Global Strategy for the Conservation of Brassica Genetic Resources

Abstract

This conservation strategy for Brassica crops aims to highlight the current status of ex situ Brassica collections, and to identify where collaborative and rationalized efforts can improve the safeguarding of Brassica genetic resources. A series of priorities has been identified that will best benefit from a partnership approach with a shared vision. This will not only enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of conservation activities, but also ultimately ensure that Brassica germplasm is available to the user community.

Full text

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION
OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES

The International Treaty
ON PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES
FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License. To view a copy of this license,
visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
COVER
Created © Uli Westphal 2017. Uli Westphal is a visual artist who documents our declining crop diversity and the things that
replace it. The ‘Cultivar Series’ portrays the existing diversity within individual crop species, one species at a time.
www.uliwestphal.com/the-cultivar-series
DISCLAIMER
This document aims to provide a framework for the efficient and effective conservation of genetic resources of Brassica crops.
The Crop Trust supported this initiative and commissioned the Warwick Genetic Resources Unit of Warwick University to
coordinate the development of the strategy. The overall objective is to outline shared responsibilities and needs for the long-
term conservation of these genetic resources and to facilitate their use for food security and sustainable agriculture. The Crop
Trust considers this document to be an important framework for guiding the allocation of its resources. However, the Crop
Trust does not take responsibility for the relevance, accuracy or completeness of the information in this document and does
not commit to funding any of the priorities identified. This strategy document (dated 2 February 2023) is expected to continue
to evolve and be updated as and when circumstances change or new information becomes available.
DISCLAIMER NOTE ABOUT ESTIMATED NUMBER OF ACCESSIONS PRESENTED IN THE STRATEGY
The number of accessions presented in the text and tables of this strategy should be seen as the best estimates the authors
could make at the time of writing based on the data available and the methods used, and not as a precise number. These
figures can change depending on the sources of data and their completeness, the time of the analyses, and the assumptions
made in analyses.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The development of this Global Crop Conservation Strategy was funded by the Government of Germany (BMEL) as part of the
3-year project led by the Crop Trust: “Breathing New Life into the Global Crop Conservation Strategies: Providing an Evidence
Base for the Global System of Ex situ Conservation of Crop Diversity.”
The Crop Trust also cooperated with the Secretariat of The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture (ITPGRFA) in the development of this document.
The development of this strategy was a collaborative effort of researchers and Brassica experts who made contributions as
individuals and as a group. We thank C. Mallor, S. Norton, S, Vogl, H. Nóbrega, N. Bas, D.A. Morales, P. Kopecký, F. Branca,
K. Annamaa, A. Artemeva, C. Fenton, C.M. Cook, B. Singh, V. Richer, S. Jani, K. Krusch, E. Willner, K. Ghamkhar, N. Mezghani,
M. El-khalifeh, D. Kessler, S. Balding, L.F. Marek, M. Arndorfer, A.M. Chèvre, L. Reiners, Y.-Y. Hsiao, J. Dickie, P. Freudenthaler,
P. Andersson and A. Hägnefelt
AUTHORS
Charlotte Allender, Warwick Genetic Resources Unit, University of Warwick, UK
Peter Giovannini, Global Crop Diversity Trust
Project coordinator at the Crop Trust: Peter Giovannini
https://www.croptrust.org
RECOMMENDED CITATION
Allender, C., Giovannini, P. 2023. Global Strategy for the Conservation of Brassica Genetic Resources. Global Crop Diversity
Trust. Bonn, Germany. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7544810
DOI
10.5281/zenodo.7544810
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA: Available at 10.5281/zenodo.7597963

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 3
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................5
Background to the strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Aims of the strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Taxonomy and species covered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Geographical distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Significance: production and use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Ex situ conservation of Brassica crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Current status and challenges for ex situ conservation of Brassica crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Strategic priorities for ex situ conservation of Brassica crops and related wild species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................9
1.1 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.2 Methods and data sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
2 OVERVIEW OF BRASSICA CROPS AND
THEIR WILD RELATIVES ................................................................10
2.1 Agricultural and economic significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 The Brassica genus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Biochemistry, and human and plant health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5 Major Brassica crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.6 Minor Brassica crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 EX SITU CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA CROPS AND THEIR WILD RELATIVES .................... 16
3.1 Storage of Brassica seeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Current ex situ conservation of Brassica genetic resources – size of collections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.3 Survey of Brassica collection holders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.4 Summary of current ex situ conservation status of Brassica crops and CWR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4 PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVING THE EX SITU CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA ......................25
4.1 Support for regeneration and long-term storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2 Identification of unique materials for priority conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3 Documentation – making information available to users and managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.4 Crop wild relatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.5 A global Brassica PGR conservation network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................... 28
REFERENCES .........................................................................29
APPENDICES .........................................................................32
Appendix 1. Brassica genetic resources stakeholders survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Appendix 2. Stakeholders’ meetings participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Appendix 3. 20 largest collections of the six major cultivated Brassica species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Appendix 4. Details of survey respondents and strategy co-developers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Appendix 5. Standardization of taxa found in Genesys and FAO-WIEWS to conduct data analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . 52

4 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Brassica nigra Kohler's Medizinal-Pflanzen

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Aims of the strategy
This conservation strategy for Brassica crops aims to
highlight the current status of ex situ Brassica col-
lections, and to identify where collaborative and
rationalized efforts can improve the safeguarding of
Brassica genetic resources. A series of priorities has
been identified that will best benefit from a partner-
ship approach with a shared vision. This will not only
enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of conserva-
tion activities, but also ultimately ensure that Brassica
germplasm is available to the user community.
Taxonomy and species covered
The Brassicaceae family covers 348 genera (including
the Brassica genus) and approximately 3,700 species. A
shared trait of Brassicaceae members is the production
of secondary metabolites known as glucosinolates, as
well as a characteristic flower morphology where four
petals are arranged in the shape of a cross, leading to
the original family name of Crucifereae. The Brassica
genus has between 36 and 41 species, depending on
Background to the strategy
The Global Crop Diversity Trust (the Crop Trust) is
leading an initiative to develop global conservation
strategies for key crops to support and prioritize key
activities underpinning the effective conservation of
crop diversity. This strategy document focuses on the
six major crop species in the Brassica genus, a group of
global agricultural, economic and nutritional signifi-
cance. The document provides background informa-
tion on the production and cultivation of the crops,
as well as their origins and domestication. It covers
genome relationships and crop wild relatives (CWR)
in the Brassica genus and also notes the impact of a
contested taxonomy, where species currently classi-
fied outside the Brassica genus may be more closely
related to Brassica crops than are other species within
the genus. The current ex situ conservation status of
Brassica crops and CWR is summarized through an
analysis of reported holdings, both those reported to
databases such as Genesys-PGR and those described in
the responses to a survey of 26 collection holders of
Brassica crops.
Photo: Charlotte Allender

6 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
the taxonomic treatment. The majority of these are
not cultivated; however, six species are cultivated
as crops of either local or global agricultural signifi-
cance. This conservation strategy therefore focuses on
these species: Brassica rapa, Brassica oleracea, Brassica
nigra, Brassica napus, Brassica carinata and Brassica
juncea. Within each species, different crop types have
been selected, including vegetable-, oilseed-, condi-
ment- and fodder-types. Across all Brassica crops, all
parts of the plant are harvested: storage roots and
stems, leaves, inflorescences and seeds. Brassica crops
are diverse and include broccoli, cabbage, bok choy,
turnip, kale, rapeseed and mustard. The degree of
intraspecific variation is impressive, particularly within
B. oleracea and B. rapa, where 14 and 15 sub-specific
taxa have been described, each corresponding to a dif-
ferent crop type with its own unique morphology and
characteristics. The morphologically diverse species
have higher numbers of accessions stored in global ex
situ collections, as assemblages of each morphotype
have been built up in parallel (see Table 2).
Geographical distribution
The six most important Brassica species for agriculture
are cultivated globally as oilseed crops, vegetables
and condiments. They have moved with migration and
trade away from their various centers of origin, and
are cultivated on all continents apart from Antarctica.
For example, rapeseed (B. napus and B. rapa) was
grown in 63 countries in 2020, with the top producers
being China, Canada and India (FAOSTAT 2022). B.car-
inata is another oilseed crop that is becoming more
commonly cultivated outside its initial domestication
center in North Eastern Africa due to its desirable
oil composition and resilience in the face of abiotic
stresses.
Significance: production and use
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organiza-
tion (FAO) has collated national and global production
data for several categories of Brassica crops; rapeseed
(oilseed), different vegetable types and mustards.
Rapeseed production has increased markedly over the
past 60 years, with a six-fold increase in its production
area and a 10-fold increase in the production amount.
For other Brassica crops, the production areas have
remained relatively static, but the production quanti-
ties have increased over the same period. For example,
the production of cabbage has almost tripled and that
of cauliflower and broccoli has increased by five times.
In terms of production quantity, rapeseed is second
only to soybean as a source of vegetable oil. Brassica
crops are of nutritional significance worldwide, being
widely consumed sources of dietary micronutrients,
minerals, dietary fiber and other beneficial com-
pounds produced as secondary metabolites. Certain
glucosinolates, such as glucoraphanin, have been
shown to reduce inflammation, delay cancer progres-
sion, and improve cardiovascular health. Conversely,
some glucosinolates are considered as anti-nutritional
compounds in rapeseed meal, a byproduct of oil
production that is fed to livestock. Breeding efforts
have resulted in the development of canola, a type of
rapeseed with low levels of glucosinolates and erucic
acid, a fatty acid suspected of negatively affecting
cardiovascular health.
Ex situ conservation of Brassica crops
A total of 70,241 accessions are reported as being
conserved in genebank collections through the
Genesys and World Information and Early Warning
System on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture (WIEWS) information portals. Interest-
ingly, a survey of collection holders indicated that the
number of accessions held is significantly greater than
the number reported; as their responses, combined
with Genesys and WIEWS data, indicate that 85,474
accessions are held in collections. Unsurprisingly, the
most widely cultivated species are best represented in
genebanks (B. rapa – 21,398 accessions; B. oleracea –
21,041 accessions; B. juncea – 19,690 accessions and B.
napus – 15,083 accessions). Far fewer accessions of B.
carinata and B. nigra are held in genebanks (2,252 and
1,090, respectively), possibly because of geographical
restrictions in their cultivation in the past. Brassica
species have orthodox seeds, meaning that long-
term conservation is possible under low-moisture and
low-temperature (−20°C) conditions.
Current status and challenges for ex
situ conservation of Brassica crops
A survey of 26 collection holders and a follow-up
workshop indicated a series of common challenges
for the efficient and effective conservation of Brassica
germplasm in genebanks. A summary of consider-
ations highlighted by collection managers through the
survey and the workshop is presented below.
1. Regeneration
Regeneration was the most widely commented-upon
aspect of the management of Brassica collections.
As out-crossing species, Brassica crops require either
sufficient space for isolation of accessions during
regeneration or, ideally, isolation facilities such as
pollination cages to prevent unwanted movement
of pollen among accessions. Investment in financial,
staff and physical resources would allow genebanks
to undertake sufficient and effective regeneration of
accessions. A further challenge is the regeneration
of F1 hybrid varieties released from breeding pro-
grams, because these cannot be propagated in the

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 7
same manner as open-pollinated material. The lack of
regeneration affects almost all aspects of collection
management, from distribution to safety duplication,
and is therefore the key to efficient and effective col-
lection management.
2. Storage conditions
The survey responses indicated that 58% of collections
are kept fully under long-term storage conditions (low
moisture content, −20°C), with another 19% being
partially maintained under long-term storage condi-
tions. All but one of the remaining collections are at
least partially kept under medium-term storage condi-
tions. Storage conditions underpin effective collection
management through minimizing the required regen-
eration frequency. The interpretation of short- and
medium-term storage conditions was variable among
respondents, although 96% of respondents reported
that seeds are dried before storage, a process vital to
improving seed longevity in storage.
3. Management of CWR
Genesys/WIEWS data indicate that 973 accessions of
Brassica CWR are held in global germplasm collections,
and the respondents to the survey reported 597 acces-
sions. These species can be challenging to manage in
germplasm collections, with long juvenile periods and
particular environmental requirements that com-
plicate regeneration. Some Brassica species are not
represented in global collections at all, and others
that are of conservation significance, such as Bras-
sica hilarionis and Brassica drepanensis, are relatively
poorly represented. These gaps require addressing,
however the complex relationship among species in
a polyphyletic taxon such as Brassica means that the
significance of missing species for crop improvement
programs is not always clear.
4. Documentation
Most collections reported the use of software to
manage collection data, with 85% reporting that
collection data are at least partly publicly available to
users. Some collections reported the need to upgrade
data management software, with two collections rec-
ognizing the need but not having the resources to do
so. Efficient data management is critical for collection
conservation and use. The software used ranged from
the internationally supported GRIN-Global system to
Microsoft Access as well as bespoke in-house systems.
During the workshop, collection holders indicated
they were not always best-placed to understand what
software tools were available and to keep up with
best practice.
5. Safety duplication
Safety duplication is a key activity to safeguard ger-
mplasm collections. There are several options avail-
able to collection managers: Storage of duplicates
at another genebank within the country; storage of
duplicates at another facility in a different country;
and deposition of samples at the Svalbard Global Seed
Vault (SGSV). Only two out of 26 survey respondents
indicated that their collection is not duplicated at all,
and 17 respondents indicated that their collection is
at least partly duplicated elsewhere. In total, 13,277
accessions of Brassica crops are held at the SGSV.
During the workshop, it was recognized that safety
duplication is intrinsically linked to regeneration and
that duplicates should be high-quality seeds with the
highest viability.
6. Distribution
Most of the survey respondents (92%) reported
that they are able to distribute materials from their
collections, with 92% of distributions being covered
by a Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA)
or another contractual document. The survey respon-
dents indicated a stable or increasing outlook for the
distribution of seed samples. Constraints included the
resources to regenerate enough seeds, as well as the
impact of more stringent phytosanitary regulations
and the requirement for testing and certification to
meet a range of national import requirements.
Strategic priorities for ex situ conserva-
tion of Brassica crops and related wild
species
Further investment and improvement is required to
safeguard and ensure the efficient and effective con-
servation of Brassica germplasm in global collections.
There is no single genebank with sole responsibility
for Brassica crops as they are a diverse collection of
crop types, therefore material is distributed among
many national and other collections. The following
equally weighted priorities were identified:
1. Assistance and resources for regeneration
Regeneration was reported as a key limiting factor
for many genebanks, as it underpins many other
collection management activities. Funds and resources
should be directed to those collections who cur-
rently cannot carry out sufficient regeneration. Other
options include assistance from better-resourced gene-
banks or in-kind partnerships with other organizations
such as commercial plant breeding companies.

8 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
4. CWR
A coordinated gap analysis of Brassica CWR in global
collections is required, pulling together information
on material not currently listed in Genesys/WIEWS and
data on the availability of material that is listed. This
will identify key gaps to target for future collections,
and further highlight key germplasm already in the
global collection. Work has already started on a wider
gap analysis of the Brassicaceae family, and it will be
important to build on this analysis. The issue of regen-
eration for this group of species is also important to
address.
5. A Global Brassica Plant Genetic Resources
Network
Many of the issues highlighted in the survey and
during the discussion would benefit from a collabora-
tive approach to the sharing of information, methods,
and where appropriate, tasks. An organized network
allowing for communication among collection man-
agers on issues such as gaps, regeneration, informa-
tion management, phytosanitary issues and other
matters will provide a much-needed means of peer
support among collections and assist in making the
best use of any future investment in ex situ conserva-
tion of Brassica materials.
2. Identification of unique materials for priority
conservation
Understanding collection gaps depends on a clear
knowledge of what is already present in collections.
With incomplete descriptive passport data and a lack
of characterization and genotype/sequence data, this
is not always clear. A joint program aimed at under-
standing uniqueness is required to identify priority
materials and ensure their conservation, as well as
highlighting gaps in global collections.
3. Documentation – making information
available to users and managers
Discussions during the workshop indicated a lack of
confidence among some collection managers about
the best way to manage data, and how to select the
best software tools to do so. This could be overcome
by sharing experiences and engaging in discussions
to find solutions, as well as by developing links with
other organizations involved in genebank data man-
agement.
Photo: Tennisons Photography

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 9
1.1 Rationale
As part of an initiative led by the Global Crop Diver-
sity Trust (the Crop Trust) and funded by the Federal
Ministry of Food and Agriculture of Germany (BMEL),
a strategy has been developed for the conservation
and use of genetic resources of crops in the Brassica
L. genus. This strategy starts with an overview of
Brassica crops and their wild relatives, continues with
an assessment of the current status of ex situ conser-
vation of Brassica genetic resources, and concludes
by outlining recommendations and priority activities
to improve the global system for the conservation of
Brassica genetic resources.
1.2 Methods and data sources
This strategy was developed between December 2021
and October 2022, facilitated by C. Allender of the
Warwick Genetic Resources Unit, Warwick University,
and coordinated by Peter Giovannini of the Crop
Trust. Information provided in the section “Overview
of Brassica crops and their wild relatives” has been
summarized from online databases and published lit-
erature, as well as from conversations with collection
holders.
Data on the ex situ conservation of Brassica crops
and their wider genepool were gathered from online
1INTRODUCTION
databases, a survey directed to curators of Brassica
ex situ collections (Appendix 1), and consultation
meetings with Brassica genetic resources stakeholders
(Appendix 2, Stakeholders’ meetings participants).
More specifically, information on Brassica was
retrieved from the following online genetic resource
databases: the Genesys Plant Genetic Resources Portal
(Genesys 2022), the World Information and Early
Warning System on Plant Genetic Resources for Food
and Agriculture (WIEWS) of the United Nations Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (FAOSTAT 2022),
and the Svalbard Global Seed Vault (SGSV) Seed Portal
(SGSV 2022).
Brassica genetic resource stakeholder (online)
meetings were conducted on the 23–24 June 2022
(Appendix 2), and were attended by 13 participants
from 11 countries. The survey results were presented
and the following topics were discussed: collection
gaps, documentation, regeneration, safety duplica-
tion, characterization, distribution and seed health.
Based on the information and data gathered as
described above, a strategy was drafted and circu-
lated to stakeholders. Inputs from stakeholders were
integrated into the draft, which was then reviewed by
the Crop Trust.
Canola field in Victoria, Australia.
Photo: Michael Major
Photo: Tennisons Photography

10 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
2.1 Agricultural and economic signifi-
cance
Brassicas are significant crops, both agriculturally
and economically. They are cultivated as vegetables,
condiments and oilseeds. Examples include cabbages,
cauliflowers, turnips, pak choy, mustards and rape-
seed. Different varieties of rapeseed yield oils suitable
for consumption, biofuel, lubricants, and other indus-
trial and pharmaceutical products. An additional and
growing use is as a biofumigant crop, offering another
means of managing agricultural pests and diseases. A
summary of the FAO production data for a range of
different Brassica crop types is presented in Table 2.1.
Figure 2.1 shows the global trend in harvested area
and production between 1961 and 2020. The diversity
of crop types within Brassica means that production is
2OVERVIEW OF BRASSICA CROPS AND
THEIR WILD RELATIVES
reported separately. In terms of vegetable oil produc-
tion, rapeseed is the second largest source globally,
second only to soybean (FAOSTAT 2022). Brassica crops
are grown on every continent due to their diversity of
form and collective ability to tolerate a wide range of
environmental conditions.
2.2 Taxonomy
The genus Brassica is part of the Brassicaceae, a
diverse and species-rich family with about 3,700
species. The Brassicaceae family sits within the order
Brassicales, along with 16 other families covering
about 4,700 species, the majority of which share the
trait of producing glucosinolates as secondary metab-
olites (Franzke et al. 2016). The Brassicaceae family is
a diverse family of species in 348 genera. A common
Table 2.1 2020 global area harvested and production quantities for various Brassica crops (FAOSTAT 2022).
Crop type Area harvested (km2)Production (Mt)
Cabbage and other Brassica vegetables 24,142.9 70.9
Cauliflower and broccoli 13,571.9 25.5
Mustard seed 6,195.0 0.5
Rapeseed 354,965.3 72.4
Photo: Charlotte Allender

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 11
characteristic of the family is the flower morphology;
flowers exhibit four sepals, four alternating petals,
and four long and two short free stamens. The petals
are arranged in the shape of a cross, which gave the
family its previous name (Cruciferae). The Brassicaceae
family also contains the extensively researched model
species Arabidopsis thaliana, the first plant species
to have its genome fully sequenced. A. thaliana has
underpinned fundamental research on the structure
and function of plant genes. The relatively close
evolutionary relationship between Brassica crops and
A. thaliana means that genetic and genomic research
in Brassica has benefited enormously from the knowl-
edge base assembled for the model species. One of
the factors supporting the radiation (development of
many species) of the Brassicaceae family is a pattern
of whole genome duplication events, which appear to
have driven novel adaptation and speciation (Schranz
et al. 2012). These genome duplications can be
observed in Brassica species, where diploid genomes
have undergone a triplication event – multiple copies
of genes mean that their structure and function can
diverge. The diversification of Brassicaceae species
has been dated to between 31.8–37.5 million years
ago (MYA) (as discussed in Franzke et al. 2016 and
references therein). The Brassicaceae family has been
divided into 25–30 tribes, including the tribe Brassi-
ceae. There are five to seven distinct lineages within
the tribe Brassiceae, with currently accepted genera
falling into more than one lineage in some cases, indi-
cating incongruence between the current taxonomic
classification and molecular evidence (see Gupta
(2016) for a summary).
2.3 The Brassica genus
The taxonomy of the Brassica species complex, and the
contradictions between currently accepted taxonomic
treatments and molecular evidence in particular, are
summarized in Gupta (2016) and references therein.
Brassica species fall into two separate lineages of the
Brassiceae tribe; the Rapa/Oleracea lineage and the
Nigra lineage. Both lineages contain species from
other genera, such as Diplotaxis, Raphanus and Eruca
(Warwick and Black 1991). Excluding hybrid species,
there are 41 accepted Brassica species as listed in the
Figure 2.1 Global harvested area of different Brassica crops (top), and their global production (bottom). Data from FAOSTAT (accessed
on 10 October 2022

12 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Plants of the World Online database (POWO 2022), or
36 as listed in the Germplasm Resource Information
System (GRIN) Taxonomy database (USDA 2022).
There are six agriculturally and economically signif-
icant crops in the Brassica genus. These crops are
cultivated globally and are consumed in a range of
ways, from oil to condiments or as a vegetable. Those
consumed as a vegetable show an impressive range of
morphological diversity – the result of local selection
and adaptation during the cultivation history of the
crop. Three of the six most commonly cultivated Bras-
sica species have diploid genomes, the other three are
amphidiploid; i.e., their genomes comprise different
combinations of the three diploid genomes. The
genomic relationships among the six commonly culti-
vated species have been described by Nagaharu and
Nagaharu (1935), who identified the different diploid
genomes and the combinations of these genomes in
the amphidiploid species (Figure 2.2). The progenitor
genomes are identified as the A genome (B. rapa), the
B genome (B. nigra) and the C genome (B. oleracea).
The amphidiploid species would have arisen as spon-
taneous inter-specific hybrids in geographical regions
where the two progenitor species overlapped. This
process requires chromosome doubling to produce
stable, fertile amphidiploid progeny; this could have
occurred via the production of unreduced (diploid
rather than haploid) gametes by the progenitor spe-
cies (Dar et al. 2017).
2.4 Biochemistry, and human and plant
health
Brassica crops contribute significantly to global
nutrition. As vegetables, they are important sources
of vitamins such as vitamins C, A and E and essential
minerals such as calcium and potassium (Sanlier and
Guler 2018), as well as other components, such as
dietary fiber. Some Brassica vegetables are excellent
accumulators of selenium, offering a means to combat
dietary deficiencies. Oilseed brassicas are sources of
monounsaturated fatty acids such as oleic acid, as
well as polyunsaturated fatty acids such as alpha-lin-
olenic acid; both classes of fatty acids have a desir-
able impact on health-related blood lipids (Aukema
and Campbell 2011). However, not all the fatty acids
present in Brassica seed oil are beneficial to health.
The breeding history of B. napus has involved selec-
tion for low levels of erucic acid, a monounsaturated
fatty acid shown to adversely impact health in animal
models (Downey 1964).
The secondary metabolites produced by Brassica plants
can also have significant health benefits. One major
class of secondary metabolites is the glucosinolates,
compounds that contain nitrogen and sulfur com-
bined with glucose and one or more amino acids. Up
to 137 glucosinolates have been putatively identified
(Blažević et al. 2020). The three major classes are
aliphatic, indole and aromatic glucosinolates. They are
Figure 2.2 Genome relationships in cultivated Brassica as described by Nagaharu and Nagaharu (1935).

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 13
secreted into storage vacuoles within plant tissues in
a biologically inactive form. Damage to the leaf, for
example by insect herbivores, releases the glucosino-
lates and brings them into contact with the enzyme
myrosinase. The glucosinolates are then hydrolyzed
and converted into a biologically active molecule,
for example, an isothiocyanate. Isothiocyanates are
highly biologically active, and have antimicrobial and
insecticidal properties, as well as favorable impacts on
cardiovascular health, inflammation and cancer devel-
opment and progression (Maina et al. 2020). Con-
versely, the high concentrations of glucosinolates in
meal left over from processing oilseed Brassica crops,
particularly B. napus, confer antinutritional properties
and result in poor palatability, leading to negative
impacts on growth and thyroid function when fed to
livestock (Griffiths et al. 1998). This, along with the
requirement to limit erucic acid levels in rapeseed oil
due to potentially detrimental impacts on health, led
to the development of the first so-called “double low”
varieties, and the new crop name “canola” in Canada
in the 1970s (Stefansson and Kondra 1975).
The presence of glucosinolates and other secondary
metabolites with biocidal actions against a range of
microbial and invertebrate organisms has led to the
further development of Brassica crops as biofumi-
gants. When they are used in this way, the Brassica
plants are grown, macerated and incorporated into
the soil, where glucosinolates released from plant
tissues break down into bioactive compounds that can
control populations of microbial pathogens (Tagele
et al. 2021) and invertebrate pests (Ahuja et al. 2010).
Biofumigation offers an alternative method of pest
and pathogen control, thereby reducing reliance on
environmentally damaging synthetic pesticides. Work
has also been undertaken to produce cover crop mix-
tures consisting of Brassica and other cruciferous crops
with a biofumigant effect and other species (Couëdel
et al. 2018). Multiple soil health benefits have been
proposed, including enhanced soil nutrient status and
decreased erosion.
2.5 Major Brassica crops
There are six major Brassica crops, as listed below.
B. rapa L. (A genome, 2n = 2x = 20). This commonly
cultivated species exhibits impressive morphological
diversity, and is cultivated for a variety of purposes,
including as a vegetable and oilseed. Depending on
the vegetable type grown, the leaves, floral buds or
storage root may be consumed, and there is further
wide variation in its growth habit (heading or open)
and leaf morphology. The crop types have been clas-
sified into subspecies based on their morphological
characteristics or use. Eight subspecies are described
for vegetable types (Table 2.2). The vegetable types
differ in their leaf traits, such as the enlarged pet-
iole seen in bok choy through to the more delicate
leaves of mizuna, which are cooked lightly or eaten in
salads. Turnips are root vegetables formed from the
storage root and the adjoining stem. Oilseed types
are grouped into three further subspecies according
to differences in their geographical origin and seed
traits.
Molecular phylogenetic analyses indicate that B. rapa
was initially domesticated in Central Asia between
3,430 and 5,930 years before present (YBP) (McAlvay
et al. 2021). The first cultivated types were turnip-
and/or oilseed-types, with diversification of crop types
occurring in different locations in the Mediterranean
region and East Asia. Wild and weedy forms appear
Table 2.2 Subspecies and subtaxa of cultivated B. rapa with corresponding common name (USDA 2022).
Taxon Crop type/common name
subsp.chinensis(L.) Hanelt Bok choy
subsp.chinensis(L.) Hanelt var.parachinensis(L. H. Bailey) Hanelt Choy sum
subsp.chinensis(L.) Hanelt var.purpuraria(L. H. Bailey) Kitam. Purple-stem mustard
subsp.dichotoma(RoxB.) Hanelt Brown sarson/Toria
subsp.japonicaShebalina
subsp.narinosa(L. H. Bailey) Hanelt Tatsoi
subsp.nipposinica(L. H. Bailey) Hanelt Mizuna/mibuna
subsp.nipposinica(L. H. Bailey) Hanelt var.perviridisL. H. Bailey Komatsuna
subsp.oleifera(DC.) Metzg. Turnip rape
subsp.oleifera(DC.) Metzg. f.annua(Metzg.) Thell. Spring turnip rape
subsp.oleifera(DC.) Metzg. f.biennis(Metzg.) Thell. Winter turnip rape
subsp.oleifera(DC.) Metzg. var.ruvo(L. H. Bailey) Gladis & K. Hammer Broccoli raab
subsp.pekinensis(Lour.) Hanelt Chinese cabbage
subsp.rapa Turnip
subsp.trilocularis(RoxB.) Hanelt Sarson

14 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
appears to be the common ancestor of contemporary
cultivated forms.
B. nigra (L) Koch (B genome 2n = 2x = 8). The lineage
leading to B. nigra is thought to have diverged from
the B. rapa/B. oleracea lineage 11.5 MYA (Perumal et
al. 2020). B. nigra was originally cultivated as an oil-
seed and spice crop, with a probable origin in the area
of Asia Minor and Iran (Hemmingway 1976). It was
widely grown across many regions, including Europe,
Asia, Africa and the Indian sub-continent, due to its
commercial value as a spice crop. However, the high
levels of seed shattering (requiring hand harvesting)
among early cultivars meant that it was replaced by
B. juncea during the mid-twentieth century (Hem-
mingway 1976). Consequently, compared with other
Brassica species, B. nigra as a whole has undergone
less selection pressure through formal breeding pro-
grams. It is designated as a harmful invasive species
in some parts of its introduced range (Pakpour and
Klironomos 2015).
B. carinata A. Braun (BC genome 2n = 4x = 34). B.
carinata is thought to have arisen from a spontaneous
hybridization between B. nigra and B. oleracea in
North-eastern Africa 4000–5000 YBP (Song et al. 2021).
The primary center of diversity of this crop seems
to be in Ethiopia, where it was likely first domesti-
cated. It is grown in several forms; as oilseed-, leafy
vegetable-, condiment- and fodder-type crops. More
recently, it has been grown as feedstock for bioen-
ergy and plastics production (Seepaul et al. 2021). As
a crop, B. carinata has several desirable agricultural
traits, such as resilience to drought and heat, resis-
tance to lodging, and resistance to various pests and
diseases. These traits make it more suitable than other
Brassica species for cultivation in hot and dry regions.
globally, however populations in Central Asia appear
to be the most diverse. Other wild and weedy popula-
tions cluster very closely with cultivated types, indi-
cating that they are of feral origin. There is evidence
of multiple origins of similar crop types in different
geographical regions, particularly oilseed- and tur-
nip-types (Bird et al. 2017).
B. oleracea L. (C genome 2n=2x=18). This species is
cultivated as a wide range of vegetables, with dif-
ferent crops characterized by the development of
different plant organs. There are 14 different crop
types currently recognized by the USDA (2022) (Table
2.3). Notable morphologies include proliferated floral
meristems (broccoli and cauliflower), a tightly packed
head of leaves (cabbages, including savoy cabbage), a
swollen storage stem (kohlrabi) and enlarged axillary
buds (Brussels sprouts). The diversity of B. oleracea
crops has intrigued researchers for many years and
has led to multiple hypotheses about the domestica-
tion event or events that resulted in this array of crop
types. B. oleracea shares the 2x=18 C genome with
several other species (see the stratification diagram).
Many studies have explored the domestication origin
of B. oleracea crops, using morphological (Nieuwhof
1969; Wellington and Quartely 1972), genetic (Golicz
et al. 2016; Perumal et al. 2021; Cai et al. 2022) and
linguistic information (Maggioni et al. 2010; Maggioni
et al. 2018). An in-depth survey of genetic variation
using single nucleotide polymorphic (SNP) markers
indicated that the closest relative of cultivated forms is
Brassica cretica (Mabry et al. 2021). The results of that
study indicated that European populations of wild B.
oleracea may in fact be feral escapes from cultivation,
as suggested previously by Mitchell (1976), and that
the genetically and morphologically diverse B. cretica
Table 2.3 Subtaxa of B. oleracea with their corresponding common name or crop type (USDA 2022).
Taxon Crop type/common name
var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil Chinese kale/Kailan
var. botrytis L. Cauliflower
var. capitata L. Cabbage
var. costata DC. Tronchuda cabbage/kale
var. gemmifera DC Brussels sprouts
var. gongylodes L Kohlrabi
var. italica Plenck Broccoli
var. medullosa Thell. Marrow stem kale
var. oleracea Wild species
var. palmifolia DC. Jersey kale
var. ramosa DC. Thousand head kale
var. sabauda L. Savoy cabbage
var. sabellica L. Curly kale
var. viridis L. Collard greens

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 15
evidence indicates that B. napus arose through hybrid-
ization between B. rapa and B. oleracea 7500 YBP
(Chalhoub et al. 2014). The maternal lineage was a
European B.rapa turnip and the paternal lineage was
an ancestor of the current B. oleracea vegetable group
(Lu et al. 2019). No truly wild populations are known,
making it challenging to ascertain the exact evolu-
tionary history of this species. B. napus is now culti-
vated in several forms that vary in their morphology,
use, and flowering behavior (annual or biennial) as
shown in Table 2.5.
2.6 Minor Brassica crops
Other species in the Brassica genus are cultivated
and have local significance in particular areas. One
example is Brassica tournefortii (African mustard
or Asian mustard). This species is particularly suited
for growth in dry conditions, for example, the drier
areas of Northern India (Singh et al. 2015); however,
it has been displaced by other oilseed crops that are
better suited to cultivation. A recent study explored its
potentially beneficial secondary metabolites (Rah-
mani et al. 2019). However, despite its beneficial uses,
B.tournefortii is regarded as a damaging invasive spe-
cies in some countries, including the USA and Australia
(CABI 2022). Other Brassica species, such as Brassica
fruticulosa in Sicily, have a long history of cultivation
as a food, and work has been undertaken to optimize
cultivation methods (Branca and Fisichella 2003).
B. juncea (L.) Czern. (AB genome 2n = 4x = 36). B.
juncea is classified into four subspecies based on
its use and crop morphology (Table 2.4). Seed mus-
tard is grown as an oilseed and a condiment, while
leaf mustards vary in form and are important leafy
vegetables that are either cooked or consumed as a
salad. Root mustards tend to be grown in Northeast
China and Mongolia and are the most cold-tolerant of
the B. juncea crops. B. juncea originated as a species
8000–14000 YBP in West Asia. A polyphyletic origin
has been proposed based on analyses of chloroplast
genetic markers (Kaur et al. 2014). Genetic analysis
indicates that three independent domestication
events took place 500–5000 YBP (Kang et al. 2021).
The contemporary geographical range of B. juncea is
very wide, covering Africa, Asia, Europe, America and
Australia. It is a significant oilseed crop particularly
in Bangladesh, India, Ukraine and China; the latter
country holds the highest diversity of all B. juncea
crop types (Dixon 2007).
B. napus L. (AC genome 2n = 4x = 38). B. napus is a
globally significant oilseed crop. Rapeseed (primarily
B. napus) is second only to soybean as a source of
vegetable oil with 72.4 Mt rapeseed produced glob-
ally in 2020 (Table 2.1, FAOSTAT 2022). Oil produced
from B. napus is mainly used in the food industry,
but different varieties have been developed that are
suitable for the production of biodiesel and other
oils for the industrial, cosmetic and pharmaceutical
industries (Aukema and Campbell 2011). Genomic
Table 2.4 Major cultivated subspecies of B. juncea (USDA
2022).
Taxon Crop type/
common name
subsp. juncea Seed mustard
subsp. napiformis (Pailleux & Bois) Gladis Root mustard
subsp. integrifolia (H. West) Thell. Leaf mustard
subsp. tsatsai (T. L. Mao) Gladis Stem mustard
Table 2.5 Major cultivated types of B. napus (USDA 2022).
Taxon Crop type/common name
subsp. napus f. annua
(Schübl. & G. Martens) Thell. Spring oilseed
subsp. napus f. napus Winter oilseed
subsp. napus var. pabularia
(DC.) Alef. Siberian kale
subsp. rapifera Metzg. Swede/Rutabaga

16 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
3.1 Storage of Brassica seeds
Brassica species have orthodox seeds in terms of con-
servation; the seeds can be dried to a low moisture
content (typically 5% moisture content by weight) and
stored at low temperatures such as −20°C (Roberts
1973). The lifespan of seeds stored under these condi-
tions can be measured in decades, however, different
studies have shown remarkably different outcomes of
long-term seed storage. A baseline recommendation
to store seeds at −20°C with a seed moisture content
of 5% (+/-1%) was made by the International Board
of Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR 1976), and was
echoed by the FAO in a guideline set of standards for
genebanks (FAO 2014). A study of seeds conserved
within the United States Department of Agriculture
National Plant Germplasm System indicated that those
of Brassica species were relatively short lived, with the
estimated time to reach 50% viability ranging from 23
to 59 years depending on the species (Walters et al.
2005). In contrast, a study on 15 accessions of Brassi-
caceae species (including two Brassica species) found
very little loss of viability after 40 years in storage
(Pérez-García et al. 2009), with longer storage periods
improving germination test results through the
removal of seed dormancy. It is likely that ensuring
a low-oxygen environment, such as that achieved
through vacuum packaging, will further enhance the
lifespan of seeds (Groot et al. 2015). Optimal storage
conditions enhance seed longevity, reducing the need
for regeneration procedures, which are both costly
and potentially risk genetic drift from the allelic com-
position of the original sample.
3EX SITU CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA CROPS
AND THEIR WILD RELATIVES
3.2 Current ex situ conservation of
Brassica genetic resources – size of col-
lections.
There are extensive collections of Brassica germplasm
conserved around the world. An assembly of Brassica
passport data from 150 genebanks was compiled using
data from Genesys (Genesys 2022) and FAO-WIEWS
(WIEWS 2022) databases (hereinafter, we refer to this
dataset as the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset).
Additionally, data on the size of the collections of
the six main cultivated Brassica species were collated
through a survey (see section 3.3).
According to the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset,
70,241 accessions of Brassica seeds are conserved in
150 institutes in 81 countries, and 31,644 of these are
included in the Multilateral System (MLS) of The Inter-
national Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food
and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). When the data obtained
through the survey (section 3.3) are also considered,
the total number of estimated Brassica accessions
conserved ex situ at the global level increases to
85,474. These accessions cover 36 species (excluding
interspecific hybrids), although the vast majority (94%
of the total) represent the six most commonly culti-
vated species; B. oleracea, B. napus, B. rapa, B. juncea,
B. nigra and B. carinata (see Table 3.1). This is unsur-
prising given the nature of crop genetic resources and
the outputs of crop breeding around the world. The
size of collections is highly variable, ranging from a
single accession (14 institutes) to 13,364 accessions in
the largest collection. The mean collection size is 471
Photo: Charlotte Allender

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 17
accessions. Eighteen institutes have more than 1,000
accessions in their collections.
It is helpful to consider the holdings of the major
crop species when assessing the status of the global
Brassica collection. Table 3.1 shows the breakdown of
the global Brassica collection in terms of the six major
species. It is clear that two species, B. nigra and B.car-
inata, have almost ten-fold fewer accessions in the
global collection than the other four. This is likely due
to the relative lack of cultivation, or restricted distri-
bution of cultivation, of these species (Hemmingway,
1976).
Figure 3.1 shows the 16 largest collections of each
of the six main cultivated species (except B. carinata,
for which only the top 13 are shown), and the num-
bers of accessions conserved, according to data from
both from the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset and
the survey of Brassica collection holders (see section
3.3). Interestingly, different collections seem to have
different focal crops in terms of the global total.
The largest B. oleracea collection is held by the UK
Vegetable Genebank (GBR006 – 3,394 accessions).
The National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources in
India (IND001) holds the largest collections of both
B. rapa and B. juncea (4,693 and 7,909 accessions,
respectively). The sizes of B. nigra collections are much
smaller, reflecting its relatively minor status globally;
the largest collection of 225 accessions is held by the
Australian Grains Genebank (AUS165). The same orga-
nization holds the largest collection of B. napus (1,478
accessions). The largest collection of B. carinata by far
is held in Ethiopia at the Ethiopian Biodiversity Insti-
tute (ETH085, 639 accessions). The location and size of
the largest 20 collections of each crop are additionally
shown in Tables 1–6 in Appendix 3. For each cultivated
species, a choropleth map was generated using data
from the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset, showing
the number of accessions recorded as landraces by
country of origin.
3.3 Survey of Brassica collection holders
To better understand the dynamics, priorities and
vulnerabilities within existing Brassica plant genetic
resource (PGR) collections, collection holders were
surveyed on various aspects of collection management
and practice, as well as issues impacting conservation.
Brassica collection holders were identified based on
information at the Genesys and WIEWS databases.
Collections holding more than five Brassica accessions
were contacted in February 2022 to invite them to
take part in the development of the strategy and
complete the survey document (Appendix 1). Twen-
ty-six collection managers responded, a response rate
of 24.7%. The respondents are based in 23 countries
(Figure 3.2). A range of organization types are repre-
sented, including 17 government or government-affil-
iated organizations, five universities, three non-gov-
ernmental organizations and one intergovernmental
organization.
Survey respondents were invited to take part in one
of two online workshops held on 23 and 24 June 2022
(Appendix 2). The agenda for both workshops was
identical; two separate meetings were held to allow
participation of survey respondents in different time
zones. The outline results of the survey were pre-
sented and discussed with a view to shaping strategic
priorities for the conservation of Brassica genetic
resources.
The survey and workshops identified several common
themes which, if addressed, would enable safe,
effective and efficient ex situ conservation of Brassica
germplasm. Future work and resources should be
targeted to enable collection holders to address areas
of concern within these themes to safeguard their
collections and make them available for distribution.
Table 3.1 Estimated size of the global collection of the six main cultivated Brassica species. Data sourced from the combined
WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022). Total estimates are based on data from the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset and data obtained
through the survey of Brassica collection holders (2022).
Species Global holdings based on combined
WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022)
Global holdings based on combined
WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022)
+ Survey 2022
B. rapa 18,341 21,398
B. oleracea 17,778 21,041
B. juncea 14,583 19,690
B. napus 12,201 15,083
B. carinata 1,944 2,252
B. nigra 996 1,090
Total 65,843 80,554
Photo: Charlotte Allender

18 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Regeneration
Due to the outcrossing nature and self-incompati-
bility of some Brassica crops (particularly B. oleracea),
regeneration procedures and facilities need to be able
to handle a sufficient number of individual plants to
maintain intra-accession diversity, and to maintain the
genetic integrity of each accession through avoiding
cross-pollination between accessions. This is normally
achieved by enclosing plants and pollinators in isola-
tion compartments, or by ensuring that there is suffi-
cient physical distance between field plots to reduce
the likelihood of pollen movement among accessions.
An additional challenge discussed by the workshop par-
ticipants was the regeneration of vegetable-type crops
compared with oilseed-type crops, the latter being
selected for seed production and the former often
being selected for delayed bolting and flowering.
Regeneration of Brassica germplasm was consistently
identified as a limiting factor in both collection man-
agement and distribution by both survey respondents
and by the discussions held in the workshops. Eleven
out of 26 respondents mentioned regeneration specifi-
cally when asked about the top three vulnerabilities of
their collection. One collection holder indicated that
no resources were available for regeneration at all,
meaning that distribution of samples was not possible.
Another factor impacting regeneration discussed at
both workshops was that new commercial varieties of
Brassica crops are likely to be F1 hybrids. This type of
cultivar offers superior uniformity and potentially supe-
rior agronomic characteristics; however, without the
parental lines used to produce the variety, it cannot
be maintained as an F1 within genebank collections.
Conservation of highly developed material such as
F1 hybrid varieties offers the possibility of conserving
useful combinations of alleles in a crop form which
can more easily be utilised by breeders. Such allels may
be present individually in more diverse germplasm
but moving alleles from less developed material into
elite breeding lines is potentially a lengthy process.
Depending on the method used to control pollination
(self-incompatibility or cytoplasmic male sterility to
ensure only hybrid seed is produced from the parental
lines), it may be possible to maintain the alleles present
in the original F1 hybrid as an F2 population. This is only
a possibility with F1 hybrid varieties developed using
self-incompatibility as a means of controlling hybrid-
ization; a fertility restorer line is required for cyto-
plasmic male sterility, and these (along with parental
lines) are unlikely to be made available to genebanks
for commercial reasons. Therefore, there is a potential
problem with the long-term conservation of F1 hybrid
Brassica crops in genebanks; seeds from F1 hybrids can
be conserved under long-term storage conditions but
their true-to-type regeneration may not be possible.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
ETH085
GBR006
PAK001
DEU146/DEU271
TWN001
AUS165
ZMB048
NLD037
IND001
CAN004
USA020
RUS001
CZE122
Accessions
B. carinata: size of ex situ collections
Online databases Survey
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
IND001
AUS165
RUS001
JPN183
PAK001
TWN001
DEU146/271
GBR006
CAN004
USA020
EST019
PRT001
USA003
NLD037
ESP009
SWE054
Accessions
B. rapa: size of ex situ colecctions
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
FRA010
RUS001
AUS165
DEU271
JPN183
CZE122
BLR011
UKR013
USA020
PAK001
BRA003
GBR006
POL003
CAN004
BGR001
IND001
Accessions
B. napus: size of ex situ collections
0
50
100
150
200
250
AUS165
DEU271
USA020
IND001
PAK001
CAN004
ETH085
RUS001
BGR001
CZE122
JPN183
GBR006
ESP003
GBR004
ISR002
NLD037
Accessions
B. nigra: size of ex situ collections
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
GBR006
RUS001
USA003
DEU146
FRA010
ESP027
PRT001
BGR001
JPN183
NLD037
POL003
IND001
BGD206
AUS165
SWE054
USA974
CZE122
Accessions
B. olearacea: size of ex situ collections
Figure 3.1 Size (number of accessions) of the 16 largest
collections of the six main cultivated Brassica species (except for,
B. carinata, for which 13 largest collections are shown). Collection
holder is identified by the WIEWS institute code, and includes the
ISO three letter code for the host country. Refer to the relevant
table in Appendix 3 for the organization name in full. Data were
obtained from the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022), and
the survey of Brassica collection holders (2022).

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 19
Many of the other factors identified as a vulnerability
to Brassica collections in the survey also potentially
relate to regeneration. Adequate financial resources,
space and facilities, and staff are required to carry out
sufficient regeneration activities to maintain overall
viability. These factors were noted by five respondents
each. Potential genetic impacts on conserved mate-
rial were also identified as issues. Genetic erosion,
seed aging and a loss of genetic integrity could all be
unwanted outcomes of inadequate regeneration fre-
quencies, facilities and procedures. Regeneration was
seen as an opportunity to rationalize collections by
two respondents, allowing prioritization of important
material. Several collection holders linked the regen-
eration capacity to safety duplication, as duplicates
should be recently regenerated high-quality seeds
rather than seeds sub-sampled from those that may
have been stored for many years.
Safety duplication
Safety duplication of samples is a vital safeguard for
the long-term conservation of crop genetic diversity.
Ideally, safety duplication involves the storage of a
high-quality subsample of an accession in long-term
storage in a different country, providing a means of
avoiding collection loss due to socio-political factors
or major natural catastrophe. The majority of respon-
dents to the survey (14) indicated that their collection
is partly safety duplicated, and a further three respon-
dents indicated that their collection is fully safety
duplicated elsewhere. Only two collections indicated
that they are not safety duplicated at all, and a fur-
ther two respondents did not answer the question.
Seventeen respondents indicated that their collections
are safety duplicated outside their country, either in
the SGSV (nine respondents), as a ‘black box’ duplicate
(five respondents), or fully integrated into another
collection (three respondents). Some collections are
safety duplicated in a central national facility. Con-
straints to safety duplication included seed quantity
and resources for regeneration (one collection),
national regulations, and restrictions due to phytosan-
itary requirements.
The SGSV allows collection holders to safety-duplicate
their samples in an international facility. Currently, 26
Brassica collections have deposited materials at the
SGSV; in total, 13,277 accessions with distinct accession
numbers are duplicated there (Table 3.2). However,
only one collection is 100% duplicated at the SGSV
(determined by comparing the WIEWS/Genesys dataset
with SGSV holdings as recorded in the SGSV seed
portal (SGSV 2022). The range of coverage of collec-
tions is <1%–100%, with a mean of 34% and a median
value of 33.3%. Figure 3.3 shows the distribution
of the estimates of safety duplication in 21 Brassica
collections.
The topic of safety duplication was discussed at the
workshop. The need for safety duplication as a part
of good collection management was recognized.
Several collections linked regeneration to safety
duplication; they reported that they use subsamples
of regenerated seeds as a safety duplicate, ensuring
that the duplicate samples have high viability and the
longest possible lifespan. Therefore, safety duplica-
tion of these collections is more of a process than a
Figure 3.2 Countries hosting the Brassica collections for which survey responses were received (Blue).

20 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
single event. The value of the SGSV as a location for
safety duplication was understood; however, not all
collection holders use this facility. Some collections
reported that they prefer, or are required, to maintain
duplicates at a central facility within their country.
Other constraints to using the SGSV included the
requirement for samples to already be duplicated else-
where (effectively triplicated). The cost of preparing
and shipping seed was seen as problematic for some
smaller collections.
Distribution
The distribution of samples by collections is a prereq-
uisite for their use in plant breeding, research and
other purposes. The survey responses indicated that
24 of the 26 (92%) collections are able to distribute
samples upon request, although four collection
holders noted that they are subject to geographical
restrictions in distribution, only being able to send
out material nationally or regionally rather than to
any country. Most collections (92%) require a Mate-
rial Transfer Agreement (MTA) or other contractual
document to be in place to fulfil seed requests. The
majority of collections (73%) indicated that they use
the SMTA, the agreement used for material provided
by signatories to the ITPGRFA, along with other MTAs
or contracts where deemed appropriate. Out of the
51,789 Brassica accessions reported by the 26 survey
respondents, 31,257 (60%) are conserved in collections
using a SMTA and therefore, are in the MLS. Some col-
lection managers mentioned that it is not always clear
when the use of the SMTA is appropriate and where
another type of agreement is required, particularly
when distributing wild taxa.
The survey responses indicated that, over the past 3
years, on average 7,471 cultivated accessions had been
distributed per year (80% nationally, 20% internation-
ally); however, not all respondents provided distri-
bution data. In contrast, the responses indicated a
total of 176 wild accessions were distributed over the
Table 3.2 Number of Brassica accessions duplicated at the SGSV by collection holders. *Accessions in SGSV as determined from
the SGSV Seed Portal (SGSV 2022); **accessions in collections as determined from combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022). ***
Value is likely inaccurate due to incomplete data on the BIH039 Brassica collection in Genesys and WIEWS at the time of the data
analysis.
Institute Identifier Brassica accessions in SGSV* Accessions in
collection**
Estimated % safety duplicated
in SGSV
DEU146/DEU271 3,837 4,349 88.2
AUS165 2,437 6,581 37.0
TWN001 1,371 1,977 69.3
NLD037 1,277 1,400 91.2
USA996 1,170 - -
SWE054 693 962 72.0
GBR006 742 5,331 13.9
PAK001 619 3,367 18.4
USA974 262 526 49.8
RUS001 214 1,651 13.0
CAN004 195 1,898 10.3
KOR011 173 - -
TWN006 106 - -
CHE001 49 89 55.1
POL003 44 1,506 2.9
BIH039 32 28 114.3***
AUT001 19 27 70.4
CZE122 15 1,384 1.1
IRL029 6129 4.7
ESP004 6246 2.4
AUS167 412 33.3
LBN020 2 4 50.0
THA513 1 - -
THA032 1 - -
EST019 1518 0.2
ETH013 117 5.9
Total 13,277 - -

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 21
Figure 3.3 Histogram showing the distribution of the estimated percentage of Brassica collections safety duplicated at the SGSV.
Estimates were binned in five categories, each with the same width and capped to 100% (n = 21).
same period, probably reflecting the smaller quanti-
ties of this type of material maintained in collections
and the low volume of use by requestors. Collection
managers painted a picture of generally increasing or
stable distribution of Brassica materials in the recent
past (Figure 3.4). Looking to the future, much the
same pattern was predicted. Currently, most of the
responding collections do not charge fees either for
requested seeds or to cover shipping costs (only four
respondents indicated that requestors were charged
fees). Ten respondents expressed concerns about
having procedures in place to deal with relevant phy-
tosanitary regulations relating to seed distribution.
This was confirmed during workshop discussions, as
comments were made about stricter testing require-
ments and delays in obtaining documentation from
relevant statutory authorities.
Storage conditions
Brassica seeds are recognized as orthodox, and the
recommended long-term storage conditions for such
seeds are 5% (+/− 1%) moisture content by weight
and a temperature of −18°C (FAO 2014). Seeds with
a low moisture content are hygroscopic, and conse-
quently will absorb atmospheric moisture very easily.
If this happens during storage at temperatures of
<0°C, then there will be a detrimental impact on seed
longevity. Moisture-proof packaging is therefore
required, and can take a variety of forms, from glass
to foil laminate pouches.
The survey results indicated that 15 of the 26 respon-
dents keep 100% of their collections under long-
term storage conditions. A further five collections
maintain part of their collections under long-term
conditions. The stated temperatures for long-term
storage ranged from −10°C to −20°C. One collection
reported that they use cryopreservation for long-term
storage of Brassica seeds, at a temperature of −180°C,
however most long-term storage facilities consist of
conventional cold chambers or freezers. Eight respon-
dents indicated that their collections are held under
medium-term storage conditions, with a further five
collections having <100% of their germplasm stored
under these conditions. Medium-term storage condi-
tions were reported as ranging from −20°C to +10°C,
the majority being around +4°C. The reported levels
of humidity in medium-term storage were variable,
ranging from 6% relative humidity (RH) to uncon-
trolled humidity. Most medium-term storage facilities
are cold chambers, although some collections reported
using freezers and one reported using a warehouse.
One collection reported that they use short-term
storage conditions, however the reported conditions
were akin to medium-term storage conditions (0°C
and 30% RH). The definition and interpretation of
short-, medium- and long-term storage conditions
therefore appeared to be somewhat variable across
the survey respondents.
Maintenance of seed moisture content, particularly
for successful long-term seed storage, is a key consid-
eration, and appropriate seed packaging is essential.
According to the survey responses, 22 collections pack
seeds in foil pouches, and 11 of those collections also
pack seeds under vacuum. Five collections reported
using glass containers and one reported using plastic
containers. Most collections (25 respondents, i.e. 96%)
reported that they dry seeds before medium- or long-
term storage, with most having access to low-tem-
perature drying equipment or space.
Addressing collection gaps
Ideally, global collections of Brassica crops, as for
other crops, would cover different crop types and
wild species at sufficient depth (in terms of numbers
of accessions) to ensure that crop genepool diversity,
in terms of alleles and frequencies, is represented

22 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
(ABS). On the whole, workshop participants felt that
cultivated types are better covered in collections
than are CWR. This contrasts with the survey findings
shown in Table 3.3 in terms of reported gaps, but not
all collections that responded to the survey manage
CWR within their germplasm collections, and others
have a limited remit, for example, national.
Managing CWR
Brassica CWR are key components of Brassica
genepool diversity. There is uneven coverage of
different groups of CWR within global collections;
wild/naturalized populations of cultivated species
are generally well covered but other taxa are poorly
represented. For the purposes of this strategy, con-
sideration was given to CWR in the Brassica genus.
Some species outside the Brassica genus could also be
considered as CWR (for example, species in the genera
Sinapis, Eruca and Raphanus can hybridize with Bras-
sica species); however, they have not been included in
this analysis. Species in these genera are crops in their
own right (for example Sinapis alba – white mustard,
Raphanus sativus – radish, Eruca sativa – rocket), so
not all species in those genera can be considered as
CWR.
The Brassica genus is polyphyletic, with closer relation-
ships between species currently classified in different
genera within major Brassica lineages (Warwick and
Black 1991). In total, 973 CWR accessions of Brassica
are listed in the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset.
and conserved. In fact, as with most crops, the global
collections of Brassica crops offer in-depth coverage
of some parts of the genepool more than others; this
is certainly true even when considering the six major
cultivated species (Table 3.3). Gaps in collections first
require identification and description before activities
(for example, collecting missions) are undertaken to
resolve the gaps.
Gaps in collections were indicated by 18 respondents.
The type of gap reported is shown in Table 3.3. Eco-
geographic and genetic gaps were the most commonly
identified, but gaps in the taxonomic coverage of col-
lections were frequently identified as well. Only two
respondents indicated gaps in existing CWR samples
within their collection, and one respondent indicated
that particular crop types were missing from their
collection. Some collections reported that they have
plans in place to deal with gaps; three respondents
indicated that collecting activities are already planned;
and eight would like to undertake such activities in
the future if resources permit. Four respondents indi-
cated no plans are in place, and a further nine gave no
information on future plans. Where comments were
given about the nature of gaps and plans to address
them, it was clear that collection managers recognize
the importance of ecogeographic coverage. Other
desirable targets included the conservation of specific
crop types, acquiring material with novel pest and
disease resistance, and ensuring that a good represen-
tation of genetic diversity within crops from specific
countries or regions is conserved.
The workshop discussions on the topic of collection
gaps revealed a recognition of the importance of
collections working together. It was generally seen
as a waste of resources to acquire material already
held in other collections that is available for distribu-
tion. Joint projects are likely to be needed, particu-
larly to aid smaller collections to meet their goals in
addressing gaps in their coverage. An additional con-
straint to gap filling and collection expansion are the
requirements surrounding Access and Benefit Sharing
Table 3.3 Summary of collection gaps identified by 26 survey
respondents.
Gap type Frequency of mention by survey
respondents
Ecogeographic 13 (50%)
Genetic 13 (50%)
Taxonomic 12 (46%)
CWR 2 (8%)
Crop type 1 (4%)
Figure 3.4 Changes in the volume of materials distributed from collections in the past 5–10 years (n = 19), and predicted change in
distribution in the next 5–10 years (n = 21).
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
100%
Change in distirbution over the past 5-10 years
Predicted change in distribution over the next 5-10 years
Increase Stay the same Decrease other

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 23
The 26 survey respondents indicated that 597 acces-
sions of 26 species (standardized taxonomy was
applied, Table 3.4) are conserved in their collections.
The survey respondents were also asked about avail-
ability. Not all respondents provided this information,
but those that did indicated that 293 accessions are
available to requestors.
Regeneration issues were felt to be particularly
relevant to Brassica CWR during discussions at the
workshop. Some participants noted the long juvenile
period of some species when grown for seed produc-
tion (five years is not unusual). This may be due to
environmental factors relating to the latitude and
conditions at particular institutions. Nevertheless, it
is potentially a significant factor in the availability of
seeds of certain Brassica CWR species.
Some identified gaps in the ex situ coverage of Bras-
sica CWR are Brassica assyriaca, Brassica beytepeensis,
Brassica cadmea, Brassica deserti, Brassica setulosa,
Brassica somalensis, Brassica taurica and Brassica
trichocarpa. Also, B. drepanensis and B. hilarionis, clas-
sified as Endangered by the International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)
(IUCN 2011; IUCN 2020), have a relatively low number
of conserved accessions. Some species are much better
covered than others (B. cretica, B. fruticulosa and
B.tournefortii in particular). This reflects taxonomic
diversity – sub-specific designations are used by collec-
tion holders, but the data in Table 3.4 are shown only
at the species level. Geographical range is another
factor; higher numbers of accessions may represent
good sampling across the recognized range of species.
Documentation
Efficient and accurate collection management requires
a suitable (fit for purpose) data management system.
This can be achieved by using specific or generic
database software systems. Alternatively, depending
on collection size and complexity, it can be carried out
adequately using a spreadsheet. However, the latter
will lack certain search and aggregation functions, and
this becomes more problematic with larger collections.
All but one of the collection holders responding to the
survey indicated that they use software for collection
management purposes. The most frequently used soft-
ware is GRIN-Global (used by 10 out of 26 collections,
i.e., 38%), a publicly available system developed from
open-source tools. It offers not only collection data
management but also a web tool for potential users
to search the collection data. Other software packages
used include MS Access and Excel, as well as bespoke
database systems developed specifically for each col-
lection. As indicated by the responses, data availability
to potential users is generally good:
22 respondents (85%) indicated that the collection
data are at least partly publicly available, and 17
(65%) further indicated that data are at least partly
available and searchable online.
Nineteen respondents (73%) reported that their data-
base system is fit for purpose. Three (12%) stated it is
not, but have plans to upgrade or change the system,
whilst two (8%) indicated that although the data
management system is not fit for purpose, there is no
plan in place for improvement.
The discussions during the workshop suggested that
it is difficult for collection managers to keep up with
best practice and understand what data management
tools are available to them, especially for smaller col-
lections with limited in-house information technology
expertise.
3.4 Summary of current ex situ conser-
vation status of Brassica crops and CWR
In general, Brassica crops are well-represented across
the global collections of PGR; however, concerns
and gaps do exist and require careful consideration
in terms of how to address them. The coverage of
crop species in particular reflects current agricultural
importance, with B. nigra being less represented in
global collections as its cultivation has not been as
widespread as that of other species.
The overall picture of the conservation of Brassica
genetic resources is also positive, at least for the
collection holders who responded to the survey.
Most collections are held in long- or medium-term
storage, and packaged appropriately to maximize
seed longevity. Regeneration was identified as a key
challenge, either in terms of staff, financial or physical
resources, or due to the biological nature of the mate-
rials conserved (F1 hybrids, biennial vegetable crops
compared with oilseeds, crop wild relatives adapted to
different physical environments). Regeneration is also
linked intrinsically to safety duplication – sufficient,
high-quality seeds must be available for duplicate
samples. Therefore, supporting regeneration activities,
particularly for germplasm that is otherwise poorly
represented across global collections, is essential to
improve the conservation and availability of Brassica
germplasm.
Collection holders indicated that they support the
use of their materials through distribution – however,
many mentioned budgetary constraints warranted the
use of with handling, sample or shipping fees, which
are passed on to users. Another issue of concern is
the developing area of phytosanitary regulations and
ensuring that requirements are met, now and in the
future.

24 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Table 3.4 Brassica CWR IUCN Red List category (IUCN 2011; IUCN 2020) and holdings as reported by 26 collection holders and in
the combined WIEWS/Genesys dataset (2022). Taxa reported in Genesys and WIEWS have been standardized and are reported only
at the species level. n/a, not applicable
Species In situ status (with source)
Accessions
in collection
as reported
in the
survey
Accessions
reported
in WIEWS/
Genesys
dataset
(2022)
Accessions
reported in
WIEWS and
Genesys and
included in
the MLS
B.assyriacaMouterde n/a - - -
B. aucheri Boiss. n/a 3 3
B. balearica Pers. Least Concern (IUCN 2011) 914 9
B. barrelieri (L.) Janka Least Concern (IUCN 2020) 19 20 10
B. beytepeensis Yıld. n/a - - -
B. bourgeaui (Webb ex Christ) Kuntze Threatened (National Red List 2008) 6 6 4
B. cadmeaHeldr. ex O.E.Schulz Data Deficient (IUCN 2011) - - -
B. cretica Lam. Least Concern (IUCN 2020) 95 146 12
B. deflexa Boiss. n/a 710 0
B. deserti Danin & Hedge n/a - - -
B. desnottesii EmB. & Maire Possibly Threatened (IUCN 1997) 3 4 1
B. dimorpha Coss. & Durieu Possibly Threatened (IUCN 1997) 1 3 0
B. drepanensis (Caruel) Damanti Endangered (IUCN 2020) 716 6
B. elongata Ehrh. Least Concern (IUCN 2020) 19 23 1
B. fruticulosa Cirillo Least Concern (IUCN 2020) 62 73 28
B. gravinae Ten. n/a 11 12 5
B. hilarionis Post Endangered (IUCN 2011) 2 9 1
B. incana Ten. Data deficient (IUCN 2011) 39 84 21
B. insularis Moris Near Threatened (IUCN 2011) 15 50 9
B. loncholoma Pomel n/a - 1 1
B. macrocarpa Guss. Critically endangered (IUCN 2011) 26 27 17
B. maurorum Durieu n/a 611 4
B. montana Pourr. Least Concern (IUCN 2011) 13 68 21
B. nivalis Boiss. & Heldr. Least Concern (IUCN 2020) - 1 0
B. procumbens (Poir.) O. E. Schulz n/a - 3 0
B. oxyrrhina (Coss.) Willk. Not Threatened (IUCN 2011) 912 4
B. repanda (Willd.) DC. Least Concern (IUCN 2011) 21 41 4
B. rupestris Raf. Near Threatened (IUCN 2011) 11 37 9
B. setulosa(Boiss. & Reut.) Coss. n/a - - -
B. somalensisHedge & A.G.Mill. n/a - - -
B. souliei Batt. n/a 5 7 3
B. spinescens Pomel Threatened (IUCN 1997) 4 6 2
B. taurica(Tzvelev) Tzvelev n/a - - -
B. tournefortii Gouan Least Concern (IUCN 2011) 171 242 55
B. trichocarpa C.Brullo, Brullo, Giusso & Ilardi n/a - - -
B. tyrrhena Giotta, Piccitto & Arrigoni n/a 1 1 0
B. villosa Biv. Near Threatened (IUCN 2011) 32 43 17
Total 597 973 244
The importance and diversity of Brassica CWR were
also noted, although not every collection manages
this type of germplasm. Taxonomic representation is
uneven across global collections, although this must
be considered alongside the relationship between the
cultivated and wild species concerned. The polyphy-
letic nature of the Brassica genus means that not all
species fall into the primary or secondary genepool of
the six crop species.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 25
Future investment and improvement plans targeting
enhanced conservation of Brassica genetic resources
around the world require careful consideration of
priorities to ensure optimal benefits. The literature
review, survey, and workshop discussions conducted
during the development of this strategy provide a
sound basis for determining priorities. These priorities
will support high-quality, efficient and cost-effective
conservation of Brassica genetic resources, ensuring
their improved and ongoing availability to users in the
future. Brassica crops are of major economic and nutri-
tional significance on a global level. Access to genetic
resources for research and breeding will help support
food and nutritional security for a growing global
population, and will support the development of the
improved crop varieties that are needed for more
sustainable farming systems.
4.1 Support for regeneration and long-
term storage
The survey results and workshop discussions indicated
that regeneration is very much a limiting factor, as
it affects other aspects of collection management,
4PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVING THE EX SITU
CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA
such as distribution to users and safety duplication.
Future financial assistance should be targeted at col-
lections that are unable to support sufficient regen-
eration activity, prioritizing unique and important
materials. Other means of achieving this objective
include networking activities among genebanks, so
that emergency regeneration can be provided as a
service by those with the resources and facilities to
do so. Such activities would also have to account for
the relevant plant health laws and regulations of the
countries concerned. Another option for improving
regeneration capacity is to seek assistance from other
organizations, such as plant breeding companies,
to provide additional capacity for at-risk accessions.
Some genebanks currently operate in partnership with
breeding companies, which contribute toward regen-
eration as an ‘in-kind’ form of support; a notable
example is the Centre for Genetic Resources in The
Netherlands. Improving the regeneration capacity
will ensure ongoing availability of materials to users,
as well as long-term conservation. As noted by the
workshop participants, safety duplication is linked to
regeneration activities, so that that duplicates consist
of high-quality, highly viable seeds. Ensuring collec-
Photo: Charlotte Allender

26 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
tions can carry out sufficient regeneration, targeting
unique and valuable materials, will support this essen-
tial component of collection management. Investment
in infrastructure to allow collections to use long-term
storage conditions where appropriate will reduce the
frequency of regeneration required, further improving
conservation efficiency and effectiveness.
4.2 Identification of unique materials
for priority conservation
Although more than 7.4 million accessions of all crops/
species are recorded in collections of PGR around the
world, only an estimated 30% of these are unique,
with duplicate samples being maintained within and
especially among collections (FAO 2010). Brassica
genetic resources are also likely duplicated across col-
lections; therefore, it is important to identify unique
materials to better target limited resources for con-
servation. Such an exercise would clarify gaps in the
global collection and enable collecting and gap-filling
activities to be planned.
However, the identification of duplicate materials is
far from straightforward. It is likely that this informa-
tion will only be gained through collective activities,
utilizing both existing collection (passport) infor-
mation and genetic/genomic approaches, as well as
phenotyping where necessary. This activity is likely
beyond the scope of individual collections, and will
require a joint approach, probably through a program
of activities carried out in parallel with routine collec-
tion maintenance. This work will need a collaborative
approach involving collection managers, experts in
genotyping and bioinformatics, and a coordinating
project secretariat. It will be necessary to identify the
most robust, cost-effective approaches and consult
with those that manage other crops (such as cereals),
where collections have already undergone character-
ization by genotyping or sequencing. Determining
the threshold for uniqueness is a key issue, along
with practical aspects of suitable sampling strategies
to compare diversity among heterogeneous popula-
tions. Because brassicas are outcrossing species — the
threshold level of inter-accession genetic diversity
compared with intra-accession genetic diversity that
would indicate accessions are different is not always
clear.
Characterization and evaluation activities also aid the
identification of significant accessions for conserva-
tion. Ideally, this could be carried out during regen-
eration activities to bring added value; however, this
is not always possible and additional resources are
required for these activities. The identification and
use of a set of minimum descriptors would allow for
comparison among collections. Various descriptor lists
are used, but not all descriptors on each list are scored
every time. Therefore, to allow comparisons among
datasets, it would be helpful to agree on a key min-
imum set of descriptors that are always scored.
Another issue is the taxonomic identification of mate-
rials in PGR collections. Not all collections have access
to taxonomic expertise, and errors can be made or
perpetuated. The analysis of accessions’ passport data
recorded in online databases after standardizing1 taxa,
as described above, is one way to address this issue,
although it is not clear how effective it will be given
the polyphyletic nature of the Brassica genus.
4.3 Documentation – making informa-
tion available to users and managers
The survey responses were encouraging – most collec-
tions already have, or are planning to install, software
capable of managing their collections and making
relevant data available to users where appropriate.
GRIN-Global is one tool available to all collections.
However, discussions in the workshop revealed a
gap between the requirements of some collections,
particularly smaller ones, and the technical capa-
bility to install and manage such packages. There is a
need to be able to share experiences with peers and
exchange information on best practices. This could
be achieved as part of dissemination activities under-
taken by a global Brassica PGR network (see point 5),
but also by co-opting other groups and organizations
with relevant interests, such as the relevant European
Co-operative Programme on Plant Genetic Resources
(ECPGR) working group (see ECPGR: ECPGR Documen-
tation and Information Working Group). It is essential
that support is continued for the further develop-
ment of GRIN-Global, including direct support to
users provided via the helpdesk, and training to assist
organizations to install the system and migrate their
data into it. Obviously, supporting and improving data
management in collections of PGR has benefits for the
conservation and use of all crops. Therefore, activities
undertaken to improve data management will have
much wider benefits beyond Brassica conservation.
4.4 Crop wild relatives
The CWR are an invaluable source of alleles and traits
for plant breeding programs. They are also essential
for research on plant and crop biology, evolution and
domestication. A gap analysis of global collections for
Brassica CWR is essential: the incomplete information
gained from the survey suggested that availability to
users may be an issue with this type of germplasm in
particular. Discussions at the workshop indicated that
some collection managers have problems with regen-
erating some taxa due to extended juvenile periods
1 Genesys also now includes an automatically generated
standardized taxon field.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 27
tial providers of in-kind support would be a means
of linking organizations for the best conservation
outcomes. A regional example of this kind of network
is the Brassica Working Group of the ECPGR. In this
group representing 34 countries, 75 members have a
range of roles, from collection curators, to researchers,
plant breeders and policy experts. This group provides
a forum for technical queries, project participation
and best-practice dissemination. A global network
would offer wider opportunities for cooperation and
improvements to conservation effectiveness and effi-
ciency. This network could be formed by inviting col-
lection holders to join the existing European network.
Such a network would ideally include a range of other
commercial and academic organizations with interests
in Brassica species. These organizations may be able
to provide expertise or resources to address regenera-
tion, as well as genetic or phenotypic characterization
and other issues. The network may also be able to
address and interact with phytosanitary authorities
to support the use of collections while managing
risk appropriately. A small amount of funding for a
secretariat would be required to ensure good commu-
nication.
before flowering. Understanding which accessions are
available for distribution at a global level, and which
require regeneration or re-collection, is an essential
step to ensure optimal conservation of these species.
This would include an assessment of intra-species
diversity facilitated by genetic/genomic analysis to
ensure that sufficient populations are sampled to con-
serve species genetic diversity. A gap analysis is being
undertaken for the wider Brassicaceae group of wild
relatives, and will provide the starting point for this
work (Castillo-Lorenzo et al. 2022). This will need to
be extended in terms of assessment of the accessions
currently available for distribution through consulta-
tion with collection managers.
4.5 A global Brassica PGR conservation
network
Networking among collections would allow for
sharing of best practices, and the provision of advice
and support on a sustained or ad hoc basis. A network
of Brassica collection holders would facilitate access
to crop- and taxon-specific expertise. Broadening the
network beyond collection holders to include poten-
Photo: Charlotte Allender

28 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
BMEL Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Germany
CWR Crop wild relatives
ECPGR European Co-operative Programme on Plant Genetic Resources
FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
Genesys-PGR Genesys-Plant Genetic Resources
GRIN-Global Germplasm Resource Information System - Global
IPK Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research
ITPGRFA International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
MTA Material transfer agreement
MYA Million years ago
PGR Plant genetic resources
RH Relative humidity
SMTA Standard material transfer agreement
SNP Single nucleotide polymorphism
WIEWS World Information and Early Warning System
YBP Years before present
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 29
Ahuja, I., Rohloff, J., Bones, A.M. 2010. Defence mech-
anisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-in-
sect interactions and potential for integrated pest
management. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable
Development 30: 311–348. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-
0394-0_28
Aukema, H., Campbell, L. 2011. Oil nutrition and
utilization. In: Daun, J.K., Eskin, N.A.M., Hickling,
D. (eds.). Canola. AOCS Press, Elsevier. pp 245–280.
DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-9818936-5-5.50013-9
Bird, K.A., An, H., Gazave, E., Gore, M.A., Pires, J.C.,
Robertson, L.D., Labate, J.A. 2017. Population struc-
ture and phylogenetic relationships in a diverse
panel of Brassica rapa L. Frontiers in Plant Science 8:
321. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00321
Blažević, I., Montaut, S., Burčul, F., Olsen, C.E., Burow,
M., Rollin, P., Agerbirk, N. 2020. 2020. Glucosino-
late structural diversity, identification, chemical
synthesis and metabolism in plants. Phytochemistry
169:112100. DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2019.112100
Branca, F., Fisichella, A. 2003. Response of Brassica
fruticulosa Cyr. to greenhouse cultivation. Leuven,
Belgium: International Society for Horticultural
Science (ISHS). pp 89–93.
CABI. 2022. Brassica tournefortii (African mustard).
Invasive Species Compendium.
Cai, C., Bucher, J., Bakker, F.T., Bonnema, G. 2022.
Evidence for two domestication lineages supporting
a middle-eastern origin for Brassica oleracea crops
from diversified kale populations. Horticulture
Research 9. DOI: 10.1093/hr/uhac033
Castillo-Lorenzo, E., Viruel, J., Breman, E. 2022. Identi-
fying conservation and knowledge gaps in culti-
vated and wild Brassicaceae. Asturias, Spain: Seed
Ecology VII, 6–9 September.
Chalhoub, B., Denoeud, F., Liu, S., Parkin, I.A., Tang, H.,
Wang, X., Chiquet, J., Belcram, H., Tong, C., Samans,
B., Corréa, M. 2014. Early allopolyploid evolution in
the post-Neolithic Brassica napus oilseed genome.
Science 345: 950–953. DOI: 10.1126/science.1253435
Couëdel, A., Alletto, L., Kirkegaard, J., Justes, É., 2018.
Crucifer glucosinolate production in legume-cru-
cifer cover crop mixtures. European Journal of
Agronomy 96: 22–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.eja.2018.02.007
Dar, J.A., Beigh, Z.A., Wani, A.A. 2017. Polyploidy: Evo-
lution and Crop Improvement. In: Bhat, T.A., Wani,
A.A. (eds.). Chromosome Structure and Aberrations.
New Delhi, India: Springer. pp 201–218.
Dixon, G.R. 2007. Vegetable brassicas and related cru-
cifers. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. 327p.
REFERENCES
Downey, R. 1964. A selection of Brassica campestris L.
containing no erucic acid in its seed oil. Canadian
Journal of Plant Science 44: 295–295. DOI: 10.4141/
cjps64-057
FAO. 2010. The Second Report on the State of the
World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agri-
culture. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Org.
FAO. 2014. Genebank Standards for Plant Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture. Revised Edi-
tion.
FAOSTAT. 2022. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Avail-
able online (accessed on 29 June 2022).
Franzke, A., Koch, M.A., Mummenhoff, K. 2016.
Turnip time travels: age estimates in Brassicaceae.
Trends in Plant Science 21: 554–561. DOI: 10.1016/j.
tplants.2016.01.024
Genesys. 2022. GENESYS Global Portal on Plant
Genetic Resources. Available online (accessed on 2
June 2022).
Golicz, A.A., Bayer, P.E., Barker, G.C., Edger, P.P., Kim,
H., Martinez, P.A., Chan, C.K.K., Severn-Ellis, A.,
McCombie, W.R., Parkin, I.A., Paterson, A.H. 2016.
The pangenome of an agronomically important
crop plant Brassica oleracea. Nature Communica-
tions 7:1–8. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms13390
Griffiths, D., Birch, A., Hillman. J. 1998. Antinutritional
compounds in the brasi analysis, biosynthesis,
chemistry and dietary effects. The Journal of Hor-
ticultural Science and Biotechnology 73: 1–18. DOI:
10.1080/14620316.1998.11510937
Groot, S.P., de Groot, L., Kodde, J., van Treuren, R.
2015. Prolonging the longevity of ex situ con-
served seeds by storage under anoxia. Plant
Genetic Resources 13: 18–26. DOI: 10.1017/
S1479262114000586
Gupta, S.K. 2016. Biology and Breeding of Cru-
cifers. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press. 406p. DOI:
10.1201/9781420086096
Hemmingway, J. 1976. Mustards: Brassica spp. and
Sinapis alba. Evolution of Crop Plants. New York,
USA: Longman Inc. pp. 57–59.
IBPGR. 1976. Report of the International Board for
Plant Genetic Resources working group on engi-
neering, design and cost aspects of long-term seed
storage facilities. Rome, Italy: IBPGR
IUCN. 1997. IUCN Red List of Threatened Plants.
Walter, K.S., Gillett, H.J. (eds.). IUCN.
IUCN. 2011. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Spe-
cies2011. www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on10
October 2022).

30 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
IUCN. 2020. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Spe-
cies2020. www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on10
October 2022).
Kang, L., Qian, L., Zheng, M., Chen, L., Chen, H., Yang,
L., You, L., Yang, B., Yan, M., Gu, Y., Wang, T. 2021.
Genomic insights into the origin, domestication and
diversification of Brassica juncea. Nature Genetics
53: 1392–1402. DOI: 10.1038/s41588-021-00922-y
Kaur, P., Banga, S., Kumar, N., Gupta, S., Akhatar, J.,
Banga, S.S., 2014. Polyphyletic origin of Brassica
juncea with B. rapa and B. nigra (Brassicaceae)
participating as cytoplasm donor parents in inde-
pendent hybridization events. American Journal of
Botany 101: 1157–1166. DOI: 10.3732/ajb.1400232
Lu, K., Wei, L., Li, X., Wang, Y., Wu, J., Liu, M., Zhang,
C., Chen, Z., Xiao, Z., Jian, H., Cheng, F., 2019.
Whole-genome resequencing reveals Brassica napus
origin and genetic loci involved in its improvement.
Nature Communications 10: 1–12. DOI: 10.1038/
s41467-019-09134-9
Mabry, M.E., Turner-Hissong, S.D., Gallagher, E.Y.,
McAlvay, A.C., An, H., Edger, P.P., Moore, J.D., Pink,
D.A., Teakle, G.R., Stevens, C.J., Barker, G. 2021. The
evolutionary history of wild, domesticated, and
feral Brassica oleracea (Brassicaceae). Molecular
Biology and Evolution 38: 4419–4434. DOI: 10.1093/
molbev/msab183
Maggioni, L., von Bothmer, R., Poulsen, G., Branca, F.
2010. Origin and domestication of cole crops (Bras-
sica oleracea L.): linguistic and literary consider-
ations. Economic Botany 64: 109–123. DOI: 10.1007/
s12231-010-9115-2
Maggioni, L., von Bothmer, R., Poulsen, G., Lipman, E.
2018. Domestication, diversity and use of Brassica
oleracea L., based on ancient Greek and Latin texts.
Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 65: 137–159.
DOI: 10.1007/s10722-017-0516-2
Maina, S., Misinzo, G., Bakari, G., Kim, H.Y., 2020.
Human, animal and plant health benefits of gluco-
sinolates and strategies for enhanced bioactivity: A
systematic review. Molecules 25: 3682. DOI: 10.3390/
molecules25163682
McAlvay, A.C., Ragsdale, A.P., Mabry, M.E., Qi, X., Bird,
K.A., Velasco, P., An, H., Pires, J.C., Emshwiller, E.
2021. Brassica rapa domestication: untangling wild
and feral forms and convergence of crop morpho-
types. Molecular Biology and Evolution 38: 3358–
3372. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msab108
Mitchell, N. 1976. The status of Brassica oleracea L.
subsp. oleracea (wild cabbage) in the British Isles.
Watsonia 11: 97–103.
Nagaharu, U., Nagaharu, N. 1935. Genome analysis in
Brassica with special reference to the experimental
formation of B. napus and peculiar mode of fertil-
ization. Japanese Journal of Botany 7: 389–452.
Nieuwhof, M. 1969. Cole crops. Botany, cultivation,
and utilization. World Crops Series. London, UK:
Leonard Hill. 353p.
Pakpour, S., Klironomos, J. 2015. The invasive plant,
Brassica nigra, degrades local mycorrhizas across a
wide geographical landscape. Royal Society Open
Science 2:150300. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.150300
Pérez-García, F., Gómez-Campo, C., Ellis, R. 2009.
Successful long-term ultra-dry storage of seed of 15
species of Brassicaceae in a genebank: variation in
ability to germinate over 40 years and dormancy.
Seed Science and Technology 37: 640–649.
Perumal, S., Koh, C.S., Jin, L., Buchwaldt, M., Higgins,
E.E., Zheng, C., Sankoff, D., Robinson, S.J., Kagale,
S., Navabi, Z.K., Tang, L. 2020. A high-contiguity
Brassica nigra genome localizes active centromeres
and defines the ancestral Brassica genome. Nature
Plants 6: 929–941. DOI: 10.1038/s41477-020-0735-y
Perumal, S., Waminal, N.E., Lee, J., Koo, H.J., Choi, B.S.,
Park, J.Y., Ahn, K., Yang, T.J. 2021. Nuclear and chlo-
roplast genome diversity revealed by low-coverage
whole-genome shotgun sequence in 44 Brassica
oleracea breeding lines. Horticultural Plant Journal
7: 539–551. DOI: 10.1016/j.hpj.2021.02.004
POWO. 2022. Plants of the World Online. Facilitated
by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
Rahmani, R., Beaufort, S., Villarreal-Soto, S.A., Tail-
landier, P., Bouajila, J., Debouba, M. 2019. Kom-
bucha fermentation of African mustard (Brassica
tournefortii) leaves: Chemical composition and bio-
activity. Food Bioscience 30: 100414. DOI: 10.1016/j.
fbio.2019.100414
Roberts, E.H. 1973. Predicting the viability of seeds.
Seed Science and Technology 1: 499–514.
Sanlier, N., Guler, S. 2018. The benefits of Brassica veg-
etables on human health. Journal of Human Health
Research 1: 1–13.
Schranz, M.E., Mohammadin, S., Edger, P.P. 2012.
Ancient whole genome duplications, novelty and
diversification: The WGD radiation lag-time model.
Current Opinion in Plant Biology 15: 147–153. DOI:
10.1016/j.pbi.2012.03.011
Seepaul, R., Kumar, S., Iboyi, J.E., Bashyal, M., Stansly,
T.L., Bennett, R., Boote, K.J., Mulvaney, M.J., Small,
I.M., George, S., Wright, D.L. 2021. Brassica carinata:
Biology and agronomy as a biofuel crop. GCB Bio-
energy 13: 582–599. DOI: 10.1111/gcbb.12804
SGSV. 2022. Svalbard Global Seed Vault Seed Portal.
Available online (accessed on 26 August 2022).
Singh, R., Semwal, D., Bhatt, K. 2015. Characteriza-
tion and evaluation of Asian mustard (Brassica
tournefortii Gouan.): An endangered oilseed crop
of northwestern India. Indian Journal of Plant
Genetic Resources 28: 278–281. DOI: 10.5958/0976-
1926.2015.00035.2

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 31
Song, X., Wei, Y., Xiao, D., Gong, K., Sun, P., Ren, Y.,
Yuan, J., Wu, T., Yang, Q., Li, X., Nie, F. 2021. Bras-
sica carinata genome characterization clarifies U’s
triangle model of evolution and polyploidy in Bras-
sica. Plant Physiology 186: 388–406. DOI: 10.1093/
plphys/kiab048
Stefansson, B., Kondra, Z. 1975. Tower summer rape.
Canadian Journal of Plant Science 55: 343–344. DOI:
10.4141/cjps75-053
Tagele, S.B., Kim, R.H., Shin, J.H. 2021. Interactions
between Brassica biofumigants and soil microbiota:
Causes and impacts. Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry 69: 11538–11553. DOI: 10.1021/acs.
jafc.1c03776
USDA, A.R.S., National Plant Germplasm System. 2022.
Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN
Taxonomy). National Germplasm Resources Labora-
tory, Beltsville, Maryland, USA.
Walters, C., Wheeler, L.M., Grotenhuis, J.M. 2005.
Longevity of seeds stored in a genebank: species
characteristics. Seed Science Research 15: 1–20. DOI:
10.1079/SSR2004195
Warwick, S.I., Black, L.D. 1991. Molecular systematics
of Brassica and allied genera (subtribe Brassicinae,
Brassiceae)—chloroplast genome and cytodeme
congruence. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 82:
81–92. DOI: 10.1007/BF00231281
Wellington, P., Quartely, C. 1972. practical system for
classifying, naming and identifying some cultivated
brassicas. Journal of the National Institute of Agri-
cultural Botany 12(3): 413–432.

32 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Appendix 1. Brassica genetic resources stakeholders survey
Brassica Conservation Strategy
Introduction
The Global Crop Diversity Trust (the Crop Trust) is an international non-profit organization, whose mission is to
conserve and make available crop genetic diversity in perpetuity, thus ensuring global food security. As part of
this mission, the Crop Trust has supported the development of 28 crop-specific conservation strategies to date,
available at www.croptrust.org/our-work/supporting-crop-conservation/conservation-strategies/. These strategies
comprehensively assess the status of crop conservation globally, with a particular emphasis on ex situ collections,
and identify key priority actions needed to preserve crop diversity effectively and efficiently for the future.
New strategies are currently under development for additional crops, including brassicas (Brassica spp.). The
Brassica Global Conservation Strategy is being coordinated by an independent consultant (Dr. Charlotte Allender)
commissioned by the Crop Trust. The strategy will critically depend on input and feedback from Brassica specialists
and collection curators. As such, the following questionnaire has been designed to connect with collection curators
worldwide, in order to make a baseline assessment of the current conservation status of Brassica genetic resources.
We would like to invite you to become a partner in this global initiative by completing the brassica questionnaire:
As the curator and/or manager of a brassica ex situ collection, the information you provide will be vital to our
global assessment. The collection data we receive via the questionnaire will be used to address not only the extent
of Brassica genetic diversity conserved worldwide, but also how securely it is conserved and if there are any collec-
tion gaps. The questionnaire contains 81 questions and should take approximately 60-90 minutes to complete.
Please complete the survey at your earliest convenience, but no later than Monday 28th February, 2022 and return
by email reply. Survey responses, questions/concerns on how to complete the questionnaire, or feedback on the
strategy itself, can be directed to Charlotte Allender (charlotte.allender@warwick.ac.uk).
Thank-you in advance for your participation in this important initiative!
Note: One question (Q12) needs to be answered separately, please see the additional file for Q12 sent along with
the survey email (if applicable for your collection).
Data Protection
The data you supply will be used to develop a global ex situ brassica conservation strategy. It will be held securely
by the University of Warwick and will be shared with The Crop Trust (headquartered in Germany) for the same
purpose. Your responses to the survey will be aggregated and anonymized in the final published document. Your
personal details will not be shared with third parties, however with your permission we would like to include your
name, institutional details and contact email address in the final Brassica strategy document.
Any questions, requests, or complaints you may have regarding the processing of your personal data can be sent to
us by email at dataprotection@croptrust.org or by post to Platz der Vereinten Nationen 7, 53113 Bonn, Germany.
Please check the appropriate boxes below:
 I confirm that I have read and understand the data protection rules
 I give consent to the processing of my personal data the purposes of the research (Optional)
 I give consent to the processing of my personal data by including my name, institutional details, and contact
email address in the final Brassica strategy document (Optional)
APPENDICES

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 33
ORGANIZATION INFORMATION
1. Organization holding/maintaining the Brassica collection:
Name of Organization
Address
City/Town
State/Province
ZIP/Postal Code
Country
Website
2. Curator in charge of the Brassica collection:
Name
Job Title
Telephone
Email
3. Name of respondent to this questionnaire (if not as above):
Name
Function/Job Title
Telephone
Email
4. Additional key contact person for the Brassica collection (if applicable):
Name
Function/Job Title
Telephone
Email
5. Is the organization in charge of the Brassica collection the legal owner of the collection?
(Y/N) If not, who is the owner?
6. Describe the organization (select one):
Governmental organization
University
Private organization
NGO or charity
Other (please specify)
7. Does the genebank or collection operate under a national conservation strategy, policy, or plan? (Y/N) If yes,
please specify.
8. Who has the most influence on genebank priorities (e.g., objectives, species focus, activities)? (Select one).
The curator(s) of the collection
The organization/department
management
A governing committee
A stakeholder committee
Other (please specify)

34 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
THE BRASSICA COLLECTION
9. Basic information on the Brassica collection:
Year of establishment
Total number of Brassica accessions (today)
Total number of Brassica species (today)
Total number of Brassica accessions currently available for distribution
10. The main objectives of the collection include (select all that apply):
Long-term conservation
Working collection for public breeding/research program
Working collection for private breeding/research program
Academic or educational use
Reference collection
Other (please specify)
11. For the cultivated species, Brassica, indicate the number of accessions by germplasm type:
B. oleracea B. rapa B. nigra B. carinata B. juncea B. napus
Total number of accessions
Landraces
Obsolete/traditional cultivars
Advanced/improved cultivars
Breeding/research materials
Specialist genetic stocks
Wild or weedy populations
Unknown
Other
12. If you hold accessions of other Brassica species, please complete the additional document “Brassica Crop Wild
Relatives (Q12)” to detail your collection holdings by species. Please return via email with the questionnaire.
13. To what extent do you consider the Brassica accessions in your collection to be unique and not duplicated
elsewhere (excluding safety duplication)?
100% unique More than 50%
unique
Less than 50%
unique Fully duplicated elsewhere
Cultivated Brassica
Wild Brassica
Crop wild relatives (i.e.,
other Brassica spp.)
14. Across the entire Brassica collection, how many countries of origin are represented?
15. Describe the geographic origins of the collection by indicating the proportion (%) of cultivated Brassica
accessions that were collected/obtained (total should sum to 100%):
Nationally
Regionally (excluding own country)
Internationally (excluding own region)
Unknown

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 35
16. Are there any known or perceived gaps in your Brassica collection (check all that apply):
Genetic gaps
Taxonomic gaps
Ecogeographic gaps
Other gaps
Please briefly describe any gaps.
17. If there are collection gaps, as indicated in Q17, how and when do you plan to fill these gaps, if at all?
18. To what extent do you consider duplication within your Brassica collection to be a problem?
No duplication within the collection
Low amounts of duplication (< 10%)
Moderate amounts of duplication (10-30%)
Duplication is extensive (> 30%)
Do you have plans to conduct collection rationalization to eliminate duplicates?
19. To characterize collection dynamics, indicate the number of Brassica accessions that have been:
Acquired in the past 10 years?
Lost from the collection in the past 10 years?
Removed as they were identified as duplicates?
EX SITU CONSERVATION FACILITIES
20. Indicate the proportion (%) of Brassica accessions that are maintained under the following conditions:
(Note: if accessions are maintained under multiple conditions, total may exceed 100%.)
Short-term storage
Medium-term storage
Long-term storage
For the following questions in this section (Q24-Q30), you need answer only for the storage conditions applicable
for your collection.
24-26. Please describe the storage facilities (check all that apply):
Short-term storage (Q24) Medium-term storage (Q25) Long-term storage (Q26)
Type of facility (warehouse, cold
chamber, freezer, etc.)
Conservation method (seed, in
vitro, etc.)
Temperature (°C)
Relative humidity (%)
27. The storage facilities may be best understood as (check all that apply):
Short-term storage Medium-term storage Long-term storage
Cold chambers
Individual freezers
Air-conditioned rooms
Air-conditioned rooms with
dehumidifier
Not climate-controlled

36 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
28. The temperature and relative humidity are monitored by (check all that apply):
Short-term storage Medium-term storage Long-term storage
Internal temperature monitors
Internal relative humidity monitors
External sounding alarms
Automated monitoring system
Daily visit by genebank or security staff
Others (please specify)
29. What type of packaging is used for seed conservation (check all that apply):?
Short-term storage Medium-term storage Long-term storage
Sealed aluminum packs
Sealed, vacuum-packed aluminum packs
Plastic containers
Glass containers
Paper envelopes or bags
Cloth bags
Other (please specify)
30. Are seeds dried before storage?
Short-term storage Medium-term storage Long-term storage
Yes
No
N/A
31. Do the genebank facilities include (check all that apply):
Separate work areas for ‘dirty’ and ‘clean’ seed handling procedures
Separate work areas for seed packaging for storage and distribution
Dedicated laboratory and trained staff for seed viability testing
Dedicated laboratory and trained staff for seed health testing
Low temperature seed dryer
Suitable field sites for regeneration and multiplication
Greenhouse/glasshouse facilities for regeneration and multiplication
Other (please specify)
GERMPLASM MANAGEMENT
32. Have you established a genebank management system or written procedures/protocols for:
Yes No N/A
Acquisition
Conservation (storage, maintenance, etc.)
Regeneration
Characterization
Distribution
Safety duplication
Information management
Germplasm health (viability testing, phytosanitary, etc.)

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 37
33. The genebank uses written procedures and protocols from (check all that apply):
No written procedures or protocols
Hanson 1985. Practical Manuals for Genebanks No. 1: Procedures for Handling Seeds in Genebanks. IBPGR.
FAO/IPGRI 1994. Genebank Standards.
Rao et al. 2006. Handbooks for Genebanks No. 8: Manual of Seed Handling in Genebanks. Bioversity
International.
Organization’s own “Operational Genebank Manual”
Written and verified Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for key processes
A Quality Management System (QMS)
Other (please specify)
34. Please describe your quality control activities for conserved seeds:
Frequency Protocols/Methods
Germination testing
Viability testing
Health testing
35. What are the parameters used to determine regeneration requirements and to maintain the viability of your
Brassica collection?
36. What proportion (%) of your Brassica collection requires urgent regeneration (apart from the normal routine
regeneration)?
Cultivated Brassica
Wild Brassica
Crop wild relatives (other Brassica spp.)
37. Is the collection affected by diseases that may restrict germplasm distribution? (Y/N) If yes, please list the rele-
vant diseases and describe the extent.
SAFETY DUPLICATION
38. Are accessions safety duplicated at another genebank?
Yes
Partly
No
Don’t know
If you answered Yes or Partly, please complete the following three questions (Q39-Q41). If No, skip these ques-
tions.
39. Please indicate the proportion (%) of Brassica accessions safety duplicated by arrangement:
(Note: if accessions are safety duplicated at more than one location, total may exceed 100%.)
Svalbard
Black box outside country
Integrated in another collection outside country
Black box within country
Integrated in another collection within country
Other

38 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
40. Please list the institution(s) where your germplasm is safety duplicated.
41. Do all safety duplication sites have formal agreements to establish terms and obligations? (Y/N)
42. Are there constraints to duplicating the collection outside your country? (Y/N) If yes, please specify.
43. Are Brassica accessions from other collections safety duplicated at your facilities? (Y/N) If yes, please provide
the name(s) of the original collection holder(s) and the number of accessions?
DOCUMENTATION AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
44. Do you use a searchable electronic platform (computerized database) for storing and retrieving accession-level
data? (Y/N) If yes, what software is used?
45. The accession-level information is (check all that apply):
Public
Private
Available by written catalogue or by contacting the curator
Available & searchable online within the institute
Available & searchable online outside the institute
46. If the accession-level information is publicly available on the internet, please provide the URL (web address).
47. The accession-level database provides the following information (check all that apply):
Passport
Taxonomy
Characterization
Evaluation
Genotypes
Images
Distribution
Other (please specify)
48. What proportion (%) of the Brassica collection has:
Passport data
Geo-referencing data
49. If you use a computerized database to manage the collection and share accession data, is it adequate to
meet the needs of both the genebank and users? (Y/N) If inadequate, are there plans to upgrade or improve this
system?
50. Are the accession-level data describing your collection available in other, external databases?
Yes Partly No If Yes/Partly, specify the database(s):
National
Regional
International

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 39
CHARACTERIZATION AND EVALUATION
51-52. What proportion (%) of cultivated and wild accessions have:
Cultivated accessions (Q51) Wild accessions (Q52)
Agro-morphological (phenotypic) characterization data
Genotypic characterization data (molecular markers, etc.)
Abiotic stress tolerance data
Biotic stress tolerance data
53. If abiotic/biotic stresses have been at least partially assessed, please list the specific stresses that have been
evaluated.
54. Indicate the descriptors used for agro-morphological characterization:
FAO/IPGRI multi-crop passport descriptors (MCPD 2015)
IBPGR brassica descriptors (1985)
Institute-specific descriptors
UPOV descriptors
USDA brassica descriptors
Other (please specify)
55. Can you describe any core collections or other trait-specific subsets of accessions that have been established
for the Brassica collection?
DISTRIBUTION
56. Do you distribute accessions from your Brassica collection? (Y/N) If no, why not?
If you answered Yes to the previous question (Q56), please complete the remaining questions in this section (Q57-
Q69). If you answered No, you may skip to the next section.
57. Are you able to distribute:
Only to users in your own country
Only to users in certain countries (i.e., regionally)
Internationally, to any country
58. What best describes the conditions that must be met for distribution:
Freely distributed without terms or conditions
Institutional material transfer agreement (MTA) or other bi-lateral agreement
The Nagoya Protocol for the CBD
The International Treaty on PGR for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA)
Other (please specify)
59. For the following categories, how many accessions are typically distributed annually (average of last 3 years)?
Answer where applicable. (Note: wild materials include wild Brassica as well as other Brassica species.)
Nationally Internationally
Cultivated accessions
Wild accessions

40 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
60. How have your distributions changed over the last 5-10 years?
Increased
Stayed the same
Decreased
61. How do you expect your distributions to change over the next 5-10 years?
Increase
Stay the same
Decrease
62. Are there factors that currently limit, or may limit in future, the distribution and use of materials maintained
in your collection? Please detail in space below.
63. Do you keep records of the germplasm distributed? (Y/N)
64. Of your annual distributions, what kind of users have received germplasm from your collection? Please esti-
mate the proportion (%) of total distribution over the last 5 years (total should sum to 100%):
Farmers or farmer organizations
Governmental departments
Other genebank curators
Academic researchers and students (universities)
Research institutes
Breeding programs: public sector
Breeding programs: private sector
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
Other
65. Do you charge fees for the following services? (Y/N)
The cost of accessions
The cost of shipping
66. Do you have any concerns over the procedures in place for: (Y/N)
Phytosanitary certification
Packaging
Shipping
67. Do you routinely solicit feedback from recipients on the following aspects (check all that apply):
Timeliness of the distribution
Helpfulness of genebank staff in selection of accessions
Quality of samples sent
Quality and usefulness of accession-level information received
Usefulness of the accessions received
Reports/publications resulting from the evaluation or use of the accessions
received
Resultant characterization/evaluation data sets
Varietal releases
Other (please specify)

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 41
68. How do germplasm users influence the management of the collection (check all that apply)?
Through feedback on available materials/distributions
Through formal consultations
Through participation in the governing body of the genebank
Other (please specify)
69. How are the accessions available for distribution publicized?
LONG-TERM COLLECTION VULNERABILITY
70. Does your organization provide most or all of the recurrent costs for maintaining the Brassica collection? (Y/N)
If not, who are your other significant funders?
71. How has the budget for conservation of the collection changed over the last 5 years?
Increased
Stable
Decreased
If it has decreased, please describe any other funds sourced to make up the shortfall?
72. Do you have adequate staff, training, and expertise for: (Y/N)
Number of staff Level of expertise Training
Managing routine annual genebank operations
Meeting annual distribution requests
Addressing the needs of users for accession-level information
73. Has there been a formal risk assessment performed and management plan developed for the genebank? (Y/N)
If yes, how recently?
74. What do you consider to be the 3 most important vulnerabilities or threats to the Brassica collection?
1:
2:
3:
75. What are the primary disease/pathogen or pest concerns for:
Seed storage
Distribution
Regeneration/multiplication
76. How do you predict the size of the collection to change in the next 10 years?
Stay approximately the same size
Limited expansion (5-10%)
Substantial increase (>10%)
Decrease owing to collection rationalization
Decrease due to lack of funding/facilities

42 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
77. Please indicate the current and expected situation of your Brassica collection with respect to the following risk
factors, where 1 = excellent, 2 = adequate, 3 = insufficient, N/A = not applicable:
Current situation Expected situation (2027 onwards)
Funding for routine operations/maintenance
Retention of trained staff
Interest for PGR conservation by donors
Genetic variability in the collections needed by users/
breeders
Access to germplasm information (passport data, etc.)
Feedback from users
Use by breeders/researchers
NETWORKS AND PARTNERSHIPS
78. Does your genebank collaborate with other collection holders? If yes, please describe the form of your collab-
orations (check all that apply):
Collection Repatria-
tion Research Safety
duplication Training Other
Other national ex situ collection holders
Other regional or international ex situ
collection holders
In situ conservation sites
On farm conservation sites
Community seedbanks
Protected sites for wild relatives
Other (please specify)
79. Do you collaborate with an in situ conservation programme? (Y/N) If yes (or planned for future), please
describe.
80. Do you participate (or have you participated in the last 10 years) in a plant genetic resource network
(including germplasm holders and/or users)? (Y/N) If yes, please describe the network & provide a URL if appli-
cable.
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
81. Please add any further comments you may have in regard to your Brassica collection and/or this question-
naire. Recommendations for the brassica conservation strategy are also welcome.
Thank-you for your participation!
Any questions about this survey or the Global Strategy may be directed to:
Dr Charlotte Allender
charlotte.allender@warwick.ac.uk

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 43
Laura Marek
USDA-ARS Plant Introduction Research Unit, Ames, IA
1305 State Ave
Ames, IA 50014 USA
Parthenopi Ralli
Greek Gene Bank,
Hellenic Agricultural Organisation-Dimitra
Institute of Plant Breeding & Genetic Resources
PO Box 60458
Thermi, Thessaloniki GR-570 01Greece
Chair
Charlotte Allender, Consultant to the Crop Trust
Attendees – 23 June 2022
Appendix 2. Stakeholders’ meetings participants
Brassica Global Conservation Strategy: Report from workshops
Workshop dates 23 and 24 June 2022
Humberto Nóbrega
Banco de Germoplasma – Universidade da Madeira
Campus da Penteada
Funchal
Madeira 9020-105 Portugal
Attendees – 24 June 2022
Catherine Cook
Greek Gene Bank, Hellenic Agricultural Organisa-
tion-Dimitra
Institute of Plant Breeding & Genetic Resources PO
Box 60458
Thermi, Thessaloniki GR-570 01 Greece
Ulrike Lohwasser
Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant
Research (IPK)
Corrensstrasse 3
Seeland, OT Gatersleben
Saxony Anhalt 06466 Germany
Catrina Fenton
Garden Organic (Heritage Seed Library)
Ryton Organic Gardens, Wolston Lane
Coventry CV8 3LG GBR
Sally Norton
Australian Grains Genebank (AUS165)
110 Natimuk Road
Horsham, Vic 3400 Australia
Vincent Richer
INRAE
Domaine de Keraïber
Ploudaniel
Finistère 29260 France
Anne-Marie Chèvre
INRAE
Institut Agro, Université de Rennes
Domaine de la Motte 35653 Le Rheu France
Laura Reiners
Centre for Genetic Resources the Netherlands
Droevendaalsesteeg 1
Wageningen Gelderland 6708PD The Netherlands
Pavel Kopecký
Crop Research Institute
Drnovská 507/73
Praha 6 – Ruzyně 161 06 Czechia
Desirée Afonso Morales
Centro de Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola
de Tenerife (CCBAT)
Calle Retama 2. Jardín de Aclimatación de La Orotava
Puerto de La Cruz
Santa Cruz de Tenerife 38400 Spain
Najla Mezghani
National Gene Bank of Tunisia (NGBT)
Boulevard Leader Yasser Arafat
Charguia 1
Tunis 1080 Tunisia

44 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
AGENDA
1. Introductions – project and participants
2. Workshop goals
3. Summary of survey responses
4. Discussion of priorities/issues to be addressed in the
global conservation strategy document
5. Open questions/further discussion
Topic areas in strategy document: identification of
issues and recommendations for solutions
• Gaps in existing collections
• Documentation and information
• Distribution
• Safety Duplication
• Regeneration
• Seed storage/seed health
• Characterization/evaluation data
• Genotyping and sequencing data
• Brief introductions were given by those present.
1. Charlotte Allender outlined the goals of the
workshop: to present key results from the survey,
to clarify the purpose of the crop strategy docu-
ments and to seek input from the Brassica genetic
resources community regarding priorities and rec-
ommendations to be included and discussed in the
strategy document.
2. Major results from the survey were presented,
highlighting key themes of responses. These can be
seen on the workshop slides, available as a separate
document.
3. Discussion of priorities/recommendations. The key
topics listed were considered by those present in
terms of reflections on their own current practice
and what should be recommended for the future to
improve the conservation status of global Brassica
collections. Comments and questions from both
workshops have been amalgamated into a
Discussion topics
Gaps in existing collections
• It is difficult to expand collections, particularly with
ABS regulations and requirements.
• It is important to identify unique and important
material across collections so that efforts aren’t
wasted on recollecting material held elsewhere
(joint projects are needed, particularly supporting
smaller collections who may not have the resources
to undertake this exercise alone).
Agenda for Workshop on Global Conservation Strategy for Brassica Crops
23 and 24 June 2022
To be held online via Microsoft Teams
• Gaps are likely to be mostly in the Brassica CWR –
most cultivated material is reasonably covered.
• Survey respondents indicated a desire for collection
activities, but only a few.
• One collection will take a different approach to
identifying gaps and use genotyping/sequencing to
analyze genepool diversity and identify materials
that could enhance diversity representation overall.
Documentation and Information
• Only one collection reported having no database.
The majority of collections used GRIN Global, with
Microsoft Access and bespoke SQL/Oracle options
also being used.
• It was suggested that a means to share best practice
and allow collection managers to find out about
potential options would be helpful, particularly at
the point at which new data management solutions
are being considered.
Distribution
• Constraints discussed regarding distribution of
germplasm ranged from confusion over Nagoya
requirements (especially regarding wild species),
problems with obtaining the necessary phytosan-
itary documentation and obtaining government
level permission to distribute from collections
where this is required.
• Possible solutions included use of the SMTA even
for non-Annex 1 material to streamline practice. It
might also be possible for larger collections to take
in valuable material to their collections and assist
with distribution.
Safety Duplication
• Safety duplication is regarded as an essential
component of good collection management. Most
collections were at least partly duplicated, and
duplication was linked in several cases to regenera-
tion. (Samples are sent for safety duplication when
accessions are regenerated to avoid old/less viable
seeds being used as a duplicate.)
• Some collections were backed up in national facili-
ties, others internationally.
• The requirement for triplicate samples by the SGSV
was seen as a constraint, as was the preparation
and shipping of samples for smaller collections.
• One collection backed up material produced at
each growing cycle, and this allowed them to check
back to identify the source of any errors noted.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 45
Regeneration
• Regeneration was identified as a key constraint to
distribution and a factor in the long-term vulnera-
bility of Brassica collections in the survey.
• Issues reported included capacity for regeneration
with adequate isolation of outcrossing Brassica
accessions – for example, many collections have
fixed numbers of isolation cages, which cannot
be easily expanded. Genetic integrity/erosion was
identified as a vulnerability by some collection man-
agers in the survey.
• Field isolation facilities are vulnerable to storm
damage.
• Staff resources to handle regeneration was a
constraining factor in some collections, sometimes
requiring that fewer isolation facilities are used
than would otherwise be the case.
• One collection reported that as capacity was con-
strained, a small sample of plants was grown up
to check homogeneity and morphology of each
material before it underwent a regeneration cycle –
to avoid wasting effort in propagating incorrect or
contaminated materials.
• Collaboration with the private sector can increase
regeneration capacity – usually carried out as an ‘in
kind’ contribution to collection management. This
is much appreciated as it increases the capacity, but
collection managers lose direct control of the mate-
rial and regeneration conditions.
• New modern varieties are F1 hybrids and the
crossing controls (restorer lines, etc.) are not avail-
able. Parental inbred lines are also unavailable. Two
collections reported that they maintain F1 hybrid
accessions by producing an F2 population where
possible. Where this is not possible, seeds will
remain in the collection for as long as they remain
viable but cannot be propagated further.
• Differences in the ease of regeneration among
accessions were noted, impacted by the local envi-
ronment/latitude of the collection and the regener-
ation location. Many brassicas require vernalization,
which can be hard to manage. Oilseed types are
much easier to manage than some of the vegetable
forms, where attaining reproductive maturity can
be challenging.
• Brassica CWR can be hard to manage in terms of
regeneration – they can take up to 4–5 years to
reach flowering, and only a few plants flower per
growing season in some cases. This may be due
to temperature/daylength combinations and light
quality within glasshouses.
Seed storage/seed health
• Only one collection reported that it had no
medium- or long-term storage; in general, storage
conditions appeared to be acceptable.
• Regarding monitoring of seed health, it was noted
that genetic differences among accessions mean
that seed-lot viability differs, even among acces-
sions regenerated in the same environment at
the same time. Therefore, testing all accessions is
important to avoid missing this variation. Another
suggestion was to test at shorter frequencies as
seeds age to adequately capture the relatively
sharp drop-off in viability that occurs towards the
end of the seeds’ lifespan.
Characterization – including genotyping and
sequencing
• Characterization was considered as a valuable
but constrained activity according to the survey
responses. The workshop participants discussed the
potential routine use of sequencing in collection
management and characterization.
• Most Brassica accessions represent variable popula-
tions rather than genetically homogenous entities –
when sequencing/genotyping, how do the methods
used account for this? A single sample may not be
representative, with cost implications for sampling
strategies. An alternative is to bulk material sam-
pled from a number of individuals.
• The experience of the IPK in sequencing their
entire barley collection was discussed — even for a
self-pollinating species, some diversity was present
in all accessions so it was difficult to ascertain what
level of difference should be counted as ‘unique.’
The degree of genetic difference often did not cor-
relate with phenotypic variation in the field. Care
is therefore needed before making decisions based
on these types of datasets.

46 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Appendix 3. 20 largest collections of the six major cultivated Brassica species
Tables providing details of the 20 largest collections of the six major cultivated Brassica species, including FAO institute code, full name,
and number of reported accessions – data sources: Online databases (Genesys and FAO/WIEWS) and survey (survey of Brassica collection
holders 2022).
Table 1. Brassica nigra
  Number of B. nigra
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of Institute Online
databases
Survey
2022
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport and
Resources 225 183
DEU271 External Branch North of the Department Genebank, IPK, Oil Plants and Fodder Crops in
Malchow 128 128
USA020 North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, USDA-ARS, NCRPIS 99 99
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 69 72
PAK001 Plant Genetic Resources Program 70 
CAN004 Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre 25 57
ETH085 Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute 52 
RUS001 N.I. Vavilov Research Institute of Plant Industry 47 48
BGR001 Institute for Plant Genetic Resources ‘K.Malkov’ 32 
CZE122 Gene bank 28 
JPN183 NARO Genebank 28 
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 224
ESP003 Comunidad de Madrid. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Escuela Técnica Superior de
Ingenieros Agrónomos. Banco de Germoplasma 23 
GBR004 Millennium Seed Bank Project, Seed Conservation Department, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew,
Wakehurst Place 23 23
ISR002 Israel Gene Bank for Agricultural Crops, Agricultural Research Organisation, Volcani Center 23 
NLD037 Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands 23 23
ITA331 Facolta di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Catania 422
UKR013 Ivano-Frankivs’k Institute of Agroindustrial Production 21 
NZL001 Margot Forde Forage Germplasm Centre, AgResearch Ltd 515
HUN003 Institute for Agrobotany 14 
Table 2. Brassica oleracea
  Number of B. oleracea
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of institute Online
databases
Survey
2022
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 3,994 4,276
RUS001 VIR 2,472
USA003 Northeast Regional Plant Introduction Station, Plant Genetic Resources Unit, USDA-ARS,
New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University 1,595 
DEU146 Genebank, Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research 1,301 1,534
FRA010 Institut de Génétique Environnement et Protection des Plantes, Plant Biology and Breeding,
INRA Ploudaniel 767 892
ESP027 Gobierno de Aragón. Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria. Banco de
Germoplasma de Hortícolas 120 834
PRT001 Portuguese Bank of Plant Germplasm 741 
BGR001 Institute for Plant Genetic Resources ‘K.Malkov’ 736 
JPN183 NARO Genebank 679 
NLD037 Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands 644 644

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 47
  Number of B. oleracea
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of institute Online
databases
Survey
2022
POL003 Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute 506 
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 484 1
BGD206 Lal Teer Seed Limited 481 
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport and
Resources 461 427
SWE054 Nordic Genetic Resource Center 380 454
USA974 Seed Savers Exchange 454 
CZE122 Gene bank 271 440
ITA331 Facolta di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Catania 209 411
MNG030 Plant Science Agricultural Research and Training Institute 406 
ESP026 Generalidad Valenciana. Universidad Politècnica de Valencia. Escuela Técnica Superior de
Ingenieros Agrónomos. Banco de Germoplasma 323 
Table 3. Brassica carinata
Number of B. carinata
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of institute Online
databases Survey 2022
ETH085 Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute 639 
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 10 271
PAK001 Plant Genetic Resources Program 243 
DEU146/
DEU271 Genebank, Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research 142 142
TWN001 World Vegetable Center 134 133
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport
and Resources 129 120
ZMB048 National Plant Genetic Resources Centre 109 
NLD037 Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands 108 108
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 73 104
CAN004 Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre 91 92
USA020 North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, USDA-ARS, NCRPIS 78 78
RUS001 N.I. Vavilov Research Institute of Plant Industry 55 41
CZE122 Gene bank 37 41
ESP026 Generalidad Valenciana. Universidad Politècnica de Valencia. Escuela Técnica Superior
de Ingenieros Agrónomos. Banco de Germoplasma 25 
UGA132 Plant Genetic Resource Centre 17 
JPN183 NARO Genebank 10 
ERI003 National Agricultural Research Institute 9 
TZA016 National Plant Genetic Resources Centre 8 
ITA331 DI3A University of Catania  6
KEN212 Genetic Resources Research Institute 6 

48 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Table 5. Brassica napus
  Number of B. napus
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of Institute Online
databases
Survey
2022
FRA010 Institut de Génétique Environnement et Protection des Plantes, Plant Biology and Breeding,
INRA Ploudaniel 71 2,161
RUS001 VIR 1,641
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport and
Resources 1,478 1,202
DEU271 External Branch North of the Department Genebank, IPK, Oil Plants and Fodder Crops in
Malchow 1,155 1,235
JPN183 NARO Genebank 965 
CZE122 Gene bank 830 12
BLR011 Republican Unitary Enterprise ‘Scientific Practical Centre of the National Academy of Sciences
of Belarus for Arable Farming’ 820 
UKR013 Ivano-Frankivs’k Institute of Agroindustrial Production 679 
USA020 North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, USDA-ARS, NCRPIS 650 657
PAK001 Plant Genetic Resources Program 573 
BRA003 Embrapa Recursos Genéticos e Biotecnologia 551 
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 451 485
Table 4. Brassica rapa
  Number of B. rapa
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of Institute Online data-
bases Survey
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 4,693 6,009
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport
and Resources 2,684 2,502
RUS001 N.I. Vavilov Research Institute of Plant Industry 352 2,066
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 4,693 6,009
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport
and Resources 2,684 2,502
RUS001 N.I. Vavilov Research Institute of Plant Industry 352 2,066
JPN183 NARO Genebank 1,569 
PAK001 Plant Genetic Resources Program 1,380 
TWN001 World Vegetable Center 1,091 1,088
DEU146/271 Genebank, Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research 804 794
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 713 784
CAN004 Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre 772 747
USA020 North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, USDA-ARS, NCRPIS 675 675
EST019 Estonian Crop Research Institute 512 546
PRT001 Portuguese Bank of Plant Germplasm 381 
USA003 Northeast Regional Plant Introduction Station, Plant Genetic Resources Unit,
USDA-ARS, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University 358 
NLD037 Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands 356 356
ESP009 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Misión Biológica de Galicia 247 
SWE054 Nordic Genetic Resource Center 230 229
ESP027 Gobierno de Aragón. Centro de Investigación y Tecnología Agroalimentaria. Banco de
Germoplasma de Hortícolas 42 173
CZE122 Gene bank 126 47
IRL029 Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, National Crop Variety Testing Centre 125 
POL003 Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute 125 

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 49
Table 6. Brassica juncea
  Number of B. juncea
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of Institute Online
databases Survey
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 7,909 12,979
RUS001 N.I. Vavilov Research Institute of Plant Industry 1,365 1,380
AUS165 Australian Grains Genebank, Department of Economic Development Jobs Transport and
Resources 1,361 1,265
PAK001 Plant Genetic Resources Program 830 
CAN004 Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre 491 562
UKR008 Ustymivka Experimental Station of Plant Production 467 
USA020 North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, USDA-ARS, NCRPIS 439 439
DEU271 External Branch North of the Department Genebank, IPK, Oil Plants and Fodder Crops
in Malchow 310 308
JPN183 NARO Genebank 224 
TWN001 World Vegetable Center 210 207
LKA036 Plant Genetic Resources Centre 120 
FRA010 INRAE 101
ARE003 International Center for Biosaline Agriculture 100 100
CZE122 Gene bank 96 5
UKR012 Institute of Oil Crops 89 
GBR006 Warwick Genetic Resources Unit 87 87
USA003 Northeast Regional Plant Introduction Station, Plant Genetic Resources Unit, USDA-ARS,
New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University 60 
EGY087 National Gene Bank 56 
BGR001 Institute for Plant Genetic Resources ‘K.Malkov’ 53 
BLR011 Republican Unitary Enterprise ‘Scientific Practical Centre of the National Academy of
Sciences of Belarus for Arable Farming’ 47 
  Number of B. napus
accessions
Institute
Code Full name of Institute Online
databases
Survey
2022
POL003 Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute 475 
CAN004 Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research and Development Centre 458 459
BGR001 Institute for Plant Genetic Resources ‘K.Malkov’ 408 
IND001 National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 258 343
SWE054 Nordic Genetic Resource Center 343 343
NLD037 Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands 222 222
EGY087 National Gene Bank 175 
MNG030 Plant Science Agricultural Research and Training Institute 142 

50 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Estonian Crop Research Institute
J. Aamisepa 1
Jõgeva
Jõgeva County 48309 Estonia
etki.ee
Contact: Külli Annamaa
Federal Research Center the N.I. Vavilov All Russian
Institute of Plant Genetic Resources (VIR)
42-44, Bolshaya Morskaya Str.
Saint-Petersburg 190000 Russian Federation
www.vir.nw.ru
Contact: Anna Artemeva (Artemyeva)
Garden Organic (Heritage Seed Library)
Ryton Organic Gardens, Wolston Lane
Coventry CV8 3LG GBR
www.gardenorganic.org.uk/hsl
Contact: Catrina Fenton
Greek Gene Bank, Hellenic Agricultural Organisa-
tion-Dimitra
Institute of Plant Breeding & Genetic Resources
PO Box 60458
Thermi, Thessaloniki GR-570 01 Greece
https://ipgrb.gr
Contact: Catherine M Cook
ICAR-National Bureau of Plant genetic Resources
Pusa campus, New Delhi-110012
Delhi 110012 India
www.nbpgr.ernet.in
Contact: Badal Singh
INRAE
Domaine de Keraïber
Ploudaniel
Finistère 29260 France
https://www6.rennes.inrae.fr/igepp/L-IGEPP/Plate-
formes/BrACySol
Contact: Vincent Richer
Institute of Plant Genetic Resources / Agricultural
University of Tirana
Rruga Siri Kodra, 132/1
Tirana 1016 Albania
http://qrgj.org
Contact: Sokrat Jani
Agrifood Research and Technology Centre of Aragón
Avda. Montañana 930
Zaragoza 50014 Spain
www.cita-aragon.es/en
Contact: Cristina Mallor
Australian Grains Genebank (AUS165)
110 Natimuk Road
Horsham, Victoria 3400 Australia
Contact: Dr Sally Norton
Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety
Wieningerstraße 8
Linz 4020 Austria
www.genbank.at
Contact: Sylvia Vogl
Banco de Germoplasma - Universidade da Madeira
Campus da Penteada
Funchal Madeira 9020-105 Portugal
https://isoplexis.uma.pt
Contact: Humberto Nóbrega
Centre for Genetic Resources the Netherlands
Droevendaalsesteeg 1
Wageningen, Gelderland 6708PD The Netherlands
www.cgn.wur.nl
Contact: Noor Bas
Centro de Conservación de la Biodiversidad Agrícola
de Tenerife (CCBAT)
Calle Retama 2. Jardín de Aclimatación de La Oro-
tava.
Puerto de La Cruz
Santa Cruz de Tenerife 38400 Spain
www.ccbat.es
Contact: Desirée Afonso Morales
Crop Research Institute
Drnovská 507/73
Praha 6 – Ruzyně 161 06 Czechia
www.vurv.cz/en/
Contact: Pavel Kopecký
DI3A University of Catania
Via Valdisavoia 5
Catania 95123 Italy
Contact: Branca Ferdinando
Appendix 4. Details of survey respondents and strategy co-developers

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 51
Royal Botanic Gardens Kew
Wakehurst Place
Ardingly
West Sussex RH17 6TN UK
www.kew.org/science/collections-and-resources/
research-facilities/millennium-seed-bank
Contact: Sharon Balding
UK Vegetable Genebank, The University of Warwick
Wellesbourne Campus,
Wellesbourne, Warwick CV35 9EF UK
https://warwick.ac.uk/gru/genebank/
Contact: Charlotte Allender
USDA-ARS Plant Introduction Research Unit, Ames,
IA
1305 State Ave
Ames, IA 50014 USA
https://www.ars.usda.gov/midwest-area/ames/
plant-introduction-research/
Contact: Laura Fredrick Marek
Verein Arche Noah
Obere Strasse 40
Schiltern, Lower Austria 3553 Austria
www.arche-noah.at/
Contact: Michaela Arndorfer
World Vegetable Center
No. 60, Yiminliao, Shanhua Dist.
Tainan City 741005 Taiwan
https://avrdc.org/
International Center for Biosaline Agriculture
Al Ruwayyah 2, Academic City
Dubai 14660
United Arab Emirates
www.biosaline.org
Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant
Research (IPK)
Corrensstrasse 3
Seeland, OT Gatersleben
Saxony Anhalt 6466 Germany
www.ipk-gatersleben.de
Contact: Karina Krusch, Evelin Willner
Margot Forde Germplasm Centre (NZ)
C/o AgResearch Ltd, Private Bag 11008
Palmerston North
Manawatu-Whanganui 4442 New Zealand
www.margotforde.com
Contact: Kioumars Ghamkhar
National Gene Bank of Tunisia (NGBT)
Boulevard Leader Yasser Arafat
Charguia 1
Tunis 1080 Tunisia
Contact: Najla Mezghani
NordGen – Nordic Genetic Resource Center
Växthusvägen 12
Alnarp
Skåne 23456 Sweden
www.nordgen.org
Contact: Mohammad El-khalifeh
Plant Gene Resources of Canada
107 Science Place
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan S7N 0X2 Canada
https://pgrc-rpc.agr.gc.ca/gringlobal/landing
Contact: Dallas Kessler

52 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Appendix 5. Standardization of taxa found in Genesys and FAO-WIEWS to conduct
data analysis.
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica cavinata Brassica carinata A. Braun
Brassica Brassica L.
Brassica napus Brassica napus L.
Brassica alboglabra Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil
Brassica atlantica Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica aucheri Brassica aucheri Boiss.
Brassica balearica Brassica balearica Pers.
Brassica barrelieri Brassica barrelieri (L.) Janka
Brassica barrelieri subsp. barrelieri Brassica barrelieri (L.) Janka
Brassica barrelieri subsp. oxyrrhina Brassica oxyrrhina (Coss.) Willk.
Brassica barrelieri var. sabularia Brassica barrelieri (L.) Janka
Brassica bivoniana Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica bourgeaui Brassica bourgeaui (Webb ex Christ) Kuntze
Brassica campestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris L. var. oleifera. Metzg. Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris L. var. oleifera. Metzg. Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris subsp. chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica campestris subsp. oleifera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris subsp. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica campestris subsp. rapifera Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica campestris var. candle Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. indian rape Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. oleifera f. biennis d.c. Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica campestris var. pollar Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica campestris var. rapifera Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica campestris var. silvestre Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv 68/420 Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv 72/1002 Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv 73 /0063 Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv 73/617 Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv 731604 Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. sv torpe Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. tobin Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. toria Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica campestris var. yellow sarson Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica campestris var. silvestre Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica capitata convar. capitata (l.) alef. var. rubra Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica carinata Brassica carinata A. Braun
Brassica carinata var. mbeya green Brassica carinata A. Braun
Brassica cauliflora Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica caulorapa Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica chinensis var. chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica chinensis var. parachinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica chinensis var. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica composita Brassica x composita

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 53
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica cretica Brassica cretica Lam.
Brassica cretica subsp. aegaea Brassica cretica subsp. aegaea (Heldr. & Halacsy) Snogerup et
al.
Brassica cretica subsp. cretica Brassica cretica subsp. cretica Lam.
Brassica cretica subsp. laconica Brassica cretica subsp. laconica M. A. Gust. & Snogerup
Brassica cretica subsp. nivea Brassica cretica subsp. cretica Lam.
Brassica deflexa Brassica deflexa Boiss.
Brassica deflexa subsp. deflexa Brassica deflexa subsp. deflexa Boiss.
Brassica deflexa subsp. leptocarpa Brassica deflexa subsp. leptocarpa (Boiss.) Hedge
Brassica desnottesii Brassica desnottesii EmB. & Maire
Brassica dimorpha Brassica dimorpha Coss. & Durieu
Brassica drepanensis Brassica drepanensis (Caruel) Damanti
Brassica elongata Brassica elongata Ehrh.
Brassica elongata subsp. elongata Brassica elongata subsp. elongata Ehrh.
Brassica elongata subsp. integrifolia Brassica elongata subsp. integrifolia (Boiss.) Breistr.
Brassica elongata subsp. subscaposa Brassica elongata subsp. subscaposa (Maire & Weiller) Maire
Brassica erectus Brassica spp.
Brassica fruticulosa Brassica fruticulosa Cirillo
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. cossoneana Brassica fruticulosa Cirillo subsp. cossoniana (Boiss. & Reut.)
Maire
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. djafarensis Brassica fruticulosa Cirillo
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. fruticulosa Brassica fruticulosa subsp. fruticulosa Cirillo
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. glaberrima Brassica fruticulosa subsp. glaberrima (Pomel) Batt.
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. mauritanica Brassica fruticulosa subsp. mauritanica (Coss.) Maire
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. pomeliana Brassica fruticulosa subsp. pomeliana Maire
Brassica fruticulosa subsp. radicata Brassica fruticulosa subsp. radicata (Desf.) Batt.
Brassica gemmifera Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica gravinae Brassica gravinae Ten.
Brassica gravinae var. brachyloma Brassica gravinae Ten.
Brassica gravinae var. djurdjurae Brassica gravinae Ten.
Brassica hilarionis Brassica hilarionis Post
Brassica hirta Sinapis alba subsp. alba L.
Brassica hybrid Brassica hybrid
Brassica hybrideBrassica hybrid
Brassica incana Brassica incana Ten.
Brassica insularis Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica insularis var. angustiloba Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica insularis var. aquellae Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica insularis var. ayliesii Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica insularis var. latiloba Brassica insularis Moris
Brassica italica Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica japonica Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica juncea Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea Cernua Group Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea crispifolia Brassica juncea var. crispifolia L. H. Bailey
Brassica juncea cvg daulat Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea Czern. Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea group oilseed Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea group vegetable Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea juncea integlifolia Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea Integlifolia Group Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.

54 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica juncea L. Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea L. Czern. Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea L. subsp. oleifera Metzg. Brassica juncea subsp. juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. areptana Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. cernua Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia (H. West) Thell.
Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia var. crispifolia Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia var. integrifolia Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia var. rugosa Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia var. subintegrifolia Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. juncea Brassica juncea subsp. juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. juncea var. juncea Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subsp. napiformis Brassica juncea subsp. napiformis (Pailleux & Bois) Gladis
Brassica juncea subsp. tsatsai Brassica juncea var. tumida M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica juncea subsp. tsatsai var. multiceps Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea subspp. integrifolia var. rugosa Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-f1-221 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-f1-354 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-f1-421 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-f5-304 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-f6-71 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. 88-fi-515 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. careptana Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. cereptana Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. crispifolia Brassica juncea var. crispifolia L. H. Bailey
Brassica juncea var. cuneifolia Brassica juncea var. rugosa (RoxB.) M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica juncea var. integrifolia Brassica juncea var. integrifolia (H. West) Sinskaya
Brassica juncea var. japonica Brassica juncea var. japonica (ThunB.) L. H. Bailey
Brassica juncea var. juncea Brassica juncea subsp. juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. laevigata Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. ld2 86-07 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. longidens Brassica juncea var. longidens L. H. Bailey
Brassica juncea var. mongolica Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. multiceps Brassica juncea var. multiceps M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica juncea var. r 3243 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. r 3245 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. r h.30 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. rugosa Brassica juncea var. rugosa (RoxB.) M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica juncea var. sareptana Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. strumata Brassica juncea var. strumata M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica juncea var. suberispifolia Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. subintegrvifol.Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. subsareptana Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t 59 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-189 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-190 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-193 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-195 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-196 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. t.003-208 Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. vugosa Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 55
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica juncea var. zem-i Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica juncea var. integrifolia Brassica juncea subsp. integrifolia (H. West) Thell.
Brassica L. Brassica L.
Brassica macrocarpa Brassica macrocarpa Guss.
Brassica maurorum Brassica maurorum Durieu
Brassica mixed Brassica spp.
Brassica monocarpa Brassica spp.
Brassica montana Brassica montana Pourr.
Brassica napoBrassica Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus biennis Brassica napus f. napus L.
Brassica napus convar. napus forma annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus convar. napus forma napus Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f. annua Brassica napus f. annua (Schubl. & G. Martens) Thell.
Brassica napus f. biennis Brassica napus f. napus L.
Brassica napus f. oleifera Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus f. oleifera annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f. oleifera biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f. oleifera italica Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f.oleifera biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f.oleifera annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus f.oleifera biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus group fodder rape Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus group spring oilseed rape Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus group swede Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus group winter oilseed rape Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus L. Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus L. ssp.oleifera (Metzg.) Sinsk Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. ssp.oleifera Ibemalis (Metzg.) Sinsk Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. ssp.oleifera Ibemalis metzg. f.biennis Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. ssp.oleifera Metzg. Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. subsp. oleifera (Metzg.) Sinsk Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. subsp. oleifera Metzg. Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus L. var. oleifera. aestiva Metzg. Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus L. var. oleifera. Metzg. Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus L. var. oleifera.aestiva Metzg. Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus L. var.oleifera.aestiva Metzg. Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus napoBrassica Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus NapoBrassica Group Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus oleifera Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus pabularia Brassica napus var. pabularia (DC.) Alef.
Brassica napus rapifera Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus ssp. oleifera Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus ssp. oleifera biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napoBrassica Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus subsp. napus Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napus convar. annua forma Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napus forma annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napus forma biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napus var. napus f. annua Brassica napus L.

56 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica napus subsp. napus var. napus f. biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. napus var. pabularia Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. oleifera Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. pabularia Brassica napus var. pabularia (DC.) Alef.
Brassica napus Subsp. rapifera Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus subsp. rapifera metzger var. alb Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. rapifera metzger var.alba Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus subsp. rapifera metzger var.flav Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. 81-53188b Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. 81-55705b Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. 81-58410k Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. 81-58413k Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. 8155705b Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. altex Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. andor Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. bln-80-245 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. brutor Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. candle Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. christa Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. cressor Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. dj-63 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. glauca Brassica rapa subsp. trilocularis (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica napus var. gulliver Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. hannah Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. indian rape Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. karat Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. line Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. maluka Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. marnoo Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. mary Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. napoBrassica Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus var. napoBrassica gr. Chou navet Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus var. napoBrassica gr. Chou navet cv. Navet d’Aubigny Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus var. napus Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus var. napus f. annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. napus f. annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. napus f. biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. napus gr. Colza fourrager Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus var. niklas Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. nokonova Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. oleifera Brassica napus subsp. napus L.
Brassica napus var. oleifera f. annua Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. oleifera f. biennis Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. olivia Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. oro Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. pabularia Brassica napus var. pabularia (DC.) Alef.
Brassica napus var. pollar Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. r 3243 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. r 3245 Brassica napus L.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 57
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica napus var. rapifera Brassica napus subsp. rapifera Metzg.
Brassica napus var. regent Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. rh 30 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. shiralee Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv 68/420 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv 72/1002 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv 73/604 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv 73/617 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv.73/10063 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv.belle Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv.torpe Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. sv73/599 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. t59 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. tatyoon Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. tobin Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. topaz Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. tower Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. wesroona Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. westar Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. wiklas Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. willi Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. ww 1307 Brassica napus L.
Brassica napus var. zem-1 Brassica napus L.
Brassica narinosa Brassica rapa subsp. narinosa (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica nigra Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra ‘giselba’ Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra (L.) Koch Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra subsp. hispida var. orientales Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra subsp. hispida var. rigida Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra subsp. nigra var. nigra Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra subsp. nigra var. pseudocampestris Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra var. abyssinica Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nigra var. dissecta Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica nivalis Brassica nivalis Boiss. & Heldr.
Brassica oleracea Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea acephala Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea Acephala Group Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea acephala medullosa Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea acephala?Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea alboglabra Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil
Brassica oleracea Alboglabra Group Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil
Brassica oleracea alboglabra?Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil
Brassica oleracea botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea botrytis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea botrytis cymosa Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea Botrytis Group Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea Capitata Group Brassica oleracea L.

58 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica oleracea capitata?Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea chinensis var. botrytis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. acephala var. gongyloide Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. acephala var. sabellica Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. acephala var. viridis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea convar. botrytis subsp. asparago Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. botrytis var. botrytis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. botrytis var. italica Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata (l.) alef. var. Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata var. alba Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata var. capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata var. capitata f Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. capitata var. sabauda Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. caulorapa Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea convar. caulorapa var. gongylode Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. gongyloides Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea convar. gongyloides var. acephal Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea convar. oleracea Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica oleracea convar. oleracea var. gemmifera Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. sabauda var. capitata f Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. sabauda var. capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea convar. sabauda var. capitata f. Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea f. longata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea gemmifera Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea Gemmifera group Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea gongylodes Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea group borecole Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group broccoli Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group brussels sprouts Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group cauliflower Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group chinese kale Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group kohlrabi Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group marrowstem kale Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group pointed headed cabbage Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group red cabbage Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group savoy cabbage Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group tronchuda Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea group white cabbage Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea italica Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea Italica Group Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea italica?Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea L. Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea L. var. cabbage Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea L. var. gongylodes Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea sabauda Brassica oleracea var. sabauda L.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 59
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica oleracea subsp. botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala galega-kohl Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. gongylodes Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. medullosa Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. palmifolia Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. sabellica Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. selenisia Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. selenisia f.
selenisia Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. acephala var. viridis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. botrytis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. botrytis var. alboglabra Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. botrytis var. botrytis Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. botrytis var. italica Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. capitata var. capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. capitata var. capitata f.
capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. capitata var. capitata f. rubra Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. capitata var. capitata forma
capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. capitata var. sabauda Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. costata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. costata var. costata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. costata var. helmii Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. fruticosa var. ramosa Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. fruticosa x B. oleracea l. ssp.
capitata (l.) var. costata dc. Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitata convar. gemmifera var. gemmifera Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. capitatoides Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. cretica Brassica cretica Lam.
Brassica oleracea subsp. cretica var. aegaea Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. gongylodes Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. oleracea Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica oleracea subsp. orientalis var. capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. robertiana Brassica montana Pourr.
Brassica oleracea subsp. rupestris Brassica rupestris Raf.
Brassica oleracea subsp. selenisia Brassica oleracea var. sabellica L.
Brassica oleracea subsp. villosa Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica oleracea subsp.europea Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea subsp.europea var. capitata Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea tronchuda Brassica oleracea var. costata DC.
Brassica oleracea tronchuda ? Brassica oleracea var. costata DC.
Brassica oleracea var. gongyloides Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. acefala Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea var. acephala Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea var. acephala gr. Chou fourrager Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea var. acephala rubra Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra Brassica oleracea var. alboglabra (L. H. Bailey) Musil
Brassica oleracea var. botritys Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. botriyis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.

60 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis gr. Chou fleur d’hiver Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. botrytys Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. bullata Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera DC.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. alba Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Cabus
de Lorient Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Chou
Saint Saëns Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Sinago Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé cv.
précoce de Louviers de Dragons Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. rubra Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata forma capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata forma rubra Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f.rubra Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. cauliflora Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. caulorapa Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. caulorapa forma gongylodes Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleracea var. conica Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. costata Brassica oleracea var. costata DC.
Brassica oleracea var. gemifera Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera DC.
Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera DC.
Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera gr. Bruxelles Brassica oleracea var. gemmifera DC.
Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes gr. Chou rave Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. gongyloides Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. gonygylodes Brassica oleracea var. gongylodes L.
Brassica oleracea var. italica Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. italica plenck Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenk Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. local Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. medullosa Brassica oleracea var. medullosa Thell.
Brassica oleracea var. medullosa gr. Chou fourrager Brassica oleracea var. medullosa Thell.
Brassica oleracea var. oleracea Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica oleracea var. palmifolia Brassica oleracea var. palmifolia DC.
Brassica oleracea var. ramosa Brassica oleracea var. ramosa DC.
Brassica oleracea var. ramosa gr. Chou fourrager Brassica oleracea var. ramosa DC.
Brassica oleracea var. rubra Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. sabauda Brassica oleracea var. sabauda L.
Brassica oleracea var. sabauda gr. Chou pommé cv. Milan de Pontoise Brassica oleracea var. sabauda L.
Brassica oleracea var. sabellica Brassica oleracea var. sabellica L.
Brassica oleracea var. talica Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. viridis Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea var. viridis Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata, f.alba Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 61
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica oleracea var. cauliflora Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. italica Brassica oleracea var. italica Plenck
Brassica oleracea var. oleracea Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica oleracea viridis Brassica oleracea var. viridis L.
Brassica oleracea x B. rapa Pekinensis Group Brassica oleracea x B. rapa
Brassica oleraceaeBrassica oleracea L.
Brassica oleraceae var. capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleraceae var.capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oxyrrhina Brassica oxyrrhina (Coss.) Willk.
Brassica pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica perviridis Brassica rapa var. perviridis L. H. Bailey
Brassica procumbens Brassica procumbens (Poir.) O. E. Schulz
Brassica purpuraria Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa and napus Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa broccoletto gp Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa Chinensis Group Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa convar. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa forma praecox Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group broccoletto Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group chinese cabbage Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group fodder turnip Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group komatsuna Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group mizuna Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group pak choi Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group spring turnip oilseed rape Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group turnip greens Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group vegetable turnip Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group winter turnip oilseed rape Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa group yellow sarson Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa Japonica Group Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa L. ssp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg. Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa L. subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg. Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa Narinosa Group Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa neep greens gp Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa nipposinica Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa oleifera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa Oleifera Group Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa pak choi group Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa parachinensis Brassica rapa var. parachinensis (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa Parachinensis Group Brassica rapa var. parachinensis (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa Pekinensis Group Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa Pekinensis Group x B. juncea Brassica rapa x B. juncea
Brassica rapa Perviridis Group Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa purpurea Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa Rapifera Group Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa ssp. oleifera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa ssp. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt

62 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica rapa ssp. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa ssp. sylvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. Brassica campestris Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. campestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis var. chinensis Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis var. communis Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis var. parachinensis Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis var. rosularis Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. indoafghanica convar. ferganica Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. narinosa Brassica rapa subsp. narinosa (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica var. chinoleifera Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica var. dissecta Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (ruvo-gruppe)Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera var. silvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. oliefera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis var. glabra Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis var. laxa Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis var. pandurata Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis x B. oleracea l. Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. navet de Viarme Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. plat / de treignac Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. rave d’oulles Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. rave de treignac Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. rave plate Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa gr. Navet cv. rave plate d’auvergne Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. rapifera Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa subsp. sarson Brassica rapa subsp. trilocularis (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. silvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. sylvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa subsp. trilocularis Brassica rapa subsp. trilocularis (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa subsp. japonica Brassica rapa subsp. japonica Shebalina
Brassica rapa sylvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa syn. Brassica campestris Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. alba Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. amplexicaulis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. brown sarson Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. campestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa var. chinensis Brassica rapa subsp. chinensis (L.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. dichotoma Brassica rapa subsp. dichotoma (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. nipposinica Brassica rapa subsp. nipposinica (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. oleifera Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 63
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica rapa var. parachinensis Brassica rapa var. parachinensis (L. H. Bailey) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. pekinensis Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis (Lour.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. perviridis Brassica rapa var. perviridis L. H. Bailey
Brassica rapa var. purpuraria Brassica rapa var. purpuraria (L. H. Bailey) Kitam.
Brassica rapa var. rapa Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. rapifera ‘milan’Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. rossica Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. rubra Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. ruvo Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris f. annua Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris f. autu.Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris f. biennis Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris f. praecox Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. toria Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. trilocularis Brassica rapa subsp. trilocularis (RoxB.) Hanelt
Brassica rapa var. yellow sarson Brassica rapa L.
Brassica rapa var. silvestris Brassica rapa subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzg.
Brassica repanda Brassica repanda (Willd.) DC.
Brassica repanda subsp. africana Brassica repanda subsp. africana (Maire) Greuter & Burdet
Brassica repanda subsp. almeriensis Brassica repanda subsp. almeriensis Gomez-Campo
Brassica repanda subsp. blancoana Brassica repanda subsp. blancoana (Boiss.) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. cadevallii Brassica repanda subsp. cadevallii (Font Quer) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. cantabrica Brassica repanda subsp. cantabrica (Font Quer) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. confusa Brassica repanda subsp. confusa (EmB. & Maire) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. gypsicola Brassica repanda subsp. gypsicola Gomez-Campo
Brassica repanda subsp. latisiliqua Brassica repanda subsp. latisiliqua (Boiss. & Reut.) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. maritima Brassica repanda subsp. maritima (Willk.) Heywood
Brassica repanda subsp. nudicaulis Brassica repanda subsp. africana (Maire) Greuter & Burdet
Brassica repanda subsp. repanda Brassica repanda subsp. repanda (Willd.) DC.
Brassica robertiana Brassica montana Pourr.
Brassica rugosa Brassica juncea var. rugosa (RoxB.) M. Tsen & S. H. Lee
Brassica rupestris Brassica rupestris Raf.
Brassica rupestris subsp. glaucescens Brassica rupestris Raf.
Brassica rupestris subsp. hispida Brassica rupestris subsp. hispida Raimondo & Mazzola
Brassica ruvo Brassica ruvo L. H. Bailey
Brassica sabaudas subsp. palmifolia Brassica spp.
Brassica souliei Brassica souliei (Batt.) Batt.
Brassica souliei subsp. amplexicaulis Brassica souliei subsp. amplexicaulis (Desf.) Greuter & Burdet
Brassica sp Brassica spp.
Brassica sp. Brassica spp.
Brassica sp. var. kanjiru Brassica spp.
Brassica sp. craciferae Brassica spp.
Brassica spinescens Brassica spinescens Pomel
Brassica spp. Brassica spp.
Brassica subspontanea Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica subspontanea gr. acephala Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica subspontanea Lizg. Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica subspontanea planifolia Brassica oleracea var. oleracea
Brassica sylvestris Brassica oleracea var. oleracea

64 | GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES
Taxon as found in databases Standardized taxon
Brassica sylvestris subsp. taurica Brassica incana Ten.
Brassica sylvestris taurica Brassica incana Ten.
Brassica taurica Brassica incana Ten.
Brassica tournefortii Brassica tournefortii Gouan
Brassica tyrrhena Brassica tyrrhena Giotta, Piccitto & Arrigoni
Brassica villosa Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica villosa bivoniana Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica villosa drepanensis Brassica drepanensis (Caruel) Damanti
Brassica villosa subsp. bivoniana Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica villosa subsp. brevisiliqua Brassica villosa subsp. brevisiliqua (Raimondo & Mazzola)
Raimondo & Geraci Raimondo & Geraci (Raimondo & Mazzola)
Brassica villosa subsp. drepanensis Brassica drepanensis (Caruel) Damanti
Brassica villosa subsp. tinei Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica villosa tinei Brassica villosa Biv.
Brassica villosa Brassica villosa subsp. villosa
Brassica x hybrid hybrid
Brassicaceae Brassica l. nigra Koch. Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassicae napus var. napro BrassicaeBrassica napus L. subsp.rapifera Metzg. (Brassica
napus Rutabaga Group)
Eruca loncholoma Brassica loncholoma Pomel
Sinapis aucheri Brassica aucheri Boiss.
Sinapis nigra Brassica nigra (L.) W. D. J. Koch
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis gr. Chou fleur d’hiver Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Cabus
de Lorient Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica cretica Lam. Brassica cretica Lam.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica incana Ten. Brassica incana Ten.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Sinago Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleraceae, var capitata Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. sabauda gr. Chou pommé cv. Milan de Pontoise Brassica oleracea var. sabauda L.
Brassica oeracea Brassica oleracea L.
Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé cv.
précoce de Louviers de Dragons Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Chou
Saint Saëns Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica rupestris Raf. Brassica rupestris Raf.
Brassica rapa subsp. japonica Brassica rapa subsp. japonica Shebalina
Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L Brassica rapa subsp. rapa L.
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis gr. Chou fleur d’hiver Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. botrytis gr. Chou fleur d’été Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Cabus
de Lorient Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Sinago Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. sabauda gr. Chou pommé cv. Milan de Pontoise Brassica oleracea var. sabauda L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. capitata gr. Chou pommé cv. Chou
Saint Saëns Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.
Brassica oleracea var. capitata f. pyramidalis gr. Chou pommé cv.
précoce de Louviers de Dragons Brassica oleracea var. capitata L.

GLOBAL STRATEGY FOR THE CONSERVATION OF BRASSICA GENETIC RESOURCES | 65
GENERAL CONTACT
+49 (0) 228 85427 122
info@croptrust.org
THE CROP TRUST
Platz Der Vereinten Nationen 7
53113 Bonn, Germany
MEDIA CONTACT
+49 (0) 228 85427 141
media@croptrust.org