FDA Fellowships, etc
Questions?
Overall cut in USDA research (down 7.5% to $2.3 bill)
Elimination of most Congressional earmarks in the
USDA research portfolio
$9 million increase for the NRI for a total of $190 million
Biggest increase goes to Hatch Act funding; $323
million – almost double the amount provided in FY2006
($177 million)
ARS research cut by $169 million
Summary of Continuing Resolution Changes in Research – February 2007
Information provided by K. Eversole
Trends in Federal R&D, 1995-2008
Trends in Research by Agency, 1976-2008
Current contract:
$7,500 per month, for up to 540 hours in a one year period (45/month)
Hours averaged bimonthly
Excess hours billed at $200 (no charge for travel) (x= $90,000)
Complimentary APS membership (access to published materials)
Eversole Contract
Eversole Assoc. Hours by Category
June 2006-January 2007
Total Mo (x)
DC visits with PPB members 30 3Visits/calls (USDA, NSF, EPA) on own
32 4
Visit Senate/House appropriations staff
6 1
Review/research on policy issues, activities
64 8
PPB conference calls 17 2Emails & calls: PPB/APS 62 8Writing – Phyto News, white papers, etc
4 0-1
Scheduling appointments 8 1*Range: 25-57 hr/mo
PPB Budget 2006-2007
Budgeted Spent
Conference calls 2,250 435
Sponsorships 500 0
Spring meeting in DC 20,000 0
Friend of APS Award 200 0
FIEN subscription 500 586
Annual meeting 500 741
Strategic planning retreat 0 6,451
Eversole expenses 0 2,709
Shipping 50 0
Emerging Opportunities in Public Policy
Presentation for APS Council 27 July 2006
Kellye A. Eversole Eversole Associates
Jacque FletcherOklahoma State University
Long-Term Objectives of Public Policy Efforts
• Ensure that plant pathology continues to be a thriving scientific discipline –– Research and education funding– Regulatory interface
• Maximize opportunities for plant pathology to compete for scarce resources
• Focus efforts on areas in which we can have the greatest impact
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 • Increased Authorizations• Mandatory funding for energy programs, specialty
crops, organic agriculture – appropriations committees will capture some of the funds for other purposes
• CSREES NIFA• NRI AFRI (Ag &Food Research Initiative) • Unified budget and complete reorganization• Chief scientist• Bottom line: Significant investments of political and
financial capital– Congress expects savings from reorganization
– No funding increases
Florida industry wants $100 million for losses
• Supplemental adds $200 million
• $325 million increase for FY 2009 for food traceability
• $155 million for food safety (opening of offices overseas)
• Funding for science and technology to address food safety – relatively flat
Food Safety Focus in Appropriations ?
Surging costs of groceries hit home
Bread, eggs, milk prices up sharply
By Robert Gavin, Globe Staff | March 9, 2008
Focus on Who’s Fault it is
• Biofuels versus food
• Changing diets in Asia
• Climate change
• June 2008 -- Emergency Food and Energy Summit in Rome– Politics of Blame
• Cheap!
• Gain political kudos
The World’s Response: Classical Crisis Management
• Food aid
• Humanitarian assistance
• Seeds, fertilizer
• Farmer education
Visionary Industry Leaders
The Opportunity
• APS leads the creation of an international industry-public sector alliance to double funding for agricultural research
• Why APS?• Strategic vision for 2050 and beyond• Double funding over next five years
– US– Europe
• Can we align the stars?
Thank you.
Report of the APS Ad Hoc Committee on Auxiliary Meetings April 22, 2008
Executive Summary: Recommendations to Council
The APS Ad Hoc Committee on Auxiliary Meetings recommends to APS Council that it form an Auxiliary Meetings Board whose charge would be to oversee the selection, investment, planning, delivery, and assessment of all scientific meetings of the society held apart from the Annual APS Meeting and Divisional Meetings. The Board would be charged also to generate ideas for scientific meetings on important issues that are timely and of broad interest to regional, national, or international constituencies. Guiding principles in constructing an APS portfolio of Auxiliary Meetings would be to conduct meetings that build APS member value, are consistent with the Strategic Plan, enhance APS’ reputation and brand recognition, and that, on balance over the portfolio, produce revenue for APS. We recommend initially that the Board include an appointed director and six appointed Board members who would each have responsibilities for overseeing individual meeting projects approved by the Board and executed by APS staff and a designated program chair. In addition, we recommend that one ex officio Board member be appointed from the Scientific Programs Board and one from the Public Policy Board. These members would participate in all Board discussions and votes, but would not be expected to oversee meeting projects. The Auxiliary Meetings Board would also include at least one senior APS staff member as a non-voting, ex officio member. We suggest that the director be appointed for a three-year term and that the six regular Board members be appointed for staggered three-year terms. The membership of the Board should be broad enough to represent many aspects of the discipline, but it is not necessary that all member areas be represented. It is especially important that Board members encompass expertise and experience in academia, government, extension, industry, private practice, and international agriculture. The most important attributes to consider in identifying candidates for the Board are broad vision, strategic thinking skills, and an enthusiasm for working with diverse people and providing new educational opportunities. We suggest that Auxiliary Meetings be re-assessed by Council after three years to determine whether the Board is accomplishing the mission set out by Council.
Report of the APS Ad Hoc Committee on Auxiliary Meetings April 22, 2008
Committee members: Scott Adkins, Michelle Bjerkness (staff), James Buck, Betty Ford (staff), Amy Hope (co-chair, staff), Randy Rowe, Gail Wisler, and Gary Bergstrom (co-chair) Charge from APS President Ray Martyn (revised on September 25, 2007) "The committee will perform the functions of proposal development and evaluation, meeting facilitation and coordination with staff, and decision-making in the interim to the development of a permanent structure. Consider how APS should handle auxiliary meetings in the future to enhance value to members. In the process, this committee will develop a proposal for council that identified possible models and permanent structure for how APS should handle these meetings and be a significant revenue source to the society." Committee approach to developing a proposal to Council Committee activity was initiated with a breakfast orientation meeting in July 2007 in San Diego. From September 2007 through February 2008, the committee held a series of conference calls in which we invited members from different constituencies within APS to share their insights and hopes for APS auxiliary meetings, i.e., programmatic meetings besides the APS Annual Meeting and Divisional Meetings. Members participating in these conversations have included representatives from the APS Executive Committee, APS Division Officers, Scientific Programs Board, Office of International Programs, Ad hoc Committee on International Programs, Public Policy Board, Extension Committee, Office of Industry Relations, Industry Committee, and the Editor-in-Chief of APS Press. Some of the information gleaned from these conference calls is summarized in the following sections. Bergstrom drafted a preliminary report that was discussed on a committee conference call on March 25 and subsequently was revised by the committee and resulted in this document. Recognizing meeting fatigue as well as strategic opportunity We heard repeatedly from APS members from different employment sectors and interests that their capacity (time and finances) for attending meetings is limited. Most members attend a combination of large general meetings (like the APS Annual Meeting) and a number of small focused-subject meetings. Members increasingly find value in specialized meetings that are close to their area of interest and responsibility. The potential for APS to assume leadership for some of the ongoing focused-subject meetings is limited. Many of these are arranged by volunteers to keep registration costs very low. However, given a critical topic with time-sensitive information, sufficient interest and supplemental funding may exist to justify an APS-organized meeting. There are important emerging issues for which APS can play a leadership role in developing new scientific meetings of strategic importance. These are meetings that can increase the brand recognition and reputation of APS as well as contribute member value and generate income for the Society. The APS role in meeting facilitation is optimally one of ‘partner’ rather than strictly ‘vendor of services’. Where possible, APS should avoid situations of competitive bidding as a vendor on meetings. Flexibility may be required though as we heard that bids may be required by some funding agencies. APS should be out front and visible on any meetings they sponsor and the meetings we facilitate should build APS brand recognition. Finite donor support APS members and other professionals typically can afford to attend only those meetings with modest costs attached. Sponsorship by government agencies and industry becomes a very large factor in keeping registration costs reasonable for attendees. For example, high attendance at the National Soybean Rust Symposium can be attributed in large part to a modest registration fee that was subsidized by USDA agencies, commodity organizations, and life sciences companies. The same agencies and companies are likely sponsors for a number of agricultural subject meetings. It is unlikely that USDA-ARS, USDA-CSREES, USDA-APHIS, commodity organizations, or life sciences technology companies will be able to
subsidize several large APS meetings in a given fiscal year. The finite nature of donor resources must be realized when doing strategic meeting planning. Workshops/meetings appended to APS National and Divisional Meetings APS has had modest success in organizing auxiliary workshops and meetings that are scheduled immediately before, after, or concomitant with existing meetings to leverage the economy of hotel contracts and to save attendees any additional transportation expense. These meetings add value to the overall meetings experience. The Scientific Programs Board in concert with APS subject matter and policy committees should explore additional workshops of this type. Successful workshops are often built around opportunities created by the location of the meeting venue (e.g., a grape production workshop in coastal California). The general experience has been that workshop attendees are predominantly people that attend the parent meeting. Attracting participants that don’t ordinarily attend an APS meeting is sometimes successful but often is not. Income potential of these add-on meetings for APS is low to modest. The Scientific Programs Board should continue to handle this activity for APS Annual Meetings. Networking between SPB and an Auxiliary Meetings Board is encouraged for exchange of ideas and to reduce duplication of programs. Divisional Officers and Local Arrangements Committees can best coordinate workshops organized at APS Divisional Meetings. Public policy workshops Public policy workshops initiated and championed by the Public Policy Board, and often financed by government agencies, have been very successful in terms of increased recognition of APS by policymakers and value to APS members. PPB anticipates continuing with two to three small workshops (20-50 attendees each) per year with break-even budgets (includes staff time and fees to Eversole and Associates). Ideas are developed by PPB and vetted by PPB and the Executive Committee. Income potential for APS is none to small. We would like to see early plans for PPB Workshops shared with the Auxiliary Meetings Board for awareness and enhanced coordination of efforts. PPB would not be required to obtain approval for their public policy workshops through the Auxiliary Meetings Board; rather the groups would coordinate to identify synergies where efforts and ideas could come together. Regular communication between an Auxiliary Meetings Board and PPB is critical since some of the small policy workshops can potentially spawn larger meetings with expanded audiences. A liaison position for the mutual benefit of these two boards is recommended in a following section. Contractual government meetings on plant pathology subjects USDA agencies have partnered with APS to plan strategically important meetings on a number of important plant pathology subjects including review of plant disease recovery plans through the National Plant Disease Recovery System (initiated by PPB contacts) and a recent planning meeting on preparedness for Ug99 stem rust in North America (initiated by Ad hoc Committee on Auxiliary Meetings). These meetings are arranged through a financial contract with USDA, and meeting participation is by the invitation of USDA. Meeting sizes are generally in the 30-50 person range. APS income generation potential from these meetings is low, but they are done because of their centrality to the discipline and the strategic mission of APS. These small meetings also have the potential to spawn larger meetings on major issues. It is desirable that the APS Auxiliary Meetings Board be involved in advocating for and overseeing future meetings of this type. Meetings on major issues of regional/national/international interest The primary opportunity for APS to grow its portfolio of meetings and to develop an income stream is through large (100 attendees or greater) national, regional, and international meetings on issues of broad interest. Very often the subjects for such meetings are interdisciplinary in nature and attract an audience from the private and public sectors and including APS members and nonmembers. The National Soybean Rust Symposium (>200 attendees) provides an example of a large meeting, while the recent Soybean Cyst Nematode Workshop (90 attendees) provides an example of a moderate-size meeting. Identification and development of meetings on major issues should be the primary focus of an APS Auxiliary Meetings Board.
Inter-society meetings and meetings proposed by the APS-Executive Committee As APS continues to pursue its goal of becoming a more international society, the Executive Committee and other APS governance groups are likely to propose more international and joint meetings with other associations (besides the annual meeting). A recent example is the proposed involvement of APS in the Plant Pathology Meeting of the Americas. It is appropriate that the initial official communication occur directly between the APS president or executive vice-president and the leaders of other societies. But we suggest that the APS Auxiliary Meetings Board be involved at the earliest stages of planning an inter-society meeting and that the Board coordinates and oversees the meeting. Such meetings are of strategic importance to APS but they can be complicated to plan and execute and they require a detailed memorandum of understanding with each of the association partners so that everyone’s role and financial obligation is clear and benchmarks are established. An appointed program chair and a supporting program committee as well as a designated APS staff liaison are critical to success of an inter-society meeting. The Auxiliary Meetings Board should also have a role in envisioning and advocating for inter-society meetings in concert with the Executive Committee. Functions of an APS Auxiliary Meetings Board The Auxiliary Meetings Board would be a diverse group of APS members, who regularly scan the scientific, agricultural, and policy environment, and who periodically survey the membership and scientific community with the intent of identifying issues on which APS should take action in terms of an educational offering. The Board would assess interest in an issue (within and beyond APS), and the impact that issue may have on APS as an association and on its members. The Board would solicit ideas from the APS membership, but Board members would also generate ideas for meeting topics. These can be presented as virtual (i.e., on-line) meetings as well as face-to-face meetings. At the outset, the Board might function 25% in a reactive (to member proposals) mode and 75% in a proactive mode. Nimbleness and timely response to opportunities are critical to the Board’s success. For each educational offering that is determined worthwhile to pursue, a person, outside of the Board, would be identified to act as program chair/meeting coordinator. From past experience, it is desirable for the program chair to set up a supporting program committee at the very early stages of planning. It is also desirable that a Board member continues interacting with the program chair in an advisory role as the meeting is developed, delivered, and reviewed. This is akin to the relationship of an APS Press senior editor with the editor of a book project. The membership of the Board should be broad enough to represent many aspects of the discipline, but it is not necessary that all member areas be represented. The most important attributes to consider in identifying candidates for the Board are broad vision, strategic thinking skills, and an enthusiasm for working with diverse people and providing new educational opportunities. We recommend initially that the Board include an appointed director and six appointed Board members who would each have responsibilities for overseeing individual meeting projects approved by the Board and executed by APS staff and a designated program chair. In addition, we recommend that one ex officio Board member be appointed from the Scientific Programs Board and one from the Public Policy Board. These members would participate in all Board discussions and votes, but would not be expected to oversee meeting projects. The Auxiliary Meetings Board would also include at least one high-ranking APS staff member as a non-voting, ex officio member. We suggest that the director be appointed for a three-year term and that the six regular Board members be appointed for staggered three-year terms. Criteria for investment in auxiliary meetings An early activity of the Board should be to develop a meeting proposal template(s) and criteria for evaluation of proposed meetings; these should be reassessed on a periodic basis. The Ad Hoc Committee suggests that the following general criteria be considered:
Importance of the issue and how the meeting will make a difference Buy-in and partnership of relevant organizations (commodity groups, research committees, agencies,
professional societies, etc.) in the topic area Estimated size and composition of potential meeting audience
Financial support for the meeting from agencies, companies, and associations Alignment with goals and objectives of the APS Strategic Plan – member value Contribution to APS image and brand Potential for generating income for APS Identification of potential risks associated with APS investment in the meeting Timeline for implementation of meeting and location options - time of year and what part of the
country/world it should be held. Position of an Auxiliary Meetings Board in the APS governance structure We carefully considered two models for an Auxiliary Meetings Board, i.e., as a free-standing governance group, or as a sub-group under the Scientific Programs Board. Both ideas had merit, but, in the final analysis, there was unanimous committee support for the free-standing model. The primary rationale was that the development of Auxiliary Meetings requires an intense and focused effort that is different in scope and process from the critically important job of the Scientific Programs Board in building the scientific content of APS Annual Meetings. If done correctly, there should be considerable networking between these two boards that will benefit the total scientific offerings of the society. In the current Manual of Operations (MoO), the Scientific Programs Board is tasked with all scientific programming for the society including auxiliary meetings and workshops. Should Council adopt the recommendations of this Ad Hoc Committee, the MoO will need to be revised in recognition of changed duties for the SPB and new duties for an Auxiliary Meetings Board. Fortunately, SPB Director Scott Adkins and SPB Workshop Chair James Buck served on this Ad Hoc Committee and they understand and support making the necessary changes to the MoO. Income goals for FY10 The Executive Committee asked the Ad Hoc Committee to consider whether auxiliary meetings could generate $100,000 in income per year. We determined that income from auxiliary meetings of $100,000 or more per year is not realistic in the current environment. We project an ambitious but attainable income goal for Auxiliary Meetings of $30,000 to $50,000 in FY10. This target assumes that two large meetings will be held in FY10 equivalent in attendance and financial support to the National Soybean Rust Symposium, or that one meeting of that scope and two meetings with more modest income generation will be held. We envision that income goals for Auxiliary Meetings could increase moderately in subsequent fiscal years as members and donors come to appreciate the value of meetings conducted through APS. In addition to cash income to APS, the charging of APS staff time to Auxiliary Meetings will result in a positive redistribution of overhead charges that would otherwise be assessed to Member Services and other cost centers.
APS-ISF Collaboration on the Codification of Pathogen Races/Strains Commonly Used in the
Seed Industry - Ad Hoc Committee
Phyllis Himmel
July 26, 2008
Disease Resistance Issues for the Seed Industry
• There is a lack of consistency in the naming of plant pathogen strains and races
• Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici (Fol) in tomato. The races are called Fol 0, Fol 1 and Fol 2 in European publications but elsewhere the same races are Fol 1, Fol 2 and Fol 3
• Currently there is no internationally recognized authority that decides on the naming and nomination of new races and/or strains
• Inconsistent descriptions of pathogen races and strains undermine claims of disease resistance made in vegetable crops
• Readily available sets of differential hosts and ‘standard’ pathogen races and/or strains are needed to help standardize naming
Develop a system that allows access to differential host and pathogen sets for a unified approach in the naming of pathogen races/strains:
1. Monthly conference calls
2. Propose a network of research laboratories and seed companies in the US for the maintenance, storage, multiplication and distribution of differential host - pathogen sets
NAKT (NL), GEVES (Fr), International Bremia evaluation board (NL)
3. Establish guidelines to standardize naming of strains and races with input from the scientific community – acceptance and use globally
Actions/Activities since January 2008
• System components identified and concept developed
• This effort has been communicated throughout the seed industry and benefits to the business are generally understood and supported– California Seed Association meetings– ASTA vegetable division meetings, committee meetings– ESA and ISF regional meetings– American Seed Research Foundation– National Council of Commercial Plant Breeders
• Developing an APS focus group for feedback on host set priorities and how to secure acceptance and use by the scientific community
Critical Components• Differential host sets
– Identify contributors• Seed increases• Phytosanitary inspections and assays• Functional traits verified
• Pathogen strains– Collection, storage and distribution
• Purity• Virulence
– Permits• Storage and distribution system
– Database for tracking inventory, expenses and payments– Link host and pathogen distribution
• Financial support– Industry grants and funding– Membership contributions– Purchase of host differentials and pathogen sets by non members– Manage both costs of operation and funds
• Acceptance and use of guidelines to standardize pathogen strain denomination by industry and the scientific community
– Surveys– APS focus group
Paying Users
ASTAManage funds
billing
Seed CompanyContributors
Phytosanitary inspectionsSeed health testingVerify host function
Member Users
ASTA, ISFWebsites:
available host setsOrder forms
USDANational PlantGermplasmCollections
GRIN
Differential host setstorage and distribution format: ‘hub and spokes’
ASTA, ISFWebsite
Available host setsOrder forms
Member usersObtain permits for contained testing
ContributorsReference pathogens
purityvirulence
ASTAManage funds
billing
Paying usersObtain permits for contained testing
Third party laboratory for
referenceisolate storageand distribution
Reference pathogenstrain storage anddistribution format: ‘hub and spokes’
Next Steps:
• Ad Hoc committee July 29 meeting with available APS council members and APHIS
• Custom permit for pathogen collection, storage and distribution– APHIS proposal for a closed testing system for reference calibration of
pathogen strains on differential host sets
• APS focus group discussions on the use and acceptance of guidelines for naming pathogen strains
• 2009 APS workshop
• Secure financial commitment by the seed industry to get the program up and running– Functional detail of this system– who does what– Cost analysis– Start up funds
• Phyllis Himmel (Chair) – Seminis, vegetable division of Monsanto• Chet Kurowski – Harris Moran• Radha Ranganathan –International Seed Federation• Craig Sandlin - Syngenta• William Dolezal – Pioneer Hi-Bred, Inc.• Lindsey du Toit – Washing State University• Kimberly Webb – USDA/ARS• John Mizicko – STA labs, Inc.• Kees van Ettekoven – Naktuinbouw• Valerie Grimault - GEVES• Andy LaVigne** – American Seed Trade Association• Ric Dunkle** - American Seed Trade Association
* Members represent the interests of APS, ASTA and ISF
** Consulting members
Members* of the APS-ISF Ad Hoc Committee
Office/ Board/ Committee/ Division
Highlights Actions of "committee"Issues Requiring Council Response/Action
APS Foundation - A. Chase a. Completed vision and strategic plan for the APS Foundation “Second Century Campaign”b. Schroth Endowment description nearing completion. Connected to the Early Career professionals committee and the Faces of the Future Symposium Series.c. Tarleton Fellowship d. Schaefer Student travel award started.e. H. J. Dubin Student travel award in honor of the Peace Corps started.
None None
Office of Electronic Communications - D. Eastburn
a. Continuing to oversee the redesign of APSnet and the conversion to a CMS systemb. OEC members provided an initial taxonomy to use for organizing the information on the CMS systemc. OEC will set priorities for adding new items to the current version of APSnet or deciding if the addition should be postponed until the new system is online
None None
Office of International Programs – S. Miller
• The OIP Library Assistance web page (http://www.apsnet.org/members/oip/library.asp) was updated to include a 5-year report of Library Assistance activities between 2003 and April 2008. During this time the program has distributed 265 copies of books and compendia, 1,726 journal issues, and many plant pathology slides. These materials were donated from 35 individuals, primarily from the U.S. Recipients were libraries in 31 countries. Shipping fees continue to increase dramatically, which may hamper activities in the future. So far, shipping fees have been covered by companies, foundations, individuals and institutes in the U.S and internationally. The Library Assistance Program is managed by Dr. Mohammad Babadoost, University of Illinois. • A Call for Proposals for the “OIP Global Experience”, a program aimed at helping plant pathologists work with scientists and extension personnel in developing countries in training and outreach efforts is being finalized and will be available at the Centennial Meeting in Minneapolis. Funds will be used to support APS members in conducting short courses, workshops or training progr with a host country cooperating institution. Development of outreach materials as well as diagnostic tools will also be supported by this program. During 2008 one award of up to $3,000 will be availablDr. Annemiek Schilder, Michigan State University, is leading this effort.• A Call for Proposals for the next round of the JANE Award and International Travel Award will be published in the August Issue of Phytopathology News.• The OIP brochure was updated and will be available for distribution at the Centennial meeting and the International Plant Pathology Congress in Turin, Italy later this summer. A poster on OIP historyand activities was also prepared. Dr. Randy Ploetz, University of Florida, prepared these materials with input from the OIP Board and assistance of Michelle Bjerkness.• The 4th Annual OIP Silent Auction will be held during the opening Centennial celebration (6-8 pm) To date, over 100 items have been donated. These include international arts and crafts, local interestitems, photographs, and vintage items in recognition of the APS Centennial. We anticipate additionadonations between now and the deadline for submission. Proceeds from the Silent Auction will be used to fund the OIP Global Experience and other OIP activities. The Silent Auction activities are led by Sally Miller and Annemiek Schilder, with assistance from Karen Deuschle.• Nominations for two new OIP Board members have been made: Jim Steadman, University of Nebraska, and Talo Pastor-Corrales, USDA ARS.
None None
2008 APS Council - Annual Reports
Office of Industry Relations -B. Olsen
• Completion of the disease crop protectant timeline. This will be featured at the OIR display booth and the special session Wednesday morning, "What Was, Is and Could be, Contributions of Industry and Partners to Plant Disease Management" • The OIR helped coordinate the special session Wednesday morning, "What Was, Is and Could be, Contributions of Industry and Partners to Plant Disease Management".
None. None
Office of Public Relations and Outreach- D. Jardine
* Awarded the APS Journalism Award to Pam Golden, Southern Farmermagazine* Made student awards at the International Science and Engineering Fairheld in Atlanta, GA* Received two entries for the APS "Dirtiest Jobs" contest* Provided funding to the Public Policy Board to help them get theirOffice of Science and Technology Policy internship established* Continued working with Standing Partnership on the implementation ofthe centennial meeting publicity plan
None None
Public Policy Board - J. Fletcher
• Education – the increasing need for broadly trained plant pathologists; survey to stakeholders, proposal to USDA and NSF for a national workshop to determine priorities for funding initiatives focused on increasing the number of broadly trained plant pathologist • Genomics – advocacy for sequencing plant associated microbial genomes and agriculturally relevant plant genomes, expanding funding programs to include functional genomics including host-pathogen studies; prioritizing lists of plant associated microbes for sequencing; and organizing a workshop in 2009 to review the state of the plant associated microbial genomics, need for additional sequences of crops and associated microbes, and opportunities for accelerated studies.• Permitting – expediting widely prevalent and/or low risk pathogen movement between states, publishing summary of APS survey on member satisfaction with APHIS permitting process, provide input for 2001 proposed APHIS rule changes, test Risk Assessment Analysis.• Industry issues – identification of high priority issues for industry as a whole and in particular develop enhanced relationship with EPA through annual meeting with leadership and development of
None • Please provide Council’s guidance/input on the focus areas listed in the highlights for 2008-09; a priority ranking from Council would be extremely helpful to the Board• Please consider the potential impact of an APS Fellow at OSTP and possible funding options • What public policy issues, not now on the list, would Council like PPB to address?• What should be the role of PPB in new APS initiatives related to international relationships?
• Plant biosecurity – partnerships with USDA’s NPDRS and NPDN, microbial forensics, interactions with the APS Threatening Pathogens Advisory Committee and the Department of Homeland Security, and monitoring legislative and regulatory activities.• Food safety – the role of plant pathology in understanding the interactions of human pathogens and plant hosts; providing information and resources to FDA, CDC and USDA food safety initiatives; added food safety specialist to PPB membership; work with APS Food Safety Interest Group; will co-host (with Co. State U.) a national workshop in October 2008; monitor Congressional initiatives.• Culture collections – addressing the critical condition and need for a multi-faceted microbial culture resource; with financial support from ARS and APHIS, a national workshop was held Fall 2007; a larger, expanded workshop is planned for Spring 2009• PPB Early Career Internship – PPB’s second intern , Angela Records, worked with PPB in 2007-08; our third intern, Maritza Abril, has just been selected • USDA research agency reorganization – monitoring implementation of the 2008 farm bill provision that will restructure USDA and its research programs, monitoring congressional activities related to the further restructuring of USDA.
• Research funding – advocacy for increased funding for programs to which APS members can apply• APS-OSTP Fellowship – discussions are ongoing with OSTP staff about the possibility of entering into a Memorandum of Understanding whereby an APS Fellow would work directly within the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), providing an opportunity for an APS member to spend several months at OSTP each year to advise and inform policy on plant science issues; funding possibilities are being explored as well as opportunities for similar fellowships at other Federal agencies
Scientific Programs Board- S. Adkins
• Experiment with “virtual” Flash and Dash presentations unveiled online in advance of Centennial meeting and showcased in exhibition area of Centennial meeting; Ten volunteers were recruited from Flash and Dash poster presentations to try this new format• Expansion of “live” Flash and Dash presentations/sessions at Centennial meeting moderated by SPB Section Chairs• Continued SPB involvement in “ad hoc” Auxiliary Meeting committee
• Continued improvement of electronic submission portion of annual meeting planning process and Tuesday afternoon annual meeting planning session• Consideration of continued
None
Publications Publications Board - M. Daub (consolidation of MPMI, Phytopathology, Plant Disease, Plant Health Progress, PHI/APSnet Ed Center, PDMR, Phytopathology News, APS Press)
Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions:• The most recent ISI impact factor for MPMI has risen to 4.275. This increase is particularly notable as some institutions use an impact factor of 4 and above as a quality indicator for a journal. MPMI ranks 12th overall in the "Plant Sciences" category, and ranks 6th among plant science journals, excluding review journals. • In the prior 12 months, 249 papers were submitted and 140 accepted (56.2% acceptance rate).• Average time from submission to first decision was 33 days. Average time from submission to final decision was 58 days.• Thanks to Reviews Editor Pietro Spanu, MPMI published 10 mini-reviews in the past year.
None None
Phytopathology:• In 2007, a total of 338 manuscripts were submitted (~28/month) and 60% were international. To date, the acceptance rate for these manuscripts has been 60%. For the first half of 2008, 155 manuscripts have been submitted (~26/month) and the acceptance rate has been 59%. Overall, these numbers are in-line for previous years and suggest a strong continued interest in publishing in the journal, both for U.S. and international authors.• A number of ethical issues have arisen that may justify having Pub Board look at adopting a standard policy for certain situations or even forming an ethics committee that could handle such issues.• Nik Grunwald has been approved as the next EIC and he will take over January 1, 2009. He is presently putting the finishing touches on his Senior Editor staff.
None
Plant Disease:• The number of manuscripts submitted increased by 13% and number of Notes decreased by 11% compared with 2007 (based on 50% of 2007 yearly totals).• Five Feature Articles were published; 4 were in the list of most frequently downloaded articles in June 2008. Generally, 50% of the “most-frequent” list is Feature Articles.• Median time in review for manuscripts was 55 days, compared with 53 days for all of 2007, still less than the target time of 60 days.
None
Phytopathology News:• Funds were approved by council for digitizing all back issues of Phytopathology News.• The APS centennial has been well covered in Phytopathology News, with articles featuring the centennial meeting and other centennial activities and Phytopathology News retrospective articles.• Interest in advertising has increased, especially for the June issue, with 7 ads placed.
Plant Disease Management Reports:• While the number of reports for PDMR volume 2 will be very similar to volume 1, the number of reports in the first submission period decreased 9% from volume 1 to volume 2 and the number of reports in the second submission period almost doubled over the two years.• A feature article written by the EIC discusses the history of PDMR in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of APS.
Plant Health Progress: • The number of manuscripts submitted from January to July in 2008 was almost identical to the amount submitted during the same time period in 2007, with 66% as plant health research and 28% as plant health brief manuscripts.• Timely industry news articles covering all aspects of plant health were published in the “News and Opinions” section of the journal.
Plant Health Instructor: • New publications in The Plant Health Instructor include 6 new Disease Lessons, 6 Advanced Topics articles, 1 collection of lab exercises for K-12 audiences, 2 Instructor Communication articles, 1 Case Study, and1 Portuguese and 4 Spanish translations.
APS Press• The Compendium of Onion and Garlic Diseases, 2nd edition, edited by Howard Schwartz and Krishna Mohan, has been published.• Phytophthora: Identifying Species by Morphology and DNA Fingerprints by Mannon Gallegly and Chuanxue Hong has been published.• The 2nd edition of ACCESS Quantitative Disease Analysis software is being released with a special training session to be held at the Centennial meeting.• Three compendia (on sugar beet, hop, and wheat diseases), a book on bark-infecting and tree killing fungi in the Cryphonectriaceae, and a CD-Rom entitled Plant Virus Image Collection and Teaching Resource are currently in production.• Chase Horticultural Research has been designated an APS PRESS representative for marketing to ornamental growers at trade shows, beginning with the Ohio Short Course this month.• Co-marketing mycology titles with Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures (CBS) and other publishers is adding more titles for APS members and increasing efficiency for APS PRESS.• APS PRESS will have a booth at the International Congress for Plant Pathology.• Essential Plant Pathology textbook adopters are being surveyed for feedback about how they use the first edition• APS PRESS will exceed budget expectations for FY08.
None
PMN - M. Wimer Strategic Developments• MOU with American Society of Agronomy and Crop Science Society of America. The written Memorandum of Understanding for shared management of PMN is complete. As specified in the MOU, the PMN Joint Executive Committee, with representation from all three societies, has been formed and has had its first two conference calls. The APS reps are Brian Olson, Dow AgroSciences, and Dennis Gross, Texas A&M University. A face-to-face meeting is scheduled for August in St. Paul. The ASA contribution of $20,000 in support of PMN for FY’08 has been received. Desired Outcomes: acquisition of additional content, access to increased audiences for new subscribers and financial partners, and input for purposes of strategic planning.• Focus on Soybean (FOS). Launched in December 2007, FOS has now published over a dozen educational/training webcasts covering various aspects of soybean production and pest management (www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/fos), with others scheduled. The site also now includes RSS feeds to keep users apprised of new content. The idea of focus topics was developed to provide a means of deliberately acquirinSite TrafficThe number of PMN site visitors continues to grow from 194,289 in 2006 to 257,806 in 2007. There have been 125,414 – January27,959 – February31,017 – March35,294 – April36,343 – May48,426 – June
None None
APS Historian - P. Peterson • Help finalize the projects and plans for the Centennial celebration of the APS this summer in Minneapolis.• Continue to coordinate with the staff of the Special Collections Department of the Library of Iowa State University where the Society’s historical records are deposited. I also work to promote an awareness of the history of APS and plant pathology for Society members, other scholarly communities, and the general public. This has been accomplished through historical publications and presentations directed to both scientific and historical communities as well as interacting with the general public. • I will present a paper on the formation of the APS at both the Minneapolis meeting in July and the International Congress of Plant Pathology in Turin, Italy this August. • I have worked over the past six months with Clay S. Griffith to complete the memoir of John S. Niederhauser for APS Press.• I am advising the volunteer staff of the Dassel Area Historical Museum (Dassel, Minnesota) on the development of a permanent exhibit “From Blight to Blessing: The Story of Ergot, ” providing information and materials on the historical, social impact of ergot as well as the current scientific understanding of the disease. • Finally, another key role as APS Historian involves my answering queries and facilitating document requests onroutine basis from national and divisional APS officers, headquarters’ staff, and Society members on matters related to the history of plant pathology and of the APS. Frequent questions also concern the appropriate storageand preservation of historical materials. Often, individuals are searching for biographical information, a particular historical document, or a unique historical photograph. Whenever possible, applicable materials are photocopied or photographic prints/negatives are either made or electronic images sent on to theAPS member
None None
Councilors Forum – G. Moorman
• Councilor's Form met via telephone conference on June 10, 2008.•There were not Volunteer Award nominations for 2008. Councilor's Forum members suggested that the Intermediate Councilor-at-Large contact Committee Chairs, Division Councilors, and Division Officers to encourage them to submit nominations for the 2009 award.• Northeastern, Potomac, Southern, and Pacific Divisions noted that things are going well and that Division meetings held in 2008 were moderately well attended and the upcoming meetings in 2008 are well planned. These Divisions expressed appreciation of the services Headquarters staff is providing the Divisions related to meeting registrations, etc.•Mike Boehm gave the group an update on the current activities of the ad hoc committee on governance.
None None
Division Counselors: Caribbean - L. Calvert • The request to OFAC to hold a meeting in Cuba was denied. A document for institutional memory
and the strategy needed to be successful with OFAC is being written. • The CD will not hold an annual meeting in 2008. A business meeting will be held during the Centennial APS meeting.• The CD 2009 meeting will be held with The Florida Phytopathology Society tentatively in Orlando during May 2009. • The CD 2010 meeting will be held together with the Meeting of the Americas.• An election was held for the Division Councilor and Maria Roca will start her term following the Centennial APS meeting.
None None
North Central - R. Hammerschmidt
No report None None
Northeast - R. Wick Northeast Division will have their annual meeting at Goat Island, Newport R.I. this fall. None NonePacific - M. Putnam • The Pacific Division held their 93rd annual meeting in Jackson Hole, WY June 24-27th. Two
symposia were held: A Consortium Approach in Advancing the use of Weather Information in IPM: The Western IPM Weather Workgroup and Using Molecular Techniques to Solve Preactical Problems in Plant Pathology. Forty two papers were presented, including 10 student papers. The Early Career Award was given to David Gent, USDA,ARS Corvallis, OR; student travel awards were given to four students; two students were awarded 1st place (a tie) in the student paper competition: J. Urbez-Torres and F. Trouillas, both of UC-Davis, and third place went to J.K. Dung of WSU, Pullman, WA. • Juliet Windes (Univ. Idaho, Idaho Falls) was appointed Secretary-Treasurer, and Walt Mahaffee (USDA, ARS Corvallis, OR) was appointed President-elect. Outgoing President Doug Gubler (UC-Davis) turned the gavel over to incoming President Dennis Johnson (WSU, Pullman, WA).
Scientific Programs Board: The Pacific Division's annual meeting will be held in conjunction with the national meeting in Portland in 2009. We request that the student papers in the PD student paper competition be scheduled together as a block to allow the judges to be able to attend all the sessions. We also request that these papers be scheduled the first day, after the Plenary Session. Scientific Programs Board: The Pacific Division would like to request that the PD business meeting be scheduled after the student papers on Monday, as a luncheon.
None
Potomac - : K. L. Everts • 64th meeting of the Potomac Division was held March 26-28 in Morgantown WV (estimated attendance 73).• Robert Davis gave the keynote address “Phytoplasmas and Spiroplasmas – shrinking genome in an expanding Universe.”• Ten students participated in the Graduate Student Competition. First Place was awarded to Jeneylyne Colcol, VPI&SU. Honorable Mentions were Huo Hu, Christine M. Coyle, and Shawn C. Keneley.• Nine companies sponsored our social, a dramatic increase from past participation. • A symposium, a workshop, and a tour on Friday focused on organic agriculture.• The Memorial Fund Student Travel Award went to Hannah Schrum, West Virginia University.• Mary Ann Hansen was elected Secretary-Treasurer in the Presidential sequence.• Chris Dardick was elected Vice President in the Presidential sequence to replace Inga Zasada, who relocated.• Potomac Division contributed $3000 to the APS Centennial Fund.
None None
Southern – J. Rupe • Our 85th annual meeting met Feb. 3-4 in conjunction with the Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists meeting in Dallas, TX. • There were 51 attendees, 13 student papers, 14 regular papers, and 4 symposium papers. The symposium, Kenny Seebold presiding, was "Extension and Research in the 21st Century - Modern Approaches to New Challenges" The symposium speakers were: Paul Vincelli, David Langston, Guido Schnabel, and Karl Steddom. •Tim Brenneman was awarded the Southern Division Outstanding Plant Pathologist. •Student Paper awards went to James Kerns, NCSU (1st), Brooke Edmunds, NCSU (2nd), and Cruz Torres, TAMU (3rd). •Student Travel Awards went to Dina Gutierrez (LSU), S-Y Park (TAMU), R. Donahoo (UT), Brooke Edmunds (NCSU), and Cruz Torres (TAMU). •Our sponsors were: Chemtura, Valent, United Phosphorus Inc., Bayer CropScience, and BASF Corp. •The meeting concluded with a banquet and had 6 teams playing in our DeBary Bowl. •Boyd Padgett, LSU was elected vice president of SDAPS
None None
Special Committees: Emerging Diseases and Pathogens - D. Luster
•Committee is developing methods for prioritizing emerging pathogens and workshop program for 2008 USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System Workshop, Oct 28-29, San Antonio TX.
None None
Advisory Committee on Threatening Plant Diseases- J. Sherwood
• Tentative contacts provided to Council on possible "Food Shield" initiative in Dept. Homeland Security
None None
Meeting of the Americas – L. Calvert
• The Mexican Phytopathology Society (MFS) proposed Mexico as the site of the MOA.• In a conference call questions concerning the purpose of the MOA, the logistics and the scientific program were discussed between MFS and APS. There were general agreements in most areas, and MFS will be sending a more detailed proposal to APS either in July or August. • The date of MOA will be in 2010 (probably May) and the tentative site is the Mayan Riviera, which is south of Cancun. • Upon acceptance of the MFS proposal, the current MOA committee will need to be expanded as the Organizing Committee. This should include member from as many countries as possible. The other committee will be the Program Committee
None None
Centennial Planning Committee – C. D’Arcy
Report to be given at the Annual Meeting None None
Committees:Awards and Honors - B. Seem
Report provided at midyear. None None
Financial Advisory - R. Rowe
•FAC membership has been reorganized, as approved by Council, and has developed a transitional rotation plan for the reorganized membership.•FAC met at Headquarters in January, 2008, and developed a set of recommendation to the President regarding pressing financial issues.
None None
Ad Hoc Committees: Profession of Plant Pathology: Status & Future Prospects – D. Goudry
• Continued meetings of committee through conference calls• Presented results to plant pathology department chairs retreat in Feb 2008• Additional demographic data collected from California Association of Crop Advisors• Census of plant pathology at US universities completed for all 50 states• Additional data on disciplinary balance from 1978 to 2008 collected from APS Forest Pathology Committee and Society of Nematology• Poster prepared on committee finding for presentation at Centennial Meeting of APS• Feature article for Plant Disease in preparation
None None
the Future of Education in Plant Pathology- J. MacDonald
• In February, I was invited to attend the Plant Pathology Department Heads meeting in Dallas, TX, where I presented the full PowerPoint of the education survey results. This was the same presentation made to Council last summer in San Diego. Following the meeting, I was contacted by several department chairs who wished to have copies of the data to assist their faculty discussions of curricular revisions. • The grant proposal I submitted to CSREES to support our workshop was approved and fully funded ($20,000) in late May. The feedback from the review panel was quite positive and the proposal received high marks. Since the announcement, I have since filled out the requisite forms to get the award into the Federal CRIS system and the funds will be disbursed to APS (as the recipient agency) soon. With this foundation, the workshop has become a reality and Marci Smith is presently trying to identify a suitable meeting site and the dates of availability. When this information is nailed down, we can begin the announcement/invitation process.• In March, in conjunction with the APS PPB, Barb Christ and I met with individuals at the NSF education directorate. These meetings, especially the meeting with Penny Firth, who heads the Division of Environmental Biology, were extremely helpful in shaping our thinking with regard to the scale and objectives of our workshopAs a result, I arranged one evening meeting while we were in DC to discuss with the chair of PPB and the APS officers possible modifications to the workshop agenda based on the NSF advice. The changes would scale it down to a smaller meeting and focus it on questions that will lead logically to a later and larger meeting. There was strong agreement with this approach, and I have subsequently modified the agenda to reflect these changes (a• Several people we met with during the PPB meetings expressed strong interest in the findings of the education survey. As a result, I prepared a narrated version of the survey PowerPoint, which was placed on APSnet. ColienHefferan (CSREES) and Toni Betschart (ARS) both downloaded and listened to the PowerPoint, and used informfrom it at a USDA meeting (held last April) addressing USDA’s future staffing concerns across a range of discipl• The narrated PowerPoint was subsequently divided into three more bite-sized pieces (approximately 25-35 minu each), and has now been made broadly available through APSnet.• In late May, Caitilyn Allen and I represented APS at an AIBS-sponsored summit on the future of undergraduatebiology education in America. AIBS invited many professional societies to send representatives and the meetingheld at the AAAS headquarters in Washington, DC. One of the topics dealt with the potential role(s) of professiosocieties in biology education. This experience was very helpful in thinking through details, topics, and potentialparticipants in our own workshop. A summary of my impressions and lessons from the workshop is attached.• Since that workshop was held, I have been contacted by Susan Musante (AIBS Senior Education Program Asso who sought permission to publish the web address for the narrated PowerPoint in an upcoming AIBS newsletter.• Kellye Eversole arranged for me to meet with Colien Hefferen at the USDA offices immediately following the A workshop. I discussed with Colien the fact that our workshop had been funded, but that we needed additional su to really deliver the kind of workshop that is needed. I gave her a copy of the proposed workshop schedule and sindicated that she would contact the heads of ARS, APHIS and the Forest Service on our behalf.• In addition to a revised workshop agenda, I have developed a tentative invitation list so that we can better plan tmeeting location and logistics. We will be striving to keep the number participants in the range of 50-60 people…
• Review proposed meeting agenda and invitation list and provide any desired feedback.Ad hoc committee: The primary activities planned over the next six months are focused on planning and delivery of the APS workshop. These include:1. Working with motels to identify the exact workshop location and dates.2. Issuing invitations to participants and initiating the student participant competition3. Fundraising and a “bazillion” details to make a quality meeting.
None
Working Group on Culture Collections – J. Jones
• See attachment: The Draft Plan for National Plant Microbial Germplasm System None None
Auxiliary Meetings and Workshops- G. Bergstrom
• Recommendations submitted to President Martyn 22 April 08See attachment APS_Auxillary_ Mtgs_04.22.08.doc
Recommend formation of an Auxiliary Meetings Board whose charge would be to oversee the selection, investment, planning, delivery, and assessment of all scientific meetings of the society held apart from the Annual APS Meeting and Divisional Meetings
We recommend initially that the Board include an appointed director and six appointed Board members who would each have responsibilities for overseeing individual meeting projects approved by the Board and executed by APS staff and a designated program chair. In addition, we recommend that one ex officio Board member be appointed from the Scientific Programs Board and one from the Public Policy Board. These members would participate in all Board discussions and votes, but would not be expected to oversee meeting projects.
Leadership and Volunteer Development- A. Tally
No report submitted. None
APS-ISF Collaboration on the Codification of Pathogen Races / Strains Commonly Used in the Seed Industry – P. Himmel
Report to be provided at Annual Meeting.
International Societal Collaborations - J. Leach
•Drafted letter that Ray Martyn sent to societies expressing an interest to fulfill Charge 3 to the committee, “Develop an appropriate response / action to international societies that express interest in establishing collaborations with APS until such time as a formal evaluation protocol is in place.” •Organizing discussion sessions with Plant Pathology societies from Japan and the Netherlands at the APS meeting to gather information on what aspects of collaborations different societies deem as valuable for their memberships
None None
APS Governance - M. Boehm
• The Task Force (TF) was appointed by President Martyn to conduct a comprehensive assessment of APS’ current governance structure and whether or not its structure is in alignment with and will allow APS to meet its future goals;•The Committee has had two teleconferences and several email-based brainstorming sessions;•Bud Crouch from Tecker Consultants has been retained by APS to work with the members of TF Gov – fundingfor this was approved by APS Treasurer;•TF Gov in conjunction with APS HQ Staff are in the process of conducting a fact-finding effort to collect information needed by the TF to complete our mission;•In an effort to reach out to the various facets of APS’ current governance structure, the TF will be reaching out to Council, Exec, FAC, and many of APS’ nine major Boards and will likely conduct focus group sessions with various sectors of APS membership;•Timeline – crudely speaking, this process is going to be ongoing for the next 12-18 months during which time TF Gov will provide periodic updates and communiqués with Council and members regarding our progress; and•At the conclusion of this process, TF Gov will be presenting its final report and recommendations to Council.
None None
Affiliate Reports: American Association for the Advancement of Science-D.G.Gilchrist
None None
American Institute of Biological Sciences - B. Ch i t
Report from AIBS meeting - See wxtended reports None None
Coalition on Funding Ag Research - J.L.Sherwood
• The previous twelve months have been a very interesting time for the future of funding agricultural research. Three different initiatives (Farm Bill, National Institute for Food and Agriculture, CREATE-21) have been introduced calling for a dramatic change in the structure of USDA and the funding of both base and competitive funding for agricultural research. CoFARM has provided written testimony to the Senate and House committees on Agricultural Appropriations on the need to support competitive research. CoFARM is now closely following the implementation of the recently passed Farm Bill on the transformation of USDA-CSREES into the National Institute for Food and Agriculture. See extended reports
None None
Council for Agricultural Science & Technology - T. B. Sutton
• A significant change in the availability of publications that will affect APS members was proposed by the Budget, Finance and Investment Committee and approved by the Board. Beginning June 2, 2008, all CAST Issue Papers, formerly $5.00 each, will be available FREE to anyone. The Issue Papers may be downloaded electronically from the CAST website (www.cast-science.org).See wxtended reports
None None
International Society for Arboriculture - G. Hudler
This is my first full year as the APS Representative to the ISA and I have to admit that not much has happened. A major problem for me for as long as I can remember is that ISA and APS have their annual meetings on exactly the same dates every year. My dedication to APS (especially since I became chair of our department) is sufficiently high that non-attendance at APS in lieu of participation at the ISA meeting is simply not an option. And aside from the ISA annual meeting, there doesn't seem to be any predictable gathering of the governing board of the Society for me to meet personally with them to swap ideas.The best I can report to Council at this stage of the game is that the lines of communication between me and A.R.E.A. ( Arboriculture Research and Education Academy) - representing research and education interests of ISA - are open. They have recently hired Andrew Koeser (B.S. Univ. Wisconsin - Stevens Point; M.S Univ. of Illinois) to be their new Science and Research Manager. With a full time appointment to this important post, Koeser is likely to offer the best opportunity for APS and ISA to forge stronger ties. My task for the immediate fsome regular dialogue with A.R.E.A. to explore opportunities that might be beneficial to both organizations.
None None
International Society for Plant Pathology - T.A.Evans
• During 2007-2008 the ISPP has hired a business manager and webmaster. Interactions with this individual has just recently led to the development of dynamic links from ISSPweb.org to our current APS officers. This meansthat as long as APSnet.org maintains an up-to-date listing of our APS officers we will have the correct listing on ISPPweb.org. This means that we do not have to submit a list of officers as they change.• The Representative has been in conversation with Steve Kronmiller about having the listing of APS Councilors to ISPP on APSnet.org. When this is accomplished, the business manager of ISPP will link to that URL. This will mean that we no longer have to submit list of Councilors as they change.• APS is current with its dues (subscription) to ISPP.• APS Councilors to ISPP have been invited to the meeting of Councilors at the ICPP in Torino to discuss the business of the ISPP. • We request input by August 10th from APS for discussion at ICPP.• By a vote of the ISPP Councilors the ICPP Meeting in 2013 will be in Beijing, China.• Election results of ISPP officers for the term 2008-2013 are as follows:President: Dr. M. Lodovica Gullino, University of TorinoFirst Vice President: Dr Wafa Khoury, FAO, RomeSecond Vice President:Prof You-Liang Peng, BeijingSecretary General: Dr Greg Johnson, AustraliaTreasurer: Dr. Thomas Evans, Delaware
None We request input by August 10 from APS council if they have items for discussion at ICPP
International Union of Microbiological Societies - C. Bull
See extended reports: APS Affiliate IUMS 2008.doc None Action items for council:• In addition to its affiliation through the National Committee, APS is affiliated with the IUMS through the ISPP. We should determine if the IUMS is receiving dues through the ISPP on our behalf. Defer to Tom Evans as treasurere of ISPP• The APS is additionally affiliated with the IUMS through the APS delegate to the ICSP (International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes). There is currently no information about this representative in the MOO and this position is often forgotten about until the ICSP/IUMS sends a letter requesting representation. The APS Bacteriology Committee has nominated a representative to this committee in the past and I am currently serving in this position. I recommend that APS Council formalize the procedure for nomination and election of the representative to the ICSP/IUMS position and develop term limits to ensure that it is filled. • The nature of the role of the APS Affiliate to the USNC/IUMS is different than most APS Affiliates in that all members of the USNC must take and active roll in developinAdditionally, the vast majority of the meetingprovide $500.00 to help cover some travel co
ti i I t b l thi th APSMycological Society of America - C. Stiles
Noted Highlight:MSA has begun to schedule their meetings further in advance, and thus it may be difficult to schedule another joint meeting very soon. MSA past-president David McLaughlin and others have worked to ensure that the meetings are not scheduled to be in conflict: for instance, in 2009, APS will be in Portland, Oregon, and MSA will be in Snowbird, UT – the meetings are scheduled a week apart, so those wishing to travel in the western U.S. could attend both meetings. See extended reports for full report:MSA Affiliate Report 2008.doc
None None
National Council for Science and Environment - K. Pernezny
Report submitted by Jim Marois -See attachment NCSE Report for APS 2008.doc
None None
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry - M. Simini
I am a member of Steering Committee of the SETAC North America Soil Contamination Advisory Group (CSAG) and I am editor of the CSAG column in the SETAC Globe. Check out my column in the attached file and visit the Communities page that is accessible through the link in my article. I have been tossing around some ideas about joint meetings, symposia, online forums, etc. between APS and SETAC. Some ideas included biosecurity, pesticide fate, and climate change. I invite APS Council to suggest joint efforts. I will be happy to present these suggestions to the SETAC Board of Directors. My contact information is Michael Simini, PhD, AMSRD-ECB-RT-TE / E5641, 5183 Blackhawk Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5424, Tel. 410-436-4698, email: [email protected] Complete report: SETAC08 Affiliates Report.rtf and TheGlobe-0902-Full.pdf
None None
Society of Nematologists - T. Niblack
I attended the joint meeting of APS/SON last year and solicited feedback from SON members about the value of the joint meetings we have periodically. Every comment I got (about 23 emails) were positive and indicated a desire to continue the tradition of joint meetings.
None None
2008 APS Council Reports Extended APS Historian – Recent and Current Activities Update Paul D. Peterson, Clemson University July 8, 2008
In addition to my major efforts to help finalize the projects and plans for the Centennial celebration of the APS this summer in Minneapolis, I continue to be involved with other activities as APS Historian. I continue to coordinate with the staff of the Special Collections Department of the Library of Iowa State University where the Society’s historical records are deposited. I also work to promote an awareness of the history of APS and plant pathology for Society members, other scholarly communities, and the general public. This has been accomplished through historical publications and presentations directed to both scientific and historical communities as well as interacting with the general public. I will present a paper on the formation of the APS at both the Minneapolis meeting in July and the International Congress of Plant Pathology in Turin, Italy this August. In addition, I have worked over the past six months with Clay S. Griffith to complete the memoir of John S. Niederhauser for APS Press. I also am advising the volunteer staff of the Dassel Area Historical Museum (Dassel, Minnesota) on the development of a permanent exhibit “From Blight to Blessing: The Story of Ergot, ” providing information and materials on the historical, social impact of ergot as well as the current scientific understanding of the disease. Another key role as APS Historian involves my answering queries and facilitating document requests on a routine basis from national and divisional APS officers, headquarters’ staff, and Society members on matters related to the history of plant pathology and of the APS. Frequent questions also concern the appropriate storage and preservation of historical materials. Often, individuals are searching for biographical information, a particular historical document, or a unique historical photograph. Whenever possible, applicable materials are photocopied or photographic prints/negatives are either made or electronic images sent on to the APS member.
APS Affiliates – CAST July 28, 2008
CAST, the Council for Agricultural Science and Technologies, was founded in 1972 after the National Academy of Science’s National Research Council identified the need for better communication on the science behind food and agricultural issues. CAST’s mission is to assemble, interpret, and communicate credible, science-based information regionally, nationally, and internationally to legislators, regulators, policymakers, the media, the private sector, and the public. 2007 was the 35th anniversary and the theme for the year was “Celebrating Our Roots, Reaching Out with Our Harvest”. CAST membership is composed of 38 scientific societies that represent approximately 170,000 members, associate societies, sustaining companies, nonprofits and individual subscribers. The Society for Nutritional Education became the 38th member society in May 2007. Dr. Kassim Al-Katib, Kansas State University serves as President, and Henry Sands, USDA/ARS, is President-elect. Dr. John Bonner is the Executive Vice President. The fall 2007 Board Meeting was held in Ames, Iowa on October 23rd-26th. A number of special events were held in recognition of the 35th anniversary. APS member and former EVP (1992-2001) Dick Stuckey attended and participated in the burning of the CAST office mortgage. Stuckey was EVP when the building was originally purchased. He also received the CAST President’s award for outstanding leadership, input, advocacy, and support. Bob Sweet, a CAST Board Member for 29 years, received the CAST Distinguished Award. A highlight of the anniversary celebration was a one man play titled “Listening to the Still Small Voice: The Life of George Washington Carver” presented by Paxton J. Williams, an Iowa State graduate. Additionally, a fully illustrated history of CAST’s first 35 years was prepared by the staff at Ames and presented to the members at the meeting. Guest presentations
were made to the Board by Dr. Joe Collettin, Senior Associate Dean, College of Agriculture, Iowa State University and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), chair of the Senate Ag Committee, sent a special video message congratulating CAST’s achievements. Senator Harkin has been a strong supporter of CAST during his tenure in Congress. The Board approved one new Issue Paper and the Executive Committee approved one new CAST Commentary. The spring 2008 Board Meeting was held in Washington, DC from March 12th-15th. The 2008 Charles A. Black Award was presented to Dr. Pedro Sanchez during a program and reception hosted by CAST in the Waterfront Center, Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, March 11th, 2008. The date and location of CAST’s event coincided with ceremonies celebrating the kick-off of National Ag Week, and Dr. Sanchez was also an invited speaker at “A Celebration of Agriculture” hosted by the Agriculture Council of America. A highlight of the spring meeting was an address by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ed Shafer. He spoke about the importance of a strong agricultural research program and working with University partners. Other speakers included Larry Myers, of Myers and Associates, who gave the Board an update on the farm bill and Matt Sutton-Vermeulen, who represents the Center for Food Integrity, spoke on a program to earn and maintain consumer trust. Also speaking were Katlin Wiest, National 2008 Ag Day Essay Contest winner and Kellin Kershner, a graduate student from Kansas State University, who is president of the Kansas State Graduate Student Association. He has been actively involved in setting up a CAST graduate student education program at KS. A number of new Issue Papers and Commentaries were discussed in each Work Group. The Board approved two new Issue Papers which will be published in 2008. A significant change in the availability of publications that will affect APS members was proposed by the Budget, Finance and Investment Committee and approved by the Board. Beginning June 2, 2008, all CAST Issue Papers, formerly $5.00 each, will be available FREE to anyone. The Issue Papers may be downloaded electronically from the CAST website (www.cast-science.org). CAST had a very strong publications year, most of which have been widely cited. Among them are its first book Water Quality and Quantity Issues for Turfgrasses in Urban Landscapes (Special Publication, March 2008). Another Special Publication was Avian Influenza Vaccines: Focusing on H5N1 High Pathogenicity Avian Influenza (HPAI) Special Publication (Oct 07). Commentaries published included Biofuel Feedstocks: The Risk of Future Invasions (Nov 07); Avian Influenza Vaccination: A Commentary Focusing on H5N1 High Pathogenicity Avian Influenza (Oct 07); and Convergence of Agriculture and Energy: II. Producing Cellulosic Biomass for Biofuels (Oct 07). Additionally the following Issue Papers were published: Probiotics: Their Potential to Impact Human Health (Oct 07); Vaccine Development Using Recombinant DNA Technology (Dec 07); and Vaccine Development Using Recombinant DNA Technology (May 08). Two Special Publications, four Commentaries and 11 Issue Papers are in various stages of publication.
Report of the APS Affiliate to the IUMS Submitted by Carolee Bull July 9, 2008
Background: The INTERNATIONAL UNION OF MICROBIOLOGICAL SOCIETIES is one of the 29 Scientific Unions of the International Council of Science (ICSU). The objectives of the Union are to promote the study of microbiological sciences internationally: initiate, facilitate and coordinate research and other scientific activities which involve international cooperation; ensure the discussion and dissemination of the results of international conferences, symposia and meetings and assist in the publication of their reports; represent microbiological sciences in ICSU and maintain contact with other international organizations. http://www.iums.org The APS affiliate to the IUMS serves as a member of the U.S. National Committee to the International Union of Microbiological Societies (IUMS). Committee members are appointed by the National Research Council of the National Academies of Science based on recommendations from various scientific societies.
The National Committee coordinates national efforts in support the objectives of the IUMS. http://www7.nationalacademies.org/usnciums/ The National Academies is in the process of restructuring the National Committee. This is in part due to the lack of success of the National Committee to raise funds from the affiliated scientific societies, as well as to concerns raised by NSF, societies, and current and former committee members about the effectiveness of the current system and of the IUMS union in general. The scientific societies were reluctant to pay back dues to the IUMS because of the lack or direct relevance to their members and recent inactivity of the National Committee. Please note that this issue has been ongoing and in her 1985 report, Dr. Anne Vidaver stated “Nor was the matter of the USNC/IUMS and IUMS dues resolved.” Dr. Vidaver recommended that the scientific societies pay based on a graduated fee structure based on membership. This was apparently never implemented. In the future it is unlikely that scientific societies will have specifically-designated seats on the National Committee, although their input will still be sought for member nominations as well as to learn their opinions on current needs and issues in their sub-disciplines. Although there were structural problems within the USNC/IUMS this is changing and the National Committee has the potential to advance national and international matters of importance to APS members. The APS should therefore make an effort to keep representation on the National Committee if possible. Activities and matters of concern: Currently there are three IUMS Executive Board members from the U.S. Dr. Klugman of Emory University and Dr. Joan Bennett of Rutgers University serve on the IUMS Executive Board and have been working with the National Committee. The National Committee has nominated them for the positions of President Elect and Vice President, respectively. http://www.iums.org/about/about_us-executive-board.html The committee nominated the following delegates to the 2008 IUMS GENERAL ASSEMBLY: Keith Klugman, Emory University (expertise in BAM), Joan Bennett, Rutgers University (expertise in mycology), Scott Baker, Pacific Northwest Laboratory (expertise in mycology), James Staley, University of Washington (expertise in BAM), Diane Griffin, Johns Hopkins University (expertise in virology), Peter Howley, Harvard University (expertise in virology) Much of the work of the Committee this year involved the discussion of restructuring the National Committee. The current proposal would consolidate all of the National Committees for the biological sciences into one National Committee for biology to be funded by NSF and NIH. The first committee convened under this proposal would evaluate U.S. memberships in the five biology unions and come up with a suggested plan for the future committee structure and activities. One possibility is that U.S. National Committee focus its efforts on topics that have broader relevance across the biological sciences than each individual disciplinary society can effectively address, or on issues that most require international consensus. The U.S. National Committee wants to avoid duplicating efforts that individual societies are already making. However, continuing to incorporate the perspectives of the many American societies in biology is a priority. The exact mechanisms for best facilitating this are not yet settled and would be part of the re-structuring process. At most one or two microbiologists would be on the committee, thus limiting diversity of the fields of microbiology represented. Thus, I suggested that the current National Committee be designated as a Scientific Society Liaison Committee that would serve to bring diverse issues to the attention of the microbiologist(s) on the newly formulated National Committee and to communicate back to the Scientific Societies the activities of the National Committee. The Liaison Committee would meet by conference call. The National Committee discussed several matters of national and international importance for potential Committee action. We are currently working on a project related to the status of culture collections. I proposed this project in hopes that it would support the APS effort to ensure long-term survival of vital
culture collections. The USNC/ISPP is currently gathering information on the status of culture collections across disciplines. I have begun a discussion with the APS ad hoc Committee on the Culture Collections to see if their next workshop might be held in conjunction with a larger workshop on the nations’ culture collections in conjunction with the USNC/IUMS. Action items for council: In addition to its affiliation through the National Committee, APS is affiliated with the IUMS through
the ISPP. We should determine if the IUMS is receiving dues through the ISPP on our behalf. The APS is additionally affiliated with the IUMS through the APS delegate to the ICSP (International
Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes). There is currently no information about this representative in the MOO and this position is often forgotten about until the ICSP/IUMS sends a letter requesting representation. The APS Bacteriology Committee has nominated a representative to this committee in the past and I am currently serving in this position. I recommend that APS Council formalize the procedure for nomination and election of the representative to the ICSP/IUMS position and develop term limits to ensure that it is filled.
The nature of the role of the APS Affiliate to the USNC/IUMS is different than most APS Affiliates in that all members of the USNC must take and active roll in developing programming, white papers, and workshops in order for the USNC to meet its goals. Additionally, the vast majority of the meetings for the IUMS are overseas. APS council voted to provide $500.00 to help cover some travel costs for the APS Affiliate to attend the IUMS meeting in Istanbul this summer as the APS representative to the ICSP/IUMS and USNC/IUM (although the Affiliate was unable to attend due to time and financial constraints). Council should consider developing a plan to ensure greater participation in the ICSP and IUMS meetings by the Affiliate. One suggestion would be for council to work with the APS Bacteriology Committee to find funding for this travel.
After the restructuring of the USNC later this year, the APS should reevaluate the role of the IUMS affiliate.
Affiliate report – Mycological Society of America Submitted by Carol M. Stiles, Affiliate Representative
The Mycological Society of America met in Baton Rouge this past year, Aug. 4-9, 2007. I attended the meeting, and made initial contacts for speakers for a symposium at the 2008 Centennial meeting of APS. The symposium is entitled: “Assembling the Fungal Tree of Life: From Linnaeus to Deep Hypha and Beyond,” sponsored by the APS Mycology Committee.
As background, the Deep Hypha Research Coordination Network (RCN, supported by the National
Science Foundation) of over 100 systematic mycologists published an issue of Mycologia devoted to “A Phylogeny for Kingdom Fungi.” Members of this group are also involved in the NSF-supported “Assembling the Fungal Tree of Life” (AFTOL), which will be available online (http://aftol.org/ for more information). This phylogenetic work will form the basis for fungal classification schemes used in textbooks and online mycological resources. I submitted an article to the MSA newsletter, Inoculum, featuring highlights of the upcoming APS Centennial Meeting in Minneapolis. The article was published in the March, 2008 issue, Inoculum 59(2), p. 51. As national co-director of the Widely Prevalent Plant Pathogenic Fungi List project for expedited permits (an APS Mycology Committee / APHIS project), I involved some mycologists, as well as extension plant pathologists and diagnosticians, in updating state lists of widely prevalent plant pathogenic fungi. An online database is under development and will be available soon, and we are seeking images of fungi to be added to the database. When it is ready to go public, I will prepare an article for both Phytopathology News and Inoculum.
Future questions / concerns - scheduling of joint meetings
MSA has begun to schedule their meetings further in advance, and thus it may be difficult to schedule another joint meeting very soon. MSA past-president David McLaughlin and others have worked to ensure that the meetings are not scheduled to be in conflict: for instance, in 2009, APS will be in Portland, Oregon, and MSA will be in Snowbird, UT – the meetings are scheduled a week apart, so those wishing to travel in the western U.S. could attend both meetings
The 2008 MSA Meeting will be held at Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA, August 9-13, 2008.
Future meetings are listed as follows:
2009 MSA Meeting (with Botanical Society of America) Snowbird, UT, USA, July 25-30, 2009
2010 MSA Meeting University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA, June 2010
2011 MSA Meeting, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, USA
COFARM
The Coalition on Funding Agricultural Research Missions (CoFARM) (www.cofarm.org) is a broadly based coalition united by a commitment to advance and sustain investment in our nation's fundamental and applied agricultural research. Since being formed in 1990, the coalition has sought to enhance public investment in agricultural research. Twenty-two scientific societies with a collective membership of about 130,000 scientists is the foundation of CoFARM. Representatives of several of the member scientific societies meet approximately monthly to discuss the current status of legislation that could potentially impact Federal funding for research and meet with policymakers to understand priorities of their agency. The previous twelve months have been a very interesting time for the future of funding agricultural research. Three different initiatives (Farm Bill, National Institute for Food and Agriculture, CREATE-21) have been introduced calling for a dramatic change in the structure of USDA and the funding of both base and competitive funding for agricultural research. CoFARM has provided written testimony to the Senate and House committees on Agricultural Appropriations on the need to support competitive research. CoFARM is now closely following the implementation of the recently passed Farm Bill on the transformation of USDA-CSREES into the National Institute for Food and Agriculture. Submitted by John L. Sherwood ([email protected]) 2008 Report of the APS Representative to the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Mike Simini
In an effort to foster the relationship between societies, I present a description of The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) including their organizational structure, mission statement, contact information, and a list of future meetings. I’ve also attached a copy of SETAC GLOBE, the sub-annual international newsletter of SETAC. I am a member of Steering Committee of the SETAC North America Soil Contamination Advisory Group (CSAG) and I am editor of the CSAG column in the SETAC Globe. Check out my column in the attached file and visit the Communities page that is accessible through the link in my article. I have been tossing around some ideas about joint meetings, symposia, online forums, etc. between APS and SETAC. Some ideas included biosecurity, pesticide fate, and climate change. I invite APS Council to suggest joint efforts. I will be happy to present these suggestions to the
SETAC Board of Directors. My contact information is Michael Simini, PhD, AMSRD-ECB-RT-TE / E5641, 5183 Blackhawk Road, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5424, Tel. 410-436-4698, email: [email protected] SETAC is an international society of some 5000 members in 78 countries, organized via geographic units in North America, Europe, Asia/Pacific and Latin America. The Society is a nonprofit, worldwide professional society comprised of individuals and institutions engaged in:
the study, analysis, and solution of environmental problems the management and regulation of natural resources environmental education research and development
SETAC's mission is to support the development of principles and practices for protection, enhancement and management of sustainable environmental quality and ecosystem integrity. SETAC promotes the advancement and application of scientific research related to contaminants and other stressors in the environment, education in the environmental sciences, and the use of science in environmental policy and decision-making. SETAC North America convened its 28th annual meeting in Milwaukee, WI, November 11-15, 2007. More than 2,500 participants, representing 45 countries, attended the meeting. A total of 97 platform sessions, 88 poster sessions, 11 interactive platform sessions (poster, short presentation and discussion on timely topics), and 23 short courses. The SETAC 29th annual meeting will convene November 16-20 in Tampa, FL. Follow the links below for more details on the North America meeting and on the upcoming SETAC World Congress and SETAC Europe meetings. Upcoming Meetings: SETAC 5th World Congress Sydney Convention Centre, Sydney, Australia 3-7 August 2008 SETAC North America 29th Annual Meeting Environmental Stewardship: Integrating Science and Management Tampa Convention Center, Tampa, Florida, USA. 16 - 20 November 2008. SETAC Europe 19th Annual Meeting Protecting ecosystem health: facing the challenge of a globally changing environment Göteborg, Sweden, 31 May – 4 June 2009. Submit a session proposal: Deadline 11 August 2008
July 11, 2008 Report to APS Council on annual meeting of the National Conference on Science and the
Environment. Held 16-18 January, 2008, Ronald Reagan Bldg., Washington, D.C. Jim Marois, University of Florida, standing in for Ken Pernezny NCSE representative from APS. The theme of this year’s meeting was “Climate Change: Science and Solutions”. There were approximately 900 attendees representing a wide diversity of disciplines, including a rather large representation from the energy industry. The impact of many of the topics directly or indirectly involved plant production and plant pathology. The keynote address was presented by James E. Rogers, President and Chief Executive Office, Duke Energy Corporation. He presented his plans for how his company is going to achieve a 0 carbon footprint, where at present it has the largest carbon footprint of any company. Another presentation with a more scientific perspective was by John P. Holdren, President and Director, Woods Hole Research
Center. He emphasized the necessity for all scientists to cooperate if the rapid progress needed is going to be achieved. There are a number of workshops and breakout sessions associated with the meeting. I attended sessions on minimizing agriculture’s impact on climate change, minimizing climate change impact on agriculture, campus solutions to global warming, and how carbon offsets work. Overall the meeting served as an ideal venue for interaction with a diverse group of scientists, policy makers, politicians, business professionals, and the concerned public in an enlightened academic setting. Next year’s topic (actually to be held in December, 2008) is “Biodiversity in a Rapidly Changing World.” I am interested in attending this meeting and willing to serve as the APS representative if Ken can not make it. Respectfully submitted, Jim Marois University of Florida, North Florida Research and Education Center
AIBS Biology Education Summit May 15-16, 2008
Meeting Summary Jim MacDonald and Caitilyn Allen
This meeting represented a cooperative venture between the American Institute of Biological Sciences (who organized the meeting), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (who hosted the meeting in their headquarters building) and the National Science Foundation (who funded the meeting and lead the first half of it). The meeting ran from 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM on May 15, and from 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM on May 16. On day one, the NSF led the meeting from 8:00-3:30, holding what they call a “conversation” regarding biology education in America. This really centered, following some introductory comments, on break-out groups. Each group considered the same set of questions (see attached) and then reported back the results of their discussions. We then had an extended break that included viewing posters and discussing issues with other meeting participants. This was followed by dinner, after which the AIBS session began and continued until the meeting broke the following afternoon. The bulk of the meeting was focused on undergraduate education in biology, but there were many references to graduate education and the preparation of students to undertake graduate studies. At the meeting, we had a opportunity to network with representatives of the American Society of Agronomy (Mary Savin), the Entomological Society of America (David Hogg), the Soil Science Society of America (John Havlin), the Society of Nematologists (Ed Masler) and others, who have similar concerns about how to get undergraduate students exposed to and interested in the plants so that there might be an opportunity to attract them to postgraduate studies. For example, George Middendorf of Howard University, and a representative of the Ecological Society of America, expressed familiar concerns regarding aging faculty in the discipline and an inability to replace them with well-rounded recruits, and how grant dollars are driving educational opportunities at universities. Likewise, Gordon Uno, who was the AIBS meeting organizer and who is the chair of the Department of Botany and Microbiology at the University of Oklahoma-Norman, shared the concern I discussed with him regarding attracting undergraduate students into the plant-related sciences. He feels real pressure in terms of his undergraduate majors and understands our concern about that critical feeder line into plant pathology. I also had an opportunity to re-connect with Terry Woodin and Penny Firth who work in the NSF Education Directorate. These are two of the individuals with whom Barb Christ and I met in March during
the PPB meetings in Washington, DC. Penny Firth is the individual who suggested that we approach our workshop in stages and I had a chance to thank her for the advice and to tell her we are proceeding along those lines. At the meeting, Caitilyn and I focused our attention on networking with representatives from closely aligned professional societies, identifying potential speakers or participants for the APS workshop, and picking out issues where APS might be able to take some independent initiative. Some of the points picked up at this meeting included:
NSF believes professional societies can play a major role in educational issues by providing a forum for discussion (e.g., hosting symposia at annual meetings).
The American Society of Microbiology was cited as having a very good educational component on
their website, including announcements of society-sponsored workshops and institutes, model curricula for microbiology, etc.
APS could consider connecting with the National Association of Biology Teachers (Note: APS did
this in the late 1950s, and published a teaching handbook that showed how to include plant pathology in biology instruction. Could that be repeated? Entomological examples are listed amongst their current instructional resources).
It was stated that much would be gained if disciplinary societies (like APS) engaged with societies
that study pedagogy (like NABT) to learn new methods for teaching today’s students. It also was noted that faculty still teach in the manner in which they were taught, and we will not attract modern students unless we can modernize our teaching methods. It was suggested that much could be gained from creating symposium sessions at disciplinary society meetings that brought in experts on education.
It was suggested that an important role professional societies could play would be to organize
workshops that would engage educational experts to help faculty develop assessment criteria for their classes, because university accreditation now requires it and no one seems to know how to do it.
APS could consider hosting local college-level (2-year and 4-year) biology instructors at APS meetings and having programs to introduce them to plant disease examples that could be used in class (Note: we used to have k-12 teacher workshops, but college-level might be more effective).
It was noted that MOST of the active biology teachers in colleges today no longer belong to their professional societies.
It was noted that disciplines spend too much time talking about specific courses that should make up the subject matter core. This is considered a very traditional approach. Instead, it was asked why not talk about desired outcomes and competencies? [i.e., could APS, using the employer survey, help to provoke discussion about core competencies in plant pathology?]
It was noted that a lot of good ideas could be generated if professional societies of similar interest could find ways to get their respective “education committees” together to exchange views on curricular issues.
The Association of College & University Biology Educators (http://acube.org/) focuses on undergraduate and graduate biology education. [Their journal (Bioscene) serves as a really good example of what could/should be happening in Plant Health Instructor, which seems to have stagnated].
The fact that APS has a teaching committee, an on-line journal dedicated to teaching, and a Public Policy Board to educate lawmakers and policy-makers about the science behind issues puts us way ahead of many other professional societies…but there is a lot that still could be done.
NSF is planning another “conversation” meeting in the fall, this one to include the presidents of professional societies. [APS should seek to be engaged in this].
Actually, this meeting seemed to bring some greater clarity (to my mind) as to what we might realistically accomplish at the planned APS workshop. We have accomplished surveys of what coursework is presently emphasized in graduate curricula and what sorts of skills future employers will value. While we had originally planned to try to define a “standard curriculum for the broadly-trained plant pathologists” this meeting caused me to realize that was still too traditional an objective. A better objective would be to come to agreement (with heads of graduate programs and employers) about the desired outcomes and competencies of students who graduate from programs…especially if they are to be considered “broadly-trained.” Such a discussion would be greatly enriched by including educational experts (to help us determine how to assess pedagogies and resultant competencies) and students, along with early-career professionals (i.e., how did their educational preparation pan out in the real world?). We would also benefit from developing a strategy (whether it be APS-driven or APS building a larger coalition) as to how to positively influence the national pipeline of undergraduates interested in plants. I also identified some speakers at this meeting whom I believe should be included in our workshop. I would consider Gordon Uno (Department chair at the University of Oklahoma), Jay Labov (Senior Advisor for Education and communication at the NAS), Penny Firth (NSF), and John Moore (President-elect of the NABT).
National Workshop on Education for the Future of Plant Pathology
Description of the proposed workshop. We envision a workshop consisting of approximately 50-60 individuals. Participation will be largely by invitation. We plan to engage educators from Land Grant universities, leaders of other agriculturally-oriented scientific societies (e.g., the American Society of Agronomy, The Crop Science Society of America, the Entomological Society of America, the Society of Nematology), leaders of Federal agencies (e.g., ARS, CSREES, APHIS, EPA) and the private sector (e.g., Monsanto, Syngenta, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Seminis). Finally, we will invite several graduate students and recent graduates (early career professionals) through an application and competitive review process. The meeting itself will be a 1 1/2 day event that will consist of a mix of presentations to frame a topic, followed by breakout sessions to discuss the topic, and re-convening to summarize major points raised during the breakout sessions. The meeting will examine topics such as: Attracting undergraduates into the plant sciences; attracting graduates into plant pathology programs; the future needs of employers; the ability of plant pathology programs to meet the needs of employers into the future; essential educational outcomes and competencies for the future; paradigms for achieving educational objectives in an environment of shrinking resources; and an examination of appropriate educational roles for professional societies, government, and the private sector. It is expected that the meeting will establish a coalition of interested parties and strategies for working together to enhance educational programs into the future. Tentative meeting agenda: Date: Undetermined, but preferably during early December, 2008.
Location: Undetermined, but preferably in or near Washington, D.C. Call to order:
A. Welcome from APS (Jim Moyer, APS President) B. Review of workshop goals (Jim MacDonald, organizer)
Session I: Educational needs for the future
A. An industry perspective on the educational and training needs of future plant pathologists (Pierre Landolt, Member of Syngenta Board of Directors and the Syngenta Fdn for Sustainable Agriculture?).
B. A government perspective on the educational and training needs of future plant pathologists (Toni Betschart, Associate Administrator, USDA-ARE or Karen Brownell, Dir. Of HR, USDA-ARS workforce planning)
C. A university perspective on the educational and training needs of future plant pathologists (Neal Van Alfen, Dean, UC Davis College of Agric. and Environ. Sci.?).
D. An overview of the U.S. Science and Engineering workforce (Michael Teitelbaum, The Alfred Sloan Foundation).
Breakout session I: Characterizing the future needs of key employment sectors. Desired outcome: Develop an understanding of what is needed to prepare graduate students for the positions of the future. What do employers in the private sector, the government and academic institutions anticipate as proficiencies needed for the future? What is needed to prepare students for a highly globalized working environment? How well positioned are graduate programs to deliver M.S. and Ph.D. graduates with the skills needed for the future? Is the workplace demanding fundamental changes in our traditional educational methods? Session II: Current status of education in Land Grant colleges of agriculture
A. What is the current status and outlook for education in the nation’s Land Grant colleges of agriculture? (Michael Martin Pres. of Louisiana State University, or a leader from the Kellogg commission or NASULGC?)
B. What is the current status of Plant Pathology education in the U.S.? (MacDonald) C. What’s the view from other disciplines (e.g., Michael Gray, Pres. of ESA, Eric Davis, Pres. of
SON, William Wiebold, pres. ff the CSSA, Ken Moore, pres. [or James Hancock, MSU or Stephen Baenziger, UNL] from ASA)
D. What’s good and what could be better about graduate education from the perspective of a student? From the perspective of an early-career professional? (winners of student and early career selection competitions)
Breakout session II: An assessment of education in plant pathology and related disciplines. Desired outcome: A fact-based overview of educational challenges faced by plant pathology and related disciplines…what are the common issues of concern? How do we feed the pipeline of undergraduates who go on to graduate school? What curricular elements appear most threatened and how do we preserve those that are essential? How can the broad training of students be sustained into the future? What can the different disciplines learn from each other? What are the appropriate roles of government, industry and professional societies in supporting graduate education, or enhancing the undergraduate pipeline? Session III: Thinking strategically about the future
A. Maintaining a strong and diverse student pipeline into the plant sciences (Linda Slakey, NSF
Division of undergraduate education? Gordon Uno, University of Oklahoma? George Hudler, Cornell?)
B. How might graduate programs translate the educational and training needs of employers into educational outcomes that can be measured. (John Moore, President of NABT)
C. Distance education: salvation for small graduate programs or a mirage? (speaker to be determined) D. Developing partnerships with the private sector to enhance the practical and field experiences of
students. (speaker to be determined) Breakout session III: Strategies for future curricula and delivery. Desired outcome: What are the “best practices” for attracting undergraduate students into the biological sciences, and ultimately into graduate studies in plant pathology? Is it possible to define the essential areas of knowledge needed in curricula? How could curricular recommendations be implemented at small and large universities? Can programs enhance their educational offerings through partnerships or distance education? If so, what needs to be done to resolve teaching credit issues between universities offering or receiving distance education? How do we bridge the support gap for students interested in a broad education? Session IV: Workshop Wrap-up Through group discussion, try to achieve consensus on the next steps. What are the key issues or constraints that need to be addressed, and how best to address them? What should be the role of APS and other professional societies? What should be the role of government? What should be the role of the private sector? How can the results of this workshop best be used to stimulate a national coalition or strategy for sustaining strong and diverse educational programs at Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture? Where do we go from here? How do we collaborate across societies, employment sectors and universities to reinvigorate education in the plant sciences? APS leaders and key staff: Jim Moyer, president Barb Christ, president-elect John Sherwood, vice president Ray Martyn, past president Jim MacDonald, former president and organizer Jan Leach, former president
Jacque Fletcher, former president and chair of PPB Steve Nelson, executive VP Michelle Bjerkness Kellye Eversole
Leaders of sister societies: Dr. David B. Hogg, ESA Vice President-Elect. (608) 262-4060. [email protected] William Wiebold, CSSA President. 573-882-0621. [email protected] Kenneth J. Moore, President of ASA. 515-294-5482, [email protected] Mary Savin, ASA Education Task Force. (479) 575-5740 [email protected] Jeffrey Derr, WSSA President, 757-363-3912. [email protected] Eric Davis, President of SON. 919.515.6692. [email protected] Representatives of example graduate programs George W. Hudler, Cornell University. (607) 255-7848. [email protected] Jim Steadman, Univ. of Nebraska (402) 472-8408 [email protected] Ed Braun, Iowa State University (515) 294-0951 [email protected]
Cleora J. D'Arcy, University of Illinois. (217) 621-8217. [email protected] Ray Hammerschmidt, Michigan State University. (517) 353-8624 [email protected] Tim Murray, Washington State University. (509)335-9541 [email protected] Dennis Gross, Texas A&M University. [email protected] Raghavan “Charu” Charudattan, University of Florida. (352) 392-3631 x 354. [email protected] Students and Recent Graduates: Four current graduate students (to be selected via competition) Four early career researchers (one each from academia, government, private sector, and international employers) Government Agencies: Rick Bennett, USDA-ARS Toni Betschart, USDA-ARS Colien Hefferan, USDA CSREES Kitty Cardwell, USDA-CSREES Phil Burger, USDA-APHIS-CPHST Ann Lichens-Park, USDA-APHIS Gail Kimbell, Chief, US Forest Service ([email protected]) (202) 205-1661 Terry Woodin, NSF Div. of Undergrad Edu. (703) 292-9015 [email protected] Penny Firth, NSF Div. of Environ. Biology. (703) 292-8480 [email protected] Private Sector: Pioneer Hybrid (Bill Dolezel) Syngenta (Alison Tally, Beth Carroll, or Eric Tedford) Monsanto (Robert T. Fraley…EVP, Chief Technology Officer and Director of the Plant Science Research Group) Bayer CropScience (Jim Bloomberg) [email protected] (919) 549-2948 Seminis (Phyllis Himmel, Plant Pathology Dept.) [email protected] (530) 669-6182 Chase Horticultural Research, Inc. (Ann Chase) [email protected] (530) 620-1624 The National Alliance of Independent Crop Consultants (NAICC) (Allison Jones, Exec. V.P.) [email protected] (901) 861-0511 Or California Agricultural Pest Control Advisers (CAPCA) (Terry Stark, President/CEO) ([email protected]) (916) 928-1625 PACE Turfgrass Research Institute (Larry Stowell) [email protected] (858) 272-9897 AgDia, Inc. (Chet Sutula) [email protected] (574) 264-2014 American Seed Trade Association. Andrew Lavigne. (703) 837-8140. [email protected] Other potential participants with important perspectives: Bob Zeigler, Director-General of IRRI. [email protected] Elbert Dickey, Dean of Extension, University of Nebraska. (402) 472-2966. [email protected] Jane Ellis, American Society for Plant Biologists. (864) 833-8416 [email protected] George Middendorf, Ecological Society of America. (202) 806-7289 [email protected] Gordon Uno, University of Oklahoma. (405) 325-4321. [email protected] John Moore, Pres.-Elect, National Assn. of Biol. Teachers. [email protected] Education Committee Members: Anne Vidaver, University of Nebraska. (402) 472-2858 [email protected] Caitilyn Allen, Univ. of Wisconsin. (608) 262-9578. [email protected]
Culture Collection Draft Plan for:
National Plant Microbial Germplasm System
Plant associated microbial germplasm, a resource at risk: Plant associated microbial germplasm represents an essential foundation for U.S. science but is subject to constant erosion. Thus, there is a critical need for a viable national microbial germplasm system that safeguards the diversity of plant-associated microbial organisms. Such a system would catalog and serve as a repository for the historical, genetic and phenotypic variation of plant microbial germplasm. These collections would provide scientists with the resources to solve a myriad of practical problems ranging from discovering microbes that control plant diseases and weeds to distinguishing between a naturally evolved disease-causing organism and an intentionally introduced plant pathogen. A National Plant Microbial Germplasm System (NPMGS) would be composed of distributed expert curated, taxon specific repositories linked through a searchable database similar to the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). A central repository to house backup cultures and receive decommissioned collections would be established. This network of linked collections will assure that reference strains are no longer lost and that they are readily available for facilitating comparative research, especially of emerging pathogens. Background. Knowing the genotypic and phenotypic variation of plant-associated microbes is essential for providing effective and timely disease management and promoting plant health through research, teaching and extension in the microbiological sciences including plant pathology. In addition to knowledge about the microorganisms themselves, collections provide a genetic link between the past and present, and can, for example, explain how changes in newly developed cultivars or plant material influence disease outbreaks. Without access to genetic diversity, it is impossible to predict durability of plant resistance. Advances in molecular techniques have revealed that microbial pathogen diversity is much more extensive than suspected. Understanding this diversity is fundamental to systematic cataloguing of fungal, bacterial, nematode and viral strains in order to provide correct identifications for regulatory compliance or attribution for forensic purposes. Reference cultures with phenotypic and genotypic tags facilitate identification of emerging pathogens. Some say that microorganisms can always be collected again and will not be ‘lost’ forever. However, science has shown that rare and unique strains can and do exist and may never be re-isolated. These unique strains provide value in forensics, commerce and biological control of pathogens and pests, as well as being essential for the continuity of science, which replicates and builds upon previous findings. Is it not then wasteful of funding agency and even commercial entity resources to discard historical isolates? Despite the importance of microbial germplasm reference material, the survival of this cache of genetic diversity is threatened because most strains in the United States exist only in individual scientists’ collections at academic institutions without support for long-term curation. Once the researcher retires or leaves the institution, the microbial germplasm is frequently lost despite often having been paid for by public funds. Because a centralized database of microbial germplasm does not exist, these individual collections are not uniformly catalogued and available to the broad research community. Valuable collections are maintained in the private sector and, except for commercial products, are considered proprietary, but may be offered to a national collection with changing company focus. The end result of inaccessibility and attrition of historical samples is that research efforts that require access to and knowledge about microbial germplasm are impeded. Finally, because there is no common database of materials, it is not currently possible to determine the extent of plant microbial germplasm currently available for use by the broader scientific research community. Existing collections, such as the American Type Culture Collection, are limited in scope and not extensively characterized beyond information provided in the initial submission and in many cases strains are cost prohibitive to obtain. It is clear that such collections cannot substitute for the network proposed here.
Finally, advances in molecular biology, microbial genomics, and biotechnology in the past decade have fundamentally changed the nature of research on plant-associated microbes, making it possible to conduct many types of experiments and analyses using molecular database information, or microbial nucleic acids, in addition to living cultures. Such advances are useful in studying all microbes, but have especially impacted work on unculturable organisms and microbial communities (metagenomes). Where maintenance of living cultures is not practical, or is prohibitively expensive, then, libraries of molecular components (DNA, RNA, proteins, etc) are becoming central to scientific inquiry. However, synthetic genomics is not expected to replace the need for live culture collections. Solution. We propose a new paradigm for plant microbial resources in the United States, specifically, the establishment of a system of plant-associated microbial resources. Composed of multiple elements, including “traditional” living culture collections, libraries of molecular components, and a centralized searchable database. This system will be called the National Plant Microbial Germplasm System (NPMGS). Taking advantage of existing expertise and collections, a permanently funded interconnected system of specialized centers together with a central backup facility is proposed for organizational coordination and management, and for the physical maintenance and distribution of strains. A database with strain information from each specialized center would link the separate repositories and all strains will be deposited in a back-up facility. This system will ensure the preservation and safeguarding of collections of living plant-associated microorganisms that represent the broadest range of phenotypic and genotypic diversity in a permanent repository system together with a permanent, robust database that provides the broader scientific community ready access to critical information. NPMGS Overview: The U.S. National Plant Microbial Germplasm System (NPMGS) will consist of:
1) specialized centers associated with experts as curators, 2) a centralized back-up facility with all strains and molecular libraries, and 3) a centralized strain information database
The living cultures comprising this system will be limited to plant-associated microorganisms. A steering committee of stakeholders will provide oversight for the development and continuing operation of the system.
1) Specialized centers of plant-associated microorganisms associated with experts The main body of the NPMGS will consist of specialized centers that maintain, authenticate and distribute specific groups of microorganisms. These centers will vary considerably in size and types of organisms maintained. Centers will be funded based on costs associated with strain maintainance and distribution with varying requirements and costs. In addition, funds should be dedicated to the continual curation of collection strains; thus the centers would be required to maintain expertise in the groups of microorganisms that they preserve. In general, each center would focus on only one group of microorganisms, either viruses, bacteria, fungi, or nematodes, although exceptions are anticipated; for example, NRRL, Peoria, IL, currently houses both bacteria and fungi. Each group of microorganisms presents special challenges in regard to maintenance and characterization of strains thus the necessary resources vary considerably. Some culture collections currently exist that are specialized in pathogens of specific crops i.e. wheat and soybeans; these may overlap with other specific collections such as Fusarium repositories. Having some overlap assures that resources would be available to accept endangered or orphaned culture collections from retiring scientists or companies and will serve as a resource for those working in that area of research.
Appendix 1 lists some existing specialized centers and the estimated number of strains currently held. Criteria must be developed to determine which collections should serve as NPGMS sanctioned repositories. To qualify for funding, each center would need to maintain a specified level of accountability. Simply housing the strains would likely not be sufficient for funding. Taxonomically accurate and up-to-date nomenclature would need to maintained and strains distributed to legitimate users upon request by NPGMS repositories. The system is envisioned to include 10-30 specialized centers covering a wide range of plant-associated microorganisms. Each center would require a stable source of funding, the amount of which would depend on the size of the collection, complexity of strain maintenance, identification and characterization methodologies as well as distribution request volume. The bulk of the funds for NPMGS would support the specialized centers including equipment and associated clerical, technical and research personnel. 2) Centralized back-up facility with all strains and molecular libraries Most strains should have duplicates deposited at a centralized location so that, if the strain is lost from the specialized center, it can be retrieved from the back-up location. In one scenario, the back-up facility could be the point of distribution of strains (see this issue under Appendix 2). Some strains such as those representing a population genetic survey might not have every isolate backed-up, but most unique strains would be backed up at the centralized location. The USDA ARS currently maintains back-up germplasm of all plant accessions at a facility at Fort Collins, CO. This facility has the space and most of the equipment needed for the back-up storage of strains in the NPMGS. Most, but not all, plant-associated microorganisms can be stored as glycerol stocks at –80 C in small vials and thus take up relatively little space. Funds would be required for the maintenance of this space and equipment as well as the personnel to take care of the acquisition and distribution of back-up strains. The specialized centers would periodically need to send newly acquired strains for back-up at this facility. Funds for the start-up phase requiring 1.0 FTE for the initial storage of back-up strains plus the space, equipment and materials for storage are anticipated. Following the start-up phase it is anticipated that the back-up facility would have relatively little activity except to maintain and distribute strains as needed. There would be anticipated recurring costs associated with technical personnel, overhead and the occasional need to upgrade equipment. 3) Centralized strain information database: plant microbial information database, part of USDA-ARS Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) A searchable centralized database is needed into which data about each strain are deposited. Such data should include scientific name, host, pathogenicity, source locality, collector, year of isolation, storage location and conditions, location of voucher specimen or source specimen, if appropriate, type culture, if applicable, date of back-up deposition; strain distribution data, catalogued genes, and other data, as needed. As the strain is further characterized information would be added. A centralized database for plant-associated microorganisms would be developed as an addition to the existing USDA ARS National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS). This centralized database for plant germplasm is used to manage the 500,000+ accessions of plant germplasm distributed at the plant germplasm centers throughout the U.S. This database is entitled the Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) and includes all of the data about the acquisition and existence of plant germplasm as well as their characteristics. The NPGS GRIN system could be expanded to include information about plant-associated microorganisms. Navigation within the GRIN system is primarily through the scientific names of plants and a full time nomenclature scientist continuously reviews and updates the accuracy of the plant names
including synonyms. If the GRIN database is used for the NPMGS, it will be essential to fund one or more curators who can function as nomenclature scientists to update the accuracy of the scientific names of plant-associated microorganisms. The ability to accurately locate strains of specific species of interest depends on the continuous updating of scientific names. This will be especially challenging for fungi and bacteria for which there are often two or more scientific names for the same species. The GRIN database has many of the fields required by the NPMGS but this system would have to be modified to include a number of additional fields that do not currently exist, for example, plant host, symptoms, toxin production and epidemiological data, to name a few. Start-up funds would be needed for adapting the GRIN database to include plant-associated microorganisms (thus becoming the plant microbial information database portion of GRIN) and for modifying and importing existing data from established culture collections. The estimated initial number of strain records of plant-associated microorganisms for the NPMGS is about 200,000 with the expectation that this will grow considerably over time. Once the NPMGS data are in the GRIN system it will be useful to have the data included in other systems such as www.straininfo.net, which includes data from a number of international culture collections. This would also provide a direct route towards linking with an envisioned International Culture Collection System. Following the start-up phase it is anticipated that each specialized center would enter their own data and thus costs for maintaining the GRIN microorganism data would be relatively stable. Continuing funds for 2.0 FTE including one nomenclature scientist and one database specialist, hardware and software upgrades and overhead are anticipated. Costs of Developing and Maintaining a National Plant Microbial Germplasm System A National Plant Microbial Germplasm System is urgently needed to further science that involves these organisms as well as to prevent loss of documented germplasm. The costs for establishing a system of repositories with a centralized database and back-up repository is roughly estimated in Appendix 3. Such a system could be established in phases with emphasis initially on certain endangered groups of organisms or culture collections. Appendix 1. List of potential specialized plant-associated microbe centers Below are some suggestions for existing specialized centers and the estimated number of strains currently held. Undoubtedly more will be added and criteria must be developed to determine which collections should serve as repositories. Virus and Viroids USDA-ARS Cereal Virus Collection, Fargo, ND – one million strains USDA-ARS Potato Virus Y Collection, Ithaca, NY; Aberdeen, ID – 3000 accessions USDA-ARS, MPPL, Beltsville, MD - viroids Bacteria USDA-ARS, NRRL, Peoria, IL – bacteria including actinomycetes, 19,000 USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD Rhizobium/Bradyrhizobium, 5,000 International Collection of Phytopathogenic Bacteria (ICPB), Ft. Detrick (see Norman Schaad, who may retire soon) Nine additional USDA-ARS collections with more than 5,000 bacterial strains Fungi and Fungal-like Organisms Fungal Genetics Stock Center, MO – Magnapothe grisea, Neurospora crassa, etc. USDA-ARS, NRRL, Peoria, IL –yeast fungi, Aspergillus, Fusarium, Penicillium, ca. 60,000 Pennsylvania State University- Fusarium
USDA-ARS Cereal Disease Lab, St. Paul, Minnesota – Puccinia graminis and other cereal pathogens.
The collection of 30,000 samples (vials) represent: 1) approx. 60 different species of rust fungi 2) from more than 50 countries 3) the bulk of the collection are samples of cereal rusts, Puccinia graminis (58%), Puccinia coronata (23%) and Puccinia triticina (15%). 4) Collection dates range from the early 1950's to present 5) Collection includes 4200 Ascomycete strains mostly Fusarium graminearum and F. oxysporum
USDA-FS, Madison, WI – forest pathogens, 12,000 USDA-ARS, SMML, Beltsville, MD – plant pathogens and biocontrol agents - Trichoderma, 11,000 UC-Riverside – World Phytophthora Collection – 6500 INVAM, West Virginia University, endomycorrhizal fungi, difficult to maintain and identify USDA-ARS-Wheat/barley/rice pathogens – 13,000 USDA-ARS in IL soybean pathogens - ???? Commercial culture collections Nematodes USDA-ARS, NL – plant-associated nematodes, 12 Florida Meloidogyne Collections – root knot nematodes, 10 Appendix 2. Issues to be considered:
1. Who will decide what culture collections to include in the NPMGS? A steering committee appointed by professional societies and the USDA is needed to develop criteria for inclusion and assess the collections that should be considered for inclusion in the national collection. This must be a recurring task to identify newer strains and isolates to be included. Consider what would be done if expertise were discontinued at a site (the person retires, etc), could those collections be folded into other existing ones?
2. Support of USDA-ARS NPGS is needed. Peter Bretting and others should be approached about the feasibility of adding the plant microbial data to GRIN as well as using the Ft. Collins facility as the
3. Will germplasm be sent to everyone who requests it regardless of origin of request? What criteria will be used to distribute germplasm to new and established investigators, including external to the U.S.? Will there be a distinction made between government and non-profit users versus commercial users? Defining a legitimate user could be difficult. Currently, some microorganisms cannot be sent to certain countries and federal scientists may not send any cultures to some countries.
4. Should there be a charge for the distribution of strains? The National Plant Germplasm System distributes plant germplasm for free. A small fee would prevent or reduce frivolous requests. On the other hand, just the handling of such fees can be costly and difficult especially for government facilities although APHIS is currently collecting fees for certain services so this may be possible. If fees were collected, it seems most advantageous to have the back-up facility with this responsibility and associate that with strain distribution. What should the fee be? The reality is that if fees were charged that covered the cost of strain maintenance and distribution, it will inhibit use of the materials.
5. Should cultures be distributed from the specialized centers, from the back-up site in Fort Collins, or a combination of these two options? This responsibility could be onerous and time-consuming requiring considerable clerical support. There would need to be a centralized system for determining legitimate users as well as keeping track of what was sent to whom. If it were decided that there should be a fee for the distribution of strains, it would be easiest if the distribution and collection of fees were undertaken at one place. The back-up repository may not be familiar with the users and therefore it might be easier for the specialized centers to know who their users are and communicate directly with them. A hybrid system is possible where centers/spokes that currently distribute cultures continue to do so but with the option that other collections less able to handle those logistics be distributed from the main repository.
6. Are explicit material transfer agreements needed for the distribution and use of strains? Should there be a distinction between national and international users? Are there different requirements for strains of foreign origin? Should strains collected before the signing of the Convention on Biological Diversity be treated differently from those collected later? Strains of foreign origin are often obtained after signing an MTA that may prohibit redistribution of strains. One could look to the NPGS for guidance on this issue.
7. Having the USDA support this effort will facilitate the monitoring of permit compliance. Permit requirements are relatively straightforward for use of microorganisms in the laboratory. Use of microorganisms in the field is
a more difficult issue. A permit would be required for the facility. Anyone requesting a strain would need to apply for the appropriate APHIS permits.
8. Most strains now present in international culture collections have multiple accession numbers depending on how many collections house them. Adding a NPMGM accession number will be required, but because of the ease of cross referencing will not significantly complicate strain identification and use. How should this numbering be accomplished?
9. What would be the relationship of the NPMGS to existing culture collections such as the ATCC, Canadian culture network, national (USFCC), international (WFCC), international, and commercial resources?
10. What procedures are needed immediately to keep from losing additional cultures. How will duplicated cultures deposited in several collections be handled? What should be done with cultures that are uncharacterized?
11. Are the existing repositories the best choice for funding? The existing spokes could be the existing locations depending on potential for continuous funding.
12. A selected steering committee is needed to shepard this project through to fruition. They would need to send this document to a professional written so that it could be direct at the intended audience. Also, we need to decide exactly who is the intended audience. We need to identify the stakeholders and obtain their input. In addition, realistic budget figures need to be added to the document including the existing funds for culture collections. The best approach may be to phase in this system.
13. The issue of sequences and data associated with each strain needs to be addressed with respect to linkage with GenBank? GenBank now “highlights” sequences that represent type species and for which voucher specimens and other information exists. The CBS in the Netherlands sequences ribosomal DNA for all strains and makes that a part of the deposit record. Voucher specimens that represent the source from which the culture was made or that represent a dried state of the culture with diagnostic features such as reproductive structures should be deposited in recognized institutional collections when possible.
14. Finally and most importantly, who will make this happen? An advocacy group is needed to spearhead and champion this system through addressing the national needs that will be filled by this program. This group would work to justify the funding needed to develop this system.
Appendix 3. Estimated budget: This information needs to be vetted in some way. What are estimates based on, can sources be documented? I (SEG) took these out of the main document. These are high numbers and in the current funding environment seem impractical. Financial estimates: Each center would need between $100,000 - $1,000,000 or more each year to operate, depending on size of the collection, difficulty of maintaining the strains, and need for identification and characterization. Total costs for specialized centers: $10-30,000,000 per year Funds for the start-up phase to modify GRIN requires 3.0 FTE, including two database specialists and one curator/nomenclature scientist, plus increased hardware, software and overhead: $1,000,000 for one year Following the start-up phase it is anticipated that each specialized center would enter their own data and thus costs for maintaining the GRIN microorganism data would be relatively stable. Funds for 2.0 FTE include one nomenclature scientist and one database specialist, hardware and software upgrades and overhead: $500,000 per year Funds for the start-up phase requiring 1.0 FTE for the initial storage of back-up strains plus the space, equipment and materials for storage: $500,000 for one year Following the start-up phase it is anticipated that the back-up facility would have relatively little activity except to maintain the strains and distribute them on an emergency basis plus occasional need to upgrade equipment and overhead:
$300,000 per year.
Total cost of a National Plant Microbial Germplasm System: $35,000,000 Further comments not incorporated: Need a budget table for start-up and annual costs, possibly with two scenarios.
Kevin McClusky: Did you see my 'hidden value in culture collections' article? It was the os-2 story. Also, this was just in Nature : "Researchers protest destruction of bacteria collection"http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080320/full/news.2008.682.html Kevin McCluskey is invited to talk in the USFCC session (Specialized academic culture collections as resources for industrial development) at the Society for Industrial Microbiology meeting next August. John Sherwood: This document needs a short 1-2 page executive summary.
1. The introduction should capture the public need for a microbial collection. While the scientific community will be the user, the public must receive the benefit.
2. A decision should be made on which two approaches should be taken for the collection. Alternatives are good, but starting out with them only delays meaningful discussion.
While it is good to have all the estimates for the cost of the elements of the collection, at this point a briefer document that capture the elements of a robust collection is what is needed. The longer document should be developed in parallel with some short of priority timeline for each element, i.e. what is needed first.
Anne Vidaver - I've tried to make the need more dramatic, which you may/may not appreciate and also suggested a minor name change to avoid being confused with napalm. I don't know how you glamorize this. By the way, I checked out straininfo.net and at least today, there was nothing except a nice introductory page, i.e. nothing connected. Make sure it's operative? Is there a biodiversity advocate in USDA? Maybe play that up? I also addressed the commercial sector, which you may/may not want to include. But, if we agree to keep their collections, would they support the system? Many more questions---
Recommended
